Sign language and visual communication. If there’s anything else more defining, more “core” to deaf and hard of hearing culture, I don’t know what it is. During the protest, this core item was a big issue, interwoven among the many events. Interpreter access during the HMB lockout. Inability of DPS officers to sign competently. Communication with the media.
Take a hearing person and a deaf person. What distinguishes them? The fact that the deaf person communicates primarily through visual means.
Deaf people of all colors and sizes are united by that common experience. The struggle to communicate. Speaking from experience, it can be very intense. There are times where one feels isolated and lost, alienated from a culture.
That feeling of isolation can happen anywhere. At home among family. In line at the bank. Sitting on the Metro.
And even at Gallaudet.
When I started working here right before the protest, a big surprise for me was the fact that some people here cannot sign competently. An even bigger surprise was the underlying attitude that deaf and hard of hearing people are not our customers, but children.
When I started working here at Gallaudet, I met a few people who couldn’t sign. One of them was a faculty member coming into my office. He couldn’t sign very well and we struggled to carry a conversation. A friend of mine, a graduate student at Gallaudet, had a teacher stop signing in the classroom many times. People tell me, “Welcome to Gallaudet!” I can’t VP colleagues and coworkers if they are hearing. “You mean I have to call them on VP and tell them to turn on their computer and then start their webcam and then their webcam software?”
“Welcome to Gallaudet.”
I was raised and trained to believe in the concept of uncompromising excellence. Uncompromising excellence is when you strive for the best. To be a real leader. For example, look at companies like Apple and Ritz-Carlton.
Apple. They take their products and think about each and every detail. How can we make the user happy, how can we predict his or hers every thought. How can we make them smile. How can we make the best product possible.
Ritz Carlton. Their slogan is “We are Ladies and Gentlemen serving Ladies and Gentlemen.” That’s a very simple and powerful concept. The maids, concierge, employees are ladies and gentlemen. The guests are ladies and gentlemen. That sets an expectation on both the employee and guest to be ladies and gentlemen. And this goes deep in their culture.
So when I came here to Gallaudet, I was struck by what I mentioned earlier. Many employees of the University cannot sign competently. Some not at all. Not only that, but policies on sign are unclear — one example is the Faculty ASL policy. As Ryan Commerson discovered a few months ago, it says that ASL is defined as sign language and spoken English.
Using my concept of uncompromising excellence, I look at Gallaudet. University Strategic Goal #1 says that it is “Guided by its mission to be the only liberal arts university in the world designed exclusively for deaf and hard of hearing students.”
So. Designed exclusively for deaf and hard of hearing students. To me, that means communication access for deaf and hard of hearing students.
Uncompromising excellence in communication should be Gallaudet’s strong point, not its weak point. Gallaudet faculty and staff should be the best sign communicators on earth.
Are they?
In my eyes as a taxpayer and deaf citizen, I think Gallaudet should be a place where a deaf or hard of hearing person can walk on campus and not feel that their communication is limited in the slightest. If a deaf or hard of hearing person has a hard time communicating with a single employee of Gallaudet (let alone die due to lack of communication, like Carl Dupree), Gallaudet has not lived up to its strategic goals.
To be fair, Gallaudet is within a larger system, and this larger system includes many influences. Students, faculty, and staff are coming in from a world where deaf and hard of hearing students are now educated in mainstream environments, deaf institutes, and everywhere in between. Technologies like cochlear implants are changing the ways that deaf and hard of hearing people communicate. And this change does affect Gallaudet as well.
Giving uncompromising excellence in sign and visual communication something that needs to be worked on here at the University in a clear and systematic manner. As President Davila said recently, Gallaudet needs to focus on its core competency — Education. And this can’t happen without uncompromising excellence in sign language and visual communication, since it is the core of the deaf and hard of hearing experience.
Uncompromising excellence in communication access.
And it needs to happen fast, from the top down to the bottom up.
——–
This was my panel presentation at the Vlog/Blog conference last week.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
33 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
However, if Gallaudet wants to remain viable as an educational institution, it needs to attract the next generation of deaf children, most of whom will have CIs, and mostly use total communication, oral, SEE, or Cued Speech.
You can’t wall Gallaudet off from those students and make it an ASL-only educational institute. That would defeat the entire purpose of the university in serving a wide variety of deaf and hard of hearing students.
Your perspective is valid. I can only offer one thought in response — what happens when you take away a deaf person’s CI? Or hearing aid? Suppose batteries become scarce… or not available? Gallaudet needs to take the long view. There are rumblings among political and policy circles that between global warming, growing threat of antibiotic-resistant diseases, and the decline of oil/gasoline… there will be major issues that constrain global supply of basics like food, let alone hearing aid batteries.
It is also a fallacy that teaching and embracing ASL will “wall off” Gallaudet from students who don’t use ASL. One does not follow the other in any clear and provable manner. I actually suspect it will be the opposite, more similar to what Sara says below. If Gallaudet has a clear mission and embraces ASL, it will attract more attention than a muddled, middle-of-the road mission that accepts all and supports none.
And suppose if stem cells provide a cure for deafness? Where will we be as a generation then when that technology is provided to the next generation? Remember that 90% of deaf children have hearing parents.
Then we can all look back at the glory days of Gallaudet and be proud, instead of saying “Gally sold out”.
A cure for deafness might just be inevitable. It might not be. No matter, we are here NOW and this is an opportunity to take Gallaudet to the next level. That gives Gallaudet University the option of maintaining a certain level of prestige, even if eventually the university will have to close its doors.
How would you prefer Gallaudet to be remembered in history?
I would prefer to remember Gallaudet as being an inclusive institution of higher education that welcomed all deaf and hard of hearing students and supported their rights to use the communication mode (whether it be SEE, ASL, oral, Cued Speech) that they are most comfortable with.
Gallaudet can do that AND elevate the use of ASL as an academic language.
Why can’t it do both?
It has been inclusive all along, allowing students to use any communication method they want and giving them support services when needed. Now, we need to ask ourselves, how can Gallaudet stand out and be unique?
Yay Magic Stem Cells! Then I’ll be sure to come to you when nobody’s insurance is willing to pay for it… LOL
You know, stem cells won’t be a cure for every day people for a long time. They cost over 3,000 just to collect right now, you know, without the benefit of easy application? How much more will they cost later, when all their use is found? Not to mention a monthly fee to store. Insurance plans don’t cover it. So unless your 90% suddenly gets rich or lives in another country with 100% free and funded health care, we’ll still be deaf.
But speculating about straw men - what if? what if? - is not the way to answer Bobby’s serious essay about improving the academic achievement of people who graduate from Gallaudet.
It’s logical to get everyone at the same university using the same language and improving what language they do have. just as people at universities use “university language” and have their own speak, so should people at Gallaudet be able to play with and develop language at the University level. This means ASL. It will highly benefit ALL users to be able to express themselves TO everyone. I do understand individuals achieve success in other methods, but whether deaf people are or are not a culture is besides the point. the point is that by treating Deaf people as a cultural group and using ASL as the method of treatment, we get around “disability” and allow our minds full access to the world through bilingual educational means. An ASL user in the wild is a Wild Man, not an animal.
When I was at Haverford we had plenty of people from out of the country or different parts of it. They worked hard on learning the dominant language. And when I tried that one Chinese class and my interpreter’s head exploded, I had to leave, but I remember them saying “Only speak Chinese or I destroy brain with axe!”
So you see there is precedent.
It is an experiment, with results possible such as we cannot dream in our poor theology. It is not something we should be afraid of. Suppose that gene therapy does happen? So what? We will have made our experiment, and we will know what works. Why wait for the hearing people to solve our puzzles? Don’t you want to KNOW what would work best? I don’t want to speculate forever.
Indeed!
And there’s no “one size fits all” approach. No single quick solution. Every strategy should be developed, promoted, and utilized, in order to achieve such excellence. This requires community awareness, patience and support across all levels of the community. So I guess more dialogue and generosity may be needed, in order for the Gallaudet community to obtain large resources ($$) such as increased provision of interpreters to accompany professors with weak signing skills, and little things like students donating $5 to a fund that’d supply sign language DVDs and dictionaries to non-academic personnel in order to encourage them to learn to sign. Fraternities and sororities could host “silent” dinners with sponsorship and invite faculty and staff to join. All kinds of activities could be done to improve the atmosphere of communication. Just a few ideas here–there’s plenty more out there!
I love your ideas.
Wait, didn’t you go to MSSD, where they worked hard at signing ALL THE TIME? Grin!
I meant “Indeed” in response to the post, not the above comment.
I think Gallaudet would do well if it distinguished itself linguistically, using ASL as the main medium of communication, in order to differeniate itself as an institution of higher education among many others in the world where there is no such distinction recognizing ASL as a viable, creative, and intelligent human language.
I agree. The way I see it, Gallaudet can either distinguish itself or it will become less relevant in a world with top-quality and tech-heavy choices like NTID/RIT.
Exactly! Gally has the opportunity here to make an impact, to find a niche. I say Gallaudet should go for it. Or they can just become like just any other university. Then why, should people want to go?
Bobby,
I totally agree. If I did not make it clear at the Vlog/Blog conference, I think Gallaudet should ensure that ASL permeates the culture of the university and that includes its staff/faculy/administration and students. But that’s the only first step - they must also make sure everyone has excellent writing and reading skills (yes - that means ENGLISH) in order to survive in the real world. That, my friend, would be uncompromising excellence.
See my earlier post (I have long altered my perspective slightly but the core message remains the same). http://www.deafdc.com/blog/gue.....al-rights/
Maybe I should write more guest blogs? :-)
yes, please do.
Regarding simultaneously speaking and signing, it reminds me of a joke–it’s supposed to be a joke, but it has been known to happen from time to time:
TEACHER: 25 of my students are gifted and 24 are learning disabled, so I’ve been teaching to the middle.
PRINCIPLA: And how’s that working out?
TEACHER: Well, my one middle-able student is doing great.
The morale here is that we can never hope to achieve in reaching “One Size Fits All” educational program for all Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing students in the same classroom. I believe that hearing, oral, and other non-ASL users chose Gallaudet, so they can be exposed to ASL and the Deaf culture, and experience the enormous advantage of being bilingual individuals. Oliver Sacks writes in Seeing Voices that “the difference between the most diverse spoken languages (e.g., English and Japanese) is small compared to the difference between speech and sign. Sign differs in origins and in biological mode. And this…may determine, or at least modify the thought processes of those who sign, and give them a unique and untranslatable, hypervisual cognitive style” (p.74). Hence, individuals who either are raised bilingually or learn to be bilingual in both ASL and English will thus have a much broader view of the world, not only compared with most hearing Americans whose only language is spoken English, but even with hearing persons bi-lingual in two spoken languages.
I think Gallaudet is not doing all non-ASL users (hearing, oral deaf, etc.) justice by resorting to simultaneous communication on campus. If Gallaudet can’t delivers, why do those non-ASL users bother applying to Gallaudet, after all there are many, many other greater and better universities, academically.
In conclusion, Gallaudet must be the ASL center university that strives to be INCLUSIVE and welcomes ALL Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing people, and provides maximum support services to students with either limited reading/writing skills in English or limited ASL skills.
Well, those with mediocre English skills should at least be able to read at the 8th grade level.
Here’s another thought. If Dr. Davila’s English is as bad as his ASL is, would he still be allowed to serve as the president of Gallaudet? I think one of the criteria for the job should include a doctoral degree AND superior signing skills as measured by the ASL Proficiency Inventory.
Maybe Gallaudet needs to take a closer look at its so-called “rival” RIT/NTID to see how they handle their communication issues. You might be surprised to find out that RIT/NTID actually has the exact same issues that Gallaudet has, faculty not being able to sign effectively, not signing in public areas, and so on. RIT/NTID however differs from Gallaudet in its intuitive to solve an issue as a community when a problem arises.
Take the first example- faculty not being able to sign clearly- NTID decided to establish a guideline that teachers need to be able to sign clearly enough for students to receive 100% of the information that is classroom. NTID also has a program that gives faculty/staff every year with a monetary reward for their level of signing after taking a test (more can be found at this website http://www.ntid.rit.edu/VPandD.....atis.shtml ) - and trust me it is not like a few dollars- this is a good motivator for the faculty/staff to keep their sign language skills up to par.
Also, some of you might remember last year there were some students that felt that it was improper for some of the faculty/staff to stop using sign language once they stepped out of the classroom, i.e. in public areas at NTID. Instead of allowing it to turn into a full blown protest- a la the recent Gallaudet protest- the administration actually listened to the students and set up several community communication workshops to get to the core of the issue and come up with a solution. The result? “Respect”, the current motto that encourages faculty/ staff to sign in public areas and also encourage students to respect the fact that the staff/faculty are doing their best to make NTID a signing environment.
RIT/NTID is run like a business- just like any other college, and the students are their customers, and customers demand the best- not sloppy seconds- the minute students stop going to a particular college, that college will lose money. Gallaudet could really learn a few tricks on how to run a college/business from RIT/NTID.
Agreed!
I find the point about monetary rewards for improving sign language skills interesting. what this does is it shows respect for the fact that it is work and time to learn ASL & keep it up. by recognizing that, they show employees respect, which creates for a more positive environment which in and of itself leads to better communication.
What about deaf professors who are natively fluent in ASL - do they qualify for the monetary reward?
Yes, this incentive program applies to deaf faculty/staff who are native signers, they are more than welcome to take the test, and qualify to get the bonus money.
You all also have to remember that Gallaudet actually offer 4 year program to get Bachelor’s Degree compare to NTID! From my experience at NTID, NTID did not offer me any Bachelor Degree program and it is non-credited courses. I was disappointed after spending $16,000 in Tuition for 2 quarters, 28 credits were not transferrable. I took Accounting, Business procedures, and so on at NTID. They were not accepted at any universities! I was so upset that I had to repeat all the same courses! NTID lacks what Gally has to offer in college degree programs. Sorry!
i enjoyed your blog. and i agree with the point that faculty and staff at Gallaudet should be competent in ASL. However, i dont think we should expect “the best” signers, for a number of reasons. Some staff people (not teachers) may have transferred from another non-deaf work environment, be highly competent, and very willing to learn whatever they can of ASL - and yet be still unable to actually become highly skilled ASL users. You may have been using a poetic license there demanding the best, but i felt the need to point out that past a certain age it is a lot more difficult to learn a new language and that should be taken into consideration. Im not saying they shouldn’t learn ASL, but that how we judge their skills should put certain things in perspective. ie: my mother (who works at a school for the Deaf) is perfectly capable of conducting a meeting with a co worker in ASL, but for the bigger meetings, she’s going to need an interpreter. So when determining whether staff and faculty are competent in ASL, i think people should consider the different situations; ability to communicate 1 on 1, in small groups, large groups, etc.
[…] Most of my fellow panelists have posted entries regarding their experiences; while most were celebratory, a good number (myself included) also included transcripts or notes of their conference remarks. If you haven’t yet done so, go and read them; at the very least, it’ll be food for thought. Ideally, perhaps their thoughts and suggestions will spark additional discussions. Here’s Bobby Cox’s and Shane Feldman’s remarks; Frarochvia at Bellamoden posted her reflections; Jared Evans lauded the conference here, and Tayler Mayer posted his notes as well. Elisa emerged from hibernation to remark on the tortures of women’s fashion (paging Dan McClintock– time to do an updated cartoon of the deaf blogosphere? You also now know what several of us look like, heh…), while wildstarryskies discussed the conference in advance, but has yet to say anything post-conference. Mike McConnell went the furthest, commenting extensively on the conference both before and after. I was intrigued by his early post on his panel topic, and told him so. I had to wait until the actual conference to see his thoughts on some of the questions he posed. He defended his decision to use his voice here. For the record, it was his decision to do so, and he is reflective of a segment of the deaf community that, although deaf, prefers other means of communication other than signing. For that alone, I respect his decision– it may not have been something I necessarily agreed with personally, but with the interpreter present, his panel remarks were inclusive. […]
As an old Gallaudet Hand (I’ve been on campus for 26 years) trained in sim-com, I am fascinated by this debate. By and large, I think it is correct that the campus should be accessible to all. Everyone should know visual communication! (I’ll leave aside the question of which exact sign system, etc.) But (you knew that was coming) it is my practice in interactions to use the communication mode that the deaf person chooses. I would say in my office it’s 50-50, with some using sign and no voice, some using sim-com, and the rare hard of hearing person who prefers voice only. (I admit, I still sim-com to these folks to reinforce visual communication.) I have met people who use voice-off on campus, voice-on off campus. Very confusing, or should I say diverse?
I am totally committed to access for my students, and part of that is access to fields of study that are important to their education. Sometimes this means a less than stellar use of the language by the professor. What are we to do about that? Trust me, I have searched the world for someone with a Ph.D. in Religious Studies who knows ASL to replace me when I retire a few years down the road. So far, this person has not come forward. (I keep browbeating students to get a Ph.D. in Religion, but so far no takers.) When I go, if a requirement for the job is previous knowledge of ASL, then no one will replace me. The study of religion at Gallaudet will end. I don’t want to exaggerate the loss this represents, but it does mean less direct access to an important part of human history and ideas.
My question is, what should we do about this kind of situation? How do we balance purity of communication with access to intellectual knowledge?
A funny thing happened at Gallaudet in 2005 that shows how complex our situation is. I walked on campus and sim-comed “hi” to two people. The hearing person signed “hi” and the deaf one said “hi.” Still makes me smile at how you just never know.
I understand about finding a replacement who can sign fluently. It can be tough finding qualified people that have pre-existing communication skills. But excellence can still be maintained while hiring people who may not be able to sign. One idea is, for instance, that the first month of a faculty or staff member’s stay here at Gallaudet be entirely devoted to learning sign language. Sign language classes 8 hours a day for one month. Total immersion. That experience will likely emphasize and make clear that signing is valued here.
That plus the RIT/NTID system of paying people more who keep up sign language can help.
Absolutism does not belong in a University, let alone Gallaudet.
It’s apparent to me based on my experiences at Gally and having observed/participated in debates about Deaf Culture and communication modes that the Gallaudet situation is a classical conflict between the Ideal vs. the Practical. In my personal version of a perfect world, Gallaudet would be an ASL-immersed place for, between, and amongst all its members, both Hearing and Deaf, a sort of Mainland Martha’s Vineyard. However, much like the intractable sectarian conflicts that plague Iraqi politics which have likely dealt a death blow to the American Dream of a strong, self-sufficient United Iraq, there are pragmatic realities that are now beginning to be realized, acknowledged, and hopefully acted upon with more prudent plans of action to at least introduce a semblence of stability in that forever war-wracked country.
Similarly, Gallaudet’s patrons, whether they be academic, administrative, social, cultural, or political, must acknowledge the similar “intractable” diversities in communication amongst Deaf and deaf individuals and find pragmatic and effective means by which all diverse parties are served with a useful education. As one poster above suggested, the use of incentives to improve signing skills of faculty would help. Bringing cutting-edge communication technologies would also be very helpful. Much like the Arabs are beginning to grasp the need to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a nation state, the extremists within the Deaf/deaf social/linguistic spectrum need to recognize the rights of other communicatively diverse groups to exist at Gallaudet. It is not practical to expect Congress to accept and finance an institution that espouses exclusion to ASL only. Especially for an University, financial support is its lifeblood. Attempts at advancing an exclusive agenda (vice an inclusive one) could potentially endanger/weaken the existence/strength of Gallaudet as a venerable institution in the Deaf Community and amongst deaf individuals. As is said, a house divided cannot stand. The ASL-only members of that house do not have the numerical strength to be politically successful in achieving a viable ASL-exclusive institution; we must unite with other groups of our Deaf/deaf House to even have a place to call our own to some degree.
Generally, I agree with you — but the nice thing about Gallaudet is that much progress can be made via administrative initiatives, as much can be accomplished when your paycheck depends on it. Nowhere do I suggest an ASL-only approach. It is about -valuing- ASL more than it is valued now.
Also, I think you do the community more of an disservice labelling people clamoring for change as “extremists.” There is no inherent right for any group to exist anywhere, other than basic human rights. Gallaudet is first and foremost an educational institution, but it has to target some sort of group because we can’t be everything to everyone. And that group needs to be clearly targeted and valued.
However it is not a message of exclusion. I would absolutely love if Gallaudet taught cued and foreign sign language classes (BSL, etc). It’s not about excluding or doing anything of that sort — it’s simply about focus and values. A white person can go to Howard University if they want to but they know that the University focuses on the Black/African-American community.
I understand what you are saying, and my comments were not really in reaction to yours, but rather an expression of my limited view of the debate from a personal soapbox position.
Your analogy using Howard University is a good way to illustrate how Gallaudet needs to better focus on the ASL community, which I personally believe is the core cultural group due to its use of an unique and real language (as opposed to other communication modalities). The Howard University analogy begins to become inadequate when moving beyond the focus and towards the facilitation of education. A white person attending Howard may feel culturally isolated at times, but will be able to fully participate in all classes in a communicative sense; in other words, the same communication modality, spoken English, is used (perhaps some might argue there might be “black english” used). At Gallaudet, the benefits of an education are not as equally obtained by all students because of the varying communication modalities used (or poorly used) by many of its patrons (i.e., faculty, students, etc). This is where the great difficulty lies.
Your suggestion that the administration can enable policies and tools to increase the focus on ASL is definitely something that IKJ and others did not focus on in the last couple of decades.
I am wondering if there are enough ASL users who would attend Gallaudet? How would PSE and SEE users react to a shift in focus to ASL at Gallaudet? Would less students apply to Gallaudet? Would less numbers of qualified professors apply to work at Gallaudet as a result? I remember having quite a few teachers who worked at Gallaudet for decades but still could not sign ASL to any appreciable degree. Is this a result of poor policies or an lack of any innate abilities to pick up a visual spatial language effectively? As we know from experience, there are interpreters who learn ASL very well in a short period of time and others who, despite 10-20 years of exposure and experience, clearly struggle to move beyond using a fragmented form of ASL, i.e., PSE. Is it reasonable to expect ALL faculty members to learn to use ASL fluently enough such that ASL users can receive a full education? How do we quantify sufficient fluency? What do we do with professors who clearly cannot sign their way out of a paper bag? Would this lead to professor shortages?
I agree that Gallaudet cannot be a “One-size fits all” institution. When foreign students attend hearing universities in the US, they are expected to use English to participate. A similar expectation could be established at Gallaudet. However, the challenge is to shape that expectation pragmatically considering the limited ASL skillsets that seem to exist amongst faculty, staff, and students. In the meantime, Gallaudet still faces the problem of ensuring adequate student numbers to remain as a fiscally viable institution.
Good points Kent. Only thing I can add is that people seem to be using ASL as a blanket that covers PSE and some of SEE. PSE and SEE are becoming historic relics and all american sign language is called ASL. Just different ranges of skill, signs, and similarity with English. So, when I think ASL I am thinking of sign language in general in America; It’s rare to find a 100% SEE signer these days.
How would a person who is a mulatto fit in at Howard university?
Do you know how dumb that question is?
It is a legitimate question considering Munro’s comment, “A white person attending Howard may feel culturally isolated at times, but will be able to fully participate in all classes in a communicative sense.” Will a mulatto fee isolated? And why do you consider my question a “dumb” one? Ever think for a moment of how a Mulatto identifies him/herself? There IS a reason why I asked that question, dumb or not. Noelle.