On What Basis Hope? Modern Progress and Postmodern Possibilities

Abstract

Modern and postmodern versions of hope as they apply to services for persons labeled as having mental retardation were examined. Proponents of modernism construct hope as relying on an ever-improving science to accurately comprehend mental retardation and other disabilities and the effectiveness of professional interventions. This myth of scientific progress is traced in various forms through American intellectual history to the development of special education as interventionist social science. Advocates of postmodernism cast doubt upon the grand narrative of modernism and critique modern social science as perpetuating stigmatized "mentally retarded" identities through the exercise of power. A rhetorical analysis of the current controversy over facilitated communication demonstrates the utilization of the language of modern science for its power effects in special education discourse.

A Back Door Approach to Autism and AAC

“…Let me first state what the point is not. I am neither proposing nor defending the postmodern, social constructivist argument that suggests that studies in which facilitated typists were unable to pass messages accurately when their facilitators were blind to the content are invalid because they employed scientific methodologies that were overly rigid and thus did not allow the typists to demonstrate their true abilities (Danforth, 1997). Nor am I suggesting that the qualitative, phenomenological studies that have been offered as evidence in support of FC are more valid than experimentally controlled studies (Biklen & Duchan, 1994).…”

Ethics and Special Education

“…The empirical case has been debated pro and con (Danforth, 1997;Fuchs & Fuchs, 1995;Carnine, 1991;Gartner & Lipsky, 1987;Stainback & Stainback, 1992;Kauffman, 1999). Although the empirical response is necessarily part of an answer, it is far from sufficient.…”

Autism, “Recovery (to Normalcy),” and the Politics of Hope

“…I am compelled to return to Danforth's (1997) and community'' (p. 100). If we are to center the ''moral and political goals of supporting human freedom and community,'' a question I ask, then, is, What might the educational experiences of young children labeled with autism look like if citizenship were viewed as a precondition for recovery (in the sense of recovering from disablement and social stigma and discrimination) rather than as one of its outcomes?…”

“…Indeed, I argue that the intensity of this most current interest in the behavioral discourse around autism may be at least partially understood by examining its active engagement with a particularly bold and compelling vision of hope-the construct of recovery from autism-and the powerful resonance that concept may have with parents' hopes for their children. Danforth (1997) published a seminal piece entitled ''On What Basis Hope? Modern Progress and Postmodern Possibilities'' in which he explored the ''powerful and assumed role of hope in special education'' (p. 93), a role that he characterized as largely ''unexamined'' (p. 93).…”