‘No sign language if you want to get him talking’: power, transgression/resistance, and discourses of d/Deafness in the Republic of Ireland

Mathews, Elizabeth

doi:10.1002/psp.611

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The experience of young people has parallels to other groups subject to such policies, ranging from mixed (Parr, 2008;Wilton, 2004) to, at worst, merely representing a scaling down the spatialities of exclusion from large-scale segregation into special schools towards micro exclusions within school spaces (Dear and Wolch, 1992;Holt, 2004b). The normalisation of disabled people, a self-conscious movement with a distinct genealogy (albeit open to Foucauldian analysis), is also an implicit backdrop to inclusive education (Culham and Nind, 2003;Mathews, 2011). Like inclusion, normalisation was premised upon the idea that disabled people should have full civil rights and live 'normal' lives, rather than be segregated and treated as less than human (eg, Wolfensberger and Nirje, 1972).…”

Section: Educational 'Inclusion' Sen and Normalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Units for Young People on the Autistic Spectrum in Mainstream Schools: Sites of Normalisation, Abnormalisation, Inclusion, and Exclusion

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the experiences of young people on the autistic spectrum (AS) who attend a special unit within a mainstream secondary school in England. The paper feeds into contemporary debates about the nature of inclusive schooling and, more broadly, special education. Young people on the AS have been largely neglected within these debates. The paper focuses upon processes of normalisation and abnormalisation to which the young people on the AS are subject, and how these are interconnected with inclusion and exclusion within school spaces. At times, the unit is a container for the abnormally behaving. However, processes of normalisation pervade the unit, attempting to rectify the deviant mind-body-emotions of the young people on the AS to enable their inclusion within the mainstream school. Normalisation is conceptualised as a set of sociospatially specifi c and contextual practices; norms emerge as they are enacted, and via a practical sense of the abnormal. Norms are sometimes reworked by the young people on the AS, whose association with the unit renders them a visible minority group. Thus, despite some problems, special units can promote genuine 'inclusive' education, in which norms circulating mainstream school spaces are transformed to accept mind-body-emotional diff erences.

show abstract

Section: Educational 'Inclusion' Sen and Normalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Units for Young People on the Autistic Spectrum in Mainstream Schools: Sites of Normalisation, Abnormalisation, Inclusion, and Exclusion

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most authoritative figures in these fields are medical or quasi-medical professionals and responses are premised on a medical discourse of deafness (Mathews, 2011). Moreover, normalisation typically looks to technology and/or administrative change for solutions (Skrtic, 1995).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both referred to political values that claimed to vindicate those rights and actual social practices that led to discrimination and injustice. Both had available the same master frames of reference, such as civil rights movements and women's movements, for formulating concepts and mobilising support (McAdam, McCarthy;Zald, 1996).…”

Section: Disability Rights and Deaf Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability, Deafness and Ideology in the late Twentieth and early Twenty-first Centuries

McDonnell

2016

Educ. Real.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Disability, Deafness and Ideology in the late Twentieth and early Twenty-first Centuries. Ideology constitutes an important site of struggle for disabled people and for Deaf communities. In recent decades two ideologies -normalisation and rights -have offered different answers to the question of what it means to be disabled or Deaf. Both ideologies emerged in the post World War II period; both challenged long-established institutional structures and professional practices; and both appealed to notions of human and civil rights. However, normalisation is fundamentally paternalistic where reform is seen to be a matter for professional expertise and to be negotiated in academic circles and in the domains of professional practice. In contrast, a rights ideology is based on a social model of disability and a socio-cultural model of deafness that oppose the exclusion of disabled and Deaf people from strategic and participative roles in defining the issues, in policy making, and in decision taking. Where normalisation seeks to eradicate or attenuate difference, a rights' perspective advocates recognition and respect for difference; where normalising ideology looks to expertise and organisational change for solutions, disability movements and Deaf communities argue that the most satisfactory answers are to be found in the fields of politics and power. Keywords: Deaf community. Disability. Ideology. Normalisation. Rights. RESUMO -Deficiência, Surdez e Ideologia no Final do Século XX e Início do Século XXI.A ideologia constitui um importante campo de luta para pessoas com deficiência e para as comunidades Surdas. Nas últimas dé-cadas, duas ideologias -a da normalização e a dos direitos -têm oferecido diferentes respostas à questão do que significa ser deficiente ou Surdo. Ambas as ideologias emergiram no período após a Segunda Guerra Mundial, desafiaram práticas profissionais e estruturas institucionais há muito estabelecidas e recorreram às noções de direitos civis e humanos. Contudo, a da normalização é fundamentalmente paternalista na medida em que a correção é vista como uma questão de competência profissional, negociada em círculos acadêmicos e domínios de prática profissional. Em comparação, uma ideologia dos direitos é baseada em um modelo social de deficiência e em um modelo sociocultural de surdez que se opõem à exclusão dos Surdos e das pessoas com deficiência de funções estratégicas e participativas na definição de problemas, na formulação de políticas e na tomada de decisões. Enquanto a normalização procura erradicar ou atenuar a diferença, uma perspectiva dos direitos defende o reconhecimento e o respeito à diferença; enquanto a ideologia normalizadora busca soluções na competência e nas mudanças organizacionais, os movimentos de pessoas com deficiên-cia e das comunidades Surdas defendem que respostas mais satisfatórias podem ser encontradas no campo da política e do poder. Palavras-chave: Comunidade Surda. Deficiência. Ideologia. Normalização. Direitos.

show abstract

“…If, as this article has maintained, the division of interpreting and Interpreting Studies into settings has little theoretical or empirical basis, then the question arises as to which kinds of divisions would be more empirically and theoretically viable. It may be that previous discussions of the effects of imbalances of power (Merlini and Favaron 2003;Rayman 2007;Mathews 2011;Angermeyer 2015) or information flows (Gile 1989) provide a more stable basis or indeed that some new basis of categorization is found.…”

Section: Toward Comparative Interpreting Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpreting is interpreting

Downie

2020

TIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract This article argues that the use of interpreting settings as theoretical categories is no longer empirically sound. Instead, research should focus on the commonalities of all interpreting practice. This move is viewed as an enabling shift for the creation of Comparative Interpreting Studies, a strand dedicated to considering interpreting as a global practice. After discussing the rationale for the current use of interpreting settings as analytical categories, evidence from a variety of existing settings is used to illustrate the commonalities between all instances of interpreting and the fuzziness of the boundaries between these settings. It is argued that using interpreting settings leads to silo thinking, where researchers focus on research in the setting in which they are working, even when findings from other settings can be applied. The article ends with a discussion of the theoretical and practical potential of this move including the power of a comparative approach.

show abstract

‘No sign language if you want to get him talking’: power, transgression/resistance, and discourses of d/Deafness in the Republic of Ireland

Cited by 15 publications

References 32 publications

Special Units for Young People on the Autistic Spectrum in Mainstream Schools: Sites of Normalisation, Abnormalisation, Inclusion, and Exclusion

Special Units for Young People on the Autistic Spectrum in Mainstream Schools: Sites of Normalisation, Abnormalisation, Inclusion, and Exclusion

Disability, Deafness and Ideology in the late Twentieth and early Twenty-first Centuries

Interpreting is interpreting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About