Sign language planning and policy in Ontario teacher education

Abstract

The Deaf Ontario Now movement of 1988 called for more hiring of deaf teachers and the full implementation of American Sign Language (ASL) across the curriculum in schools with deaf students. In 1989, the Review of Ontario Education Programs for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students recommended that ASL become a language of instruction at the Ernest C. Drury School for the Deaf in Milton, Ontario. Subsequently, the school became the site of a pilot bilingual bicultural project that led to the ratification of a policy statement on bilingual bicultural education for deaf children at all three anglophone provincial schools with deaf students in Ontario. In 1993, Bill 4 was incorporated into the Ontario Education Act, sanctioning the use of ASL and Langue des signes québécoise as languages of instruction in all schools for deaf students in Ontario. Despite this seeming progress at the policy level in sign language planning in Ontario deaf education, there has been a marked pattern of resistance to systemic change at levels of government and teacher accreditation, the university teacher of the deaf preparation program established in 1991, and provincial school administration. This paper outlines the trajectory of deaf community activism, policy change, and subsequent resistance.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
Language Policy (2021) 20:577–598
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-020-09569-7
1 3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Sign language planning andpolicy inOntario teacher
education
KristinSnoddon1
Received: 18 February 2020 / Accepted: 3 November 2020 / Published online: 9 December 2020
© Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract
The Deaf Ontario Now movement of 1988 called for more hiring of deaf teachers
and the full implementation of American Sign Language (ASL) across the cur-
riculum in schools with deaf students. In 1989, the Review of Ontario Education
Programs for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students recommended that ASL become
a language of instruction at the Ernest C. Drury School for the Deaf in Milton,
Ontario. Subsequently, the school became the site of a pilot bilingual bicultural pro-
ject that led to the ratification of a policy statement on bilingual bicultural education
for deaf children at all three anglophone provincial schools with deaf students in
Ontario. In 1993, Bill 4 was incorporated into the Ontario Education Act, sanction-
ing the use of ASL and Langue des signes québécoise as languages of instruction in
all schools for deaf students in Ontario. Despite this seeming progress at the policy
level in sign language planning in Ontario deaf education, there has been a marked
pattern of resistance to systemic change at levels of government and teacher accredi-
tation, the university teacher of the deaf preparation program established in 1991,
and provincial school administration. This paper outlines the trajectory of deaf com-
munity activism, policy change, and subsequent resistance.
Keywords Deaf education· Sign language policy· Ontario Education Act· Teacher
education· American Sign Language· Langue des signes québécoise
Introduction
This paper surveys the history of sign language planning and policy in teacher-of-
the-deaf education in Ontario, Canada with regard to the issue of teachers’ sign lan-
guage proficiency. From the perspective of deaf communities and bilingual educa-
tion researchers, teachers’ lack of sign language ability is frequently considered to
* Kristin Snoddon
ksnoddon@ryerson.ca
1 School ofEarly Childhood Studies, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St, Toronto,
ONM5B2K3, Canada
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.