|
The complete testimony of MCDHH in support of these
bills is appended.
Missouri Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Testimony before the House Education Committee Regarding HB 297 and
HB 310 (ASL for Foreign Language Credit)
April 16, 2003
Madam Chair, members of the Committee. My name is
Dr. Roy Miller, and I am the executive director of the Missouri
Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. I am here today to
speak in support of House Bills 297 and 310, although I favor the
language of HB 310 for reasons that will become apparent.
According to information from the American Sign
Language Teachers Association, there are over thirty states in the
United States that currently legally recognize American Sign
Language, which is commonly referred to as ASL <>.
One of these states, of course, is Missouri, where 209.285(1), RSMo,
2000, recognizes the unique language status of ASL and defines it as
“a visual-gestural system of communication that has its own syntax,
rhetoric and grammar. American Sign Language is recognized, accepted
and used by many deaf Americans. This native language represents
concepts rather than words.”
For sources of information on the linguistics of
ASL, see Linguistics of American Sign Language by Clayton Valli and
Ceil Lucas (Gallaudet University Press, 1993), American Sign
Language: Linguistic and Applied Dimensions by Ronnie Wilbur (Little
Brown and Co., 1987), and The Signs of Language by Edward Klima and
Ursala Bellugi (Harvard University Press, 1979).
Indeed, linguistic scholars have long since
recognized the fact that ASL is a fully developed human language,
one of the many naturally occurring signed languages of the world.
And even though Missouri has recognized this basic fact in its
statutes, ASL is still treated as a “second class citizen” in the
Missouri educational system. In particular, while ASL has been
reported by the Washington Post to be the third most commonly used
language in the United States, it is seldom taught in our schools,
infrequently accepted as meeting language requirements for
graduation from our high schools and colleges, and rarely accepted
for meeting language admission requirements in any of our
institutions of higher education. At the same time, so called “dead
languages” (no longer spoken), such as Latin and Classical Greek,
are commonly accepted for meeting entrance and graduation
requirements, and languages seldom used in this country, such as
Portuguese and French, are being taught in our schools.
According to 1995 and 1998 data from the Modern
Language Association, ASL registrations in two- and four-year
colleges increased by 169% between 1990 and 1995 (Brod & Huber,
1995), and by 165% between 1995 and 1998; almost three times the
gain of any other language (Brod & Welles, in press).
Brod, R., & Huber, B. (1997). Foreign language
enrollments in United States Institutes of Higher Education, Fall
1995. Modern Language Association Bulletin, 28(2). Brod, R. &
Welles, E. (in press). Foreign language enrollments in United States
Institutes of Higher Education, Fall 1998. Modern Language
Association Bulletin, 28(2).
These statistics are indicative of a general trend
throughout the country for more and more schools to offer ASL
instruction, and more and more students to take such classes. In the
words of Gary Olsen, former executive director of the National
Association of the Deaf, interest in American Sign Language has
become “an American ground swell.” House Bills 297 and 310 are
manifestations of this national trend toward increased interest in
American Sign Language.
If more schools were to offer ASL, however, this
could have only limited positive social effects so long as ASL
classes face structural factors that make taking them far less
appealing than studying other world languages. In particular, if a
student were given credit for taking German or Russian, but would
receive no academic credit for taking ASL as it was only offered as
a non-credit course, then that student would most likely be far less
motivated to study ASL. So too, if the study of French or Latin
would satisfy a high school’s graduation requirements, but the study
of ASL would not, few students at that school would likely be
motivated to take ASL classes. And if Spanish or Swahili were
accepted as meeting the entrance requirements of the college that a
student wanted to attend, but ASL was not accepted, then that
student would have a very strong reason for not taking the ASL
class. What House Bills 297 and 310 do simply is say that if a
school chooses to offer instruction in ASL it must treat ASL as a
“foreign language” for purposes of receiving and granting academic
credit, as well as meeting entrance and graduation requirements.
In other words, if a school offers both Greek and
ASL, and students get academic credit for taking Greek, then
students taking ASL shall also receive academic credit for their
efforts. If a school offers both Italian and ASL, and allows
students to proficiency Italian, then they must allow students to
proficiency ASL. If a school offers both Chinese and ASL, and
Chinese is counted towards meeting a foreign language graduation
requirement, then ASL shall also be counted towards meeting that
graduation requirement. ASL would not be treated as a “second class
citizen” among the world’s languages, but rather would be treated as
if it were a “foreign language” for credit granting purposes in our
Missouri schools.
Many scholars, such as Dr. Sherman Wilcox of the
Department of Linguistics at the University of New Mexico, have
noted the ever-increasing number of colleges and universities that
accept ASL as meeting their language arts entrance requirements.
(See,
Academic Acceptance of American Sign Language by
Sherman Wilcox (Editor). Linstok Press, 1992). House Bill 310 would
logically complete its program of removing ASL from its “second
class citizenship” status by requiring that academic credit received
for ASL “shall be counted towards satisfaction of the foreign
language entrance requirements of any institution of higher
education located in the state of Missouri.” This critical phrase is
missing from the language of HB 297, and is the primary reason why
the Missouri Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing prefers the
language of HB 310 to that of HB 297.
HB 310 also includes language that encourages the
“teaching, study and learning of American Sign Language” in Missouri
schools (language that HB 297 does not include). In encouraging the
teaching and study of ASL, HB 310 recognizes the simple fact that
ASL is a living language used by many deaf and hard of hearing
Missourians - one of whom might be your next-door neighbor. People
are much more likely to encounter a user of ASL anywhere in Missouri
than a person who speaks Thai, Polish, or Swedish.
By eliminating the structural barriers that serve as
disincentives for students to take ASL classes, and by treating ASL
exactly the same as any other foreign language, either of these
bills would help foster a social environment in which all of our
hearing citizens are better able to communicate with ASL signers,
and in which all of our deaf citizens are better able to meet the
economic and social challenges of the 21st Century. Students who
know a second language commonly find that their perceptions of
themselves and the world are richer than that of their monolingual
peers. I strongly urge you to provide this educational opportunity
on an equal basis to all students wishing to study American Sign
Language. I thank you for your time and attention, and of course
would be happy to answer any questions that you might have. |
