Brazilian Sign Language and phonoaudiologist training: a preliminary portrait for understanding bilingual phonoaudiologic practiceABSTRACT
Purpose To understand undergraduate training in bilingual speech and language therapy in Brazil and discuss its application to deaf individuals.
Methods An exploratory, cross-sectional study with descriptive and interpretative analysis conducted between August 2022 and February 2023 in partnership with the Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia. Data were collected through an electronic form sent to the 115 active speech and language programs in Brazil.
Results Twenty-three programs participated, mainly from the Southeast Region and mostly public institutions. All programs offer courses on Brazilian Sign Language, mostly in-person, taught by hearing professors, ranging from 60 to 90 hours. Qualitative analysis revealed heterogeneous practices and perspectives on how curricula address deaf individuals’ needs, often lacking a clear stance on understanding deafness and deaf people regarding cultural and linguistic diversity. Other practices are divided into oral/auditory approaches to auditory rehabilitation and the use of technological resources and bilingual approaches that, besides Brazilian Sign Language, emphasize language development stages (oral, written, and signed).
Conclusion Brazilian Sign Language content is present in curricula as required by law. However, there is still a tendency to overlook the needs of signing deaf individuals, favor oral/auditory practices, and limit bilingual speech and language therapy training to Brazilian Sign Language knowledge and non-mandatory projects and activities.
Keywords:
Teaching; Speech therapy; Curriculum; Deafness; Sign language
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Subcategories of response analysis: (A) Cross-sectional, but does not explicitly address practices with deaf people (7); (B) Not cross-sectional, understanding only oral/auditory development as a speech-language-hearing need of deaf people (1); (C) Cross-sectional, highlighting practices in other speech-language-hearing areas, without considering deaf people’s linguistic diversity (2); (D) Cross-sectional, highlighting bilingual practices in other speech-language-hearing areas in addition to linguistic development (2); (E) Not cross-sectional, highlighting bilingual practices that deal only with linguistic development (3); (F) None (0); (G) No answer (8)
Subcategories of response analysis: (A) There are specific outreach projects for working in bilingual speech-language-hearing practices (2); (B) There are outreach projects and academic leagues linked to Libras and the deaf community, but without a direct relationship with working in bilingual speech-language-hearing practices (5); (C) There are outreach projects and research in bilingual phonoaudiologic practices (2); (D) There are outreach projects and leagues from the oral/auditory perspective (2); (E) There is undergraduate and postgraduate research, but it is not specified whether it is about working in bilingual phonoaudiologic practices (2); (F) None (1); (G) No answer (9)