Field Experience Report Observation in the Deaf Classroom

Field Experience Report - Observation in the classroom at the school for the Deaf
Introduction
In the US, residential institutions of learning have had a long relationship with the deaf community. They are the centers where linguistic and cultural transmission takes place. The residential, educational institutions for deaf people serve learners at K-12 levels. They avail dormitories for learners who hail from far geographical distances. Usually, each state has built, at least, one residential program of education for the deaf (Romano, 2013). It has also been noted that large communities of the deaf usually settle near a residential school. A good number of states offer education programs that provide language services and training for the deaf, including a rich cultural environment where American Deaf learners are taught American Sign Language and English Bilingual instruction. Such settings are also referred to as deafcentric. Learners are enabled to interact with teachers, heads, classmates, and other staff around the school, in their native language. The schools have also been made to offer extracurricular activities with mentors who are also deaf. The latter is yet another important way of nurturing and transmitting the culture of the deaf.
Research questions for this study are:
• What kinds of accommodations are seen in the classroom?
• What is your view regarding the lesson that gives a chance to the learners to access the curriculum?
• What similarities and differences do you see, relative to your other pair of observations?
The research questions are designed to find out the factors that influence the ability of the school to offer a deafcentric environment that succeeds in promoting the wellbeing of the deaf.
Literature Review
Studies indicate that the deaf has improved in the learning engagement in the residential schools for the deaf. Such a development is attributed to the improved communication context within these institutions, which is an aspect of providing a deafcentric environment. According to Staten (2011), the following should be made possible in the learning environments of the deaf: free communication and securing a comfortable sign language environment, a heightened social and personal interaction between the deaf people, and a cultural identity model development, a perceived readiness for life, following graduation (p. 3). Another study reveals that deaf learners who attend school with a peer who hears properly have a reduced level of social wellbeing and self-esteem compared to those who attend special schools (van Gent et al., 2012).
The success of schools has been gauged with the use of a range of criteria. The criteria are developed for residential schools for the deaf. Some of the measures relating to socialization and linguistic settings will have to be reviewed and changed if they are applied to the non-deaf learners and deaf instructional programs. The current research available suggests that three critical areas should be examined: 1: the outcomes of education; 2: the programs of education; 3: socialization and linguistic experiences. The only entity mandated institution by the federal authorities to measure student progress is the NAEP. They measure academic progress in a range of areas, including mathematics, reading, geography, writing, history, and the arts (Hombo, 2003’ Malik et al., 2018).
The social development with the education of the deaf happens through extra-curricular tasks, in dormitories, and through the athletic programs. The socialization and linguistic environment is a critical aspect of deaf education. Thus, residential schools for the deaf should provide these environments, using both the dormitory and the classroom. They are critical environments for the transmission of culture and language use. These then offer culturally and linguistically useful interactions.
Background
The school is situated in an old structure that even if it is in a good state, it appears run-down because it is not maintained. The illumination of the classroom is not appropriate. The furniture is also not comfortable to use. The air conditioning is noisy while the windows remain closed. It is designed in the shape of a semicircle. There are times when there is obstruction, and a student may not see when another one is consulting the teacher because of poor lighting. One can’t read and see the screen easily. The lighting is, simply, wrong. There is no way to call all students to attend. When the teacher in session is a deaf one and explains by use of sign language, the class covers more, compared to when there is an interpreter. The learners have a challenge in calling the teacher when he is in discourse with another learner or looking towards the screen.
Data collection
The study made use of a descriptive qualitative research approach that included interviews, document review, and observations, to analyze the residential school for the deaf indicators. The goal is to unearth the factors that determine the ability of the school to offer Deafcentric education. Deafcentric education enhances the self-advocacy qualities, including skills for leadership among deaf learners to be developed and nurtured, hence the improved academic performance among such deaf learners.
Observations
Two teachers were involved in the classroom observations. Although the approaches of the two were different, they both offered a deafcentric environment for learning for deaf students. They made use of the effect of eye contact and exploited ASL fully. The first teacher A was conducting a math lesson while in the second one, teacher B, was running a social studies lesson for grade 6 learners who totaled 7.
The desks in the class were arranged to form a C. This happens to work well with deaf people. It allows them to interact too. The classwork and homework are outlined clearly on the board. The TV in the middle of the room announced the commencement of each lesson. The smartboard, placed next to the TV, was switched on. The walls of the classroom were full of science topic charts and posters. The lab equipment for science was arranged at the back of the class. There was a sign reading: “ BEWARE!” outside of the class.
Accommodation made in the classroom
In order to encourage group engagement, a match-problem was developed by teacher A to be handled in pairs. In contrast, teacher B came up with an imaginary battlefield for an army encounter or opposing student teams. Teacher A used the classic classroom method to disseminate content with the use of PPT. He constantly paused to check the comprehension of the learners and also stopped responding to questions. Teacher B, on his part, made use of active learning before they embarked on reading discussions about the war topic. The students were provided with the war experience through the imaginary battlefield first. They simulated different actions to capture war scenes, including throwing crumpled paper at each other, taking stained fluid as soup, and more. After that, they watched the teacher explain videos that related to the reading they had been assigned. Contemporary teaching methods encourage active learning techniques, I would opine, though, that the group involvement inspired a deafcentric culture, since it focused more on group work and relied on the visual acquisition of content.
Students Access to the Curriculum
Both classes consistently used ASL. This approach inspired learners and kept them motivated for the lesson. The particular focus on socialization/interaction could also have helped the class collaboration. The approaches can be viewed as deafcentric because they managed to attain a collective identity. Both teachers made use of the technique to attain a notable level of socialization, even as learning was taking place. The loudest learner and the quietest were also paired by teacher A to work on the lab. Teacher B sent learners into teams to achieve the same end of balancing.
Differences and Similarities
Another quality that both of the teachers had was an impressive sense of humor. This drew the learners to what was being taught. While humor is welcome in any classroom situation, the deaf culture seems even to pay more dividends to its use to keep the learners interested in the lesson. The teachers concluded their lessons by sharing outside experiences and news related to their experience in school. Sharing news not only keeps the learners informed but also encourages collective involvement, an element that drives deafcentric education.
Critique
Considering the observations and interviews conducted in the schools that were selected, it can be argued that a deafcentric environment can be stimulating to learners without distracting visually. Nevertheless, the physical characteristics of the school are in themselves distracters. Between the classes, the school has artificial cubicle walls. The setup makes it difficult for the teacher to control the lighting because one light set spreads across the classrooms in several classes. Furthermore, most of the classrooms are small. The posters and the teaching aids on walls make the class feel congested even when it is empty.
In the interview, I pursued with teacher B; he gave a detailed account regarding the physical environment of the school since the 1950s. The environment does not help the condition of deaf learners. It represents what the architect in the 50s thought to be an open classroom. That has changed a lot. He stated that they tried to alter the setup by use of the artificial walls, but still, the problems mentioned remain.
One of the classrooms I observed had too many items on its walls. The other was not as distracting because the decoration was focused on one theme, i.e., the history of war. The third classroom I visited was only helpful because the walls remained plain and hence not distracting. It was quite boring, though.
Recommendations
The layout of the classroom influences the first recommendation. The layout here refers to the display of the various elements based on their function and relations. Thus, the layout should take into consideration the user flow in executing the tasks they have been assigned. It should enable them to work smoothly and efficiently. For example, the way furniture is arranged within a classroom space should not be guessed. It should offer security since humans require accuracy, standardization, regularity, and rationalization. A school surrounding should be designed in a way that leaves open the diversity of use or adapting to different circumstances as they may arise (Jeffries Jr., 2010). There should be due consideration to the teacher configuration, even as the architects and designers set to build these structures.
The classroom space is dynamic. It should allow different groups to run classes, with different pedagogies applied successfully. Since a deaf student is widely visual, they may not learn effectively in the conventional and traditional classroom layout. A deaf student placed behind another in a traditional class may have their vision blocked by the learners seated in front. On the other hand, if they are placed in front, they may not see what transpires at the back or on the sides. They will lose out on discussions between other classroom members or with the teacher. A question directed at learners may also not be noticed by the deaf one because of their classroom positioning, not to mention discussions of importance that may be ensuing around the class.
The school under this study has several important issues relating to the environment that can help to deliver effective teaching and learning to deaf students and the facilitation of deaf space. Deaf space has been described in earlier studies as architecture that presents sightlines that are not obstructed (Malik et al., 2018). The school requires a set up of a physical deafcentric environment, including an in-built environment with relevant visual information placed on the walls. This should be sufficient to stimulate and not distract. Such a design should not overrun the C-formation of furniture that is ideal for a deaf classroom, or any clear lines of visual design. There should also be boards that reflect elements of the deaf culture, including but not limited to news of the school and about the school (Guardino & Antia, 2012), art forms created by the deaf, and, or even images of role models who are deaf. The built environment should also be refurbished, not only for the learning goals but for safety reasons too.
The interpreter positioning is another area that influences our recommendation. This is the point where the deaf learner comes into contact with the teacher. The interpreter should be in view line by the learners and the teachers. Renard (1999), states that the deaf learner should see the teacher and the other learners during the lesson. Therefore, they should be placed at the center of the second row to allow them to see how the colleagues react seated at the front. When the deaf learner is placed at the front, they may feel discriminated. The circle arrangement or the U setup allows for learner teacher exchange with the teacher being nearly at an equal distance from every student in the class. It also allows for more interaction compared to the traditional layout. However, such a provision may not suffice when the number of students is higher than can sit in two rows in the U or the C. In such a scenario then; it is better to arrange the seats in varying levels.
The teacher also plays a central role in the deafcentric residential school for deaf learners. The role of the teacher overlaps the two mentioned earlier. Research has not mentioned it before. Therefore it will be of use to mention it here. It is critical to only hire teachers with the attitude of the average population of employees of a school that serves to enhance the cultural transmission for a given language community, i.e., the deaf in this case. Teachers are pivotal in the implementation of the ASL program.
Conclusion
The essence of the residential schools for deaf people lies in their ability to have an impact on the ability of the school to offer a deafcentric environment. Such an environment supports linguistic, emotional, and social growth. In the current study of one school of residential type, the use of visual techniques for instruction, the crafting of a visual environment for learning, the consistent use of ASL and adherence to it; out and inside the classroom setup, and the positive attitude is shown by teachers, including the school administration were observed to be critical in the creation of a deafcentric environment. With the factors highlighted, other residential institutions for the deaf can make use of the data and apply the recommendation to improve the learning environments, hence outcomes for the deaf learners they handle.
References
Guardino, C., & Antia, S. D. (2012). Modifying the classroom environment to increase engagement and decrease disruption with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(4), 518-533.
Hombo, C. M. (2003). NAEP and No Child Left Behind: Technical challenges and practical solutions. Theory into Practice, 42(1), 59-65.
Jeffries Jr., R. L. (2010). A Case Study of a Teacher Implementing Guided Reading in a Deaf Classroom. ProQuest LLC.
Malik, A. M., Rashid, M., Awan, M. Y., & Alvi, I. B. (2018). The Role of Architecture in the Identification of Obstacles and Spatial Solutions to Inclusive Education. UMT Education Review (UER), 1(2), 39-58.
Renard, M. (1999). Les sourds dans la ville: surdités et accessibilité. ARDDS (Association pour la réadaptation et la défense des devenus-sourds).
Romano, A.M. (2013). Observing a Residential School for the Deaf: Identifying Factors in Creating a Deafcentric Environment. (The Honors Program, Gallaudet University).
Staten, F. D. (2011). Examining the influence of the residential school for the deaf experience on deaf identity. (Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of Iowa).
Van Gent, T., Goedhart, A. W., Knoors, H. E., Westenberg, P. M., & Treffers, P. D. (2012). Self-concept and ego development in deaf adolescents: a comparative study. Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 17(3), 333-351.