COVID-19 and the Deaf Community: Unmasking the Impacts of Virtual Learning in a Hearing-Centric World
Article
By Anna Jones*
Introduction
Alexander Graham Bell was one of sign language’s greatest adversaries.[1] It is almost poetically obvious that the inventor of the telephone opposed the only language in the world that can’t be understood through cables and electronic signals—after all, visual modes of communication were his industry rivals. Yet, his hatred for sign language education went beyond lighthearted competition; he was once quoted as saying, “We should try ourselves to forget that they are deaf. We should try to teach them to forget that they are deaf.”[2] Bell’s quote may seem appalling by today’s standards, but it reflects an unfortunate reality for the Deaf community[3] in various realms of society. Even United States schools oftentimes forget deaf children. Recently, the education system again failed the Deaf community during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The pandemic produced an unparalleled form of social isolation that few people in the 21st century had ever experienced, and this isolation was amplified in the educational realm. Schools which once relied heavily on collaborative and Socratic methods to educate students shuttered their windows, trading in these tried-and-true techniques to experiment with virtual learning.[4] Even neurotypical, high-achieving students struggled adjusting to a completely new system, one unfamiliar to even their own teachers and administrators. Imagine, then, how this massive societal shift affected one already disadvantaged and often-secluded group in particular—the Deaf community.[5]
This Article will examine the impact of COVID-19 on the estimated 308,648 deaf or hard of hearing students between the ages of 5 and 17 living in the United States.[6] First, Part I will focus on the general, disability rights available for deaf children in schools. Second, it will dissect the practical effects of virtual learning and masking in providing deaf children with an education in Part II. Third, Part III will analyze the subsequent mental health impacts of school closures and societal changes in education styles for hearing and deaf children catalyzed by the pandemic. Finally, Part IV will underscore the importance of preserving Deaf culture in schools and at home and promoting the mandatory instruction of American Sign Language (ASL) in all public schools and for hearing parents of deaf children. This Article will ultimately argue that the COVID-19 pandemic exposed critical gaps in the education of deaf children and unmasked the need for tailored solutions to address the unique challenges these students face in remote learning environments.[7]
I. Disability Rights of Deaf Children
To understand how COVID-19 profoundly affected the education of deaf children, one must generally understand the foundation of disability education law. It is important to first understand disability education law as it exists generally. Thus, this Part will address the disability law guiding the education of deaf children in public schools, including the sanctions for schools who do not comply. Additionally, it explores disability laws’ practical application and its evolution over time.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)[8] creates an obligation for states to provide children ages 3 to 21 with disabilities access to a free appropriate public education.[9] This is partially effectuated through individualized education programs (IEPs).[10] Each IEP is drafted for a child through a collaborative process between teachers and parents.[11] States risk losing federal assistance by failing to provide a disabled student with access to appropriate public education via an IEP.[12] Not all deaf or hard of hearing students are entitled to a sign language interpreter as part of their IEP, though.[13] Although many schools provided interpreters prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, some courts have explicitly denied the necessity of interpreters for some deaf and hard of hearing students’ success, and many schools stopped providing translation support entirely when they switched to a virtual education.[14]
This issue existed long before the pandemic. In 1980, the parents of 8-year-old Amy Rowley filed suit against a public elementary school in Peekskill, New York for refusing to provide their daughter with a sign language interpreter in class.[15] Amy was born deaf, and although she had some residual hearing, as many deaf people do,[16] she communicated mainly through a combination of sign language, lip-reading, and a FM wireless hearing aid.[17] The lower court noted that Amy could not understand her teachers or peers unless they were directly facing her.[18] Both the trial court and circuit courts held that Amy was entitled to an interpreter, reasoning that Amy only understood around 59% of what transpired within the classroom but would be able to understand 100% with an interpreter.[19]
Unfortunately for the Rowley family, the Supreme Court afforded the family less sympathy.[20] In a 6-3 decision, the Court reasoned that the school conformed to IDEA standards because Amy “performed better than the average child in her class” and “advance[ed] easily from grade to grade.”[21] The Court held that a state has met IDEA obligations as long as the IEP was “reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive education benefits.”[22] Essentially, an IEP does not have to provide the best possible educational plan for a child, as long as the child is still retaining some benefits and reaching sufficient academic milestones.
Rowley’s central conclusion was that Amy’s demonstrated academic success eliminated the need for a sign language interpreter.[23] The Rowley decision was consistent with the “least restrictive means” provision of IDEA, which recommends a student’s placement in the “least restrictive environment” possible before resorting to special classes or separate schooling.[24] In short, a deaf student must fail in a hearing environment before they are guaranteed instruction in their native language.[25] Further, the more gifted a deaf child is, the less assistance they will receive to reach their full potential.[26]
Rowley served as the leading precedent for instruction on disability education until 2017, when the Supreme Court heard Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F. v. Douglas County. School. District.[27] In that case, the Court reaffirmed that the definition of “appropriate progress” as intended by IDEA should be evaluated on an individual basis in light of the particular student’s needs. School authorities may define “appropriate progress” through their “expertise and exercise of judgment,”[28] but any educational program “reasonably calculated” to allow the child to pass from grade to grade is usually deemed sufficient.[29] Thus, Endrew agreed with Rowley that the educational benefits derived from IDEA must only be “more than de minimis,” and not the maximum benefits that could be afforded to help the child reach their full potential.[30]
Sometimes, though, the judgment of school authorities is misguided and self-serving. Academic officials may artificially inflate a student’s progress for IDEA purposes, as the parents of Miguel Perez argued in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools.[31] The now 23-year-old immigrated from Mexico to America at the age of 9 and attended school in the Sturgis Public School District in Sturgis, Michigan, which was unfortunately ill-equipped to accommodate his hearing disability.[32] Although the school provided him with an aid, the aid lacked the required training for working with deaf students and did not know sign language.[33] Miguel’s case, which eventually reached the Supreme Court in March 2023, involved the issue of damages and recovery under the ADA without exhausting all of his IDEA claims.[34] While the issues he disputed do not directly instruct on the issue of disability law itself, his story demonstrates the deficiencies of both the Rowley and Endrew standards.
If students are required to be placed in the “least restrictive environment” until they fail, but whether or not they fail is a decision made by the “judgment of school authorities,” then these holdings incentivize schools to artificially inflate deaf student’s performance to that student’s own detriment. In Miguel’s case, he argued that his public school was misrepresenting his academic progress to circumvent updating his IEP.[35] Providing students with adequate resources to accommodate disabilities can be expensive, and schools may not want to spend the money, nor may they want to admit they are not capable of educating the child at their school and open themselves up to lawsuits or heavy public criticism.[36]
II. Effects of Virtual Learning and Masking in Providing Deaf Children with an Education
Researchers have well-documented the achievement gap between hearing students and students with profound hearing impairments, even prior to the pandemic.[37] Average SAT reading comprehension scores for hard of hearing high school juniors and seniors equate to those of fourth-grade hearing students.[38] Experts attribute this disparity to failures within the education system to adequately provide specialized education to hard of hearing children.[39] Further, post-pandemic research indicates that remote learning widens the achievement gap between traditionally high-achieving students and those who are historically disadvantaged.[40]
Communication between the Deaf and hearing communities about COVID-19 got off to a substandard start when the World Health Organization (WHO) failed to establish a sign in sign language to represent “COVID-19.”[41] This made it difficult for WHO to communicate information about COVID-19 to the Deaf community.[42] Left to their own devices, individual Deaf communities invented various different signs to represent the pandemic’s official name; however, this created confusion and, in some cases, spread misinformation.[43] For instance, the hand sign for COVID-19 in Brazil was a gesture similar to the sign for “bat bite,” generating a misguided panic about animal bites and confusion regarding the virus’ transmission.[44]
This initial mishap represented the first in what would become years of inadequate communication between the Deaf and hearing-impaired communities apropos to COVID-19. This Article additionally argues that there are two major struggles that deaf children face as a direct result of the pandemic. Firstly, the deficiency of Deaf-friendly virtual learning materials, and secondly, the use of opaque face masks, which hinder deaf and hearing-impaired students’ ability to read lips.[45]
A. Virtual Classrooms Are Not an Appropriate Forum to Properly Educate Deaf and Hearing-Impaired Children
The COVID-19-related shift from in-person to online activities jarred the education, home, and social realms of students. In the classroom, teachers frantically reworked curriculums to suit a virtual format.[46] Outside the classroom, parents desperately sought childcare.[47] Socially, students, who likely used to complain about getting up at 6 a.m. every day to eat breakfast before catching the bus, suddenly found themselves missing their friends.[48]
As early as three years after the pandemic began, though, societal attitudes shifted.[49] Perhaps this shift occurred because the effects of the pandemic somewhat waned, and people began to view virtual life as an empowering choice rather than a tragedy-driven compulsion. Either way, studies show that people were and continue to be hesitant about fully returning to their physical worlds.[50] A survey by Digital Pulse, published in April 2021, revealed that 73% of higher education students “strongly” or “somewhat” agreed that they would like to take fully online courses in the future.[51] Two years later, another survey by the World Economic Forum reported that almost 1/3 of workers surveyed would search for another job if they were forced to return to work in-person full-time.[52]
While studies on what elementary and secondary students want are somewhat limited, it is clear that the United States is trending toward a hybrid-virtual world, where students and members of the workforce are offered physical and virtual options.[53] Further, the widespread and relatively successful use of virtual operations during the COVID-19-era made it more likely for schools to transition online at the smallest inconvenience in the future.[54]Unfortunately, virtual learning creates permanent, far-reaching consequences in every aspect of life, including how children communicate, socialize, and receive an education.[55] Experts hypothesize that social distancing, isolation, and virtual learning will ultimately negatively impact the communication skills of even able-bodied students, but particularly students with disabilities.[56] However, these problems particularly impact deaf and hard of hearing children because most virtual learning programs were designed for hearing students.[57]
Many virtual formats do not allow for easy sign language interpretation because the signer and the viewer cannot see each other adequately.[58] The minimized visuals of a computer screen make it difficult for the viewer to understand exactly what the signer is saying.[59] Notably, children who are hard of hearing struggle during synchronous lectures held in a video-conferencing format where multiple conversations are signed simultaneously.[60] It is also time consuming, in the virtual classroom, for students to ask questions to their teachers.[61] Deaf students have to sign the question to their interpreter, who then speaks the question to the teacher, waits to receive a verbal answer from the teacher, and then signs the answer back to the student.[62] This makes classroom communication—an already frustrating and cumbersome activity for deaf students—even more laborious through virtual transmission delay.[63] Studies show that this inconvenient process discourages deaf children from classroom participation, and many deaf students resort to playing online games in class rather than paying attention.[64]
In lieu of translators, some schools opt mainly for automatic captioning or transcription software; however, this technology is often an unreliable solution.[65] It is not uncommon for even the most high-quality captioning and transcription software to make errors.[66] Further, not all deaf students have reached the appropriate age or intellectual capability to read an entire days’ worth of school on their computer screen.[67] The pre-existing learning gap between hearing and hard of hearing students means it is not uncommon for deaf and hard of hearing students to fall below the reading comprehension level of their peers.[68] Educators should note that deaf and hard of hearing students may be uncomfortable using “chat” functions to communicate via writing to their teacher during class.[69] The use of writing as the primary means of communication for deaf students also hinders exposure to sign language, something that is important both for their own communication skills and for their communication with other members of the Deaf community.[70] These issues are exacerbated if the child has limited speech.[71]
B. Requiring Opaque Masks Rather Than See-Through Alternatives creates Ableism that Harms Deaf Children
Deaf and hard of hearing individuals use their entire bodies to communicate—including their lips.[72] Observers of sign language interpreters will notice that, although no sound is emanating, the interpreters will move their mouths along with their gestures to mimic what is being said.[73] Although lip reading is not a foolproof reliable source, it is still a vital resource.[74]
Despite the implementation of masks as a crucial public health tool, the use of opaque masks that cover the mouth completely prevent lip-reading, which many deaf or hard of hearing children rely on for their day-to-day communication with the outside world.[75] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced in 2020 that the Federal Drug Association (FDA) approved marketing for a transparent face-mask described as potentially “helpful for interacting with certain groups of people,” including those deaf and hard of hearing, along with children with learning disabilities, children who are learning how to read, and students learning a new language.[76] However, the CDC countered that these transparent medical masks should be reserved for “use by healthcare workers and the patients that require them.”[77] Transparent face shields are not recommended by the CDC for normal everyday activities or as a substitute for cloth face coverings because they are open at the bottom.[78]
One challenge presented by clear face masks or shields is that these types of masks fog up.[79] For example, ClearMask, are intended for one-time use and costs individual purchasers a minimum of $67 at the minimum purchase order of twenty-four.[80] This extraordinary price for a single-use product creates a barrier for deaf children from middle or lower-class families.
Beyond the consideration of lip reading, though, lies another concern. The majority of Americans with profound hearing loss still retain some residual hearing, or a small percentage of hearing that allows them to interpret speech.[81] Not only do masks physically block the movements of someone’s mouth, but they also decrease the transmissions of sound frequencies that allow those with residual hearing, or who rely on other types of assistance such as hearing aids or cochlear implants, to interpret speech.[82] Listening is an acquired skill for hard of hearing individuals, unlike people born with full auditory capacities.[83] Therefore, children whose listening practice is minimized by widespread mask usage will not develop strong residual hearing skills in their adulthood.[84]
III. Mental Health Impacts of Covid-19 on Deaf Children
There have been extensive studies and academic research conducted to analyze the effects of pandemic isolation on children in general.[85] For instance, research conducted in 2022 showed a rise in temper tantrums and anxiety, along with a poor ability to manage emotions, particularly among young elementary-aged children.[86] Although it is impossible to know what kind of long-term societal effects might manifest from the COVID-19-era, experts almost unanimously agree that adolescents and young children are profoundly impacted by social isolation.[87] Health professionals have also expressed concern regarding children born after or around March 2020. These babies, born into a pandemic world, may have grown up to two years without meeting anyone outside their immediate family.[88] Young children under the age of 5 are in special need of attention and socialization to optimize their development.[89] The lack of fully-formed mental and physical development in children amplifies feelings of depression, anxiety, and uncertainty.[90] Children of all ages across the country were kept out of school for long periods of time, prompting them to ask questions like, “Do my peers still like me?” or “Did my friends change because of the pandemic?”[91] Some experts have suggested that the pandemic directly led to a global mental health crisis among young children and teenagers, the likes of which America has never seen before.[92] One study published by CNN indicated that 1 in 4 adolescents now experiences clinical depressive symptoms while 1 in 5 displays clinical anxiety.[93] How much more, then, must a group that was already ostracized feel mental health affects?
Studies show that depression and anxiety already existed at higher levels within the Deaf community than in the hearing community.[94] Since there are only 49 residential schools and 47 day schools for the Deaf community in the United States, not even enough to account for children in all fifty states, the vast majority of deaf students attend mainstream schools[95] with hearing teachers and peers[96] Further, only about 500,000 people in the United States speak Sign Language fluently.[97] Approximately 90 to 95% of deaf or hard of hearing children are born to hearing parents.[98] These hearing parents likely will not know sign language and thereby struggle to become fluent in a new language before their child is school-aged.[99] This means that most deaf children already exist in an environment where they are being ignored or isolated to greater degrees than their hearing counterparts.
Since the disparity between mental health issues in deaf children and hearing children already existed pre-pandemic, the pandemic then amplified these inequalities. Although studies regarding the mental health of deaf children during the pandemic are scarce, the statistics on the mental health of children during the pandemic indicate that the underlying socialization problem of deaf children may have worsened. It can be inferred that Deaf children were impacted by decreased socialization more so than their hearing counterparts because it is well-documented that deaf children face more difficulties interacting with peers and adults.[100]
The phenomenon of hearing people excluding deaf people from conversations is often termed “Dinner Table Syndrome.”[101] An author and member of the Deaf community compared video conferencing with “just another dark bar [or] another dinner table.”[102] This sentiment goes beyond feeling left out among peers. The challenges that deaf children faced in schools during COVID-19, including a greatly reduced ability to communicate with their children and peers because of the use of masks and computer screens, increased their fatigue.[103] These higher levels of fatigue caused by difficulties in auditory processing can then manifest cognitive difficulties in adulthood.[104]
IV. Proposal: Prioritizing Sign Language Education in Schools and Within Families of Deaf Children
Although the pandemic formally ended, its effects still remain. There is now a societal comfortability around virtual activities and a shift away from in-person interactions. As such, it is important to consider the effects of these virtual activities on deaf children. Specifically, it is critical to provide practical accessibility solutions and to examine the educational and social advantages of early sign language exposure at an early age for both deaf and hearing students.
The WHO downgraded COVID-19 from a global emergency in May 2023.[105] President Joe Biden subsequently announced an end to the official emergency declarations regarding the pandemic in May 2023.[106] Culturally, many Americans treated the pandemic as foregone since 2021. Yet, COVID-19 remains an ongoing public health threat, although community spread is more difficult to monitor due to increased availability and use of at-home testing and decreased public reporting.[107] Overall, society is returning to pre-pandemic life.
Recent case precedent illustrates how the general public’s attitude toward COVID-19 ignores the lasting impacts on the Deaf-Community. In Martinez v. Newsom, a group of students with disabilities and their parents sued all of the school districts in California, alleging that the students were not afforded free and appropriate education under IDEA during COVID-19.[108] Specifically, they claimed that schools did not account for the changes that should have been made to students’ IEPs in light of the remote learning period.[109] The case was dismissed for two reasons: firstly, because the students did not have standing to sue schools which they did not attend, and secondly, because California public schools had already returned to in-person instruction as of August 2022, when this case was decided.[110]
This Article argues that the Court erred in concluding that the plaintiffs’ claims were moot, because remnants of the pandemic will manifest for years to come, and virtual learning is becoming ubiquitous both as an emergency option and a legitimate alternative to the physical classroom. For example, compare the state of Louisiana’s reaction to displaced students amid Hurricane Katrina in 2005 with Hurricane Ida in 2021. When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005, hundreds of thousands of students were displaced by the storm in a massive educational relocation, the likes of which educators had never seen before.[111] Many students received no schooling at all for months after the storm.[112] The ones who did return to school for the fall 2005 semester were forced to move a considerable distance away from the storm-ravaged area, or they were absorbed by one of the schools that were able to reopen as soon as October or November.[113] This usually meant attending class in a FEMA trailer.[114] The alternative was waking up at odd hours of the morning or staying at school until past dinner time to accommodate a schedule where a single school facility was shared by thousands of students who originally attended different schools.[115] In any scenario, children either attended school in-person, or not at all.[116]
It is difficult to imagine Katrina’s effects on Louisiana’s education system in the modern age. When the life-changing category 5 hurricane hit the Gulf Coast nearly twenty years ago, a widespread shift to virtual learning was unprecedented. Contrastingly, when the similarly powerful category 4 Hurricane Ida hit New Orleans August 2021, schools shifted to virtual formats soon after and remained in a virtual setting through mid-October and later.[117] Nearby, schools in Baton Rouge reported little change in their enrollment numbers from before and after the storm. In comparison, in September 2005, over 11,000 students transferred to attend Baton Rouge schools after being displaced from the New Orleans system.[118] The relatively mild effects of Hurricane Ida on New Orleans-area school systems are undoubtedly linked to the lessons Louisiana learned from education amid the pandemic.
There is certainly a positive aspect to providing children with interim educational opportunities rather than closing schools for indefinite periods—children do not have to change their entire social environment or attend FEMA-trailer school—but the ease in which schools now transition to virtual formats places deaf children at a clear disadvantage. Adjudicative intervention is therefore necessary to protect deaf children from falling behind academically when future public health or natural disasters inevitably arise. One exception to the typical constitutional rules requiring an actual controversy for judicial standing is if an issue is “capable of repetition, yet evading review.”[119]
Pandemics resemble natural disasters and have parallels with other issues like abortion. As with pregnancy, the reality of natural disasters, global pandemics, and other widespread tragedies will also always be with us. In Roe v. Wade, the infamous 1970’s case legalizing abortion, the Court held that, although the plaintiff’s pregnancy was ended by the time the litigation reached the courtroom, the matter was not moot. The Court reasoned that pregnancy provides a classic example of the exception to mootness, because the reality of pregnancy will “always be with us . . . if man is to survive.”[120] Applying similar logic, the Martinez Court incorrectly found that the California schoolchildren’s argument was moot simply because the pandemic was over, because similar situations can, and already have, repeated themselves. Therefore, the judiciary should enact precedent to protect disabled students from facing pandemic-related education issues in the future.
1. Sign Language Instruction Should Be Mandatory in Elementary Schools
Sign language deprivation and language acquisition deprivation for deaf children existed long before the pandemic. The lack of ASL use, both in the classroom and within families of deaf children at home, can be attributed to a societal bias toward spoken language and lack of ASL knowledge.[121] Early intervention systems commonly encourage spoken language in lieu of learning ASL.[122] Further, although medical insurance coverage includes means that promote oralism, such as cochlear implants, speech therapy, and audiologist visits, insurance does not cover sign language courses for children and their families.[123] This makes learning ASL difficult for young deaf children with hearing parents, whose parents will have difficulty becoming proficient before their deaf child needs to acquire language skills.
The holding of Rowley limits deaf children by providing them only with the bare minimum accommodations to pass them each grade.[124] Therefore, it is exceedingly difficult for even the most academically gifted deaf children to outperform their peers. In Rowley, Amy was above the median in her class even though the Court acknowledged she was only able to understand a little over half of what her teacher and her peers were saying at any given time.[125] Had she been afforded accommodations that created equitability between herself and her classmates, Amy would have likely been at the very top of her class. It was unfair to Amy that she was forced to outwork her peers and was not permitted to reach the heights of her great potential.
Although it is impossible to predict if this issue will make its way to the Supreme Court in the near future, in the case that it does, Rowley should be overturned and the Supreme Court should hold that deaf children must be provided with accommodations that place them on the same level as their peers, rather than merely “reasonable” accommodations. In the meantime, local entities such as school boards and activist organizations can effectuate change on a smaller scale within their communities. One way to achieve progress would be to mandate the presence of professionally trained, fluent sign language translators in every classroom that includes a deaf student. Not only would this help deaf students to thrive, but it would also preserve sign language for the Deaf community and expose the hearing community to sign language. This would benefit society as a whole and place the United States on par with other nations that encourage linguistic diversity.[126] Further, it would prevent what happened to Miguel Perez in Perez from happening to another deaf child. Any denial of an education in a language that a child understands is a tragedy. If more people in this country were familiar with the Deaf language and culture, Perez’s situation would have been noticed and rectified before it was too late.[127]
2. Schools Should Update Each Child’s IEP Whenever Remote Instruction is Required.
One way to eliminate the problems presented by potential future pandemics, or any other national or regional disasters, is to mandate the revision of IEPs among all disabled students whenever the educational platform will be transferred to a different format. Undoubtedly, any alteration in the routine or normal education plan of disabled students will cause a disruption in the quality of education they receive. A mandatory overview of IDEA would help mitigate such effects. While educators and policy makers can argue it was implausible to provide deaf children with adequate resources at the height of the pandemic, since resources were already scarce and teachers were struggling to adjust to Zoom, there is no excuse for not preparing for similar events in the future.
In the wake of virtual learning, an ideal updated IDEA for a deaf child might include providing a child with a sign language interpreter if the child speaks Sign Language, even if the child did not previously have one and using software with appropriate, real-time closed-captioning services. Other ways teachers could help deaf children in their classroom are by testing the software out before use and ensuring that everything is running at the appropriate speed, encouraging other children in the class to type out their questions in the chat rather than speaking them out loud, asking all children who are willing and able to turn their cameras on during class, and using lots of visuals rather than relying solely on auditory learning methods. Deaf children should also not be penalized for requiring extra time to complete assignments during periods of virtual learning.
Conclusion
Although the WHO and the Biden administration may have officially declared the pandemic’s end,[128] the effects of the pandemic are far from over and the possibility of another pandemic is not precluded; in fact, it’s more likely than not.[129] The United States should effectuate efforts aimed at correcting educational defects among deaf children and establishing deaf-friendly emergency education measures. There is no justification for depriving over 300,000 deaf students in the United States of an adequate education. deaf children are important young members of society and young people shape the future of the United States. Contrary to Alexander Graham Bell’s proposition, we should not forget deaf children. We should not teach them to forget that they are deaf. We should teach them to embrace who they are, and we should teach ourselves to embrace the ability that deaf children have to change the world.
Footnotes:
* J.D. 2024, Loyola University New Orleans College of Law; B.A. Mass Communication 2021, Louisiana State University. Special thanks to Professor Nicole Tuchinda for helping me edit this piece and for encouraging me to seek publication. Thank you also to the Loyola Law Review online team for their invaluable assistance throughout the editing process. Finally, to Mom, Dad, Amy, Ryan, and Kaylynn—thank you always, for everything.
[1] Brian H. Greenwald, Alexander Graham Bell and His Role in Oral Education, Disability History Museum, https://www.disabilitymuseum.org/dhm/edu/essay.html?id=59 (last visited Mar. 23, 2025).
[2] The Story Behind the World’s First Telephone, Heritage Calling (July 29, 2022), https://heritagecalling.com/2022/07/29/the-story-behind-the-worlds-first-telephone/.
[3] Editor’s Note: This article follows The National Center on Disability and Journalism’s “Disability Language Guide.” “Deaf” modifies the community, and “deaf” is used when referring to the condition. See National Center on Disability and Journalism, Disability Language Style Guide (last updated Aug. 2021), https://ncdj.org/style-guide/#D.
[4] “Collaborative learning” is an umbrella term for a variety of educational approaches involving joint intellectual effort by students working in groups of two or more. See Barbara Leigh Smith & Jean T. MacGregor, Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education, Nat’l Ctr. on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning & Assessment (1992), https://teach.ufl.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/WhatisCollaborativeLearning.pdf. The Socratic Method involves a shared dialogue between teachers and students, with the teacher leading the discussion by asking thought-provoking questions. See Pete Conor, The Socratic Method: Fostering Critical Thinking, Colo. State Univ., https://tilt.colostate.edu/the-socratic- (last visited Feb. 12, 2025).
[5] This Article uses the National Deaf Center’s all-encompassing definition of the term “deaf,” which includes people who identify as deaf, deafblind, deaf-disabled, late-deafened, and hard of hearing. Deaf Awareness - Defining Deaf, Nat’l Deaf Ctr. (2025), https://nationaldeafcenter.org/resources/deaf-awareness/. A “Deaf individual” means an individual who has a hearing loss which is so severe that the individual has difficulty processing linguistic information through hearing, with or without amplification or other assistive technology; a “hard of hearing individual” refers to one who has a hearing loss, whether permanent or fluctuating, which may be corrected by amplification or other assistive technology or means but nevertheless presents challenges in processing linguistic information through hearing. Model Mental Health for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals’ Bill of Rights Act, Nat’l Ass’n of the Deaf (last updated June 18, 2014), https://www.nad.org/resources/health-care-and-mental-health-services/mental-health-services/model-mental-health-for-deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-individuals-bill-of-rights-act/. Notably, although special education law and policies utilize the terms “hearing impairment” and “hearing impaired,” such terminology is considered archaic and offensive to the Deaf and hard of hearing community. See Position Statement on Educating PreK-12 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students During the COVID-19 Outbreak, Nat'l Ass'n of the Deaf (2025), https://www.nad.org/position-statement-educating-prek-12-deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-students-during-the-covid-19-outbreak/#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20there,and%20hard%20of%20hearing%20students.
[6] Position Statement on Educating PreK-12 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students During the COVID-19 Outbreak, supra note 5.
[7] Id.
[8] 20 U.S.C.A. §§ 1400–1409 (West 2025).
[9] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1400(d)(1)(A) (West 2025); Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F. v. Douglas Cnty. Sch. Dist. RE-1, 580 U.S. 386, 390 (2017).
[10] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1414(d) (West 2025); Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F., 580 U.S. at 391.
[11] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1414(d)(1)(A) (West 2025); Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F., 580 U.S. at 391.
[12] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1412(a)(5)(B). See Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F., 580 U.S. at 390; see also U.S. Dep’t of Justice & U.S. Dep’t of Educ., Fact Sheet on the Collaboration Between the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice to Address the Civil Rights of Students with Disabilities (2014), https://archive.ada.gov/doe_doj_eff_comm/doe_doj_eff_comm_fact_sht.htm.
[13] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1412(a)(5); see generally Rowley v. Bd. of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist., 632 F.2d 945, 946-47 (2d Cir. 1980) (finding that not all deaf students are entitled to a sign language interpreter.)
[14] See Position Statement on Educating PreK-12 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students During the COVID-19 Outbreak, supra note 5.
[15] Rowley, 632 F.2d at 946—47.
[16] See How People with Hearing Loss Learn to Communicate, U.S. Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention (2024), https://www.cdc.gov/hearing-loss-children/treatment/how-people-with-hearing-loss-learn-language.html#:~:text=Most%20people%20who%20are%20deaf,residual%20hearing%20(auditory%20training) (finding that most people who are deaf or hard of hearing have some hearing, which is referred to as residual hearing)
[17] Rowley, 632 F.2d at 947. A FM wireless hearing aid is a device that uses frequency modulation (FM) to transmit sound from a speaker to a listener’s hearing aid. See Hearing Assistive Technology, Am. Speech-Language-Hearing Ass’n, https://www.asha.org/public/hearing/hearing-assistive-technology/#fm (last visited Feb. 18, 2025).
[18] Rowley, 632 F.2d at 948.
[19] Id.
[20] See Bd. of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
[21] See id. at 210.
[22] See id. at 207.
[23] See id. at 210.
[24] 20 U.S.C.A. § 1412 (West 2005).
[25] Id.
[26] Bd. of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist., 458 U.S. at 185.
[27] Endrew F. ex rel. Joseph F., 580 U.S. at 386.
[28] Id. at 403-04.
[29] Id. at 404.
[30] See id. at 386 (indicating that any review of an IEP must consider whether the IEP is reasonably calculated to ensure such progress, not whether it would be considered ideal). Thus, what constitutes “reasonable progress” differs for every child and is based on a totality of the circumstances analysis.
[31] Perez v. Sturgis Pub. Sch., 3 F.4th 236, 238 (6th Cir. 2021).
[32] Id.
[33] Id.
[34] Perez v. Sturgis Pub. Sch., 143 S.Ct. 859, 863 (2023) (holding that Perez could not pursue compensatory damages under ADA because he had not exhausted all of his potential IDEA remedies).
[35] Id.
[36] Katie Pak & Arianna Parsons, Equity Gaps for Students with Disabilities, 17 Perspectives on Urban Education, Penn GSE (Apr. 20, 2020), https://urbanedjournal.gse.upenn.edu/volume-17-spring-2020/equity-gaps-students-disabilities.
[37] Susan Rose, Monitoring Progress of Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing, Dep’t of Educ. Psych.
Univ. of Minn., https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502455 (last visited Feb. 18, 2025).
[38] Id.
[39] Id.
[40] Olivia Crow, Education Inequality During Covid-19: How Remote Learning Is Widening the Achievement Gap and Spurring the Need for Judicial Intervention, 63 B.C. L. Rev. 713, 713 (2022).
[41] Wajdi Aljedaani, Rrezarta Krasniqi, Sanaa Aljedaani, Mohamed Wein Mkaouer, Stephanie Ludi & Khaled Al-Raddah, If online learning works for you, what about deaf students? Emerging challenges of online learning for deaf and hearing-impaired students during COVID-19: a literature review, PubMed (Jul. 25, 2022), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35910240/.
[42] Id.
[43] Id.
[44] Id.
[45] See infra Parts III(A)–(B).
[46] Christina Maxouris & Christina Zanowicz, US teachers had days to re-define class amid a nationwide crisis. The weeks stuck in limbo haven’t been easy, CNN (Apr. 5, 2020), https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/05/us/us-coronavirus-teachers-school-closures/index.html.
[47]Bianna Golodryga, Schools and Daycare Reopening Safely, CNN (July 13, 2020), https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2020/07/13/schools-daycare-reopening-safely-newday-golodryga-pkg-vpx.cnn.
[48] Jacqueline Howard, Parents and Schools Struggle to Deal with COVID Surge, CNN (Jan. 9, 2022), https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/09/us/parents-schools-dealing-with-covid/index.html.
[49] Kim Parker, About a third of U.S. workers who can work from home now do so all the time, Pew Rsch. Ctr. (Mar. 30, 2023), https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/03/30/about-a-third-of-us-workers-who-can-work-from-home-do-so-all-the-time/.
[50] Kim Parker, Many Remote Workers Say They’d Be Likely to Leave Their Job if They Could No Longer Work from Home, Pew Rsch. Ctr. (Jan. 13, 2025), https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/01/13/many-remote-workers-say-theyd-be-likely-to-leave-their-job-if-they-could-no-longer-work-from-home/.
[51] Lindsey McKenzie, Students Want Online Learning Options Post Pandemic, Inside Hired (Apr. 28, 2021), https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/04/27/survey-reveals-positive-outlook-online-instruction-post-pandemic.
[52] Douglas Broom, Home of Office? Survey Shoes Opinions About Work After COVID-19, World Econ. F. (July 21, 2023), https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/07/back-to-office-or-work-from-home-survey.
[53] Sabrina Wulff Pabilonia & Jill Janocha Redmond, The Rise in Remote Work Since the Pandemic and Its Impact on Productivity, Beyond The Numbers (Oct. 2024), https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-13/remote-work-productivity.htm.
[54] The Numbers Don’t Lie: See Why There’s Such a High Demand for Hybrid Learning, Discovery Fusion (Mar. 13, 2024), https://www.discoveryhsf.org/o/discovery-fusion/article/1505484.
[55] Jill Anderson, The Negative Effects of Remote Learning on Children's Wellbeing, Harv. Graduate Sch. Of Educ. (Feb. 18, 2022), https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/edcast/22/02/negative-effects-remote-learning-childrens-wellbeing.
[56] Sarah A. Charney, Potential Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Communication and Language Skills in
Children, Pubmed (Dec. 1, 2020), https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33258739.
[57] See Robert Adam, Sign Language and Deaf People During COVID-19: How You Can Help in the Classroom, Cambridge (Sept. 22, 2020), https://www.cambridge.org/elt/blog/2020/09/22/sign-languages-and-deaf-people-during-covid-19-how-you-can-help-in-the-classroom.
[58] Id.
[59] Aljedaani et al., supra note 41.
[60] Id.
[61] Id.
[62] See id.
[63] See id.
[64] Id.
[65] Adam, supra note 57.
[66] See Aljedaani et al., supra note 41.
[67] See id.
[68] Marlon Kuntze, Lee Branum-Maritn & Jessica Scott, Pandemic effects on the reading trajectories of deaf and hard of hearing students: a pilot analysis, Pubmed (Oct. 25, 2022), https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9592872.
[69] See Aljedaani et al., supra note 41.
[70] Karen L. Kritzer, Educating Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students During COVID-19: What Parents Need to Know, The Hearing J. (Aug 2020), https://journals.lww.com/thehearingjournal/Fulltext/2020/08000/Educating_Deaf_and_Hard_of_Hearing_Students_During.10.aspx.
[71] Because young children take in and respond to many auditory cues from their surroundings, verbal communication can be more difficult for a person who is deaf from birth or became deaf at an early age. A deaf person may also not wish to use verbal speech, as spoken language is for the benefit of hearing people. Finally, a deaf person may speak at a different pitch than a hearing person, may have trouble using some sounds, or may speak at a volume that hearing people perceive as too loudly or too softly, which could potentially discourage deaf children from speaking in front of their hearing peers at school. Joseph J. Murray, The Importance of Signed Languages for Deaf Children and Their Families, The Hearing J. (Mar. 2020), https://journals.lww.com/thehearingjournal/Fulltext/2020/03000/The_Importance_of_Signed_Languages_for_Deaf.6.aspx.
[72] See Nat’l Deaf Children’s Soc’y, Lip-reading (June 11, 2024), https://www.ndcs.org.uk/information-and-support/language-and-communication/spoken-language/lip-reading/.
[73] Id.
[74] Id. (finding that a good speech reader might only be able to see four or five words out of a given twelve-word sentence).
[75] Charney, supra note 56.
[76] U.S. Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention, Types of Masks and Respirators (May 11, 2023), https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/types-of-masks.html.
[77] Id.
[78] Id.
[79] Yuki Noguchi, Demand Surges for See-Through Face Masks as Pandemic Swells, NPR (July 28, 2020), https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/28/893071631/demand-surges-for-see-through-face-masks-as-pandemic-swells.
[80] Id.
[81] U.S. Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention, How People with Hearing Loss Learn to Communicate (May 15, 2024), https://www.cdc.gov/hearing-loss-children/treatment/how-people-with-hearing-loss-learn-language.html.
[82] Kait Sanchez, Deaf People Face Unique Challenges as Pandemic Drags On, The Verge (January 29, 2021), https://www.theverge.com/22254591/deaf-communication-tech-access-coronavirus-isolation.
[83] U.S. Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention, supra note 81.
[84] Haley Herfurth, Learn How Masking Negatively Affects Those with Hearing Loss — and How You Can Help, UAB Reporter (Aug. 11, 2020), https://www.uab.edu/reporter/campus/campus-safety/item/9208-learn-how-masking-negatively-affects-those-with-hearing-loss-and-how-you-can-help (“When the volume of speech is reduced, the listener must concentrate harder to understand and follow the communication. Couple this reduction in volume with the inability to lip-read and it can make it very frustrating for hard-of-hearing and deaf individuals, as well as the general population.”)
[85] Anderson, supra note 55.
[86] Id.
[87] Eduardo Medina, How Young People's Social Anxiety Has Worsened in the Pandemic, N.Y. Times (September 27, 2021), https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/us/social-anxietypandemic.html...living%20with,withdrawal%20and%20entrenches%20reclusive%20habits.
[88] Sunil Bhopal & Pascal Fearon, Pandemic Babies: How Covid-19 has Affected Child Development, The Conversation (March 10, 2021), https://theconversation.com/pandemic-babies-how-covid-19-has-affected-child-development-155903.
[89] Jennifer Palmer, Social and Emotional Development in Early Learning Settings, NCSL (last updated Oct. 9, 2019), https://www.ncsl.org/human-services/social-and-emotional-development-in-early-learning-settings.
[90] Medina, supra note 87.
[91] Id.
[92] Sarah Molano, Youth Depression and Anxiety Doubles During the Pandemic, New Analysis Finds, CNN (August 10, 2021), https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/10/health/covid-child-teen-depression-anxiety-wellness/index.html.
[93] Id.
[94] Ivette Cejas, Depression & Anxiety in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children & Adolescents: Identify, Assist, and Refer, Educ. Audiology Ass’n, https://edaud.memberclicks.net/index.php?option=com_jevents&task=icalrepeat.detail&evid=2&Itemid=115&year=2023&month=03&day=07&title=depression-a-anxiety-in-deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-children-a-adolescent (last visited February 13, 2025).
[95] See Position Statement on Educating PreK-12 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students During the COVID-19 Outbreak, supra note 5 (finding that Roughly 20.8% of Deaf or hard of hearing children between the ages of five and seventeen are in specialized schools are programs).
[96] Catzian Maris, Insight into American Sign Language, Bromberg & Associates (Sept. 23, 2021), https://www.brombergtranslations.com/asl-international-signed-language-day/ (last visited Feb. 14, 2025).
[97] Id.
[98] Elizabeth Doughtry, Getting the Word In, The Brink (Mar. 6, 2017), https://www.bu.edu/articles/2017/asl-language-acquisition/.
[99] Id.
[100] See Position Statement on Educating PreK-12 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students During the COVID-19 Outbreak, supra note 5.
[101] Rheana Murray, Deaf People Are Being Left Out of the Conversation During COVID-19 Pandemic, Today (Oct. 14, 2020), https://www.today.com/health/deaf-people-are-left-out-conversation-during-covid-19-t193570.
[102] Id.
[103] Charney, supra note 56.
[104] Id.
[105] Kunming Cheng et al., WHO declares the end of the COVID-19 global health emergency: lessons and recommendations from the perspective of ChatGPT/GPT-4, Nat’l Libr. Of Med. (May 26, 2023), https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10498859/.
[106] Nikki Carvajal, Biden signs bill ending Covid-19 national emergency, CNN (Apr. 10, 2023), https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/10/politics/covid-19-national-emergency-end-biden/index.html.
[107] Greta M. Massetti et al., Summary of Guidance for Minimizing the Impact of COVID-19 on Individual Persons, Communities, and Health Care Systems — United States, August 2022, CDC (Aug. 19, 2022), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7133e1.htm.
[108] Martinez v. Newsom, 46 F.4th 965, 968—69 (9th Cir. 2022).
[109] Id.
[110] Id.
[111] Erin McClam, Displaced Katrina Teens Tested at Schools, NBC News (Nov. 14, 2005), https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna10004072.
[112] Douglas N. Harris, As Schools Recover After COVID-19, Look to New Orleans, Educ. Week (Sept. 29, 2020), https://www.edweek.org/leadership/opinion-as-schools-recover-after-covid-19-look-to-new-orleans/2020/09.
[113] Rachelle Oblack, Back to School After Hurricane Katrina, Thought Co. (Feb. 6, 2019), https://www.thoughtco.com/back-to-school-after-hurricane-katrina-3443854.
[114] Trailers Become Schools After Hurricane Katrina, Education World (May 7, 2023), https://www.educationworld.com/a_lesson/newsforyou/pdfs/newsforyou033.pdf.
[115] Catherine Donaldson-Evans, Schools in Slidell, La., Get Back on their Feet After
Hurricane Katrina, Fox News (May 7, 2023), https://www.foxnews.com/story/schools-in-slidell-la-get-back-on-their-feet-after-hurricane-katrina.
[116] See What Post-Katrina New Orleans Can Teach Schools About Addressing COVID Learning Losses, Ctr. on Reinventing Pub. Educ. (April, 2020), https://crpe.org/what-post-katrina-new-orleans-can-teach-schools-about-addressing-covid-learning-losses/ (discussing how many New Orleans students had a six-month educational gap from when schools were closed in early August 2005 until many were reopened again in early 2006).
[117] Rick Seltzer, Hurricane Ida Continues to Scramble Campus Plans and Force Schools Online, Higher Educ. Dive (Sept. 2, 2021), https://www.highereddive.com/news/hurricane-ida-continues-to-scramble-campus-plans-and-force-schools-online/606031/.
[118] Charles Lussier, Few Students Changing Schools After Hurricane Ida, but There’s a Long Road
to Recovery, The Advocate (Sept. 13, 2021), https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/education/few-students-changing-schools-after-hurricane-ida-but-theres-a-long-road-to-recovery/article_4c23e066-1348-11ec-bbae-131bca104c29.html.
[119] Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 125 (1973).
[120] Id.
[121] Megan Woolhouse, Helping Deaf Children Learn in Coronavirus Isolation, BU Today (April 2, 2020) https://www.bu.edu/articles/2020/asl-education-library-deaf-children-coronavirus-isolation/.
[122] Id.
[123] Id.
[124] See Bd. of Educ. of Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist., 458 U.S. at 185.
[125] Id. at 215.
[126] Pete Detlef, The Language Learning Gap in the U.S.: Causes and Solutions, 24-Hour Translation (March 3, 2023), https://www.24hourtranslation.com/language-learning-gap-us-causes-solutions.html. (discussing how only 20% of American students from kindergarten to 2nd grade take a foreign language course, while 92% of Europeans do.)
[127] See generally Perez, 3 F.4th 236.
[128] Carvajal, supra note 106.
[129] Marco Marani, Gabriel G. Katul, William K. Pan & Anthony J. Parolari, Intensity and frequency of extreme novel epidemics. Princeton Univ. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2105482118; Kate E. Jones et al., Global trends in emerging infectious diseases, Nature (2008), https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06536.
