MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES AND FACILITIES Sixty-eighth Session May 10, 1995 The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 1:40 p.m., on Wednesday, May 10, 1995, in Room 226 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman Senator Sue Lowden, Vice Chairman Senator Maurice Washington Senator Kathy M. Augustine Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr. Senator Bob Coffin Senator Bernice Mathews GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Assemblyman Larry Spitler STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Kerry Carroll Davis, Senior Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau Linda Chapman, Committee Secretary Mary Gavin, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Ronald Malcolm, President, Nevada Association for the Deaf Dean Swaim, Retired Teacher and Principal Maureen Ricciuti, TTY Specialist, Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living James Cole, Student, Deaf Youth of Southern Nevada Davina Daviton, Student Chris Donahue, Member of American Sign Language (ASL) Task Force and Hearing Impaired Program Parents' Advisory Commission of Clark County Diana Callahan, Interpreter for the Deaf Catherine Black, Interpreter for the Deaf Sandra Workman, Professor, Community College of Southern Nevada Lois Ehrler, Hearing Impaired Specialist, Carson City School District Gloria Dopf, Director of Special Education, State Department of Education Cheryl Euse, M.S., Speech Language Pathologist, Carson City School District Geraldine Rueger, Interpreter for the Deaf Danell Fanning, Sign Language Interpreter Mary Peterson, Ph.D., Superintendent of Public Instruction, State Department of Education Marsha Berkbigler, Lobbyist, Nevada State Medical Association (NSMA) Chairman Rawson opened the meeting as a subcommittee meeting since the committee lacked a quorum, and opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 366. ASSEMBLY BILL 366: Requires creation of policies and procedures on teaching of American Sign Language. (BDR 34-1123) Assemblyman Larry Spitler told the committee he learned on May 5, 1995, that there is opposition to A.B. 366 from a group called Signing Exact English (SEE). He said he wants to assure the members of SEE and the Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities that this bill, in no way, is precluding other forms of signing or impeding anything that a school district might choose to do, or preventing any parent from accepting any option available to them. He said this bill simply addresses American Sign Language (ASL), but added ASL is not being offered by him or this bill as the only way to effectively communicate. Assemblyman Spitler told the committee the original printing of A.B. 366 did not convey his intent or the intent of others who originally worked on it. He stated the original bill included a $7 million fiscal note, and insisted he would never come before the Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities with that fiscal note. He explained they worked very carefully to present the Assembly a fully amended version of A.B. 366 which does not carry with it a fiscal note. He mentioned he read an editorial in the newspaper criticizing the original bill, and met with several individuals in the hearing impaired community in contemplation of a response. Mr. Spitler told the committee ASL is taught by such prestigious schools as the universities of Texas, New York, California, Boston, Georgetown, Brown, Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He asserted ASL is recognized as a language, and is taught for foreign language credit in more than 30 states. He testified that the Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization of the United Nations has recognized that the signed languages of the world are fully developed, autonomous, natural languages with inherent grammars and art forms which must be afforded the same status as other linguistic systems. He stated ASL is widely recognized throughout America to fulfill the purpose of a foreign language requirement in education, allowing students to learn and understand language as a structured system, provide the student entr‚ into another culture, and expose the student to a new and different mode of aesthetic expression. Mr. Spitler asserted ASL is currently used by more than 1/2 million Americans; it is the third most widely used, non-English language in the United States following Spanish and Italian. He stated an estimated 1,800 deaf Nevadans use ASL as their first language. He pointed out that the teaching of ASL, as a language, provides significant benefits to the general population as well as to deaf individuals. He suggested such course work will: 1) increase the number of teachers, professionals, and business owners able to effectively communicate with the population of deaf children and adults for whom they provide a service; 2) add to the financial planning, home buying, and other purchasing selection opportunities for deaf Nevadans; 3) increase the cross-cultural understanding and interaction between hearing and non-hearing citizens; 4) increase the numbers of available, qualified interpreters and teachers of deaf study programs in Nevada; and, 5) provide opportunities for hearing students to learn a recognized minority language and culture which they can use to communicate with other citizens in their own state. Mr. Spitler pointed out the University of New Mexico has observed, over the past 10 years since they have been offering ASL, that the demand for ASL courses has risen steadily. He added, since ASL was accepted by that university in fulfillment of the foreign language requirements in 1986, there has been no negative impact on enrollment in other foreign language courses. In fact, it seems that the popularity of ASL courses seems to have led to increased interest in other foreign languages as students overcome foreign language anxiety. Mr. Spitler explained A.B. 366 is permissive with the exception of section 1, number 1, which requires that the State Board of Education shall approve course work and develop policies and procedures for the teaching of ASL in the system of public instruction. He said number 2 states that a school that chooses to offer ASL as a course shall allow any pupil who successfully completes the course to earn credit for completing an elective course in a foreign language, or toward completing a required number of credits in a foreign language if the school has such a requirement. He said the bill also sets forth the qualifications and requirements for obtaining a license or endorsement to teach ASL. Mr. Spitler pointed out that section 4 also states the Board of Regents may approve a uniform course of study and develop policies and procedures of ASL in the University and Community College System of Nevada. Chairman Rawson told Mr. Spitler the committee is presently dealing with another issue: teaching English as a second language. He asked Mr. Spitler, if, by giving ASL equal status, a requirement will be created through the back door. Mr. Spitler replied, "No, this is probably the most permissive bill I have ever seen." He added it only applies if a school is currently teaching ASL or wants to develop a program. He said he certainly does not want to set forth mandates on schools. He said he believes Nevada has the largest number of state mandates in the public education system of any of the United States, and reiterated he does not want to add to that. Senator Washington referred Mr. Spitler to section 2, subsection 1, and pointed out that the language therein states shall, and said when he sees the word shall, the red flags go up. Mr. Spitler replied, and then you see dollar signs, but said he worked with the State Department of Education to determine that there would be no additional money or resources to the department. Chairman Rawson stated, essentially, all they are doing is approving the accepted form for the course work. Mr. Spitler confirmed Chairman Rawson's statement. Ronald Malcolm, President, Nevada Association for the Deaf, told the committee there are a group of individuals in the State of Nevada who have invisible disabilities. He said they are not recognized on the streets until they start moving their hands or they speak. He said it is the disability grouping that has the highest group of children that graduate from high school with a disability, and are very productive within the state. In terms of what is impacting the deaf community in the State of Nevada on ASL issues, Mr. Malcolm stated there is a very large deaf education program in southern Nevada, where many of the children are academically talented and have the skills to go to their own public school, but the reason they are clustered and bused across town is because they cannot find ASL interpreters. He suggested the recognition of ASL at the college level will allow men and women to be trained as interpreters. He insisted, if there were more interpreters, deaf and hearing impaired children could go to the same school as their brothers and sisters who can hear. Chairman Rawson announced that the committee has a quorum at this time and the hearing will resume as a regular hearing. Mr. Malcolm told the committee many people who are not familiar with ASL confuse it with English because English is the language hearing people speak. He said he is very proud of his ASL skills because he uses them every day on his job, allowing him to communicate. He explained, as a deaf person, he is a little bit unique because communication is not his disability, his deafness is. He said he can speak; his problem is when people speak back to him. He pointed out interpreters with weak sign language skills impact his job greatly because the people he deals with perceive the interpreter's lack of skill as his own. He insisted finding someone who is qualified in this state who has a language double in ASL that can compete with him is very difficult. Mr. Malcolm informed the committee that 30 states already have this type of legislation. He maintained the deaf community is not asking Nevada to do anything new, but does not want Nevada to be the last state to pass this type of legislation for its deaf citizens. Senator Augustine referred Mr. Malcolm to section 2, item 2, which states that ASL will be an elective course in foreign language, and asked him if that applies to the primary, secondary and collegiate level, or only at the high school level. Mr. Malcolm replied the impact is currently at the community colleges and universities, but thinks they are also looking at the high school level, as well. He said many students at the high school level want ASL as a foreign language option. He stated he believes if ASL is offered at the high school level, an increased number of students would graduate from high school with the skills to be employed as interpreters. Senator Augustine said she is uncertain whether this bill applies to the community college and university level, because the chapter of Nevada Revised Statutes affected by this bill only makes requirements of the State Board of Education which she believes only has jurisdiction over the public high schools. Senator Washington told Mr. Malcolm he thinks ASL may be more effective at the elementary or secondary level rather than the collegiate level. Mr. Malcolm responded by saying he thinks with any foreign language, the earlier you begin to teach children, the better. He said, as a father of children who can hear, his children's language is not spoken English, it is ASL. He stated society is concerned that deaf people are teaching children ASL, but his children tip every language scale within the public schools because they developed a visual language first. He insisted they never spoke in single words, but rather in sentences because they learned that concept, and are fluent in two languages, ASL and English. Chairman Rawson explained acceptance of ASL courses for credit is clarified in section 2, subsection 2, regarding high schools. He added section 4 does not clarify college credit where it directs the Board of Regents to develop a uniform course and does not state whether or not students will be given credit. He asked Mr. Malcolm if he has any concern about that. Mr. Malcolm answered in the affirmative, and added the classes currently being offered in the State of Nevada are offered as elective classes. He said many people would prefer to take ASL in place of another foreign language class because they do not need more elective credit. Chairman Rawson said the committee will ask for a legal opinion on the issue of credit while the committee hears further testimony. Dean Swaim, Retired Teacher and Principal, with the assistance of an interpreter, presented his prepared written testimony (Exhibit C) to the committee expressing his support for A.B. 366. Maureen Ricciuti, TTY Specialist, Northern Nevada Center for Independent Living, with the aid of an interpreter presented her prepared written testimony (Exhibit D) to the committee expressing her support for A.B. 366. Senator Washington asked Ms. Ricciuti, since she uses English as a second language, if she could substitute English for any other language as a second language. Ms. Ricciuti replied, "No, just English as a second language." Chairman Rawson stated the legal opinion on section 4, is that, because of the separation of powers, the Legislature cannot demand that the university system do anything, but can merely suggest. He explained section 4 does not require them to offer credit, but does suggest that they may develop regulations or procedures. He pointed out the University and Community College System can do that anyway, so this is just a suggestion to them on the part of the Legislature. He said, therefore, there is no need for an amendment. Mr. Malcolm said he thinks the issue with the deaf community today is that their language be given status as a foreign language and be recognized as such. James Cole, Deaf Youth of Southern Nevada, told the committee he goes to a hearing school and is mainstreamed, but is the only deaf person at his school. He said he would like to see his fellow students learn sign language, and would like to see ASL offered throughout the whole world so we could develop better communication. He stated ASL has its own syntax, just as Spanish or other foreign languages, and although it is different from English, it is a language. Davina Daviton, Student, presented her prepared written testimony (Exhibit E) to the committee expressing her support for the bill. Chris Donohue, Member of the ASL Task Force, Member of the Hearing Impaired Program Parents' Advisory Committee of Clark County, and father of a deaf child told the committee he supports this bill for a number of reasons. He stated the number one issue is isolation. He said his daughter is fully mainstreamed into a program where she is the only deaf child. He said it has been an eye-opening experience for all of the children in the program. He stated his daughter is fully accepted by her peers, and gets along well with them, but her friends cannot communicate directly with her which is a real problem. Mr. Donohue told the committee when his daughter's interpreter is ill, there is no substitute for her, and his daughter has to go to school without any effective means of communication. He said her inability to communicate heightens her sense of insecurity and he feels that as she gets older the pressure will increase due to that lack of ability to communicate. He insisted the passage of this bill will provide the means to break down communication barriers that currently exist. Mr. Donohue explained he has always encouraged his daughter to participate fully with other children her age, and has assured her that the only difference between her and other children is her hearing impairment. He stated he would like to see his daughter go on to college, but the system currently requires a foreign language, that his daughter would not be able to complete or use. He remarked if this bill passes and allows ASL to qualify as a foreign language it would open the door for his daughter and other deaf children to graduate from college. Chairman Rawson asked Mr. Donohue if he has had to learn sign language. Mr. Donohue replied he has. He said he began with SEE and is now taking ASL instruction. He said he wishes he had begun with ASL, because it would be a lot easier now. He said his daughter is signing so much faster than he and his wife that it is a struggle to keep up with her. Diana Callahan, Interpreter for the Deaf, presented the committee with her prepared written testimony, together with letters of support from Louis J., and Peggy J. Locke, and Nan Baker, M.S. (Exhibit F), expressing support for A.B. 366. Catherine Black, Interpreter for the Deaf, told the committee she is the mother of three deaf sons, and an instructor of ASL. She said she was offered ASL in Arizona as a vocational program. She maintained she was fluent in ASL at the age of 17, in 1975, and was earning $9 an hour at Mesa Public Schools. She said she had an employable skill just out of high school while she attended college. She said she was able to learn SEE very easily because it is derived from ASL. She said she switched to SEE, but when she moved back to Nevada she learned that ASL is the language of choice of deaf adults. Ms. Black told the committee she has had her company for 3 years, and has had only one request for a SEE interpreter in the legal system. She said a good interpreter can go the whole continuum. She said her skill also brought her sons into her life. She said she received a phone call from the State of Nevada asking if she would be a foster parent to James, 5 years ago. She explained James joined them, and a year later another brother joined them, and 2 years later his third brother joined them. She said they have had their tears and joys with those young men, but it is because of her skill in ASL that the door was opened for her to have the boys. She remarked that James attends Greenspun Jr. High School with 1200 hearing children. She said she would like to see those hearing children have the opportunity to take ASL as well as Spanish, or French, enabling them to communicate with James. Ms. Black said she teaches at the Community College of Southern Nevada, and currently has 70 students, waiting with baited breath, to hear that the Legislature has passed this bill. She said her class is not comprised of interpreters, but of a cross- section of society including dental hygienists, bus drivers, water district employees, and state and county employees who have a sensitivity to deafness and want basic communication skills. She insisted this bill will allow Pell Grant individuals to take the class. She said unless ASL is offered as a foreign language elective it will restrict many college students. She suggested the passage of this bill will open up a lot of avenues for her sons and hearing students who wish to advance their communication skills. She urged the committee to support A.B. 366. Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Black what size vocabulary is required to effectively communicate in ASL. Ms. Black said she cannot say exactly, but told the committee taking ASL training increases sensitivity and understanding of the frustrations of the hearing impaired. She stated when she was in her first sign class, she was standing in a United Parcel Service (UPS) line and there was a deaf individual in front of her who was very frustrated, and only needed 10 labels. She explained his inability to communicate held the line up for more than 15 minutes. She said she was able to assist that individual, and feels that was so worthwhile that if that is all she ever did it would have been enough to justify her taking the class. She pointed out that not everyone who takes ASL will be an interpreter, but just taking one class will impact the community. Chairman Rawson told Ms. Black many students take French or Spanish with the idea of traveling to a foreign country, and would like to master a couple thousand words vocabulary. Ms. Black said when one leaves an ASL 1 class, she would approximate that one would have command of 600 to 700 vocabulary words, but would also know the syntax, culture, and so much more than the mere vocabulary. She said one nice thing about ASL is that one does not have to travel very far to meet their first deaf person. Senator Augustine asked Ms. Black why they are not just taking the first step and going for academic credit, rather than designating it as foreign language credit. Ms. Black stated she is not sure. Senator Augustine said she disagrees with Ms. Black in that she believes foreign language is very valuable as our world becomes smaller and closer. Ms. Black replied, if she impressed upon the committee that foreign language is not important, she did not intend to. She said she, too, believes foreign language is very important, but they just want ASL to be considered as one of those languages. Senator Augustine told Ms. Black, at the present time, academic credit is not given for ASL. Ms. Black replied ASL is currently given elective credit at the Community College of Southern Nevada. Senator Augustine told Ms. Black this bill deals with the State Board of Education, or high school level, and right now academic credit is not given. She said her question is: "Why are we not taking it in increments to provide for academic credit." Ms. Black told Senator Augustine that Mr. Malcolm could better address that question. Mr. Malcolm stated he thinks, when foreign language is discussed, two individuals could be placed in the same Spanish class with the same teacher and same curriculum and one walk out with a pretty good level of Spanish, and the other one walk out fluent, because during the time they were given that class they socialized with Spanish-speaking people outside of the class. He said what Senator Augustine is asking is twofold, and he thinks their goal is both. He said, at the universities, ASL is offered as an elective credit. He said they are looking at changing that in the future so that it can also be foreign language credit, because that is really what these people are studying. He said at the high school level right now it is not offered, and they are also looking for it to be offered in the future as a foreign language credit. Senator Augustine said, but this bill addresses both issues, and asked Mr. Malcolm why they did not just ask for ASL to be afforded academic credit within the school system. She emphasized she is not talking about the university where it may already be offered for a credit. Mr. Malcolm asked Senator Augustine if she is asking why they did not separate the two. Senator Augustine answered yes and added, why not take it in increments; first get the academic credit; if the programs are successful, and there is sufficient interest, then come back and say, "Okay, what about ASL as an alternative to a foreign language." Mr. Malcolm replied it has already been shown that there is adequate interest because the classes are packed at the college level, and since the Legislature only meets every 2 years, to deal with issues separately for the colleges and high schools would just prolong the process. He said he thinks this bill represents the best of both worlds in allowing those in college to take ASL as a foreign language and providing the classes to high schools who do not currently offer it at all. Sandra Workman, Professor, Community College of Southern Nevada, presented the committee with a collection of letters of endorsement for A.B. 366 from her colleagues, collectively designated as Exhibit G. Ms. Workman told the committee she enjoys working at the community college because the college does recognize ASL as a foreign language, however, the credit is transferrable only as a general elective credit. She insisted ASL is a language with its own syntax, grammatical structure, culture, tradition, and heritage. She said what makes it a foreign language is that when a student walks into her class they are learning a language they do not know, just as they would if they walked into a Spanish classroom. Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Workman at which campus she teaches, and further asked if ASL is offered at all of the community colleges in Southern Nevada. Ms. Workman replied she teaches at the Cheyenne Campus, and that ASL is offered at all three campuses. Lois Ehrler, Hearing Impaired Specialist, Carson City School District, told the committee she developed and runs the district-wide program for the hearing impaired in the Carson City School District, and outlined her credentials. She said she taught ASL for several years, and has been an instructor of SEE for the last 7 years. She testified Western Nevada Community College (WNCC) has been requesting her to teach a SEE class for the last 3 years, and said she has agreed to do so in the fall. She said she has been a teacher of the hearing impaired for 20 years, and stated her views are in accordance with the people who submitted letters of opposition to A.B. 366, collectively labeled as Exhibit H. Ms. Ehrler told the committee she believes ASL should be afforded the status of acceptance equal to other foreign languages because it is representative of the rich cultural background of the hearing impaired population and has its rightful place in the education of deaf students. She said ASL is the natural language of children of hearing impaired parents. She said she understands A.B. 366 to propose not only the recognition of ASL as an accredited linguistic system offered in the public education system, but to develop the means to approve course work policies, licensure qualification and endorsements. She said she further understands that there is no direction regarding the system choice of language to be used in hearing impaired programs in this bill. She said her position, together with those who have called and faxed from the Carson City School District, is that SEE which was developed from ASL and has added vocabulary, inflections and affixes should be accorded equal status to be accredited and offered as a linguistic system for credit as well. Ms. Ehrler read a quote beginning on page 5, paragraph 2, of Exhibit I, bracketed for emphasis, written by Dr. Gerilee Gustason, deaf author of the SEE system who has her bachelor's degree in English, three master's degrees and a doctorate degree in education. Ms. Ehrler told the committee longitudinal and recent research conducted between 1984 and 1994, and specifically in 1993 confirms the following: Hearing impaired students raised with SEE are at levels of educational competence equal to hearing students. ASL-raised students graduate with an average nationwide of fourth grade reading level, which is the point at which reading changes from learning to read to reading to learn. Secondly, demographic studies show a decline in the profoundly deaf population and an increase in the hard of hearing population. Additionally, enrollment in residential placements are decreasing whereas public school mainstream programs are increasing. Ninety percent of deaf children are from hearing parents and their communication choice is part of the IEP [individual education plan] process, but should prescriptively reflect the language of the parents. Finally, if high school students are offered ASL for credit and SEE not for credit, or not at all because this process has not included SEE, this may decimate the hearing impaired programs utilizing SEE in the following manner: students seeking language credit will prefer ASL. If interest develops and they pursue their interest in deafness, it will be their language of choice. The peers of our hearing impaired youngsters in SEE programs will practice their new skills with our hearing impaired students who are signing and learning in English who will then opt for ASL, dropping the more difficult SEE and limiting their literacy levels, and ultimately limiting their educational competency and their ability to avail themselves of the wide range of opportunities presented in both deaf and hearing cultures. Ms. Ehrler quoted the SEE book, "Because we wish to see such problems minimized, we encourage the study of and acceptance of both ASL and manual English, SEE." Ms. Ehrler urged the committee to consider all of our youth. She said she commends Mr. Spitler for his work on this bill, and said she will be working with him in the future to bring her concerns into future legislation. Vice Chairman Lowden asked Ms. Ehrler if she does not want this bill passed if it does not include SEE. Ms. Ehrler replied, that is a difficult question. She said she is definitely in support of ASL, and she would not want to do anything which would prohibit the acceptance of ASL as a language, and the promotion of it in our society; however, as a dedicated educator, she believes fervently in SEE because English is the language of our society at large. Vice Chairman Lowden commented she has no idea which language is truly more accepted. Chairman Rawson stated the committee always advises people not to bring internal arguments to the Legislature because it is usually self defeating. He said this is an issue which the committee does not possess the expertise to sort out for themselves, and therefore must rely on testimony. He said if they rely on the testimony given today, it is overwhelmingly in favor of ASL, and yet the committee can recognize it may not be the most just thing to do, and wonders if it is better to accept ASL and then handle SEE in another bill. He stated, if this bill goes into the amendment process, there is no guarantee that it will survive the session. Ms. Ehrler responded she believes in both ASL and SEE, and thinks they are both very valuable in the lives of hearing impaired youngsters. She said, as far as the dilemma before the committee, she would not like to see this bill defeated as a result of her concerns, but would like to have her concerns addressed as well. Senator Washington said he would not like to see this bill defeated because of the conflict between the two languages. Ms. Ehrler replied she would like to see them both accepted as languages. Senator Washington remarked he thinks the issue of SEE could be better addressed in another bill. Senator Augustine referred Ms. Ehrler to section 2, item 1, which states, "A state board shall approve course work and develop policies and procedures for the teaching of American Sign Language in a system of public instruction." She asked Ms. Ehrler, while they are developing that course work or policies, would they be able to develop SEE as well, and then allow the school districts to make the decision on which one they want to adopt, or if she wants a set policy throughout the state. Chairman Rawson asked Gloria Dopf, Director of Special Education, State Department of Education, if the State Department of Education has the authority to process regulations or procedures for both ASL and SEE. Ms. Dopf said she thinks, if the State Department of Education is looking at the inclusion of a system as a recognized foreign language, the first step would be to determine whether the committee wishes to expand that concept to include both ASL and SEE. She explained, once that determination is made, then the State Board of Education would prescribe a course of study responsive to each of those discreet programs. She suggested, until the determination is made to elevate both programs to the recognition of a foreign language including the requisite linguistic systems and culture, the State Department of Education would not perceive that the State Board of Education would do that. Senator Augustine asked Ms. Dopf, "What about for academic credit only; if it was not for a foreign language credit?" Ms. Dopf said she needs clarification as to what Senator Augustine means by academic credit. She testified the State Department of Education looked at this issue in the context of a high school program, where there are unitary credits for a prescribed course of study, and additionally there are elective credits. She stated the foreign language credit is an elective credit. She said this bill would allow that to happen for ASL. Senator Augustine stated it is really twofold; it is both academic and foreign language credit in this bill. She said perhaps if it was not for foreign language credit, she would at least like to see it for an elective credit. She asked Ms. Dopf if it is looked at as an elective credit rather than a foreign language credit, could both languages be incorporated into a policy or procedure for teaching. Ms. Dopf said both languages could be incorporated once the Legislature determines what status those particular programs or languages would have. She said the committee would have to ask the experts in the field to determine if both ASL and SEE should qualify as foreign languages. She said there were members of the foreign language departments at both university campuses on their task force, and there was no question that ASL should be considered a foreign language. She said she is not certain what the perspective would be on SEE. Senator Augustine said it seems to her a more viable option to include both as eligible for academic credit, and then ASL would just be more geared toward foreign language credit. Ms. Dopf said she would see nothing to preclude that particular position, but indicated there is already a significant shortage of skilled individuals in the area. She said if they bifurcate the process, there may be difficulty recruiting individuals who can teach programs in the schools. Ms. Dopf said it may not be practical to offer both SEE and ASL. Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Dopf if the fiscal note would be increased if the committee included SEE. Ms. Dopf told the committee it would not add more cost, in terms of implementation by the school districts as long as the program was mandatory. She said the concept of the course of study prescribed by the State Board of Education, and licensure by the Professional Standards Committee, was contemplated to come from the task force. She said if it is opened up for another program, she is not certain that particular task force, as identified in the bill, would have the time, interest, or requisite skills to address a course of study for SEE and it may require another task force to look at those particular issues. Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Dopf if there is a more general term that the committee could use, rather than saying SEE or ASL; in terms of sign language for the deaf or hearing impaired. Ms. Dopf told Chairman Rawson she believes they can, but would respectfully request that he ask that question of the individuals who testified on ASL. Senator Neal told Ms. Ehrler he is thoroughly confused because he hears her voicing her disagreement with A.B. 366 because she feels it ignores the necessity for developing literacy, and sees the interpreter signing her disagreement back to the audience, and they seem to be understanding. He asked Ms. Ehrler if she could explain what it is he is missing. Ms. Ehrler replied, when they are speaking of literacy, they are speaking of the ability to read, write and speak in a literate manner in complete sentences in English. Senator Neal asked if Ms. Ehrler is saying that ASL does not develop that. Ms. Ehrler replied she is not saying that, but said ASL has an altered grammar and syntax different from English, which makes it applicable as a foreign language. Senator Neal asked Ms. Ehrler if it is that difference that she disagrees with. Ms. Ehrler said she is not disagreeing, she said she is concerned that Nevada's hearing impaired youth be afforded the opportunity to learn SEE if that is what is determined in the individual education plan (IEP) process for that student prescriptively in order that they may become literate in English, and contributing members of our society to their fullest. Senator Neal said, as he understands the bill, it would allow the school district to make this an elective, and persons who want to learn the language can, so he assumes, that they would have already learned English before they started to learn the sign language. He asked Ms. Ehrler what he is missing here in terms of her opposition to the bill. Ms. Ehrler responded she would also like to see SEE, which is also a sign language... Senator Neal interrupted asking Ms. Ehrler if she would like to see the students sign in exact English. Ms. Ehrler replied she would like to see both accepted for credit. Senator Coffin told Ms. Ehrler he sees a parallel here, and asked her to tell him if he is oversimplifying the issue. He stated there are two means of learning English for people who speak a foreign language, for example, there is total immersion which is recommend by many for studying English if one is from a foreign country, and the other method is bilingual education that has some variation, of which English as a second language (ESL) is a part. He stated it is proven that if one uses correct bilingual education a youngster learns the language skills better while being taught their other subjects in their native language, and then gradually everything is switched to English. He said the students acquire skills in their native language so that they progress at the same speed as other students. He asked Ms. Ehrler if there is, indeed, a parallel here; does SEE perform the same function; does one learn SEE because one is learning English, and then learn ASL to develop that language? He commented, in that case, ASL would be the equivalent of English in the example he used, and SEE is the equivalent of the bilingual education. Ms. Ehrler answered in the affirmative. Senator Coffin stated, in that case, he can see a need for both. Senator Augustine asked Ms. Ehrler if a person is blind, as well as deaf, if they use SEE because the letters are actually spelled out in the hand. Ms. Ehrler replied they use the Rochester Method of finger spelling. She said, as she understands it, that is used to augment both ASL and SEE, but is not used exclusively in its entirety any longer except by a small population. Senator Washington remarked that a letter included in Exhibit H, from Mary Jolly, states that ASL uses shortcuts, slang, and omits endings. He said he is confused now, too, and does not understand the difference between the two. Ms. Ehrler told Senator Washington it was not her intent to confuse the committee. Senator Washington asked Ms. Ehrler if ASL is slang or not. Ms. Ehrler replied, "One gesture or sign can express many words, and it is not directly translatable to English." Senator Neal asked Ms. Ehrler which language is more universal, SEE or ASL. Ms. Ehrler told Senator Neal that SEE is a derivative of ASL. She stated ASL is certainly a more universal language in that it is visual and conceptual so there is a finer communication created which is easily understood in many languages. Senator Neal asked Ms. Ehrler, if he had command of ASL, whether he could communicate with deaf people in Japan. Ms. Ehrler said she does not know specifically about Japan, but said she has tested hearing impaired students from other countries, and has been able to make an appraisal of where they belong in the educational system. Senator Neal asked Ms. Ehrler if she made the appraisal with the use of ASL or SEE. Ms. Ehrler replied, in the testing procedures that she used for those particular students, she used single words which could translate to either ASL or SEE. She explained when she is testing a student, she accepts ASL or SEE signs, because both demonstrate the knowledge of words. Cheryl Euse, M.S., Speech Language Pathologist, Carson City School District, told the committee she has a master's degree in hearing and speech science, and has taken many classes in deaf education and SEE. She said she works with deaf and hearing impaired students. She stated she is at this meeting to present the views of educators in the elementary school setting, as well as the views of hearing impaired and deaf students who choose to learn to speak orally as well as to use manual signing as a means of communication. She said there are many degrees of hearing impairment, and she feels it is beneficial to address the needs of all hearing impaired individuals, not just those who choose to use one language to the exclusion of using oral language simultaneously. She told the committee she has firsthand experience with receptive and expressive language development in both normal and hearing impaired individuals. She said she agrees with previous testimony that there are receptive and expressive components of language, and receptive language development precedes expressive language development. She stated hearing impaired children see language if they are not able to hear it, just as normal hearing youngsters have to hear language repeatedly in the proper context in order to develop their speech and language. She insisted students will speak what they sign just as children with normal hearing acuity speak what they hear. She said it is her belief and experience that it is essential, when teaching English for reading, speaking and writing, that correct English syntax is followed. She said she in no way opposes the use of ASL, and appreciates the deaf culture and those who use ASL, but sees the necessity to address the needs of all hearing impaired youngsters, and asked that SEE be included. Ms. Euse told the committee she teaches verb tenses and plurals every day to students. She said she has worked with students who have been raised with SEE and with ASL. She insisted those who use ASL are at a disadvantage in terms of speaking with other English speaking children because they have not learned proper syntax. She said she believes ASL students have the ASL syntax very firmly established and have difficulty switching to English. She testified, in her experience working with students on a daily basis in conjunction with their English teachers and hearing impaired teachers, she has not been successful in teaching those students to speak. Ms. Euse told the committee the students who have had comparable hearing impairment and backgrounds who have learned SEE have been able to learn to speak because SEE teaches them all the necessary elements to learn to speak. She insisted students who use SEE are able to use grammar and syntax that can be understood by non-hearing parents, teachers and peers. She stated they progress more rapidly in acquiring and using correct speech productions, because they have a visual handle. Ms. Euse said their sentence length and memory skills increase (in terms of speaking, reading and writing English) because they are planning and carrying out the production of sentences that include articles, endings, and prepositions, and see them in their visual form. She said she appreciates that they are included in ASL in the form of a particular glance, or whatever, but said the students are seeing them in their written form. She reiterated that students who have ASL syntax can learn to produce words correctly, and can learn to produce speech sounds correctly, but they break down when trying to put those ideas into sentences. Ms. Euse recounted a personal experience where a high school student became very good friends with her family because one of her children and he were the same age. She said he spent a great deal of time in their home and they learned to communicate with him using signs, but it was very difficult for them to understand him because he used ASL and they used SEE. She said, while many of the signs are similar, the communication broke down when he had something important to communicate and was not able to use the correct syntax. She said he would use signs that they could barely understand, there was a lot of pantomiming, and when he wanted to speak to her sons, he would write messages to them that were completely unintelligible. She pointed out he has now graduated, but has difficulty communicating with those who do not use ASL, and can only read at a fourth grade level. Ms. Euse testified she has an eleventh grade student with a SEE background whose hearing loss and family background is comparable to the other student she mentioned. She said both students learned their sign language in school because it is not used in their families. She added they are both social individuals who are very well accepted among their peers. Ms. Euse stated the eleventh grade student with the SEE background speaks intelligibly, can be understood by others, reads at an eighth grade level and above, and attends all mainstream classes with an A-B average. She said those two examples are characteristic of the research that is referred to in the information provided to the committee. Ms. Euse told the committee it is her hope that hearing, deaf, and hearing impaired students can experience the ideal: learning SEE for the purpose of their education within the school system, for purposes of literacy, reading, writing and speaking, and then learn and use ASL for ease in conversation and for relating within the deaf community. She urged the committee to amend this bill, or support another bill that includes SEE and ASL within the school districts. She said her concern is that if only ASL is offered, that will be the exposure of people who will be interpreters for the children. Ms. Euse said she represents families within the Carson City School District, who would like to attend future meetings to testify as to the efficacy of using SEE, and the tremendous improvement that their students have made. Ms. Dopf indicated the task force she participated with as a representative of the State Department of Education had representation from Clark and Washoe counties which have the majority of programs for the hearing impaired. She said the directors or administrators of the sensory deficit programs discussed the issue of SEE relative to the deliberation that transpired over the year and a half period of the study. Ms. Dopf told the committee it was the consensus recommendation of the task force that they make the proposal relative to ASL. She said the proposal for this bill relative to ASL was not intended to eliminate SEE or any other system that is appropriate for a given youngster based on his IEP. She said the intent of this bill is to create an elevation of capability of communication of the deaf in the larger community and to set up a structure whereby they would begin to facilitate that kind of communication process by giving skills to individuals so they can communicate with hearing impaired individuals whose majority language is ASL. Ms. Dopf explained that to amend the bill to include SEE as a foreign language would present a problem in that SEE is based on English, and to consider English a foreign language in this context would be somewhat circuitous. Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Dopf if the committee would be going against the task force recommendation if an amendment to the bill said something like ASL and its variations in the system of public instruction. Ms. Dopf replied she would defer to Mr. Malcolm or any of the other experts in sign language, since she does not have that expertise. Senator Augustine asked Ms. Euse, if the students have to do written assignments, why in the world would their syntax and everything be jumbled when they go to write a message, such as the 17 year old who was in her home. Ms. Euse replied he had been in a public institution for the deaf, and used ASL exclusively, and did not have that ability. Senator Augustine asked Ms. Euse if the students who are now in the mainstream with an interpreter are actually doing the regular class work such as English papers, etc. Ms. Euse replied the students in her district who are using SEE are doing that. She said they write their reports in English, and speak English. Senator Augustine told Ms. Euse she thinks Mr. Malcolm testified that there are ASL interpreters who sign for the kids who are... Ms. Euse interjected, "In Clark County!" Senator Coffin said he believes this bill comes along at a wonderful time to help the committee understand the complexity of Senate Bill (S.B.) 88, because it is exactly the same parallel. He said if you take a person born in Mexico and totally immerse them in the English language they will learn a form of English, but not actual English. He said it is like the proverbial story of the uncle who came from Italy to this country and learned how to speak English without a special program. He maintained it is always some version of English as opposed to real English, and that is the difference. He said he thinks the SEE program enables people to really learn English, just as a true bilingual program does as opposed to total immersion. He said both will learn a variation of English, but are different from each other. SENATE BILL 88: Authorizes school districts to establish programs to teach English language to certain pupils. (BDR 34-735) Senator Augustine stated the point is that they should get academic credit for both. Senator Washington said he understands the intent of the bill now, and if ASL is a foreign language, then he thinks we ought to deal with this bill on its own merits. He added the issue of SEE should be dealt with on its merits in a different bill. Chairman Rawson asked Senator Augustine, if she wants to deal with both ASL and SEE, if she believes academic credit should be given for both ASL and SEE but only foreign language credit given for ASL. Senator Augustine answered in the affirmative. Chairman Rawson asked if anyone in the audience would object to that amendment. Mr. Malcolm told the committee that deaf people do not view themselves as handicapped. He said many of them will be called disabled, but they are very firm in teaching children that although they have a disability, it is the child who decides if it will disable him. He said there are things that those children are unable to do because of their deafness, but there are all types of people who cannot do certain things. He remarked the senators are asked to grasp the issues which drastically impact the deaf community in just a few hours of testimony. He said the question was asked if ASL is universal. He said he grew up in Nova Scotia, Canada, and ASL is not universal; when he came to this country he had to learn ASL because it was not the sign language system used by him or his parents in Canada. He explained deaf students are provided with an IEP pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. He told the committee that plan can provide whatever language is written into it; there is nothing in this bill which would preclude them from being taught SEE. Mr. Malcolm stated, although the committee was told that Ms. Ehrler and Ms. Euse represent a very large number of deaf students, they actually represent approximately 25 deaf children in northern Nevada, as opposed to the 350 in southern Nevada. He said the children in northern Nevada do not use ASL because nobody teaches ASL in northern Nevada. He said if they were Portuguese, but nobody taught them to speak Portuguese, they would not know that either. He said many of the ASL learners do leave high school with a fourth grade literacy level, but so do hearing students! He said there are many factors that go into a child's life and education, including family issues, background, and social economics. He insisted one cannot look at two deaf people and say they are the same because they have the same hearing loss. He said he has visited the schools in northern Nevada and the deaf children express their frustration to him in not understanding SEE. He testified he sits before the committee today, as a deaf adult who could be blown out of his seat by being told that ASL people are not proficient literacy learners. He told the committee he has two bachelor's degrees, three master's degrees and a doctorate degree, and he uses ASL in every aspect of his life. He said the children that he represents who have language learning problems, are not experiencing problems as a result of their choice of language, there are many factors involved. Mr. Malcolm said, contrary to previous testimony, deafness is on the rise in Nevada. Mr. Malcolm said he believes by now the committee is very clear on the issues. He stressed this bill deals with ASL; whether or not it should be considered as a foreign language. He said SEE means signing exact English, and unless one has grown up French or Spanish, etc., English is not a foreign language, and has nothing to do with this bill. He said this bill would not prevent a deaf student who wants to learn SEE from doing so, but would show the deaf and hearing impaired students that Nevada respects their language choice. He said he has not met one deaf adult in the State of Nevada, who would write "garbly-gook" on paper as result of using ASL as their language of choice. He said the only difference between deaf and hearing people is that deaf people's ears do not work, what is between their ears does, and that is the point. Senator Augustine asked Mr. Malcolm if he also believes that SEE could be allowed as an elective course for those students who would like to take a sign language course. Mr. Malcolm replied he thinks the confusion arises when one realizes that all of the adults use ASL, and teaching those people SEE is not going to enhance their communication skills within the community. He said he thinks there is a time for SEE signing, but has not personally ever used his SEE signing in public. Geraldine Reuger, Interpreter for the Deaf, told the committee her parents are deaf, and emphasized that expression is a very important aspect of ASL. She said the teacher who mentioned that one of her students was doing a lot of pantomiming which she had difficulty understanding obviously did not know ASL, because if she did she would know that pantomiming is a part of ASL. Danell Fanning, Sign Language Interpreter, told the committee she grew up in northern Nevada, and went to Wooster High School where she learned SEE. She said she wanted to continue her education and went into the interpreter training program at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. She said the first thing she was instructed to do, in order to become an interpreter for the deaf, was to forget she ever knew SEE. She said she thinks that is relevant because this issue is not about whether deaf children are going to take ASL as a foreign language, but that hearing children will be taking it as a foreign language, and that is what this bill would accomplish. Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on A.B. 366. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 366. SENATOR WASHINGTON SECONDED THE MOTION. Senator Coffin stated he does not have enough information to make a decision on this bill, and would like to think about it further. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATORS COFFIN, LOWDEN AND AUGUSTINE ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.) * * * * * Chairman Rawson opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 296. ASSEMBLY BILL 296: Revises provisions governing fees collected for issuance or renewal of licenses for teachers and other educational personnel. (BDR 34-1764) Chairman Rawson suspended the hearing on A.B. 296 while waiting for the testifiers to arrive. Chairman Rawson opened the work session on Senate Bill (S.B.) 362. SENATE BILL 362: Expands circumstances under which practitioner may refer patient to health care facility in which he has financial interest. (BDR 40-483) Vice Chairman Lowden suggested a change in the language to include privately traded companies as well as publicly traded companies. Marsha Berkbigler, Lobbyist, Nevada State Medical Association (NSMA), testified: If all of the language that relates to group practice is not removed; for instance, on the second page of the original bill, line 10, sub[section] 1, what happens in the case of cardiologists who have group offices? There are two in Reno and several in Las Vegas who practice out of a number of different offices, and even though the language would be removed that relates to contiguous, these cardiologists do not move from office to office, but they may have one piece of equipment in one office, and another in another office. So, what happens if you don't remove [subsection] 1 is that they cannot send their patients from office A to office B. That would be considered a banned self-referral... that was the reason when we went to the bill drafters originally that they suggested removing all of this language that was put in here. It is not in compliance with federal law. The IRS [Internal Revenue Service] does not define group practice with all of those subsets in it. It just defines it as it is defined in lines 7-9. Vice Chairman Lowden asked Ms. Berkbigler; in other words, the bracketed part in the bill rather than the amendment? Ms. Berkbigler replied, "Yes, not in the amendment, but in the bill." Vice Chairman Lowden asked her if she wanted that part taken out or left in. Ms. Berkbigler told Vice Chairman Lowden the NSMA wants the bill as it is currently printed. She said they want the bracketed part left in, because that streamlines the definition of group practice more closely to the federal definition, and does not put them in a position of having... Chairman Rawson asked Ms. Berkbigler if it is the language that they want left out. Ms. Berkbigler answered in the affirmative. She said she does not know where the language came from, but... Senator Neal said, "It came from Senator Titus; this was her bill." Ms. Berkbigler told Senator Neal this was not the amendment she discussed with Senator Titus. She added they also have concerns about removing subsection 3. She said she is aware that Senator Titus discussed removing that, but said she has since talked with Senator Titus and the logic behind that language was: as the practice of medicine expands and technology changes, there will be other pieces of equipment which may also require exemption and they will have to come back to the Legislature every time to request an exemption. She said that was the purpose behind the language in subsection 3 which allowed that type of equipment to be brought into the State of Nevada. Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on S.B. 362, and reopened the hearing on A.B. 296. Mary Peterson, Ph.D., Superintendent of Public Instruction, State Department of Education, outlined the proposed changes to the law as delineated in A.B. 296. She told the committee the General Fund has historically supported the operation of the teacher licensing office. She told the committee the Governor's recommended budget shifts 71 percent of the funding to licenses and fees. She said lines 10 and 11 of A.B. 296 operationalize this shift by depositing the fees generated from licensing directly into the department budget. She said the budget office has prepared an analysis of how other licensing boards in the state are funded and what other licensing boards in the state charge, and have pointed out that these changes in A.B. 296 would bring teacher licensing more into line with other licensing functions in the state. She said if their budget account 2705 is to be approved as recommended in the Governor's budget, passage of A.B. 296 is necessary because it operationalizes the budget. Senator Augustine said the current language in line 2 should already allow them the flexibility of increasing the fee, because it says the commission may fix fees of not less than $25, which means it could be more, and now must fix the fees at not less than $65. She asked Dr. Peterson, since she already has the flexibility, why change the language? Dr. Peterson replied that change was made in the Assembly Committee on Ways and Means, and was not part of the original bill put forth by the budget office. She said the State Department of Education went along with it because they estimate that $65 is the minimum amount necessary to generate the dollars that they will need to support the budget. She said Senator Augustine is correct that they could have done it without this change but reiterated they did not object to having it put in statute because they figure $65 is the minimum they are going to have to charge anyway. Senator Neal said this increase will amount to about 160 percent, and his retirement bill only required about a 140 percent increase. Dr. Peterson replied, as Senator Augustine pointed out, the original statute just set the minimum at $25. She said, in fact, teachers currently pay $85 for an initial license, and $50 for a renewed license, so it is not quite as large an increase as it may appear. Vice Chairman Lowden asked Dr. Peterson how she was able to get the money into the State Department of Education. She said the committee has been attempting to accomplish that with other commissions and boards, and have not been able to succeed. Dr. Peterson said it was a budget office recommendation, and since the State Department of Education has a desperate need for additional personnel, the budget office agreed. Chairman Rawson closed the hearing on A.B. 296. SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO DO PASS A.B. 296. VICE CHAIRMAN LOWDEN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR AUGUSTINE VOTED NO. SENATOR COFFIN WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) * * * * * There being no further business before the committee, Chairman Rawson adjourned the meeting at 4:20 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Linda Chapman, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities May 10, 1995 Page