Diversity in deaf education 1st Edition

Lampropoulou
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/diversity-in-deaf-education-1st-edition-lampropoulou/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Research in Deaf Education: Contexts, Challenges, and

Considerations 1st Edition Stephanie Cawthon

https://textbookfull.com/product/research-in-deaf-education-
contexts-challenges-and-considerations-1st-edition-stephanie-
cawthon/

Languages and Languaging in Deaf Education A Framework

for Pedagogy 1st Edition Ruth Swanwick

https://textbookfull.com/product/languages-and-languaging-in-
deaf-education-a-framework-for-pedagogy-1st-edition-ruth-
swanwick/

Diversity intercultural encounters and education 1st

Edition Susana Gonçalves

https://textbookfull.com/product/diversity-intercultural-
encounters-and-education-1st-edition-susana-goncalves/

Educational Inequalities Difference and Diversity in

Schools and Higher Education 1st Edition Kalwant Bhopal

https://textbookfull.com/product/educational-inequalities-
difference-and-diversity-in-schools-and-higher-education-1st-
edition-kalwant-bhopal/
Early Childhood Education and School Readiness in India
Quality and Diversity Venita Kaul

https://textbookfull.com/product/early-childhood-education-and-
school-readiness-in-india-quality-and-diversity-venita-kaul/

Higher Education and Working-Class Academics :

Precarity and Diversity in Academia Teresa Crew

https://textbookfull.com/product/higher-education-and-working-
class-academics-precarity-and-diversity-in-academia-teresa-crew/

Arts and Cultural Education in a World of Diversity ENO

Yearbook 1 Lígia Ferro

https://textbookfull.com/product/arts-and-cultural-education-in-
a-world-of-diversity-eno-yearbook-1-ligia-ferro/

Language Deprivation and Deaf Mental Health 1st Edition

Neil S. Glickman

https://textbookfull.com/product/language-deprivation-and-deaf-
mental-health-1st-edition-neil-s-glickman/

Disability Studies and the Inclusive Classroom Critical

Practices for Embracing Diversity in Education Susan
Baglieri

https://textbookfull.com/product/disability-studies-and-the-
inclusive-classroom-critical-practices-for-embracing-diversity-
in-education-susan-baglieri/
i

Diversity in Deaf Education

ii

Perspectives on Deafness

Series Editors
Marc Marschark
Harry Knoors
The Gestural Origin of Language
David F. Armstrong and Sherman E. Wilcox
Educating Deaf Learners: Creating a Global Evidence Base
Edited by Harry Knoors and Marc Marschark
Teaching Deaf Learners: Psychological and Developmental Foundations
Harry Knoors and Marc Marschark
The People of the Eye: Deaf Ethnicity and Ancestry
Harlan Lane, Richard C. Pillard, and Ulf Hedberg
A Lens on Deaf Identities
Irene W. Leigh
Deaf Cognition: Foundations and Outcomes
Edited by Marc Marschark and Peter C. Hauser
Diversity in Deaf Education
Edited by Marc Marschark, Venetta Lampropoulou, and
Emmanouil K. Skordilis
Sign Language Interpreting and Interpreter Education: Directions for
Research and Practice
Edited by Marc Marschark, Rico Peterson, and
Elizabeth A. Winston
Bilingualism and Bilingual Deaf Education
Edited by Marc Marschark, Gladys Tang, and Harry Knoors
Early Literacy Development in Deaf Children
Connie Mayer and Beverly J. Trezek
The World of Deaf Infants: A Longitudinal Study
Kathryn P. Meadow-​Orlans, Patricia Elizabeth Spencer, and
Lynn Sanford Koester
Advances in the Sign Language Development of Deaf Children
Edited by Brenda Schick, Marc Marschark, and
Patricia Elizabeth Spencer
Advances in the Spoken Language Development of Deaf and
Hard-​of-​Hearing Children
Edited by Patricia Elizabeth Spencer and Marc Marschark
Approaches to Social Research: The Case of Deaf Studies
Alys Young and Bogusia Temple
iii

Diversity in Deaf Education

Edited by
Marc Marschark
Venetta Lampropoulou
Emmanouil K. Skordilis

1
iv

1
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2016

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Cataloging-​i n-​Publication Data

Names: Marschark, Marc, editor. | Lampropoulou, Venetta, editor. | Skordilis,
Emmanouil K., editor.
Title: Diversity in deaf education /​edited by Marc Marschark, Venetta
Lampropoulou, Emmanouil K. Skordilis.
Other titles: Perspectives on deafness.
Description: Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, [2016] |
Series: Perspectives on deafness | Includes bibliographical references.
Identifiers: LCCN 2015037330 | ISBN 9780190493073 (alk. paper)
Subjects: | MESH: Cultural Diversity. | Education of Hearing Disabled—methods. |
Cultural Competency. | Early Intervention (Education)--methods. | Mainstreaming
(Education)—methods. | Persons With Hearing Impairments—psychology.
Classification: LCC RF291 | NLM HV 2430 | DDC 617.80071—dc23 LC record
available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015037330

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America
v

Contents

Preface vii
Contributors xiii

1. Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education: From Paris

to Athens With a Diversion to Milan 1
Greg Leigh and Marc Marschark
2. Evidence-Based ​Practice in Early Intervention: The Proof
of the Pudding Is in the Eating 21
Marilyn Sass-​Lehrer and Alys Young
3. The Transition from Early Intervention to School for
Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing Children 49
Brenda T. Poon, Janet R. Jamieson, Anat Zaidman-​Zait,
Deirdre Curle, Nancy Norman, and Noreen Simmons
4. School as a Site for Natural Language Learning 77
Marlon Kuntze, Debbie Golos, Kimberly Wolbers,
Catherine O’Brien, and David Smith
5. On the Home Front: Parent Personality, Support, and
Deaf Children 109
Patrick J. Brice, Rachael M. Plotkin, and Jennifer Reesman
6. High Standard Competencies for Teachers of the Deaf
and Other Qualified Professionals: Always Necessary,
Not Always Guaranteed 135
Guido Lichtert, Kevin Miller, Areti Okalidou, Paul Simpson,
and Astrid van Wieringen
7. Exploring Signed Language Assessment Tools in Europe
and North America 171
Charlotte Enns, Tobias Haug, Rosalind Herman,
Robert Hoffmeister, Wolfgang Mann, and Lynn McQuarrie
8. Language Use in the Classroom: Accommodating the
Needs of Diverse Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing Learners 219
Harry Knoors

v
vi

vi  Contents

9. The Development of Pragmatic Skills in Children

and Young People Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing 247
Dianne Toe, Pasquale Rinaldi, Maria Cristina Caselli,
Louise Paatsch, and Amelia Church
10. Addressing Diversity in Teaching Deaf Learners to Write 271
Connie Mayer
11. Many Languages, One Goal: Interventions for Language
Mastery by School-​Age Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing
Learners 297
Susan R. Easterbrooks, Joanna E. Cannon, and Jessica W. Trussell
12. From Social Periphery to Social Centrality: Building
Social Capital for Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing Students
in the 21st Century 325
Gina A. Oliva, Linda Risser Lytle, Mindy Hopper,
and Joan M. Ostrove
13. The Inclusion of Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing Students
in Mainstream Classrooms: Classroom Participation
and Its Relationship to Communication, Academic,
and Social Performance 355
Naama Tsach and Tova Most
14. Mental Health Problems in Children and Adolescents:
An Overview 381
Tiejo van Gent and Ines Sleeboom-​van Raaij
15. A Comprehensive Reading Intervention: Positive
Postsecondary Outcomes and a Promising Practice
for Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing 417
Greta Palmberg and Kendra Rask
16. Critical Factors Toward the Inclusion of
Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students in Higher Education 441
Merv Hyde, Magda Nikolaraizi, Denise Powell,
and Michael Stinson
17. 21st-​Century Deaf Workers: Going Beyond “Just
Employed” to Career Growth and Entrepreneurship 473
Ronald R. Kelly, Andrew B. Quagliata, Richard DeMartino,
and Victor Perotti
18. Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education: Now What
Do We Do With It?! 507
Marc Marschark and Greg Leigh

Index 537
vii

Preface

The American educational reformer John Dewey once wrote, “if I were
asked to name the most needed of all reforms in the spirit of educa-
tion, I should say: Cease conceiving of education as mere preparation
for later life, and make it the full meaning of the present life” (Dewey,
1893, p. 660). That is, Dewey saw education not only as the acquisition
of knowledge and skills obtained from formal schooling, but also the
daily application of what every individual has learned—​individuals’
“fund of knowledge,” in current terms—​to the benefit both of their
daily life and of society.
Some people see education and academic outcomes as pertaining
only to the individual learner—​a means to the ends of being finan-
cially secure, fulfilling one’s roles and responsibilities in society, and
perhaps just being. Certainly, that is the view of most students while
involved in formal education settings who have not yet glimpsed the
forest for the trees. For the majority of parents and teachers, however,
the education of children and youth, whether formally or informally, is
something more. It is not just “preparation for later life” of the individ-
ual, but a contribution to society with the ultimate goal of each learner
in some way making the world (community, region, culture, nation) a
better place.
What is the situation when the learner has some kind of disability?
In the case of severe disabilities, it may be appropriate to focus on pro-
viding an education that allows the individual simply to enjoy qual-
ity of life and perhaps gain employment to a reasonable extent. In the
case of mild disabilities, in contrast, it may (indeed, should) be possible
to provide accommodations in school, the workplace, and society that
allow the individual to lead a life fully commensurate with nondis-
abled peers. The situation, admittedly, is more complex between these
extremes; the extent of an individual’s strengths and needs, and the
possibilities for accommodating the latter not only vary widely, but
also are seen from diverse perspectives—​those of the individual and
family, school, community, and the larger society (Antia, 2015; Leigh &
Crowe, 2015).
Since 1878, through the International Congress on Education of the
Deaf (ICED), researchers and educators of deaf or hard-​ of-​
hearing
(DHH) learners have shared their understanding, their methods, and
materials seen as appropriate to the needs of DHH students and, more

vii
viii

viii  Preface

recently, to their strengths as well. Although intended primarily to be

an academic conference focusing on evidence-​based practice, ICED
has never been immune from the differing philosophies and politics
of what is commonly referred to as “deaf education.” Indeed, it is fre-
quently noted that deaf education approaches new méthodes du jour
every few years, even if the evidence to support them is often lacking
(Spencer & Marschark, 2010). One reason for this situation, acknowl-
edged by many—​if not most—​people in the field, is that the DHH
population is rather different than other populations identified as “dis-
abled” (Marschark & Knoors, 2012). Among the 13 categories of dis-
ability identified by the U.S. government, for example, it is only deaf
individuals who sometimes see themselves as a linguistic–​cultural
minority (instead of or as well as disabled). Historically, this has cre-
ated significant tension in the field as both deaf and hearing individu-
als have varied in their acceptance of that view and the extent to which
it has been seen as relevant to educational practice.
A second reason for the constant search for new instructional
methods in deaf education, simply put, is that despite the myriad
approaches, interventions, and educational philosophies that have
been offered through the centuries (Lang, 2011), deaf learners con-
tinue to lag behind hearing peers in their academic achievement
(Marschark, Shaver, Nagle, & Newman, 2015; Qi & Mitchell, 2012).
Some individuals within the field seek to attribute the chronic under-
achievement of DHH learners to a single factor—​the “philosophies
and politics”—​whether related to language, cultural attitudes, school
systems, or directly to hearing thresholds. More realistically, and
more pertinent in the present context, is recognition that deaf learn-
ers comprise an extremely heterogeneous population, and one that is
only becoming more diverse over time. Not only does this population
vary widely in terms of the extent to which individuals have and/​or
use residual hearing (in other words, their hearing thresholds) and
the presence and severity of secondary disabilities, but, as a function
of these factors and associated variability in their early language and
educational environments, their use of different language modalities,
and social–​emotional interactions inside and outside of the family,
DHH learners likely are more heterogenous than any other group in
the educational system. Adding variability in the quality and appro-
priateness of instruction, access, and psychosocial functioning and
mental health, and the fact that these domains all interact and have
cumulative effects, the result is considerable diversity in both deaf
learners and the contexts in which they are educated.
As the following chapters illuminate, recognition of the diversity
among DHH learners is not new. What perhaps is new, or at least is
becoming more widely acknowledged, is that the notion of a one-​size-​
fits-​all approach to deaf education—​a “silver bullet” that is going to
ix

Preface   ix

result in DHH learners’ performing uniformly at the same level as

hearing peers—​simply is not on the horizon. Throughout the more
than 135 years of ICED meetings, advocates of “oral” education, bilin-
gual education, separate education, inclusive education, and any num-
ber of variations within and among these have been touted as panaceas
for deaf education. Although there is evidence that each and all of
these offer benefits to some DHH learners at some ages, the existing
evidence base and the 800-​lb gorilla that is the missing evidence base
indicate there is not a single solution to the many challenges of deaf
education. As Marschark and Leigh describe in the final chapter of this
volume, interventions that appear to “level the playing field” for some
DHH learners are ineffective for others, and some that are effective for
young children do not produce lasting gains (at least on average). Like
it or not, this is what diversity is all about. The insistence of many in
the field that “the one true path” is before us does not change the fact
that both history and the existing literature tell us that many paths are
needed, even if our goal of optimizing educational opportunities and
outcomes for all DHH learners is the same.
There is no doubt that educational, psychological, and linguistic
research has provided us with a much better understanding of the foun-
dations and barriers to academic growth by DHH learners. Technology
has provided students, parents, and educators with effective teaching–​
learning tools and communication access (through both signed and
spoken language). Meanwhile, societal enlightenment has taught us
that diversity with regard to gender, ethnicity, and cultural values can
make life more interesting and, in many ways, make us stronger. There
is no reason why diversity among DHH learners and the methods used
to educate them should be seen as negative or unnecessary. Indeed,
the diversity of educational settings and curricula available typically
to hearing children serves important societal functions (otherwise we
would not have them), and offers the possibility of matching learners
to alternative instructional methodologies and settings that allow them
to thrive. DHH learners are more diverse than their hearing peers at
any age level, and it thus appears evident that, correspondingly, they
are likely to need a broader continuum of educational placements if we
want them to thrive.
The chapters in this volume—​written by deaf and hearing individu-
als, teachers and parents of deaf learners, and researchers in education,
psychology, linguistics, and related fields—​barely scratch the surface
of the complexity inherent in educating DHH learners. They all bring
to the fore, however, that diversity in deaf learners and in deaf edu-
cation must be acknowledged and perhaps even embraced. If the fac-
tors that affect the academic achievement of DHH learners directly are
not always obvious or consistent, we need to discover the mediating
variables that underlie both variability among learners and variability
x

x  Preface

among instructional approaches that work (or not). As we move beyond

obsession with single solutions and single factors accounting for the
educational status of DHH learners from primary to postsecondary
education, we will no doubt find that some educational approaches
work better than others for some learners of some ages in some contexts.
What appears simple in theory, however, often becomes more complex
(and expensive) in practice. We thus are not suggesting that simply
recognizing diversity is sufficient to allow us to accommodate it in the
classroom. Nor do we believe that all or even most schools are in a pos-
ition to provide DHH students with all the resources necessary to opti-
mize the outcomes of each. But, this does not mean we should not try.
As we move toward the goal of educating all DHH learners in a man-
ner that offers each individual the greatest opportunity for academic
and personal success, we need research, implementation, and evalua-
tion in practice, and flexibility in the way that we look at deaf learners
and deaf education. The chapters in this volume, offered by contributors
to ICED 2015 in Athens, Greece, point to several paths forward. They
should not be seen as contradictory, but complementary. Diversity in
deaf education is largely beyond our control. How we deal with it is not.
Marc Marschark
Venetta Lampropoulou
Emmanouil K. Skordilis

REFERENCES
Antia, S. (2015). Enhancing academic and social outcomes: Balancing individ-
ual, family, and school assets and risks for deaf and hard-of-hearing stu-
dents in general education. In H. Knoors & M. Marschark (Eds.), Educating
deaf learners: Creating a global evidence base (pp. 527–546). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Dewey, J. (1893). Self-realization as the moral ideal. Philosophical Review, 2, 652–664.
Lang, H. (2011). Perspectives on the history of deaf education. In M. Marschark
& P. Spencer, (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education,
volume 1, 2nd edition (pp. 7–17). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Leigh, G., & Crowe, K. (2015). Responding to cultural and linguistic diversity
among deaf and hard-of-hearing learners. In H. Knoors & M. Marschark
(Eds.), Educating deaf learners: Creating a global evidence base (pp. 69–92).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Marschark, M., & Knoors, H. (2012). Sprache, Kognition und Lernen:
Herausforderungen der Inklusion fürgehörlose und schwerhörige. In M.
Hintermair (Ed), Inklusion, Ethik und Hörschädigung (pp. 129–176). Heidelberg:
Median-Verlag.
Marschark, M., Shaver, D. M., Nagle, K., & Newman, L. (2015). Predicting the
academic achievement of deaf and hard-of-hearing students from indi-
vidual, household, communication, and educational factors. Exceptional
Children, 8, 350–369.
xi

Preface   xi

Qi, S., & Mitchell, R. E. (2012). Large-scale academic achievement testing of

deaf and hard-of-hearing students: Past, present, and future. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 17, 1–18.
Spencer, P. E., & Marschark, M. (2010). Evidence-based practice in educating deaf
and hard-of-hearing students. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
xii
xiii

Contributors

Patrick J. Brice Richard DeMartino

Department of Psychology
Gallaudet University
Washington, DC
Joanna E. Cannon
Education of the Deaf and
Hard-​of-​Hearing Program
Department of Educational &
Counselling Psychology &
Special Education
Faculty of Education
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada
Maria Cristina Caselli
Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie
della Cognizione
Consiglio Nazionale delle
Ricerche
Rome, Italy
Amelia Church
Melbourne Graduate School of
Education
University of Melbourne
Victoria, Australia
Deirdre Curle
Educational and Counselling
Psychology, and Special
Education
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada
E. Phillip Saunders College of
Business
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
Susan R. Easterbrooks
Program in Education of the Deaf
Educational Psychology,
Special Education, and
Communication Disorders
Georgia State University
Atlanta, GA
Charlotte Enns
Faculty of Education
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Debbie Golos
Department of Communicative
Disorders and Deaf Education
Utah State University
Logan, UT
Tobias Haug
Department of Pedagogical and
Therapeutic Professions
University of Applied Sciences of
Special Needs Education
Zurich, Switzerland
Rosalind Herman
Division of Language &
Communication Science
City University
London, UK

xiii
xiv

xiv  Contributors

Robert Hoffmeister Marlon Kuntze

Center for the Study of Department of Government and
Communication & the Deaf Public Affairs
Boston University Burstein Center for Excellence in
Boston, MA Leadership and Innovation
Gallaudet University
Mindy Hopper Washington, DC
Department of Liberal Studies
National Technical Institute for Venetta Lampropoulou
the Deaf Deaf Studies Unit
Rochester Institute of Technology Department of Primary
Rochester, NY Education
University of Patras
Merv Hyde Patras, Greece
School of Education
University of the Sunshine Greg Leigh
Coast RIDBC Renwick Centre
Maroochydore, Queensland, Royal Institute for Deaf and Blind
Australia Children
North Rocks, Australia
Janet R. Jamieson and
Educational and Counselling The University of Newcastle
Psychology, and Special Newcastle, Australia
Education
University of British Columbia Guido Lichtert
Vancouver, British Columbia Research Group
Canada Experimental ORL
Department of Neurosciences
Ronald R. Kelly Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
REACH Center for Studies on Leuven, Belgium
Career Success and
National Technical Institute for Koninklijk Orthopedagogisch
the Deaf Centrum Antwerpen
Rochester Institute Antwerp, Belgium
of Technology
Rochester, NY Linda Risser Lytle
Department of Counseling
Harry Knoors Gallaudet University
Royal Dutch Kentalis Washington, DC
Kentalis Academy
Sint-​Michielsgestel, Wolfgang Mann
The Netherlands Department of Education
and University of Roehampton
Radboud University London, UK
Behavioral Science Institute and
Nijmegen, The Netherlands City University
London, UK
xv

Contributors   xv

Marc Marschark Catherine O’Brien

Center for Education Research
Partnerships
National Technical Institute for
the Deaf
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
Department of Government and
Public Affairs
Burstein Center for Excellence in
Leadership and Innovation
Gallaudet University
Washington, DC

Connie Mayer Areti Okalidou

Faculty of Education Department of Educational and
York University Social Policy
Toronto, Ontario, Canada University of Macedonia
Salonika, Greece
Lynn McQuarrie
Western Canadian Centre for Gina A. Oliva
Deaf Studies Department of Physical
University of Alberta Education and Recreation
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (Retired)
Gallaudet University
Kevin Miller Washington, DC
Department of Special
Education Joan M. Ostrove
Concordia University Department of Psychology
Seward, NE Macalester College
Saint Paul, MN
Tova Most
School of Education Louise Paatsch
Tel-​Aviv University School of Education
Tel-​Aviv, Israel Faculty of Arts and Education
Deakin University
Magda Nikolaraizi Geelong, Australia
Department of Special Education
University of Thessaly Greta Palmberg
Volos, Greece Intermediate District 287
VECTOR Transition Program
Nancy Norman Brooklyn Park, MN
Educational and Counselling
Psychology, and Special Victor Perotti
Education E. Phillip Saunders College of
University of British Columbia Business
Vancouver, British Columbia Rochester Institute of Technology
Canada Rochester, NY
xvi
xvi  Contributors
Rachael M. Plotkin
Kennedy Krieger Institute
Johns Hopkins University School
of Medicine
Baltimore, MD
Brenda T. Poon
Human Early Learning
Partnership, School of
Population and Public Health
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada
Denise Powell
College of Education, Health and
Human Development
University of Canterbury
Christchurch, New Zealand
Andrew B. Quagliata
School of Hotel Administration
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY
Kendra Rask
Intermediate District 287
VECTOR Transition Program
Hennepin Technical College
Brooklyn Park, MN
Jennifer Reesman
Kennedy Krieger Institute
Johns Hopkins University School
of Medicine
Baltimore, MD
Pasquale Rinaldi
Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie
della Cognizione
Consiglio Nazionale delle
Ricerche
Rome, Italy
Penny Roy
Division of Language &
Communication Science
City University
London, UK
Marilyn Sass-​Lehrer
Deaf and Hard-​of-​Hearing Infants,
Toddlers, and Their Families
Interdisciplinary Program
Graduate School and Continuing
Studies
Gallaudet University
Washington, DC
Noreen Simmons
British Columbia Family Hearing
Resource Society
Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
Paul Simpson
British Association of Teachers of
the Deaf
Kent, UK
Emmanouil K. Skordilis
Faculty of Physical Education and
Sport Science
National and Kapodistrian
University of Athens
Athens, Greece
Ines Sleeboom-​van Raaij
Royal Dutch Kentalis
Sint-​Michielsgestel,
The Netherlands
and
Trajectum Hoeve Boschoord
The Netherlands
David Smith
Department of Theory & Practice
in Teacher Education
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN
xvii

Contributors   xvii

Michael Stinson Astrid van Wieringen

National Technical Institute for
the Deaf
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
Dianne Toe
School of Education
Faculty of Arts and Education
Deakin University
Geelong, Australia
Naama Tsach
Department of School
Counseling and Special
Education
Tel-​Aviv University
Tel-​Aviv, Israel
Jessica W. Trussell
National Technical Institute for
the Deaf
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, NY
Tiejo van Gent
Royal Dutch Kentalis
Sint-​Michielsgestel,
The Netherlands
Research Group
Experimental ORL
Department of Neurosciences
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Leuven, Belgium
Kimberly Wolbers
Department of Theory & Practice
in Teacher Education
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN
Alys Young
Social Research with Deaf
People Group
School of Nursing, Midwifery
and Social Work
University of Manchester
Manchester, UK
Anat Zaidman-​Zait
Department of School
Counseling and Special
Education
Tel-​Aviv University
Tel Aviv, Israel
1

Recognizing Diversity in Deaf

Education: From Paris to Athens
With a Diversion to Milan
Greg Leigh and Marc Marschark

This chapter is drawn from the opening presentation at the 22nd

International Congress on Education of the Deaf (ICED). In that pres-
entation it was our aim to address some of the history of the Congress
and, through that, some of the history of the field of education of deaf
and hard-​of-​hearing (DHH) children more broadly as a means to high-
light some important issues. In so doing, it was our intention to address
the overall theme of the Congress—​“Many ways, one goal”—​from a
historical perspective and to question how effectively the field has
accommodated diversity and the need for differentiated approaches for
DHH learners. Just as it was in 1878 at the first ICED, in 2015 consider-
able diversity continues to be the norm within the population of DHH
learners on many different levels—​from cultural and linguistic diver-
sity, to the diversity associated with the presence of myriad additional
disabilities, to the natural variations seen in any population of learners
relative to individual cognitive abilities and aptitudes. Some of these
are issues are taken up in more detail in Chapter 18. Whatever its basis,
diversity has particular consequences for how educators do, or should,
approach the task of teaching DHH learners.
Being able to take a historical perspective on educational practice
since the first ICED is eminently possible because the field has the ben-
efit of a rich tradition of scholarship, inquiry, and training. Having
commenced at that 1878 meeting in Paris, the ICED has been held more
or less continuously ever since, albeit with some breaks associated
with periods of world wars. It is worthy of note that the conference is
almost certainly the world’s oldest continuously held conference in any
field of education (Leigh & Power, 2004). The history of the Congress,
at least for its first 100 years, was recorded rigorously by Brill (1984)
in his “Analytical History” of the meetings and has been recorded

1
2

2   Diversity in Deaf Education

subsequently through the publication of proceedings and associated

edited books of papers (see, for example, Moores, 2011; Power & Leigh,
2004; Weisel, 1998). These records provide a useful lens through which
to continue to explore the theme of change and development in deaf
education, and how the field responds, or perhaps should be respond-
ing, to the diverse nature of DHH learners around the world.

THE VANCOUVER STATEMENT: RESPONDING TO MILAN

The decision to examine the path from 1876 to the 2015 ICED in the
opening presentation stemmed from events surrounding the 21st ICED
in Vancouver, Canada, and, in particular, a statement that was prepared
and delivered to that Congress at the opening ceremony in 2010. The
statement was titled “A New Era: Deaf Participation and Collaboration”
and was made as a direct, albeit significantly delayed, response to the
resolutions made at the 2nd ICED in Milan in 1880. In particular, the
statement related to the first two of eight resolutions that were made at
the 1880 Congress. Those two resolutions were as follows:
1. The Convention, considering the incontestable superiority of
articulation over signs in restoring the deaf-​mute to society
and giving him a fuller knowledge of language, declares that
the oral method should be preferred to that of signs in educa-
tion and the instruction of deaf-​mutes.
2. The Convention, considering that the simultaneous use of
articulation and signs has the disadvantage of injuring articu-
lation and lip-​reading and the precision of ideas, declares that
the pure oral method should be preferred. (Fay, 1881, p. 64).
The statement at the Vancouver Congress was read at the opening cer-
emony by Dr. Joseph McLaughlin on behalf of the ICED 2010 Vancouver
Organizing Committee, the British Columbia Deaf Community, the
Canadian Association of the Deaf, and the World Federation of the Deaf.
The statement “acknowledged with regret the detrimental effects of the
Milan Congress” and issued a call to “accept and respect all languages
and all forms of communication” in the education of deaf people. Sinclair
(2010) noted that the statement was heralded by “a loud, long-​standing
and emotional applause” (p. 8). Certainly, anyone present at the cere-
mony could attest to that being an accurate characterization of the event.
The aims of making the statement were patent and laudable on
many different levels—​socioculturally, linguistically, and, importantly,
educationally. The statement called for the acceptance of cultural and
linguistic diversity among DHH people, particularly children. From
an educational perspective, the point of the statement was abundantly
clear and, at least to these observers, self-​evident: that is, it sought to
make the point that there cannot be, and never could be, one and only
3

Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education   3

one way to approach the education of all DHH learners. Indeed, the
patently self-​evident nature of such a statement raises an inevitable
and often-​overlooked question about the resolutions made in Milan at
the 2nd ICED. How was it that such resolutions could have ever been
passed in the first place? Given the diversity that must have existed
among the population of DHH children at that time, as now, how could
it ever have been suggested, much less formally resolved, that there
could be just one “true” path to the goal of linguistic and social fulfill-
ment for all DHH children? In approaching and seeking to address such
a question, it would serve the field well to recall the often-​misquoted
adage of philosopher and essayist George Santayana who warned that
“those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”
(Santayana, 1905, p. 284). So, how did the Milan resolutions come to be?

DECONSTRUCTING THE MILAN RESOLUTIONS

At a political level, the 1880 resolutions in Milan can perhaps best be
seen as some skillful lobbying by vested interests to achieve a particular
outcome (something not unknown in the field today). It is worthy of
note that there were just 164 delegates to that Congress and that those
delegates came from just eight countries or regions (Brill, 1984). As was
noted by Gallaudet (1881), a clear majority of delegates (87) were from
Italy and the majority of those delegates (46) were from just two exclu-
sively oral schools for the deaf in Milan. By any reckoning, the views
expressed by such a majority could not have been truly representative of
the international zeitgeist in the education of DHH children at the time.
Demonstrably, the first two resolutions passed at the Milan Congress
failed to acknowledge the need for educators of deaf children to seek to
be responsive to the needs of individual children—​that is, the need to
match programs to children and not children to programs. Seemingly
out of their desire to promote practices and procedures that were being
advanced by one part of the educational establishment—​however fer-
vently the underpinning beliefs in the correctness of those practices
may have been held—​the advocates of the resolutions and, in partic-
ular, the staff of those two Italian schools actively sought to exclude
the potential for alternative approaches to be not only viable, but also
perhaps necessary for many DHH children to achieve successful lin-
guistic and educational outcomes. Indeed, there appears to have been
little consideration of the diversity among the pupils in the broader
DHH population that may not have been—​and almost certainly were
not—​represented in the oral schools in Milan in 1880.
From an empirical perspective, it would also appear the resolutions
were based on limited evidence of outcomes for the methods being
proposed. There is certainly nothing in the historical record to indi-
cate any formal evidence was advanced in support of the claims of
4

4   Diversity in Deaf Education

successful application of the methods, other than anecdotes about the

speech production abilities of the children in the Milan schools and
elsewhere. Based on the records of those who attended the Congress
and paid visits to the two schools in question, there is no doubt they
were introduced to children who had mastered spoken language suc-
cessfully and had good spoken communication skills. Buxton (1883,
p. 42), for example, noted he had been in Milan and was “officially
present when the ‘pure oral’ method was exemplified by its pupils,”
but there was no commentary on the nature of the children’s hearing
loss, their age, or their educational history. The fact that some pupils
achieved in this way has never been in doubt. What is absent from
the literature and would clearly appear to have been absent from the
debate at the time, however, was any evidence to support the notion that
the methods were equally applicable to all deaf children, as asserted
in the ultimate Congress resolutions. Edward Miner Gallaudet (1881)
noted this in his reflections on the Congress. He recorded that two
of the English delegates to the Congress used “eloquent language” to
urge the adoption of exclusively oral teaching methods but that they
failed to recognize “the objection which may be raised against the oral
method for all deaf-​mutes: that, in point of fact, a large proportion of
the deaf are incapable of attaining any real success in speech and lip-​
reading” (p. 5).
The prima facie evidence for the success of the oral methods pro-
claimed in Milan was the presentation of successfully orally commu-
nicating students in the Milan schools. However, there is no evidence
that the pupils in the Milan schools were in any way representative
of the broader population of DHH children in Italy (or elsewhere in
the world) at that time. In all likelihood, that population was rather
exclusive with regard to a number of characteristics that would today
be recognized as being associated with variance in the linguistic and
educational outcomes for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (see
Chapter 18).
Quite simply, the full potential for diversity among DHH learners at
the time could not have been considered because most of them would
not have been enrolled in formal education at all. According to Soysal
and Strang (1989), the primary enrollment ratio in Italy in 1870 (i.e., the
proportion of all children of school age who were actually enrolled in
formal education) was only 29%. Although, as noted by these authors,
moves to compulsory education were just beginning around the time
of the Milan Congress (i.e., in 1877 in Italy, 1880 in England, and 1882
in France), it is still very likely that a large proportion of deaf children
were not engaged in formal education at the time. Furthermore, as
would have still been the case for the majority of hearing children at the
time, those deaf children who were in schools would almost certainly
have been children from higher socioeconomic status backgrounds
5

Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education   5

whose parents were themselves relatively better educated than others

in the community. This conclusion is supported by other matters set for
debate at the 1880 Congress. Notably, the Congress debated the ques-
tion of what could be done to provide for the “great number” of deaf
children who were not, at that stage, receiving the benefit of instruction
“due to the poverty of the families and the want of suitable institu-
tions” (Fay, 1881, p. 64).
In addition to being, disproportionately, from higher socioeco-
nomic status and better educated families, the children in the oral
schools of Milan (and elsewhere) would likely also have shared a num-
ber of other characteristics. First, it is clear that, relative to modern
standards, they would have been identified as being deaf and would
have commenced formal education at relatively late ages. This fact is
in evidence in another of the debates and subsequent resolutions at
the Milan Congress. Resolution 3 centered on the question of the age
at which children should commence formal educational intervention
with the ultimate resolution being that “the most favourable age at
which the deaf can be received in school is 8 to 10 years” (Fay, 1881,
p. 64). Clearly, by modern standards, the average age at which most
children were afforded educational intervention in 1880 was very late.
Another issue that would have defined the population of children in
oral schools of the period is the relative absence of children with addi-
tional disabilities. Although there is no specific information available
about the nature of the population in the schools, it is highly unlikely
there was any significant representation of children with disabilities
(particularly intellectual or physical disabilities). If such children
were in school at all, they would likely have been in entirely sepa-
rate “institutions” rather than in schools for the deaf, in accordance
with the dominant philosophy of the 1880s (Kauffman, 1981; White &
Wolfensburger, 1969).
Finally, there is a question around the nature and diversity of hear-
ing loss experienced by children who may have been enrolled in oral
schools of the day. Obviously, in the absence of any objective strategies
for assessing hearing loss at the time, it is just not possible to know
about this issue. However, it is simply logical that (a) there would have
been, as there is today, a diverse range of levels of hearing loss among
the population of DHH children; and (b) there was no available system
of personal amplification that could have enabled children with greater
levels and more complex types of hearing loss to access spoken lan-
guage effectively. Hence, in all likelihood, children with lesser degrees
of hearing loss would have been significantly overrepresented among
those who had so successfully developed oral language and were the
objects of display at the Congress.
So, in summary, it would seem that, in 1880, the pupils for whom a
single approach to communication and language acquisition was being
6

6   Diversity in Deaf Education

deemed to be appropriate by the majority of Congress participants

would have been
• From higher socioeconomic and well-​educated family
backgrounds
• Unlikely to have any disabilities in addition to their deafness
• More likely to have lesser degrees of hearing loss
• Unlikely to have encountered formal education until at least
8 years of age (or potentially older)
• Without any access to amplification that could provide access to
spoken language
Notably, these are all factors that we know to be associated with sig-
nificant variance in the linguistic and educational outcomes achieved
by DHH children (Ching et al., 2013a, 2013b). We return to these issues
later, but it is important to note here that, although the last factor would
clearly have had an equal effect on outcomes for all DHH children dur-
ing the 19th century, the first four factors would almost certainly have
weighed more positively for children in the schools in Milan and more
negatively on the developmental outcomes for the large group of DHH
children that Gallaudet described as being “incapable of attaining any
real success in speech and lip-​reading” (Gallaudet, 1881, p. 5).
So, to return to the initial question, how did the Milan resolutions
happen? Clearly, whether for political purposes or through lack of
awareness and knowledge, there was much about the diverse nature of
DHH children at the time that was simply not considered in the fram-
ing of the Milan resolutions. Specifically, there was a range of variables
among the population of DHH children at the time that should have
been considered. Careful consideration of at least some of those issues
would have made it patently clear there were many students who did not
share the characteristics of those who acquired spoken language suc-
cessfully. These facts alone, we argue, should have suggested the folly
in the Milan delegates’ dogmatic conclusion about the appropriateness
of oral educational methods for all DHH children. Simply put, there
was a failure to recognize the diversity that existed within the popula-
tion of DHH children at the time and, just as significant, there was a
rush to embrace an approach on ideological grounds in the absence of
hard evidence to support the outcomes of that approach.

RECOGNIZING DIVERSITY IN THE MODERN ERA

From a contemporary perspective, educators and other professionals
involved in the identification and education of DHH children should
be no less attentive to the diversity that exists among that population of
learners today, and should be no less skeptical about suggestions that
there should, or could, be any “one true path” to seek language, commu-
nication, and educational outcomes for all deaf children. Indeed, just as
7

Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education   7

it should have been in 1880, any claim that there is a single approach that
should be applied to the needs of “all deaf children” should be treated
with the same degree of skepticism as the pronouncements of the Milan
Congress. Having said that, however, we acknowledge there are now
greater opportunities for DHH children to develop speech and spoken
language that are more commensurate with their hearing counterparts
than at any time in history. Without question, those opportunities are
the result, in large part, of a number of developments—​educational,
audiological, technological, and medical. Perhaps the two most notable
among these developments have been the advent of universal newborn
hearing screening (UNHS) and early access to cochlear implantation.
These interventions, perhaps more than any other developments in the
history of our field, have had a dramatic impact on children’s capac-
ity for spoken language development, and their subsequent educational
and vocational opportunities (Leigh, 2008).
In the years since the 2000 ICED was held in Sydney, Australia, the
number of DHH children around the world who have been identified
early though UNHS has increased dramatically (Leigh et al., 2010). In
Australia, for example, in the year following that ICED, just 5% of all
children born were screened for birth through such hearing screen-
ing programs. Wake (2002) noted that, accordingly, only about 25% of
infants born with permanent hearing loss were identified by 12 months
of age. In 2015, at the time of the Congress in Athens, that proportion
reached 97%, with the vast majority of those children going on to
engage with early intervention by 3 months of age.
Increasingly in Australia, as elsewhere in the developed world, chil-
dren who are identified with severe and profound levels of hearing
loss routinely receive one or, more frequently, two (bilateral) cochlear
implants. Although far from being universal, this is an internation-
ally observable trend. During the 5 years since the ICED was held in
Vancouver, Canada, the number of children younger than 18 years
who have received cochlear implants has increased by at least 100,000.
According to one maker of implant devices, approximately 30,000
children around the world now receive at least one cochlear implant
each year. Significantly, as the number of children receiving cochlear
implants increases, the age at which they receive these devices has been
decreasing. In Australia, the age at which children, identified through
UNHS, receive a cochlear implant continues to decrease. Although
exact statistics are not available, it seems reasonable to conclude that
the average age of fitting for children whose severe to profound hear-
ing loss is identified through UNHS is now around 9 months.
At this point it is important to note this phenomenon is very much
a “first-​world” issue. As significant as this trend may be in countries
such as Australia, the Netherlands, and the United States, the avail-
ability of UNHS and the decreasing age of cochlear implantation
are factors that clearly divide the first and developing worlds (Leigh
8

8   Diversity in Deaf Education

et al., 2010). To account for this dichotomy of opportunity, while ever

it exists, there will be the need for a wide variety of responses—​both
audiological and pedagogical. Such responses will need to be applied
differentially according to particular international circumstances. To
this end, it behooves us to ensure there is no less emphasis on the
development and application of interventions that are applicable and
effective in circumstances in which early identification and advanced
hearing technologies are not the norm. It should not be that our field
simply develops interventions exclusively for the privileged first
world, to the detriment of children who are not able to access such
advantages (see Chapter 2).
Now, having claimed that two issues—​UNHS and early access to
cochlear implantation—​are dramatically changing outcomes for DHH
children, there is an obvious question regarding the extent of available
evidence to support this contention. Certainly, we are not suggesting
these two developments are a panacea for the linguistic and develop-
mental consequences of deafness, and neither are we of the view that
they suggest that “all deaf children” should or even can achieve ideal
outcomes via such a route. However, it is, we argue, increasingly appar-
ent that the outcomes of these interventions with DHH children continue
to be very positive with regard to speech and spoken language (Dettman
& Dowell, 2010; Hammer, 2010; Verbist, 2010), and that there continues to
be considerable variability. So, what do we know in this regard?

Accounting for Diversity

The starting premise for these comments is to return to the observa-
tions we have already made about the Congress participants in Milan
and how they failed to recognize the diversity among the population
of DHH learners in 1880. As then, there continues to be a litany of
factors that can and do account for diversity of linguistic and educa-
tional outcomes in this population, even with the advantages of earlier
identification and earlier access to cochlear implantation. Not the least
among such factors, and perhaps most commonly cited, is the degree of
a child’s hearing loss, particularly for those whose hearing loss is insuf-
ficient to justify the application of cochlear implants (Sininger et al.,
2010). Among others, additional factors that may influence outcomes
for deaf children include the following:
• The presence of additional disabilities: The degree and conse-
quences of a range of disabilities have been shown to affect
the rate and extent of growth in a number of outcomes mea-
sures for deaf children (Dammeyer, 2009; Knoors & Vervloed,
2011; Meinzen-​Derr et al., 2010).
• Cognitive ability: Nonverbal cognitive ability has been shown to
be predictive of speech perception (Geers et al., 2003), language
9

Recognizing Diversity in Deaf Education   9

development (Geers, 2006), and reading abilities (Geers, 2003) in

deaf children.
• Socioeconomic status: There are several issues at play here, some
of which impact families’ capacities to engage fully in educa-
tional and therapeutic processes with their children (Marschark
et al., 2015; Powers, 2003);
• Parental (particularly maternal) level of education: Higher levels
of maternal education have been associated with higher lev-
els of child language ability among both hearing children
(Reilly et al., 2010), and DHH children (Pipp-​Siegel et al., 2003;
Yoshinaga-​Itano et al., 1998).
• Cultural and linguistic background: Divergent home language
backgrounds have been associated with differential levels of
achievement in the development of both spoken and signed
language (Akamatsu & Cole, 2000; Leigh & Crowe, 2015).
• Age at time of intervention (Kennedy et al., 2006; Sininger et al.,
2010; Yoshinaga-​Itano, 2004).
• Type and quality of intervention (Geers & Moog, 1989; Geers
et al., 2003). This factor could perhaps be better divided in
two: (a) the extent and timeliness of access to a fully available
communication mode (regardless of whether that communi-
cation is spoken or signed) (Dettman et al., 2007) and (b) the
type of assistive hearing device provided for the child and
the age at which that device was fitted effectively (Sininger
et al., 2010).
Each of these factors, among others, is currently being considered as an
independent (predictor) variable in a major investigation of developmen-
tal outcomes for DHH children in Australia. The Longitudinal Outcomes
of Children with Hearing Impairment (LOCHI) study is a prospective
study that aims to identify the effect of numerous variables on outcomes
for a large cohort of DHH children from the time of identification of their
hearing loss to at least 9 years of age, and potentially beyond.

The LOCHI Study

A succinct overview of the LOCHI study has been provided by Ching
et al. (2013b). The study involves more than 450 children, born between
2002 and 2007, in three Australian states (Queensland, New South
Wales, and Victoria), who were identified with a hearing loss sufficient
to be fitted with a hearing aid. Recruitment was conducted across these
three states because of the differential commencement dates and prog-
ress of rollout of newborn hearing screening programs during that
time. The interstate differences in the rollout of UNHS programs meant
that approximately half the children recruited for the study had their
hearing loss identified through UNHS before the age of 6 months, thus
10

10   Diversity in Deaf Education

allowing for an ethical examination of the effects of earlier versus later

identification of hearing loss.
As reported by Ching et al. (2013a), at the time of the 3-​year assess-
ments, 451 children (54% boys) were enrolled in the study, of whom 56%
were identified as having a hearing loss and were fitted with a hear-
ing aid before 6 months of age—​on average, by just less than 3 months
of age. The remainder of the children were identified, on average, at
approximately 8 months of age. At 3 years of age, there were 317 chil-
dren (70%) who were hearing-​aid users and 134 (30%) who had received
at least one cochlear implant. There were 107 children (24%) with addi-
tional disabilities, 71% who used an aural/​oral mode of communica-
tion, and 21% who were in environments where a language other than
English was spoken language at home. Approximately 33% had par-
ents with university education. All the children in the study received
hearing aids and audiological intervention from a common federal
government agency—​Australian Hearing—​which provides free hear-
ing services to Australian children regardless of location and according
to a standardized fitting and service regime. Therefore, those aspects of
intervention were held constant across the sample (Ching et al., 2013b).
The LOCHI study considers a wide range of predictor variables along
with a wide range of outcome variables. The predictor variables include
hearing level, additional disability, gender, socioeconomic status, lan-
guage and mode of communication used at home and in intervention,
nonverbal intelligence, and, importantly, the age at which the children
received their first hearing aid (i.e., as a proxy for the age at which
their hearing loss was identified) and the age at which they received a
cochlear implant when applicable. With regard to outcome measures,
there is a similar wide range of variables that includes tests of receptive
and expressive language, vocabulary, academic achievement, reading
ability, and functional communication skills, among others (see Ching
et al., 2013a, 2013b). All children enrolled in the study were (or will be)
tested 6 months after receiving their hearing aid, 12 months after the
first hearing-​aid fitting, and then again at 3 years of age, 5 years of age,
and, ultimately, at 9 years of age.
Full details of this study have been reported for the assessments at
3 years of age (see Ching & Dillon, 2013; Ching et al., 2013a; Cupples
et al., 2013; Leigh et al., 2015). For the purposes of this discussion
about diversity among DHH children, we are referencing the report-
ing of global outcomes for the sample of children at 3 years of age
by Ching et al. (2013a). In that analysis, children’s outcomes were
quantified in terms of global factor scores, which, on the basis of fac-
tor analysis, were computed for each participant by combining
individual test scores across measures of receptive and expressive
language, speech production, auditory functional performance, and
psychosocial functioning. The global factor score was scaled so that
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Crónicas
imorais
 This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

Title: Crónicas imorais

Author: Albino Forjaz de Sampaio

Release date: September 27, 2023 [eBook #71745]

Language: Portuguese

Original publication: Lisboa: Santos & Vieira, 1918

Credits: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at

https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from
images generously made available by The Internet
Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CRÓNICAS

IMORAIS ***
 ALBINO FORJAZ DE SAMPAYO

Crónicas
imorais
«O que melhor se ria será
o último a rir-se.»

F. Nietzsche.

3.º MILHAR

Editores—S A N T O S & V I E I R A
EMPREZA LITTERARIA FLUMINENSE
125, Rua dos Retrozeiros, 125
LISBOA
CRÓNICAS IMORAIS

Editores—SANTOS & VIEIRA—LISBOA

Typ. da Empreza Litteraria e Typogr.
(Officinas movidas a electricidade)
R. Elias Garcia, 184 Porto MCMXV
 OBRAS DO MESMO AUTOR:
PALAVRAS CÍNICAS, 7.º milhar 1 volume
LISBOA TRÁGICA, 4.º milhar 1 »
PROSA VIL, 2.º milhar 1 »
GENTE DA RUA, 3.º milhar 1 »
No prelo:
GRILHETAS 1 »
ALBINO FORJAZ DE SAMPAYO

Crónicas
imorais
«O que melhor se ria será
o último a rir-se».

F. Nietzsche.

3.º MILHAR

EDITORES—Santos & Vieira

EMPREZA LITTERARIA FLUMINENSE
125, Rua dos Retrozeiros, 125
LISBOA
 AO
DR. BRITO CAMACHO
 Crónicas imorais
OS artigos, crónicas ou antes as impressões que hoje se reúnem
em volume são já do domínio público. Todavia devo declarar que
não foi nele que pensei, quando as escrevi. Os quatro géneros de
criaturas que há no mundo, «criaturas racionais, como os homens;
criaturas sensitivas como os animais; criaturas vegetativas, como as
plantas; criaturas insensíveis, como as pedras», como quere Vieira,
só mediocremente me interessam. Publicam-se hoje porque isso me
apraz, e se são más ou boas, tal não me fará doer a cabeça. Nunca
mais as lerei. São cousas que passaram, notas à margem dum
acontecimento, comentários a uma leitura, impressões de momento,
fumo, cinza, terra, nada. Viveram um dia. Hoje reúne-as um certo
egoismo. Vivi com elas. Acharia a algumas, se as voltasse a ler,
uma ingenuidade primitiva; a outras uma piada estupenda.
Pensadas e escritas à hora em que o chefe da tipografia vem pedir
original, só para mim terão valor. No emtanto marcam cousas
curiosas e são um depoimento pessoal não falho de interêsse.
Umas são indignadas, outras biliosas, algumas pândegas. Não
admira. Filhas do momento que as inspirou, devem tambêm ter o
seu grão de incoerência, de petulância, de atrevimento. Que
importa? Não as renego. Chamei-lhes imorais, porque algumas
tiveram o condão de irritar muita gente boa, que ainda tem moral.
Ah! abjecta gente a que ainda tem moral! Muitas mereceram acres
censuras e outras ainda despertaram louvores. As que despertaram
louvores tive o cuidado de não as juntar aqui. Devem ser más por
fôrça.
Vivendo a vida do jornal, perdendo-se no arquivo do
esquecimento que o jornal é, em pouco tempo estariam esquecidas.
Em livro, não será mais longa a sua vida, mas sempre o entêrro é
melhor engendrado. Imorais disse eu. Imorais sim porque quási
sempre estão em desacôrdo com a moral do meu parceiro. Que
devo confessar-lhes, não me dou nada bem com os que estão de
acôrdo. Quem está de acôrdo não sabe ter razão. Porque a razão
não é dos que a teem, é dos que teem talento para a ter. Devo
tambêm confessar-lhes, que estas crónicas são inofensivas. A
ninguêm fazem mal. Não passam dum bom riso, um grande riso.
Tolice seria tomar tudo isto a sério. O mundo é uma espécie de
revista e quem se mata morre cedo. Se alguma vez, leitor, te
interessares, olha que tudo isto é ilusão. Não vale a pena, em
verdade te digo. Ilusão, ilusão sómente. A comoção, a ironia, o riso,
a tristeza, tudo isto que vês reunido, tudo isto, não é mais do que
cousas que já passaram, recordações, notas breves, leves
apontamentos, terra, pó, nada, cinza.
E não se comovam que se acaba o prólogo.
 Juízo do ano
O ano que começou ontem será um ano igual aos outros. Igual, sem
tirar nem pôr. Haverá nele, como já houve o ano passado, como
houve em todos os anos que passaram e como haverá em todos os
anos que vierem, tolos que enriquecem e tolos que cavam pés de
burro, asnos que se suicidam e asnos que acham isto uma cousa
óptima. Continuará a haver uma ignorância formidável da multidão
dominada e uma patifaria criminosa da minoria dominante;
continuará a haver homens cavalos e homens cavaleiros; sábios
que são burros e burros que são sábios; muita maldade nas
mulheres—a maldade nas mulheres é um pleonasmo!—e muita
estultícia nos homens. Haverá côres para todos os gostos, acepipes
para todos os paladares e partidos para todos os cidadãos. Não
sucederá nada de novo, porque nada é novo debaixo do sol, diz a
voz grave do vélho Eclesiastes, um mágico que sabia muito mais da
patifaria humana do que o snr. Civinini das mulheres que usam
bigode e pêra.
O novo ano será um ano feliz para quem jogar e lhe sair «el
prémio gordo». Para os que joguem e lhes sair branco será um ano
de azar.
Quem trabucar, manduca, a não ser que perca o apetite. Quanto
ao resto, o que êste ano será, é fácil de adivinhar.
Para os tolos, uma felicidade, porque êsses banabóias são felizes
todos os dias; para os que não sejam, nem eu mesmo sei.
Quanto ao ano artístico, será deplorável, porque o que terá menos
é arte, e de artistas nem sombra. Haverá vários quadros assinados
por estes e aqueles fulanos. Se é paisagem, já sabemos o que é:
«Macieira em flor», «Um trecho da Tapada» ou a «Ribeira de
Algés». Se é retrato, um cavalheiro ou uma cavalheira de cara
lambuza e desconfiada, olhos de goraz do vapor, ou então um ar
bonacho de quem diz à gente: «Então que tal? como passou? estou
catita, heim?»
Em arquitectura, continuarão a aparecer projectos... do Palácio da
Justiça, de várias saladas de cal e areia para projecto ou para
habitar, e de «artes várias».
Os nossos escultores continuarão fazendo Senhoras da
Conceição, cruzes para jazigos, e «muchas cosas más» dum
«salero» infinito.
Das finanças: «finanças se chamam as rendas públicas quando
Portugal está a finar-se». É de Camilo o dito. Das finanças dizia eu...
mas em finanças não sou muito forte. Adiante.
O ano literário... Continuará a haver literatura, literatos vulgares
de Linneu, literatos abezelgados e chués, porque, irmãos
caríssimos, «todo o homem tem em si uma porção de inépcia, que
há de sair em prosa ou verso, em palavras ou obras, como o
carnicão dum furúnculo». Homens de génio não haverá, mas em
compensação abundosos se prognostica os homens de génio mau
ou de bom génio, porque cada um é como o pai o fêz. A crítica
continuará a ser como foi sempre: De mostarda, de manteiga, e de
àgua e sal.
E, tenho dito.
Quanto a ti, leitor molesto, eu não tiro o teu horóscopo nem te leio
as ruins tenções de que porventura estejas cheio. Mas é sempre
bom conversar, uma conversa de amigos vélhos e inseparáveis.
Não sei se és rico, se pobre, se alto, se baixo. Se rico, guarda a
bôlsa que não preciso dela; se pobre, tem paciência porque não te
posso valer.
Dito isto, em verdade te digo que tens um ano diante de ti.
Emprega-o bem. Lê a vida do bom homem Ricardo, regula as tuas
digestões, não tenhas excessos e deita-te cedo. A isto se chama em
bom português fazer pela vida.
Faze pois pela vida. Lembra-te que «os mortos caem fácilmente
no olvido», como dizia Bürger na balada de Leonora, traduzida por
êsse tristonho Gerard de Nerval que se enforcou num candieiro da
Rue Vieille-Lanterne, numa manhã gelada de janeiro em que um
corvo, que parecia fugido ao «Never more!» de Poe, lhe crocitava
satânico e lúgubre a sua elegia de tímido, de sonhador e de
incompreendido. ¿E quem hoje, no aniversário da sua morte, se
lembra dêsse pobre Gerard, que trazia sempre os bolsos cheios de
livros, como o Schaunard da Bohème, que traduziu Goethe e visitou
o Oriente? Ah! é bem certo que «os mortos caem fácilmente no
olvido!»
Faze por ter dinheiro. O Dinheiro, alêm de ser tudo o que tu
sabes, é ainda aquilo com que se compram os melões. Se o tiveres
não o emprestes nem o dês. Se precisares não peças, porque
ninguêm te vale. Gritar é inútil tambêm, para que não chames
curiosos à tua desventura.
Prefere «um pássaro na mão a dois voando» e não te fies na
Virgem. Porque se te fias na Virgem e não corres não tarda o fatal e
bem merecido pontapé.
Se és casado não leves amigos a casa. Isto não é para que te
ofendas, é por uma cousa que eu cá sei. Se tens filhos, ao menos
um filho só, que é cousa que tôda a gente tem, seu ou alheio, faz do
teu filho um homem forte. Bom estômago, bons nervos, bons
músculos. Antes o obrigues à frequência do mestre Raku, um sujeito
que ganha a vida a deitar os outros ao chão, do que à de Félix
Pereira, que lhe ensina que meter os dedos no nariz é porcaria. É
preferível ser forte a ser bem-criado. É mesmo preferível ter fôrça a
ter direito, «porque se vai mais longe com a mão cheia de fôrça do
que com um saco cheio de direito», ensina a experiência dos
homens e a sabedoria das nações.
Podes ensinar-lhe muitas mais cousas que tu saibas. Não o
queiras nem artista, nem literato, nem jornalista. Vê se o podes fazer
par do reino, que o pariato é uma cousa que se está dando ou se vai
dar a tôda a gente, exactamente como o hábito de Cristo ou de S.
Tiago. «Dizem que até há barbeiros...» como já o suspeitava o
Baptista dos Maias. Se o fizeres par, porque êle não tenha geiteira
para outra cousa, recomenda-lhe que se cale. «O silêncio é de
ouro» e um tolo calado, conquanto não deixe de ser tolo, passa por
homem sisudo. Porque se êle assim não fôr, tanto pior para êle. Os
que assim não são, nada teem a esperar do ano novo. São e serão
sempre escarnecidos, ridículos e pobres. E o pior mal dum homem é
ser pobre. Ninguêm lhe vale. Ser pobre é...
Não continuo porque um cavalheiro que está vendo o que eu
escrevo, refila, em ar de resposta:
—«Mas há a Caridade. A Caridade, homem!»
—«A Caridade? Ah! sim.»—As misérias do próximo comovem
muito a caridade de cada um. E eu, que tambêm me vou tornando
azêdo como o senhor Silva Pinto, resmunguei e recordei-me. Devia
ser uma caridade como a daquele barão da Falperra que o nosso
Alfredo Mesquita conheceu: Um homem tão caridoso que, depois de
ter ouvido um pobre contar-lhe as suas misérias, a ponto de o fazer
chorar, chamava sempre o criado e, com a voz entrecortada de
soluços, ordenava:—«João, ponha êsse homem no ôlho da rua;
parte-se-me o coração de o ouvir...»
E para os que lhe dissessem que êle lhe não dera nada, retorquia,
que sim, que dera. Dera-lhe... atenção.
E estava certo, como diz ainda o senhor Silva Pinto.
 Artistas
A morte recente dêsse desventurado Augusto Santo, escultor do
Pôrto, veio avocar com amarga intensidade a malfadada sorte que
está guardada a todos que teem a suprema desventura de ter
nascido artistas em Portugal. Augusto Santo foi discípulo de
Falguière, de Rodin e de Soares dos Reis. Ouviu as lições de Taine,
e expôs no Salon. Era quási um desconhecido e morreu na maior
miséria, num catre humilde de hospital.
Ser desconhecido em Portugal é um caso banalíssimo.
Herculano, e êsse Garrett que «num dia de apuro por cem ou
duzentas moedas seria capaz de tôdas as porcarias menos de pôr
num papel a trôco de todo o ouro do mundo uma linha mal escrita»
são, ainda que isto pareça um paradoxo, quási desconhecidos. O
grande público não tem ideia dêles e ainda hoje uma das suas
edições leva uma eternidade para se esgotar.
A indiferença do público pelos artistas é absoluta, e não vai longe
ainda o tempo em que literato era sinónimo de vadio. Camilo no
Pôrto, ao tempo, era sómente um janota que para ali quebrava
esquinas, um tal que não avezava com que mandar cantar um cego.
Quando, pelos romances, ganhava com que forrar de cuidados o
passadio de dois meses, não se imagina o escândalo que aquilo
produzia nos Antónios Josés da Silva e na rua das Congostas. O
Pôrto de então tinha ideias seguras e via as cousas como devia ver.
Literatos neste país?! hum! e torcia o nariz como quem dizia que
aquilo não era prático, nem por aquele caminho se chegava a ter um
rolosito de inscrições, um prédiosito, ou uma velhice sossegada. Era
a vida prática, o balcão é que era o caminho. Por isso, quando
Camilo, já no apogeu de glória, em cartas duma dolorosa
humildade, quási esmolava, para comer, a compra de pratas que os
seus admiradores lhe ofereciam, o Pôrto mui devia rir. Êle bem lhe
dizia! Não era aquele o caminho...
 A Soares dos Réis para lhe fazerem justiça foi preciso que a
morte o tomasse. Em vida foi um obscuro obreiro sem amigos, ou
quási, e teve uma existência bastante precária. Basta dizer que em
tôda a sua vida de trabalho não conseguiu mais do que 4:764$500
réis segundo a autobiografia do artista, que o snr. Joaquim de
Vasconcelos, em 1905, confidenciou ao público por intermédio da
Revista. Para ganhar essa importância confessa Soares dos Réis
que esteve «algumas vezes em relação com a arte industrial».
Mesmo assim quem a achar exagerada deduza-lhe o custo do
material e de auxiliares indispensáveis e verá quanto fica. O Artista
na Infância vendeu-o por 600$000 réis e foi o máximo preço que
levou por uma obra sua, se exceptuarmos, é claro, o monumento ao
Conde de Ferreira.
Em vida ninguêm o auxiliou, ninguêm o encorajou para
prosseguir. Muito ao contrário perseguiam-no, sitiavam-no,
roubavam-no, fechavam-lhe tôdas as portas com intrigas soezes,
com indróminas de sabidos e ronha de marotos. Concurso a que
fôsse, vaga a que concorresse, plano que tentasse viabilizar, certo
era a mediocridade arranjista, por portas travessas, frustrar-lhe tôda
a ambição e todo o Sonho.
Emquanto o homem viveu não puderam os amigos, êsses amigos
do diabo, atormentá-lo mais, nem mais o perseguirem. Depois de
morto não houve lamúria que não chorassem e não houve adjectivo
sonoroso e amelaçado que a criatura não tivesse. A justiça chega
sempre depois da morte, é certo, mas pela injustiça dos vivos.
Com Augusto Santo o caso é o mesmo. Augusto Santo era, antes
de tudo, um impersistente. Não possuía a tenacidade avara, fria e
reservada, a confiança absoluta dêsses brocadores do Ideal,
fadados para o êxito. A menor contrariedade o exasperava. E como
se não fôsse bastante a execução perra, o sonho nebuloso, a vida
material e a falta de tudo, ainda a minar-lhe a existência a
agressividade constante dos outros,—os colegas os primeiros,—não
fôsse o pobre diabo roubar-lhes a glória, e numa avidez de faminto a
guardasse tôda para si. Augusto Santo foi um perseguido desde que
expôs êsse Ismael, a sua única obra a valer, mas ainda assim uma
promessa do que o seu temperamento de artista poderia dar.
 Como vêem, eu não quero dizer que Augusto Santo era um génio
e que a sua morte abre uma clareira formidável entre os Teixeiras e
os Lopes da pedra portuguesa. Não. Augusto Santo não deixou
fauteuil vago. O que eu quero precisar é que era Augusto Santo um
artista a valer, que noutro meio floresceria, um meio que lhe não
fôsse hostil como o seu,—tão hostil que até o deixou morrer de fome
numa enxêrga de hospital. Com esta hostilidade e com esta
ingratidão a arte perdeu, mas ganharam os escultores portugueses.
Podem agora catrapiscar a imortalidade à vontadinha, que ela não
esperará que êles morram para vir, ou o seu cão, sevandijar-lhes em
cima da obra.
Alguns gazeteiros ou gazetíferos, com as palavras de louvor do
cliché, justificam porque Augusto Santo não teve carruagem às
horas, mesa lauta e colchão fôfo. Foi, dizem êles reprimendando os
restos do escultor, porque era um inadaptado, porque desprezou
sempre a arte de engorda, a que dá lucros e considerações, e
preferiu correr atrás dum sonho que o exauria e que o matava, um
sonho de arte irrealisável e irrealisado, arte verdadeira que não tem
preço, embora às vezes se venda, e que não se compra, embora às
vezes se adquira. E com um desdêm olímpico, absoluto, ditatorial,
chamam-lhe... sonhador. Sonhador!... como se isto fôsse o sumo
desprêzo ou a máxima compaixão. Deve ser bem triste morrer,
assim!
Ao menos se essa turba se calasse e governasse vida, vá; mas
vir babujar a sua irresponsabilidade desvergonhada no momento em
que o pobre vencido solavancava a caminho do cemitério, é
intolerável. Não se justifique, que ninguêm lhe tira o ganho: ela tem
a sua utilidade. ¿Quem é que nos havia afinal de fazer os fretes?
Augusto Santo, não reste dúvida, foi um atormentado da forma.
Quando a concepção, megalomania conceptiva era nele, lhe
fabulava maravilhas, logo o barro, parece que conluiado com os
homens, debaixo dos gadanhos convulsos e nervosos tinha formas
brutais, aduncas e agressivas. E a sua frialdade viscosa logo ali
abafava o delírio artístico do pobre impotente e lhe dava crises de
desânimo capazes de vergar um atleta.
 Todo o Pôrto cabareteiro e intelectual conhecia estas torturas do
artista. Sem fôrças para opôr uma resistência, êle consumia-se em
desolações. Cada tentativa malograda deixava-o mais exausto de
fôrças do que uma noite perdida a caminhar. O Sonho vampirizava-o
e exigia-lhe uma impossível produção de calorias. Todavia nada
resta dele, decorrendo como decorreu intramuralhas do seu crânio.
Após a criação dêsse Ismael, que noutro meio mais acarinhante, se
o não celebrizasse, o evidenciaria, Augusto Santo criara, para si
mesmo, responsabilidades. Ficaram por cumprir. A quantos artistas
não sucede outro tanto?! Todos o sabem, Portugal artísticamente é
um país morto. Capaz duma ressurreição? Certamente. Desde que
os poderes públicos olhem com atenção para a Arte, desde que a
percentagem assustadora dos analfabetos diminua e desde que o
público manifeste interêsse por estas cousas. Arte em Portugal? Os
pintores é que sabem o que isso é. Êles bem vêem que não é de
sonhos e de belos quadros que se vive. O que dá são as lições, que
é como quem diz os quadros que fazem e os discípulos assinam. É
uma arte de opereta, de muito riso, com sinfonias de Offenbach e de
que só vai mal a quem a toma a sério. Êsses são os vencidos, os
Soares dos Réis e os Augustos Santos.
Ê pois mais um artista que sucumbiu em luta inglória com o
Destino. Consagrado ou desconhecido, não há dúvida que era um
artista. O Ismael o atesta. E já que ninguêm teve que o auxiliasse e
que no meio da indiferença geral da gente que escreve e do regosijo
da gente que escultura, êle deixou a vida, justo é que eu o admire,
ao seu exemplo de intransigência, à luta que sustentou e à tragédia
da vida que sofreu. E ninguêm se lembrou dele senão a Morte, que
se amerceou de tanto sofrimento. Ó morte remediadora e
sacratíssima, amiga dos pobres, remidora dos desventurados e
consoladora dos aflitos, eu te bemdigo.
 O Jettatore
TEÓFILO Gauthier, o Benvenuto Cellini da prosa francesa, segundo
Camilo, consagrou um dos seus volumes à Jettatura, ou mau
olhado, condão funesto do Jettatore. Nesse volume, obra prima do
lapidário precioso a quem já Baudelaire havia chamado «poeta
impecável, mago e mestre», se romantiza a vida dum jettatore e se
dá conta de todos os malefícios que o seu olhar causou. Paulo
d’Aspremont, francês, é o protagonista do romance, e, sem o saber,
possui o fascino, que, traduzido em vulgar, significa mau olhado. O
seu olhar fatal onde pousa é nefasto. A pata do cavalo de Attila não
teve tanta crueldade. Se se debruça na amurada dum barco, para
olhar a água mansa e tranqùila, logo o mar se encapela e enfuría;
se entra num teatro e fita um actor que ri, logo o espectáculo se
interrompe e a própria Troça fica séria; se olha uma bailarina que
rodopia, um bico de gás incendeia a gaze e a bailarina morre.
Quando fita a sua própria noiva, o pobre jettatore mata-a. Uma
roseta escarlate assoma às faces da condenada inglêsa, um escarro
de sangue vem da goela à bôca, e dali à morte é um ai. Nápoles
inteiro o odeia. «Tôdas as vezes que parava junto duma loja, o dono
parecia assustado, murmurava algumas imprecações a meia voz, e
alongava os dedos como se quisesse apunhalá-lo com o auricular e
o índex; as vendedeiras mais ousadas, acabrunhavam-o de
impropérios e mostravam-lhe o punho.» Por fim cega-se e suicida-
se, arremessando-se ao mar. O seu corpo nunca se encontrou.
Quando êle morreu,—oh meu adorável Gauthier!—quando êle
morreu «a tempestade desencadeou-se então com tôda a fúria: as
ondas assaltaram a praia em filas compactas, como guerreiros
correndo ao assalto, e lançando a cincoenta passos ao ar jactos de
espuma; as nuvens negras alagartaram-se como paredes do
inferno, deixando entrever a ardente fornalha dos relâmpagos; luzes
sulfurosas iluminaram a extensão; o cume do Vesúvio avermelhou-
se e um penacho de sombrio vapor, que o vento impelia, ondulou na