Advertisement

The Social Relational Model of Deaf Childhood in Action

  • Kristin Snoddon
  • Kathryn Underwood
Chapter

Abstract

  • Early childhood education and care discourse on inclusion and ‘supports’ presents parents of young deaf children with false options regarding language learning that are not in the best interests of deaf children.

  • The authors argue that the social relational model of deaf childhood can account for differences in children and their communities.

  • The first author’s research, presented here, describes the process of developing an intensive American Sign Language (ASL) curriculum for parents of young deaf children. This curriculum is aligned with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR; Snoddon 2015).

  • The research shows how the social relational model can be put into action for the parents of different deaf children.

References

  1. Akamatsu, C., Musselman, C., & Zweibel, A. (2000). Nature Versus Nurture in the Development of Cognition in Deaf People. In P. Spencer, C. Erting, & M. Marschark (Eds.), The Deaf Child in the Family and the School: Essays in Honour of Kathryn P Meadow-Orlans. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Allan, J. (2005). Inclusion as an Ethical Project. In S. Tremain (Ed.), Foucault and the Government of Disability. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barnartt, S. N. (1996). Disability Culture or Disability Consciousness? Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 7(2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brennan, M. (2003). Deafness, Disability and Inclusion: The Gap Between Rhetoric and Practice. Policy Futures in Education, 1(4), 668–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carbin, C. (1996). Deaf Heritage in Canada: A Distinct, Diverse and Enduring Culture. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd.Google Scholar
  6. Coste, D., Moore, D., & Zarate, G. (2009). Plurilingual and Pluricultural Competence: Studies Towards a Common European Framework of Reference for Language Learning and Teaching. Strasbourg: Language Policy Division.Google Scholar
  7. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/source/framework_en.pdf.Google Scholar
  8. Ferri, B. A., & Bacon, J. (2011). Beyond Inclusion: Disability Studies in Early Childhood Teacher Education. In B. S. Fennimore & A. L. Goodwin (Eds.), Promoting Social Justice for Young Children (pp. 137–146). New York: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foucault, M. (1998). Practicing Criticisms. In L. Kritzman (Ed.), Michel Foucault: Politics, Philosophy, Culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Gilson, S. F., Tusler, A., & Gill, C. (1997). Ethnographic Research in Disability Identity: Self-Determination and Community. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 9, 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Greiner-Ogris, S., & Dotter, F. (2012). SignLEF: Sign Languages Within the European Framework of Reference for Languages. In International Conference ICT for Language Learning (5th ed.). Retrieved from http://conference.pixel-online.net/ICT4LL2012/common/download/Paper_pdf/72-CEF01-FP-Greiner-Ogris-ICT2012.pdf.
  12. Hall, P. J. (2002). Narrowing the Breach: Can Disability Culture and Full Educational Inclusion Be Reconciled? Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 13, 144–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2001). The Practice of Co-operative Inquiry: Research ‘with’ Rather than ‘on’ People. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Hoffmeister, R. (2008). Language and the Deaf World: Difference Not Disability. In M. E. Brisk (Ed.), Language, Culture, and Community in Teacher Education. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G., Napoli, D. J., Padden, C., Rathmann, C., & Smith, S. R. (2012). Language Acquisition for Deaf Children: Reducing the Harms of Zero Tolerance to the Use of Alternative Approaches. Harm Reduction Journal, 9, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karchmer, M., & Mitchell, R. D. (2003). Demographic and Achievement Characteristics of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kauppinen, L., & Jokinen, M. (2014). Deaf Culture and Linguistic Rights. In M. Sabatello & M. Schulze (Eds.), Human Rights and Disability Advocacy. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kemmis, S. (2001). Exploring the Relevance of Critical Theory for Action Research: Emancipatory Action Research in the Footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Kliewer, C., Biklen, D., & Kasa-Hendrickson, C. (2006). Who May Be Literate? Disability and Resistance to the Cultural Denial of Competence. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 163–192. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043002163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Komesaroff, L. (2007). Introduction. In L. Komesaroff (Ed.), Surgical Consent: Bioethics and Cochlear Implantation. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Komesaroff, L. (2008). Disabling Pedagogy: Power, Politics, and Deaf Education. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ladd, P. (2003). Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  23. Ladd, P. (2007). Cochlear Implantation, Colonialism, and Deaf Rights. In L. Komesaroff (Ed.), Surgical Consent: Bioethics and Cochlear Implantation. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lane, H. (2005). Ethnicity, Ethics, and the Deaf-World. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(3), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leeson, L., & Byrne-Dunne, D. (2009). Applying the Common European Reference Framework to the Teaching, Learning and Assessment of Signed Languages, Report for the D-Signs Distance Online Training in Sign Language Project Consortium, UK/08/LLP-LdV/TOI/163_141. Bristol: Centre for Deaf Studies, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
  26. Morris, J. (1992). Personal and Political: A Feminist Perspective on Researching Physical Disability. Disability, Handicap and Society, 7(2), 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Oliver, M. (2013). The Social Model of Disability: Thirty Years On. Disability and Society, 28(7), 1024–1026. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oyserman, J., & de Geus, M. (2013, July). Hearing Parents and the Fluency in Sign Language Communication. In Poster Session Presented at the Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference 11, London, UK.Google Scholar
  29. Oyserman, J., & de Geus, M. (2015, July). Teaching Sign Language to Parents of Deaf Children. In Poster Presented at the 2nd International Conference on Sign Language Acquisition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  30. Piñar, P., Dussias, P. E., & Morford, J. P. (2011). Deaf Readers as Bilinguals: An Examination of Deaf Readers’ Print Comprehension in Light of Current Advances in Bilingualism and Second Language Progressing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(10), 691–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reindal, S. M. (2008). A Social Relational Model of Disability: A Theoretical Framework for Special Needs Education? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 23(2), 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Russell, D., & McLeod, J. (2009). Educational Interpreting: Multiple Perspectives of Our Work. In J. Mole (Ed.), International Perspectives on Educational Interpreting. Brassington: Direct Learned Services Ltd.Google Scholar
  33. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Siegel, L. (2000). The Educational & Communication Needs of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children: A Statement of Principle Regarding Fundamental Systemic Educational Changes. Greenbrae: National Deaf Education Project.Google Scholar
  35. Slee, R. (2011). The Irregular School: Exclusion, Schooling and Inclusive Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Slee, R. (2013). How Do We Make Inclusive Education Happen When Exclusion is a Political Predisposition? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17, 895–907. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2011.602534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Small, A., & Cripps, J. (2011). On Becoming: Developing an Empowering Cultural Identity Framework for Deaf Youth and Adults. Toronto: Ministry of Children and Youth Services.Google Scholar
  38. Snoddon, K. (2008). American Sign Language and Early Intervention. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(4), 581–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Snoddon, K. (2009). Equity in Education: Signed Language and the Courts. Current Issues in Language Planning, 10(3), 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Snoddon, K. (2012). American Sign Language and Early Literacy: A Model Parent-Child Program. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Snoddon, K. (2014). Hearing Parents as Plurilingual Learners of ASL. In D. McKee, R. Rosen, & R. McKee (Eds.), Teaching and Learning of Signed Languages: International Perspectives and Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  42. Snoddon, K. (2015). Using the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages to Teach Sign Language to Parents of Deaf Children. Canadian Modern Language Review, 71(3), 270–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Snoddon, K., & Underwood, K. (2014). Toward a Social Relational Model of Deaf Childhood. Disability & Society, 29(4), 530–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Terzi, L. (2004). The Social Model of Disability: A Philosophical Critique. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 21(2), 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tregaskis, C. (2002). Social Model Theory: The Story So Far…. Disability and Society, 17(4), 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Underwood, K. (2008). The Construction of Disability in Our Schools: Teacher and Parent Perspectives on the Experience of Labelled Students. Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  47. Underwood, K., Valeo, A., & Wood, R. (2012). Understanding Inclusive Early Childhood Education: A Capability Approach. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 13(4), 290–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Valente, J. M. (2011). Cyborgization: Deaf Education for Young Children in the Cochlear Implantation Era. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(7), 639–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vertovec, S. (2007). Super-Diversity and Its Implications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(6), 1024–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Walker, M. (2005). Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and Education. Educational Action Research, 13(1), 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Watkins, S., Pittman, P., & Walden, B. (1998). The Deaf Mentor Experimental Project for Young Children Who Are Deaf and Their Families. American Annals of the Deaf, 143(1), 29–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. World Federation of the Deaf. (2015, April 8). Presentation from the WFD Side-Event on 8 April. 13th Session of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Geneva, Switzerland, 25 March–17 April 2015. Retrieved June 22, 2015, from http://wfdeaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/WFD-side-event-presentation.pdf.
  53. World Federation of the Deaf. (n.d.). Sign Language. Retrieved June 22, 2015, from http://wfdeaf.org/human-rights/crpd/sign-language.
  54. Young, A. M. (1999). Hearing Parents’ Adjustment to a Deaf Child: The Impact of a Cultural-Linguistic Model of Deafness. Journal of Social Work Practice, 13(2), 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristin Snoddon
    • 1
  • Kathryn Underwood
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Linguistics and Language StudiesCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  2. 2.School of Early Childhood StudiesRyerson UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations