Below is the text of the letter to Senator
Kennedy:
PARENTS VOICE, INC.
Post
Office Box 511
Wilmington, DE
19899-0511
6/4/2002
Honorable Senator Edward Kennedy
Chairman, Health
Education Labor and Pensions Committee
Fax (202)
224-2417
RE: I.D.E.A. Reauthorization and Policy Guidance For
Acoustic Accessibility For Disabled Hearing Impaired Children
and DRAFT ANSI Acoustical Standard.
Dear Honorable Senator Kennedy,
Thank you for your time and attention.
We write you respectfully asking for immediate assistance
and consideration for IDEA reauthorization in the area for
students who are deaf and hard of hearing and acoustics. Our
group membership includes parents and professionals advocating
for functionally hard of hearing students covered by IDEA
across the nation.
About 70,000 of the approximately 45 million students
enrolled in public schools are currently receiving special
education services due to hearing impairment as being the
primary disability. More than 95% of students who are
functionally hard of hearing do not use sign language (source:
http://www.pepnet.org, publication #1022, Access Training
Package). Their primary mode of communication is auditory and,
as such, highly dependent on adequate room acoustics. Our
children are listening and speaking.
From experience and discourse with many parents of hearing
impaired children covered under IDEA from all over the nation,
the conclusion across this nation is the same. The denial of
school districts to provide or allow reasonable acoustical
modifications and appropriate evaluations of classrooms for
functionally hard of hearing students is discriminatory and a
violation of the spirit of IDEA and its principles. There is
no provision expressly addressing this critical need. The
lengths parents are having to go is wrong and puts many
families at grave risk with the time it is taking to advocate
in this area.
A typical hearing impaired student protected under IDEA, in
the absence of appropriate room acoustical treatment, while
wearing hearing aids or a cochlear implant, has unimpeded
access to approximately 10% of the listening area and language
of their non-disabled hearing peers. Research indicates that
acoustics (background noise and reverberation) create barriers
and directly impacts speech intelligibility for hearing
impaired children more than for their hearing peers. Hearing
impaired children who wear hearing aids, cochlear implants,
and assistive listening devices are at particular risk as
these devices amplify both wanted and unwanted sound.
Sign language interpreters can cost as much as $30,000 a
year or more. Room acoustical modifications can be achieved
for far less in most cases and can utilize materials that can
be relocated as a student progresses through school. A
consultant who presented a session on acoustics at the most
recent Educational Audiology Association convention advised
that modifications can be achieved for approximately $4,000.00
or less per classroom, depending on the environment and child.
Some $5 to $6 billion a year is being spent on school
construction. The marginal cost of meeting our children's
special room acoustical needs pales in comparison.
There is definitive research and articles are being written
everyday about classroom acoustics and the impact on all
children, but mostly, those who are young and hearing
impaired. We can easily provide all of this to you. A poor
acoustical environment impacts literacy, academics, vigilance,
attention, math skills, empathy, social skills and overall
social development, anxiety, access to peers, stress, fatigue,
and health. While this is generally more true of children who
are hearing impaired, the room acoustical modifications made
for their benefit will benefit everyone. Such is rarely the
case with respect to resources allocated for special education
purposes.
We are forwarding a letter we have already sent to
Secretary Paige for a policy statement.
Identification of the specific parts of speech our children
actually understand and miss in their public classrooms are
critical to the development of an appropriate IEP, and with
appropriate provisions in IDEA can be accomplished with very
reasonable expense, and in some cases, no expense to the
district.
Currently under IDEA, school districts are currently not
held sufficiently accountable for providing acoustical
criteria or speech intelligibility in the classroom because
the language in IDEA is not specific enough. This creates
insurmountable obstacles for parents, and continues the
discrimination against these disabled children whose
disability is invisible. From state to state there is no
policy guidance on acoustic access for disabled children, and
the Board of Education has yet to create a policy statement
for parents, advocates and school districts. These children
cannot hear completely under any circumstances and must be
offered an opportunity to equal learning and access to their
peers.
In the United States, in 1997, the United States
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
(aka the U.S. Access Board) partnered with ANSI, and
Acoustical Society of America, on the development of a new
standard, in response to a petition for rule making by Widget
Richards, the mother of a hearing impaired child who requested
ADA Accessibility Guidelines be amended to include new
provisions for acoustical accessibility in schools for
children who are hard of hearing. The development of a
National Standard on Classroom Acoustics has now been
completed. On May 23, 2002, a final draft of the standard was
mailed by the Standards Secretariat of the Acoustical Society
of America (ASA) to the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) for their approval.
However, the standard development has been delayed more
than a year beyond the original timeline, due to an appeal
filed against the standard, and it is now too late to include
provisions derived from the standard in revisions to the ADA's
guidelines until the next opportunity in the year 2007.
Any further delay that may be caused in approval and
publication of the standard will only be harmful now and for
many years to come in the education of students to be housed
in the many new and renovated schools being built throughout
the US. The acoustical environments specified by the standard
have been determined to be vital to ensure an acceptable
learning environment for students of all ages. Meanwhile, in
Europe, many countries have adopted standards for classroom
acoustical accessibility and many European students, schools,
and families benefit from this alliance of research and
accountability.
Returning to OUR kids, the draft standard is limited in
scope and does not extend to special purpose rooms such as
special education classrooms for children who are severely
acoustically-challenged. A 1995 report published by the World
Health Organization, which recommends acoustical criteria for
all students very similar to those identified in the
forthcoming American standard, indicates that, preferably,
noise levels and reverberation rates should be even lower for
students with hearing loss.
Even with the teacher utilizing assistive technology, an FM
system does not fix the disability of hearing loss, in fact,
an FM system while amplifying the voice of the teacher, will
also amplify background noise and reverberation also creating
an obstacle to understanding speech of peers around the
student. Specific evaluation procedures in the student's
customary environment to sufficiently identify their needs are
critical and should include acoustical criteria according to
either the Federal Access Board's interim accessibility
guidelines or other guidelines by ASA, ASHA, or others.
The IDEA language regarding development of IEPs should, in
our opinion, specifically address room acoustics, e.g.
"Consider the communication needs of the child and in the case
of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the
child's language and communication needs, opportunities for
direct communication with peers and professional personnel in
the child's language and communication mode, the acoustical
environments of the classrooms so as to provide auditory
access to information and to peers, academic level, and full
range of needs, including opportunities for direct instruction
in the child's language and communication mode; ..."
Currently there are a number of industry and other
guidelines re classroom acoustics. For functionally hard of
hearing children protected under IDEA these criteria are more
critical. Several sets of guidelines specifically for hard of
hearing students exist and are discussed in review by the U.S.
Access Board in a public notice published in the Federal
Register. IDEA specifically makes reference to opportunities
for direct communication with peers in academic and
non-academic settings. Appropriate room acoustics is critical
to making this a reality. The Secretary issued Guidance in
1992 which emphasized, as a consideration separate from
academic level, "Social, emotional, and cultural needs
including opportunities for peer interactions and
communication." Appropriate room acoustics is critical to
realizing this goal. The Secretary went so far as to state,
"Even the availability of interpreter services in the
educational setting may not address deaf children's needs for
direct and meaningful communication with peers and teachers."
The need for appropriate room acoustics for hard of hearing
students, especially those who do not sign, can not be
overstated.
The social disadvantages suffered by our children due to
inadequate room acoustics are inestimable. Because of the time
that is spent cognitively filling in "missing words" that
weren't heard sufficiently well, there is a delayed reaction
time which impairs social interaction. The cognitive
processing demands imposed under degraded auditory conditions
create longer analytical listening time, and also create
secondary problems with missed communications, missed social
cues, social exclusion, anxiety, stress, and depression.
Further insights on acoustics and socialization, which have
been confirmed by adults who have hearing loss and by
educators with considerable experience, may be found at: http://www.handsandvoices.org/articles/tech/acoustics.html
We propose the following issues be addressed during the
reauthorization of IDEA:
1. A mandate for room acoustical accessibility for students
who have the disability of hearing impairment.
2. A mandate for objective speech intelligibility
evaluation procedures geared to profile the effects of room
acoustics vis-a-vis the child's speech discrimination ability,
with results provided in a format that can readily be
translated into a guideline or standard that is reasonable and
appropriate for disabled hearing impaired children protected
under IDEA.
3. Measures to assure that such evaluations and ensuing
room acoustical modifications are carried out by appropriately
qualified professionals who do not have a conflict of
interest. The following draft language is offered as a
beginning point with respect to the room acoustics portion:
"Selection of a person experienced in room acoustics
evaluation shall be by mutual consent of the parents and the
school district. Such a person should be able to provide
evidence of professionally recognized expertise in measurement
of background noise levels in an unoccupied space and in
analysis, by calculation or measurement, of reverberation time
in such spaces. This may be evidenced by documented experience
or by employment and guidance from a firm with the same
professionally recognized expertise. The school district shall
use assessment tools and strategies that provide relevant
information and are sufficiently comprehensive to assist in
identifying all of the child's needs for special education and
related services."
4. While there are many new options to implement the
foregoing efficiently and at modest cost per student, such as
software for estimating reverberation time and sound panels
that can be relocated from room to room as a student
progresses through school, we recommend an initial allocation
of $200 million in special federal funding to be set aside
solely for the purpose of making appropriate room acoustical
modifications for classrooms in which a student with hearing
loss that qualifies under IDEA is to be served. This funding
will help provide the impetus for large scale implementation,
in turn promoting innovation and economies of scale to further
improve efficiency and reduce long term costs.
5. To further promote speedy implementation, innovation,
and economies of scale to develop, we ask that parents and
other private parties be allowed to raise or contribute
additional funds, and schools be directed to accept such
funds, to supplement state and federal funds available for
acoustical modifications.
6. To reduce conflict, we ask that, if a parent is able to
raise or contribute funds for acoustical improvements, that
the schools be directed to make every effort to apply such
funds in a manner to address the parent's acoustical concerns
to the parent's satisfaction, except in extreme cases.
We respectfully request immediate action in this area. Many
parents of hearing impaired children are currently asking for
acoustical evaluations, some even offering to provide pro bono
acoustical evaluations and are being denied. Please help us
help our children.
We also send a letter from an eight year old hearing
impaired child named Cubby. He has fluctuating permanent
sensorineural hearing loss. He is in second grade classroom of
25 gifted children. He says, "Dear Senator Kennedy, My school
is so loud. I cant stand it! I can't understand the other
kids. Could you ask to make a law. I sort of get tired of
having to say, 'Huh?'"
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Monte M. Stern
President, Parents Voice, Inc.
Correspondence by e-mail preferred: monte@netbox.com
For
prompt response, please send duplicate of snail mail to:
2305-C Ashland St., PMB 223 Ashland, OR 97520 and/or fax:
541-482-7815
cc: Members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions
Members of the House Committee on
Education and the Workforce
Mary Whitaker, President of
Educational Audiology Association ("EAA")
Cheryl DeConde
Johnson, CCC-A, past President of EAA
Karen Anderson,
CCC-A, past President of EAA
Suggested Legislative Amendments
The following are merely suggested amendments to IDEA
legislation that we, as parents, feel would be helpful:
20 U.S.C. Chapter 33
PART A - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 1400 Short title; table of contents; findings;
purposes
(d) Purposes
(1)(A)
insert "including communication needs" such that the
amended language reads:
"The purposes of this title are---
(1)(A) to insure that
all children with disabilities have available to them a free
appropriate public education that emphasizes special education
and related services designed to meet their unique needs,
including communication needs, and prepare them for employment
and independent living."
Sec. 1401 Definitions
(2)(A)
add " (which, in the case of a child who has a hearing
impairment, shall include an objective speech intelligibility
evaluation designed to assess the effects of the room
acoustical environment on the child's ability to understand
both teacher and conversational speech at various distances) "
after "functional evaluation" such that it reads:
"the evaluation of the needs of such child, including a
functional evaluation (which, in the case of a child who has a
hearing impairment, shall include an objective speech
intelligibility evaluation designed to assess the effects of
the room acoustical environment on the child's ability to
understand both teacher and conversational levels at various
distances) of the child in the child's customary
environment;"
(6) (B)
Insert the phrase ", including room acoustical
modifications" after "telecommunications, sensory, and other
technological aids and devices;" so that it reads:
"... materials; telecommunications, sensory, and other
technological aids and devices, including room acoustical
modifications; and ..."
(22) Related services
Append to the very end: " (and, in
the case of child who has a hearing impairment, assessment,
counseling, and education regarding the effects of room
acoustical environments)."
Sec. 1404 Acquisition of equipment; construction or
alteration of facilities
Add "(c) Private/Public Partnerships
Given the
fundamental importance of room acoustics to communication in
the educational environment, the unique potential of
improvements in room acoustics to result in better educational
outcomes (particularly in the area of reading achievement) for
students with a wide variety of disabilities, and the
potential that an overall reduction in the need for special
education services may consequently ensue, the Secretary is
directed to develop programs, policies, and incentives to
promote private/public partnerships for the purpose of
upgrading existing school facilities to meet an appropriate
room acoustical standard."
Sec. 1412 (a)(5) Least restrictive environment
Change
"(B) Additional requirement" to "(C)" [and change the current
(B)(i) reference to subparagraph (A) to include subparagraph
(A) and (B)] and insert new subparagraph:
"(B)
Communication Needs
Any setting which does not meet the
unique communication and related needs (including equal
opportunity to participate fully in classroom discussions and
social interactions in academic and non-academic settings) of
a child who has a hearing impairment cannot be considered the
least restrictive environment for that child. Such settings
shall, therefore, comply, at a minimum, with an appropriate
room acoustics standard."
Sec. 1414 (d) Individualized education
programs
(1)(iii)(III)
Change from: "to be educated and participate with other
children with disabilities and non disabled children in the
activities described in this paragraph;" to
"to be educated, participate, and communicate with, to the
maximum extent possible, other children with disabilities and
non disabled children, in the activities described in this
paragraph:"
---------
Currently, the criteria parents have for advocacy include
the following (and the interim accessibility guidelines
published by the U.S. Access Board).
IDEA Federal Regulations
300.346 Development, review,
and revision of IEP [a] (2)Consideration of special factors:
(iv)references child with hearing loss e,g, "Consider the
communication needs of the child and in the case of a child
who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the child's language
and communication needs, opportunities for direct
communication with peers and professional personnel in the
child's language and communication mode, academic level, and
full range of needs, including opportunities for direct
instruction in the child's language and communication mode;
and " (v)" Consider whether the child requires assistive
technology devices and services"
IDEA Federal Regulations:
Section 226.220 Factors in
Development of the IEP
a) The team shall consider whether
the child requires assistive technology devices and
services.
b) The team shall consider whether the child has
any special needs related to communication.
c) In the case
of a child of limited English proficiency, the team shall
consider the language related needs of the child.
d) In the
case of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, the team shall
consider the child's language and communication needs,
opportunities for direct communication with peers and
professional personnel in the child's language and mode of
communication, academic level, and full range of needs,
including opportunities for direct instruction in the childıs
language and mode of communication.
IDEA Federal Regulation:
34 CFR 300.347 General The IEP
for each child with a disability must include--
3) A
statement of the special education and related services and
supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child,
or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program
modifications or supports for school personnel that will be
provided for the child--
i) to advance appropriately toward
attaining annual goals
ii) To be involved and progress in
the general curriculum in accordance with paragraph
(a)(1)
of this section and to participate in extracurricular and
other non academic activities to be educated and participate
with other children with disabilities and non disabled
children in the activities described in this section;
34 CFR Sec.300.533
(a) Review of existing evaluation
data. As part of an initial evaluation (if appropriate) and as
part of any reevaluation
(2) On the basis of that review,
and input from the childıs parents, identify what additional
data, if any, are needed to determine-
(iv) Whether any
additions or modifications to the special education and
related services are needed to enable the child to meet the
measurable annual goals set out in the IEP of the child and to
participate, as appropriate, in the general curriculum.
IDEA-Part C (PL 99-457) [34CFR303.12(D)]
Audiology
includes:
(i) Identification of children with impairments,
using at-risk criteria and appropriate audiological screening
techniques;
(ii) Determination of the range, nature, and
degree of hearing loss and communication functions by use of
audiologic evaluation procedures; including functional
evaluations in the child's customary environment and analysis
of the classroom noise and reverberation conditions;
(iii)
Referral for medical and other services necessary for the
habilitation or rehabilitation of children with auditory
impairment;
(iv) Provision of auditory training, aural
rehabilitation, speech reading and listening device
orientation and training, and other services;
(v) Provision
of services for the prevention of hearing loss; and
(vi)
Determination of the child's need for individual
amplification, including selecting, fitting, and dispensing of
appropriate listening and vibrotactile devices, and evaluating
the effectiveness of those devices.
| 
