Posted on 10/29/2006 3:35:53 PM PST by RDTF
Rhetorical question. (More for the deaf than you.) I can still hear. Should I be proud? If not, can I just wear ear plugs instead of puncturing my ear drums?
LOL!
I see their point. I wouldn't hire a deaf person at my business where we can all hear. Why should they hire a hearing person at a deaf school?
Yep and there is way more to the story, including what was going on with the grammar and high schools. Again, dont' believe everything you hear from the MSM.
She was deaf herself. They just didn't like the fact that she had learned to lip-read and grew up among hearing people, rather than being in a segregated environment where everybody communicates through ASL.
Meanwhile, Gallaudet still has "declining enrollments and low graduation rates" (from the article). They're probably declining because more forms of deafness are correctible, to some extent, and will become more so in the future; and refusing to be part of the non-deaf world could have something to do with the low graduation rates. Sounds like a bunch of thuggish "activist" types have taken over the place.
It is a definite handicap and the deaf community has a distinct culture. It is hard to explain just how "different" they are. (Like trying to label people as normal-- an impossibility.) But I will say that hearing people can dance around the periphery of the group, however they will never be accepted into the group.
I attended Madonna University in Michigan, known for its deaf program. Deaf students from Ontario, Canada literally took over the dorms and the campus. The hearing were outnumbered. I found it to be an interesting mix of people.
When it came to political correctness, their definition of it, and their defense of all things deaf... I admit to being perplexed. That said, they weren't helpless people. They were as competent as the next person when it came to ability and skills, not related to their handicap. They saw themselves as capable people.
That's terrific. I'm all for re-orienting, so to speak, and for finding the strength hidden in one's weaknesses. And certainly the few deaf people I know are immensely capable.
But there's this little problem -- and making it into a kind of shibboleth is no less silly than thinking that deaf people are incapable. I think they're shooting themselves in the foot.
To your first comment - there are other reasons that Fernandes was not liked - having to do with her accepting unqualified substitute teachers in the classrooms for weeks at a time at the Pre K, K-8 and High School levels.
The enrollments are not declining because more forms of deafness are CORRECTABLE (which forms of deafness are correctable, do you think? I am interested in your qualifications on that subject).
Enrollment is also declining because Rochester, NY has a very very good program for deaf students. And enrollment is declining because mainstreaming, rightly or wrongly, is more the norm now, so kids who are mainstreamed will go to typical colleges or go out into the typical workplace.
I think mainstreaming does have a lot to do with it, but even mainstreaming has increased because there are improved tools for dealing with the physical aspect of deafness.
Cochlear implants are a relatively new technique, and it seems there will soon be various forms of "hardware" that will be able to assist or replace the normal hearing apparatus. That's why I said it can be corrected; not "cured," but corrected by means of an external device.
I have actually read of deaf people criticizing people who have gotten cochlear implants. I once read a truly stupid article by a deaf person who said she would refuse to hear even if she could because she was special and deaf people were special. I think a lot of this has to do with sullen, left-over "identity politics" run riot, and I think that was what was being expressed in the Fernandes flap.
It's quite possible that there were other issues, but it sounds as if she really wasn't there long enough to tell about her policies. In any case, they just started citing her real or imagined inadequacies when the other approach (that she wasn't "deaf enough") didn't work.
She was there for 10 years. How long should she have been there before people knew what her policies are?
My first visit to Gallaudet was 1996, and she was there then.
Many deaf people choose not to be corrected by implants, and I respect that in them. There are cultures, held together by language and sociologicial reasons, who choose not to embrace technology. And an implant is an invasive technology, by the way. We respect the rights of the Amish not to embrace technology because this is against their teachings and culture, but if its a deaf person, then they should embrace the technology?
And by the way, the deaf people who criticize other deaf people for getting implants are very few and far between.
I should know. My daughter has a CI and I spoke to members of the deaf/Deaf community and advocacy groups prior to her getting the CI. They were very kind and accepting; 95/100 percent. She is accepted by deaf and Deaf.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.