Second International Congress on Education of the Deaf

The Milan Congress of 1880 ( actually "Second International Deaf teachers Congress" ) was a major conference of leading European Deaf educators in September 1880 in Milan. The decisions of the Congress had far-reaching, worldwide, about a century long-lasting consequences for the social life of the deaf, which were mostly negative perceived by them. The term " Milan Congress " was coined in the Deaf community.

Background

According to the decision of the " Paris Congress for the Amelioration of the deaf " of 30 September 1878, the Second International Deaf teachers Congress in Italy from 6 to 11 September 1880 in Milan instead of as originally decided conducted in Como.

Organization

For the Organizing Committee were intended: as honorary members Isaac and Eugène Pereire (Paris), as Honorary President L. Vaïsse (Paris), as President E. Rigaut (Paris), as Vice - President Abbé Lambert and E. Selin Gros (Paris) and as Secretaries of La Rochelle ( Paris) and J. Hugentobler (Lyon ) and 18 other members and " correspondierende members" from France, Sweden, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, England and the USA. Deaf teachers were not invited for the organizing committee nor as members of the Congress. However, F. Rigaut resigned prematurely and was replaced by Eugène Pereire, the grandson of Jacob Rodrigues Pereira as president.

For the Congress, " the Lombard Institute of Arts and Sciences " the premises were asked in the Brera Palace provided by.

Program

As " Individual questions from the program " were announced:

Decisions

Among other things, the following resolutions were passed:

  • " Convinced of the undisputed superiority of the spoken language with respect to the sign language in so far as those deaf-mutes reproduces the traffic with the hearing world and allows them a deeper penetration into the spirit of the language, explains the Congress that the use of oral language in the classroom and in the education of the deaf-mute sign language would be preferable. "
  • " Considering that the simultaneous use of sign language and the spoken word carries with it the disadvantage that by doing the speaking, reading from the lips and the clarity of terms is compromised, the Congress is of the opinion: that the mere articulation method was preferable. "
  • " Considering the particular difficulties of teaching the deaf and dumb by the articulation method and based on the on this side almost all deaf teacher -made experience of the Congress declares that the best age for the admission of deaf-mute children to school the period from 8 to 10. 's age; that attend school at least 7, more must last eight years; that a teacher can not teach more than 10 students for the pure articulation method. "

A numerically small group of members of Congress ( USA, one each from the UK and Sweden ), which did not agree with the resolutions made ​​the following reasons for their rejection:

  • According tongue teaching has only " half- deaf " (meaning: Spätertauben ) success.
  • According tongue teaching slows down and neglected the spiritual education of the deaf.
  • According tongue instruction produces an unnatural -sounding artificial language.
  • According tongue teaching is more expensive.
  • The methods of dispute bears nationalist character and should therefore be rejected.

Implementation in France

The Minister of the Interior of France, acting on the recommendation of the French Congress participants on 3 September 1884 newsletter. This explained the spoken language as the only valid method for the ( state ) schools in France. For the local experts specialty exam grade 1 and 2 should be introduced. The number of deaf teachers was increased as a whole, the deaf teachers were replaced by listening. All necessary expenses for this were set in the budget.

Review of Congress and effects in Germany

Contemporary reviews, until 1940

On the first German deaf teacher Congress in Berlin on September 26, 1884 represented Dr. Karl Schneider, who until 1899 headed the deaf education system in the Prussian Ministry of Education of 1879, the opinion: " That has not worked in vain, shows that currently German in 96 institutions is spoken by the pure spoken language method of face to face. The gesture draws after a hundred years of struggle always go back. A throwback ... is not possible ... But we must be aware that we still have much work to make the German name of honor. You know what trouble, our Chancellor, to get the victory of Sedan. To claim the victory of Milan, requires of us a huge amount of work " At the congress of Cologne in 1889 was to be heard ." We can not go back, we have accepted the German articulation system, we must bring the spoken language to honor. "

Paul Schumann wrote in 1940 in his "History of the deaf and dumb nature ": "When at the International Congress of Milan, after long negotiations, the deaf teachers from seven cultural countries in the world almost unanimously not only to the spoken language method, but for pure articulation method, méthode oral pure, the exclusion gesture known - only the part of the Americans, and the Swedish Eckborn made ​​his opposition claims - this was initially as " a great victory in the realm of humanity and education felt the importance and broad meaning can not be emphasized strongly enough," In reality, of deaf education was therefore asked a task that will be settled only in a few places, the resources and forces were given, quite apart from whether it was ever corrected and solve worth.

Today's opinion

These decisions of the Congress are commented from today's perspective as follows:

  • The above Resolutions, statements and views are the result of a professional meeting and therefore had no legal character. However, they exercised an influence on the regulations of ministries. The quality of speech of students is highly valued by the hospitierenden inspectors as their academic knowledge.
  • In the " deaf and dumb institutions " before and until after the turn of the century all hearing impaired ( deaf, hearing rest, hard of hearing and partially also speech impaired) were taught together. A comprehensive methodological differentiation until then had been completed or only rudimentary.
  • An all-encompassing and absolute rejection of sign language use is carried out only partially.
  • The resolutions are to be seen in a historical context. Emergence of overarching national aspirations in European countries
  • Spoken and written language as a factor to demarcating national thinking
  • Population consolidation in the late 19th century
  • Emergence of the social question.

Since deaf teachers were not invited for the organizing committee nor as members of Congress, all the resolutions were without the inclusion of " deaf " perspective taken.

540880
de