State education of deaf children in New Zealand began in 1880 and the ensuing policies make interesting reading. From the first 80 years of oralism, through the 70’s and the shift to Total Communication, to the current lack of bilingualism in classrooms, generations of deaf children appear to have been under-serviced by the education system. Here follows an interesting comparison between an "ideal" education for deaf students and what New Zealand offers.
According to the United Nations Statement on Rights of the
Disabled people with
disabilities should have access to “full and equal
participation in education”, their education should be given in the
“most appropriate languages and modes and means of communication for the
individual” and, specifically for the deaf community, their
linguistic identity should be promoted and their learning of sign language facilitated. Furthermore, it states that teachers qualified in sign
language should be employed, including disabled teachers, and that training be
given to all staff on disability awareness and appropriate interaction
techniques.
So, what is the current offering for deaf students in New Zealand?
Mostly they are mainstreamed and should have the support of the Ministry of Education (MOE) in the following ways:
advisers; access to support from one of the two bespoke Deaf education centres,
namely Kelston Deaf Education Centre (KDEC) in the North Island and Van Asch
Deaf Education Centre (VADEC) in the South Island; Resource Teachers – Deaf
(RTDs). A deeper enquiry into this MOE "support" raises
issues of teacher-aides with no formal
training who may also
foster dependency in their charges, and persisting low levels of NZSL being used which is believed by many
researchers to impact negatively on literacy.
The background you've provided to the history of Deaf education is succinct but includes some interesting links for more information, and provides some vital context to the situation.
ReplyDeleteWhile I totally agree that the current offering to Deaf students is not sufficient, especially in the area of teacher aides, approaching it from the opposing side I imagine the response would be that there simply aren't the trained staff out there to meet the ideal scenario, and that they're 'doing the best they can'. While I don't think this is an excuse not to take action, I think maybe it'd be good to acknowledge the lack of trained teachers/aides out there as an explanation for why they aren't present in schools, but then counteract it with your suggestion for what measures they could/should take to improve the availability of these valuable skills in educators of the Deaf. I see you've gone into more detail about what the MOE are doing in your next post, but it might be persuasive to take a stance on what more they should be doing than they're currently doing?
Good point there, Julia. Thanks. I'll have another look at my overall blurb and probably re-work things a little
ReplyDeleteHi again Julia. After reading my final post, I'm satisfied I address the lack of better staff, albeit superficially. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteHa, I've just taken a fresh look at what I had and have rejigged those last two posts, hopefully addressing your point of an opposing view. Thanks again for your input.
ReplyDeleteWell-organised and informative reading of a distressing topic. I am a little bit unclear, however, on what your stand is...? Have I missed it? Please excuse my typical obliviousness if I have. I understand that you disagree with the status quo in NZ d/Deaf education.
ReplyDeleteA minor point: avoid using quotation marks for terms, e.g., "oralism" and confine their use of to actual quotes. For the purposes of a blog, I think inserting a hyperlink and the resultant different font colour should suffice to indicate particular meanings.
Hi Ana
ReplyDeleteThanks for your feedback. I'll go and check out the quote mark/hyperlink issue - thanks.
Re my stand, it is supposed to be that the MOE talks about providing education settings OF CHOICE, but there actually isn't much choice for our deaf students, more a case of get what you possibly can.