In the Best Interests of the Children
by
Linda
Schrock Taylor
by Linda Schrock Taylor
DIGG THIS
Educational
priorities in America's schools, public and private, are rarely
based on definitive long-range goals to meet the complete needs
of students. There are certainly many fine educational examples,
but too often those are limited in scope and not district-wide.
Many occur by happenstance, or are brought about by a few excellent
teachers, many of whom often provide instruction in unapproved
ways; using unapproved materials; unsupported by administration.
It is rare,
indeed, to find an educational program that is a purposeful, top-down,
concerted effort to provide children with superb teachers, skilled
instruction, effective methods and fine materials – while ignoring
political correctness; administrative bias; district kick-backs;
union policies; and other unsavory reasons that might be behind
the organization and misdirection of educational priorities.
I have seen
one such school – planned; consistent; focused on needs; providing
the best education possible for its students. Unfortunately, that
school is not in America.
In 1977, while
at Manchester University, England, reading towards a master's degree
in "Administration and Supervision of Programs for the Deaf," we
repeatedly noticed that our professors referred to, as an example
of excellence, The Institute of the Deaf, in Sint-Michielsgestel,
The Netherlands. Finally, a group of us wanted to see for ourselves,
so we arranged to attend visitation week at the school and traveled
to Holland.
That week was
one of the most memorable of my life, but it was also one of the
most frustrating, for I soon realized that American education was
very lacking.
It is difficult
to appreciate the toll that deafness takes on an individual's life
because deafness is an invisible handicap. In truth, being
deprived of that most human need – communication – is devastating.
Deaf children cannot, unless born to a deaf parent, even communicate
with their mothers! No mother tongue! Additionally, if deaf
children are to learn how to use their voices, they must be skillfully
and patiently taught to speak. Many may have had experience with
husky, guttural, semi-distorted deaf speech.
Reading is
also a very difficult skill to learn, and the average deaf child
born to hearing parents will not read much above the third grade
level, even at graduation from high school. Without the ability
to auditorily store words in their brains, phonics are useless to
deaf readers. This is similar to the problem that so many in America
face, and sight word readers too often top out at a third grade
reading level. Our prisons are full of third grade readers, as are
our welfare rolls.
The Institute
of the Deaf at Sint-Michielsgestel was at that time under the direction
of Father van Uden, a remarkable man who had taught and worked at
the school for over thirty years. He had written a very informative
book, A
World of Language for Deaf Children, described as "A maternal
reflective method."
We were soon
to meet the wonderful Father van Uden and his remarkable staff;
to observe, first hand, the results of capable leadership based
on comprehensive scholarship and thoroughness in execution. We spent
five long days at the school, and still wanted to see and learn
more. From top to bottom, the planning and orchestration of a total
educational program that would educate deaf children was breathtaking.
Parents with
deaf infants were frequent visitors at the school, where they stayed
in special family apartments in order to learn from therapists as
those professionals taught the babies. Father van Uden explained
that since human speech is so rhythmic, the first thing one should
do with deaf babies is to hold them while dancing, moving, singing;
to help them develop rhythm.
As the children
grew, they attended classes in a large room ringed with long wooden
boxes that held huge speakers. The boxes were exactly the right
height for children to use as seats. On the day of our visit, the
young children were playing a musical chairs/funny hats game during
which they sat on the speakers, waiting to detect sound or vibrations.
Immediately they would leap to their feet and laughingly dance around
the circle, wearing a goofy hat, listening carefully for the sound
to stop…at which time they would quickly sit on the nearest speaker.
Every child
had individual speech instruction from an extremely skilled speech
therapist twice a day! Little ones sat on the laps of the
therapists, looking into the adult's mouth to see the making of
sounds. Academic classrooms had video cameras. When a child began
to speak, the teacher swung the camera to focus on the child. When
the communication was complete…the teacher rewound the tape and
directed the child's attention to the monitor where they would watch
for speech errors and work to correct them.
In America,
deaf children are lucky if they see the speech clinician twice a
week! Too often those speech classes contain students other
than deaf children so the therapist leads games in pronouncing /s/,
or say "Good Morning," or other pat phrases. It is no wonder that
our deaf people, young and old, never fully develop their voices;
that they have voice qualities that continue to reveal their hearing
losses. Speech is obviously not a priority in American education.
Speech, language,
academics, testing, support – at Sint-Michielsgestel, all aspects
of education were planned specifically to develop every child's
potential.
When Father
van Uden suggested that I go chat with the children, I pointed out
that I did not speak Dutch. He laughed, as he explained that the
children spoke English and German, as well. (Three languages?)
Since Dutch colleges used a wide range of textbooks, the deaf children
were also taught to read all three languages! The school's priorities
were to prepare deaf children for the same opportunities in life
as hearing children. As I recall, the deaf children, by graduation,
read Dutch at age level; German at grade level; and English at ninth
grade or higher. (Remember that third grade reading level in only
English is the norm for most American deaf children.)
While we were
visiting the school, deaf children served as our guides. They spoke
beautifully accented English. Their voices were nothing like the
deaf voices in America.
Those children
knew much about English, and I was shocked to hear this exchange
spoken in English by junior high children:
1st
Student: "The policemen is here."
2nd
Student: "You can't say that! 'Policemen' is a plural word and so
you need to use the verb 'are'."
1st
Student" "No. 'Policemen' is a group; a group is a single
thing, so it should need 'is'."
2nd
Student: "Your thinking is right, but English is a strange language.
You need to say, 'The policemen are here'."
A dance instructor
was teaching upper elementary students a modern dance routine to
the song "Alley Cat." I took pictures that day, and in my mind I
hear the song and see the rhythmic movements each time I look at
the slides.
A chemistry
teacher was as deeply involved in teaching high school students.
Father van
Uden, himself, was testing students for learning disabilities, and
planning specific interventions.
At Sint-Michielsgestel,
the deaf seemed more like hearing individuals for they learned;
they spoke; they danced; they sang; they achieved! Everything
at the school was focused on those outcomes….as it should be.
I was enthralled
so I approached Father van Uden to ask if there was any chance that
I might work at the school. I stated my willingness to learn Dutch
and German. He asked me what I had majored in at university, then
gave me a sympathetic smile when I responded, "Education of the
Deaf."
I was so disappointed
then – but I fully understand now – when he explained that they
never hired education majors…for their preparation and studies
were too broad; too shallow; too limited. When the school needed
a chemistry teacher, they hired a chemist then taught the
person how to work with deaf children. The school hired biologists,
dance masters, linguists, artists, speech masters, etc. They paid
competitive wages in order to hire the best in the various fields,
then those specialists were taught how to teach deaf children.
Of course!
It was a wonderful educational plan, and it was expected that the
children learn to speak clearly; read well; attend university; meet
with success in life. The plan was wisely designed; fully comprehensive;
began at birth. Its goal was to fully prepare deaf children for
Life. The school was clearly designed to serve the best interests
of the children.
American educational
leaders fail to view and orchestrate schooling with anything close
to that commitment; focus; relevance, importance; determination;
goals; foresight. Instead of schools educating children to be fully
capable, knowledgeable, and self-reliant, schools too often cripple
natural abilities; make weaknesses worse; waste time and lives.
It need not
be that way. There are fine models that America could replicate,
in public and in private schools; in day schools and in residential.
One model would be the educational whole-child philosophies and
whole-life focus of The Institute of the Deaf, Sint-Michielsgestel,
The Netherlands.
However,
American educational decisions are too often made by people who
put power over scholarship; ambition over the best interests of
children.
September
4, 2006
Linda
Schrock Taylor [send
her mail] is an educational
consultant, homeschooling mom, and public school special ed teacher.
She is available for presentations, inservices, and workshops.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Linda
Schrock Taylor Archives
|