ZoekresultatenZoekresultaten
Volg ons op
Volg ons op
Types
0Instelling
26Publicatiejaar
6Producttype
19Bestandstype
9Taal
5Onderzoeksthema's
13Publicaties met bestand/URL
2Projectstatus
3This 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.
ARTIKEL
Deaf scholars have long worked at the margins of academic institutions not designed for them. Designated deaf academic spaces—where deaf ways of knowing, teaching, and communicating are centered—remain rare. This study explores what becomes possible when such a space exists, presenting Dr Deaf as a case study. Drawing on interviews with participants and teachers, we show how deaf epistemologies and pedagogies are enacted through cross-stage responsibility and academic becoming through re-alignment of deaf participants and teachers. We also identify a distinct deaf rhythm that emerges in this space. At the same time, we recognize that these practices are not experienced or valued equally by all participants and teachers: needs, priorities, and ways of engaging differ, and Dr Deaf’s approaches may not resonate for all. Yet its values offer a flexible framework for imagining and sustaining other deaf academic and broader educational spaces.
ARTIKEL
This article examines the integration of Deaf Studies and ethics as core components of the bachelor’s programme in Dutch Sign Language (NGT) /Dutch interpreting at the University of Applied Sciences Utrecht (HU) in the Netherlands. Drawing on student evaluations, instructor feedback, and theoretical perspectives, it explores the curriculum redesign process aimed at fostering a holistic, student-centred approach to interpreter education. By embedding Deaf Studies and ethics as foundational elements, the programme challenges systemic inequities and prepares students to navigate the complexities of interpreting practice with cultural competence and critical engagement. The article discusses the challenges and opportunities of this integration, highlighting the broader implications for interpreter education across Europe. It concludes by advocating for structural changes, including a reconsideration of entry requirements and the Introduction of standalone Deaf Studies programmes.
ARTIKEL
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)
RAPPORT
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
PREPRINT
In this chapter we discuss the Surinam Deaf community as a linguistic minority with a language of their own: an as yet unnamed sigh language. This language is sometimes called Surinam Sign Language bu could easily also be named Paramaribo Sign Lanaguage or even Kennedy School Sign Language. Ther ehas been no research on this sign variety, so its structure and possible varieties are unknown. Here, we will refer to this language as the local sign variety,
BOEKDEEL
This paper explores the interplay of AI language technologies, sign language interpreting, and linguistic access, highlighting the complex interdependencies shaping access frameworks and the tradeoffs these technologies bring. While AI tools promise innovation, they also perpetuate biases, reinforce techno ableism, and deepen inequalities through systemic and design flaws. The historical and contemporary privileging of sign language interpreting as the dominant access model, and the broader inclusion ideologies it reflects, shape AIs development and deployment, often sidelining deaf languaging practices and introducing new forms of linguistic subordination to technology. Drawing on Deaf Studies, Sign Language Interpreting Studies, and crip technoscience, this paper critiques the framing of AI as a substitute for interpreters and examines its implications for access hierarchies. It calls for deaf-led approaches to foster AI systems that remain equitable, inclusive, and trustworthy, supporting rather than undermining linguistic autonomy and contributing to deaf aligned futures.
RAPPORT
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.
BOEKDEEL
