Our Battle - Accessing Deaf Education

Like other deaf children, Taylor’s neurological condition severely impairs her ability to hear sounds (this is referred to as auditory agnosia). In addition, she has problems processing auditory information and discriminating directed speech from background noise.

Taylor has spent the last three years, enrolled in an Early Education Program at a school for the Deaf. There, she has learnt to communicate using sign language and has slowly regained some of her spoken language. Taylor still communicates principally through sign language (expressively) and relies heavily on sign language to comprehend instructions. Her verbal language abilities (both expressive and receptive) fluctuate day to day, sometimes hour to hour, according to the seizure activity present in her brain.


Taylor’s educational needs:
At the end of this year, Taylor will have completed her early education program and must continue her primary school education elsewhere. Taylor requires an educational environment where she can gain access to sign language and intensive language support, from trained Teachers of the Deaf, in accordance with her linguistic needs. Due to the effects of Landau-Kleffner Syndrome, Taylor is effectively neurologically deaf and needs to be provided with the same consideration and support as a profoundly deaf child to ensure her educational needs are being met.

Our Latest Battle:
Sadly, Taylor may not be able to access deaf educational programs or facilities because her diagnosis is different and does not meet the criteria established for eligibility.

Criteria for entry/eligibility to Deaf Facilities and Deaf Schools.
Access to a deaf facility or school for the deaf , is determined by a clear set of criteria; “a bilateral, sensori-neural hearing loss of 40 decibels or greater”.

Here is a child that clearly needs access to deaf education and because she does not fit the criteria, can not access these programs/schools. She functions very similarly to a child with a profound hearing loss; her education needs are the same as that of a profoundly deaf child. The schools and facilities are there, we have one 7 kms from our house. Yet, Taylor’s application may be denied because she is not the right kind of deaf.

Other options:
Yes, there are other options - but I don't think any come close to being an adequate alternative.

1) Mainstream Primary School, with an integration aid.
Taylor could always go to the local primary school and possibly have access to an integration aid. However, Taylor does not need a babysitter or somebody who will repeat instructions several times. She needs somebody who can sign instructions and facilitate her communication. Finding an integration aid that has adequate Auslan skills, I imagine, would be next to impossible, as most people with good signing skills would probably prefer to work as an interpreter, being paid four times that of an integration aid.

I also imagine that Taylor would have quite a difficult time establishing friendships and communicating with the other children. I would hate for her to be teased and bullied because she can't talk, or sounds funny when she does attempt to speak. In a mainstream primary school, Taylor would be different. She would stand out. She would be a target for bullies.

Furthermore, the average teacher does not have adequate training in dealing with a child like Taylor. Although I am certain that any good teacher would ensure that they adapt and modify their lessons to cater for Taylor - being a teacher myself, I am only too aware of how difficult it is to ensure that every child's individual learning needs are met, every lesson. And given the added complication of restricted communication, it would be a very difficult task indeed for the average teacher to fully cater for Taylor.

2) A Special School
Special schools may be better equipped in dealing with children with limited communication and intellectual impairments but again, can they cater for Taylor's communication needs? Some special schools employ staff that are knowledgeable in Makaton (key word signing), but if Taylor is ever going to establish good communication skills, in Auslan, she needs to have access to a signing rich environment. Her spoken language will always be limited because of the damaged caused by the CSWS, but there is nothing limiting her ability to learn and communicate using Auslan.

Taylor recently underwent a cognitive evaluation and scored in the range that indicates a mild intellectual disability. These tests are useful in establishing a child's current cognitive ability and performance but does not evaluate their learning potential. I believe that any child who experiences a two year period of language deprivation, during such a critical period of development, would obviously perform poorly when being compared to age appropriate peers.

We also have to consider, is it a) Taylor's limited language, causing b) her intellectual impairment or b) intellectual impairment, causing a) limited language ability. I truly believe that it is a) limited language, causing b) intellectual impairment. I also believe that with her increased ability to communicate, her cognitive abilities/understanding will also improve. Why do I believe this? Since gaining seizure control, Taylor has slowly, but surely regained all previously lost abilities. She runs, dances, swims. Her communication continues to improve. I now can not keep up with her, in terms of learning Auslan. She has well and truly surpassed me. Cognitive evaluations, such as the WPPSI, only evaluates current performance and does not indicate learning potential.

In terms of her learning and cognitive abilities, I believe she is delayed, not disabled. Any child, deprived of language and communication for two years would not perform the same way their age appropriate peers would. She can learn, she may learn differently than the average child, but she has a lot of potential. Potential that I don' t believe could be realised in a special school that does not have a full time teacher of the deaf available to her. Therefore, when choosing a school for Taylor, our priority is finding a school that can cater for her communication needs and her learning potential and that leads us back to educational options for deaf children.

3) A School for the Deaf
This option would be ideal for Taylor. An educational environment that allows children to communicate however they feel comfortable - Auslan, spoken English with key word signing and/or spoken English. She would have the opportunity to build some meaningful peer relationships as well as have her educational needs met.

4) A mainstream school with a deaf facility
Also another option. Taylor would be able to mix with deaf and hearing peers as well as have her educational needs met.

Although options 3 & 4 are the obvious options, these are also the options that Taylor does not automatically qualify for because she is not eligible for enrolment.

This system is clearly discriminatory. Taylor has been raised in a signing environment; she clearly would not cope in a regular classroom, where most of the information would be delivered to her auditorily. She needs access to sign language to comprehend instructions and so she can express herself. She would be at an absolute disadvantage in a regular classroom environment.

This system seems to be more about excluding children from the program for children with a disability, rather than assessing a child’s individual educational needs and finding ways and means of supporting a child through their education.

I am a teacher. I have worked in government schools for my entire professional life. I was a supporter and great believer in public education until I had a child with special needs. I am now finding myself utterly disillusioned with an appallingly inadequate system. Unfortunately, this stance was only confirmed when I recently approached a private school with a deaf facility and was informed that if I enrolled my daughter there, she would have her educational needs met (access to a teacher of the deaf, specialist teaching and learning in the deaf facility) regardless of her diagnosis. Sadly, it seems that money talks. Sadly, the average working class family could not afford the fees. Why should my daughter be at a disadvantage because we can not afford the fees to send her to an exclusive private school? Why should we have to fork out that money, when what she needs is available in a government school 7 kilometres from our home? Why should money matter in education? Why should it make a difference?