Deaf Schools: TRUE-BUSINESS Deaf?—20 Years Later

April 26, 2018

By Trudy Suggs

Read the 1997 article or the 2007 article. Scroll down to see my thoughts about this year’s results.

For full text, contact the author.

(For a larger version, click on chart.)

A survey sent to 40 schools in the fall of 1997, revealed, to many people’s surprise, that no deaf school had a majority of employees who were deaf. Out of the 21 schools that responded, the highest percentage was 46% (at the Model Secondary School for the Deaf and California School for the Deaf in Fremont) — not even 50%. Following a close second was Maryland School for the Deaf, at 41%.

Ten years later, in the fall of 2007, this same questionnaire was distributed to 57 schools, with 46 responding. The highest percentage was 55% for Maryland School for the Deaf, with Indiana and Washington at 50%. Even so, the numbers remained the same or even lower at many other schools.

In the fall of 2017, this questionnaire was once again distributed, with 27 schools responding. In the past, only residential schools were contacted, but for this year, charter schools were also contacted.

The deaf staff percentages were higher this time around, with the highest percentage going to the Clerc Center (Kendall Demonstration Elementary School and Model Secondary School for the Deaf) at 78% of employees being deaf, and two charter schools following at 69% and 66%. Next were Maryland at 65%, Indiana at 64%, and California (Fremont) at 63%. There has also been an increase in deaf superintendents, with the number growing to 24 in 2017, according to a database compiled by Joey Baer, who is Deaf and works at the California School for the Deaf in Fremont.

However, it is crucial to recognize that the statistics include all levels of employment — from entry-level to administration. If each set of data were isolated by administration only, or teachers only, the numbers would likely paint a different picture. Just take a look at California School for the Deaf in Fremont’s breakdown of its numbers:

For a text version of this chart, please contact the author.

(For a larger version, click on chart.)

A light-skinned man with black-rimmed glasses and a salt-and-pepper goatee smiles into the camera. He is wearing a suit and a PSD pin.

Peter Bailey

Peter Bailey, Head of the Pennsylvania School for the Deaf in Philadelphia and Deaf himself, attributes the increase in the hiring of deaf employees to “the timing of modern changes. People are more aware of what deaf students need, such as full access and seeing adults just like them. In the past, we had limited resources and options, but now they’re more broad.”

Teaching Profession No Longer Top Choice
The low numbers of deaf employees at many deaf schools may be credited to a number of reasons, such as location, student population, and credentials, according to Bailey. “Schools in rural areas may have a harder time recruiting deaf employees, while schools in large cities generally have more choice in application pools. This is true for any job, really.”

A light-skinned, bearded man with brown hair is in a suit, smiling at the camera.

Dr. Bradley Porché

Dr. Bradley Porché, Superintendent at the New York School for the Deaf in White Plains (more commonly known as Fanwood), agrees. “Schools with larger student bodies typically have more applicants than those with smaller bodies, but at the same time, we’re not seeing the same pipeline churning out teachers as we have historically.”

Porché,who has been at Fanwood for nine months, cites increased accessibility and media visibility as possible reasons. “Social media may be a factor, in that younger generations are seeing people like Nyle DiMarco and other deaf people rise to incredible success,” he explains. “There are so many successful deaf people in a variety of fields, and as the media has reported, the teaching field is severely underrated, underpaid, and unappreciated. Teaching is an incredible profession, one that should be celebrated and respected. Yet many deaf people, just like their hearing counterparts, see the drawbacks to teaching and choose to go into other fields because they don’t want all the stress that comes with teaching.”

This echoes an observation by Texas School for the Deaf Superintendent Claire Bugen, who said in the 2007 article, “Clearly, deaf people have many more career choices today than in the past, and with changing technology I suspect that will only continue to be a factor – that’s a good thing. Salaries in education, on the other hand, have not kept pace with the private sector and many young people both want and need to be paid better than most educators are paid. Now with the requirements of highly qualified teaching under various laws, our already shrinking pool of qualified deaf and hearing candidates is compromised even further, which will likely cause more challenges in the years ahead.”

In a September 2016 article in The Washington Post, a new study revealed that there was a nationwide shortage of teachers. The article reported, “Although nearly every state has reported teacher shortages to the U.S. Department of Education, the problem is much more pronounced in some states than others. But across the country, the shortages are disproportionately felt in special education, math and science, and in bilingual and English-language education.”

A post by McDaniel College about its Deaf Education program

Dean of Graduate and Professional Studies at McDaniel College J. Michael Tyler wrote in an April 4th Facebook post that the McDaniel deaf education graduate program was facing an uncertain future.

This shortage has affected deaf education training programs as well. On April 4, the dean of graduate and professional studies at McDaniel College, J. Michael Tyler wrote in an announcement shared on Facebook, “Due to ongoing enrollment issues in Deaf Education [sic], a decision has been made that we will be unable to start a new class in the fall of 2018. We will start a new class this summer, and all introductory courses will be offered. Graduate and Professional Studies faculty will work in the next 90 days to determine if there is a viable path forward for this program.” McDaniel, formerly Western Maryland College, has been a popular graduate program for those wanting to become teachers in deaf education.

Tyler further wrote, “Enrollment in Deaf Education [sic] has been in decline for a number of years. While low enrollments have created serious revenue issues, ultimately the College’s ability to deliver a strong, vibrant program that meets the needs of students pushed us to this point.”

Credentials
Credentials and certifications continue to be a challenge, as in 1997 and 2007. Testing standards have become so difficult that many choose to become paraprofessionals or teachers in fields that don’t require testing. In an attempt to address this, Minnesota passed a state law permitting deaf teachers to request exemption from the reading and writing portions of the examination process in order to gain licensure. As outlined on the Minnesota Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, “…an applicant who is deaf must complete the skills examination in mathematics adopted by the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board. The reading and writing skills requirements can be completed by either passing the examinations adopted by the Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board or by an evaluation completed by board approved colleges and universities of demonstrated proficiency in the expressive and receptive use of alternative communication systems, including sign language and finger spelling as measured by the Sign Communications Proficiency Inventory (SCPI).

Bailey came to PSD after the school experienced numerous challenging years in which it had several heads of the school, community protests over board decisions, and strained community relations.  In under two years, Bailey has managed to repair many strained relationships, and increase the number of applicants by offering incentives for employees to pursue teaching credentials through reimbursed tuition, tutoring, and other options. “Whatever I can do to help encourage the growth of teachers who our students can identify with, the better,” he says.

Meanwhile, Porché points out that he’d like to see teachers be hired based on their work experience and knowledge, rather than testing. “I’ll always ask to see a teacher’s portfolio, because that tells me far more than what a teacher’s test scores do,” he says. “I always tell state legislature that teaching is an art and a skill that is acquired, not something you can just be tested on.”

The Lack of Diversity Among Employees
Another challenge is the lack of diversity among employees at deaf schools. Bailey says that at PSD, “We have about 74% of students of color, yet only 46% staff of color. The challenge for me then becomes: do I hire people who are deaf, or people who are of color? Ideally, we should hire deaf people of color, which I want to do. But we can only make do with what we have in our application pool, and try to reach out to diverse communities as much as possible.”

And this is a step Bailey takes seriously. He attended the National Black Deaf Advocates conference in Baltimore last year, and recalls, “I was surprised to see that only two superintendents were in attendance, and we were both deaf.” The other was Donald Galloway, Superintendent of the Lexington School for the Deaf in New York City. “Why were we the only ones there? How can we ensure that our schools serve underserved and oppressed populations if we don’t reach out? And how can we hire more people of color if we don’t pursue them?” Bailey asks.

Language Deprivation and Outreach Efforts
Yet another obstacle is that many deaf schools have become a last resort, rather than a first resort. Deaf students often come to deaf schools later in their educational years, severely delayed in language, socialization, and world knowledge. As a result, schools invest more time trying to catch these students up before they graduate.

Bailey notes that there are over a thousand students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the Philadelphia area, yet only 200 attend PSD. “Where are they? How do we bring them in earlier in their education, rather than later in their education after they’ve experienced language deprivation and delay, not to mention a lack of socialization or opportunities?”

This is a problem that Porché wrestles with. “A lot of time students are language deprived because of the lack of access to language at an early age. This places a stress on schools to try to address this language deficiency and to ensure that students receive quality education.” He notes that Fanwood shares with the community and parents that “deaf and hard of hearing children should be exposed to American Sign Language at an early age as a safety net regardless of hearing level or communication choices. We need to work with everyone to reach a common dialogue on how to best support deaf children.”

Bailey is also working hard to ensure that PSD becomes attractive not only to families of deaf and hard of hearing children, but also to potential employees and community members. As part of outreach efforts, Bailey has developed a solid relationship with neighboring communities, legislators, and even the Chamber of Commerce.

“By becoming more visible, it’s more possible we can reach out to more families,” he says. He also releases a monthly vlog on the PSD website, which has helped strengthen relations between stakeholders and the school board. “It’s my hope that with increased visibility, we’ll have increased student enrollment, which will naturally lead to increased employment opportunities and a greater applicant pool.”

Rising to the Challenges
Porché believes there are many solutions to the long list of challenges facing deaf schools.  “One potential solution is to invest more in early childhood education via an outreach or intervention program that would guarantee success across the spectrum,” he says. “We also need to ensure that key people who are deaf or hard of hearing are more involved in outreach so that parents are exposed to more than just a language. They need to see that there are successful deaf people in every area possible.”

Porché further suggests working at the legislative level to ensure that mandates for academic standards and language access are enacted, such as those supported by the Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf (CEASD): the Child First, Alice Cogswell, and Macy Sullivan Acts.

Porché also points to the Language Equality and Acquisition for Deaf Kids (LEAD-K), a nonprofit organization that is rapidly gaining momentum. LEAD-K states on its website that it works to “end language deprivation through information to families about language milestones and assessments that measure language milestone achievements, and data collection that holds our current education system accountable.” LEAD-K also works to ensure that all deaf and hard of hearing children, regardless of communication choice, are kindergarten-ready.

Indeed, more and more schools have turned to early hearing detection and intervention programs, ensuring that their schools are included in informational packets given to parents of newborn babies identified as deaf. For example, in Maryland, all parents are automatically referred to the Maryland School for the Deaf when their babies are identified as deaf.  More schools are also offering programs designed to accommodate students with cochlear implants.

Despite all the challenges, it is certainly motivating to note that there are now 23* superintendents of deaf schools or charter schools who are deaf. Porché, who is Deaf and was raised in a mainstreamed setting in Louisiana, says, “I grew up not having [access to] all the features a deaf school provides, such as full communication access, athletics, deaf role models, and much more. I’m now in a position to make sure every deaf or hard of hearing child has these opportunities. My leadership style is a reflection of my upbringing in a flawed deaf education system, and I want to make sure students today experience things I never did, and that I can give them what I didn’t have.”

Special thanks go to Joey Baer for his assistance with superintendent data.

*At the time of this survey last fall, there were 24 deaf superintendents. However, in March 2018, according to The Daily Moth, Nancylynn Ward was relieved of her duties as the Tennessee School for the Deaf superintendent after eight months on the job.

In the time since the 1997 article, I’ve had four kids, all Deaf (all born after the 2007 article). My oldest is now a fourth grader, and we’ve relocated from one state to another. Being the Deaf parent to Deaf children has added to how I experience the deaf education system. I’m also married to a Deaf teacher who has worked at four deaf schools, including a charter school, for 23 years.

An interesting result of this survey was that the first schools to respond were all Deaf. Yet so many schools were reluctant to share data, which isn’t anything new — they’ve been reluctant in the past, too, as I shared in the 2007 article. I suspect this reluctance is because of a few things:

  1. They didn’t want to admit that their numbers were nowhere near where they should be.
  2. In today’s social media age, they were uncomfortable with how this information might backfire and be used against them.
  3. They didn’t want to face that they were possibly perpetuating audism.

I didn’t bother chasing them after the second request for data. Schools should be forthcoming with their data, whether it’s about deaf people, people of color, communication philosophies, or anything else affecting schools — after all, this information is generally public information.

As I read through the data, I was struck by one thing: how many hearing employees continue to work at deaf schools. Mind you, I’m not talking about those who have direct relationships with the Deaf community, such as those with Deaf family members. Rather, I’m talking about those who have no direct relation to the Deaf community, and just work there by chance.

At the previous school my children attended and my husband worked at, there was a good number of Deaf employees. Yet the school was strongly hearing-centric. Many of the hearing employees had worked there for at least 10 years, even 20 or 30 years. Many still couldn’t sign fluently, of course. I often wondered why they stayed for so long, when so many Deaf people were struggling to get jobs at the school. Job security, perhaps. That school was in a very small town, where jobs weren’t as readily available as in a bigger town.

Many hearing employees obviously have the heart and soul for working with Deaf people — but are their intentions misplaced? Are they taking jobs away from Deaf people who already face a 70% underemployment/unemployment rate? I think so, yes; In most cases, they can find employment elsewhere more easily than their Deaf counterparts. They are also taking away opportunities for Deaf people to build the village our deaf children need.

The difference between a school that has a majority of Deaf employees and a school that has a majority of hearing employees is day and night. I should know; I’ve experienced both environments. My children are products of deaf schools, and I have seen firsthand the major difference a Deaf-centric school, staffed by mostly Deaf people, has made. Don’t get me wrong; hearing people absolutely should work at Deaf schools, but not as a majority. The hearing people who do work at my children’s school almost all have direct connections to the Deaf community, which is reassuring.

I’ve also seen how many schools have seen their enrollment numbers dwindle. We left the previous school for many reasons, one being that one of my children had no peers in his grade. He was four and performing well above his grade level, yet he was placed in a preschool classroom with two-year-olds because the school simply didn’t have anywhere else to put him. The school wasn’t willing to accommodate his academic needs, so we saw no option but to move.

At my children’s current school, each child has 15 students, give or take, in each grade, with plenty of peers, resources, and role models. With this critical mass comes an amazing array of opportunities in academics, athletics, and socialization. I’ve seen my children blossom at their school in ways they wouldn’t have at the old school simply because of this much-needed critical mass.

Yet I feel guilty for having left the old school. That school lost as many as 20 students within a three-year period to other, bigger schools. If the school dwindles in enrollment, that means job opportunities for Deaf people dwindle, students at that school are provided with fewer Deaf role models, and so on — a domino effect.

This is the classic “who came first” question: the chicken or the egg? Did we need to stay to help maintain the school’s enrollment numbers, or did we need to go where there was already a critical mass? We struggled with this decision, and chose the latter. The school we left has seen its enrollment dwindle from 130 to about 100 in just a few years. If that school should ever close, is it partly our fault? Or is it the school’s fault for not meeting our children’s needs? Which comes first?

There, of course, are other obstacles to employability among deaf people at deaf schools: teaching credentials, wanting to work in different fields, and job availability. Still, I think the numbers could certainly be as high as they are at the top schools listed in this survey. So why don’t we work toward that? After all, the numbers have steadily increased at many schools over the past 20 years — which I see as wonderful news.

What will the numbers be like in 2027? Your guess is as good as mine…that year, I’ll have three children still in high school. So I’ll see you then.

This article cannot be copied, reproduced, or redistributed without the written consent of the author.

Filed Under: Blog, Community resources, Deaf Community, Deaf education, DeafNation Newspaper, Humanity, Language, Parenting

Deaf Schools: TRUE-BUSINESS DEAF?—10 Years Later

December 12, 2007
Click to see full size.

Click to see full size.

This article originally appeared at i711.com.

In 1997, an article published in DeafNation Newspaper examined staff numbers at 21 residential schools in the U.S. Only three schools reported having more than 40 percent of staff—including all levels of employees, such as maintenance, administrators, dorm staff and teachers—who were deaf or hard of hearing, Ten years later, at least five schools report having broken the 50 percent mark; see chart at right.

The residential school has long played a pivotal role in the Deaf community, given its strong, deep roots in Deaf education history. With the 1817 establishment of American School for the Deaf, in Hartford, Conn., residential schools have since served as a social, educational and language source for many. In fact, it is often at such schools that deaf people are given language and meet deaf role models for the first time in their lives.

Effects of Deaf Staff
In the 1997 article, Brian Sipek, then a junior at the Illinois School for the Deaf, said, “The [hearing] staff are usually not familiar with what the student needs, being a deaf person. There are some hearing teachers, I admit, that try to be very helpful to deaf students, but it’s not the same coming from them, since they were never raised as a deaf person. They’re just not as familiar with being deaf as we are.”

Are students and communities better served through a large number of deaf employees at deaf schools? “Without question, a diverse faculty and staff impact positively on students’ motivation to achieve academically and to set their sights high,” says Texas School for the Deaf (TSD) superintendent Claire Bugen, who is hearing. “Deaf role models are part of the fabric of our educational environment.”

The positive effects of having deaf staff at residential schools are unquestionable, but most schools continue to have more hearing employees than deaf. Sipek feels this should be changed. “I still believe that there is a shortage of deaf and hard of hearing role models for these young students at the residential schools. Being a minority, deaf and hard of hearing children need role models, someone who views the world in the same way that they do, to look up to and be inspired by. “

Indiana School for the Deaf (ISD) superintendent David Geeslin, Ph.D., who is deaf, believes having deaf people on staff is a reason for ISD’s enrollment rising dramatically to 377 students within a few years. “Obviously, with deaf staff, we have a greater number of deaf role models for students, and this also leads to increased exposure to bilingualism for the students,” he says. “Deaf people can share knowledge that no college education can provide.”

Language is another benefit to having deaf staff, says Alex Slappey, Wisconsin School for the Deaf (WSD) superintendent. “Language is learned through the interchange of the language, and the richer and more diverse the language models available, the richer and more diverse the language foundation will be. It’s essential that students at WSD, an American Sign Language/English bilingual program, have the language models that both peers and adults provide. It is equally important that we have hearing staff because we are a bilingual program and provide the cultural and language models our students require to develop English language skills and an understanding of the hearing culture.”

Geeslin adds, “Even so, it’s critical that we maintain a bicultural environment where hearing staff are also equally respected and revered, especially if they’re fluent in both American Sign Language (ASL) and English and have the right attitude.”

Obstacles
Among the several reasons cited in the 1997 articles for having such low percentages of deaf staff were widening career choices for deaf professionals, hiring systems, pay levels, and certification procedures. These appear to continue to be challenges today.

“There are so many more professional employment opportunities today for people who are deaf and many more pre-service training and educational opportunities than there used to be. All of this is great, but it means that many capable individuals are seeking and finding challenging employment outside of the education arena,” says Joseph Finnegan, director of Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf (CEASD). “Also, I think that many individuals don’t see educational administrative employment as very attractive these days, especially with long hours, low pay and many headaches.” CESAD, established in 1868, provides accreditation for deaf schools, and advocacy and program services.

“The state hiring process may inadvertently discriminate against qualified deaf and hard of hearing candidates. This is less true for direct contact staff in Wisconsin, such as teachers, assistants, and dorm staff. We were successful in changing requirements for that in the early 1990s. However, it continues to be true for non-contact staff such as building/grounds and food services staff,” Slappey theorizes. “Bureaucratic certification systems are also impediments to hearing, deaf, or hard of hearing candidates, and can be rather discouraging.”

“I think there are both positives and negatives that contribute to this dilemma of a lack of deaf staff. Clearly, deaf people have many more career choices today than in the past, and with changing technology I suspect that will only continue to be a factor – that’s a good thing,” Bugen adds. “Salaries in education, on the other hand, have not kept pace with the private sector and many young people both want and need to be paid better than most educators are paid. Now with the requirements of highly qualified teaching under various laws, our already shrinking pool of qualified deaf and hearing candidates is compromised even further, which will likely cause more challenges in the years ahead.”

Geeslin is less forgiving. “Even though circumstances for gaining certification have become much stringent, the harsh truth is that we have to roll up our sleeves, whether we’re deaf or hearing or whatever our languages are, and work as much as we can to meet requirements. There’s no way around it at this point. We have to actually try and do what we can to earn our credentials, because we can. After all, we are to serve as models for students. It is time to raise the bar for ourselves and our students.”

Deaf Administrators
Currently, there are at least 14 deaf or hard of hearing superintendents in the nation, a number that fluctuates with time. “I foresee a need for more deaf administrators at deaf schools, but I think the pool of qualified candidates is smaller than it could be,” Slappey says. “Finding good administrators, whether hearing or deaf, is a problem. States are now more aware of and sensitive to the value a good deaf administrator brings to a program.”

Finnegan, a former superintendent, notes that graduate-level or professional-level training for deaf people were nonexistent for years, especially after the closure of the Leadership Training Program at California State University, Northridge, but that this is changing with the establishment of the Gallaudet Leadership Institute (GLI).

Training may be key, Bugen agrees, who also cites GLI. “Given the growing scarcity of young deaf or hearing professionals interested in education, we have to groom and grow our future leaders from within. We have to find ways to give our talented young deaf people opportunities to take on leadership roles and then encourage them to get the proper certification and training to assume administrative positions.”

“I think another challenge is that so many deaf administrators try to buck the system head-on instead of working within the system,” Dr. Geeslin states. “What helps me in my current position greatly are my years in outreach. I was out in the field, and I saw how hearing parents often didn’t care about Deaf culture. They simply wanted to find the best options for their children in acquiring spoken and/or written English. I had to come up with different ways of sharing the idea of using ASL to acquire English, and that really helped me understand the reality of working within the system in order to buck it. It’s all about mediating between the two worlds.”

New Challenges
What makes the enrollment boom that some residential schools are experiencing even more remarkable is that a Dec. 4 article in Education Week reported that only 15 percent of 72,000 K-12 deaf students attend deaf schools, down from 33 percent in 1985.

“I think there are two important elements that contribute to this success. The first is a community with a critical mass of Deaf people and a school that offers a high quality educational program. We find an increasingly large number of Deaf families moving to the Austin area so that their children can attend TSD,” Bugen says. “When this happens it not only keeps our enrollment strong, but it brings more Deaf families into the larger business and social community of Austin. Second, I believe the school must be ‘Deaf friendly’ and involve Deaf people in all aspects of the school’s operations so that Deaf people feel respected, valued and empowered.”

Serving a specific niche is another significant boost, Slappey says. “The landscape of deaf education has been changing and continues to change. Deaf schools, especially residential schools, need to decide where their focus is going to be in terms of who they will serve and how they will serve their students. WSD considers itself a niche school that serves children who require a visual language, ASL, to access education. This doesn’t mean we don’t serve the more hard of hearing child who uses English, but we do not sacrifice the needs of the ASL child to meet the needs of the English child. Deaf schools need to show how their uniqueness may make them a better placement option. To a large degree, this is an education and public relations issue. We must educate as to the unique needs, especially the communication and social emotional needs, of our deaf children.”

Even so, schools are struggling with an emergent problem: students with additional disabilities, such as autism or attention deficit disorder. According to Education Weekly, a 2005 survey indicated that 42 percent of 37,000 deaf students reported having additional disabilities. Dr. Geeslin, noting that 52 percent of ISD’s students have other disabilities, says that the lack of deaf teachers specializing in special education is a dilemma. “Now with the proliferation of students with additional needs, it’s even more crucial that deaf teachers pursue certification and experience in working with those students. The students are the ones who need the best language and cultural role models. And who knows? With earlier intervention and clear language models, it may be that those students make greater progress in acquiring both languages improving academic performance.”

Citing changes in federal and state statutes, Slappey says, “It is not a trend limited to teachers of the deaf, but part of the overall trend. To realize a true change in the supply, the teaching profession needs to be made more attractive as a career choice. Such things as better compensation, better working conditions, less bureaucracy, and less paperwork would go a long way to that extent. It’s a huge order to attempt to implement.”

‘Grow Our Own’
Despite the hurdles, Geeslin believes he has the solution to ensuring stronger roots and equality at deaf schools.

“15 years ago, I went to the National Association for the Deaf conference and ran into a friend, Lindsay Dunn. Given that I’ve always tried to look at things from outside of the box even as a teacher, I had been thinking about the lack of diversity at ISD. So I asked Lindsay how we could bring more African-Americans to the school. He said, ‘I have the answer. First, what did you do to recruit them?’ I told him that we had asked many people, but none ever applied. He then asked if we had a strong black deaf community, and I said we did not. He asked if we had any black deaf teachers. I again said we did not. He said, ‘There you have it. You have to grow your own first.'”

Profoundly affected by this revelation, Geeslin’s outlook changed. “Thanks to Lindsay, I have tried to ensure that we grow our own by encouraging staff, students and parents to invest in the community, and making sure that they understand they are investments themselves, too. We have to do this to create a community to which people of all types want to return and continue the work previous generations did. This is one reason ISD has grown so much in such a short time – because we grow our own.”

The fact that more schools have broken the 50 percent mark comes as good news to Sipek, who graduated Gallaudet University in 2004 and now works at the university. “I’m thrilled to know that there are more role models for deaf and hard of hearing children at residential schools. This closes a much-needed gap, but like most things, there is always room for more. I think this increase in staff numbers has been a long time coming.”

My thoughts:

This article first came about in 1997 when Brian Sipek asked me to see how many schools had deaf people employed at deaf schools. I agreed, and set out to collect the data. I was surprised at the amount of resistance from schools in giving me the statistics I asked for—something that was also true this time around. But I was even more surprised at the staggeringly low numbers, and how defensive some schools were about the numbers. My questions were simple: 1. How many students attend your school? 2. How many people do you employ? 3. How many of those staff members are deaf or hard of hearing?

Those who did not try to justify their low percentages were the ones who had outstanding attitudes, were upfront about this being a concern, and worked hard to change the numbers.

I am beyond thrilled to see how the numbers have grown since 1997, even if only a few have broken the 50 percent barrier. I should also point out that the numbers of deaf and hard of hearing teachers and dorm staff at many schools are quite high, and that the low numbers usually stemmed from cafeteria workers, maintenance, and administration. This is in no way an excuse; we should have deaf employees in each of these categories, too.

As Sipek commented, we still have a long way to go. Regardless of changing needs and times, we must continue to promote the increased hiring of qualified deaf people in key positions at every level. After all, paraphrasing Lindsay Dunn, it’s the only way we can grow our own.

Copyrighted material. This article can not be copied, reproduced, or redistributed without the express written consent of the author.

Filed Under: Deaf education, DeafNation Newspaper, i711.com, Politics

Where Have They All Gone?

January 23, 2003

This originally appeared at NAD’s Members-Only website area at www.nad.org.

Recently, I was preparing a press release for one of my clients who owns a deaf-run business. As the client and I were talking about where to send the press release, I suddenly had a startling realization.

There weren’t any deaf newspapers I could send the press release to.

I started ticking deaf publications off in my head. Silent News is apparently kaput. Newswaves – gone. Deaf USA is a trade publication now distributed by CSD. DeafNation quickly folded – temporarily, it said – in April 2000, and they show no sign of returning anytime soon. DeafCanadaToday closed down some time ago. The rest are either newsletters or organizational publications (i.e., NADmag), or feature magazines (i.e. Hearing Health – which, incidentally, has been sold to Deafness Research Foundation).

Deaf people suddenly have very sparse resources for them to share news, opinions and information within the deaf community. Where can we find in-depth coverage of sports? What about deaf events? Where will we find profiles of not only prominent deaf leaders, but of also ordinary deaf people?

The past five years haven’t been too kind to newspapers within the deaf community. What is happening? Why are they all disappearing?

I say it’s because of The Big Three affecting any publication in the mainstream, and especially affecting deaf-oriented publications: Money, mismanagement, and the Internet.

It’s all about $Moola$
Money is probably the biggest factor. Ever since I left Silent News in late January of 2002, I’ve been asked the same question by practically every person who asks me about the decline of newspapers in the deaf community: “Why don’t you set up your own newspaper?”

My response is always the same: “You got the money for me?” I haven’t gotten a “yes” yet.

People don’t quite realize how expensive it is to run a monthly, even quarterly, publication. For one thing, printing costs have skyrocketed – not only for small community newspapers like Silent News, but for major publications and university materials, too.

And then there’s overhead costs… staffing costs… and the costs of the lifeblood of any publication: the photographers, illustrators and writers. Usually advertising and subscriber rates cover these costs, but declining subscription numbers – a problem for almost all publications today – and struggles with getting advertisers to pay up or place ads have not helped.

Advertising is a Catch-22 situation: Companies or people like to advertise, but don’t always want to pay for it, so they often resort to advertising via e-mail or via websites. Using e-mail or websites is a much cheaper, sometimes free, method than paying for printed advertisements. This, obviously, hurts publications that rely upon advertisement income. Another frustration is when companies try to negotiate a barter ad, where they get free ad space in exchange for listing the publication’s name as a sponsor. The publication makes absolutely no money this way, and the free publicity usually isn’t very beneficial.

I’ve also had many people say, “Well, how expensive could it be to start up a newspaper? I’d be willing to do work for free, and I know many others would, too.” Sure, of course – but for how long? I actually started writing for a deaf newspaper for free many years ago – but it seemed unfair when the newspaper started making money off my work and didn’t pay me.

Keep in mind that many of these start-up businesses – much like the dot.com craze – flop after a few years. The Small Business Administration says the majority of small businesses fail eventually, and 50% of them fail within the first year. Why should start-up businesses within the deaf community be any different?

I’ve seen the same delusions of grandeur with many other individuals, mostly inexperienced, who want to start their own business within the deaf community.

Mind you, I’m all for dreams and visions. But I’m also interested in solid, actual business plans and numbers. We’ve seen publication after publication close down because of money. You gotta have money to make money, and you gotta know how to handle money.

This brings me to the second reason: mismanagement.

“I’m The Boss, That’s Why!”
The key to any successful organization is its leader. With a bad leader, you’re going to have chaos waiting to erupt. I can safely say that many of the leaders at the newspapers I worked at had minimal business experience, and a lack of understanding about how important the writers were. The successful publishers and editors are the ones who believe that reliable writers are the heart and soul of their publication.

In my 16 years of working for publications within the deaf community, I’ve seen one constant: a lack of appreciation for writers and contributors. Writers are often expected to write for free – something that would rarely happen with mainstream publications. I once was approached by an online publication that asked me to become the editor for little pay. I immediately asked, “How will you pay the writers?” Their response was, “I don’t understand. Why would the writers be paid at first? They should prove their work to us before we pay them.”

I quickly declined their offer.

Publishers must understand that even if operations and staffing costs are running them into the ground – which wouldn’t ideally happen if they were well-prepared and well-budgeted – they must get rid of their expectations that people will write for free. With no writers, they have no stories. With no stories, they have no subscribers. It’s really quite that simple.

Websites and the Dreaded Forward Syndrome
The third reason is the Internet – which is both a blessing and a curse for the publication world. The Internet is wonderful for finding information and contacting people. USA-L was a valuable tool I utilized more often than not when I was editor over at Silent News. Yet, at the same time, publications have been stunted by the immediate nature of news appearing on websites – especially deaf newspapers.

When the Gallaudet murders happened, the whole world knew about it within 24 hours. When, a month later, Silent News published an in-depth story, the murders were pretty much old news. Yet, for many other stories (like the Errol Shaw shooting in Detroit), we were able to provide in-depth information that weren’t available on many of the sites, thanks to exclusive interviews and information gathering.

Publications have addressed this by providing an online version of their printed newspaper or magazine – but what if you’re a small deaf newspaper with limited funds? Then you’re probably going to be affected by the Internet.

There are also so many websites that try to be a site for “deaf news,” when in reality they’re a compilation of all the news articles about deaf and hard of hearing people that appear in the world’s newspapers and magazines. Search engines and newsgroups easily do this. Where are the original, in-depth stories, written by deaf people and published by deaf people?

Let’s also not forget the annoying Forwarding Syndrome within the deaf community. Anyone can type up an e-mail containing jokes or actual news, and forward it to someone, who will then pass this along to about twenty other people, and these twenty people forward it to forty others.

With this Forwarding Syndrome in place, who needs newspapers anymore?

Subscribers Are the Backbone
One thing bothered me when I was deluged with e-mail after word of yet another deaf newspaper’s demise got out: Why didn’t these subscribers take matters into their own hands, rather than complaining about losing their respect for deaf publications? Why didn’t they demand an answer from the publisher of the newspaper, rather than leaving the paper’s fate to rumors of a buyout? At least three of the now-defunct deaf newspapers did not even have the respect to at least send out a letter of explanation to their subscribers and advertisers or post a message on their websites. If I were a subscriber or advertiser treated this way, I’d be hopping mad and trying to find out answers, fast.

The subscribers could’ve easily filed a class lawsuit to get their money back, filed reports with the Better Business Bureau or filed complaints with the state’s consumer affairs division. Why didn’t they? I’m not sure. Perhaps they expected someone else to take care of matters; perhaps they simply didn’t know their rights as consumers; or they just didn’t think the subscription fee was worth the trouble.

So what do we do? Do we set up yet another newspaper? Hope that some benevolent corporation will save the newspaper? Resort to reading these canned-news websites that cannot offer experienced and qualified editors? Put faith in one of the many new magazines popping up?

Quite frankly, I don’t know.

All I know is that I used to have three deaf-oriented newspapers coming to my house each month. Today, I don’t have even one to look forward to anymore.

Copyrighted material. This article can not be copied, reproduced, or redistributed without the express written consent of the author.

Filed Under: Community resources, Culture, Deaf Community, DeafNation Newspaper, History, Language, Media, Silent News

A Deaf Educator Retires: Victor Galloway

March 1, 1999

Originally appeared in DeafNation Newspaper, March 1999. The interview for this article was conducted via e-mail.

vicgalloway“Let me tell you this…retirement is but a phase in your career! I am just turning over a new leaf in the story of my life,” says Victor Galloway.

Galloway certainly has had many leaves in his tree of life, retiring at the age of 70 1/2 from a career that has spanned many years and many experiences.

Born in Atlanta, Ga., in 1928, he remembers, “I have very little recollection of my early years and the very first I can remember of my ‘being’ was in Clio, South Carolina, population 500. I grew up with Big Mama, who I later learned when I was about nine years old was really my grandmother.”

Galloway’s deafness was not identified until he was two and a half years old, when a local physician realized that Galloway’s “slowness” was not due to mental retardation, but to hearing loss.

“When I turned six years old, Big Mama packed a steamer trunk with all my clothes and personal stuff, which were then loaded into my uncle’s vehicle,” Galloway says. “I could not figure out what was going on. Big Mama tried to tell me that I was going to get shoes. On we went through towns and villages, and each time we passed stores that looked like they sold shoes, I kept pointing at themand beseeching them to stop and back up.”

He later realized that Big Mama was actually trying to tell him that they were going to school. “Such was the vagaries of lipreading,” exclaims Galloway.

He enrolled at the South Carolina School for the Deaf and the Blind, and continued there for the next 13 years. Galloway, with other students at SCSDB, learned sign language even though the school had strict policies in favor of oralism.

When he arrived at high school level—in these days, deaf schools ended at the eighth grade—Gallaudet entrance examinations were administered, but he could not take them because he was only 15 years old. Officials decided that because they would be unable to challenge Galloway academically, he would best benefit from a public school education. “This proved to be the best thing that ever happened to me!” Galloway says.

“I got to play basketball and football with the big guys. I was on varsity basketball and football teams. One of the linemen on the football team learned enough sign language to give me the signals in he huddles. This team was equivalent to the 5-A teams in Texas. My egotism knew no boundaries, but hey, in such a rarefied atmosphere, I had every reason to crow.”

Galloway was mainstreamed without interpreting services, tutoring or notetakers. “Mainstreaming was not yet a word, and Public Law 94-142 would not be enacted for approximately 30 years,” Galloway explains.

“I did not know such services existed so I really never felt deprived or oppressed. I happened to be a serious student, so I made the Beta Club—which became the National Honor Society a decade or so later.”

After attending Gallaudet College, Galloway was a high explosives research chemist at the U.S. Naval Ordnance Laboratory in Maryland. He then worked in Atlanta as a process control engineer at Lockheed Aircraft Corporation, which transferred him to Sunnyvale, Calif. After 12 years with Lockheed working in various positions, Galloway says, “A strange turn of events found me as a graduate student in the famous Leadership Training Program at the then San Fernando Valley State College, now California State University, Northridge.”

“Upon receiving my master’s degree, the late Dr. Ray L. Jones, the legendary educational leader who paved the way for many deaf individuals to move into leadership positions. . .persuaded me to remain at CSUN as a faculty member and to assume partial responsibility for the Leadership Training Program. Undoubtedly, my years in the LTP gave me the impetus to move ahead and upward, and ultimately led me to the superintendency of two state schools for the deaf.” Galloway was Superintendent of the Scranton School for the Deaf in Pennsylvania, and Texas School for the Deaf in Austin.

Galloway, upon encouragement from numerous colleagues and superiors, decided to enroll at the University of Arizona in Tucson for two years as a doctoral student. There, he, along with Dr. Norm Tully and Dr. Richard Johnson, developed a proposal that led to the development of the Community Outreach Program for the Deaf in Tucson. This program recently celebrated its 25th anniversary.

He completed all the requirements but decided to do the dissertation in absentia so he could take his family (including three small children) to Rochester, N.Y., and accept a position at the National Technical Institute of the Deaf (NTID). He started as an educational specialist in the College of Science and College of Applied Science, and eventually became the Director of Certificate, Diploma and Associate of Arts program.

He says of that time, “It was an exciting time, a real opportunity to break ground in the education of deaf individuals. I welcomed very much the responsibility to establish the program for the very first 70 students to enroll at NTID. This is yet another accomplishment of which I am proud. I should point out that it was at NTID where I learned to accept responsibility and to carry it out completely.”

Galloway’s immediate supervisor was Dr. William Castle, who was the Vice President of NTID for many years. Galloway says of Castle, “He strongly believed that if one was assigned a major responsibility, he or she must have the authority to carry out this responsibility. I am forever indebted to Dr. Castle for grooming me for future challenges.”

Galloway made his way to his most recent career at the Department of Education in Washington, D.C., where he was Chief of the Deafness and Communicative Disorders Branch. Here, he was heavily involved with technology. When asked how he got involved with promoting technology, Galloway answers, “In October of 1994 I was going through an exhibit hall on my way to my office building. This all-day exhibit was primarily to showcase various computers and programs that could increase the federal government’s productivity and so on.

“The one that fascinated me was a monitor showing a speaker apparently presenting a paper and I was trying to decide if the computer was using a tape.” The exhibitor of that booth started to speak to Galloway, but when Galloway indicated he was deaf, the exhibitor immediately retrieved an interpreter. The exhibitor then explained that the speaker was actually at a site in front of a camera 25 miles away in Rockville. This was Galloway’s introduction to videoconferencing, and he quickly saw how two deaf people could communicate using this technology.

After a preliminary experiment, Galloway set up a videoconference with the Rehabilitation Services Administration, the University of Illinois, and a group of rehabilitation students at the University of Dublin in Ireland. He says, “This is the technology of the future—no, make it the present! With the growth of fiberglass optics networks, the cost of this development will slowly decrease. The current high costs discourage the use of this technology in the homes of deaf people.”

Galloway sees a future in this for fields such as remote interpreting and one-on-one conversations between deaf individuals in different locations. “Many of the technical developments that we see today are those we did not even dream of just a decade ago. I believe that such developments will eventually enable deaf and hard of hearing individuals to communicate with their hearing colleagues regardless of the differences in their linguistic capabilities,” predicts Galloway.

“With the rapidly changing faces of this planet and the constant upheaval in the world of work along with the new developments that quickly become obsolete (remember when WordPerfect 5.1 was big?), we must be mentally prepared to accept such shifts in the area of employment and to fully realize that no one can stop learning.”

Galloway also emphasizes the importance of continuing education. “Over the decades I have had to continually go to school or to enroll in short-term training programs in order to remain abreast of development.”

In 1994, Galloway even got a taste of the big screen by appearing in The River Wild, a movie with Meryl Streep. The movie, which was filmed in Montana, left quite an impression upon Galloway. “It was some experience that I will never forget! I left the set with a lot more respect for filmmaking!” he says. “I enjoyed playing the role of her father. I was on the set nearly seven weeks and ended up with about five minutes on the screen so that tells how so much work is involved!”

Galloway also says that Meryl Streep was such a sincere person. “I found [her] to be a true artist and one really wonderful person. There is absolutely nothing phony about her; she is genuinely a good person. I enjoyed playing the role of her father.”

Now that Galloway has achieved so much in his career, doesn’t he want to rest and appreciate his free time? “Free time? Let me tell you this…retirement is but a phase in your career!”

Even though he recommends retirement highly, Galloway shares a story he jokingly identifies with. “Seems there was a very well-liked four-star general at a base located adjacent to a thriving small community. He had become a fixture there, so when one day he announced his retirement it sent a ripple of shock throughout the entire community. The local paper’s reporter decided to go to the base to interview him. ‘So now after so many years on the base what are you going to do?’ asked the reporter. The genial general thought momentarily and replied, ‘Well, I reckon I will go back to my ranch and sit in my favorite rocking chair on the front porch and then after two weeks I will begin to rock!’”

Galloway plans to work on several home projects, doing a bit of consulting in the area of education and rehabilitation of deaf and hard of hearing people, spending time with his wife and travelling when she retires in a few years, enjoying his grandchildren, and most importantly, breaking 100 on the golf course. He says of time with his family and golf, “This I think is like riding into the glorious sunset!”

Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced, or redistributed without the express written consent of the author.

 
Filed Under: Community resources, Deaf education, DeafNation Newspaper, Notable People

Deaf Schools: TRUE-BUSINESS Deaf?

November 1, 1997

deafstaffchart1997This article originally appeared in DeafNation Newspaper, November 1997. Read the 10-year follow-up article here.

Editor’s note: TRUE-BUSINESS is an ASL gloss. The rough English equivalent is: “Is it really true?” or “Are you sure?”

One of the cornerstones of the Deaf community is the residential school.

Ever since American School for the Deaf was first founded in 1817 by Laurent Clerc and Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet, deaf students have been going to deaf schools.

True, these schools were often predominantly run by hearing teachers and administrators, not to mention janitors and dormitory staff.

But in the 180 years since ASD was founded, deaf people are found at every level within deaf schools. Nowadays, it seems that most residential schools are run by deaf people in every category, from janitorial to dormitory supervision to teachers to administration.

Have the times really changed? Are residential schools for deaf students now really mostly deaf-run?

DeafNation contacted over 40 deaf schools, and got the numbers of hearing and deaf staff at various deaf schools during the 1996-1997 academic year (see graph).

From the 21 schools that responded or had the numbers available, the highest percentages were found at two schools renowned for their high rate of success in deaf students.

But even with the highest percentage, it was surprising to find that not one school that responded had a majority of deaf staff*. Many schools also refused to respond to DeafNation’s request for statistics.

The schools with the highest percentage (46%) of deaf workers were California School for the Deaf-Fremont, run by Superintendent Henry Klopping, who is a child of deaf adults (CODA), and Model Secondary School for the Deaf/Kendall Demonstration Elementary School, located at Gallaudet University.

The next highest was Maryland School for the Deaf, run by Superintendent James Tucker, who is Deaf, with a 41% deaf staff. Following that was a lower percentage of 35%, at Michigan School for the Deaf.

These numbers are startling, considering how loud the Deaf President Now movement was in 1988, and considering how the Americans with Disabilities Act has tried to provide equality in the workplace and elsewhere.

Is it a case of hiring discrimination? Is it a case of simply insufficient availability of deaf teachers and administrators? Why are there no residential schools that have a majority of staff being Deaf?

Most cited is the widening of career choices for deaf professionals. Peter Seiler, formerly the superintendent of the Illinois School for the Deaf and currently the superintendent of the Arkansas School for the Deaf in Little Rock, says, “I think we have done such a good job in opening many doors for career opportunities that teacher is no longer the only professional choice for educated deaf people. That is one reason and maybe the major reason for the low percentage of deaf and hard of hearing professional staff.”

David Updegraff, a hearing (but losing his hearing slowly) superintendent of the St. Mary’s School for the Deaf in Buffalo, N.Y., agrees with Seiler. “For example, how many deaf people 10 years ago worked as reporters for newspapers? Probably none, but there were printers. It used to be that if deaf people wanted a professional career, they almost had to work in a school for the deaf. There were always a few exceptions, like ministers or rehabilitation counselors, but the situation is radically different now. Merrill Lynch has deaf stockbrokers, an auto dealer has a deaf salesman, a law firm has deaf attorneys and so on.”

Hiring systems and pay levels were also cited as possible reasons for the low percentages, especially in state-supported residential schools. Alex Slappey, the Deaf superintendent of the Wisconsin School for the Deaf in Delavan, explains, “State residential schools tend to follow state hiring requirements. Sometimes the system will put a deaf individual at a disadvantage.”

Seiler supports this theory, saying, “Since state schools for the deaf are operated as a state agency, these schools are stuck by the state level pay grade plan. . . State legislators want to shave costs from the state budget to make the taxpayers happy and so they pick on programs with little visibility and state schools for the deaf have little visibility.”

Another major possible reason cited by both Updegraff and Seiler is the issue of teaching certification. Updegraff states, “There is still a serious problem in many states with the requirement that teachers pass the National Teacher Examination to get certified. That is a tough exam for many people to pass, including deaf and hearing people, but deaf people have a tougher time than hearing because of the structure of the exam.”

Seiler concurs. “These tests often stress speech development rather than language development or communication development. These tests are also culturally biased towards hearing people and away from the deaf people.”

Just how this disproportionate number of deaf staff affects the heart of every deaf school—the students—is a key question in many superintendents’ minds.

David LeFors, who worked at the Louisiana School for the Deaf in Baton Rouge from 1992 to 1994 as a dorm counselor, says, “The kids would always come to me or other deaf counselors, because they were more comfortable to talk with us and because they could communicate with us without having to repeat or slow down. They seldom went to the hearing counselors because they didn’t see much support or bonding from the hearing staff.” LeFors left LSD to take a better-paying job.

Brian Sipek, a junior at the Illinois School for the Deaf in Jacksonville, recognizes this comfort level with deaf staff, also. “The [hearing] staff are usually not familiar with what the student needs, being a deaf person. There are some hearing teachers, I admit, that try to be very helpful to deaf students, but it’s not the same coming from them, since they were never raised as a deaf person. They’re just not as familiar with being deaf as we are.” Sipek is third-generation Deaf.

Slappey says, “I believe the outnumbering of hearing staff also affects the level of language interaction with the children. They have less exposure to fluent ASL through native users.”

Dr. Ernesto Santistevan, a hearing clinical psychologist at the New Mexico School for the Deaf, admits the limitations of being a hearing person at a deaf school is quite powerful for the students. Even though Santistevan is quite fluent in ASL, having earned his degree in Gallaudet University’s five-year doctoral program, he says, “I don’t have that effortless communication and knowledge of culture a CODA or a Deaf person would have. It impacts service and I believe anyone who says it doesn’t is fooling themselves.”

Santistevan adds, “I think it affects the kids because it is hard to find Deaf role models in high stations.”

When asked how to solve this disparity in numbers, Slappey mentions that aside from increasing pay scales for deaf workers commensurate with their position’s responsibilities, “I also think we need to get more deaf adults interested in teaching as a career.” He cautions, however, “What I don’t think we should do, is hire the deaf just for the sake of having deaf staff in positions. If they are not qualified, if they are not the best applicants, then we are ‘watering down’ the quality of our program and that is not in the best interests of our children.”

He also states, “I think it affects the students in the sense that they continue to see the deaf as a less powerful minority. I think it sends a message that does not help the self-esteem of the deaf.”

There appears to be a long list of questions surrounding this issue. Schools must take into consideration whether it is better to hire hearing individuals who are overqualified for their respective positions, or to hire qualified deaf people who have experienced deafness their entire lives. Are schools responsible for not having enough deaf role models? Or is it today Deaf people choose to work in fields long dominated by hearing people? Are Deaf graduates of deaf schools giving back to their schools in various ways, whether it be teaching or simply attending football games?

How do schools address this problem of having a large inequality in deaf and hearing staff, when language is so essential to the child’s learning process? Since deaf schools have a majority of hearing staff, does it mean the hearing staff is to blame for the national reading average being at third grade for the deaf individual? What does it all mean for the student?

Ronald Sipek, Brian’s father and also a graduate of the Illinois School for the Deaf, says, “I can’t imagine what it is like for those students to have limited deaf role models. It is so important for them to have teachers and workers that they can go to who will understand their deaf ways, their communication, and their experiences, because they have, too, experienced it themselves. Brian has a Deaf family. But what about those who are not from Deaf families? Who do they look up to if there are not enough deaf role models at the schools?”

* The word staff includes those employed at every level, including janitorial, administration, teaching and support staff.

Read the 10-year follow-up article here.

Copyrighted material. This article can not be copied, reproduced, or redistributed without the express written consent of the author.

Filed Under: Deaf education, DeafNation Newspaper, Language, Parenting

Tweets