disabilities physical blind and deaf and education

Part I: Definitions and Characteristics
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
Hearing disabilities occur on a continuum from mild to more serious impairments to the ability to process auditory cues. Deafness is a spectrum of disabilities referring to anything from mild hearing impairments to fully identifying with the Deaf community and culture (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Defining deafness or hard of hearing requires various types of assessments, including those that determine responsiveness to various types of sounds and their decibel levels. Hearing loss can also be defined according to cause or type (such as damage to the auditory nerves), degree of hearing loss (whether a person can hear some sounds but not others), and also age of onset or etiology (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). According to laws like IDEA, though, hearing disabilities may also be defined by the degree to which they impact the student’s performance in school (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). The degree to which the student can process auditory stimuli or use language will have a strong bearing on their performance in a general education classroom.
Because hard of hearing and deafness vary so much, there is no one set of characteristics that distinguishes this group of students. Some deaf children will identify full with Deaf culture, which is defined by the use of a distinct language and “folk tradition,” with its own set of norms, myths, symbols, and traditions (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 246). Students who identify with Deaf culture would likely prefer to go to specialized schools for the Deaf community. Yet not all students identify with Deaf culture.
Students who are hard of hearing or deaf may have few if any actual cognitive impairments, other than those that are traceable to the inability to process or produce sounds. Instructional strategies and classroom design should be based on “the uniqueness of each individual student,” with great respect for diversity and cultural context (Becker & Bowen, 2018, p. 356). At the same time, educators know that academic achievement in certain subject areas may suffer due to hearing impairments. The primary characteristics of hard of hearing or deaf students are not necessarily based on subject or content assessments but on speech and language characteristics (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Qualified medical professionals should be entrusted with assessments and making recommendations for best practice educational environments.
Blind/Low Vision
Blindness and low vision, or visual impairments, also occur on a continuum. Measured in most cases by visual acuity assessments, legal definitions of blindness or low vision can be helpful for recognizing the diversity among students. The IDEA definition of low vision stresses the impact visual impairment may have on the student’s academic performance, encouraging educators to adapt classroom instructional techniques and the educational environment to offer students alternative means of taking in and processing information. If the classroom is oriented towards visual information processing, the teacher would need to make adaptations and alterations to include students who have low vision.
Characteristics of students who are blind or have low vision will vary depending on their medical assessments and the cause of their vision impairment. However, teachers do need to understand that being blind has no impact on general intelligence or the ability to learn (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Students with low vision may struggle because they are unable to access the same instructional content as their peers, and likewise, might also demonstrate frustration in play and social contexts (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). When blind or low vision students are offered appropriate supports academically and socially, their performance in school can be at least on par with peers. Students who are low vision of course have different orientation and mobility skills than their sighted peers, though.
Other Physical and Health Disabilities
Other physical disabilities, including orthopedic and motor impairments or brain injuries may or may not have an impact on student academic performance. Because this category is broad, it is impossible to offer definitions that would apply to the entire diverse cohort. However, students with physical or health disabilities may have impairments that do in fact affect the student’s educational performance. Energy level or perceptual or cognitive processing may be different for students with specific physical and health disabilities. Within this broad category, IDEA includes traumatic brain injuries, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, orthopedic issues like cerebral palsy, asthma, heart conditions, and more (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). The main component of the definition of physical and health disabilities is that the physical issue adversely affects student academic or social performance in school. Yet characteristics of students with physical and health disabilities will vary tremendously depending on the condition, age of onset, and the severity of the issue.
Best Practice Instructional Strategies
Deaf/Hard of Hearing
Best practice instructional strategies for students who are Deaf or hard of hearing will vary depending on the individual. An individualized education plan (IEP) will reflect the strengths of the student and the need for specific adaptations in the learning environment. Research shows that diverse instructional strategies emphasizing comprehension and analysis, not rote learning, will assist in literacy development in spite of difficulties with auditory processing (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Integrating Deaf studies into the curriculum may also help empower students in the use of sign languages (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Teachers may need to use different communication modes such as oralism, bilingual/bicultural strategies, and the “total communication” approach (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009, p. 256). Teachers may also need to adapt the actual classroom environment to help students who are hard of hearing acquire content and process auditory stimuli, or to be more visually engaged with the classroom materials. Of course, assistive technologies can be tremendously helpful when working with students who are hard of hearing (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). As with all students with special needs, family involvement in transition planning is critical for the success of the child’s education (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Advocacy entails pairing the student’s interests and predilections with available opportunities.
Blind/Low Vision
Blind and low vision students benefit from active family engagement in the IEP and personalized instructional content or adaptations to the classroom environment. Because low vision has no bearing on cognitive or intellectual abilities, teachers can open the general education or expanded core curriculum for visually impaired students, simply paying attention to how the content is delivered and how the student expresses learning or skill mastery (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Best practices for students who are blind or low vision include shifting the classroom design to accommodate for mobility and orientation challenges, and promoting more social interaction with peers (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Assistive technologies are critical for teaching students with low vision or blindness (Thomas, Barker, Rubin, et al., 2015). Transition planning for students with low vision may also include opportunities to develop independent living skills and self-determination, as well as general career planning (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). The principles of the least restrictive environment applies equally as well to visual impairments as auditory or physiological disabilities.
Physical and Health Disabilities
For students with physical and health disabilities, instructional strategies will vary depending on the condition and circumstances. Ongoing monitoring and assessment of the student are critical needs in special education (Christiansen, Bilder, Zahorodny, et al., 2016). The IEP will be developed in conjunction with medical professionals who understand the child’s needs. For example, a student with epilepsy will have different needs or expectations than one with cerebral palsy or asthma. Teachers do need to recognize also that students with disabilities may need to be on medications, and may also need to learn about the signs or symptoms that may warrant immediate medical attention. Instructional strategies may include specific instructional or content adaptations, which can be based on the universal design concept (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Universal design allows the classroom to be modified in ways that promotes inclusivity and student participation. Students may also need expanded curricular support in terms of self-determination and independence, with life skills or occupational therapy included.
Part II: Instructional Programming
Instructional programming for students who are hard of hearing, who have low vision, or who have health or physical disabilities must reflect respect for diversity and cultural competencies, as well as knowledge of age-appropriate best practices. A leader in special education recognizes that teachers have a responsibility to learn about each student as an individual, taking into account the results of medical assessments and the information imparted by the medical or care team. Best practices in instructional programming also include ongoing monitoring and assessment, as well as emphasis on early identification and intervention (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Some students in the categories of visual, hearing, or health disabilities will require some minor adaptations to content or instructional design; others may require assistive technologies or additional instructional strategies that can be implemented in an inclusive classroom with the least restrictive environment.
Instructional programming for students who are hard of hearing also needs to be based on the student’s affiliation with the Deaf community, which may also depend on parental concerns (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). While some students who are hard of hearing struggle with language processing, many have the ability to master core curriculum when they are provided with the means of acquiring and processing information in ways that do not depend so heavily on auditory stimuli or verbalization. Instructional strategies also need to be integrated with best practices in organizational design, leadership, and human resources in general education settings. For example, research shows that special education and general education teachers need manageable caseloads; that limiting caseloads increases the level of student engagement in the classroom (Bruce, Ferrell & Luckner, 2016). Hard of hearing, low vision, and health/physical disabilities are considered low incidence, and yet ultimately teachers need to work within the parameters of IDEA to develop and maintain an IEP that promotes individual success. To this end, a number of specific programs and services may be available through the school or in the community.
Computer programming and computational skills development is increasingly being shown to be empowering for students with low incidence disabilities like hard of hearing, low vision, or health-related disabilities (Israel, Wherfel, Pearson, et al., 2015). Because many of these low incidence disabilities have zero impact on student intelligence or cognitive performance, instructors should be cognizant of student interests and strengths and encourage the pursuit of extracurricular activities or classroom exercises that stimulate those interests. Some students may need to incorporate instructional strategies in conjunction with counseling and mental health services, particularly students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, or students struggling socially (Lambros, Kraemer, Wager, et al., 2015). Above all, federal law like IDEA guarantees all students access to the general education program in the least restrictive environment. One exception to the general principle of inclusivity would be situations in which students who identify with the Deaf community and culture to a degree that warrants attendance in a Deaf school or instructional programming that includes Deaf studies (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009).
Students with disabilities also need role models and mentors, particularly during the critical stages of transition planning (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). To this end, special education leaders can work hard to network with community and professional organizations that offer support and advocacy for students with special needs. Transition planning can include the use of field trips and internships, taking into account the student’s interests and strengths. Additionally, special education requires additional effort in acquiring skills in the application of evidence-based practice models for specific instructional strategies. For example, teachers working with hard of hearing students need to learn about oralism, bilingual-bicultural approaches to instructional design, and also total communication (Taylor, Smiley & Richards, 2009). Special education cooperative teaching may be of use, but even general education teachers can learn fingerspelling, cued speech, and other methods that improve communications with students hard of hearing. Working with students with visual impairments or sensorimotor disabilities requires similarly individualized attention, depending on the way in which the student prefers to acquire new information and process or present it to demonstrate skill mastery or core competencies.
When developing the least restrictive environment for each student, the administrator and teacher can work together to determine the student’s needs based on the IEP. In most cases, innovative instructional technologies will become the teacher’s best ally. Robotics and artificial intelligence are providing some of the most unique missing links in assistive classroom technologies, helping the visually impaired and students with orthopedic disabilities to interact with, process, and become engaged in core curriculum (Ludi, Bernstein & Mutch-Jones, 2018). Implementing proprietary and innovative new technologies in the classroom may require administrative support and funding, which is why special education leaders serve in public relations, public policy, and communications roles throughout their career. “Administrative support is a foundational component of schoolwide transformation toward inclusion,” (Roberts, Ruppar & Olson, 2017, p. 3).
While the law ensures the creation of the IEP and the maintenance of the least restrictive environment, IDEA and other legislation is purposefully vague to account for the diversity among students. The extent to which a supportive, inclusive classroom environment is created depends not just on teacher requests or teacher mastery but also on administrative support in diverting funds or changing the approach towards instructional design. Empowering students and their parents means finding out about age-appropriate resources in the community that can strengthen the child’s self-efficacy and promote social skills that build resilience and confidence. Parents have a strong role to play in the design of their child’s IEP, but may also lack the means by which to empower themselves or advocate on behalf of their children. Therefore, teachers and special education leaders can spearhead movements to create more inclusive classrooms that are designed, organized, and arranged in ways that permit freedom of movement, the ability of all children to interact with course material, and the potential for students to remain engaged socially.
References
Becker, S.J. & Bowen, S.K. (2018). Service providers’ perspective on education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing and English learners. American Annals of the Deaf 163(3): 356-373.
Bruce, S., Ferrell, K. & Luckner, J.L. (2016). Guidelines for the Administration of Educational Programs for Students Who Are Deaf/Hard of Hearing, Visually Impaired, or Deafblind. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 2016, pp. 47-59.
Christiansen, D., Bilder, D., Zahorodny, W., et al. (2016). Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among 4 year-old children in the autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics 37(1): 1-8.
Israel, M., Wherfel, Q.M., Pearson, J., et al. (2015). Empowering K-12 students with disabilities to learn computational thinking and computer programming. Teaching Exceptional Children 48(1): 45-53.
Lambros, K., Kraemer, B., Wager, J.D., et al., (2015). Students with Dual Diagnosis: Can School-Based Mental Health Services Play a Role? Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities 9(1-2): 3-23.
Ludi, S., Bernstein, D., & Mutch-Jones, K. (2018). Enhanced robotics. SIGCSE '18 Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, p. 372-377.
Roberts, C.A., Ruppar, A.L. & Olson, A.J. (2017). Perceptions matter. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities 43(1): 3-19.
Taylor, R.L., Smiley, L.R. & Richards, S. (2009). Exceptional Students. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Thomas, R., Barker, L, Rubin, G., et al. (2015). Assistive technology for children and young people with low vision. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD011350.pub2/abstract