Success, Socialization, and Sign Language: Examining Signed vs.

Oral Education for the

American Deaf
The deaf1 education debate has persisted for decades. Through Deaf Eyes, an enlightening
documentary featuring interviews from many prominent Deaf figures, quotes Alexander Graham
Bell as saying My dear sir, the organs of speech are in no way effected by deafness. The deaf
person is mute simply because he cannot hear, and hasnt been taught to speak. (Hott and
Garey) While Bells statement is true, it is also true that for many, deafness regarded as a cultural
identifier rather than a disability. As written by a coalition of authors in the article FamilyCentered Practices and American Sign Language (ASL): Challenges and Recommendations,
Those who identify with Deaf culture often prefer to communicate through ASL2 (Hardin,
Blanchard and Kemmery) The opposing method to ASL is oralism, defined by Dr. Jacquelyn H.
Flaskerud as the education of deaf students to communicate through the spoken language by
using lip reading, speech, and mimicking the mouth shapes, facial expressions, body language,
and breathing patterns of speech. (Flaskerud) With scientific and technological advances
prompting new opinions on communication, the increasing trend of enrolling deaf students in
mainstream schools, and the historical oppression of the Deaf community, those involved in
educating the deaf and hard-of-hearing have yet to answer the question; do oral schools or
signed schools graduate more successful, socially integrated students?
One of the most impactful factors of deaf education is the setting in which children receive their
schooling. In the past, the deaf education debate fell between two options: oral schools for the
1 Capitalizing the word deaf, also known as big D deaf signifies a cultural,
signing Deaf individual or community. Little d deaf refers to the physicality of
deafness, or an individual with impactful hearing loss not brought up in Deaf
culture.
2 ASL, abbreviation for American Sign Language

deaf and schools for the Deaf that instructed using American Sign Language, or ASL. In the
modern age, it is becoming gradually more popular to mainstream deaf children into primarily
hearing schools. Fifty years ago, 80% of DHH children were educated in special settings where
instruction typically was offered through some form of signed communication; today, more than
85% spend all or part of the school day in regular schools. (Marschark, Shaver and Nagle)
While oral schooling is the least commonly practice method of education, many elderly deaf
adults can recall the age in which oral education was a reigning practice and sign language was
forbidden because many believed it inhibited spoken language and thus, communication with
peers. In these schools, children would often be forced to sit on their hands if caught using any
form of gestural communication. In resistance to this oppression of their natural language, many
deaf children in America and abroad participated in secretive peer learning, those with
experience signing teaching their less-knowledgeable peers how to communicate with their
hands. (Anglin-Jaffe) This trend of peer-taught sign language behind the backs of educators and
enforcers in oral school settings is partially explained in a focus group that sought to examine the
educational and social abilities of children raised primarily with ASL; those who did not initially
have access to the manual language stated that after being taught sign language and integrated
into a signing community, they were able to learn more in school. (Hardin, Blanchard and
Kemmery)
While many adults educated in oral schools have clear, understandable speech, there is
often a misperception by hearing people that because a deaf person is well-spoken, they can
somehow hear. In Through Deaf Eyes, English Professor Kristen Harmon, who was educated
primarily in mainstreamed schools, illustrates her struggles being a Deaf woman with both oral
and manual communication skills: You asked me to speak so I can demonstrate how successful

I was as an oral deaf person. But understand that speaking is only one way. And that if I speak
the other person hears me. They assume that I dont need any sort of interpreting or any kind of
sign or anything like that. They assume that I can hear them. And thats the problem with
speaking. Its a two-way communication. Thats why I dont. I dont want people to assume that I
can hear them because I cant. Its much easier just to turn off my voice. (Hott and Garey)
While Kristen makes a valid point in the downfalls of using speech as a Deaf person in a hearing
world, Deaf Psychology Professor Irene W. Leigh describes her perspective on her position
between the Deaf and Hearing worlds, stating Ive always wanted to be connected to people, to
humanity. It didnt matter whether they were hearing or deaf and Im very fortunate that I had the
communication skills to do so relatively, comfortably. I know that my speech is not exactly
normal. But its very understandable. Thats gotten me through situations in communicating with
hearing people. (Hott and Garey) Clearly, there are benefits to both oral communication and
signed communication in schools, but from which setting do students leave and enter the adult
world with the skills to best communicate, bond, and succeed with hearing and deaf peers alike?
According to teacher and interpreter for the Deaf, K. Rebecca Haines, one of the most
commonly ignored factors in education is incidental learning. As a child is growing, much of
their learning is subconsciously absorbed. A hearing child learns language from hearing their
parents talk just as a Deaf child learns language from seeing adults around them sign. Educating
deaf children by oral means is a long and tedious process; they are not absorbing language, they
are mimicking mouth shapes, tongue movements, and throat vibrations without understanding
what it all means. She goes on to explain that much of the time that these students spend trying
to be receptive of the English language without having the ability to be truly, fully exposed to it
could be used to teach lessons in subjects like geometry, reading, or writing. (Haines) Rosalyn

Gannon, a former student at an oral school for the deaf recalls the teaching methods she would
undergo in her interview in Through Deaf Eyes: many people dont realize that when children
learn speech its all repetition and speech training over and over again. Think of all the time I
spent on it when I could have learned other things, be educated in other things. I spent so much
time learning how to talk, how to say milk, cat, dogHolding my face, pushing my mouth,
making things go back and forth trying to make the right movements Rosalyn now
communicates primarily with American Sign Language. (Hott and Garey)
Even beyond the four walls of schools like Clarke School and Mystic Oral School for the
Deaf, after years of education where sign language was prohibited and oral communication
demanded, many oral school graduates face obstacles communicating with hearing peers. Many
feel similarly to teacher Rory Osbrink, who felt that her oral education benefited her receptively,
but not expressively. My oral abilities were limited she states. I learned vocabulary in
English but I couldnt speak it. My parents were relying on my speech, so I couldnt show them
my intelligence. The oralist methods practiced by oral schools for the Deaf were seen as a
progressive movement, allowing the integration of deaf individuals into the hearing world
around them. However, it resulted in the opposite; many Deaf graduates of oral schools, such as
Rory Osbrink, note the sense of separation from their hearing counterparts when they could not
fully express themselves or their thoughts. K. Rebecca Haines reminds that lipreading, the
receptive factor in oralism, can be very exhausting and limits those who depend on lipreading to
few platforms of conversation. The person an oral deaf is communicating with must be close
enough for lipreading to take place. This is a serious hindrance for the elderly. Haines explains
that the elderly are the most largely oral deaf population, and their communication skills
deteriorate as eyesight and the ability to focus for a long period of time deteriorate, as well.

(Haines) These personal accounts and general observations of the oral deaf reveal that perhaps,
lip-reading and speech are not the most beneficial methods of education, socialization, and
communication for those who experience hearing loss, both during and post-schooling.
Despite these recounted experiences from both Deaf/deaf students, instructors, and active
members of the Deaf community, certain studies and focus groups highlight concerns with
signed schooling. A 2005 study revealed that students who used sign language interpreters in the
classroom scored lower than others. This implies that students with hearing losses were excelling
at a slower rate than their hearing counterparts due to their deafness. While this is true, the issue
is not with the deafness of the students, but rather the difficulty of adapting, as a deaf student, to
a hearing classroom and curriculum. (Marschark, Shaver and Nagle) While a sign language
interpreter relays information provided by the teacher to a student, many deaf students
mainstreamed into hearing schools have less developed sign language skills than those in
specialized schools, thus, the student cannot fully absorb the information provided by the teacher
and translated through the interpreter. In a school that teaches using American Sign Language,
each student has equal access to education, unlike deaf students mainstreamed into hearing
schools. (Haines) According to the article Family Centered Practices and American Sign
Language (ASL): Challenges and Recommendations, the push for oralism often comes from
members or professionals that claim spoken skills foster future independence and increase
communication. However, the same article notes that only about 30% of the English language
can be lipread. (Hardin, Blanchard and Kemmery) It is difficult to believe that when unable to
access 70% of the English language, a deaf individual would be able to increase
communication or be an independent, successful learner achieving full potential inside and
outside the classroom. Oralism consistently refutes the advantages of sign language; the deaf in

oral schools who are taught to speak are often refused access to their natural means of
communication, and as a result, have less access to education and communication.
From the introduction of American Sign Language to the United States and schools for
the Deaf in the early 1800s, to the establishment and popularity of oral schools between 18601970, there have been golden times and dark ages for Deaf culture. (Flaskerud) The practices
popularized in oral schools for the deaf, ones that are often mimicked in mainstream schools
(such as a dependence on lipreading) do not facilitate learning; rather, learning is inhibited when
deaf are restricted from being immersed in their natural language. Deaf Professor Kristen
Harmon and Deaf teacher Rory Osbrick depict a widespread issue in for the oral deaf- an
inability to establish an identity, express oneself, and achieve full potential when ones deafness
is regarded as an obstacle to be overcome rather than a cultural identifier for a community that
provides a wholesome, real, and natural language. (Hott and Garey) Oral schools are revealed to
cause more problems than they solve; elderly deaf raised in oral settings, dependent on
lipreading, communicate with even less ease than experienced before the deterioration of sight.
(Haines) Oral communication is exhausting for the deaf, who must maintain intense focus to
converse via lipreading, as only 30% of the English language can be read on the lips. (Hardin,
Blanchard and Kemmery) The success of D/deaf students is dependent on their ability to absorb
the world around them; through American Sign Language, Deaf individuals have full access to
their identity, language, and classroom.

Works Cited
Anglin-Jaffe, Hannah. "Signs of Resistance: Peer Learning of Sign Languages Within
'Oral' Schools for the Deaf." Springer Science and Business Media (2013).
Flaskerud, Jacquelyn H. "Culture, Community, and Diversity." Issues in Mental Health
Nursing: Cultural Competence Column (2014).
Haines, K. Rebecca. Interview. Jenna Haines. Brooklyn, 17 November 2015.
Hardin, Belinda J., et al. "Family-Centered Practices and American Sign Language
(ASL): Challenges and Recommendations." Exceptional Children 81(1) 107123 (2014).
Marschark, Marc, et al. "Predicting the Academic Achievement of Deaf and Hard-ofHearing Students From Individual, Household, Communication, and
Educational Factors." Exceptional Children 81(3) 350-369 (2015).
Through Deaf Eyes. Dirs. Lawrence Hott and Diane Garey. 2007.