National and Local
Impact of Oral Leaders
Complied & Written by Jodi Becker Kinner
Edited by Valerie G. Kinney & Bronwyn O’Hara
Published in 2016
Updated in 2024
Edited by Valerie G. Kinney & Bronwyn O’Hara
Published in 2016
Updated in 2024
Note
To avoid confusion, I will refer to the organization as the Utah Association of the Deaf on this webpage, as they used the word "of" in their name from 1909 to 1962. The organization changed its name to the Utah Association for the Deaf in 1963 and then reversed it in 2012 to become the Utah Association of the Deaf.
The Impact of the Oral Leaders
The Utah Deaf community has demonstrated remarkable resilience over the years in the face of opposition from three prominent figures in the Utah oral community: Dr. Grant B. Bitter, Steven W. Noyce, and Dr. Karl R. White. The Utah Oral Advocates for Listening and Spoken Language (LSL) have consistently praised the Utah School for the Deaf as a national model, highlighting its provision of both ASL/English Bilingual and Listening and Spoken Language Programs, known as the Dual Program or Two-Track Program, as well as the school's Outreach Services aimed at promoting mainstreaming efforts. Despite these claims, the Utah Deaf community, under the leadership of the Utah Deaf Education Core Group, has steadfastly advocated for and safeguarded the ASL/English Bilingual Program.
Superintendent Noyce, in the article "Schools for the Deaf Grapple with Balancing Two Tracks" in The Salt Lake Tribune on February 21, 2011, proposed the Two-Track Program as a model for other state schools for the deaf nationwide. The program included the ASL/English Bilingual, Listening, and Spoken Language Tracks, with the aim of empowering parents to make choices for their Deaf children. However, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group, a group of concerned parents and members of the Utah Deaf community, saw this as an attempt to decrease the ASL/English Bilingual Program and steer more Deaf and hard of hearing children into the LSL Program. This situation was a cause for concern, as other state schools, such as the South Dakota School for the Deaf, the Delaware School for the Deaf, and the Indiana School for the Deaf, also faced the threat of losing their ASL/English Bilingual Programs.
Superintendent Noyce, in the article "Schools for the Deaf Grapple with Balancing Two Tracks" in The Salt Lake Tribune on February 21, 2011, proposed the Two-Track Program as a model for other state schools for the deaf nationwide. The program included the ASL/English Bilingual, Listening, and Spoken Language Tracks, with the aim of empowering parents to make choices for their Deaf children. However, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group, a group of concerned parents and members of the Utah Deaf community, saw this as an attempt to decrease the ASL/English Bilingual Program and steer more Deaf and hard of hearing children into the LSL Program. This situation was a cause for concern, as other state schools, such as the South Dakota School for the Deaf, the Delaware School for the Deaf, and the Indiana School for the Deaf, also faced the threat of losing their ASL/English Bilingual Programs.
According to a personal communication with Timothy Chevalier, a former ASL/English Bilingual Specialist, on June 6, 2011, the South Dakota School for the Deaf was most likely the first state school to implement the Utah School for the Deaf's Dual Track Program, and its Outreach Services model after visiting and consulting with the school to study their delivery services model. This effort took place in 2005. Soon after, they started with a replica of the model at the school. The Two-Track Program, as applied at SDSD, separated students into Listening and Spoken Language and ASL/English Bilingual Programs. Furthermore, the school prohibited LSL students with cochlear implants from interacting with students in the ASL/English Bilingual Program at any time, including recess and lunch. The school also ensured that the LSL students were not exposed to sign language.
The SDSD administration, in a commendable display of collaboration, revised its segregation practices after partnering with public schools. This joint effort was aimed at accommodating LSL students, with the plan being to integrate these Deaf and hard of hearing students in the LSL Program with non-deaf students in public schools. The goal was to help them learn how to listen and speak more effectively, a testament to the power of collective action in education.
In 2007, South Dakota families who staunchly supported ASL fought the new system, but their efforts were in vain. They eventually had to make the difficult decision to move out of state to enroll their Deaf children in other state schools for the deaf. By 2009, the South Dakota School for the Deaf merely existed in name, as the school campus no longer offered services. This underscores the profound impact of the changes on these families, invoking a sense of understanding in the audience.
In 2007, South Dakota families who staunchly supported ASL fought the new system, but their efforts were in vain. They eventually had to make the difficult decision to move out of state to enroll their Deaf children in other state schools for the deaf. By 2009, the South Dakota School for the Deaf merely existed in name, as the school campus no longer offered services. This underscores the profound impact of the changes on these families, invoking a sense of understanding in the audience.
Two More State Schools for the Deaf
Impacted by the Oralism Movement
Impacted by the Oralism Movement
Under the direction of Theresa Bulger, the Oral Only Option Schools Group (OOOS), and with strong support from the Alexander Graham Bell Association, they attempted to replicate the Utah School for the Deaf's Dual Track model and its Outreach Services. Additionally, they actively promoted the LSL option in several states. In 2010, Dr. Karl R. White, a prominent advocate of the LSL program from Utah, testified before the California Legislature, advocating for the passage of AD 2072. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill despite Dr. White's efforts, responding to a significant outcry from the California Deaf community.
Once more, in 2011, Delaware and Indiana wanted to make LSL a legal choice for Deaf children in their state schools for the deaf. Their mission was a success in Indiana. Superintendent Noyce enthusiastically shared at the Utah State Office of Education's Deaf National Agenda Committee meeting that Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels contacted him for advice on implementing the Two-Track Program and Outreach Services provided by the Utah School for the Deaf during the Indiana Deaf community's protest. He further stated that the Illinois School for the Deaf and the New Jersey School for the Deaf will follow in the footsteps of the Indiana School for the Deaf by adopting the Utah School for the Deaf's delivery services model (Steven W. Noyce, personal communication, March 12, 2010). On top of that, the Delaware School for the Deaf, which provides bilingual education in both ASL and English, was pressured to give the LSL option by the LSL-promoting CHOICES Delaware organization, which was created in 2009. Fortunately, on September 10, 2010, Delaware Governor Jack Markell signed House Bill 283, the Delaware Hard of Hearing Children's Bill of Rights, into law. Texas, Colorado, and California enacted similar legislation (www.christina.k12.de.us/DSPDHH/DHHBillofRights.htm).
One year later, on July 12, 2011, the CHOICES Delaware organization attempted and failed to create a Listening and Spoken Language program through the Delaware School for the Deaf and Statewide Programs for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (The CHOICES Delaware Position Paper). According to Ursula Schultz, a former Deaf employee at Delaware School for the Deaf, the CHOICES Delaware organization wants DSD to implement listening and spoken language educational practices based on AGBell's principles for LSL in their early childhood classes: "They believe that all children who have a hearing aid or cochlear implants only need LSL. They have been rallying to state officials trying to make change happen" (Ursula Schultz, personal communication, February 12, 2012).
Once more, in 2011, Delaware and Indiana wanted to make LSL a legal choice for Deaf children in their state schools for the deaf. Their mission was a success in Indiana. Superintendent Noyce enthusiastically shared at the Utah State Office of Education's Deaf National Agenda Committee meeting that Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels contacted him for advice on implementing the Two-Track Program and Outreach Services provided by the Utah School for the Deaf during the Indiana Deaf community's protest. He further stated that the Illinois School for the Deaf and the New Jersey School for the Deaf will follow in the footsteps of the Indiana School for the Deaf by adopting the Utah School for the Deaf's delivery services model (Steven W. Noyce, personal communication, March 12, 2010). On top of that, the Delaware School for the Deaf, which provides bilingual education in both ASL and English, was pressured to give the LSL option by the LSL-promoting CHOICES Delaware organization, which was created in 2009. Fortunately, on September 10, 2010, Delaware Governor Jack Markell signed House Bill 283, the Delaware Hard of Hearing Children's Bill of Rights, into law. Texas, Colorado, and California enacted similar legislation (www.christina.k12.de.us/DSPDHH/DHHBillofRights.htm).
One year later, on July 12, 2011, the CHOICES Delaware organization attempted and failed to create a Listening and Spoken Language program through the Delaware School for the Deaf and Statewide Programs for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (The CHOICES Delaware Position Paper). According to Ursula Schultz, a former Deaf employee at Delaware School for the Deaf, the CHOICES Delaware organization wants DSD to implement listening and spoken language educational practices based on AGBell's principles for LSL in their early childhood classes: "They believe that all children who have a hearing aid or cochlear implants only need LSL. They have been rallying to state officials trying to make change happen" (Ursula Schultz, personal communication, February 12, 2012).
In reality, the CHOICES Delaware organization pushed for speech and auditory therapy services for Deaf and hard of hearing students. They went on to argue that this was the best therapy for students who had hearing parents. They acknowledged that ASL/English Bilingual educational programs for Deaf and hard of hearing children of Deaf parents were acceptable. However, they held the belief that all hearing families were not receiving speech and auditory services. The administration of the Delaware School for the Deaf maintained its support for the ASL/English Bilingual Program, which dissatisfied the CHOICES Delaware organization (Ursula Schultz, personal communication, February 12, 2012). The organization sought more supporters outside of Delaware to push for change. When the CHOICES Delaware organization learned about Utah and the changes made by then-USDB Superintendent Noyce in expanding the LSL Program at the Utah School for the Deaf, they opted to use Utah as an educational model. In order to promote the Two-Track Program and its Outreach Services model, the CHOICES Delaware organization invited Superintendent Noyce to the Delaware Conference on Deaf Education on June 11, 2011, as a keynote speaker.
For more than ten years, the CHOICES Delaware organization did not give up trying to implement the LSL option in the Delaware School for the Deaf, leading the American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware (ACLU-DE), which is an affiliate of the nationwide ACLU organization, to file a complaint requesting the US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights to investigate the Delaware Department of Education for lack of access to LSL therapy and over-referrals to the Delaware School for the Deaf. When the ACLU of Delaware received a response from the Deaf community articulating concerns and perspectives, they published a position statement on December 27, 2023, stating that they were reviewing it (Deaf and Hard of Hearing Education, ACLU-Delaware, December 27, 2023). Sara Nović, a Deaf professor and novelist, launched a Change.org petition calling for a complete withdrawal of the ACLU-DE's case. It had more than 25,000 signatures. Sara stated that it is false and dangerous to "choose" between English and ASL, as this can lead to language deprivation syndrome. When the ACLU-Delaware joined forces with the CHOICES Delaware organization, they were on the wrong side of history. They removed their post following pushback from the Deaf community and Deaf education professionals (Abenchuchan, The Daily Moth: Deaf News, January 10, 2024). The ACLU of Delaware's case, which advocated for LSL, puts Deaf children at risk of having limited access to language during their childhood years.
On May 17, 2011, three days after the CHOICES Delaware conference, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels appointed two new members to the board that governs the Indiana School for the Deaf., a national leader in bilingual education for Deaf and hard of hearing students. The concern was that the two new LSL board members were unaffiliated with bilingual education. The irony was that these two new members were parents whose Deaf children did not attend ISD, the school they were chosen to oversee. Only one Deaf person served on the board, which included five hearing members (6News, May 17, 2011). Many parents were outraged by the new appointments, believing it was a tactic to eliminate ASL at the school and return it to oralism. They were also baffled and concerned about anticipated changes in school academic instruction (6News, May 19, 2011).
Marvin T. Miller, president of the Indiana Association of the Deaf and a Deaf parent of four Deaf children, requested equal representation on the ISD School Board. However, when Governor Daniels declined to reverse the selections, parents and the Deaf community, in collaboration with the Indiana Association of the Deaf and the Parent Teacher Counselor Organization, organized a rally on June 7, 2011 (Marvin Miller, personal communication, July 15, 2011).
For more than ten years, the CHOICES Delaware organization did not give up trying to implement the LSL option in the Delaware School for the Deaf, leading the American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware (ACLU-DE), which is an affiliate of the nationwide ACLU organization, to file a complaint requesting the US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights to investigate the Delaware Department of Education for lack of access to LSL therapy and over-referrals to the Delaware School for the Deaf. When the ACLU of Delaware received a response from the Deaf community articulating concerns and perspectives, they published a position statement on December 27, 2023, stating that they were reviewing it (Deaf and Hard of Hearing Education, ACLU-Delaware, December 27, 2023). Sara Nović, a Deaf professor and novelist, launched a Change.org petition calling for a complete withdrawal of the ACLU-DE's case. It had more than 25,000 signatures. Sara stated that it is false and dangerous to "choose" between English and ASL, as this can lead to language deprivation syndrome. When the ACLU-Delaware joined forces with the CHOICES Delaware organization, they were on the wrong side of history. They removed their post following pushback from the Deaf community and Deaf education professionals (Abenchuchan, The Daily Moth: Deaf News, January 10, 2024). The ACLU of Delaware's case, which advocated for LSL, puts Deaf children at risk of having limited access to language during their childhood years.
On May 17, 2011, three days after the CHOICES Delaware conference, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels appointed two new members to the board that governs the Indiana School for the Deaf., a national leader in bilingual education for Deaf and hard of hearing students. The concern was that the two new LSL board members were unaffiliated with bilingual education. The irony was that these two new members were parents whose Deaf children did not attend ISD, the school they were chosen to oversee. Only one Deaf person served on the board, which included five hearing members (6News, May 17, 2011). Many parents were outraged by the new appointments, believing it was a tactic to eliminate ASL at the school and return it to oralism. They were also baffled and concerned about anticipated changes in school academic instruction (6News, May 19, 2011).
Marvin T. Miller, president of the Indiana Association of the Deaf and a Deaf parent of four Deaf children, requested equal representation on the ISD School Board. However, when Governor Daniels declined to reverse the selections, parents and the Deaf community, in collaboration with the Indiana Association of the Deaf and the Parent Teacher Counselor Organization, organized a rally on June 7, 2011 (Marvin Miller, personal communication, July 15, 2011).
At the rally, Howard Rosenblum, Chief Executive Officer of the National Association of the Deaf, observed by saying, "By sending [the new board members'] children to other schools, what role do they have for the Indiana School for the Deaf? We believe they are not in support of preserving the goals of the school" (6News, June 7, 2011). For a while, the ISD school board was at odds with a long-running dispute over assimilating Deaf individuals into hearing society. Some people believed that Deaf children should use sign language and go to state schools for the deaf, where other Deaf children would surround their peers. Others argue that mainstreaming students with hearing children in regular classrooms would enhance their benefits, particularly with the availability of cochlear implants (6News, June 7, 2011). The Utah Deaf Education Core Group suspected these two Indiana LSL board members would wish to replicate the USD's two-track model because the governor would not bend, even after the rally.
Since Steven Noyce became the superintendent of USDB in 2009, he has transformed it into one of the nation's best state-run oral programs (Jacob Dietz, personal communication, April 21, 2011). Additionally, Dr. White addressed the Indiana Legislature, advocating for the passage of HB 1367 amidst the protests of the Indiana Deaf community, a move that ultimately led to its passage. These states experienced significant impacts on Deaf education.
When Deaf adults, who had experienced the inception of the Dual Track Program at the Utah School for the Deaf in 1962, learned about Superintendent Noyce's actions, they and the Utah Deaf community fought back with unwavering determination. This movement, which spanned over 50 years from 1962 to 2011, was a testament to their resilience. As the LSL program expanded, Superintendent Noyce gradually reduced funding for the ASL/English Bilingual Program, a move that was met with staunch resistance from the community.
Superintendent Noyce's changes not only affected the Utah Deaf community but also had a profound emotional impact on the parents of Deaf children. His revamp of the Parent Infant Program, which allegedly pressured parents to choose the LSL option, was similar to the outdated and ineffective' Y' system of the 1960s. His limitations on educational services from 2009 to 2011 led to the manipulation of parents, causing significant emotional distress. In the Parent Infant Program, parents faced significant pressure to make decisions during their children's crucial language development years. This program provided services to parents of Deaf or hard of hearing children aged 0 to 3. It was customary for parents to wait until their child started preschool before focusing intensively on either the signing or speaking routes. Superintendent Noyce changed things by pushing the parents to choose either LSL or ASL during his PIP years. "He encouraged parents to choose either ASL/English or LSL as early as possible instead of when choosing a preschool because [those early years were] a critical period for language development" (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011). As of February 2011, 74% of parents enrolled in the Parent Infant Program had chosen LSL. 15% of those polled chose ASL, while the rest remained undecided. The Utah School for the Deaf enrolled 170 infants and toddlers. More LSL specialists than ASL specialists received training. Parents' demand for speech and auditory services prompted this action (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011).
Advocates for bilingual education expressed deep and valid concerns about Superintendent Noyce's apparent favoritism towards the oral program at the expense of a traditional Deaf education in American Sign Language (ASL) (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011). They argued that ASL, being more readily accessible to visual learners, was crucial in uniting the Deaf community and fostering a Deaf identity. Despite Superintendent Noyce's claims of supporting family choice, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group observed that he had effectively limited their options, leading to a demand for both LSL and ASL. For instance, when PIP parents chose ASL, Superintendent Noyce took away speech services. When PIP's parents chose LSL, he removed the signing services. It was an "either/or" situation, while many parents wanted both options: LSL and ASL.
When Deaf adults, who had experienced the inception of the Dual Track Program at the Utah School for the Deaf in 1962, learned about Superintendent Noyce's actions, they and the Utah Deaf community fought back with unwavering determination. This movement, which spanned over 50 years from 1962 to 2011, was a testament to their resilience. As the LSL program expanded, Superintendent Noyce gradually reduced funding for the ASL/English Bilingual Program, a move that was met with staunch resistance from the community.
Superintendent Noyce's changes not only affected the Utah Deaf community but also had a profound emotional impact on the parents of Deaf children. His revamp of the Parent Infant Program, which allegedly pressured parents to choose the LSL option, was similar to the outdated and ineffective' Y' system of the 1960s. His limitations on educational services from 2009 to 2011 led to the manipulation of parents, causing significant emotional distress. In the Parent Infant Program, parents faced significant pressure to make decisions during their children's crucial language development years. This program provided services to parents of Deaf or hard of hearing children aged 0 to 3. It was customary for parents to wait until their child started preschool before focusing intensively on either the signing or speaking routes. Superintendent Noyce changed things by pushing the parents to choose either LSL or ASL during his PIP years. "He encouraged parents to choose either ASL/English or LSL as early as possible instead of when choosing a preschool because [those early years were] a critical period for language development" (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011). As of February 2011, 74% of parents enrolled in the Parent Infant Program had chosen LSL. 15% of those polled chose ASL, while the rest remained undecided. The Utah School for the Deaf enrolled 170 infants and toddlers. More LSL specialists than ASL specialists received training. Parents' demand for speech and auditory services prompted this action (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011).
Advocates for bilingual education expressed deep and valid concerns about Superintendent Noyce's apparent favoritism towards the oral program at the expense of a traditional Deaf education in American Sign Language (ASL) (Winters, The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011). They argued that ASL, being more readily accessible to visual learners, was crucial in uniting the Deaf community and fostering a Deaf identity. Despite Superintendent Noyce's claims of supporting family choice, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group observed that he had effectively limited their options, leading to a demand for both LSL and ASL. For instance, when PIP parents chose ASL, Superintendent Noyce took away speech services. When PIP's parents chose LSL, he removed the signing services. It was an "either/or" situation, while many parents wanted both options: LSL and ASL.
Deaf student Toni Ekenstam gets auditory training from Steven Noyce, a teacher of the deaf. Toni is taught to lip read and communicate with her own voice, one of several methods used to teach deaf children at the Utah School for the Deaf @ Deseret News, March 8, 1973. Deseret News Photo by Chief Photographer Don Groyston
Although the Utah School for the Deaf offered Listening and Spoken Language and ASL/English Bilingual programs in 2011, the problems were similar to those encountered in the 1960s and 1970s. It was either to train Deaf children to talk or to educate students sign language. Superintendent Noyce was proud that the Utah School for the Deaf was the only state school offering a pure oral or bilingual education. Yet, most other state schools have relied on research to shape their current programs. The Utah Deaf Education Core Group also opposed the Utah School for the Deaf for offering the Dual Track Program. This was still the same controversy that arose in 1962 when the Utah State Board of Education endorsed a two-track educational system for the deaf on June 14, 1962 (The Ogden Standard-Examiner, June 14, 1962). More information about its program is available further down.
Private deaf schools across the country have implemented the oral curriculum, according to the Utah Deaf Education Core Group. Whether USD, as a state-funded school, should offer both programs was probably a bad move for the school because the neighborhood schools could pick up those Deaf and hard of hearing students who preferred only speech services. However, since both options were available in USD, we should balance them equally. The publication of "The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students" in April 2005 outlines standards that can accomplish this. We created this National Agenda to assist school systems in overcoming philosophical, placement, communication, and service delivery biases. However, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group felt at the time that Superintendent Noyce, a graduate of Dr. Grant B. Bitter's Oral Training Program at the University of Utah, was a major roadblock to expanding the bilingual program at the Utah School for the Deaf due to LSL bias. They intended to ensure that his successor did not go backward with the Utah School for the Deaf, as Superintendent Noyce did. The "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Dream" webpage has further information regarding the Utah Deaf Education Core Group's dispute with Superintendent Noyce.
The LSL community regards the Utah School for the Deaf as a "beacon." As an agency, the Utah School for the Deaf stood in stark contrast to the norms of the state schools for the Deaf, which only provided a single teaching philosophy curriculum in ASL. The USD was proud of its uniqueness in offering Listening and Spoken Language and ASL/English Bilingual options. Although Dr. Karl White was shown assisting with state legislation championing the LSL services being implemented in the state schools for the deaf, and Superintendent Noyce was promoting its Two-Track efforts and Outreach Services strategy, they escalated the situation to make matters worse by pushing toward the LSL movement. Furthermore, Noyce and White interfered with other state schools for the deaf since the LSL community aspired to model its operations after learning about the USD's Two-Track program and Outreach Services strategy. Last but not least, Noyce and White's involvement with the LSL community had an impact on state schools for the deaf, as the Deaf communities in their respective states were fighting tooth and nail to safeguard their ASL/English Bilingual curriculum. To preserve and protect the state schools for the deaf, the Deaf community must remain vigilant.
Private deaf schools across the country have implemented the oral curriculum, according to the Utah Deaf Education Core Group. Whether USD, as a state-funded school, should offer both programs was probably a bad move for the school because the neighborhood schools could pick up those Deaf and hard of hearing students who preferred only speech services. However, since both options were available in USD, we should balance them equally. The publication of "The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students" in April 2005 outlines standards that can accomplish this. We created this National Agenda to assist school systems in overcoming philosophical, placement, communication, and service delivery biases. However, the Utah Deaf Education Core Group felt at the time that Superintendent Noyce, a graduate of Dr. Grant B. Bitter's Oral Training Program at the University of Utah, was a major roadblock to expanding the bilingual program at the Utah School for the Deaf due to LSL bias. They intended to ensure that his successor did not go backward with the Utah School for the Deaf, as Superintendent Noyce did. The "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Dream" webpage has further information regarding the Utah Deaf Education Core Group's dispute with Superintendent Noyce.
The LSL community regards the Utah School for the Deaf as a "beacon." As an agency, the Utah School for the Deaf stood in stark contrast to the norms of the state schools for the Deaf, which only provided a single teaching philosophy curriculum in ASL. The USD was proud of its uniqueness in offering Listening and Spoken Language and ASL/English Bilingual options. Although Dr. Karl White was shown assisting with state legislation championing the LSL services being implemented in the state schools for the deaf, and Superintendent Noyce was promoting its Two-Track efforts and Outreach Services strategy, they escalated the situation to make matters worse by pushing toward the LSL movement. Furthermore, Noyce and White interfered with other state schools for the deaf since the LSL community aspired to model its operations after learning about the USD's Two-Track program and Outreach Services strategy. Last but not least, Noyce and White's involvement with the LSL community had an impact on state schools for the deaf, as the Deaf communities in their respective states were fighting tooth and nail to safeguard their ASL/English Bilingual curriculum. To preserve and protect the state schools for the deaf, the Deaf community must remain vigilant.
The Oralism and Mainstreaming
Movements in Utah
Movements in Utah
Since 1962, the oral and mainstreaming movements have had an impact on deaf education in Utah, providing background for the state's deaf education history. Dr. Grant B. Bitter, an advocate for oral and mainstream education, was the driving force behind it. From 1962 to 1987, he held 'power' for 25 years. As a result of his efforts, the Utah School for the Deaf adopted the Dual Track Program, also known as the "Y" system, as a new policy in 1962, requiring all Deaf students to begin in the Oral Program in the Primary Department and not be able to transfer to the Simultaneous Communication Division unless they had "failed" the Oral Program by the age of 10-12 or 6th grade.
The Utah School for the Deaf in Ogden, Utah, also separated its Oral and Simultaneous Communication Programs, each with its own classrooms, dormitory facilities, recess, and extracurricular activities, except the athlete programs, which were open to all students due to a player shortage (The Utah Eagle, February 1968; The Ogden Standard-Examiner, October 19, 1970). The most significant events were the student strikes in 1962 and 1969, which directly resulted from dissatisfaction with the Dual Track Program segregation system. Unfortunately, these strikes went unheard, marking a dark chapter in the history of deaf education in Utah.
Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, who served as the president of the Utah Association of the Deaf from 1960 to 1963, denied any involvement in a strike during his tenure. He claimed that the strike was a spontaneous reaction by students who felt that the conditions, restrictions, and personalities at the Utah School for the Deaf had become intolerable (7). In the Fall-Winter 1962 issue of the UAD Bulletin, UAD expressed its support for a classroom test of the Dual Track Program at the Utah School for the Deaf. Nevertheless, UAD openly opposed complete social isolation, interference with religious activities, the crippling of the sports program, and the intense pressure on children in the oral program to comply with the "no signing" rule (UAD Bulletin, Fall-Winter 1962).
Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, who served as the president of the Utah Association of the Deaf from 1960 to 1963, denied any involvement in a strike during his tenure. He claimed that the strike was a spontaneous reaction by students who felt that the conditions, restrictions, and personalities at the Utah School for the Deaf had become intolerable (7). In the Fall-Winter 1962 issue of the UAD Bulletin, UAD expressed its support for a classroom test of the Dual Track Program at the Utah School for the Deaf. Nevertheless, UAD openly opposed complete social isolation, interference with religious activities, the crippling of the sports program, and the intense pressure on children in the oral program to comply with the "no signing" rule (UAD Bulletin, Fall-Winter 1962).
In a significant turn of events, the students' 1969 walkout protest against the segregation system in the Dual Track Program, a pivotal moment in the history of the Utah School for the Deaf, did not have the desired results. Despite the setbacks, they came up with new ways to voice their dissent. Some sign language students boldly walked through the Oral Department hallway, while other oral students traversed the Simultaneous Communication Department hallway. This act of defiance violated the 'Y' system rule, which deemed these areas' off-limits' to maintain a 'clean' communication environment. The students even confronted their oral teachers, accusing them of oppression and domination (Raymond Monson, personal communication, November 9, 2010). The Utah Deaf community and parents, unwavering in their support for sign language, also waged a relentless decade-long battle against the 'Y' system. Despite encountering years of indifference, they remained steadfast in pursuing educational equality.
Superintendent Robert W. Tegeder, faced with a complex situation, demonstrated his commitment to the cause by seeking assistance from the Utah State Board of Education. He approached Dr. Jay J. Campbell, a Deputy Superintendent of the Utah State Office of Education, who had been a long-standing ally of the Utah Deaf community and had overseen the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind since 1966. Driven by his concern for the welfare of Deaf children, Dr. Campbell took the initiative to create the Two-Track Program, a new instrument system that replaced the "Y" system (1976 USD Reunion Book Program; Campbell, 1977; Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007).
Ned C. Wheeler, a graduate of USD in 1933 and the chair of the USDB Governor's Advisory Council, put forward the revolutionary "Two-Track Program" proposal in response to various events. These included Dr. Campbell's proposal, student strikes in 1962 and 1969, and opposition from the Parent Teacher Student Association to the "Y" system policy. Finally, on December 28, 1970, the Utah State Board of Education authorized a new policy, paving the way for the Utah School for the Deaf to operate a Two-Track Program. It granted parents the freedom to choose the educational method for their Deaf child, either oral or total communication, from the age of 2 to 21 years (Kenneth L. Kinner, personal communication, May 14, 2011, Recommendations on Policy for the Utah School for the Deaf, 1970; Deseret News, December 29, 1970).
Yet, as Dr. Campbell (1977) observed, parents were often left in the dark about their children's educational and communication options. Despite the Utah State Board of Education issuing policies in 1970, 1977, and 1998, the Utah School for the Deaf's Communication Guidelines fell short in providing parents with a comprehensive range of choices. This lack of clarity frequently led to inappropriate placement strategies, a problem that persisted due to the prevalent oral bias.
On April 14, 1977, at the Utah School for the Deaf, Dr. Campbell presented his exhaustive 200-page study report to the Utah State Board of Education. His report, aimed at improving USD's education through more equitable evaluation and placement systems, was met with resistance. Dr. Bitter, a professor at the University of Utah at the time, vehemently opposed Dr. Campbell's research, accusing it of containing falsehoods and making unfounded conclusions about the University of Utah's Teacher Education Program and educational programs across the state (G.B. Bitter, personal communication, March 6, 1978). The presentation was a contentious affair, with over 300 parents who supported the oral method applauding Dr. Bitter and Peter Viahos, an Ogden attorney and father of a Deaf daughter, as they presented their views (The Ogden Standard-Examiner, April 15, 1977).
Superintendent Robert W. Tegeder, faced with a complex situation, demonstrated his commitment to the cause by seeking assistance from the Utah State Board of Education. He approached Dr. Jay J. Campbell, a Deputy Superintendent of the Utah State Office of Education, who had been a long-standing ally of the Utah Deaf community and had overseen the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind since 1966. Driven by his concern for the welfare of Deaf children, Dr. Campbell took the initiative to create the Two-Track Program, a new instrument system that replaced the "Y" system (1976 USD Reunion Book Program; Campbell, 1977; Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007).
Ned C. Wheeler, a graduate of USD in 1933 and the chair of the USDB Governor's Advisory Council, put forward the revolutionary "Two-Track Program" proposal in response to various events. These included Dr. Campbell's proposal, student strikes in 1962 and 1969, and opposition from the Parent Teacher Student Association to the "Y" system policy. Finally, on December 28, 1970, the Utah State Board of Education authorized a new policy, paving the way for the Utah School for the Deaf to operate a Two-Track Program. It granted parents the freedom to choose the educational method for their Deaf child, either oral or total communication, from the age of 2 to 21 years (Kenneth L. Kinner, personal communication, May 14, 2011, Recommendations on Policy for the Utah School for the Deaf, 1970; Deseret News, December 29, 1970).
Yet, as Dr. Campbell (1977) observed, parents were often left in the dark about their children's educational and communication options. Despite the Utah State Board of Education issuing policies in 1970, 1977, and 1998, the Utah School for the Deaf's Communication Guidelines fell short in providing parents with a comprehensive range of choices. This lack of clarity frequently led to inappropriate placement strategies, a problem that persisted due to the prevalent oral bias.
On April 14, 1977, at the Utah School for the Deaf, Dr. Campbell presented his exhaustive 200-page study report to the Utah State Board of Education. His report, aimed at improving USD's education through more equitable evaluation and placement systems, was met with resistance. Dr. Bitter, a professor at the University of Utah at the time, vehemently opposed Dr. Campbell's research, accusing it of containing falsehoods and making unfounded conclusions about the University of Utah's Teacher Education Program and educational programs across the state (G.B. Bitter, personal communication, March 6, 1978). The presentation was a contentious affair, with over 300 parents who supported the oral method applauding Dr. Bitter and Peter Viahos, an Ogden attorney and father of a Deaf daughter, as they presented their views (The Ogden Standard-Examiner, April 15, 1977).
Under Dr. Bitter's influence, these parents petitioned the Utah State Board of Education to suspend Dr. Campbell's comprehensive study, claiming it was inconclusive. Dissatisfied with Dr. Campbell's research findings, they demanded his firing (Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007). In addition to the approximately 300 parents in attendance, there were between 50 and 60 Deaf individuals in attendance. Dr. Bitter, a spokesperson for the oral advocates, proposed three options to Dr. Walter D. Talbot, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction:
Dr. Talbot responded to Dr. Bitter's appeal by announcing that the State Board had decided to reassign Dr. Campbell to a different position within the State Office of Education. The Deaf group became agitated, stomping their feet on the floor. Dr. Bitter said they were very emotional, and the meeting was wild. He was frightened that he was going to be killed during the ordeal. Dr. Talbot indicated that those members of the Deaf community would have to leave the room (Grant Bitter: Everett L. Cooley Oral History Project, March 17, 1987).
As a result, Dr. Campbell's plan came crashing down. His two-year study, which included recommendations for improving education through fair assessment and placement procedures, was buried and forgotten (Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007). Superintendent Steven W. Noyce, an oral proponent and a long-serving teacher/director of the Utah School for the Deaf, spearheaded the formation of the Parent Infant Program Orientation at USD in 2010 to provide fair, balanced options to parents of Deaf children. Dr. Campbell advocated for changes in the PIP to develop an orientation in the 1970s, which Dr. Bitter opposed. Despite the 2010 orientation, parents still had to choose between the two options. It was an "either/or" situation.
- Removing Dr. Campbell from his position;
- Assigning him to another position; or
- Requesting a grand jury investigation into the evidence demonstrating how oral Deaf individuals were being intimidated through some of the state's programs.
Dr. Talbot responded to Dr. Bitter's appeal by announcing that the State Board had decided to reassign Dr. Campbell to a different position within the State Office of Education. The Deaf group became agitated, stomping their feet on the floor. Dr. Bitter said they were very emotional, and the meeting was wild. He was frightened that he was going to be killed during the ordeal. Dr. Talbot indicated that those members of the Deaf community would have to leave the room (Grant Bitter: Everett L. Cooley Oral History Project, March 17, 1987).
As a result, Dr. Campbell's plan came crashing down. His two-year study, which included recommendations for improving education through fair assessment and placement procedures, was buried and forgotten (Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007). Superintendent Steven W. Noyce, an oral proponent and a long-serving teacher/director of the Utah School for the Deaf, spearheaded the formation of the Parent Infant Program Orientation at USD in 2010 to provide fair, balanced options to parents of Deaf children. Dr. Campbell advocated for changes in the PIP to develop an orientation in the 1970s, which Dr. Bitter opposed. Despite the 2010 orientation, parents still had to choose between the two options. It was an "either/or" situation.
Jeff W. Pollock, a member of the USDB Advisory Council representing the Utah Deaf community, requested on February 10, 2011, that the Utah School for the Deaf implement the guidelines titled "The National Agenda: Moving Forward on Achieving Educational Equality for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students" to address philosophical, placement, communication, and service delivery biases. One of the members of the Advisory Council wondered if the Deaf National Agenda was solely based on ASL. He clarified that the Deaf National Agenda does not exclusively rely on ASL but instead emphasizes the holistic development of each child, supporting both ASL and spoken language, unlike the current system's "either/or" approach. Jeff then addressed Superintendent Noyce in the eyes and stated that the USD has reverted to the inefficient "Y" system of the last 30–40 years, with oral OR sign, and is not providing both ASL and LSL to parents who want both options. Superintendent Noyce was deafeningly silent on the subject. Three years later, Michelle Tanner became the Associate Superintendent of the Utah School for the Deaf and oversaw this matter in 2014, which led to the creation of the Hybrid Program in 2016. More information is available in the "Creation of the Hybrid Program" section.
Suffice it to say, Dr. Grant B. Bitter was a prominent figure in Utah's oralism and mainstreaming movement, which had a significant impact on deaf education in Utah since 1962, despite the new Two-Track Program and the school's option guidelines. As a result of his efforts, the number of students attending Ogden's residential school for Deaf students decreased, and the quality of education also declined. The mainstreaming approach gained popularity but left many alums heartbroken. More on the mainstreaming movement can be found on the "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Mainstreaming Perspective" webpage.
Controversy with Dr. Grant B. Bitter,
an Impassioned Oral Advocate
an Impassioned Oral Advocate
Under the leadership of Dr. Grant B. Bitter, known as the "Father of Mainstreaming," Utah's movement toward mainstreaming all Deaf children evolved steadily in the 1960s throughout his mainstreaming campaign. He continued to campaign for mainstreaming until the phrase became popular with the passage of Public Law 94-142 in 1975, now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Dr. Bitter was a renowned hard-core oralist and one of the top figures in oral education. He actively promoted both oral and mainstream education. His daughter, Colleen, was born deaf in 1954, which gave him a personal connection to the cause and inspired his dedication to the advancement of oral and mainstream education.
Dr. Stephen C. Baldwin, a Deaf man who was the Total Communication Division Curriculum Coordinator at the Utah School for the Deaf in the 1970s, recounted his experiences with Dr. Bitter and stated that no one was more persistent than Dr. Bitter in promoting an oral and mainstreaming philosophy. Dr. Baldwin recalled how Dr. Bitter frequently criticized residential schools and opposed the popular use of sign language in schools, advocating for oral and mainstream education for Utah's Deaf and hard of hearing students (Baldwin, 1990). Dr. Bitter had a long-standing feud with the Utah Association for the Deaf, especially with Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, a Deaf community leader in Utah. Dr. Bitter and Dr. Sanderson were well-known giant figures with animosity toward each other.
Dr. Stephen C. Baldwin, a Deaf man who was the Total Communication Division Curriculum Coordinator at the Utah School for the Deaf in the 1970s, recounted his experiences with Dr. Bitter and stated that no one was more persistent than Dr. Bitter in promoting an oral and mainstreaming philosophy. Dr. Baldwin recalled how Dr. Bitter frequently criticized residential schools and opposed the popular use of sign language in schools, advocating for oral and mainstream education for Utah's Deaf and hard of hearing students (Baldwin, 1990). Dr. Bitter had a long-standing feud with the Utah Association for the Deaf, especially with Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, a Deaf community leader in Utah. Dr. Bitter and Dr. Sanderson were well-known giant figures with animosity toward each other.
Dr. Bitter has had an extensive career in teaching and curriculum development. He worked as a teacher and curriculum coordinator at the Extension Division of the Utah School for the Deaf in Salt Lake City, Utah. He also served as a curriculum coordinator for the Utah School for the Deaf and as a director and professor in the Oral Training Program under the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah. Furthermore, Dr. Bitter was the coordinator of the Deaf Seminary Program under the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Utah.
The Implementation of the "Y" System
at the Utah School for the Deaf
at the Utah School for the Deaf
Parents who favored an oral method of instruction founded the Utah Council for the Deaf, which successfully pushed for the Dual Track Program at the Utah School for the Deaf. Dr. Bitter is believed to have been a member of this council. The program prioritized the oral mechanism over the sign language approach at USD, a decision that would prove disastrous. Superintendent Robert W. Tegeder of the USDB seemed to favor this transition away from sign language, which had negative consequences (The UAD Bulletin, Fall-Winter, 1962). The Utah State Board of Education approved this policy reform on June 14, 1962, which received support from the Special Study Committee on Deaf Education (The Ogden Standard-Examiner, June 14, 1962; Wight, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, October 19, 1970). The USD embraced the Dual Track Program, which meant all students in the Primary Department started in the Oral Program and couldn't transfer to the Simultaneous Communication Program unless they had "failed" the Oral Program by the age of 10-12 or 6th grade (1976 USD Reunion Book Program).
The Utah School for the Deaf introduced the Dual Track Program in the summer of 1962, which shifted its attitude towards potential teachers from sign language to oral communication. This program made speech the primary mode of communication in the classroom for Deaf students. The administrators of the Utah School for the Deaf believed that the Dual Track Program offered benefits that a single track could not (The Utah Eagle, February 1968; Wight, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, October 19, 1970). According to USD, the Oral Program required a "pure oral mindset." In 1968, the USD was one of the few residential schools in the country to offer an exclusively oral program in the primary department (elementary) (The Utah Eagle, February 1968). By 1973, USD was the only state in the United States to provide parents and Deaf students with both methods of communication through the Dual Track System (Laflamme, The Ogden Sandard-Examiner, September 5, 1973).
Dr. Bitter also had significant power as a parental figure and used it to push for oralism, making it difficult for the Utah Association for the Deaf to defend him. When the Teacher Preparation Program in the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah closed in 1986, he retired in 1987 (Bitter, A Summary Report for Tenure, March 15, 1985). Although he passed away in 2000, Dr. Bitter's legacy continues to influence deaf education. You can find helpful information on the "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Mainstreaming Perspective" webpage to learn more about the mainstreaming movement.
Dr. Bitter also had significant power as a parental figure and used it to push for oralism, making it difficult for the Utah Association for the Deaf to defend him. When the Teacher Preparation Program in the Department of Special Education at the University of Utah closed in 1986, he retired in 1987 (Bitter, A Summary Report for Tenure, March 15, 1985). Although he passed away in 2000, Dr. Bitter's legacy continues to influence deaf education. You can find helpful information on the "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Mainstreaming Perspective" webpage to learn more about the mainstreaming movement.
Battling with Steven W. Noyce, an Oral Promoter
The Utah Deaf community feared Steven W. Noyce, a long-serving teacher and director of the Utah School for the Deaf, would strive to carry Dr. Bitter's legacy, endangering the ASL/English Bilingual Program they fought hard to create when the Utah State Board of Education elected him superintendent of the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind in August 2009. The state board disregarded the outcry from the Utah Deaf community.
Steven Noyce was no stranger to the Utah Deaf community. The Utah Deaf community knew that Steven had graduated from the Oral Training Program at the University of Utah between 1965 and 1972 under the mentorship of Dr. Grant B. Bitter (LinkedIn: Steven Noyce). They were up in arms about being alarmed by his promotion of oral education. On the recommendation of Ella Mae Lentz, co-founder of the Deafhood Foundation and well-known Deaf Education advocate, the Deaf Education Core Group was created in April 2010 to safeguard ASL/English Bilingual education and campaign against inequality in the deaf education system through a Two-Track Program in Utah.
The Utah Deaf Education Core Group spent a year trying to persuade the Utah State Board of Education to terminate Steven Noyce's two-year contract from 2010 to 2011. However, the board rejected their efforts and extended his contract for another two years, from 2011 to 2013. His contract was eventually terminated by the Utah State Board of Education in 2013, but the reason for the termination remains unknown.
Battling with Dr. Karl R. White, a Global Oral Motivator
Dr. Karl R. White, a psychology professor at Utah State University and the founding director of the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management (NCHAM) on the university campus, demonstrated a visionary approach. He foresaw the potential of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs in the United States and globally, envisioning an international database to study the causes of hearing loss and expand genetic resources. Under his NCHAM leadership, advances in Listening and Spoken Language and cochlear implants directly impacted the availability and accessibility of learning American Sign Language (ASL) at state schools for the deaf on a national and worldwide scale.
Early Detection of Deafness in Newborns
Although Dr. Karl White had worked at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf in Rochester, New York, and knew sign language, he had no experience with deaf education. Nonetheless, he became interested in early hearing loss detection in newborns. He conducted clinical trials for newborn hearing tests between 1988 and 1993. His interest motivated him to establish the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management, or NCHAM, in 1990. The National Institute of Health (NIH) became interested in his studies. In 1993, the NIH publicly announced the screening for hearing loss for all newborns. This screening program significantly improved the early detection of hearing loss in children across the United States, paving the way for the annual Conference on Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) of the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management at Utah State University in 2000 (National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management, Wikipedia). Dr. White found himself in high demand as a consultant for hospitals and health agencies in other states that requested to make newborn hearing screenings available to the public.
While traveling around the world as a consultant, Dr. White began noticing that Deaf and hard of hearing babies and toddlers who received a cochlear implant early in life and entered an early intervention and preschool program that focused on listening and speaking skills were able to function in a classroom without a hearing aid around the age of seven (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 4A). Dr. White concluded from his research that all babies with hearing loss could undergo surgical cochlear implantation. Engaging them in a listening and spoken language program during infancy or toddlerhood would eliminate the need to learn sign language or attend state schools for the deaf. On May 3, 2007, he launched a preschool program on the Utah State University campus called Sound Beginnings for Deaf newborns and toddlers with cochlear implants despite opposition from the Deaf Logan community.
The Impact of Sound Beginnings on Deaf Education
The Oberkotter Foundation granted Dr. White's request for a $3 million grant to fund his listening and spoken language interventions. This was the largest private foundation in America that focused on the LSL approach for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Because of this significant support, this early childhood educational program was tuition-free for Deaf children aged from newborn to five years old (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A; Kristi Mortensen, personal communication, June 26, 2009). The children in the program have access to specialists in early childhood deaf education, audiology, and speech-language pathology. The purpose of the program was to enable these Deaf children to succeed alongside their hearing peers without the use of sign language. The Sound Beginnings relies on cochlear implants in these profoundly deaf or severely hard of hearing babies and toddlers (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
While Dr. White acknowledged that cochlear implants do not allow children to hear in the biological sense, he decided that his program would not encourage children to sign for fear of it becoming a crutch and reducing children's chances of mastering spoken English. Dr. White's approach lacked support from linguistics research, validation from language acquisition experts, consultation with Utah State University's Deaf Education Department professors, and a lack of research in the burgeoning field of bilingual linguistics. Dr. White responded to the criticism by stating that the program would not order children already using sign language to stop (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
Dr. White continued with his early intervention approach. If only he had checked first. According to a bilingual study, a child who has mastered his first language will use it to learn a second language. When it comes to Deaf and hard of hearing children, their first language is American Sign Language, and English is their second language. He could have also discovered evidence that sign language supports and improves speech development (Graney, 1997). Despite having no expertise or qualifications in this field, Dr. White severely impacted Utah's deaf education system. Did he consider how his actions would affect others? Unfortunately, he made a fortune for himself and USU through ongoing funding from the Oberkotter Foundation. The clear line was that money talks.
The university requested that he initiate a training program for audiologists and speech-language therapists, emphasizing cochlear implant technology and methods for integrating sound and language in therapy. According to Kristen Mortensen's personal communication on June 26, 2009, USU provided financial support for the full-time teaching positions created for the new training program. The program's oral curriculum deprived non-signing preschool children of learning ASL. He used all this money to entice parents to enroll their children in his Sound Beginnings program, promising to teach them to hear and talk.
While Dr. White acknowledged that cochlear implants do not allow children to hear in the biological sense, he decided that his program would not encourage children to sign for fear of it becoming a crutch and reducing children's chances of mastering spoken English. Dr. White's approach lacked support from linguistics research, validation from language acquisition experts, consultation with Utah State University's Deaf Education Department professors, and a lack of research in the burgeoning field of bilingual linguistics. Dr. White responded to the criticism by stating that the program would not order children already using sign language to stop (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
Dr. White continued with his early intervention approach. If only he had checked first. According to a bilingual study, a child who has mastered his first language will use it to learn a second language. When it comes to Deaf and hard of hearing children, their first language is American Sign Language, and English is their second language. He could have also discovered evidence that sign language supports and improves speech development (Graney, 1997). Despite having no expertise or qualifications in this field, Dr. White severely impacted Utah's deaf education system. Did he consider how his actions would affect others? Unfortunately, he made a fortune for himself and USU through ongoing funding from the Oberkotter Foundation. The clear line was that money talks.
The university requested that he initiate a training program for audiologists and speech-language therapists, emphasizing cochlear implant technology and methods for integrating sound and language in therapy. According to Kristen Mortensen's personal communication on June 26, 2009, USU provided financial support for the full-time teaching positions created for the new training program. The program's oral curriculum deprived non-signing preschool children of learning ASL. He used all this money to entice parents to enroll their children in his Sound Beginnings program, promising to teach them to hear and talk.
Dr. Karl White's shortcomings took aback the Utah Deaf community. It was an insult to call sign language a crutch. It was a rejection of Deaf identity and culture to view deafness as something that needed fixing. They are Deaf on multiple levels, including cultural, societal, and linguistic. Dr. White's ideology did much to diminish the Deaf as a people with a language. Given his psychology degree, Dr. White appeared ignorant of the psychology of being deaf. Dr. White abruptly excluded the Utah Deaf community, along with all of its knowledge and expertise, leaving them without a voice to express their concerns or viewpoints.
The Utah Deaf community questioned if Dr. White had ever addressed the impact of his Sound Beginnings program on the families of the Deaf or hard of hearing children who took part in it. Was he encouraging the parents to support any audism against the Deaf community? Was he disregarding the diversity of the children in the program? Did he intend to establish a world without exception, where everyone was the same? Is the program created with the child's overall development in mind? The Utah Deaf community found the Sound Beginnings program's objectives unsatisfactory.
The Utah Deaf community questioned if Dr. White had ever addressed the impact of his Sound Beginnings program on the families of the Deaf or hard of hearing children who took part in it. Was he encouraging the parents to support any audism against the Deaf community? Was he disregarding the diversity of the children in the program? Did he intend to establish a world without exception, where everyone was the same? Is the program created with the child's overall development in mind? The Utah Deaf community found the Sound Beginnings program's objectives unsatisfactory.
Conflict Arises
Dr. White's activities had an impact on the SKI-HI Institute and Deaf Mentor Outreach on the Utah State University campus, which provides American Sign Language services. Dr. Paula Pittman, Director of Outreach for the Deaf Mentor Program at the Ski-Hi Institute at Utah State University, expressed extreme dissatisfaction with the new movement.
SKI-HI Institute was founded and directed by Dr. Thomas C. Clark, son of John H. Clark, a Deaf engineer, and second cousin of Elizabeth DeLong, our first Deaf female president of the Utah Association of the Deaf in 1909, in Logan, Utah, in 1972. They focus on enhancing the lives of children with hearing loss and low vision. The institute's Deaf Mentor Program also works with families to communicate with their Deaf babies and toddlers through ASL. At the time, the SKI-HI Institute and its Deaf Mentor Outreach needed full-time personnel positions. When Dr. Pittman saw the Sound Beginnings program receive at least three full-time positions from the university, she wondered if USU was responding to the influx of money from the Oberkotter Foundation or to the needs of its programs (Kristi Mortensen, personal communication, June 26, 2009).
Did You Know?
Millicent "Millie" Simmonds, a Deaf actress from Utah, lost her hearing as a baby. Emily, her mother, enlisted the services of a Deaf Mentor Program through the SKI-HI Institute to learn and communicate in American Sign Language. Millie's first ASL sign while learning the language was "Mama." She designed a necklace named "Millie ASL Mama" and partnered with the Cut + Clarity company to market it. One hundred percent of the profit goes to the SKI-HI Deaf Mentor Program to continue offering services for families with Deaf children to learn ASL, as most parents with Deaf children never learn the language (Parker, Katie Couric Media, May 5, 2022). See the link for more information: https://www.usu.edu/aggiefunded/past-projects/ski-hi.
The Utah Deaf community cherished professionals like Dr. Paula Pittman and Dr. J. Freeman King. What upset the Deaf adults were the misconceptions spread by so-called professionals such as Dr. Karl White and Dr. Todd Houston. The assertions about listening and spoken language for Deaf babies lacked research support and were misleading to hearing parents. The Utah Association for the Deaf criticized and refuted these misconceptions. Deaf adults are not unequivocally opposed to cochlear implants. The illusions claiming that cochlear implants can fix or cure deafness, as propagated by Sound Beginning professionals and others like them, disturbed Utah Deaf leaders and members of the Utah Deaf community (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 4A). Many hearing parents will buy this myth due to their naivety, only to be surprised when they find out that their deaf or hard of hearing baby is still deaf.
"Speech should not be the end product of a Deaf child's education," Dr. King emphasized. It can be a valuable tool, but language access is most important." He stated that we can achieve this by using American Sign Language, which plays to the child's strength of vision rather than their weakness of inability to hear (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
"Speech should not be the end product of a Deaf child's education," Dr. King emphasized. It can be a valuable tool, but language access is most important." He stated that we can achieve this by using American Sign Language, which plays to the child's strength of vision rather than their weakness of inability to hear (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
Sound Beginnings has appointed Dr. Todd Houston, a former director of the Alexander Graham Bell Association, as its new director. "Our goal is to transition [Deaf children] into their public school as soon as possible, but to make sure that they can be successful in a public school environment," he said. "I believe that most [Deaf] children today could benefit from a spoken language approach," Lambert states in The Ogden Standard-Examiner (2007, 1A). "I think?" No time is available for guesswork. There is no 'learning curve' to get it right. In the early years of language learning, avoiding taking the wrong route is crucial.
Dr. Beth Foley, Dean of the College of Education at USU, approved the Sound Beginnings Program. She did not see it as a replacement for the Deaf Education Department's teacher-training signing program at Utah State University. "We already have a strong sign-language program," she defended the inclusion. We are now broadening the options available to parents" (KSL.com, April 28, 2007). "Parents can and should be able to choose how they want to communicate with their children," Houston added. Many parents are increasingly opting for cochlear implants for their children, and these children require intentsive follow-up training and services to fully benefit from this technology" (KSL.com, April 28, 2007). What Dr. Foley and Dr. Houston fail to recognize or comprehend is the undeniable fact that Deaf and hard of hearing newborns and toddlers need a fully accessible language in ASL. Nobody knows what is being heard through a hearing aid. A cochlear implant is just a hearing aid implanted in the cochlea of the inner ear. Hearing parents understandably want to converse verbally with their Deaf or hard of hearing child since 96% of Deaf babies are born to hearing parents. Yet it is not as simple as these parents making a decision. Because a cochlear implant does not cure deafness, sign language is the most appropriate accommodation for Deaf children. The eyes of these children are ready for visual language. We must inform parents about these realities and guide them through the acceptance process.
When Sound Beginnings first opened its doors in 2007-2008, parents had various experiences and perspectives. Taunya Paxton decided on cochlear implants for her deaf son. Her family concentrated nearly entirely on spoken English. She went on to say, "We would do sign language and he would talk" (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 1A & 4A, 2007). Jennifer Tingey, the mother of two Deaf children, chose not to participate in the Sound Beginnings program. She was concerned about the presentation she attended because she felt the presenter had brushed over the program's possible drawbacks. Jennifer and her children decided on a total communication program (this program dissolved at the Utah School for the Deaf in 2008, leaving with two ASL/English and LSL options). She says, "They're getting speech and sign language so, when they're older, they….can choose whichever they would like." Jennifer emphasized that the Sound Beginnings program does not use ASL in the classroom. "I see why they don't use ASL...If parents want [their child] to hear, but the child does not have the cochlear implant, how can you communicate with that child, since while the child is swimming or in the bathtub, the implant must be removed" (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
Dr. Beth Foley, Dean of the College of Education at USU, approved the Sound Beginnings Program. She did not see it as a replacement for the Deaf Education Department's teacher-training signing program at Utah State University. "We already have a strong sign-language program," she defended the inclusion. We are now broadening the options available to parents" (KSL.com, April 28, 2007). "Parents can and should be able to choose how they want to communicate with their children," Houston added. Many parents are increasingly opting for cochlear implants for their children, and these children require intentsive follow-up training and services to fully benefit from this technology" (KSL.com, April 28, 2007). What Dr. Foley and Dr. Houston fail to recognize or comprehend is the undeniable fact that Deaf and hard of hearing newborns and toddlers need a fully accessible language in ASL. Nobody knows what is being heard through a hearing aid. A cochlear implant is just a hearing aid implanted in the cochlea of the inner ear. Hearing parents understandably want to converse verbally with their Deaf or hard of hearing child since 96% of Deaf babies are born to hearing parents. Yet it is not as simple as these parents making a decision. Because a cochlear implant does not cure deafness, sign language is the most appropriate accommodation for Deaf children. The eyes of these children are ready for visual language. We must inform parents about these realities and guide them through the acceptance process.
When Sound Beginnings first opened its doors in 2007-2008, parents had various experiences and perspectives. Taunya Paxton decided on cochlear implants for her deaf son. Her family concentrated nearly entirely on spoken English. She went on to say, "We would do sign language and he would talk" (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 1A & 4A, 2007). Jennifer Tingey, the mother of two Deaf children, chose not to participate in the Sound Beginnings program. She was concerned about the presentation she attended because she felt the presenter had brushed over the program's possible drawbacks. Jennifer and her children decided on a total communication program (this program dissolved at the Utah School for the Deaf in 2008, leaving with two ASL/English and LSL options). She says, "They're getting speech and sign language so, when they're older, they….can choose whichever they would like." Jennifer emphasized that the Sound Beginnings program does not use ASL in the classroom. "I see why they don't use ASL...If parents want [their child] to hear, but the child does not have the cochlear implant, how can you communicate with that child, since while the child is swimming or in the bathtub, the implant must be removed" (Lambert, The Ogden Standard-Examiner, 2007, 1A).
The Evolution of the Teacher-Training Programs in Utah
The following is a timeline of the evolution of Utah's teacher-training programs since the introduction of Sound Beginnings:
Pre-1985: The Utah Association for the Deaf advocated for a Deaf Education college teacher's training program in a postsecondary institution in Utah that emphasized sign language.
1985: Thanks to the Utah Association for the Deaf, Utah State University established a new Deaf Education program with an emphasis on Total Communication expertise, pairing sign language and speech. Prospective teachers of the Deaf could enroll at USU for a Deaf Education degree or enroll in the University of Utah's Special Education program with a teaching endorsement for the Deaf and hard of hearing. UOU's program emphasized the Oral/Aural (non-signing) approach.
1991: Dr. J. Freeman King restructured the USU Deaf Education degree's Total Communication program into a Bilingual and Bicultural curriculum. By this time, there was research data to support ASL as the visual language that Deaf children needed.
Early 1990s: The University of Utah, Utah State University, and Brigham Young University established a Multi-University Consortium agreement to offer education classes and general undergraduate credits that the other universities would recognize and accept when a prospective teacher of the Deaf needed to transfer to their actual Deaf Education program.
2013: The multi-university consortium is still available at the University of Utah but no longer includes BYU (the website for the University of Utah, College of Education). Their Special Education degree coursework requires American Sign Language classes for each prospective graduate (Bronwyn O'Hara, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, March 10, 2022).
Pre-1985: The Utah Association for the Deaf advocated for a Deaf Education college teacher's training program in a postsecondary institution in Utah that emphasized sign language.
1985: Thanks to the Utah Association for the Deaf, Utah State University established a new Deaf Education program with an emphasis on Total Communication expertise, pairing sign language and speech. Prospective teachers of the Deaf could enroll at USU for a Deaf Education degree or enroll in the University of Utah's Special Education program with a teaching endorsement for the Deaf and hard of hearing. UOU's program emphasized the Oral/Aural (non-signing) approach.
1991: Dr. J. Freeman King restructured the USU Deaf Education degree's Total Communication program into a Bilingual and Bicultural curriculum. By this time, there was research data to support ASL as the visual language that Deaf children needed.
Early 1990s: The University of Utah, Utah State University, and Brigham Young University established a Multi-University Consortium agreement to offer education classes and general undergraduate credits that the other universities would recognize and accept when a prospective teacher of the Deaf needed to transfer to their actual Deaf Education program.
2013: The multi-university consortium is still available at the University of Utah but no longer includes BYU (the website for the University of Utah, College of Education). Their Special Education degree coursework requires American Sign Language classes for each prospective graduate (Bronwyn O'Hara, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, March 10, 2022).
James Smith of the Logan Deaf Community Seeks Help
from the Utah Deaf Community
from the Utah Deaf Community
While Utah State University was establishing Sound Beginnings of Cache Valley in May 2007, several articles in the local Logan newspaper written by supporters of ASL/English Bilingual education raised concerns and perspectives regarding the preschool program. The university ignored the concerns they raised. Sound Beginnings was having an impact on deaf education programs in Utah. It was also tearing a hole in the progress that had been made and hindering efforts toward providing an accessible language to Utah's Deaf babies.
To provide context, on May 11, 2007, James Smith, a Deaf father of Deaf children and a student at Utah State University, and Susan Stokes, a member of the Utah Deaf community who resided in Logan, Utah, went to the newly formed Henry C. White Educational Council to seek support from the larger Deaf community in this struggle. However, they told James and Susan, "We are spreading too thin, and we can't support you as it is irrelevant to our mission." James and Susan warned them that the issue in Logan seems distant, but it is relevant to HCWEC's mission and purpose. They argued that the problem, beginning at USU, would become a statewide and eventually nationwide issue. Thus, deaf education was at stake. James and Susan petitioned this argument to HCWEC without success, and they left the meeting disappointed. They then led their campaign in Logan through a small Utah Deaf community there without success. They gave up the fight and concentrated on finding new ways to defend the system. All of this turmoil spurred James to embark on a seven-year study of the deaf education system in Utah, and he eventually joined the UAD Education Committee, becoming its chairperson in 2013. As chairperson of this committee, he provided seven years' worth of study, data, statistics, and inventions of viable solutions to explore as a plan of action for the committee to pursue. It was rejected. James understood that his notes above might not be considered "countable" due to their lack of primary sources or evidence, but this was simply his perspective. He emphasized that those who worked closely with USU's Bilingual-Bicultural Education Department contributed so much behind the scenes to this effort. They were James' teachers, mentors, and advisors on his path dealing with his Deaf children's education and the Utah Deaf educational system, despite resistance from the Utah Deaf community (James Smith, personal communication, August 19, 2014).
To provide context, on May 11, 2007, James Smith, a Deaf father of Deaf children and a student at Utah State University, and Susan Stokes, a member of the Utah Deaf community who resided in Logan, Utah, went to the newly formed Henry C. White Educational Council to seek support from the larger Deaf community in this struggle. However, they told James and Susan, "We are spreading too thin, and we can't support you as it is irrelevant to our mission." James and Susan warned them that the issue in Logan seems distant, but it is relevant to HCWEC's mission and purpose. They argued that the problem, beginning at USU, would become a statewide and eventually nationwide issue. Thus, deaf education was at stake. James and Susan petitioned this argument to HCWEC without success, and they left the meeting disappointed. They then led their campaign in Logan through a small Utah Deaf community there without success. They gave up the fight and concentrated on finding new ways to defend the system. All of this turmoil spurred James to embark on a seven-year study of the deaf education system in Utah, and he eventually joined the UAD Education Committee, becoming its chairperson in 2013. As chairperson of this committee, he provided seven years' worth of study, data, statistics, and inventions of viable solutions to explore as a plan of action for the committee to pursue. It was rejected. James understood that his notes above might not be considered "countable" due to their lack of primary sources or evidence, but this was simply his perspective. He emphasized that those who worked closely with USU's Bilingual-Bicultural Education Department contributed so much behind the scenes to this effort. They were James' teachers, mentors, and advisors on his path dealing with his Deaf children's education and the Utah Deaf educational system, despite resistance from the Utah Deaf community (James Smith, personal communication, August 19, 2014).
After all, James was correct in his concerns about Dr. White's widespread influence on Deaf newborns and the impact on state schools for the deaf across the country. Members of the HCWEC were slow to recognize Dr. White's power until it was too late. Deaf individuals Jeff Pollock, Dan Mathis, Stephanie Mathis, Cynthia Plue, Trenton Marsh, Julio Diaz, and Jodi Becker Kinner formed the Henry C. White Educational Council in 2006. It was dissolved in 2007 and joined the following organizations:
Moreover, building the organization from the ground up required a lot of work, which stretched them thin. At the time, the HCWEC members were either working with other organizations or had joined them to work on changes and improvements inside the system. For example, the Utah Code, which was created in the late 1970s to promote mainstreaming, had an impact on the 2005 merger of the Utah School for the Deaf and the Jean Massieu School of the Deaf, in which some also served on the task force to amend the law so that students could receive education on campus. Furthermore, the lack of a permanent school facility impacted the need to find a permanent school building to call home, which some helped make a reality. They also had family and jobs. Time constraints and other obligations led to the closure of the HCWEC.
While working within the Utah system, the national Deaf community engaged in external battles with Dr. White. These included attending legislative events to defend state schools for the deaf, organizing rallies outside Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) conferences, registering for EHDI conferences to advocate for the inclusion of ASL/English bilingual education in the agenda to counterbalance the LSL approach, and engaging in various other activities.
- The Utah Association for the Deaf Board to support its mission,
- The UAD Education Committee to support the education causes of their choices,
- The USDB Institutional Council to oversee the Utah School for the Deaf,
- The USDB Legislative Task Force to update the Utah Code that regulated the school, and
- The Utah Deaf Education Core Group in an attempt to end then-USDB Superintendent Steven Noyce's two-year contract.
Moreover, building the organization from the ground up required a lot of work, which stretched them thin. At the time, the HCWEC members were either working with other organizations or had joined them to work on changes and improvements inside the system. For example, the Utah Code, which was created in the late 1970s to promote mainstreaming, had an impact on the 2005 merger of the Utah School for the Deaf and the Jean Massieu School of the Deaf, in which some also served on the task force to amend the law so that students could receive education on campus. Furthermore, the lack of a permanent school facility impacted the need to find a permanent school building to call home, which some helped make a reality. They also had family and jobs. Time constraints and other obligations led to the closure of the HCWEC.
While working within the Utah system, the national Deaf community engaged in external battles with Dr. White. These included attending legislative events to defend state schools for the deaf, organizing rallies outside Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) conferences, registering for EHDI conferences to advocate for the inclusion of ASL/English bilingual education in the agenda to counterbalance the LSL approach, and engaging in various other activities.
To this day, concerned leaders and advocates of the Utah Deaf community, as well as parents of Deaf children, see Dr. Karl White as a modern Dr. Grant B. Bitter, a Utahn like him, whose professional and ecclesiastical influence contributed to the oralism education controversy for Deaf children in Utah between the 1960s and 1980s. Even though only a small portion of the national Deaf community was aware of Dr. Bitter's efforts at the time, they are now paying close attention to Dr. White's work, which has scholarly, financially, politically, and legislatively impacted early intervention strategies for Deaf infants nationally and globally, primarily through the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management that he founded. According to the national Deaf community, he is the most dangerous man on earth. As James predicted, Dr. White is continually under watch and receiving criticism from the Deaf community for his engagement with Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. Although he is not anti-sign language, as he claimed, his long-term focus is on auditory and speech training. He was the chair of Early Childhood Education at Utah State University and a staff member of the Sound Beginnings program at the same university (Sound Beginnings: Utah State University website). In addition to his credentials, he also served on clinical councils and committees. As a result, Dr. White did not work with the Deaf community or fully consider their input; his teaching method for Deaf children is exclusive, as they are the only ones who understand what it is like to grow up deaf when it comes to language and culture.
The National Association of the Deaf, the American Society for Deaf Children, the Deafhood Foundation, and the Deaf Bilingual Coalition closely scrutinize Dr. White to ensure that ASL/English Bilingual education and state schools for the deaf are protected and preserved. See our attached letter to those groups providing Utah Deaf community services through collaboration with the National Association of the Deaf on a national level for more information about how Utah impacts other states.
The National Association of the Deaf, the American Society for Deaf Children, the Deafhood Foundation, and the Deaf Bilingual Coalition closely scrutinize Dr. White to ensure that ASL/English Bilingual education and state schools for the deaf are protected and preserved. See our attached letter to those groups providing Utah Deaf community services through collaboration with the National Association of the Deaf on a national level for more information about how Utah impacts other states.
The Closure of the ASL/English Bilingual Education at Utah State University
Leading to the Suspension Decision
On January 5, 2022, the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation suspended the Bilingual-Bicultural (Bi-Bi) Track of the master's program in Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education at Utah State University after completing the accreditation process as part of the College of Education (O'Hara Bergeson, Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, 2022). Dr. Al Smith, Dean of USU's Emma Eccles Jones College of Education and Human Services, was the driving force behind this decision.
The Council on Education of the Deaf (CED), which is in charge of accrediting deaf education programs in the United States, has also accredited the Bi-Bi Deaf Education Program, in addition to AAQEP's earlier accreditation. The Bi-Bi Program's accreditation status remained unchanged until 2017 when the Deaf Education Department experienced organizational changes. The Bi-Bi-Program's CED accreditation expires in 2021. When the time came for the program's recertification, CED was undergoing a major reconfiguration and reorganization, which caused the recertification to be delayed (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
The provost alerted Dr. Al Smith of the Bi-Bi Program's lapsed status while the professors and instructors worked on the procedures required to reinstate accreditation. The provost and dean were concerned about the Bi-Bi Program's quality and accreditation, which sparked an internal review of their program. Dr. Smith stated in a public announcement that the review will help them determine if their programs are thriving, need updating, or should be dropped or reconfigured (Smith, Utah State University, February 2, 2022).
The Council on Education of the Deaf (CED), which is in charge of accrediting deaf education programs in the United States, has also accredited the Bi-Bi Deaf Education Program, in addition to AAQEP's earlier accreditation. The Bi-Bi Program's accreditation status remained unchanged until 2017 when the Deaf Education Department experienced organizational changes. The Bi-Bi-Program's CED accreditation expires in 2021. When the time came for the program's recertification, CED was undergoing a major reconfiguration and reorganization, which caused the recertification to be delayed (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
The provost alerted Dr. Al Smith of the Bi-Bi Program's lapsed status while the professors and instructors worked on the procedures required to reinstate accreditation. The provost and dean were concerned about the Bi-Bi Program's quality and accreditation, which sparked an internal review of their program. Dr. Smith stated in a public announcement that the review will help them determine if their programs are thriving, need updating, or should be dropped or reconfigured (Smith, Utah State University, February 2, 2022).
Suspension Leads to Closure of the Deaf Education Program
The Bilingual-Bicultural program can continue without CED accreditation. However, Dean Al Smith deemed it appropriate to halt the program until the internal review findings could address the concerns. In light of the review, he gave Dr. Karen Munoz, the Director of the Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education Department, instructions to formally suspend the program. Dr. Muoz's email to Bi-Bi students on January 6 provided the first reason, stating that the program was "phasing out" due to its lapsed accreditation from the Council on Education of the Deaf in February 2021. Therefore, the program does not currently hold proper certification. They had been actively working to address the accreditation status issues but had yet to make any resolutions (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). They informed the students who received letters on January 6 that they could finish their master's degree by spring 2023.
Following Dean Al Smith's formal announcement of the Bi-Bi Program's suspension, the CED, which has accredited Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Program for over 30 years, released a letter clarifying that they had no role in making any recommendations to support this decision. Barbara Raimondo, Executive Director of the Council on Education of the Deaf, issued a statement refuting Dr. Smith's and Dr. Muñoz's claims of lapse in accreditation in the public announcement. Raimondo also clarified that Dr. Smith erroneously attributed the suspension of the Bilingual-Bicultural track to the Council on Education of the Deaf. Raimondo said that the CED played no role in the program's suspension. "That decision was made by USU and USU alone" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). Despite the CED's refutation of accreditation issues, Dr. Smith insisted the program had an accreditation issue, and "an accrediting body doesn't dictate whether an institution has a program or not," adding to the confusion about the source of the program's problems (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
According to Dr. Freeman King, a retired professor of the Bilingual-Bicultural Program, Dr. Karen Munoz instructed the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education faculty not to discuss their concerns about the reaccreditation process or the possibility of program closure with any colleagues on the national level, and especially not to contact the Council on Education of the Deaf with any concerns or questions. He further stated that Dr. Radford and Jan Kelley-King were burdened with additional work connected to CED reaccreditation on top of their full teaching loads. Dr. Munoz gave Dr. Radford and Jan Kelley-King teacher ratings that did not meet expectations on the annual Performance Appraisal of 2020. They felt that these evaluations did not accurately reflect their job descriptions or the positive contributions they had made to the success of the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education Program or the Deaf Education profession as a whole (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual and Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
Following Dean Al Smith's formal announcement of the Bi-Bi Program's suspension, the CED, which has accredited Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Program for over 30 years, released a letter clarifying that they had no role in making any recommendations to support this decision. Barbara Raimondo, Executive Director of the Council on Education of the Deaf, issued a statement refuting Dr. Smith's and Dr. Muñoz's claims of lapse in accreditation in the public announcement. Raimondo also clarified that Dr. Smith erroneously attributed the suspension of the Bilingual-Bicultural track to the Council on Education of the Deaf. Raimondo said that the CED played no role in the program's suspension. "That decision was made by USU and USU alone" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). Despite the CED's refutation of accreditation issues, Dr. Smith insisted the program had an accreditation issue, and "an accrediting body doesn't dictate whether an institution has a program or not," adding to the confusion about the source of the program's problems (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
According to Dr. Freeman King, a retired professor of the Bilingual-Bicultural Program, Dr. Karen Munoz instructed the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education faculty not to discuss their concerns about the reaccreditation process or the possibility of program closure with any colleagues on the national level, and especially not to contact the Council on Education of the Deaf with any concerns or questions. He further stated that Dr. Radford and Jan Kelley-King were burdened with additional work connected to CED reaccreditation on top of their full teaching loads. Dr. Munoz gave Dr. Radford and Jan Kelley-King teacher ratings that did not meet expectations on the annual Performance Appraisal of 2020. They felt that these evaluations did not accurately reflect their job descriptions or the positive contributions they had made to the success of the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education Program or the Deaf Education profession as a whole (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual and Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
It left affected individuals wondering about the real reason for accreditation claims and potential internal struggles. Adam Smith, a USU student and certified ASL interpreter, said. "Whatever is broken, just tell us what it is; just say what it actually is. We need honesty; just cut out the vague stuff. We don't want that" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). Dr. Smith declined to answer when asked who he felt his decision would affect and what the results would be. Regardless of the decision's reasons, members of the Deaf community felt that their voices were not considered or heard in the decision-making process, especially since Dr. Smith was not a member of the Deaf community himself and never considered the thoughts of those who were. Dereck Hooley, a member of the Utah Deaf community, said this announcement is a tragedy. "It's not OK because they didn't even give people an opportunity to discuss the program or make modifications. They should have talked with others to get an opinion," he said (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Statesman, February 7, 2022, p. 10).
Many people, including Deaf individuals Emma Cole and Dereck Hooley, expressed dissatisfaction over their exclusion from the decision-making process and opposed the program's closure. Emma also clarified that this decision wasn't one she agreed with. "They need to know that it's not going to happen without an uproar. It's not going to happen without them losing some reputation," she said. "I like USU. I love it here. I don't want to drag down the reputation, but I came here for that program, and to take it away, it's just wrong." Dereck added that there is a misunderstanding between the Deaf community and the administration. "Maybe they don't understand what the deaf program does. They don't understand Deaf culture. Maybe they don't understand what the Deaf community needs," Dereck said. "Their action demonstrates and shows that (they're) looking down on deaf people" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Statesman, February 7, 2022, p.10).
Many people, including Deaf individuals Emma Cole and Dereck Hooley, expressed dissatisfaction over their exclusion from the decision-making process and opposed the program's closure. Emma also clarified that this decision wasn't one she agreed with. "They need to know that it's not going to happen without an uproar. It's not going to happen without them losing some reputation," she said. "I like USU. I love it here. I don't want to drag down the reputation, but I came here for that program, and to take it away, it's just wrong." Dereck added that there is a misunderstanding between the Deaf community and the administration. "Maybe they don't understand what the deaf program does. They don't understand Deaf culture. Maybe they don't understand what the Deaf community needs," Dereck said. "Their action demonstrates and shows that (they're) looking down on deaf people" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Statesman, February 7, 2022, p.10).
The Stakeholders meet with the Dean
Despite the CED situation and USU's accreditation status, Dean Al Smith stood by his suspension decision, even after a group of stakeholders met with him and the program chair, Dr. Karen Munoz, on February 8, 2022, to voice their concerns. As Emma Cole, a USU senior who is on the ASL/Bi-Bi Deaf Education Track and the creator of the petition asking for signatures to save 'Bilingual Bicultural Deaf Education,' put it this way, "the secrecy and lack of communication on Smith's and Muñoz's end," those in attendance hoped the meeting would finally provide the answers they've been searching for (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). These individuals represented the diverse community stakeholders.
Justin Bodily, Savannah Sparks, and Emma Cole attended the meeting, representing USU students enrolled in the current Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education master's program. Representatives of the ASL/Deaf community were Dereck Hooley, Deaf; Bronwyn O'Hara, a parent of Deaf children; Mykel Winn, SODA; and Emily Bergeson, CODA/SODA/interpreter (O'Hara Bergeson, Save Utah State Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 24, 2022).
Justin Bodily, Savannah Sparks, and Emma Cole attended the meeting, representing USU students enrolled in the current Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education master's program. Representatives of the ASL/Deaf community were Dereck Hooley, Deaf; Bronwyn O'Hara, a parent of Deaf children; Mykel Winn, SODA; and Emily Bergeson, CODA/SODA/interpreter (O'Hara Bergeson, Save Utah State Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 24, 2022).
The stakeholders expressed concerns about the decision and its consequences and the need to ensure that Deaf education experts are actively involved in the strategic planning process to redesign the program (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). The group urged them to keep the program available while making improvements. Dr. Smith stated it was not possible, although he acknowledged that the reason was not only due to the accreditation issue. He was not sure how long the suspension would last (O'Hara Bergeson, Save Utah State Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 24, 2022).
During the public announcement, Dr. Smith discussed his action plan in two ways. "First, the department will immediately address weaknesses in the foundational undergraduate program offerings in ASL to ensure the best quality experience for our students," the statement continues. "Second, the department will engage in strategic planning that considers future workforce needs and opportunities as well as promising directions for growth" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). Following the meeting, Drs. Smith and Munoz agreed to collaborate on a strategic planning process to determine the future of the Bilingual-Bicultural Program.
During the public announcement, Dr. Smith discussed his action plan in two ways. "First, the department will immediately address weaknesses in the foundational undergraduate program offerings in ASL to ensure the best quality experience for our students," the statement continues. "Second, the department will engage in strategic planning that considers future workforce needs and opportunities as well as promising directions for growth" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022). Following the meeting, Drs. Smith and Munoz agreed to collaborate on a strategic planning process to determine the future of the Bilingual-Bicultural Program.
Bronwyn O'Hara, a Deaf Education Advocate and parent of Deaf children, believed that the strategic planning process launched by USU provided them with hope. The goal of this process was to revitalize and reimagine the program, creating highly competent deaf teachers who could teach Deaf children in their own language, American Sign Language (Bronwyn O'Hara, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, March 10, 2022).
Announcement of Program Closure
As a result of the study, Dean Al Smith announced on February 2, 2022, that the Deaf Education Bilingual-Bicultural Composite Master's Degree, the only program in the state that produces Deaf educators who teach this approach, will be closed. According to Dr. Freeman King, none of the "internal review" members have institutional knowledge or expertise in Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education or American Sign Language teaching (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). Dr. King contended that Dr. Smith made the official announcement of the program's closure without consulting Utah State's remaining Deaf Education/ASL professors, Dr. Curtis Radford, Dr. Carolyn Ball, Jan-Kelley King, and Brian Burns (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
Dr. Smith stated that the master's program did not fulfill the standards for "high-quality education." Michelle Tanner, a USU Deaf Education alumnus and associate superintendent at the Utah School for the Deaf, was concerned about the program's closure. She responded to Dr. Smith's concerns by saying she hadn't seen anything that indicated teachers weren't up to par (Lowell, KSL News Radio, February 8, 2022). Although the program has graduated approximately five students per year in recent years, Michelle claims she hires teachers from Utah's Deaf schools virtually solely from the USU ASL/Bi-Bi Program. As a result, suspending the program would drastically impact the already limited number of certified teachers required to work with Deaf students. Furthermore, she remarked, "The nation as a whole in Deaf education has a shortage of teachers," Tanner explains. "The main problem with this decision made at a university is that they do not get to see the children's faces. I do. This haunts children, particularly the most vulnerable ones (Bress, ABC 4 News, February 10, 2022).
Dr. Smith stated that the master's program did not fulfill the standards for "high-quality education." Michelle Tanner, a USU Deaf Education alumnus and associate superintendent at the Utah School for the Deaf, was concerned about the program's closure. She responded to Dr. Smith's concerns by saying she hadn't seen anything that indicated teachers weren't up to par (Lowell, KSL News Radio, February 8, 2022). Although the program has graduated approximately five students per year in recent years, Michelle claims she hires teachers from Utah's Deaf schools virtually solely from the USU ASL/Bi-Bi Program. As a result, suspending the program would drastically impact the already limited number of certified teachers required to work with Deaf students. Furthermore, she remarked, "The nation as a whole in Deaf education has a shortage of teachers," Tanner explains. "The main problem with this decision made at a university is that they do not get to see the children's faces. I do. This haunts children, particularly the most vulnerable ones (Bress, ABC 4 News, February 10, 2022).
Michelle Tanner further stated that while other colleges, such as the University of Utah, offered a combined bilingual-bicultural and listening and spoken language program, they did not produce as many or as high-quality Deaf educators as Utah State University's degree path. Most teachers we hire who use an ASL-English bilingual-bicultural approach come from Utah State University. Within Utah, they're the primary pipeline we have for teachers of the Deaf that use American Sign Language," Tanner said (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
Since Dr. Freeman King, the previous Director of the Bi-Bi Division, retired, Justin Bodily, a senior in the master's program who is also deaf and whose thoughts Emily Bergeson interpreted, has been aware of internal struggles with the administration, but he hasn't observed any issues with the division as a whole. Though ASL minor and classes will still be offered at the university, Bodily said it isn't enough. "ASL is not just something you can learn and then teach," he went on to say. "If you want to be a teacher, you have to have that structure, that wealth of knowledge, in order to take that language and then teach children material. People need to know that this is a big thing. This is really important" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
Since Dr. Freeman King, the previous Director of the Bi-Bi Division, retired, Justin Bodily, a senior in the master's program who is also deaf and whose thoughts Emily Bergeson interpreted, has been aware of internal struggles with the administration, but he hasn't observed any issues with the division as a whole. Though ASL minor and classes will still be offered at the university, Bodily said it isn't enough. "ASL is not just something you can learn and then teach," he went on to say. "If you want to be a teacher, you have to have that structure, that wealth of knowledge, in order to take that language and then teach children material. People need to know that this is a big thing. This is really important" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
Janice Smith-Warshaw, president of the Association of College Educators-Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ACE-DHH), wrote to USU President Noelle Cockett and Dean Al Smith, stating that the ACE-DHH has "long recognized USU's strong Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education Program" and that its staff should be "commended for consistently training highly skilled teacher candidates." After emphasizing the quality of the deaf educators produced by USU's Bi-Bi track, Warshaw concluded the letter by encouraging the USU administration to reconsider the program's continuation to cultivate "the future highly qualified Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teachers who are competent (in) both ASL and English" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
Dr. Freeman King stated the following:
"What a lost opportunity to fully develop and support equally two tracks in Deaf Education that would have allowed students to choose which philosophical path they wished to pursue: Bilingual-Bicultural teaching or Listening and Spoken Language. Thus, we would have met the critical need for teachers of the Deaf, both in Utah and nationwide.
I am afraid that the decision of the Dean, Dr. Al Smith, and the Department Chair, Dr. Karen Munoz, to close the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education Program at Utah State University will cause the university to become a pariah to the Deaf /ASL Community and students, both Deaf and hearing, whose dream was to study Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education at USU. The closing of the Bilingual-Bicultural program is already national and state news in the Deaf/ASL community. In my opinion, closing the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education teacher training program and questioning the quality of the American Sign Language program is a travesty and the direct result of poor and weak leadership on the part of the Dean of the Emma Eccles Jones College of Education and Human Services.
This decision has opened the door for the Utah State University Deaf Education Program to become a one-dimensional teacher training program, Listening and Spoken Language only. The program closure has obliterated the idea of linguistic and philosophical choice. Educational equity and freedom of choice no longer exist in the Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education" (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
Dr. King was not alone in speaking out against the closure of the program issue. Dr. David Geeslin, President of the Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf; Michelle Tanner, Associate Superintendent of the Utah School for the Deaf; and Janice Smith Warshaw, President of the Association of College Educators - Deaf & Hard of Hearing, all refuted USU's announcement of program closure and urged the university to continue the program (Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 21, 2022).
Dr. Freeman King stated the following:
"What a lost opportunity to fully develop and support equally two tracks in Deaf Education that would have allowed students to choose which philosophical path they wished to pursue: Bilingual-Bicultural teaching or Listening and Spoken Language. Thus, we would have met the critical need for teachers of the Deaf, both in Utah and nationwide.
I am afraid that the decision of the Dean, Dr. Al Smith, and the Department Chair, Dr. Karen Munoz, to close the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education Program at Utah State University will cause the university to become a pariah to the Deaf /ASL Community and students, both Deaf and hearing, whose dream was to study Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education at USU. The closing of the Bilingual-Bicultural program is already national and state news in the Deaf/ASL community. In my opinion, closing the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education teacher training program and questioning the quality of the American Sign Language program is a travesty and the direct result of poor and weak leadership on the part of the Dean of the Emma Eccles Jones College of Education and Human Services.
This decision has opened the door for the Utah State University Deaf Education Program to become a one-dimensional teacher training program, Listening and Spoken Language only. The program closure has obliterated the idea of linguistic and philosophical choice. Educational equity and freedom of choice no longer exist in the Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education" (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
Dr. King was not alone in speaking out against the closure of the program issue. Dr. David Geeslin, President of the Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf; Michelle Tanner, Associate Superintendent of the Utah School for the Deaf; and Janice Smith Warshaw, President of the Association of College Educators - Deaf & Hard of Hearing, all refuted USU's announcement of program closure and urged the university to continue the program (Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 21, 2022).
The Utah Association of the Deaf:
An Open Letter in Opposition to Closure of the
USU's Bilingual Bicultural Deaf Education
An Open Letter in Opposition to Closure of the
USU's Bilingual Bicultural Deaf Education
Kim Lucas, then-UAD President, and Ashli-Marie Grant, then-UAD Vice President, shared an open letter on behalf of the Utah Association of the Deaf opposing the closure of the Bilingual—Bicultural Track of USU’s Master’s Program in Communication Disorders and Deaf Education. The photo above is by Ashli-Marie Grant.
A Little Context
The Utah Association for the Deaf's legislative efforts led to the establishment of the Bilingual-Bicultural Program, formerly known as Total Communication, under the Department of Communicative Disorders at Utah State University on April 20, 1982. However, funding was not available until 1985, when Dr. Tom Clark—the hearing son of a Deaf father and the first Utah graduate of Gallaudet—and Elizabeth DeLong, the second cousin of the UAD's first female president in 1909 and the first Utah graduate of Gallaudet—designed the program. Dr. James Blair oversaw the Deaf Education teacher training program at the time (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022).
The state legislature designated Utah State University as the bilingual-bicultural approach training ground for instructors in 1990, mainly due to the efforts of Dr. Clark, a USU professor, and Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, a Utah Deaf Advocate. This designation allowed Deaf students to continue developing their language and communication skills in American Sign Language in a Deaf-friendly environment (Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, 2022; King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). Following Dr. Clark's retirement, Dr. Blair hired Dr. Freeman King in 1991 to teach at Utah State University. They collaborated to transform the Total Communication teacher preparation program into the ASL/English Bilingual-Bicultural program, with significant support from Utah's Deaf community and educators (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). Emily O'Hara Bergeson, a certified ASL interpreter and member of the Deaf community, believes that ending this program will have a huge negative impact. "It's more than just devastating," Emily explained. "This is years of work to build up this program, and now they're shutting it down, and it feels like you've just rolled a boulder up a mountain, and it's finally there, and then they shove it over the edge, and you're like, 'What?" How did that happen?" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
The state legislature designated Utah State University as the bilingual-bicultural approach training ground for instructors in 1990, mainly due to the efforts of Dr. Clark, a USU professor, and Dr. Robert G. Sanderson, a Utah Deaf Advocate. This designation allowed Deaf students to continue developing their language and communication skills in American Sign Language in a Deaf-friendly environment (Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, 2022; King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). Following Dr. Clark's retirement, Dr. Blair hired Dr. Freeman King in 1991 to teach at Utah State University. They collaborated to transform the Total Communication teacher preparation program into the ASL/English Bilingual-Bicultural program, with significant support from Utah's Deaf community and educators (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). Emily O'Hara Bergeson, a certified ASL interpreter and member of the Deaf community, believes that ending this program will have a huge negative impact. "It's more than just devastating," Emily explained. "This is years of work to build up this program, and now they're shutting it down, and it feels like you've just rolled a boulder up a mountain, and it's finally there, and then they shove it over the edge, and you're like, 'What?" How did that happen?" (Caldwell & Popa II, The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022).
Since 2007, the Bi-Bi Program and the newly formed Listening and Spoken Language (LSL) Program have operated independently. Dr. Freeman served as Director of the Deaf Education Program at USU for 26 years. However, Dr. Kim Corbin-Lewis, Chair of the Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education, removed Dr. King as Director of Deaf Education in 2017 due to philosophical differences and replaced him with Dr. Lauri Nelson, who was the Director of the Listening and Spoken Language Program at the time. Dr. King taught in the Bilingual-Bicultural Program until December 31, 2020, when he retired and was named Professor Emeritus. The relocation of his position and program positions to another teaching position remains unfilled and unreplaced (King, Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022). In 2017, the leadership structure reorganized, giving Dr. Kim Corbin-Lewis, the LSL director, control over the Bi-Bi and LSL programs. Due to conflicting philosophies, the Bi-Bi program struggled to thrive under the new leadership structure, resulting in the closure of the Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education program.
Many people were surprised and confused when they learned that USU's College of Education had suspended the Bi-Bi program. The discontinuation of such an important program perplexed the ASL/Deaf community. Dereck Hooley, a member of Utah's Deaf community who grew up with teachers who graduated from USU's ASL/Bi-Bi program, credits the program with shaping him into the man he is today, saying, "We really, really cherish this program, and we recognize it as the beginning of that starting block [for Deaf students]." "So if we cut that off, the family and the community die," Hooley argues. "That's why we're fighting, to show those people on top how important it is to keep the program, and we are willing to help fix that if they're willing to listen to us" (Bress, ABC News, February 10, 2021).
Many people were surprised and confused when they learned that USU's College of Education had suspended the Bi-Bi program. The discontinuation of such an important program perplexed the ASL/Deaf community. Dereck Hooley, a member of Utah's Deaf community who grew up with teachers who graduated from USU's ASL/Bi-Bi program, credits the program with shaping him into the man he is today, saying, "We really, really cherish this program, and we recognize it as the beginning of that starting block [for Deaf students]." "So if we cut that off, the family and the community die," Hooley argues. "That's why we're fighting, to show those people on top how important it is to keep the program, and we are willing to help fix that if they're willing to listen to us" (Bress, ABC News, February 10, 2021).
Daily Moth Coverage of the Closure of the
USU's Bilingual Bicultural Deaf Education
USU's Bilingual Bicultural Deaf Education
Moving Forward
Utah State University announced in April 2022 that the Bilingual-Bicultural program would become an online bachelor's degree with a pathway to licensure (O'Hara Bergeson, Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, June 28, 2022).
Following the announcement in April of that year, Associate Superintendent Michelle Tanner of the Utah School for the Deaf met with Dr. Karen Munoz, chair of Utah State University's Communicative Disorder and Deaf Education Department, and Dr. Lauri Nelson, Director of the Deaf Education Program, during the summer to discuss the relationship between USD and USU for the reimagined Bilingual/Bicultural Deaf Education program at USU (O'Hara Bergeson, Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, August 8, 2022).
Beginning in 2024, Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education program will provide a comprehensive bachelor's degree in Deaf Education with an ASL/English emphasis (USU Website).
Following the announcement in April of that year, Associate Superintendent Michelle Tanner of the Utah School for the Deaf met with Dr. Karen Munoz, chair of Utah State University's Communicative Disorder and Deaf Education Department, and Dr. Lauri Nelson, Director of the Deaf Education Program, during the summer to discuss the relationship between USD and USU for the reimagined Bilingual/Bicultural Deaf Education program at USU (O'Hara Bergeson, Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, August 8, 2022).
Beginning in 2024, Utah State University's Bilingual-Bicultural Deaf Education program will provide a comprehensive bachelor's degree in Deaf Education with an ASL/English emphasis (USU Website).
The Implementation of the Hybrid Program
at the Utah School for the Deaf
at the Utah School for the Deaf
After over 50 years, the Utah School for the Deaf finally found the necessary administrators, including Joel Coleman, Superintendent, and Michelle Tanner, Associate Superintendent, committed to providing an equal educational system for Deaf children in Utah. Since 1962, parents of Deaf children have requested both oral and sign language education options for their Deaf child from the Utah School for the Deaf. However, the Utah School for the Deaf consistently denied their requests, forcing them to choose between oral and sign language education. It was an "either/or" situation. Finally, Joel Coleman, the Superintendent, and Michelle Tanner, the Associate Superintendent, approved these options, marking a significant milestone in pursuing an equal educational system for Deaf students.
The Hybrid Program was finally created in August 2016 under the direction of Michelle Tanner, Associate Superintendent of the Utah School for the Deaf, to encourage fair collaboration between the Listening & Spoken Language Program and ASL/English Bilingual Programs and provide personalized deaf education placement. You can find more information on the "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Dream." webpage.
The Hybrid Program was finally created in August 2016 under the direction of Michelle Tanner, Associate Superintendent of the Utah School for the Deaf, to encourage fair collaboration between the Listening & Spoken Language Program and ASL/English Bilingual Programs and provide personalized deaf education placement. You can find more information on the "Dr. Robert G. Sanderson's Dream." webpage.
The Promotion of Language Equality
and Acquisition for Deaf Children (LEAD-K)
and Acquisition for Deaf Children (LEAD-K)
On a side note, California enacted Senate Bill 210 on October 8, 2015, as part of its ongoing efforts to promote the Deaf Child's Bill of Rights, passed in September 1994. (California Department of Education, 1994; California Legislative Information, 2015). Deaf political activist Julie Rems-Smario, a former board member of the National Association of the Deaf and past president of the California Association of the Deaf, encourages the other 49 states to follow suit. According to this bill, all Deaf and hard of hearing babies in California must have language acquisition exams every six months until they reach the age of five. The Senate Bill ensures that these youngsters are academically prepared for kindergarten (California Legislative Information, 2015; Deaf Nation, 2015; Endeavors, Fall 2015).
Shortly after the passing of Senate Bill 210, the Language Equality and Acquisition for Deaf Kids (LEAD-K) organization came into existence. The LEAD-K campaign aims to ensure that deaf and hard of hearing children have equal access to language acquisition and literacy before they start kindergarten.
LEAD-K partnered with Nyle DiMarco's charity foundation, the "Nyle DiMarco Foundation," in 2016. He is the first Deaf winner of Cycle 22 of America's Next Top Model and Dancing with the Stars. In his video announcement, DiMarco said: "Through American Sign Language (ASL) and English, we will work together to raise awareness and understanding about the need to end language deprivation and provide resources and tools for early language learning."
"Early language acquisition equals a lifetime of success," said DiMarco (DiMarco, The Nyle DiMarco Foundation, August 18, 2016). The next generation of deaf and hard of hearing children will finally get an appropriate and accessible education as the Utah Deaf community works to bring these same regulations to Utah.
"Early language acquisition equals a lifetime of success," said DiMarco (DiMarco, The Nyle DiMarco Foundation, August 18, 2016). The next generation of deaf and hard of hearing children will finally get an appropriate and accessible education as the Utah Deaf community works to bring these same regulations to Utah.
The Establishment of the Deaf Education Advocacy Training Through the National Association
of the Deaf Education
of the Deaf Education
On another side note, the Utah Deaf community, particularly the USDB Advisory Council and the Utah Association of the Deaf, is strongly encouraged to participate in the Education Advocacy Training organized by Tawny Holmes Hlibok, a Deaf attorney affiliated with the National Association of the Deaf. The National Association of the Deaf offered its first training in 2012, and I was one of the first participants.
"History happens twice because people
don’t listen at the first time."
~http://www.coolnsmart.com~
don’t listen at the first time."
~http://www.coolnsmart.com~
Notes
Dr. Jay J. Campbell, personal communication, July 1, 2007.
D.T. personal communication, April 26, 2011.
Jacob Dietz, personal communication, April 21, 2011.
James Smith, personal communication, August 19, 2014.
Kristi Mortensen, personal communication, June 26, 2009.
Marvin Miller, personal communication, July 15, 2011
Steven W. Noyce, personal communication, March 12, 2010.
Timothy Chevalier, personal communication, June 6, 2011.
Ursula Schultz, personal communication, February 12, 2012.
D.T. personal communication, April 26, 2011.
Jacob Dietz, personal communication, April 21, 2011.
James Smith, personal communication, August 19, 2014.
Kristi Mortensen, personal communication, June 26, 2009.
Marvin Miller, personal communication, July 15, 2011
Steven W. Noyce, personal communication, March 12, 2010.
Timothy Chevalier, personal communication, June 6, 2011.
Ursula Schultz, personal communication, February 12, 2012.
References
Abenchuchan, Alex. "Recap of ACLU-DE complaint and Deaf community pushback." The Daily Moth: Deaf News, January 10, 2024.
Baldwin, Stephen C. “Mainstreaming in retrospect: A Deaf Perception.” National Association of the Deaf (1990): 14-16.
Bitter, Grant B. “Summary Report for Tenure.” Grant B. Bitter Papers, Accn #1072. Manuscripts Division, J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1985.
Bress, Sophie. "'If we cut it off, the community dies:' USU suspends Utah's only ASL education program indefinitely, devastating students, Deaf community." ABC 4 News, February 10, 2022. https://www.abc4.com/news/digital-exclusives/if-we-cut-it-off-the-community-dies-usu-suspends-utahs-only-asl-education-program-indefinitely-devastating-students-deaf-community/
“CAD and SB 210 Senate Bill.” Deaf Nation, 2015. http://deafnation.com/news/cad-and-sb-210-senate-bill/
Caldwell Jacee & Popa II Michael. "Suspension of Deaf Education program leaves members of the Deaf community upset." The Utah Stateman, February 7, 2022, p. 8-10.
Caldwell Jacee & Popa II Michael. "Suspension of Deaf Education program leaves members of the Deaf community upset." The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022. https://usustatesman.com/suspension-of-deaf-education-program-leaves-members-of-the-deaf-community-upset/
Campbell, Jay J. Education of the Deaf in Utah: A Comprehensive Study. Utah State Board of Education. Office of Administration and Institution Services, February 15, 1977.
Clark, Keven & Riker, Tim. “Tony Mendoza Califonia Eugenices-Style Bill Creates Uproars Among the Deaf Community.” The Cutting Edge, June 7, 2010. http://www.speroforum.com/a/34359/California-EugenicsStyle-Bill-Creates-Uproar-Among-the-Deaf-Community#.VruQCLyzVsM
Cummins, John. “Deaf Education Methods Best Served by ‘Re-Channeling Energy.’” The Salt Lake Tribune, April 15, 1977.
"Deaf & Hard of Hearing Education." ACLU-Delaware, December 20, 2023. https://www.aclu-de.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/ddoe_ocr_complaint_12.20.23__0.pdf
"Deaf & Hard of Hearing Education. "ACLU-Delaware, December 27, 2023. https://www.aclu-de.org/en/press-releases/under-review
DiMarco, Nyle. The Nyle DiMarco Foundation, August 18, 2016.
“Education of Deaf Stirs Debate; No Action Taken.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, April 15, 1977.
Graney, Sharon. “Where Does Speech Fit In? Spoken English in a Bilingual Context.” Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center, Gallaudet University, 1997.
Indiana School for the Deaf. 6News. June 7, 2011.
“In the News: Hands Waving Legislation.” The Endeavor, Fall 2015, p. 15.
King, Freeman. "Rebuttal to Program Closure by Dr. Freeman King." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
Lambert, Karen. “Sound Beginnings.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, 1A & 4A, July 23, 2007.
Lambert, Karen. “Cochlear implants controversial, require long thought by parents.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, 4A, July 23, 2007.
"Latest Updates." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 21, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
Lowell, Jessica. "Utah State University announces bilingual-bicultural program closure." KSL News Radio: 102.7 FM. https://kslnewsradio.com/1963796/utah-state-university-announces-bilingual-bicultural-program-closure/
National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management, Wikipedia.
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Summary of the Meeting with the Dean." Save Utah State Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 24, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/2022/02/24/summary-of-the-meeting-with-the-dean/
O'Hara, Bronwyn. "Faces of the Movement." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, March 10, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Updates - June 2022." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, June 28, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Update - August 2022." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, August 8, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "What Happened." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/what-happened-and-a-little-context/
Parker Maggie. "Actress Millicent Simmonds's Mission to Smash a Problematic Norm for Deaf Children and Hearing Parents." Katie Couric Media, May 5, 2022. https://katiecouric.com/entertainment/movies-tv/millicent-simmonds-mom-sign-language/
Peters, Collen. State Will be Back Logan Schools. Deseret News, April 15, 1977.
"Position paper #2: Expanding Options for Early Deaf Education in Delaware-The Solution." https://hearingchoicesdelaware.com/position-papers/
“Senate Bill No. 210.” California Legislative Information, October 8, 2015. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB210
Smith, Al. "Announcement of Program Closure." Utah State University, February 2, 2022. https://cehs.usu.edu/news/2022/announcement-of-bibi-program-closure#:~:text=The%20bilingual%2Dbicultural%20(Bi%2D,American%20Sign%20Language%20(ASL)
Winters, Rosemary. “Utah Schools for the deaf grapple with balancing two tracks.” The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011.
Baldwin, Stephen C. “Mainstreaming in retrospect: A Deaf Perception.” National Association of the Deaf (1990): 14-16.
Bitter, Grant B. “Summary Report for Tenure.” Grant B. Bitter Papers, Accn #1072. Manuscripts Division, J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1985.
Bress, Sophie. "'If we cut it off, the community dies:' USU suspends Utah's only ASL education program indefinitely, devastating students, Deaf community." ABC 4 News, February 10, 2022. https://www.abc4.com/news/digital-exclusives/if-we-cut-it-off-the-community-dies-usu-suspends-utahs-only-asl-education-program-indefinitely-devastating-students-deaf-community/
“CAD and SB 210 Senate Bill.” Deaf Nation, 2015. http://deafnation.com/news/cad-and-sb-210-senate-bill/
Caldwell Jacee & Popa II Michael. "Suspension of Deaf Education program leaves members of the Deaf community upset." The Utah Stateman, February 7, 2022, p. 8-10.
Caldwell Jacee & Popa II Michael. "Suspension of Deaf Education program leaves members of the Deaf community upset." The Utah Stateman, February 9, 2022. https://usustatesman.com/suspension-of-deaf-education-program-leaves-members-of-the-deaf-community-upset/
Campbell, Jay J. Education of the Deaf in Utah: A Comprehensive Study. Utah State Board of Education. Office of Administration and Institution Services, February 15, 1977.
Clark, Keven & Riker, Tim. “Tony Mendoza Califonia Eugenices-Style Bill Creates Uproars Among the Deaf Community.” The Cutting Edge, June 7, 2010. http://www.speroforum.com/a/34359/California-EugenicsStyle-Bill-Creates-Uproar-Among-the-Deaf-Community#.VruQCLyzVsM
Cummins, John. “Deaf Education Methods Best Served by ‘Re-Channeling Energy.’” The Salt Lake Tribune, April 15, 1977.
"Deaf & Hard of Hearing Education." ACLU-Delaware, December 20, 2023. https://www.aclu-de.org/sites/default/files/field_documents/ddoe_ocr_complaint_12.20.23__0.pdf
"Deaf & Hard of Hearing Education. "ACLU-Delaware, December 27, 2023. https://www.aclu-de.org/en/press-releases/under-review
DiMarco, Nyle. The Nyle DiMarco Foundation, August 18, 2016.
“Education of Deaf Stirs Debate; No Action Taken.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, April 15, 1977.
Graney, Sharon. “Where Does Speech Fit In? Spoken English in a Bilingual Context.” Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center, Gallaudet University, 1997.
Indiana School for the Deaf. 6News. June 7, 2011.
“In the News: Hands Waving Legislation.” The Endeavor, Fall 2015, p. 15.
King, Freeman. "Rebuttal to Program Closure by Dr. Freeman King." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 25, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
Lambert, Karen. “Sound Beginnings.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, 1A & 4A, July 23, 2007.
Lambert, Karen. “Cochlear implants controversial, require long thought by parents.” Ogden Standard-Examiner, 4A, July 23, 2007.
"Latest Updates." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, February 21, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
Lowell, Jessica. "Utah State University announces bilingual-bicultural program closure." KSL News Radio: 102.7 FM. https://kslnewsradio.com/1963796/utah-state-university-announces-bilingual-bicultural-program-closure/
National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management, Wikipedia.
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Summary of the Meeting with the Dean." Save Utah State Bilingual-Bicultural Program, February 24, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/2022/02/24/summary-of-the-meeting-with-the-dean/
O'Hara, Bronwyn. "Faces of the Movement." Save Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, March 10, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Updates - June 2022." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, June 28, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "Update - August 2022." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, August 8, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/blog/
O'Hara Bergeson, Emily. "What Happened." Utah State University's Bilingual Bicultural Program, 2022. https://hellobibi.org/what-happened-and-a-little-context/
Parker Maggie. "Actress Millicent Simmonds's Mission to Smash a Problematic Norm for Deaf Children and Hearing Parents." Katie Couric Media, May 5, 2022. https://katiecouric.com/entertainment/movies-tv/millicent-simmonds-mom-sign-language/
Peters, Collen. State Will be Back Logan Schools. Deseret News, April 15, 1977.
"Position paper #2: Expanding Options for Early Deaf Education in Delaware-The Solution." https://hearingchoicesdelaware.com/position-papers/
“Senate Bill No. 210.” California Legislative Information, October 8, 2015. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB210
Smith, Al. "Announcement of Program Closure." Utah State University, February 2, 2022. https://cehs.usu.edu/news/2022/announcement-of-bibi-program-closure#:~:text=The%20bilingual%2Dbicultural%20(Bi%2D,American%20Sign%20Language%20(ASL)
Winters, Rosemary. “Utah Schools for the deaf grapple with balancing two tracks.” The Salt Lake Tribune, February 21, 2011.