Do we have a challenge ahead of us to avoid becoming Hearing?

[StSapphire]

But, he summarized by saying that the findings were inconclusive, there didn't seem to be an advantage either way.

If there was no advantage either way, then why have I seen differently in real life? Strange.

I'd guess one of two things.

1) Self selection; there may simply be way more deaf of hearing, so you come into contact with those who had issues due to your field of work with significantly more of them, making it seem much larger, when the percentage of developmentally delayed children as a factor of the total population of DoD/DoH is roughly similar.

2) One of the factors I mentioned, either English illiteracy rates of DoD parents or ASL non-fluency rates of DoH parents are not nearly as even as would be implied, tipping the scales overall towards one of the two sides appearing to be "better".

 

[Beach girl]

If anything, I would assume that if there are any literacy rate correlations, they would come about due to teachers not being fluent in the language (spoken English or ASL) they're teaching in, and thus having the students attempting to learn literacy in a language other than their native language.

I would imagine trying to teach someone how to read and write Latin, who doesn't already know it, with a teacher who only speaks Latin, would have difficulties.[/QUOTE]

English as a Second Language is often taught by teachers fluent in English, but not fluent in the language their students speak (Spanish, typically, in the U.S.) There are difficulties, but there is something to be said for the "full immersion" method, too.

 

[DeafCaroline]

GrendelQ - when I was bodybuilding, I learned something very important about studies. Who sponsors those studies? If there was a statement that says according to these studies, drinking milk makes your bones stronger and I later learned that the studies were sponsored by the agricultural sector, it's obviously biased and slanted.

Who sponsored the studies about the literacy in Deaf kids - oral vs asl education. What was the demographics? Deaf kids going to Deaf school where education is taught in ASL only - and those kids didn't know any asl before going to the school, then there's kids who did learn ASL and goes to the same school, then there's kids who do know how to speak and speechread but were transferred to the school and is now learning ASL. Then there are deaf oral kids in mainstream schools only, then asl only kids transferred to oral schools, etc etc etc. There are so many variables involved that blanket statements are dangerous in that they don't tell the whole story.

So, I would love to see those studies you've mentioned and find out who sponsored them.

 

[GrendelQ]

I'm still confused with your statements, since they're not directly talking about the hypothesis I mentioned above. The reason I outlined it as I did was because I was separating the issues of literacy in English and fluency in ASL further from the flawed starting point of "Who's a better parent for a deaf child, Deafies or Hearies?" and moved it instead to "Who's a better parent for a deaf child, ASL/English bilinguals, or monolinguals?"

(As a side note - I'm at work, so I can look at individual articles, but don't have time right now to download an entire book and read it, or to peruse an entire website to see if I can find relevant information on it, since I don't personally need generic information regarding parenting, due to having no interest in raising children whatsoever for a very long time.)

Nothing of what I posted had anything to do with your new hypothesis, but with your preceding question. Typically, you would base a hypothesis on facts, on data, your hypothesis being an explanation for that data. So, you would need to do some research to have those facts to start with. Which is why I suggested some starting points.

I don't understand how your reframing of this as a question about "who's a better parent?" comes in. I thought the topic we were discussing was how academic environment and home language affect literacy. And I can assure you that the educatingdeafchildren site is not a general parenting site. It's NTID's knowledge base for deaf education, featuring the opportunity to ask questions directly of some of the foremost researchers in the field..

 

[StSapphire]

English as a Second Language is often taught by teachers fluent in English, but not fluent in the language their students speak (Spanish, typically, in the U.S.) There are difficulties, but there is something to be said for the "full immersion" method, too.

That works because the language being taught is still fully accessible to the students. That would be different with ASL/English if the students are both unable to even fully access the language they're being immersed in, in addition to the teacher not even fully understanding the language they do have full access to.

Nothing of what I posted had anything to do with your new hypothesis, but with your preceding question. Typically, you would base a hypothesis on facts, on data, your hypothesis being an explanation for that data. So, you would need to do some research to have those facts to start with. Which is why I suggested some starting points.

What? No, no. You come up with a hypothesis first. Then you run the experiment to see if the data fits. If it does, then you try to design new experiments to attempt to disprove the hypothesis. If it doesn't, then you come up with a new hypothesis.

I don't understand how your reframing of this as a question about "who's a better parent?" comes in. I thought the topic we were discussing was how academic environment and home language affect literacy. And I can assure you that the educatingdeafchildren site is not a general parenting site. It's NTID's knowledge base for deaf education, featuring the opportunity to ask questions directly of some of the foremost researchers in the field..

You keep talking about Deaf of Deaf vs Deaf of Hearing rates, which implies a question of "who's better", because otherwise the comparison of rates of the entire population, without sampling based on the proposed underlying variables, gives you a rather useless metric.

 

[DeafCaroline]

I think what shel90 is trying to say is that at her school, the education is customized and designed specifically for the Deaf. Mainstreamed schools are not. Kids with cochlear implants do benefit more in mainstreaming because they get more hearing and thus miss out on less.

However, what about those who have profound hearing loss wearing HAs? They do not hear as much as CI implanted, they miss out on more in mainstream settings. Let's use a subject as an example: math. Kids like me are lost in the mainstream classroom and have only our textbooks to depend on to learn. But what if we don't understand certain parts of the textbooks nor do we understand what the teacher is saying? That's where parents would need step in and do their part to ensure that whatever their deaf kids are missing out on, they get filled in on at home.

My mother was very very involved in my schooling and making sure I understood my subjects and heavily reviewed my homework to make sure I understood what was being taught in class. Why? Because I am not hearing what's happening in the classroom.

In schools dedicated to the Deaf, the deaf are not missing out because their teachers speak a language they can understand...with their eyes since their ears do not work very well.

Classic example: there's a french school for the Deaf, and teachers teach in LSQ - their studetns are performing very well. They are not struggling to follow in the classrooms, because they can actually understand what their teachers are saying.

There's an oral elementary school for the deaf with the objective to get their kids mainstreamed ASAP. They do that in stages from full immersion at the oral school to slowly getting them integrated into "hearing schools". It's this school where literacy is a much bigger problem than at the french LSQ school.

So, if kids with CIs who get more hearing than profoundly deaf kids with HAs, obviously the former is going to do better in mainstream. But their success is also contingent on their parents' degree of involvement in their schooling.

My mother helped me with my writing and grammar, my brother helped me hugely in math. He's dyslexic but a genius at math (and by the way, despite his poor reading and writing skills, he has a very very successful career thanks to his wife who helped him get through college - she helped him make sense of his textbooks) and without him, I would have done badly in math. It also helped that my mother got me gadgets to make learning math fun such as "Little Professor".

So, again, there are huge variables at play and certainly further complicated by how early the child acquired their first language and how fluently they were able to acquire it. And how fully involved their parents are in making sure they are keeping up in school.

GrendelQ has employed every tool she can think of and that's exactly what we want for all deaf kids. To make sure all the tools they need to do well in school are made available to them. Oral-only schools, mainstream schools are not providing all the tools and that's the problem.

 

[rolling7]

Ok, I know a bit about adult literacy and I do know the older one gets, the harder it is for them to take the initiative to learn to read and write. Even their ability to learn slows down as they get older and the more they are pressured to learn, the more stubborn they get. It's a pride thing. I know this pride is not helping them but that's how it is.

I am wondering as far as CRR is concerned: those ASL only people, they willing show up CRR but unwilling to take advantage of the resources? And what percentage of those using CRR can't read and write?

The director hates me giving out this percent but I'm independent (read: not getting a paycheck) and my observation is 55-65%. It is NOT a fair picture of the Houston community altogether, the reason being "word on the street". What I mean by that is the deaf share their experience with each other and deaf who would benefit from CRR's services stay away basic on what they are told on the street.
An example...we recently had as a client a 32 year old woman. She is deaf from birth, completely on SSDI all her life even today, she attended TSD (Texas State School for the Deaf) and graduated. Right months after graduation she had her first child, the dad was a well known deaf guy, they never married, he got mixed up in drugs and long story short was killed, she was living off his drug-dealing. Moving on, she had four more children through two relationships, still never had a job. Again long story short, she and her kids were alone without family our outside support (except for SSDI), her deaf friends could no longer help her and she entered the woman's shelter, where she is today with five children. The shelter MADE her come to CRR as a condition of staying at the shelter. When evaluated as a client, she admit she knew CRR well but did not come for assistance because, in her opinion, CRR would "look down on her" due to her life. Once explained to her at for free CRR would not only assist her but her children also, it was also explain she was accountable to a process and schedule.
Although she did graduate from TSD, she has in group sessions admit "kids played through school". Consequently, she is ASL-only, good news is so fast she has engaged herself in all the classes and, my observation, is an outstanding student, willing to work with CRR's process and requirements without a single complaint. Right at this moment (starting at 2pm HOUSTON time) I'm teaching her drivers ed. One of the huge dealerships (Ford) is a local supporter of CRR and we use their lot for practice in one of their used cars. This woman is going to be (knock on wood) a success story.
Because I have, and I'm sorry for, posting negative experiences with deaf clients I wanted to post a huge POSITIVE and encouraging post. This woman could have rejected every benefit we and the Woman's Shelter offered her but THANKS GOODNESS she is well on her way to a better life

 

[GrendelQ]

What? No, no. You come up with a hypothesis first. Then you run the experiment to see if the data fits. If it does, then you try to design new experiments to attempt to disprove the hypothesis. If it doesn't, then you come up with a new hypothesis.

A "working hypothesis" as you called it, is suggested or supported in some measure by features of observed facts, from which consequences may be deduced which can be tested by experiment and special observations. Your "supporting facts" are little mini-hypotheses, not facts in of themselves. You need to start with some underlying data, propose why you think these facts work together to support some concept that can be measured, and then you have a "working hypothesis" that can be investigated by yourself and others.

You keep talking about Deaf of Deaf vs Deaf of Hearing rates, which implies a question of "who's better", because otherwise the comparison of rates of the entire population, without sampling based on the proposed underlying variables, gives you a rather useless metric.

No, Shel brought up as fact that Deaf of Deaf have been shown to outperform DOH. I clarified that this was old research since debunked as inconclusive. It is not currently thought that either DOD or DOH outperform the other.

 

[StSapphire]

A "working hypothesis" as you called it, is suggested or supported in some measure by features of observed facts, from which consequences may be deduced which can be tested by experiment and special observations. Your "supporting facts" are little mini-hypotheses, not facts in of themselves. You need to start with some underlying data, propose why you think these facts work together to support some concept that can be measured, and then you have a "working hypothesis" that can be investigated by yourself and others.

Okay, I have a much much simpler question for you, then. Of the four hypotheses made (they weren't supposed to be interpreted as facts, they're all descriptive aspects of my total hypothesis), do you think any of those statements are false?

 

[GrendelQ]

They are all available to the public. You can often use Googlebooks to read part of these materials online without cost (I've done that with all of these at some point before purchasing) and they are available via libraries without cost, including the Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, which is otherwise subscription-based. Often if you access too much of a book online, you'll be restricted from reading any more of it. I've had to purchase a few of these for that reason. But most studies published in respected journals are "sponsored" by universities where the researchers are PhDs, in PhD programs, or teaching. The Journal includes a conflict of interest declaration required for all participants.

I've posted PDFs with full text of studies I've referenced in the past (for example), and even typed up sections of the books, but unfortunately, the Journal requested that I remove the links, and AD mods have deleted several of the more contentious threads in which I'd typed some of the lengthier passages from books.

But you are right about blanket statements -- in fact, that was some of what Marschark objected to in the earlier studies -- so many variable were not taken into consideration. In one case, it seems that researchers were comparing children of university teachers/grad students with a parent at home, all attending a particular school against children of uneducated blue collar working parents with low literacy themselves, in other schools. He felt the results reflected the variables more than the hearing status of the parents.

GrendelQ - when I was bodybuilding, I learned something very important about studies. Who sponsors those studies? If there was a statement that says according to these studies, drinking milk makes your bones stronger and I later learned that the studies were sponsored by the agricultural sector, it's obviously biased and slanted.

Who sponsored the studies about the literacy in Deaf kids - oral vs asl education. What was the demographics? Deaf kids going to Deaf school where education is taught in ASL only - and those kids didn't know any asl before going to the school, then there's kids who did learn ASL and goes to the same school, then there's kids who do know how to speak and speechread but were transferred to the school and is now learning ASL. Then there are deaf oral kids in mainstream schools only, then asl only kids transferred to oral schools, etc etc etc. There are so many variables involved that blanket statements are dangerous in that they don't tell the whole story.

So, I would love to see those studies you've mentioned and find out who sponsored them.

 

[DeafCaroline]

The director hates me giving out this percent but I'm independent (read: not getting a paycheck) and my observation is 55-65%. It is NOT a fair picture of the Houston community altogether, the reason being "word on the street". What I mean by that is the deaf share their experience with each other and deaf who would benefit from CRR's services stay away basic on what they are told on the street.
An example...we recently had as a client a 32 year old woman. She is deaf from birth, completely on SSDI all her life even today, she attended TSD (Texas State School for the Deaf) and graduated. Right months after graduation she had her first child, the dad was a well known deaf guy, they never married, he got mixed up in drugs and long story short was killed, she was living off his drug-dealing. Moving on, she had four more children through two relationships, still never had a job. Again long story short, she and her kids were alone without family our outside support (except for SSDI), her deaf friends could no longer help her and she entered the woman's shelter, where she is today with five children. The shelter MADE her come to CRR as a condition of staying at the shelter. When evaluated as a client, she admit she knew CRR well but did not come for assistance because, in her opinion, CRR would "look down on her" due to her life. Once explained to her at for free CRR would not only assist her but her children also, it was also explain she was accountable to a process and schedule.
Although she did graduate from TSD, she has in group sessions admit "kids played through school". Consequently, she is ASL-only, good news is so fast she has engaged herself in all the classes and, my observation, is an outstanding student, willing to work with CRR's process and requirements without a single complaint. Right at this moment (starting at 2pm HOUSTON time) I'm teaching her drivers ed. One of the huge dealerships (Ford) is a local supporter of CRR and we use their lot for practice in one of their used cars. This woman is going to be (knock on wood) a success story.
Because I have, and I'm sorry for, posting negative experiences with deaf clients I wanted to post a huge POSITIVE and encouraging post. This woman could have rejected every benefit we and the Woman's Shelter offered her but THANKS GOODNESS she is well on her way to a better life

you know what, rolling7? I'm impressed with you. You really do care and try to get involved on your own time and on your own dime.

So, I did some research on adult literacy and why it's a problem addressing this: this applies to ALL adults struggling to read and write. One is embarrassment and shame on their part. They feel embarrassed they can't do what a 10 year old kid can do. So, they try to cover this up by finding other coping mechanisms and then get so used to those coping mechanisms. meanwhile, peers, friends, family, employers are pressuring them to learn to read and write. They resent this. They resent what they perceive as this "dominating force" telling them what to do. Here's a case of perceived "paternalism".

I asked why those ASL only people showed up for CRR yet be unwilling to take advantage of free resources. You've just explained it in your answer - they were pressured to do so. The shelter MADE her come to CRR as a condition of staying at the shelter.

She would not have gone to CRR if she had not been threatened to be kicked out and homeless if she didn't. It was not a willing choice on her own. Somehow, CRR found a way to get through to her that they do not look down on her and in fact, want her to have a better life for herself and her children. Many illiterate adults are already so self-doubting that they doubt anyone can help them and that's a very difficult task, to get them over their pride and be willing to learn without feeling like they are being patronized. They're adults, not kids and as such, don't want to be treated like kids. So, if someone says to them "you have to go learn to read and write for your own good and you're not getting a welfare cheque until you do." They will resentfully show up for the courses instead of willingly and they are not liking the paternal pressure.

It's a huge monumental task dealing with adult illiteracy, whether or not one is deaf or hearing. The Texas School for the Deaf - they don't teach deaf people how to read? How do they teach subjects without books? Is it really because it's a deaf school or because the standards are pitifully low at that school?

 

[shel90]

you know what, rolling7? I'm impressed with you. You really do care and try to get involved on your own time and on your own dime.

So, I did some research on adult literacy and why it's a problem addressing this: this applies to ALL adults struggling to read and write. One is embarrassment and shame on their part. They feel embarrassed they can't do what a 10 year old kid can do. So, they try to cover this up by finding other coping mechanisms and then get so used to those coping mechanisms. meanwhile, peers, friends, family, employers are pressuring them to learn to read and write. They resent this. They resent what they perceive as this "dominating force" telling them what to do. Here's a case of perceived "paternalism".

I asked why those ASL only people showed up for CRR yet be unwilling to take advantage of free resources. You've just explained it in your answer - they were pressured to do so. The shelter MADE her come to CRR as a condition of staying at the shelter.

She would not have gone to CRR if she had not been threatened to be kicked out and homeless if she didn't. It was not a willing choice on her own. Somehow, CRR found a way to get through to her that they do not look down on her and in fact, want her to have a better life for herself and her children. Many illiterate adults are already so self-doubting that they doubt anyone can help them and that's a very difficult task, to get them over their pride and be willing to learn without feeling like they are being patronized. They're adults, not kids and as such, don't want to be treated like kids. So, if someone says to them "you have to go learn to read and write for your own good and you're not getting a welfare cheque until you do." They will resentfully show up for the courses instead of willingly and they are not liking the paternal pressure.

It's a huge monumental task dealing with adult illiteracy, whether or not one is deaf or hearing. The Texas School for the Deaf - they don't teach deaf people how to read? How do they teach subjects without books? Is it really because it's a deaf school or because the standards are pitifully low at that school?

All deaf schools here in America teach reading/writing using English in the printed form.

 

[shel90]

The director hates me giving out this percent but I'm independent (read: not getting a paycheck) and my observation is 55-65%. It is NOT a fair picture of the Houston community altogether, the reason being "word on the street". What I mean by that is the deaf share their experience with each other and deaf who would benefit from CRR's services stay away basic on what they are told on the street.
An example...we recently had as a client a 32 year old woman. She is deaf from birth, completely on SSDI all her life even today, she attended TSD (Texas State School for the Deaf) and graduated. Right months after graduation she had her first child, the dad was a well known deaf guy, they never married, he got mixed up in drugs and long story short was killed, she was living off his drug-dealing. Moving on, she had four more children through two relationships, still never had a job. Again long story short, she and her kids were alone without family our outside support (except for SSDI), her deaf friends could no longer help her and she entered the woman's shelter, where she is today with five children. The shelter MADE her come to CRR as a condition of staying at the shelter. When evaluated as a client, she admit she knew CRR well but did not come for assistance because, in her opinion, CRR would "look down on her" due to her life. Once explained to her at for free CRR would not only assist her but her children also, it was also explain she was accountable to a process and schedule.
Although she did graduate from TSD, she has in group sessions admit "kids played through school". Consequently, she is ASL-only, good news is so fast she has engaged herself in all the classes and, my observation, is an outstanding student, willing to work with CRR's process and requirements without a single complaint. Right at this moment (starting at 2pm HOUSTON time) I'm teaching her drivers ed. One of the huge dealerships (Ford) is a local supporter of CRR and we use their lot for practice in one of their used cars. This woman is going to be (knock on wood) a success story.
Because I have, and I'm sorry for, posting negative experiences with deaf clients I wanted to post a huge POSITIVE and encouraging post. This woman could have rejected every benefit we and the Woman's Shelter offered her but THANKS GOODNESS she is well on her way to a better life

That's nice.

 

[DeafCaroline]

All deaf schools here in America teach reading/writing using English in the printed form.

So this girl rolling7 used as an example of ASL-only Deaf being oppressed - how did she graduate without knowing how to read and write? That's why I'm trying to understand.

I mean, if rolling7 was using an example of a deaf kid who did very badly at a low quality deaf school or doing badly in a mainstream setting and ended up dropping out before graduating high school, then I could understand why their reading/writing skills are very low. But how can one get a high school diploma without knowing how to read and write? How is that possible? rolling7 gave a rough approximate of about 55-65% of the Deaf at CRR has having low literacy skills. They were high school graduates? From which schools?

 

[shel90]

So this girl rolling7 used as an example of ASL-only Deaf being oppressed - how did she graduate without knowing how to read and write? That's why I'm trying to understand.

I mean, if rolling7 was using an example of a deaf kid who did very badly at a low quality deaf school or doing badly in a mainstream setting and ended up dropping out before graduating high school, then I could understand why their reading/writing skills are very low. But how can one get a high school diploma without knowing how to read and write? How is that possible? rolling7 gave a rough approximate of about 55-65% of the Deaf at CRR has having low literacy skills. They were high school graduates? From which schools?

I have a feeling it was back in the 70s when this girl graduated and back then, the criteria to meet graduation requirements arent as strict as they are now but I cant imagine for the life of me that a Deaf school or even a mainstreamed one wouldnt have any language arts classes that involved reading/writing.

It seems to me that rolling7 isnt really clear on her definition of ASL-only.

 

[GrendelQ]

All deaf schools here in America teach reading/writing using English in the printed form.

At my daughter's deaf school -- known as being academically rigorous -- a (mostly Deaf) parent group banded together a couple of years ago and successfully protested and changed the curriculum. They had found that their otherwise academically strong kids were graduating with a severely substandard grasp of English, and they were being called on it in college, including at deaf colleges. I saw one senior's final project: her ASL presentation was insightful and articulate while her corresponding paper looked like it was written by a 10 year old, maybe even younger. The grading structure had focused on one on one presentation, with English taught as a secondary language. Think how many hearing kids graduate from US high school having taking years of French or Spanish, yet are still not fluent in those languages. So, you've got the potential for a whole lot of really intelligent and otherwise well-educated kids with low literacy leaving these schools. It's brutal for them to face a world in which literacy is so critical.

 

[shel90]

At my daughter's deaf school -- known as being academically rigorous -- a (mostly Deaf) parent group banded together a couple of years ago and successfully protested and changed the curriculum. They had found that their otherwise academically strong kids were graduating with a severely substandard grasp of English, and they were being called on it in college, including at deaf colleges. I saw one senior's final project: her ASL presentation was insightful and articulate while her corresponding paper looked like it was written by a 10 year old, maybe even younger. The grading structure had focused on one on one presentation, with English taught as a secondary language. Think how many hearing kids graduate from US high school having taking years of French or Spanish, yet are still not fluent in those languages. So, you've got the potential for a whole lot of really intelligent and otherwise well-educated kids with low literacy leaving these schools. It's brutal for them to face a world in which literacy is so critical.

Doesnt the state have tests for children to be able to pass in order to get their high school diplomas?

anyways..that's another issue. I was responding to another poster's question about deaf schools not teaching reading and writing at all to their deaf children and I replied saying that all of them do.

How they do it is another matter but to say that there is no reading nor writing being taught is false.

 

[DeafCaroline]

And what was the reason for their low literacy in writing and what changes were made specifically to address this?

 

[KristinaB]

Behind every child who succeeds in school academically in all subjects and who does well and graduates on grade level is a very supportive family and totally dedicated teachers. You cannot have it without both those components. The child must want to be educated and accept the responsibility, the parents or guardians, MUST be there to help that child and the teachers must work hard to teach that child what is to be learned. A teacher cannot do it alone. The school is not totally responsible for the education of that child. It must be done in conjunction with a parent's/guardian's involvement.

I do not know the specifics of Shel90's job, just that she is a dedicated teacher of the deaf. She has a passion for her students that I only had in a few of my teachers in public school. For her job, or any other teacher of the deaf, they have more responsibility than a teacher in public schools. They not only have to teach the child in all required subjects, they must also make sure to sometimes use 2 different languages to do this.

Heck, I've had teachers who couldn't even grasp the English language. In fact, I had a Chemistry teacher who was let go due to the extreme problem of understanding him. He was from India. His replacement was from Uganda, Africa. The language barrier did not get easier for the hearing kids and I was even more behind. There were no terps for me at all. The school district did not feel that me having a moderate to severe hearing loss needed any help. I failed Chemistry.

But, back to my original thought here, the students, whether in a deaf school, or hearing school, MUST be willing to learn and willing to work hard, the parents/guardians MUST be willing to help that student, and the teachers MUST provide them with the education mandated by law. Now, since this crappy NCLB Act was passed, teachers are not even able to teach what the students need to get on in life, they are required to teach so that the child can pass the state exam. Got to hand it to those teachers who stay dedicated after that.

 

[GrendelQ]

And what was the reason for their low literacy in writing and what changes were made specifically to address this?

That's pretty much the question behind all of this, isn't it?

It's easy to blame the education system in general, teachers, education methods, the government, and parents when you see studies showing the typical deaf high school 12th grader scoring at the level of a typical hearing 4th grader. But, those sorry stats and high risk of low literacy apply to all deaf kids -- from the deaf child of hearing parents with CIs using spoken English to the unaided deaf of deaf child who uses ASL at home and school. No setting is currently providing the outcomes we want to see, from mainstream and unit settings to AVT-based schools for the deaf to bi-bi schools for the deaf.

What's not easy is determining how to fix the issue of literacy. The school is working closely with Gallaudet's VL2 program, Boston University and other partners to find ways to change the curriculum, the way deaf kids are taught to read and write, and improve literacy. I look forward to seeing the new curriculum as it rolls out.