Indiana School for the Deaf layoffs tell students they're not important
The difference between a student thriving and a student slipping through the cracks often comes down to one adult. The one who notices their struggles and has the time to explain, to listen and to stay after class. At Indiana School for the Deaf, 26 of those adults were laid off after state budget cuts. With them go hundreds of quiet moments that help students feel seen, safe and supported.
Educational equity isn't about giving every child the same tools. It's about making sure every child has what they need to thrive.
ASL is a full and complex language with its own grammar and nuance, equal in richness to spoken English. Unlike mainstream schools, where deaf students often rely on interpreters to communicate, ISD offers direct, effortless interaction throughout the day.
Whether in the classroom or during unstructured moments like lunch, recess, standing in line, or chatting after school, students are surrounded by others who sign. That matters because when students are fully included in both the academic and social life of school, they begin to see themselves as capable learners. That sense of belonging helps them stay connected to their education and carry that momentum into adulthood.
Without that kind of access, students may withdraw socially. Gaps in learning grow wider. Emotional and academic setbacks follow them into adulthood.
It might sound like the decision to cut ISD's budget was a response to a last-minute budget shortfall, but it wasn't. These cuts were proposed months ago, when the governor's draft budget called for nearly $1 million in reductions for ISD. Sadly, that has now ballooned into a $3 million cut.
This wasn't a financial emergency. It was a conscious decision to pull resources away from deaf children.
Briggs: IU is lucky to have Pamela Whitten weathering the MAGA storm
When we cut staff at a school like ISD, we're not just trimming a budget. We're narrowing the path to equal opportunity. We're telling deaf children that their futures are expendable. We're sending the message that they simply aren't as important as hearing children.
Deaf children are rarely part of the conversation when decisions like this are made. They're not voting. They're not holding press conferences. They're counting on hearing allies to speak up and say this isn't right.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
10 hours ago
- Politico
White House eyes Kentucky state senator for Massie challenge
White House officials will host Kentucky state Sen. Aaron Reed in the coming weeks for a discussion about challenging GOP Rep. Thomas Massie in next year's Republican primary, according to two people granted anonymity to describe the private plans. President Donald Trump and his political operation have been searching for a candidate to challenge Massie over his opposition to the president's 'big, beautiful bill' and his strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump political advisers Chris LaCivita and pollster Tony Fabrizio have launched a super PAC directed at defeating Massie that's already running a TV ad attacking the seven-term incumbent. Massie is embracing the challenge, fundraising off MAGA's slights and telling reporters last week he raised $120,000 in a single day off of Trump's threats to campaign 'really hard' against him. Massie — who previously endorsed Reed for state Senate, and whom Reed in return had called 'one of America's greatest Congressmen' — did not immediately return a request for comment. Reed, a former Navy SEAL, was first elected to the Kentucky state house last year.
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
After criticism from MAGA world, Amy Coney Barrett delivers for Trump
WASHINGTON — As President Donald Trump reveled in a major Supreme Court victory that curbed the ability of judges to block his policies nationwide, he had special praise for one of the justices: Amy Coney Barrett. 'I want to thank Justice Barrett, who wrote the opinion brilliantly,' he said at a White House press conference soon after Friday's ruling. Barrett's majority opinion in the 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, which at least temporarily revived Trump's plan to end automatic birthright citizenship, is a major boost to an administration that has been assailed by courts around the country for its broad and aggressive use of executive power. It also marks an extraordinary turnaround for Barrett's reputation among Trump's most vocal supporters. Just a few months ago, she faced vitriolic criticism from MAGA influencers and others as she sporadically voted against Trump, including a March decision in which she rejected a Trump administration attempt to avoid paying U.S. Agency for International Development contractors. CNN also reported that Trump himself had privately complained about Barrett. That is despite the fact that she is a Trump appointee with a long record of casting decisive votes in a host of key cases in which the court's 6-3 conservative majority has imposed itself, most notably with the 2022 ruling that overturned the abortion rights landmark Roe v. Wade. One of those outspoken critics, Trump-allied lawyer Mike Davis, suggested that the pressure on Barrett had the desired effect. 'Sometimes feeling the heat helps people see the light,' he said in a text message. Quickly U-turning, MAGA influencers on Friday praised Barrett and turned their anger on liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson instead. They seized upon language in Barrett's opinion in which she gave short shrift to Jackson's dissenting opinion, in which the President Joe Biden appointee characterized the ruling as an 'existential threat to the rule of law.' Barrett responded by accusing Jackson of a 'startling line of attack' that was based on arguments 'at odds with more than two centuries' worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself.' Jack Posobiec, a conservative firebrand who a few months ago called Barrett a 'DEI judge,' immediately used similar language against Jackson, who is the first Black woman to serve on the court. In an appearance on Real America's Voice, a right-wing streaming channel, he call Jackson an 'autopen hire' in reference to the unsubstantiated allegation from conservatives that Biden's staff was responsible for many of his decisions. He then described Barrett as 'one of the nicest people. She's not some flame-throwing conservative up there.' It is not just the birthright citizenship case in which the Trump administration has claimed victory at the Supreme Court in recent months. The court, often with the three liberal justices in dissent, has also handed Trump multiple wins on emergency applications filed at the court, allowing various policies that were blocked by lower courts to go into effect. In such cases, the court does not always list exactly how each justice voted, but Barrett did not publicly dissent, for example, when the court allowed Trump to quickly deport immigrants to countries they have no connection to or ended temporary legal protections for 500,000 immigrants from four countries. Barrett defenders dismiss suggestions she would be influenced by negative comments from MAGA world, with Samuel Bray, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, saying her ruling that limited nationwide injunctions simply shows her independent qualities as a judge. 'It should reinforce the sense that she's her own justice and she's committed to giving legal answers to legal questions. We shouldn't be looking for political answers to political questions,' he said. Barrett, via a Supreme Court spokeswoman, did not respond to a request for comment. More broadly, legal experts said that in the Supreme Court term that just ended, Barrett showed that on many traditional conservative issues she is 'solidly to the right,' noted Anthony Kreis, a professor at Georgia State University College of Law. There were fewer examples of her going her own way than in the previous term, when which she staked out her own path in some significant cases. On Friday alone, she was part of a conservative 6-3 majority in three of the five rulings, including the birthright citizenship case. The others saw the court rule in favor of religious conservatives who objected to LGBTQ story books in elementary schools and uphold a Texas restriction on adult-content websites. 'I don't think we can say she was ever drifting left, but she was occupying a center-right position on the court that occasionally made her a key swing vote,' he added. 'This term's docket at the end just wasn't that.' One notable wrinkle in the birthright citizenship case is that Barrett, as the most junior justice in the majority, would not have been expected to write it. Often, Chief Justice John Roberts, who gets to assign cases when he is in the majority, will write such rulings himself. Carolyn Shapiro, a professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law, said the assignment suited Barrett, who is known for her expertise on legal procedure. But she also wondered if Roberts might have considered the impact of the complaints against Barrett and wanted to 'give her a place to shine from the perspective of the right.' Even if that were a consideration in Roberts' thinking, Shapiro added, 'I don't see much evidence that she is doing things that she wouldn't have done if not for the criticism she received.' This article was originally published on
Yahoo
14 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Red states have launched a hostile takeover of public universities
Earlier this month, for the first time in its history, the Florida Board of Governors rejected a university's choice of a college president. Despite unanimous approval by the University of Florida's board of trustees, MAGA activists attacked Santa Ono, a former president of the University of Michigan, for his past support of diversity, equity and inclusion programs; his views on admissions, gender-affirming care and climate change; and his handling of pro-Palestinian protesters and the COVID-19 pandemic. Ono's claim that 'I am here to ensure that DEI never returns to the University of Florida' was too little, too late. Florida is at the extreme edge of an unprecedented red-state campaign to reinforce and sometimes outdo the Trump administration's efforts to remake higher education. But Florida is by no means alone. Since 2023, 135 bills have been introduced in 29 states to eliminate DEI offices, ban mandatory diversity training, forbid the use of diversity statements in hiring and promotion and bar colleges and universities from requiring classes that 'promote concepts such as systemic racism, reparations, and racial or gender diversity.' Twenty-seven of those bills have become law. Educational 'gag orders' restricting instruction about race, gender and sexual orientation have also grown increasingly extreme. Ohio limits discussion of 'controversial beliefs or policies,' including 'climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion,' requires universities to 'ensure the fullest degree of 'intellectual diversity,' and bans or restricts most DEI-related policies and programs. Florida's Stop Woke Act, which sought to regulate how colleges and universities teach 'divisive concepts,' has been blocked by federal courts as a violation of the First Amendment. Nonetheless, Florida's Board of Governors and State Board of Education have eliminated hundreds of general education courses from the state's 40 public institutions to comply with legislation banning instruction based on 'identity politics' or 'theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States.' Last week, following criticism of existing accreditation agencies for supporting DEI, the public university systems in Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee decided to establish their own accreditor. Ohio, Utah and Florida mandate civics instruction focused on a conservative vision of Western civilization. Ohio requires students to read at least five essays from 'The Federalist Papers,' Martin Luther King Jr.'s 'Letter from Birmingham Jail' and the writings of Adam Smith. Multiple states — including Florida, Arizona, Tennessee, Ohio, Texas and Iowa — have established civics institutes intended to be bastions of conservative thought. At least 11 states have passed laws imposing new levels of post-tenure review or making it easier to dismiss tenured faculty. Indiana, for example, prohibited the award of tenure to faculty 'unlikely to foster a culture of free inquiry, free expression, and intellectual diversity,' and authorized the demotion or termination of faculty who do not, in the board's judgment, help create that culture. In several states, proposals to eliminate tenure have only narrowly failed. The academic tradition of shared governance is also under attack. A bill in Arizona, vetoed by its governor, would have stripped faculty of the ability to approve academic degrees or programs. In a law enacted earlier this week that may serve as a model for other states, Texas reserved to the governing board of each public university — whose members are appointed by the governor — the right 'to overturn any decision made by the institution regarding any changes to the general education curriculum'; 'approve or deny the hiring of an individual for the position of provost or deputy, associate, or assistant provost'; 'collaborate with institutions … to set campus admission standards'; and 'overturn any hiring decision for the position of vice president or dean.' Texas also gave university boards exclusive authority to establish faculty senates or councils; prohibited them from issuing statements not directly related to their educational mandate; and limited them to advisory roles, with the presiding officer appointed by the institution's president. Faculty and staff 'may provide recommendations on academic matters,' so long as 'governing boards and institutional leadership retain clear and ultimate decision-making authority.' In another sign of the hyper-politicization of higher education, red states are increasingly using ideological litmus tests for prospective trustees and presidents. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, for example, transformed New College from, in his words, a center of 'woke indoctrination' into a conservative haven by stacking the board with right-wing partisans and naming a conservative president. These campaigns at the federal and state level to undermine academic freedom, weaken faculty authority and impose conservative values are often compared to McCarthy-era initiatives, but what's happening today is far broader and more damaging. McCarthyites focused almost exclusively on a single issue — the perceived spread of communist influence. Mandates were directed principally at faculty and staff who refused to take loyalty oaths. Professors of economics and political science were pressured to teach the virtues of democracy and the 'free enterprise system.' Even when institutions dragged their feet in complying, neither states nor the federal government imposed anything remotely like the punitive and crippling measures employed against educational institutions today. Nonetheless, the McCarthy era fostered a climate of fear and intellectual conformity in higher education that took years to dissipate. When, if ever, will public and private institutions recover from the ongoing all-out assault on the freedom of teaching and learning that made American higher education the envy of the world? It's anyone's guess. Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Cornell University. David Wippman is emeritus president of Hamilton College. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
