This deaf-led work critically explores Deaf Tech, challenging conventional understandings of technologies ‘for’ deaf people as merely assistive and accessible, since these understandings are predominantly embedded in medical and audist ideologies. By employing participatory speculative workshops, deaf participants from different European countries envisioned technologies on Eyeth - a mythical planet inhabited by deaf people - centered on their perspectives and curiosities. The results present a series of alternative socio-technical narratives that illustrate qualitative aspects of technologies desired by deaf people. This study advocates for expanding the scope of deaf technological landscapes, emphasizing the needs of establishing deaf-centered HCI, including the development of methods and concepts that truly prioritize deaf experiences in the design of technologies intended for their use.
MULTIFILE
Book review of Critical perspectives on plurilingualism in deaf education. Kristin Snoddon and Joanne C. Weber (Eds.), Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 2021. 272 pp.
DOCUMENT
This paper discusses the meaning of inclusive education for deaf learners in a way that acknowledges the diversity of learner identities, and outlines problems with normative definitions of inclusive education as advanced by recent interpretations of Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This discussion calls on us to reconsider how the concepts of inclusion and segregation are understood in education for all learners with intersectional identities. We outline the legislative history of the CRPD and Article 24, show the active involvement of deaf advocacy organisations, and highlight contradictions with this history in the CRPD Committee’s recent General Comment No. 4 on Article 24. We provide examples of innovative models of inclusive education for deaf learners that provide an education in sign language and discuss the implications of these arguments for inclusive education as a whole.
LINK
Eight deaf scholars come together to reflect on their experiences with exclusionary practices in the academy that contribute to feelings of imposterism, otherness, and not-belonging. The combined powers of ableism, audism, and negative attitudes about signed languages generate tension as deaf academics affirm their place within higher education institutions and fields of research. Across individual and shared experiences, they narrate about hostility towards disability and sign languages, reflecting on how such hostilities work towards excluding signing deaf scholars. As disability rights legislation increased access for deaf academics, gaps exist in which ableism continues to function as an institutional barrier. In spite of exclusionary practices and negative attitudes, deaf academics have organized ways to be resilient as they argue they make valuable contributions to scholarly discourses.
LINK
Due to emancipation process there is need for information on Deaf culture - Is there a Deaf Culture in the Netherlands? - If so what is it? How can we define it? - What are priorities in research? - How best disseminate results in Deaf community? - Lobby for rights of Deaf people (Unesco 1994; UN Convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities 2006)
DOCUMENT
In this paper, we report on interview data collected from 14 Deaf leaders across seven countries (Australia, Belgium, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States) regarding their perspectives on signed language interpreters. Using a semi-structured survey questionnaire, seven interpreting researchers interviewed two Deaf leaders each in their home countries. Following transcription of the data, the researchers conducted a thematic analysis of the comments. Four shared themes emerged in the data, as follows: (a) variable level of confidence in interpreting direction, (b) criteria for selecting interpreters, (c) judging the competence of interpreters, and (d) strategies for working with interpreters. The results suggest that Deaf leaders share similar, but not identical, perspectives about working with interpreters, despite differing conditions that hold regarding how interpreting services are provided in their respective countries. When compared to prior studies of Deaf leaders’ perspectives of interpreters, these data indicate some positive trends in Deaf leaders’ experience with interpreters; however, results also point to a need for further work in creating an atmosphere of trust, enhancing interpreters’ language fluency, and developing mutual collaboration between Deaf leaders and signed language interpreters. De url van de uitgeversversie van het artikel is: http://dx.doi.org/10.1556/084.2017.18.1.5
DOCUMENT
The inclusive education debate is often framed as a choice between outmoded special schools and progressive inclusive general education schools. However, the rhetoric of ‘choice’ hides what is in reality a context of restricted resources, both in general education and in special congregated settings. We interview three deaf-parented families with a total of six deaf children enrolled in different educational settings in Belgium. We explore the educational choices parents made for their children and how these choices are influenced (1) by their own knowledge of and lived experience with the educational choices available and (2) actually existing resources. Our study shows a clear contrast between the capital parents bring to their children’s educational experiences and the choices available. Parents want to send their children to congregated settings to give them an education in sign language but are hindered from doing so because of the schools’ lack of adherence to educational standards. Instead they are pushed into a general education system that tasks their time and energy, as well as their child’s bodies. The paucity of options for these parents calls for a rethinking of the parameters of the inclusive education debate, moving beyond placement to a holistic focus on deaf children’s linguistic, educational, and social development.
DOCUMENT
Paper presented at Equality Diversity Inclusion (EDI) 2010 Conference, Vienna, Austria 14-16 july 2010
DOCUMENT
- Job control both Deaf and hearing are satisfied with amount of job control - Job demands both Deaf and hearing find that they can meet the jobs demands - Job strain both Deaf and hearing experience stress from time pressure and work planning issues - Language use is not a strain factor - Access to information is felt to be sufficient, although the information streams are different for Deaf and hearing employees - Deaf employees receive much information from their deaf colleagues - Hearing employees receive much information from their hearing colleagues
DOCUMENT
This article looks at the use of ICST in two multilingual and deaf/hearing teams in an educational and research environment.
DOCUMENT
