Sign Language and Deaf Culture

Two Constructs of Deafness

• Medical model of deafness
• Sociocultural model of Deafness

Social, Cultural, and Developmental Factors

• Vibrant Deaf Culture exists.
• New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) is an official language.
• Cultural equity is promoted.
• 95% of deaf babies are born to hearing parents.
• Cochlear Implants are effective for providing access to sound/speech.
• Early implantation is most effective.

Socially Constructed Perspectives

• COLONIALISM: Imposition of one culture’s perspective on another.
• Medical Model:
  • Deaf = disabled
  • Aim: reduce disability
  • Focus: spoken language
• Sociocultural Model:
  • Deaf = cultural group
  • Culture is precious
  • Focus: sign language

What is Culture?

• Shared patterns of behaviors and interactions.
• Cognitive constructs learned by socialization.
  • Beliefs, ethics, morals, epistemology, etc.
• Growth of a group identity.
  • Fostered by social patterns unique to the group.

What is Deaf Culture ("D")?

Shared:

• Language
• Values
• Rules for behavior
• Traditions

What Identity Might a d/Deaf Person Develop?

• Culturally Hearing
  • Audiological basis
  • Goal of ‘hearing ability’ as a reference point
  • Deaf culture irrelevant
  • No access to positive Deaf role models
  • Idea that Deaf Culture is only for those who can’t ‘make it’
• Bicultural Identity
  • Less extreme stance
  • Aware both cultures legitimate
  • Identity comes from both Deaf and Hearing cultures
  • Communicate in speech and sign
  • Formulate new ways of thinking about who they are
• Culturally Deaf
  • Communicates well through sign
  • No need or wish to hear
  • May be angry at what previously taught about ‘hearing loss’ etc
  • Shun contact with Hearing culture
  • Feel happy to be d/Deaf
  • Sees no need to try to fit in with ‘hearing culture’
  • Deafness is about cultural difference not ‘disability’
• Marginalized
  • Poorly adjusted to either culture
  • ‘Outsiders’ in both cultures
  • Don’t identify with either culture
  • Often raised in Hearing world but unable to participate
  • Unable to communicate well in speech or sign
  • Associated with negative outcomes
• Glickman’s Stages of Deaf Identity

Deaf Community

An environment for Deaf people where:

• They are fully accepted
• Communication is not a struggle
• Deaf Culture is celebrated

The Role of Sign Language

• Sign Languages have the linguistic features of natural language
  • Phonology
  • Morphology
  • Syntax
• Phonemes include:
  • Hand-shape
  • Orientation
  • Movement
  • Location
  • Facial expression
  • Body posture

Signed vs Spoken Language

• Developmental language milestones reached at the same time for spoken and signed languages.
• The same brain regions (largely) process both spoken and signed languages.
• Sign uses different ways of getting similar information across and can be more efficient
  • e.g. “They crossed the road”

Sign Language in NZ

• New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) is the Deaf community’s language.
• Originally based on British Sign Language
  • As are those of other former British colonies
• Now unique and different from other sign languages around the world.

Role of Education on Sign in NZ

• International Congress on Education of the Deaf
  • Milan, 1880
  • Led to “oralism” in NZ Schools for the Deaf
• Sign language officially banned in deaf education from 1880-1979
  • Goal: to produce deaf people who could speak
• NZSL not recognized in NZ schools until 1993

What Changed?

• Concerns about poor academic achievement.
• Introduction of “Total Communication”
  • Including Signed English
• Increasing awareness/acceptance of sign as a real language
  • Late 1980s
• Acknowledgement NZSL was a complete language
  • 1992
• NZSL Act (2006)
  • NZSL made an official language

Interim Summary 1

• Deaf culture is a culture in its own right
• Rejects the medical model of deafness as a deficit/disability
• NZSL is a proper language and is an official language of NZ
• Education played a significant role in the marginalization of Deaf Culture and people

Who Makes Up the Deaf Community?

• Congenital hearing loss
  • 1 to 6 per 1000 live births internationally
  • Approximately 120 of 60,000 babies born in NZ yearly
• Mixed levels of hearing loss

Universal Newborn Hearing Screening and Early Intervention Programme

• Introduced progressively between 2007-2010
• Previously, the average age of diagnosis of deafness was 4 years
• Unidentified deafness impacts many areas of life
  • Language development
  • Socialization
  • Education
• Early detection means we can communicate with the child

Three Intervention Pathways

1. Hearing Aids
2. New Zealand Sign Language
3. Cochlear Implants

Hearing Aids

• Amplify sound
• Use the working parts of the ear
• Require a reasonable ability to hear sound

Cochlear Implants NFD NZ

• Direct electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve.
• Used to address severe-profound levels of deafness.
• Requires an operation
• Government funding
  • Children: Bilateral since 2014
  • Adults: Unilateral and for limited numbers per year

Issues for Sign Language & Deaf Culture

• Unlike with ethnicity-based cultures, 95% of children born into Deaf Culture are from hearing parents
• Hearing parents tend to raise their children in their own culture
  • They give profoundly deaf children cochlear implants
  • They do not know NZSL
  • Even if they learn it, they will not be very fluent to teach their children
• Deaf children with cochlear implants are more likely to be assimilated into hearing society
  • Communicate through spoken language
  • Less need for Deaf community
  • Concern that NZSL use will decline

Medicalisation of D/deafness

• Screening and audiology are done in hospitals
• Staff tend to believe in the medical model of deafness
• The medical model, and the science that underpins it, focuses on the “treatment” of the “disability”

Age of Implantation (Sharma, 2002)

• Babies are now implanted around six months old.
• Earlier implantations stimulate the auditory pathways during critical periods for hearing development.
• Users, therefore, develop a better ability to access sound than when implantations were done later.

Online Research with Deaf, deaf, and Hard-of-Hearing Respondents

• Attitudes to cochlear implantation in children.
• 66 Respondents: 45 Culturally Deaf, 21 deaf or hard-of-hearing, but not Deaf
• Combination of quantitative and qualitative findings
• Putnam, B., Pivac Alexander, S., McMenamin, K., & Welch, D. (2022). Deaf community views on paediatric cochlear implantation. New Zealand Medical Journal, 135, 26-39.

Qualitative Themes

• Respondents were concerned about how children would see themselves
  • e.g. "they will be caught in the middle with no clear identity of who they are”
• They wanted balanced advice for families
  • e.g. “give the parents the opportunity to know more about learning NZSL, NOT just CI as the only option”

By Providing Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants, Are We Contributing to the Decline of Deaf Culture

NZ Promotion of NZSL Government

• First Signs
• NZSL@School
• NZSL at NCEA level
• NZSL Advisory Board
• Deaf Community
• Attitudinal change towards CIs
• Involvement of parents & children
• Organizing NZSL events for families
• Taster Classes
• Community Classes

Why Do We Want to Promote NZSL for Deaf Children?

• Assimilation: Dominant Hearing Culture swallowing Minority Deaf Culture
• Acculturation: Overlapping cultures (Deaf and Hearing).

Interim Summary 2

• Deaf culture is a culture in its own right
• Sign language is central to Deaf culture
• CIs are amazing technology, but not without controversy
  • And to work well they are implanted very early in life
• Deaf children may grow up:
  • Hearing Acculturated (Spoken Language)
  • Deaf Acculturated (Sign Language)
  • Bicultural (Bilingual/Bimodal)

How Does Identity Form in Those Born Deaf?

How Does Cultural Identity Develop?

• Social Identity
• Collective Identity
• Horizontal Influences on Identity
  • Child Influence: External Groups
  • Examples: Sexuality, Deaf Culture
  • Within Family: May not “fit”
• Vertical Influences on Identity
  • Family
  • Examples: Ethnicity, Language, Religion
  • Within Family: Encouraged Influence

How Does Cultural Identity Develop in Those Born Deaf? How Does it Influence Key Outcomes?

• Research
  • Phase 1: Qualitative
  • Phase 2: Quantitative
• Purpose was to explore:
  • Influences on identity development
  • Identity & outcomes

Phase 1: Qualitative Research With Parents and Teachers of Children Born Deaf and with CIs

• Developed a model of acculturation
• McMenamin, K. E., Welch, D., & Purdy, S. C. (2022). Resources and Attitudes Influence Acculturation of Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, enac043. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enac043

Model of Acculturation: Parental Attitudes to Deafness

• Deafness as a Disability
  • “Oh God, I hope she’s not deaf because I don’t want her to be like that”
• Deafness as a Human Variation
  • “We’ve always said that everybody’s got something [that makes them different]”

Model of Acculturation: Communication Choices

• Oral Only
  • “We weren’t prepared to sign… It doesn’t fit into our family”
• Bilingual/Bimodal
  • “For us, it was a way of honoring and respecting that we have a deaf child and giving him a key form of communication”

Model of Acculturation: Deaf Community Involvement

• No Involvement
  • “He doesn’t need [Deaf community] support”
• Involvement
  • “For me, it’s more about a cultural thing… It’s just embracing who she is”
  • “You can drop them [hearing children] in a dinner with Deaf people and they’re good.”

Model of Acculturation: Parental Resources

• Well Resourced
  • “Without the Hearing House, we wouldn’t be in the position we’re in now… It was a wrap-around service. It was really really great”
• Poorly Resourced
  • “She doesn’t get anything. We did apply for NZSL in schools because we are quite bilingual at home and embrace sign at home. Because it’s not our first language, it’s not supported… and doesn’t get seen as important”

Phase 2: Quantitative Research

• Developed a battery of questionnaires to assess the elements of the Model of Acculturation
• Questionnaires were circulated to parents of children with CIs in NZ
• Reorganized the Model of Acculturation based on statistics

Assessment of the Proposed Model of Acculturation (MoA)

• Developed PADS (Parental Attitudes to Deafness Scale)
• Developed DCI (Deaf Community Involvement Scale)
• Developed PRS (Parental Resources Scale)
• Developed NZSL/English Fluency Scale
• Standardised English Language Scales
• Developed DASAC (Deaf Acculturation Scale for Adolescents & Children)
• Parental Rating of Academic Competency
• RSES (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale)
• SSIS (Social Skills Improvement Scale)

Results from Questionnaires

• Parental attitudes predicted Bicultural Identity

Revised Model of Acculturation

• Key factors influencing child identity: Parental Attitudes to Deafness, NZSL Fluency, Deaf Community Involvement, Deaf-Related Resources
• Key Outcomes: Self-Esteem, Social Skills, Academic Outcomes, Oral Language Outcomes

β = 0.76 Parental Attitudes to Deafness predict NZSL Fluency.

β = 0.89 Parental Attitudes to Deafness predict Deaf Community Involvement.

β = 0.61 Parental Attitudes to Deafness predict Resources.

β = 0.41 NZSL Fluency influences Child's Identity.

β = 0.63 Deaf Community Involvement influences Child's Identity.

β = 0.61 Resources influences Child's Identity.

Self-Esteem is predicted by Child's Identity (β = 0.53).

Hearing and Deaf Acculturation of Children in the Research

• Identified categories: Hearing Acculturated, Bicultural, Marginalised, Deaf Acculturated
• Deaf Acculturation
• Hearing Acculturation

Social Identity and Acculturation

• Social Identity
• Collective Identity
• Horizontal Influences on Identity (Deaf Acculturated)
• Vertical Influences on Identity (Hearing Acculturated)
• Third Space (Bicultural)
• Assimilation
• Acculturation

Summary

• Parental attitudes influence the identity of children with cochlear implants.
• This is mediated by involvement with the Deaf Community and resource availability.
• Children were accultured either to Hearing Culture or to both Deaf and Hearing Cultures
• Key outcomes (self-esteem, social skill, academic ability, and oral language) were not influenced by acculturation

Conclusion: Model of Acculturation (MoA)

• Key factors: Parental Attitudes to Deafness, Communication Choice, Deaf Community Involvement, Deaf-Related Parental Resources, Child’s Identity

References

• Baker, C., & Cokely, D. (1980) American sign language: A student text. Silver Spring, Md. T. J. Publishers.
• Deaf Aotearoa. http://deaf.org.nz
• Glickman, N. S., & Carey, J. C. (1993). Measuring deaf cultural identities: A preliminary investigation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 38, 275-283.
• See what I mean. (1992). www.nzonscreen.com/title/see-what-i-mean-1992
• Sound and Fury. (2000). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdIoSNwNfVs
• Digby, J. E., Purdy, S. C., Kelly, A. S. (2019). Deafness Notification Report (2018). Hearing loss (not remediable by grommets) in New Zealanders under the age of 19. Enable New Zealand, Auckland, New Zealand.
• Glickman, N. S. (1993). Deaf identity development: Construction & validity of a theoretical model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Amherst, MAUniversity, Massachusetts.
• Mitchell, R. E., & Karchmer, M. A. (2004). Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies, 4(2), 138.
• McMenamin, K. (2019). Communication Choices, Identity, and Outcomes in Children with Cochlear Implants. University of Auckland.
• McMenamin, K. E., Welch, D., & Purdy, S. C. (2022). Resources and Attitudes Influence Acculturation of Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, enac043.
• Putnam, B., Pivac Alexander, S., McMenamin, K., & Welch, D. (2022). Deaf community views on paediatric cochlear implantation. New Zealand Medical Journal, 135, 26-39.

Audiology

• 2-year Master of Audiology degree:
  • Interesting, valuable, well-paid work
  • Use your studies to help people
• Competitive entry: 24 places
• Entry criteria:
  • GPA for your best four courses (60 points) at Stage 3 or above
  • Interview scores (MMI)