Deaf students could get ASL first in special education

A federal proposal in Congress would put American Sign Language, or ASL, much closer to the center of special education for children who are deaf, hard of hearing or deafdisabled. The bill would not just ask schools to promise support. It would require states to explain how they are identifying students, how they are evaluating them and how they are making sure children actually get the instruction they need.

The measure is called the Alice Cogswell and Anne Sullivan Macy Act. It amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the federal law that governs special education. While the bill also covers students who are blind or visually impaired and students who are deafblind, its clearest message is that language access is not a side issue. For many children, it is the difference between sitting in class and being able to follow it.

ASL would no longer be an afterthought

At the center of the bill is a direct requirement. States would have to describe how all children who are deaf, hard of hearing or deafdisabled who need special education and related services receive instruction in ASL unless parents expressly waive it. The proposal also says these students should not be served only through Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, a civil rights law that can provide accommodations but is not the same as a full special education program.

That matters because the bill treats language access as part of the service itself, not something that happens around the edges. It says state plans must explain how schools support language development in ASL and written language, with or without speech therapy. It also calls for direct interaction with peers and professionals in the child’s language, plus direct instruction in that language. In plain terms, the bill is trying to move schools beyond partial access and toward communication a child can actually use throughout the school day.

What schools would have to prove

The proposal is built around accountability. States would need to show that children who are deaf, hard of hearing or deafdisabled are evaluated by qualified professionals using valid and reliable assessments. Those evaluations would have to look at the child’s unique language, literacy, academic, social and related learning needs. The bill also says the state must show there is enough qualified personnel available to provide those evaluations and the instruction that follows.

The language in the bill is broad on purpose. It says instruction may include services that are also used for children without disabilities, but only if they are specifically designed, modified or delivered to meet a child’s needs. It also points to a wide range of supports schools should address, including audiology, age-appropriate career education, language, social skills, functional skills for academic success, self-determination, technology and family education.

For families, that list reflects how many parts of school life can break down when communication is incomplete. A child may need help with more than reading and math. They may need support understanding classroom routines, building confidence, learning to advocate for themselves and preparing for work or higher education later on. The bill would require states to say how they are covering those pieces, not just whether the child has a formal plan on file.

Children can be missed when labels are too broad

One of the bill’s most practical changes is about identification. It says states that classify children by disability must identify, locate and evaluate students who are deaf, hard of hearing or deafdisabled even if they are listed in another disability category. It also tells states to stop using vague labels such as hearing impaired, section 504 student or having a communication disorder when those terms blur a child’s actual needs.

The bill makes a similar point in its data rules. States, and the Secretary of the Interior, would have to count how many students in other disability categories are also deaf, hard of hearing or deafdisabled, and how those students are getting access to ASL. The route could be an interpreter, a teacher of the deaf or a parent waiver. That kind of accounting can expose a common problem in special education. When students are folded into broader categories, their hearing-related needs can disappear from the record even when they still shape every part of the school day.