conclusion for sign language essay

Advertisement

The moral case for sign language education

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 23 November 2019
• Volume 37 , pages 94–110, ( 2019 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Hilary Bowman-Smart   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2142-9696 1 , 2 ,
• Christopher Gyngell 1 , 2 ,
• Angela Morgan 3 , 4 &
• Julian Savulescu 1 , 5  

36k Accesses

7 Citations

45 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Here, a moral case is presented as to why sign languages such as Auslan should be made compulsory in general school curricula. Firstly, there are significant benefits that accrue to individuals from learning sign language. Secondly, sign language education is a matter of justice; the normalisation of sign language education and use would particularly benefit marginalised groups, such as those living with a communication disability. Finally, the integration of sign languages into the curricula would enable the flourishing of Deaf culture and go some way to resolving the tensions that have arisen from the promotion of oralist education facilitated by technologies such as cochlear implants. There are important reasons to further pursue policy proposals regarding the prioritisation of sign language in school curricula.

Similar content being viewed by others

English Language Education in the Philippines: Policies, Problems, and Prospects

A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st century: a survey of the state of the field.

Intersectionality: A pathway towards inclusive education?

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Learning another language is a life goal for many. We generally think that doing so is a form of self-improvement. We teach languages in our schools. Many people go out of their way to ensure that their child becomes bi- or multilingual. However, it is important to ask exactly why we choose certain languages above others, and which languages we should teach our children. The answer depends on assessing not just what is good for the individual child, but also what makes society better.

Languages taught in schools in English-speaking countries are often European or Asian languages. In Australia, Japanese, Italian, French, Indonesian, German and Chinese constitute 93% of enrolment numbers (Orton 2016 ). In both the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK), Spanish, French and German dominate (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages 2011 ; Long and Bolton 2016 ). One set of languages that receives comparatively little attention are sign languages such as Australian Sign Language (Auslan), British Sign Language (BSL) and American Sign Language (ASL).

In December 2016 the first Australian national curriculum for Auslan was launched, as a result of much lobbying from the deaf (or Deaf) community (Dalzell 2016 ). This means there is a standard text for teaching Auslan that can be implemented around the country. Despite this, Auslan is still only taught in 4% of all Victorian public schools (Hore 2017 ). A recent push has occurred in the UK for BSL to be made available as a GCSE subject, with one child mounting a legal challenge in 2018 (Busby 2018 ). A 2017 petition to the government calling for BSL to be integrated into the national curriculum received over 35,000 signatures (“Make British Sign Language part of the National Curriculum” 2018 ). A 2017 survey by the National Deaf Children’s Society found that 92% of young people (both deaf and hearing) thought BSL should be taught in schools (National Deaf Children’s Society 2017 ). In the US, the provision of ASL in secondary schools is increasing, although it remains a very small minority of foreign language enrolments; teachers generally rely on a number of commercially-prepared curricula (Rosen 2010 ).

Here, we argue that sign languages should be compulsorily integrated into the school curriculum, whether primary, secondary, or both. This would make sign language education accessible to both hearing and deaf or hard-of-hearing students. We will focus on English-speaking countries as examples, particularly Australia (with Auslan) and the UK (with BSL). In these two countries in particular, sign language education has been the matter of recent public debate. We do not propose a specific educational policy, but rather a moral case as to why sign languages should be prioritised in any approach to developing a school curriculum.

Although the strong version of our claim is that sign language should be made compulsory, we accept that there may be some situations and contexts where this may not be appropriate or possible. In these exceptions, we still argue that sign language education should at least be made accessible, prioritised, and/or incentivised.

Teaching a second language has many cognitive and social benefits. Teaching sign language, specifically, has further benefits. Firstly, learning sign language would benefit individual students, as it would improve each student’s overall communication skills and provide additional cognitive advantages that come from being bimodally bilingual. Secondly and critically, widespread knowledge of sign language would benefit numerous groups who are already disadvantaged, such as those with a communication disability, particularly those who are congenitally deaf or hard-of-hearing. These individuals are at risk for social isolation, stigmatisation, loss of independence, poorer literacy and academic outcomes, underemployment, and overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system (Bryan et al. 2010 ; Health Workforce Australia 2014 ; Law et al. 2009 ; Schoon et al. 2010 ; Snow and Powell 2007 ). This makes sign language education a question of justice. Thirdly, teaching sign language in schools will go some way to resolving the tension around new technologies and the erasure of Deaf culture.

We set out our case as follows. In Sect.  2 , we outline the benefits that learning sign language bestows on individuals. In Sect.  3 , we argue that considerations of justice favour prioritising the teaching of sign language over other second languages. In Sect.  4 , we discuss issues regarding identity and deaf culture. We conclude by endorsing the general principle that in a default curriculum, students should learn sign language. At the very least, sign languages should be much more widely taught than they are now, so that they are among the most widely taught languages.

2 Benefits to the individual

Learning a second language has a number of demonstrated benefits to the individual. It can foster analytic thinking (Jiang et al. 2016 ), enhance multitasking (Poarch and Bialystok 2015 ), and improve social cognition and executive control (Bialystok and Craik 2010 ; Carlson and Meltzoff 2008 ; Colzato et al. 2008 ; Cox et al. 2016 ; Hilchey and Klein 2011 ) among a number of other cognitive benefits. These benefits are most evident when the second language is supported with strong bilingual education rather than only speaking the language at home (Lauchlan et al. 2012 ). Numerous studies have indicated that bilingualism serves as protection against cognitive decline in older age, delaying the onset of dementia by 4 to 5 years (Alladi et al. 2013 ; Perani et al. 2017 ; Woumans et al. 2015 ). With this level of protection against age-related disease, language education could even be argued to be a kind of public health measure. Additionally, there is the simple positive aspect of being able to communicate directly with a larger number of people than one otherwise would be able to. This also means the opportunity to engage with other cultures to a deeper level.

Learning a sign language provides additional benefits, as not only does it make a person bilingual, but also bimodal. It provides several cognitive gains: it improves the use of co-gesture in speech (Casey et al. 2012 ), improves the ability to identify facial expressions (Bettger et al. 1997 ), enhances vocabulary development and literacy in young children (Daniels 1994 , 2004 ; Moses et al. 2015 ), and improves spatial cognition such as mental rotation (Emmorey et al. 1993 , 1998 ; Romero Lauro et al. 2014 ; Talbot and Haude 1993 ). Bimodal bilinguals can co-activate both languages during spoken comprehension (Shook and Marian 2012 ) and there is no cost to simultaneous speech and sign (Emmorey et al. 2016 ). Uniquely, sign language allows for simultaneous communication in two modalities; this is not possible with two oral languages.

There are additional social benefits to learning sign language. For example, it allows people to communicate in very noisy environments (such as a crowded bar or factory) or in an unobtrusive fashion where noise may not be allowed or may be distracting (such as the classroom). It facilitates effective communication with members of the deaf community who do not communicate orally, without the need of an interpreter or assistive device (including pen and paper). This can have advantages in both the personal and professional realm (for example, by making a business more accessible to deaf or hard-of-hearing people, thereby potentially increasing profit).

Gestures and visual communication are already an integral part of communication, with co-gestures representing an important visual modality that accompanies verbal output (Perniss et al. 2015 ). Sign language further provides another modality beyond the verbal to express oneself. A large part of communication is non-verbal, and the use of sign language integrates, formalises and expresses this non-verbal communication in an effective way. The strong link between sign language and emotional expression (Elliott and Jacobs 2013 ) may prove to be a positive outlet for some.

Learning sign language will also provide additional benefits to those who may become deaf. Hearing loss is associated with age (Oh et al. 2014 ). Australia’s population is ageing, and the proportion of Australians who are 65 or older is expected to continue to grow, projected to reach a quarter of the population by the end of this century (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2018 ). The situation is similar in the UK (Office for National Statistics 2017 ). Therefore, the number of people in these countries who are deaf or hard-of-hearing is likely to increase. Admittedly, technological and medical progress may prevent this, but this is not guaranteed. Loss of hearing due to age has been associated with impacts on quality of life, social relationships, and cognitive function (Fortunato et al. 2016 ). Learning sign language prior to the advent of hearing loss could ameliorate these impacts and make this transition less distressing. Learning another language such as German does not necessarily provide a benefit in the same way. For example, if you failed to learn German before you moved to Germany, you would be in a difficult position. However, apart from taking language lessons, you could also turn to a translator to translate German into your primary language. If you become hard of hearing when you rely on oral communication, you have lost your full capacity to communicate in your primary language. Without knowledge of sign language, a translator will provide no additional benefit to you. You have not just moved to another country where people do not understand you; there is no chance of going home. This is a reason that teaching sign language specifically confers a benefit to the individual over the teaching of other second languages. Over time, as younger generations transition, it would allow effective communication with the elderly as they become hard of hearing, without requiring hearing assistive technology.

In sum, the learning of sign language will benefit individuals by promoting a bimodal form of communication that can facilitate expressive communication. These benefits will be particularly significant for those who are, or will become, deaf. It should be noted, however, that the degree to which individuals (as well as society in general) will benefit depends on the degree to which students successfully acquire sign language in school, and the extent to which they will retain it throughout their lifetime. This is hard to predict prospectively. We will simply note even if people only acquired a small amount of sign language, this could have significant benefits in terms of the social acceptance of deaf culture. Furthermore, learning a little sign language at school would provide a platform on which to learn further sign language when needed (for example, if they become deaf).

The Roman lawyer Cicero gives one of the earliest definitions of justice as “the virtue which assigns to each his due” (Cicero 1933 ). This broad definition still captures the core concerns of justice today. While justice encompasses many elements of ethics and law, it fundamentally represents a concern for giving people what they are ‘due’. Educational resources (such as a teacher’s time, a school’s budget) are limited. This raises the question of how we ought to allocate these resources in a way that assigns each their due.

There are several different theories of distributive justice which give different answers to the question of how we should distribute a limited resource. However, the most widely accepted theories are versions of ‘prioritarianism’ (Parfit 1997 ), which is the view that, other things being equal, benefits matter more, the more worse off their recipients. Footnote 1 One version of prioritarianism is John Rawls’ theory of justice, which includes the difference principle (Rawls 1999 ). It holds that differences between the best-off and the worst-off are only permissible if they raise the absolute standing of the worst off. On this view, we should distribute educational resources so that the worst off in society are as well off as they possibly can be.

Teaching sign language will benefit groups in society who are significantly marginalised. In many contexts, there will be strong reasons of justice to prioritise teaching sign language over other languages, as outlined further here.

Being able to communicate is an essential component of being able to participate fully in society. For this reason, it is more important to teach children a language that will allow them to communicate with those whose capacities for communication and engagement with society are limited by a language barrier. This is not necessarily the case with all second languages currently being taught, such as some European languages of wealthy countries where migrants are likely to be highly educated and already speak English. Therefore, linguistic minorities that are less likely or able to speak English have a greater claim to their language being represented on the educational curriculum than those who can speak English.

With this line of argument, it is also important to establish the deaf or hard-of-hearing not only as a linguistic minority, but also as a marginalised minority who are worse-off in a way that is directly related to language. It is more difficult for people who are deaf to communicate with other members of society and go about their daily lives with the ease of those who are not deaf can do. Although many people do not recognise deafness as a disability in itself (Bauman et al. 2014 ), the social implications of not being able to communicate in the same way as the majority of society are clear (regardless of how we conceptualise these barriers). It is, for example, more difficult to order a coffee or open a bank account if there is nobody who can communicate with you simply and effectively by non-oral means—that is, through languages such as Auslan. These are relatively trivial tasks, but it is also evident in more serious and important moments in life, such as being unable to communicate with medical staff during the birth of your child (Browne 2016 ). There is evidence of discrimination against the deaf in both Australia and the UK. Those who are deaf have poorer employment outcomes (Hill et al. 2017 ; Willoughby 2011 ; Winn 2007 ); as of 2015 in Australia, people with a communication disability such as deafness have a labour participation rate of only 37.5% (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2017a ). Deaf people have increased difficulty with accessing primary healthcare services (Kuenburg et al. 2016 ), and in the UK, deaf mental healthcare service users stay in hospital twice as long as hearing patients (Baines et al. 2010 ). Deaf people have increased barriers accessing the criminal justice system in the UK (Elder and Schwartz 2018 ) and are not able to serve as jurors in Australia (Napier and McEwin 2015 ). Parents of deaf children have had to resort to the courts to ensure that their children receive education that is accessible to them (Busby 2018 ; Komesaroff 2004 ). Although some of these problems are systemic and institutional, if the number of people who were able to communicate in sign languages were to increase, even if that level of communication is not particularly strong or skilled, this will go some way to ameliorating the difficulties deaf people face as they go about their daily life. It will also normalise the use of sign languages in various contexts and could provide a societal background where discrimination against the deaf is less accepted.

Deafness, as noted above, also intersects with other marginalised groups such as the elderly. Forms of sign language can also be useful for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities, such as autism spectrum disorder, Down syndrome (Toth 2009 ), or the plethora of genetic syndromes identified in this genomic era. Emphasising alternate modalities of language may help in making these communication methods more accessible and/or normalised. Modified forms of sign language, such as Key Word Sign or Makaton, have proved highly valuable for people with intellectual disabilities (Beecher and Childre 2012 ; Meuris et al. 2015 ; van der Meer et al. 2012 ). Teaching sign language may benefit individuals with, for example, autism, either directly or indirectly by making communication with their friends, family members and support staff easier. Varieties of sign languages can form a part of or a more natural alternative to augmented communication devices, and increased knowledge may be helpful for those who require access to alternative or augmented communication. However, it is important to recognise here that in this context we are not referring specifically to sign languages such as Auslan or BSL. Auslan and BSL are not in any way ‘easier’ or less complex than spoken languages. Rather, we argue that the broader implementation, integration and normalisation of bimodality may foster a more conducive environment for those with other forms of communication disabilities. Having some knowledge of sign language may make it more accessible for people to use other forms of signed language to facilitate communication.

There is an additional key difference that makes it more just to learn a sign language than the languages of other marginalised linguistic minorities. Simply put, it is possible for someone who speaks French to learn how to speak English. Although there may be barriers for many people to learn another language (including, for example, access to educational resources and/or time to learn), and this should certainly be taken into consideration, second language learning is still generally possible. It is very difficult or impossible for someone who is profoundly deaf to communicate verbally in English or comprehend spoken English, particularly if they have not learnt to do so at a young age or prior to hearing loss. Communication in writing is not sufficient compensation. The language barrier is one of function and cannot be overcome by the deaf party learning another language. Thus, it is the onus of those who speak English to learn the most effective language with which to communicate—that is, sign language.

The benefits to deaf people do not just extend to being able to access more goods and services directly. Even with widespread integration of sign language into a curriculum, there will remain many hearing people who require an interpreter when communicating with deaf people. Deaf people have a right to communicate through an interpreter, particularly when it comes to vital services such as medical care. There are a limited number of sign language interpreters, and more are needed. In Australia, with the recent introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), the demand has increased and it is a matter of justice for this demand to be met (Campbell 2018 ). Three out of five children under 12 living with a communication disability, including deafness, have unmet needs for formal communication assistance (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2017a ). Similarly, a 2017 government review found that there is a significant shortage of interpreters in the UK, with only 908 registered sign language interpreters in the entire UK (Department of Work & Pensions 2017 ). Integrating sign language into school curriculums will increase the exposure of young people to sign language, and may influence the number of those who choose to become interpreters. There is also the risk that speech pathology services may deteriorate in quality due to the increase in demand caused by the NDIS (Health Workforce Australia 2014 ), and so the ability to use a non-oral language to communicate may become even more important.

It is important that the training and work of skilled and certified sign language interpreters would remain essential, even if there were more widespread knowledge of sign language. Some knowledge of a language would not be sufficient to provide translation services in an ad-hoc fashion in the context of medical care, education, or public events. A skilled interpreter would absolutely be required in many situations. There is the risk that some may overestimate their ability to communicate in sign language and thus counterproductively impair effective communication. However, in small daily tasks where an interpreter is unlikely to be resourced, some knowledge of a language—such as numbers, and common words—would facilitate effective communication.

A greater emphasis on learning sign language at schools can also serve to rectify historical injustices. The Milan conference of 1880 solidified the teaching of the oralist tradition and greatly discouraged the use of sign languages in deaf education (Moores 2010 ). This has had profound impacts on deaf pedagogy and the growth and development of sign languages. For a long time, sign languages were not seen as legitimate languages. Although the teaching of sign language in schools cannot rectify the harms already done to those who were unable to fully master, learn, or communicate in the most appropriate language for their needs, it can go some way to legitimising sign language as a valuable form of communication that should be encouraged.

Another justice-based reason to prioritise teaching sign language over other languages is that it would enable countries such as Australia and the UK to fulfil their obligations under The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which was ratified in 2009 by both Australia and the UK (Australian Law Reform Commission n.d.; Fraser Butlin 2011 ). By ratifying the CRPD, these governments imposed on themselves several obligations in relation to sign language including:

Facilitating the learning of sign language and the promotion of the linguistic identity of the deaf community; Taking appropriate measures to employ teachers, including teachers with disabilities, who are qualified in sign language and/or Braille, and to train professionals and staff who work at all levels of education.

Given the lack of easy access to sign language education, there is an imperative on these governments to undertake more drastic means to increase the uptake of Auslan or BSL. Making sign languages compulsory in schools would be the most effective way to discharge their obligations in relation to the CRPD.

Amongst all this, there is the question as to whether the teaching of sign language will come at a cost to the individual. If it does, then this must be weighed against the benefits to others who are currently worse off or marginalised (i.e., the deaf). This cost to the individual student may be the provision of sign language education at the expense of another language that it is more in the student’s interests to learn, and that it may reduce the frequency of other forms of bilingualism on a population level. If this cost is significant (i.e. it affects many students), then this is reason to reconsider our contention. However, we do not believe that a policy of compulsory sign language education will make a large number of students or society worse off, at least in Australia and the United Kingdom.

Firstly, as of the 2016 Census, 21% of Australians speak a language other than English at home (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2017b ). However, less than 10% of students learn language to a Year 12 level (and this includes those who are already native language speakers) (Mayfield 2017 ). This suggests that most of those who speak a second language do not learn it at school. In addition, schools frequently offer multiple languages, so that students can continue to pursue learning several languages. We accept that in the event that a school only has the resources to teach one language, there may be considerations for an exception to making sign language education available if there is another language with a greater claim to be prioritised in a particular context. Depending on regional context, there may be a case for another language to be prioritised along with, or instead of, sign language. For example, if there is an area in an English-speaking country with a high number of unilingual Spanish speakers, and resources or individual capacity are not available to facilitate learning English (including resources such as a person’s time or capacity), then Spanish has a strong case to be prioritised alongside (or instead of) sign language. Additionally, there might be reasons to promote the teaching of Indigenous languages over sign language in certain areas, to promote the continued survival of particular cultures.

These reasons stem from the same considerations of justice we have outlined earlier. However, we do not believe that exceptions such as these need to be widespread. This is because when we are addressing prioritisation of sign language education, the cost should be considered within the context of the whole curriculum rather than only the languages curriculum. We do not believe that generally, making sign language a necessary part of the curriculum need be an either/or proposition; there will be ways to implement sign language education without seriously impacting the provision of other second languages. For example, for schools with extremely limited resources or very low enrolments, an external sign language educational course could be established within the overall public school system, and students could be incentivised to attend.

Secondly, sign language is unique in a certain respect; most deaf children are born to hearing parents (Mitchell and Karchmer 2004 ), and so parents will often learn sign language (if they do at all) alongside the child whose native language it is likely to be. Children who are deaf do not have the opportunity to learn a language at home in the same way as many second language speakers. Therefore, the school is a key nexus for the spread of languages such as Auslan or BSL. There is much to suggest that language education in general is in serious need of investment,but there is also a strong argument that any attempts to overhaul or prioritise language education curriculums should focus on sign language(s). Even basic communication skills in sign language, rather than fluency, may have an important impact on society.

4 Identity, Deaf culture, and language

There is significant tension between those who view deafness as something to be ‘fixed’, and those who view it as the basis for a rich cultural tradition (capital-D ‘Deaf’). This tension is exemplified in the debate around cochlear implants. Cochlear implants enable children with hearing loss to hear, with varying degrees of efficacy. It is generally encouraged to have cochlear implants implanted in children while they are very young, due to the sensitive period and neural plasticity that impacts their acquisition of oral communication (Tomblin et al. 2005 ). Implanting very young children with cochlear implants is done so that they grow up accustomed to the sensory input provided and more adequately adjust to oral communication methods.

However, some members of the Deaf community do not view cochlear implants as a positive development for deaf children. Rather, they view the advent of cochlear implants as facilitating a form of cultural erasure or ethnocide (Sparrow 2010 ). Deaf children undergoing cochlear implant surgery are thereafter generally raised in the ‘oralist’ tradition, where a strong emphasis is made on acquiring and practicing the skill of oral communication. This is at odds with a tradition more in line with the cultural model, which places an emphasis on sign language as a means of communication. Parents of children with cochlear implants have been discouraged by practitioners from signing with their children, with sign language viewed as a kind of ‘crutch’ that discourages effective oral communication (Humphries et al. 2017 ). Deaf children raised in an oralist tradition, with its strong emphasis on oral communication, are thus likely to learn sign language later in life, if they do at all. This may impact on their communication skills, their sense of identity, and their capacity to sign. Most deaf children are born to hearing parents (Mitchell and Karchmer 2004 ), and it is likely that hearing parents in general would wish their child to share their mode of communication—that is, oral language. This means that they may prioritise an oralist approach to what may be the detriment for the child.

Outcomes from cochlear implants vary greatly depending on the degree and nature of hearing loss (Cosetti and Waltzman 2012 ; Fontenot et al. 2018 ) and timing of implant (Dettman et al. 2016 ), and many children with cochlear implants do not attain the same level of spoken language outcomes as their non-deaf peers (Geers et al. 2009 ). Therefore, it would seem to remain beneficial on an individual level for children with cochlear implants to learn sign language. There is also, again, the level of group benefit. If there are fewer deaf people or people who view themselves as Deaf, the concern is that Deaf culture will lose many (potential) members. This sort of decrease in numbers of a cultural group is, naturally, generally seen as a negative by members of that culture who value its continued existence. Therefore, it would similarly be beneficial to a specific group of people (the culturally Deaf) that sign language be normalised and more widely taught and accessible, particularly to those who may otherwise have been discouraged from using it (deaf or hard-of-hearing people raised in an oralist tradition).

Much could be written on this source of disagreement between medical and cultural or social models of disability. However, this will not be explored at length here. It is sufficient to recognise that the Deaf community has a strong claim that their culture and practices are threatened by an emphasis on oral communication that is facilitated by the increased use of cochlear implants. However, there is concurrently a strong claim that children who are born deaf have the right to have access to the faculty of hearing if it is possible for them to do so (Byrd et al. 2011 ). It has been stated that cochlear implants provide the child with more of an ‘open future’ (Nunes 2001 ). Although the choice has been made by the parents to provide the deaf child with a degree of hearing, the child can later exercise that choice to reject the implant and the hearing abilities it provides. However, the reverse is not as true, as the older a child is when they receive a cochlear implant the less likely they are to effectively acquire oral communication (Boons et al. 2012 ). Therefore, providing young children with a cochlear implant may provide them with an increased range of options when making their life plans, if it is effective. Many culturally Deaf parents are now choosing cochlear implants for their children and raising them in a bimodal bilingual tradition (Mitchiner 2015 ).

It is important here not to assume that a deaf child would automatically be in favour of the use of a cochlear implant. Although teenagers with cochlear implants may generally view them positively (Wheeler et al. 2007 ), there are a number of cases where a cochlear implant may be rejected. This can be because the hearing facilitated by the cochlear implant is so poor as to be more of a hindrance than a help, dislike or pain associated with the sensation of hearing provided by the implant, difficulties with the extensive speech therapy generally required after cochlear implant surgery, or a rejection of the oralist tradition emblematised by the cochlear implant and concomitantly, an embracement of the Deaf identity (Watson and Gregory 2005 ). There are good reasons for the latter; involvement with the Deaf community has a positive impact on the mental health of deaf people (Fellinger et al. 2012 ). These may be valid and sensible reasons for an autonomous agent to reject the use of the cochlear implant in favour of their natural state of deafness.

However, while the decision to choose even a modicum of hearing over complete deafness is seen as the ‘obvious’ choice by hearing members of society, the converse choice to embrace deafness or Deafness is less understood and not necessarily seen as a reasonable choice to be supported. It is difficult to see how this choice between ‘hearing’ and ‘Deafness’ can be made in an autonomous fashion if the alternative option to oral culture—Deafness—is not sufficiently supported or validated by society. If a deaf person has not learnt sign language, how can it reasonably be said that they can make an autonomous and informed choice to embrace a Deaf identity with the ease that would have been provided to them if they had been raised in a manualist tradition? The debate may continue regarding the education of deaf children in their early years (a harm reduction approach would advocate for not depriving young deaf children of sign language regardless of cochlear implant status (Humphries et al. 2012 )), but at least if all children learn sign language in school, this will allow children full access to both worlds and facilitate fully autonomous choice later in life. All children who have difficulties with hearing will be able to make an informed and autonomous choice about whether they identify as deaf, or Deaf, even if they have been raised with a focus on oralism, because access to a key part of Deaf culture—the language—will be normalised and made accessible to them by default. Importantly, it will also encourage a wider intercultural understanding, and this will reduce some of the difficulties associated with embracing Deafness, decreasing some of the pressures that may compel someone to make the alternative choice when they would prefer not to.

In addition to the direct benefits to the deaf child and family gained through significantly increased availability of sign language, there will also be broader cultural benefits to the Deaf community. If the number of people who have familiarity with sign language greatly increases, there will be advantages beyond the direct facilitation of communication. Even if students at school only learn rudimentary levels of sign language, the availability of and increased familiarity with sign language may have a positive impact on the wellbeing of the members of the Deaf community. This would be because increased availability of sign language could make Deaf people feel more included and welcomed in society. It would also facilitate societal familiarity with Deaf culture and validate deaf needs amongst hearing peers. If children lack familiarity with deafness and the needs of deaf people, they are more likely to view deafness negatively and be less likely to accept deaf peers (Batten et al. 2013 ). Therefore, even if sign language education does not produce widespread fluency, increased familiarity with elements of Deaf culture, such as sign language, are likely to have a positive impact on the Deaf community.

5 Conclusion

There are a number of reasons why there is a strong moral claim for sign language to be compulsory, or at least highly prioritised, in the school curriculum. It would benefit individuals, and it would also benefit groups. The benefit to the deaf and/or culturally Deaf is a matter of justice, as the cost to the individual and other groups would be slight. Indeed, learning a sign language may provide hearing children with unique benefits. People living with a communication disability are also significantly marginalised, economically disadvantaged and have unmet needs for assistance; widespread knowledge of sign languages would ameliorate some of these associated negative impacts. It would also enable deaf or hard-of-hearing people to make an autonomous choice between hearing culture and Deaf culture, or embrace both.

As noted previously, this argument presents a moral perspective rather than a specific policy proposal. Here, we have outlined the ethical reasons why such policy proposals should be pursued and prioritised. In order to translate this into more concrete plans of action, extensive consultation would be required with the Deaf community, as well as service providers, teachers, and other education professionals.

It is a responsibility of society to create an environment that is most conducive to the welfare of everyone, including deaf people. Part of this process would be ensuring that as many people as possible can communicate in the most appropriate languages for the needs of this community, which are sign languages. The most effective way to ensure that as many people as possible would communicate in a sign language would be to integrate sign languages into the school curriculum.

Two other view of distributive justice are egalitarianism—which aims for a distribution in which all are equal; and utilitarianism, in which resources should be distributed to provide the greatest benefits to the greatest number. Both are subject to serious objections as theories of justice. For example see Crisp, Roger. 2003. ‘Equality, Priority, and Compassion’ Ethics vol. 113, Issue 4: 745–763 and Dworkin, Ronald, 2000,  Sovereign Virtue: the theory and practice of equality , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Alladi, S., T.H. Bak, V. Duggirala, B. Surampudi, M. Shailaja, A.K. Shukla, S. Kaul, et al. 2013. Bilingualism delays age at onset of dementia, independent of education and immigration status. Neurology 81 (22): 1938.

Article   Google Scholar  

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. 2011. Foreign language enrollments in K–12 public schools: Are students prepared for a global society? Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/ReportSummary2011.pdf .

Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2017a. Australians living with communication disability. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from https://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/773675A7F2B7400ACA2581E80011A786/$File/australians%20living%20with%20communication%20disability.pdf .

Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2017b. Census reveals a fast changing, culturally diverse nation. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/lookup/Media%20Release3 .

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2018. Older Australia at a glance. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/older-people/older-australia-at-a-glance/contents/demographics-of-older-australians/australia-s-changing-age-and-gender-profile .

Australian Law Reform Commission. n.d. Equality, capacity and disability in commonwealth laws: Legislative and regulatory framework. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/equality-capacity-and-disability-commonwealth-laws/legislative-and-regulatory-framework .

Baines, D., N. Patterson, and S. Austen. 2010. An investigation into the length of hospital stay for deaf mental health service users. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 15 (2): 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enq003 .

Batten, G., P.M. Oakes, and T. Alexander. 2013. Factors associated with social interactions between deaf children and their hearing peers: A systematic literature review. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 19 (3): 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/ent052 .

Bauman, H., L. Dirksen, and J.J. Murray. 2014. Deaf gain: An introduction. In Deaf gain: Raising the stakes for human diversity , ed. H. Bauman, L. Dirksen, and J.J. Murray. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Google Scholar  

Beecher, L., and A. Childre. 2012. Increasing literacy skills for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: Effects of integrating comprehensive reading instruction with sign language. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities 47 (4): 487–501.

Bettger, J.G., K. Emmorey, S.H. McCullough, and U. Bellugi. 1997. Enhanced facial discrimination: Effects of experience with American sign language. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 2 (4): 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.deafed.a014328 .

Bialystok, E., and F.I.M. Craik. 2010. Cognitive and linguistic processing in the bilingual mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science 19 (1): 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409358571 .

Boons, T., J.P.L. Brokx, I. Dhooge, J.H.M. Frijns, L. Peeraer, A. Vermeulen, A. van Wieringen, et al. 2012. Predictors of spoken language development following pediatric cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing 33 (5): 617–639.

Browne, R. 2016. Childbirth not the same as ‘buying a bag of chips’: Disability discrimination case. The Sydney Morning Herald . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.smh.com.au/national/childbirth-not-the-same-as-buying-a-bag-of-chips-disability-discrimination-case-20160823-gqzbs1.html .

Bryan, K., J. Freer, and C. Furlong. 2010. Language and communication difficulties in juvenile offenders. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 42 (5): 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/13682820601053977 .

Busby, E. 2018. GCSE in British Sign Language may be introduced after deaf boy’s campaign. The Independent . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/british-sign-launguage-gcse-government-campaign-daniel-jillings-department-education-a8474376.html .

Byrd, S., A.G. Shuman, S. Kileny, and P.R. Kileny. 2011. The right not to hear: The ethics of parental refusal of hearing rehabilitation. The Laryngoscope 121 (8): 1800–1804. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.21886 .

Campbell, C. 2018. Auslan interpreter shortage ‘getting worse with NDIS rollout’. ABC . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-11/auslan-interpreter-shortage-worsening-in-sa/9974142.

Carlson, S.M., and A.N. Meltzoff. 2008. Bilingual experience and executive functioning in young children. Developmental Science 11 (2): 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00675.x .

Casey, S., K. Emmorey, and H. Larrabee. 2012. The effects of learning American Sign Language on co-speech gesture. Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) 15 (4): 677–686. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728911000575 .

Cicero, M.T. 1933. On the Nature of the Gods (trans: Rackham, H.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Colzato, L.S., M.T. Bajo, W. van den Wildenberg, D. Paolieri, S. Nieuwenhuis, W. La Heij, and B. Hommel. 2008. How does bilingualism improve executive control? A comparison of active and reactive inhibition mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 34 (2): 302–312.

Cosetti, M.K., and S.B. Waltzman. 2012. Outcomes in cochlear implantation: Variables affecting performance in adults and children. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 45 (1): 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2011.08.023 .

Cox, S.R., T.H. Bak, M. Allerhand, P. Redmond, J.M. Starr, I.J. Deary, and S.E. MacPherson. 2016. Bilingualism, social cognition and executive functions: A tale of chickens and eggs. Neuropsychologia 91: 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.08.029 .

Dalzell, S. 2016. Auslan national curriculum for Australian schools hailed as ‘huge step’ for deaf community. ABC News . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-19/deaf-community-hails-school-rollout-of-auslan-curriculum/8132474 .

Daniels, M. 1994. The effect of sign language on hearing children’s language development. Communication Education 43 (4): 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529409378987 .

Daniels, M. 2004. Happy hands: The effect of ASL on hearing children’s literacy. Reading Research and Instruction 44 (1): 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388070409558422 .

Department of Work & Pensions. 2017. Market review of British Sign Language and communications provision for people who are deaf or have hearing loss . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/630960/government-response-market-review-of-bsl-and-communications-provision-for-people-who-are-deaf-or-have-hearing-loss.pdf .

Dettman, S.J., R.C. Dowell, D. Choo, W. Arnott, Y. Abrahams, A. Davis, R.J. Briggs, et al. 2016. Long-term communication outcomes for children receiving cochlear implants younger than 12 months: A multicenter study. Otology & Neurotology 37 (2): 82–95.

Elder, B.C., and M.A. Schwartz. 2018. Effective deaf access to justice. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 23 (4): 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eny023 .

Elliott, E.A., and A.M. Jacobs. 2013. Facial expressions, emotions, and sign languages. Frontiers in Psychology 4: 115. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00115 .

Emmorey, K., M.R. Giezen, and T.H. Gollan. 2016. Psycholinguistic, cognitive, and neural implications of bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 19 (2): 223–242. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728915000085 .

Emmorey, K., E. Klima, and G. Hickok. 1998. Mental rotation within linguistic and non-linguistic domains in users of American sign language. Cognition 68 (3): 221–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00054-7 .

Emmorey, K., S.M. Kosslyn, and U. Bellugi. 1993. Visual imagery and visual-spatial language: Enhanced imagery abilities in deaf and hearing ASL signers. Cognition 46 (2): 139–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(93)90017-P .

Fellinger, J., D. Holzinger, and R. Pollard. 2012. Mental health of deaf people. The Lancet 379 (9820): 1037–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61143-4 .

Fontenot, T.E., C.K. Giardina, M.T. Dillon, M.A. Rooth, H.F. Teagle, L.R. Park, D.C. Fitzpatrick, et al. 2018. Residual cochlear function in adults and children receiving cochlear implants: Correlations with speech perception outcomes. Ear and Hearing . https://doi.org/10.1097/aud.0000000000000630 .

Fortunato, S., F. Forli, V. Guglielmi, E. De Corso, G. Paludetti, S. Berrettini, and A.R. Fetoni. 2016. A review of new insights on the association between hearing loss and cognitive decline in ageing. Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica 36 (3): 155–166. https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-993 .

Fraser Butlin, S. 2011. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Does the Equality Act 2010 Measure up to UK International Commitments? Industrial Law Journal 40 (4): 428–438. https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwr015 .

Geers, A.E., J.S. Moog, J. Biedenstein, C. Brenner, and H. Hayes. 2009. Spoken language scores of children using cochlear implants compared to hearing age-mates at school entry. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 14 (3): 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enn046 .

Health Workforce Australia. 2014. Australia’s Health Workforce Series—Speech pathologists in focus. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from   http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/133228/20150419-0017/www.hwa.gov.au/sites/default/files/HWA_Speech_Pathologists_in_Focus_V1.pdf .

Hilchey, M.D., and R.M. Klein. 2011. Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 18 (4): 625–658. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0116-7 .

Hill, S., R. Wicks, L. Cook, C. Regan, S. Fleming, and S. Hards. 2017. What works: Hearing loss and employment. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/hearing-loss-what-works-guide-employment.pdf .

Hore, M. 2017. Call for sign language lessons in Vic schools. The Herald Sun . Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/sign-language-call-for-auslan-lessons-in-vic-schools/news-story/1d56f3adbac22448bf24ead546c12af3 .

Humphries, T., P. Kushalnagar, G. Mathur, D.J. Napoli, C. Padden, C. Rathmann, and S.R. Smith. 2012. Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches. Harm Reduction Journal 9: 16–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7517-9-16 .

Humphries, T., P. Kushalnagar, G. Mathur, D.J. Napoli, C. Padden, C. Rathmann, and S. Smith. 2017. Discourses of prejudice in the professions: The case of sign languages. Journal of Medical Ethics 43 (9): 648.

Jiang, J., J. Ouyang, and H. Lui. 2016. Can learning a foreign language foster analytic thinking? Evidence from Chinese EFL learners’ writings. PLoS ONE 11 (10): e0164448. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164448 .

Komesaroff, L. 2004. Allegations of unlawful discrimination in education: Parents taking their fight for Auslan to the courts. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 9 (2): 210–218.

Kuenburg, A., P. Fellinger, and J. Fellinger. 2016. Health care access among deaf people. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 21 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/env042 .

Lauchlan, F., M. Parisi, and R. Fadda. 2012. Bilingualism in Sardinia and Scotland: Exploring the cognitive benefits of speaking a ‘minority’ language. International Journal of Bilingualism 17 (1): 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911429622 .

Law, J., R. Rush, I. Schoon, and S. Parsons. 2009. Modeling developmental language difficulties from school entry into adulthood: Literacy, mental health, and employment outcomes. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 52 (6): 1401–1416. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0142) .

Long, R., and P. Bolton. 2016. Briefing paper: Language teaching in schools (England). (07388). House of Commons Library.

Make British Sign Language part of the National Curriculum. 2018. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/200000 .

Mayfield, T. 2017. Australia’s ‘spectacular’ failure in languages. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/australia-s-spectacular-failure-in-languages .

Meuris, K., B. Maes, and I. Zink. 2015. Teaching adults with intellectual disability manual signs through their support staff: A key word signing program. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 24 (3): 545–560. https://doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJSLP-14-0062 .

Mitchell, R.E., and M.A. Karchmer. 2004. Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies 4 (2): 138–163.

Mitchiner, J.C. 2015. Deaf parents of cochlear-implanted children: Beliefs on bimodal bilingualism. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 20 (1): 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enu028 .

Moores, D.F. 2010. Partners in progress: The 21st International Congress on Education of the Deaf and the Repudiation of the 1880 Congress of Milan. American Annals of the Deaf 155 (3): 309–310.

Moses, A.M., D.B. Golos, and C.M. Bennett. 2015. An alternative approach to early literacy: The effects of ASL in educational media on literacy skills acquisition for hearing children. Early Childhood Education Journal 43 (6): 485–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-015-0690-9 .

Napier, J., and A. McEwin. 2015. Do deaf people have the right to serve as jurors in Australia? Alternative Law Journal 40 (1): 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X1504000106 .

National Deaf Children’s Society. 2017. Right to Sign—British Sign Language in schools. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.buzz.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/JR1219-Right-To-Sign-Report-AW-WEB.pdf .

Nunes, R. 2001. Ethical dimension of paediatric cochlear implantation. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (4): 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011810303045 .

Office for National Statistics. 2017. National Population Projections: 2016-based statistical bulletin. Retrieved May 1, 2019 from  https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationprojections/bulletins/nationalpopulationprojections/2016basedstatisticalbulletin .

Oh, I.-H., J.H. Lee, D.C. Park, M. Kim, J.H. Chung, S.H. Kim, and S.G. Yeo. 2014. Hearing loss as a function of aging and diabetes mellitus: A cross sectional study. PLoS ONE 9 (12): e116161. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116161 .

Orton, J. 2016. Issues in Chinese language teaching in Australian schools. Chinese Education & Society 49 (6): 369–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10611932.2016.1283929 .

Parfit, D. 1997. Equality and priority. Ratio 10 (3): 202–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9329.00041 .

Perani, D., M. Farsad, T. Ballarini, F. Lubian, M. Malpetti, A. Fracchetti, J. Abutalebi, et al. 2017. The impact of bilingualism on brain reserve and metabolic connectivity in Alzheimer’s dementia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (7): 1690.

Perniss, P., A. Özyürek, and G. Morgan. 2015. the influence of the visual modality on language structure and conventionalization: Insights from sign language and gesture. Topics in Cognitive Science 7 (1): 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12127 .

Poarch, G.J., and E. Bialystok. 2015. Bilingualism as a model for multitasking. Developmental Review 35: 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.003 .

Rawls, J. 1999. A theory of justice . Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Romero Lauro, L.J., M. Crespi, C. Papagno, and C. Cecchetto. 2014. Making sense of an unexpected detrimental effect of sign language use in a visual task. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 19 (3): 358–365. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enu001 .

Rosen, R.S. 2010. American sign language curricula a review. Sign Language Studies 10 (3): 348–381.

Schoon, I., S. Parsons, R. Rush, and J. Law. 2010. Children’s language ability and psychosocial development: A 29-year follow-up study. Pediatrics 126 (1): e73.

Shook, A., and V. Marian. 2012. Bimodal bilinguals co-activate both languages during spoken comprehension. Cognition 124 (3): 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.05.014 .

Snow, P.C., and M.B. Powell. 2007. Oral language competence, social skills and high-risk boys: What are juvenile offenders trying to tell us? Children and Society 22 (1): 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2006.00076.x .

Sparrow, R. 2010. Implants and ethnocide: Learning from the cochlear implant controversy. Disability & Society 25 (4): 455–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687591003755849 .

Talbot, K.F., and R.H. Haude. 1993. The relation between sign language skill and spatial visualization ability: Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Perceptual and Motor Skills 77: 1387–1391. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1993.77.3f.1387 .

Tomblin, J.B., B.A. Barker, L.J. Spencer, X. Zhang, and B.J. Gantz. 2005. The effect of age at cochlear implant initial stimulation on expressive language growth in infants and toddlers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 48 (4): 853–867. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2005/059) .

Toth, A. 2009. Bridge of signs: Can sign language empower non-deaf children to triumph over their communication disabilities? American Annals of the Deaf 154 (2): 85–95.

van der Meer, L., D. Sutherland, M.F. O’Reilly, G.E. Lancioni, and J. Sigafoos. 2012. A further comparison of manual signing, picture exchange, and speech-generating devices as communication modes for children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 6 (4): 1247–1257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2012.04.005 .

Watson, L.M., and S. Gregory. 2005. Non-use of cochlear implants in children: Child and parent perspectives. Deafness & Education International 7 (1): 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1179/146431505790560482 .

Wheeler, A., S. Archbold, S. Gregory, and A. Skipp. 2007. Cochlear implants: The young people’s perspective. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 12 (3): 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enm018 .

Willoughby, L. 2011. Sign language users’ education and employment levels: Keeping pace with changes in the general Australian population? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 16 (3): 401–413.

Winn, S. 2007. Employment outcomes for people in Australia who are congenitally deaf: Has anything changed? American Annals of the Deaf 152 (4): 382–390.

Woumans, E.V.Y., P. Santens, A. Sieben, J.A.N. Versijpt, M. Stevens, and W. Duyck. 2015. Bilingualism delays clinical manifestation of Alzheimer’s disease. Bilingualism 18 (3): 568–574. https://doi.org/10.1017/s136672891400087x .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research conducted at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute was supported by the Victorian Government’s Operational Infrastructure Support Program. This work was also supported by the Wellcome Trust [203132]. This research was supported by the Research Training Program (RTP).

Funding was provided by Wellcome Trust (Grant No. 203132), State Government of Victoria, Operational Infrastructure Support Program, Department of Education and Training and Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Biomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, 50 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia

Hilary Bowman-Smart, Christopher Gyngell & Julian Savulescu

Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia

Hilary Bowman-Smart & Christopher Gyngell

Speech and Language Group, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, 50 Flemington Rd, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia

Angela Morgan

Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia

Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, St Ebbes St, Oxford, OX1 1PT, UK

Julian Savulescu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julian Savulescu .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bowman-Smart, H., Gyngell, C., Morgan, A. et al. The moral case for sign language education. Monash Bioeth. Rev. 37 , 94–110 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-019-00101-0

Download citation

Published : 23 November 2019

Issue Date : December 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-019-00101-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sign language
• Deaf culture
• Language education
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors Essay

Formative evaluation, summative evaluation, assumptions, return on investment.

The most important element of any training is evaluation of results. Not only does it provide an objective indicator of the efficiency of learning, but it also highlights areas of improvement for both the instructor and the learner. Evaluation is important for learning any competency, and acquiring a sign language is no exception. First-line supervisors have to work in loud conditions when normal communication is constrained. In order to maintain communicative clarity, supervisors need to learn the American sign language (ASL). Understanding how to properly evaluate learners’ comprehension of training is essential in ascertaining the most effective ways of increasing the return on training investment.

Formative evaluation is a type of assessment that transpires during learning. Its purpose is to explore how a learner acquires and processes new information. The instructor’s role is to identify the learners’ patterns of thinking and comprehension and correct them to increase the efficiency of training (Wilson et al., 2020). An important characteristic of the summative assessment is that it does not take into account the overall success of learning, instead evaluating the learning competency itself.

A major specific of assessing sign language competency is the visual nature of this language. Unlike spoken languages, which rely on hearing and speaking to convey meaning, ASL is predominantly visual (Rojas-Murillo et al., 2021). Learners have to correctly interpret gestures and nonverbally communicate without relying on their ears and voice. Unlike people with hearing impairment, who do not rely on sounds, first-line supervisors usually have no such issues. As a result, they can use ineffective techniques to learn ASL, because perceiving information via spoken words is their habitual behavior.

There are three assessment tools that can accentuate how effective trainees are at acquiring the sign language. The first is to instruct learners to use concept maps when learning a new topic. Research indicates that by looking at concept maps, it is possible to understand the thinking process of learners and correct it (Ellozy & Mostafa, 2010). The second tool is observation of trainees’ behavior during intensive learning activities. Specifically, it is important to observe the number of times a learner asks to clarify the instruction and make appropriate corrections (Dostal et al., 2021). The third tool is identify how much attention learners give to key visual areas, such as the position of the palm and use of fingers (Rojas-Murillo et al., 2021). The more diluted trainee’s attention is, the less effective their comprehension is.

Summative assessment is a type of evaluation transpiring at the end of a lesson or a training session. Its purpose is to ascertain how successful the learner has been at comprehending the new information. Summative evaluation provides insight into the overall efficiency of learning as opposed to the quality of trainees’ comprehension. The reason for this distinction is that it is possible to quickly memorize a certain piece of information, yet fail at transforming it in knowledge and skills.

Kirkpatrick’s model is the most appropriate framework for applying summative assessment in practice. There are four stages in this model: reactions, learning outcomes, behavioral change, and results (Wilson et al., 2020). Reactions pertain to learners’ level of acceptance of the training program. Learning outcomes allow instructors to assess how successful learners are at meeting the established educational objectives. Behavioral change highlights whether trainees have implemented their new skills and knowledge at work. Results allow the instructor to compare the learners’ knowledge, skills, and behavior before and after the completion of a training program.

Kirkpatrick’s model can also be applied to the analysis of the effectiveness of a sign language training program. Reactions may provide insight how accepting learners are of a certain educational method, such as concept maps, which may actually repel some trainees because of the workload required to make them (Ellozy & Mostafa, 2010). Learning outcomes would represent the level of trainee’s comprehension of the meanings created by palms and fingers (Rojas-Murillo et al., 2021). Behavioral changes would take the form of the ability of trainees to understand the sing language and communicate using it (Dostal et al., 2021). Results will inform management how much supervisors use the sign language at work after the training in comparison to their communication before it.

In order to calculate the return on investment, a number of assumptions have to be made regarding the cost of training and risks. The first one is that the inability to communicate using the sign language is the reason behind many accidents involving first-line workers. The second assumption is that the annual fee paid to the training provider is $3,500, while travel costs for trainees are $6,500 (Andrews & Laing, 2018, p. 6). The second assumption is that annual plant maintenance costs $1,000,000 a year. The final assumption is that once supervisors learn the sign language, the cost of maintenance is lowered by $100,000.

The ultimate goal of any organization is to maximize benefits while reducing costs. Financing employee training is a significant investment, which has to pay out in the long-term perspective. The formula for return on investment is ROI = Benefits/Costs. The total cost including both trainer fees and travel costs would be $10,000, which is calculated by adding $3,500 to $6,500. Combined with the $1,000,000 required for annual plant maintenance, the total cost is $1,010,000. In the year, where training is scheduled the benefits are $100,000. If a company continues to schedule training courses each year, the benefits will outweigh the costs in ten years. The numerical indicator of such a change would be the value of 1 achieved when the benefits are divided by costs.

The first change that could improve ROI is selecting a training provider that is located in closer proximity to minimize travel costs. The second change is to observe the reactions of trainees to mind maps – if developing concept maps takes more time than actually learning the sign language, they should be replaced with a more traditional material. The third change is to add smaller summative assessments during the training, which could take the form of quick evaluations of learners’ comprehension of the material at the beginning of each lesson (Dostal et al., 2021). Combined, these measures can reduce the costs and improve the quality of training.

Altogether, it should be evident that summative and formative evaluations are not exclusive and can be used in combination. Some learning techniques may cause negative reactions in trainees, requiring instructors to use a different assessment tool. Meanwhile, regular assessment on a smaller scale may help instructors understand how quickly trainees progress in learning the sign language. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that supervisors can communicate using only gestures at work, rather than configuring the most coherent assessment of a sign language training program.

Andrews, P., & Laing, G. (2018). Evaluating the outcomes of a training program through an ROI evaluation: A case study. e-Journal of Social & Behavioural Research in Business , 9 (3), 1-9.

Dostal, H. M., Scott, J. A., Weir, J., Kang, K. Y., Amadi-Ihebuzor, C., & Bernard, T. A. (2021). Literacy development at camp: Leveraging language models . The Reading Teacher , 74 (5), 539-547. Web.

Ellozy, A. R., & Mostafa, H. M. (2010). Making learning visible: Using e-maps to enhance critical reading skills. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching , 6 (3), 634-646.

Rojas-Murillo, S., Pancho, A. B., Cariaso, M. J., Speicher, A., Mato, A., & Segal, O. (2021). Visual learning curves for American sign language (ASL) alphabet . International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics , 81 , 1-15. Web.

Wilson, M., Sahay, S., & Calhoun, C. (2020). Addie explained: Evaluation . aritzhaupt.com. Web.

• The Factors in Managerial Work
• Sleep-Wake, Eating, and Personality Disorders Treatment
• Summative and Formative Assessment
• Australian English Lessons Planning Rationale
• Transactional Writing and Writing Teaching Strategies in Grade Six
• The Lack of Self-Confidence to Speak English in Language Learners
• Pragmatic Competence in Learning English as Foreign Language
• To Grammar or Not to Grammar: Teaching Grammar in Context
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, January 16). How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-to-teach-basics-of-sign-language-to-first-line-supervisors/

"How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors." IvyPanda , 16 Jan. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/how-to-teach-basics-of-sign-language-to-first-line-supervisors/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors'. 16 January.

IvyPanda . 2024. "How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors." January 16, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-to-teach-basics-of-sign-language-to-first-line-supervisors/.

1. IvyPanda . "How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors." January 16, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-to-teach-basics-of-sign-language-to-first-line-supervisors/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "How to Teach Basics of Sign Language to First-Line Supervisors." January 16, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/how-to-teach-basics-of-sign-language-to-first-line-supervisors/.

Essays on Sign Language

Faq about sign language.

Sign Language Studies

ISSN 0302-1475

Editors: Erin Wilkinson , University of New Mexico Pilar Piñar , Gallaudet University

SPECIAL ISSUE

The first wave of sign language research, selected memoirs.

Guest Editors: 

Penny Boyes Braem

Virginia volterra, robbin battison, nancy frishberg, carol padden.

"A truly  stunning  collection from the who's who of early sign language research, and a very valuable gift to anyone wanting to learn about the sign language research community."  — Ceil Lucas, Professor Emerita, Gallaudet University

From the Introduction

"Fifty years after William Stokoe founded Sign Language Studies ( SLS ) in 1972, we have reason to give thanks for a half-century of research and discovery, and to reflect on its origins. Because much has changed since those early days. And many stories have not yet been told. . . . The resulting collection serves as historical documentation of how a new research field is born. We believe that the personal details and variety of motivations and settings will interest a wide range of readers—not only the veterans of the field who will recognize their pioneering friends, but also younger researchers seeking insights into the roots of sign language linguistics and related fields."

This special issue is included as part of the SLS subscription. 

If you would like to purchase a digital copy ($24/individuals) , please click here.

Aims & Scope Issues Submissions Manuscript Submission Guidelines Book Review Guidelines Special Issue Proposals Subscribe Purchase Digital Content The Editors Customer Service

Aims & Scope

Founded by William C. Stokoe, known by many as the father of the linguistics of American Sign Language, this quarterly journal presents a singular forum for groundbreaking research on the language, culture, history, and literature of signing communities and signed languages. The first journal published in the field, SLS continues to offer fresh content with a uniquely international, multidisciplinary focus.

" “Time and again, Sign Language Studies features some of the best articles in the field. The editing is solid, the issues are always pertinent and whether about a sign language of the world, or about the people who use it, the topics are invariably interesting.” —Carol Padden, Professor, Department of Communication, University of California, San Diego "

A common misconception about sign language is that it is universal. Check out our #SLStudies map to see the many different sign languages that are used across the globe! These are the sign languages that have been represented in Sign Language Studies .

New Features in Sign Language Studies

An annual list of completed sign language or sign language-related dissertations and master’s theses.

A section called In Brief , which features short pieces that are 3–4 pages in length, written by undergraduate and graduate students, that are not yet full articles but contain interesting information that should be shared.

History of SLS

William C. Stokoe began publication of Sign Language Studies in 1972. With the encouragement of Thomas Sebeok, Stokoe created this seminal journal as an outgrowth of his pioneering studies of the structure of American Sign Language and the dynamics of Deaf communities. From then until now, SLS has presented a unique forum for revolutionary papers on signed languages and other related disciplines, including linguistics, anthropology, semiotics, deaf studies, deaf history, and deaf literature.

After a three-year hiatus, Sign Language Studies commenced publication in the fall of 2000. The new editor was David F. Armstrong, an anthropologist and author of Original Signs: Gesture, Sign, and the Sources of Language and coauthor of Gesture and the Nature of Language with Stokoe and Sherman Wilcox. A long-time collaborator with Stokoe, Armstrong became a member of the SLS editorial board in 1986.

David Armstrong stepped down as editor at the end of 2009 and was succeeded by Ceil Lucas, Professor Emerita, Gallaudet University, who is the coauthor and editor of many Gallaudet University Press books, including Linguistics of American Sign Language and What’s Your Sign for PIZZA? , and is the founding editor of the Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities series. She is also the author of a memoir, How I Got Here .

In 2022, the editorship moved to Erin Wilkinson and Pilar Piñar.

Back to top

Table of contents and article abstracts for current and previous issues are available at Project MUSE . All issues are fully searchable.

Search Project MUSE®

Publisher Limited To: Gallaudet University Press

Journal Limited To: Sign Language Studies

https://muse.jhu.edu

Submissions

Articles, book reviews, and other pieces.

Sign Language Studies invites submissions of high-quality papers focusing on research relevant to signed languages and signing communities from around the world. Topics of interest include linguistics, corpora development, anthropology, deaf culture, deaf history, and deaf literature. We are also interested in ongoing research reports, shorter pieces that are not full-fledged articles but contain information that should be shared with signing communities, and book and media reviews.

Articles and essays are welcomed from all countries. All submissions must be in English. Authors should submit papers electronically to [email protected] and [email protected] .

Original scholarly articles and essays relevant to signed languages and signing communities.

Word count limit: 8,000 to 10,000 words, including references

Ongoing Research Reports

Status reports of research being done on signed languages or issues relevant to signing communities.

Word count limit: 3,000 to 6,000 words

Pieces that are shorter in length (can be written by undergraduate and graduate students) and are not yet full articles but contain interesting information that should be shared.

Word count limit: 750 to 3,000 words

Book Reviews

Reviews of relevant books.

Word count limit: 600 to 1,000 words

Every fall, SLS publishes a list of doctoral dissertations related to signed language and signing communities that have been successfully defended that year. Please send citations for dissertations you’d like to see included in the list by early August in the following format:

Author. Year of Defense. Title. University. Database where the dissertation can be found or ProQuest order number if available.

Note: Please do not send full text of the dissertation.

Manuscript Submission Guidelines

A manuscript will be accepted for review on the condition that it has not been published or is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Once an article is accepted, the author will be asked to assign copyright to Gallaudet University Press in order to protect the article from copyright infringement. Gallaudet University Press will not refuse any reasonable request by authors for permission to reproduce their contribution to Sign Language Studies .

All articles will undergo peer review, be professionally edited and typeset, and be distributed in print and electronic format.

Length. Manuscripts can be between 8,000–10,000 words including the references. After an article has been accepted, the author will be asked to send the final version as an attachment to an email with the article saved in Word or Rich Text Format.

Format. The title of the article/essay and the author’s name, affiliation, and contact information (including email address) should be on page 1. This is the only page where the author’s name should appear.

Headings. Please do not number your headings (i.e., “3.1. Data Collection”). Also, please do not include cross-referrals to sections in your article's text (i.d., “see section 4.1.2”). If this appears, it will be removed during copy editing. Please do indicate head levels by either formatting them differently (bold, all caps for first-level heads, bold, initial cap/lowercase for second-level heads, bold italics for third-level heads) or by adding bracketed codes:

• <1> = first-level heads
• <2> = second-level heads
• <3> = third-level heads
• <4> = fourth-level heads.

Tables and Figures. All tables and figures should be mentioned in the text, should include a title or caption, and should be numbered consecutively. Tables should not be embedded in the running text but appended at the end of the article. Figures should not be embedded in the file with the text. They should be submitted as separate files in the format in which they were created. Do not embed the figures in a Word document. All figures should be in reproducible form, with type that is clearly legible at a reduction of 50 percent.

Endnotes and Footnotes. Footnotes should be used sparingly and should be numbered consecutively. Endnotes should also be numbered consecutively and should follow the form detailed in The Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) , 17th ed. Endnotes should be placed together in a section following the main body of the text.

References. All sources cited in the text should appear in the reference list at the end of the chapter. Text citations should include the author, year of publication, and page number, where applicable: (Wilcox 2000, 120). Books and articles listed in the references should take the following form:

Brueggemann, B. J. 1999. Lend Me Your Ear: Rhetorical Constructions of Deafness. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Winston, E., and C. Monikowski. 2000. Discourse Mapping: Developing Textual Coherence Skills in Interpreters. In Innovative Practices for Teaching Sign Language Interpreters , ed. C. Roy, 15–66. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Stokoe, W. C. 2000. Commentary. Sign Language Studies 1(3): 5–10.

For other types of citations, consult The CMOS , 17th ed.

Permissions. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reprint tables, figures, illustrations, and large excerpts. Copies of the permission letters must accompany the manuscript.

Proofs. One set of proofs will be sent to the lead author. Authors are responsible for proofreading and returning the proofs within three days of receipt.

Graphics. Please submit all graphics in a size that is clearly legible when reduced 50 percent. Please note that all graphics must be in grayscale or black and white. Color graphics are not acceptable. Line art should be saved in files separate from the article, preferably in Adobe Illustrator .eps files. Photographs should be scanned as TIFF or PNG files—do not send them as JPEGs.

Please make a separate file for each graphic submitted. Do not embed the graphic in a Word document (this reduces resolution and will affect how well the graphic appears on the printed page). When scanning line art or halftones for submission, please scan to 300 dpi. This is the minimum resolution required for good printing results.

Book Review Guidelines

Sign Language Studies considers the following genres for book reviews:

• Scholarly monographs and contributed volumes on sign language linguistics and/or sociolinguistics, deaf history, deaf education, deaf studies, deaf literature studies, sociology, anthropology, psychology

• Nonfction—memoirs, biographies, autobiographies

• Fiction and poetry

• Alternative media—videotexts, online multimedia texts

• Double-spaced 12 pt. Times Roman text.

• Length: 800–1,200 words (does not include references).

• Include a one-sentence author biography for the reviewer.

Example: Christina Young is an associate professor in the Department of History at the University of Virginia.

Bibliographic Citation:

The book review should begin with a bibliographic citation of the book under review following the format below:

Author/Editor’s name(s). (Translator’s name, if required). Book title. Publisher (Page count, price, ISBN, additional format, price, ISBN). URL or DOI if available.

Example: Mary H. Wright. Sounds Like Home: Growing up Black and Deaf in the South. Twentieth Anniversary Edition. Gallaudet University Press (282 pages, $32.95, paperback: ISBN 978-1-944838-58-4, ebook: ISBN 978-1-944838-59-1).

Writing a scholarly book review requires careful analysis, critical thinking, and the ability to communicate your thoughts and opinions effectively. Here is a step-by-step guide:

1.  Read the book thoroughly: Begin by reading the book from start to finish. Take notes while reading, paying attention to the main arguments, evidence, and the author's writing style. It's essential to have a clear understanding of the book's content. Questions to ask while reading:

• What is the author's main argument that they want to get across?

• What are the smaller arguments the author argues contribute to the main one? Are you persuaded that these more specific reasons support the author's wider thesis? If not, why not? (this is also an excellent time to think about any key terms the author uses or invents to discuss a specific problem or occurrence. How do they improve upon what we already know?)

2. Understand the book's context: Research the author's background, their previous works, and the broader context in which the book was written. Consider the book's genre, its significance within the field, and any relevant historical, cultural, or social aspects that may inform your review.

3. Structure your review: Start by providing a concise summary of the book, highlighting its main themes, arguments, and contributions. Then, organize your review by discussing specific aspects of the book in separate sections, such as the author's methodology, the strength of their arguments, the quality of evidence, the writing style, and the overall impact of the book.

4. Provide evidence and examples: Support your evaluation with specific evidence from the book. Quote relevant passages, cite specific examples, and reference any data or research the author presents. Use these examples to illustrate your points and provide a solid foundation for your analysis.

5. Engage with the text critically: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the book. Consider the author's arguments, the evidence they provide, and their overall effectiveness in conveying their ideas. Identify any gaps or limitations in the book's approach, and analyze how it contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

6. Situate the book within the field: Assess the book's contribution to the broader scholarly conversation. Determine whether the book introduces new insights, challenges existing theories, or offers a fresh perspective on the subject matter. Discuss how the book aligns with or diverges from other works in the field and its potential impact on future research.

7. Develop a clear and coherent argument: Present your analysis in a logical and organized manner. Use clear language and concise sentences to convey your thoughts effectively. Make sure to back up your assertions with evidence and examples from the book.

8. Balance objectivity and subjectivity: While a scholarly book review requires objectivity, it's also acceptable to include your own subjective opinions and reactions. Just make sure to clearly differentiate between the author's work and your personal perspective.

9.  Conclude your review: Summarize your main points and provide a final evaluation of the book. Offer a concise recommendation or judgment regarding the book's overall quality, usefulness, and significance.

10. Edit and proofread: Review your work for grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Ensure your review is clear, coherent, and well-structured. Consider seeking feedback from peers or colleagues to refine your review further.

Remember, a scholarly book review should be thoughtful, well-reasoned, and objective. It should provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the book and its contributions to the field while offering your own critical analysis and evaluation.

Suggested Structure for the Review

1. Introduction

   a. Begin with a brief introduction that includes the book's title, author, publication information, and any relevant background information about the author or the book's context.

   b. Provide a concise overview of the book's main topic or subject matter.

   c. State your overall purpose for writing the review and mention the main points you will address. What is at stake here? Why should scholars be interested in this work? Grab the reader’s attention right away, locating the book in established debates and controversies.

2. Summary of the Book

   a. Provide a summary of the book's main arguments, ideas, and supporting evidence. Include the major themes and key concepts.

   b. Be concise but ensure that you cover the essential aspects of the book. Within the first two paragraphs, it’s important to try to explicitly state the primary argument of the book (e.g., “Smith’s main argument revolves around/centers on/is…”). What is the larger point of this book, and why should readers care?

3. Analysis and Evaluation

   a. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the book. Consider aspects such as the author's argumentation, evidence, methodology, organization, and writing style. Please strive to be fair and considerate while offering critique. However, you can disagree with the book's claims if you believe they are incorrect, exaggerated, misguided, or for any other reason. On the other hand, you can talk about how much you loved the book and explain what specifically fascinated, persuaded, or revolutionized your perspective about the argument or idea.

   b. Assess the book's contribution to the field or discipline. Evaluate whether it adds new insights, challenges existing theories, or provides a unique perspective.

   c. Support your analysis with evidence from the book. Quote relevant passages or provide examples to substantiate your points.

4. Discussion and Interpretation

   a. Engage in a critical discussion of the book's content. Analyze the implications of the author's arguments and ideas.

   b. Consider the book's significance in relation to broader academic debates or the field of study.

   c. Offer your own interpretations and insights, presenting your perspective on the book's strengths, weaknesses, and overall value.

5. Conclusion

   a. Summarize your main points and findings from the analysis and evaluation.

   b. Provide a clear and concise overall assessment of the book.

   c. State your final thoughts and opinions on the book, including any recommendations for further reading or research.

6.  References

   a. Include a list of references for any sources cited or referenced in your review. Follow the Chicago Manual of Style ’s author-date format.

Potential Book Reviewers

We are always looking for new book reviewers interested in various disciplines. If you wish to become a book reviewer, write to us along with your CV. You can send us a few titles that you would like to review or just your areas of interest. Please contact our editors at [email protected] .

Special Issue Proposals

Guest editor guide.

We know that there is a lot to take on when assuming the role of guest editor. We have therefore put together this guide, which leads you through the most important aspects of the role and what you can expect from the process of editing a special issue.

What is a special issue of a journal?

Special issues of a journal are generally centered around a theme. These articles can come from papers/presentations at workshops, symposia, or conferences. The guest editors can also issue a call for papers about a particular topic. Some special issues are festschrifts honoring a certain scholar’s contributions to their field.

In the past, Sign Language Studies has featured special issues on:

• Linguistic ethnography and sign language studies (guest editors: Annelies Kusters and Lynn Hou; vol. 20, no. 4)
• Creative sign language in the Southern hemisphere (guest editors: Rachel Sutton-Spence and Michiko Kaneko ; vol. 20, no. 3)
• Rural sign languages (guest editors: Connie De Vos and Victoria Nyst ; vol. 18, no. 4)
• Language planning and sign language rights (guest editor: Joseph J. Murray; vol. 15, no. 4)
• (This is not an exhaustive list of our special issues—it’s just a sampling.)

What are the responsibilities of guest editors?

As a guest editor, you are assuming the responsibilities of the journal editors. They will be available to give advice but you are responsible for the following:

• coming to an agreement with the SLS editors on a specific deadline to submit the final version of the papers
• gathering the initial submissions
• identifying appropriate peer reviewers and asking if they are available to peer review
• sending out and tracking the submissions for peer review (you may have to nudge some reviewers to meet your deadlines)
• deciding whether or not to accept the submissions as is, with revisions, or whether to reject
• communicating your decisions to the submissions’ authors
• sending out the contributor contracts to the accepted submission authors
• gathering all the signed contributor contracts and forwarding them to GU Press along with each author’s snail-mail address (in order to facilitate sending out the comp copies after the issue is printed) and each contact author’s email address
• submitting a table of contents to GU Press to indicate the articles’ order and to help market your issue
• writing an introduction to the special issue
• submitting the final manuscripts with all of their art, tables, appendixes, etc., to GU Press by the established deadline
• reviewing the typeset proofs (these will also be sent to the article authors)

Before submission

Unless one of SLS ’s editors has directly approached you about guest editing an issue, you will need to submit a proposal. The proposal should include:

• the potential papers and authors with a brief description of each paper (these papers don’t need to be already written, though they might be in progress)
• the timeframe in which the special issue could be produced (include time for paper writing, peer reviewing, and submission of final copy to the journal) if the proposal is accepted
• short biographies of all authors and guest editors
• any special timing, associated events, funding support, partnerships, or other links or relationships that could influence the issue
• any other information that you feel is relevant

A special issue normally contains around five full-length articles, in addition to an editorial written by the guest editors (occasionally the SLS editors might want to include their own editors’ note).

Please submit your proposal to [email protected] .

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) their actions.

The special issue may publish submissions from the guest editors but the number should normally not exceed one by each guest editor (except where specifically approved by the SLS editors). The guest editor cannot be involved in decisions about papers that they have written themselves. Peer review of any such submission should be handled independently of the relevant guest editor/coeditor and their research teams.

The peer review process

Confidentiality

The guest editor should protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers. The guest editor must not disclose reviewers’ identities.

Selection of papers and the decision process

You are responsible, along with any other guest editor(s), for making sure that the review process is conducted in an appropriate manner and in line with normal review practices for the journal. You may consult with the SLS editors about the procedure to be followed.

You will make the decision on all manuscripts based on peer review and your own expertise (as well as that of any co-guest editors).

Selection of reviewers

As guest editor, you should select reviewers who have expertise in the field. You also must ask for and review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest made by reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias.

Publication process

Once all the peer reviews are finished and you are satisfied with the final accepted articles, they should be submitted with all of their art, tables, videos, contact email addresses, and any other supplementary material to [email protected] . She will review the articles to make sure they are complete and then they will be sent out for copy editing.

Once the copy editor has finished, the articles will be returned to their respective authors for their review. Typically, there is a one- to two-week turnaround. Once the authors are finished, the manuscripts are returned to GUP for clean-up. If time is available, the clean version of the articles is re-sent to the authors for a final check before being sent to typesetting.

After the issue is typeset, proofs of each article are sent to their respective authors and a proof of the entire issue is sent to the guest editor(s). At this point in the process, we are checking for typos and any serious factual errors. Changes such as rewriting paragraphs or moving figures and tables around are not acceptable at this stage (anything that affects the pagination is very costly to change and the authors may be charged for these changes).

The article authors have the prime responsibility for proofreading their typeset articles but you may also review them and submit corrections. Once all the proofs have been returned, the GU Press managing editor will combine all of the changes onto a single marked-up proof and will return that to the typesetter. GU Press will then check all subsequent proofs to make sure the changes have been made correctly.

Final “print-ready” files are then sent to the printer, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center at the U.S. Department of Education), and to electronic library platforms such as Project MUSE and JSTOR. Once the issue is printed, hard copies of the issue will be sent to each of the guest editors and article authors.

SLS (ISSN #0302-1475) is published four times a year: fall, winter, spring, and summer.

Click here for subscription information.

Purchase Digital Content

Click here for information about purchasing digital copies of articles or issues.

The Editors

Erin Wilkinson and Pilar Piñar Editors

SLS Editorial Board

Robert Adam University College London

Glenn Anderson University of Arkansas

Dirksen Bauman Gallaudet University

Karen Emmorey San Diego State University

Jordan Fenlon Independent Researcher

Maribel Gárate Gallaudet University

Brian Greenwald Gallaudet University

Joseph Hill National Technical Institute for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology

Julie A. Hochgesang Gallaudet University

Lynn Hou University of California, Santa Barbara

Tom Humphries University of California, San Diego

Terry Janzen University of Manitoba

Arlene B. Kelly Gallaudet University

Christopher Krentz University of Virginia

Gaurav Mathur Gallaudet University

Kazumi Matsuoka Keio University

Carolyn McCaskill Gallaudet University

Johanna Mesch Stockholm University

Rezenet Moges-Riedel California State University Long Beach

Soya Mori Institute of Developing Economies

Erin Moriarty Gallaudet University

Ronice Müller de Quadros Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina

Elena Radutzky Mason Perkins Deafness Fund

Timothy Reagan University of Maine

Octavian Robinson Gallaudet University

Kristin Snoddon Toronto Metropolitan University

Rose Stamp University of Haifa

Gladys Tang Chinese University of Hong Kong

John Vickrey Van Cleve Gallaudet University

Sherman Wilcox University of New Mexico

Betsy (Elizabeth) Winston Teaching Interpreting and Mentors Center

Customer Service

Click here for customer service information.

Home — Essay Samples — Science — Language and Linguistics — Sign Language

Essays on Sign Language

Clayton valli, "train go sorry" by leah hager cohen: analysis, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Analysis of Toys by Roland Barthes

The effect of teaching infants sign language on the language acquisition process, the development of asl (american sign language), static hand gesture recognition paper, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

A Critical Review on Watkins & Thompson’s Research on British Sign Language

Complications of acquiring sign language, my personal re-imagining of titus: making use of the sign language, teaching british sign language in school, hands that speak: exploring indian sign language, relevant topics.

• Language Diversity
• Linguistics
• English Language
• Dictionaries
• Spanish Language
• Bilingualism

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

So much is at stake in writing a conclusion. This is, after all, your last chance to persuade your readers to your point of view, to impress yourself upon them as a writer and thinker. And the impression you create in your conclusion will shape the impression that stays with your readers after they've finished the essay.

The end of an essay should therefore convey a sense of completeness and closure as well as a sense of the lingering possibilities of the topic, its larger meaning, its implications: the final paragraph should close the discussion without closing it off.

To establish a sense of closure, you might do one or more of the following:

• Conclude by linking the last paragraph to the first, perhaps by reiterating a word or phrase you used at the beginning.
• Conclude with a sentence composed mainly of one-syllable words. Simple language can help create an effect of understated drama.
• Conclude with a sentence that's compound or parallel in structure; such sentences can establish a sense of balance or order that may feel just right at the end of a complex discussion.

To close the discussion without closing it off, you might do one or more of the following:

• Conclude with a quotation from or reference to a primary or secondary source, one that amplifies your main point or puts it in a different perspective. A quotation from, say, the novel or poem you're writing about can add texture and specificity to your discussion; a critic or scholar can help confirm or complicate your final point. For example, you might conclude an essay on the idea of home in James Joyce's short story collection,  Dubliners , with information about Joyce's own complex feelings towards Dublin, his home. Or you might end with a biographer's statement about Joyce's attitude toward Dublin, which could illuminate his characters' responses to the city. Just be cautious, especially about using secondary material: make sure that you get the last word.
• Conclude by setting your discussion into a different, perhaps larger, context. For example, you might end an essay on nineteenth-century muckraking journalism by linking it to a current news magazine program like  60 Minutes .
• Conclude by redefining one of the key terms of your argument. For example, an essay on Marx's treatment of the conflict between wage labor and capital might begin with Marx's claim that the "capitalist economy is . . . a gigantic enterprise of dehumanization "; the essay might end by suggesting that Marxist analysis is itself dehumanizing because it construes everything in economic -- rather than moral or ethical-- terms.
• Conclude by considering the implications of your argument (or analysis or discussion). What does your argument imply, or involve, or suggest? For example, an essay on the novel  Ambiguous Adventure , by the Senegalese writer Cheikh Hamidou Kane, might open with the idea that the protagonist's development suggests Kane's belief in the need to integrate Western materialism and Sufi spirituality in modern Senegal. The conclusion might make the new but related point that the novel on the whole suggests that such an integration is (or isn't) possible.

Finally, some advice on how not to end an essay:

• Don't simply summarize your essay. A brief summary of your argument may be useful, especially if your essay is long--more than ten pages or so. But shorter essays tend not to require a restatement of your main ideas.
• Avoid phrases like "in conclusion," "to conclude," "in summary," and "to sum up." These phrases can be useful--even welcome--in oral presentations. But readers can see, by the tell-tale compression of the pages, when an essay is about to end. You'll irritate your audience if you belabor the obvious.
• Resist the urge to apologize. If you've immersed yourself in your subject, you now know a good deal more about it than you can possibly include in a five- or ten- or 20-page essay. As a result, by the time you've finished writing, you may be having some doubts about what you've produced. (And if you haven't immersed yourself in your subject, you may be feeling even more doubtful about your essay as you approach the conclusion.) Repress those doubts. Don't undercut your authority by saying things like, "this is just one approach to the subject; there may be other, better approaches. . ."

Copyright 1998, Pat Bellanca, for the Writing Center at Harvard University

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Write an Essay Conclusion

4-minute read

• 1st October 2022

Regardless of what you’re studying, writing essays is probably a significant part of your work as a student . Taking the time to understand how to write each section of an essay (i.e., introduction, body, and conclusion) can make the entire process easier and ensure that you’ll be successful.

Once you’ve put in the hard work of writing a coherent and compelling essay, it can be tempting to quickly throw together a conclusion without the same attention to detail. However, you won’t leave an impactful final impression on your readers without a strong conclusion.

We’ve compiled a few easy steps to help you write a great conclusion for your next essay . Watch our video, or check out our guide below to learn more!

1. Return to Your Thesis

Similar to how an introduction should capture your reader’s interest and present your argument, a conclusion should show why your argument matters and leave the reader with further curiosity about the topic.

To do this, you should begin by reminding the reader of your thesis statement. While you can use similar language and keywords when referring to your thesis, avoid copying it from the introduction and pasting it into your conclusion.

Try varying your vocabulary and sentence structure and presenting your thesis in a way that demonstrates how your argument has evolved throughout your essay.

2. Review Your Main Points

In addition to revisiting your thesis statement, you should review the main points you presented in your essay to support your argument.

However, a conclusion isn’t simply a summary of your essay . Rather, you should further examine your main points and demonstrate how each is connected.

Try to discuss these points concisely, in just a few sentences, in preparation for demonstrating how they fit in to the bigger picture of the topic.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

3. Show the Significance of Your Essay

Next, it’s time to think about the topic of your essay beyond the scope of your argument. It’s helpful to keep the question “so what?” in mind when you’re doing this. The goal is to demonstrate why your argument matters.

If you need some ideas about what to discuss to show the significance of your essay, consider the following:

• What do your findings contribute to the current understanding of the topic?
• Did your findings raise new questions that would benefit from future research?
• Can you offer practical suggestions for future research or make predictions about the future of the field/topic?
• Are there other contexts, topics, or a broader debate that your ideas can be applied to?

While writing your essay, it can be helpful to keep a list of ideas or insights that you develop about the implications of your work so that you can refer back to it when you write the conclusion.

Making these kinds of connections will leave a memorable impression on the reader and inspire their interest in the topic you’ve written about.

4. Avoid Some Common Mistakes

To ensure you’ve written a strong conclusion that doesn’t leave your reader confused or lacking confidence in your work, avoid:

• Presenting new evidence: Don’t introduce new information or a new argument, as it can distract from your main topic, confuse your reader, and suggest that your essay isn’t organized.
• Undermining your argument: Don’t use statements such as “I’m not an expert,” “I feel,” or “I think,” as lacking confidence in your work will weaken your argument.
• Using generic statements: Don’t use generic concluding statements such as “In summary,” “To sum up,” or “In conclusion,” which are redundant since the reader will be able to see that they’ve reached the end of your essay.

Finally, don’t make the mistake of forgetting to proofread your essay ! Mistakes can be difficult to catch in your own writing, but they can detract from your writing.

Our expert editors can ensure that your essay is clear, concise, and free of spelling and grammar errors. Find out more by submitting a free trial document today!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Better Essays: Signposting

Improving your essays

Explore how to structure your assignments, introduce new topics and take your reader on a journey

Essays can be considered a journey from the introduction to the conclusion. You're the driver, your readers are the passengers, and signposts are the roads you choose to take. The principles discussed here apply to most types of assignment.

Not signposting your essay is a bit like sleeping on a journey and only waking up occasionally – it can be disorientating. You'll wonder where you are and how you got there. Your tutors can feel this way if your content isn't clearly signposted.

The examples below are suggestions and you don't need to reproduce them exactly; each word and phrase has a precise meaning so you should check their meaning before you use them. Most of these terms can be used in any section of an essay, but some will suits particular fields more than others.

What signposting means

Signposting means using words to tell your reader about the content of your essay to help them understand as clearly as possible. Here are three examples of signposts and what they mean:

Types of signposting

You can signposting using single words, short phrases, long phrases, or whole sentences. Examples of each are provided below:

• single words: however, furthermore, initially
• short phrases: in contrast, in conclusion, an additional point is
• sentence: Having discussed the reliability of the research, this report will next address its validity.

Signposting in the introduction, body and conclusion

These lists include some terms you could use for signposting in your introduction, main body and conclusion.

Signposting in the introduction

You could use an opening statement like this to signpost your introduction: 

This essay will:

It will then: 

To quantify what your essay will do, you could say: 'This essay will address three aspects'. You could also signpost how this will be done, for example: 'This essay will attempt to determine whether cats are better pets than dogs by analysing studies of their behaviour.'  

Signposting in the body

These examples show a word or phrase and what it tells the reader:

• 'This essay will now' — introduces what is next
• 'Furthermore' — takes the point, issue, or data further
• 'In contrast' — includes a strong alternative or challenge 
• 'However' — adds an alternative or challenge, but less strongly than the phrase 'In contrast'

Signposting don't always have a statement of intent (like 'It will then', or 'In addition'). You could say: 'Cats are often seen as less affectionate than dogs'.

Signposting in conclusions

You can use many terms and phrases from the introduction and main body of your essay in the conclusion too, but not all of them are appropriate. You shouldn't introduce new material in a conclusion and can use the past perfect tense ('This essay has focused on') or present tense ('This essay shows that'). 

Download our signposting for better essays revision sheet

Download this page as a PDF for your essay signposting revision notes.

Writing: flow and coherence

Commas and its

Reflective writing introduction

Find an undergraduate or postgraduate degree course that suits you at Portsmouth.

Guidance and support

Find out about the guidance and support you'll get if you need a helping hand with academic life – or life in general – when you study with us at Portsmouth.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing

How to Conclude an Essay (with Examples)

Last Updated: May 24, 2024 Fact Checked

Writing a Strong Conclusion

What to avoid, brainstorming tricks.

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams and by wikiHow staff writer, Aly Rusciano . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 8 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,209,664 times.

So, you’ve written an outstanding essay and couldn’t be more proud. But now you have to write the final paragraph. The conclusion simply summarizes what you’ve already written, right? Well, not exactly. Your essay’s conclusion should be a bit more finessed than that. Luckily, you’ve come to the perfect place to learn how to write a conclusion. We’ve put together this guide to fill you in on everything you should and shouldn’t do when ending an essay. Follow our advice, and you’ll have a stellar conclusion worthy of an A+ in no time.

Tips for Ending an Essay

• Rephrase your thesis to include in your final paragraph to bring the essay full circle.
• End your essay with a call to action, warning, or image to make your argument meaningful.
• Keep your conclusion concise and to the point, so you don’t lose a reader’s attention.
• Do your best to avoid adding new information to your conclusion and only emphasize points you’ve already made in your essay.

• “All in all”
• “Ultimately”
• “Furthermore”
• “As a consequence”
• “As a result”

• Make sure to write your main points in a new and unique way to avoid repetition.

• Let’s say this is your original thesis statement: “Allowing students to visit the library during lunch improves campus life and supports academic achievement.”
• Restating your thesis for your conclusion could look like this: “Evidence shows students who have access to their school’s library during lunch check out more books and are more likely to complete their homework.”
• The restated thesis has the same sentiment as the original while also summarizing other points of the essay.

• “When you use plastic water bottles, you pollute the ocean. Switch to using a glass or metal water bottle instead. The planet and sea turtles will thank you.”
• “The average person spends roughly 7 hours on their phone a day, so there’s no wonder cybersickness is plaguing all generations.”
• “Imagine walking on the beach, except the soft sand is made up of cigarette butts. They burn your feet but keep washing in with the tide. If we don’t clean up the ocean, this will be our reality.”
• “ Lost is not only a show that changed the course of television, but it’s also a reflection of humanity as a whole.”
• “If action isn’t taken to end climate change today, the global temperature will dangerously rise from 4.5 to 8 °F (−15.3 to −13.3 °C) by 2100.”

• Focus on your essay's most prevalent or important parts. What key points do you want readers to take away or remember about your essay?

• For instance, instead of writing, “That’s why I think that Abraham Lincoln was the best American President,” write, “That’s why Abraham Lincoln was the best American President.”
• There’s no room for ifs, ands, or buts—your opinion matters and doesn’t need to be apologized for!

• For instance, words like “firstly,” “secondly,” and “thirdly” may be great transition statements for body paragraphs but are unnecessary in a conclusion.

• For instance, say you began your essay with the idea that humanity’s small sense of sense stems from space’s vast size. Try returning to this idea in the conclusion by emphasizing that as human knowledge grows, space becomes smaller.

• For example, you could extend an essay on the television show Orange is the New Black by bringing up the culture of imprisonment in America.

Community Q&A

• Always review your essay after writing it for proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation, and don’t be afraid to revise. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

Tips from our Readers

• Have somebody else proofread your essay before turning it in. The other person will often be able to see errors you may have missed!

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://www.uts.edu.au/current-students/support/helps/self-help-resources/grammar/transition-signals
• ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/argument_papers/conclusions.html
• ↑ http://writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/conclude.html
• ↑ https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/ending-essay-conclusions
• ↑ https://www.pittsfordschools.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=542&dataid=4677&FileName=conclusions1.pdf
• ↑ https://www.cuyamaca.edu/student-support/tutoring-center/files/student-resources/how-to-write-a-good-conclusion.pdf
• ↑ https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803&p=185935

About This Article

To end an essay, start your conclusion with a phrase that makes it clear your essay is coming to a close, like "In summary," or "All things considered." Then, use a few sentences to briefly summarize the main points of your essay by rephrasing the topic sentences of your body paragraphs. Finally, end your conclusion with a call to action that encourages your readers to do something or learn more about your topic. In general, try to keep your conclusion between 5 and 7 sentences long. For more tips from our English co-author, like how to avoid common pitfalls when writing an essay conclusion, scroll down! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Eva Dettling

Jan 23, 2019

Did this article help you?

Mar 7, 2017

Jul 16, 2021

Gabby Suzuki

Oct 17, 2019

Nicole Murphy

Apr 26, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

• The Open University
• Guest user / Sign out
• Study with The Open University

My OpenLearn Profile

Personalise your OpenLearn profile, save your favourite content and get recognition for your learning

About this free course

Become an ou student, download this course, share this free course.

Start this free course now. Just create an account and sign in. Enrol and complete the course for a free statement of participation or digital badge if available.

In this free course, Understanding language and learning , you considered the role of language in learning and started out from the assumption that language, and more particularly, linguistic interaction with other people, is a key aspect of learning. You also began to develop more critical skills, asking questions about what we actually mean by language and whether it is possible and necessary to separate out one language from another. In relation to English in particular, you began to question the extent to which new forms of English or ‘Englishes’ must begin to be recognised alongside more established ones. The growing discomfort with established notions of language in general and English in particular has been prompted by well-documented and intensified global interconnectedness in recent years, leading to increased language contact and a growing number of English-language users. Such real-world phenomena bring into question what we mean by English and what we mean by language. For educational practitioners, it raises important practical questions about the norms according to which students should be taught.

This OpenLearn course is an adapted extract from the Open University course EE818 Language, literacy and learning [ Tip: hold Ctrl and click a link to open it in a new tab. ( Hide tip ) ] .

Search and compare thousands of words and phrases in American Sign Language (ASL). The largest collection online.

How to sign: a position or opinion or judgment reached after consideration "a decision unfavorable to the opposition"; "his conclusion took the evidence into account"; "satisfied with the panel's determination";

Your browser does not support HTML5 video.

Similiar / Same: decision , determination

Categories: judgement , judgment , mind

Within this category: predeterminaation

How to sign: the temporal end; the concluding time "the stopping point of each round was signaled by a bell"; "the market was up at the finish"; "they were playing better at the close of the season";

Similiar / Same: stopping point , finale , finis , last , close , finish

Categories: end , ending

Sign not right? Or know a different sign?

Upload your sign now.

Embed this video

Add this video to your website by copying the code below.