Audism is defined as "a negative or oppressive attitude towards deaf people by either deaf or hearing people and organizations, and a failure to accommodate them" (Berke, 2011). This definition can be applied to the various Deaf Education programs throughout Canada in a number of ways.
Primarily, the vast predominance of the oral/aural method of instruction throughout the country can be considered extremely audist in attitude: it promotes to students, parents, and teachers that to be hearing, or as close to hearing as possible, is far superior to being deaf. The lack of ASL in the majority of these programs coupled with the focus on speech and medical/technological intervention (cochlear implants, hearing aids, FM/amplification systems) indicates the majority opinion that deafness must be fixed and children taught to be as 'normal' as possible. It is believed that this is the only way that a deaf or hard of hearing child will grow up to function 'normally' in the hearing world.
Accommodations are another area in which audism is apparent in Deaf Education. It is rare that qualified interpreters are provided to children in mainstream classrooms, as well as the lack of one on one attention that is available when a single deaf/HoH child is integrated into a classroom full of hearing children. A simple amplification system is not enough in most cases- deaf and hard of hearing children require a great deal more accommodation in order to receive the same level of education as their hearing counterparts.
Discrimination is an issue less apparent within Deaf Education, or more accurately the discrimination takes on a different form. Teachers are trained to accommodate deaf and hard of hearing children in the way that the Education system as deemed 'best', by treating the children as 'normally' as possible. However, other children within the class often discriminate against the deaf/HoH child in a number of different ways: medical devices worn by the deaf/HoH child, the different ways in which a deaf or HoH child may speak (impediment, hollow-sounding speech, or inability to speak), the fact that a single student uses an Educational Assistant, etc. Children can be cruel and discriminate in ways that teachers or other adults may not consider.
Another form of audism/discrimination that can be directly related to Deaf Education programs is the lack of accommodations within the programs themselves for Deaf students that use ASL. None of these programs (with the possible exception of the ASL/LSQ Communication stream at York University) expressly provides their Deaf Education classes in ASL, without the use of an interpreter. This discriminates against Deaf individuals, in a program 'meant to' promote inclusion!
Despite the landmark decision and apology of the 2010 ICED Conference it is apparent that little progress has been made to move away from the damaging resolutions put in place at the 1880 Milan Conference. In my own opinion, I feel that more effort needs to be made to promote Deaf Education programs that focus on ASL, use ASL as the primary language of instruction of their students, and actively include Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals in their student body. I feel that this is important not only to encourage equality among the students of the Deaf Education programs, but also to create more opportunities in the workforce for Deaf and HoH individuals. This is their language, who better to teach it than a native language user? Children should be permitted to learn in the most natural language to them- in the case of Deaf and Hard of Hearing children, a visual-gestural language.
Primarily, the vast predominance of the oral/aural method of instruction throughout the country can be considered extremely audist in attitude: it promotes to students, parents, and teachers that to be hearing, or as close to hearing as possible, is far superior to being deaf. The lack of ASL in the majority of these programs coupled with the focus on speech and medical/technological intervention (cochlear implants, hearing aids, FM/amplification systems) indicates the majority opinion that deafness must be fixed and children taught to be as 'normal' as possible. It is believed that this is the only way that a deaf or hard of hearing child will grow up to function 'normally' in the hearing world.
Accommodations are another area in which audism is apparent in Deaf Education. It is rare that qualified interpreters are provided to children in mainstream classrooms, as well as the lack of one on one attention that is available when a single deaf/HoH child is integrated into a classroom full of hearing children. A simple amplification system is not enough in most cases- deaf and hard of hearing children require a great deal more accommodation in order to receive the same level of education as their hearing counterparts.
Discrimination is an issue less apparent within Deaf Education, or more accurately the discrimination takes on a different form. Teachers are trained to accommodate deaf and hard of hearing children in the way that the Education system as deemed 'best', by treating the children as 'normally' as possible. However, other children within the class often discriminate against the deaf/HoH child in a number of different ways: medical devices worn by the deaf/HoH child, the different ways in which a deaf or HoH child may speak (impediment, hollow-sounding speech, or inability to speak), the fact that a single student uses an Educational Assistant, etc. Children can be cruel and discriminate in ways that teachers or other adults may not consider.
Another form of audism/discrimination that can be directly related to Deaf Education programs is the lack of accommodations within the programs themselves for Deaf students that use ASL. None of these programs (with the possible exception of the ASL/LSQ Communication stream at York University) expressly provides their Deaf Education classes in ASL, without the use of an interpreter. This discriminates against Deaf individuals, in a program 'meant to' promote inclusion!
Despite the landmark decision and apology of the 2010 ICED Conference it is apparent that little progress has been made to move away from the damaging resolutions put in place at the 1880 Milan Conference. In my own opinion, I feel that more effort needs to be made to promote Deaf Education programs that focus on ASL, use ASL as the primary language of instruction of their students, and actively include Deaf and Hard of Hearing individuals in their student body. I feel that this is important not only to encourage equality among the students of the Deaf Education programs, but also to create more opportunities in the workforce for Deaf and HoH individuals. This is their language, who better to teach it than a native language user? Children should be permitted to learn in the most natural language to them- in the case of Deaf and Hard of Hearing children, a visual-gestural language.