Meeting Global Deaf Peers, Visiting Ideal Deaf Places ... - NCRTM

Meeting Global Deaf Peers, Visiting Ideal Deaf Places: Deaf Ways
of Education Leading to Empowerment, an Exploratory Case
Study
De Clerck, Goedele A. M.
American Annals of the Deaf, Volume 152, Number 1, Spring
2007, pp. 5-19 (Article)
Published by Gallaudet University Press
DOI: 10.1353/aad.2007.0009
For additional information about this article
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/aad/summary/v152/152.1clerck.html
Access Provided by Utah State University Libraries at 10/28/11 10:25PM GMT

MEETING GLOBAL DEAF PEERS, VISITING IDEAL
DEAF PLACES: DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION
LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT,
AN EXPLORATORY CASE STUDY
IN A F LEMISH CASE STUDY, deaf role models revealed a moment of
awakening, indicated by the Flemish sign WAKE-UP. Contact with deaf
cultural rhetoric made them wake up, and deconstruct and reconstruct
their lives, a process represented by a circle of deaf empowerment.
Flemish deaf leaders mentioned acquiring this rhetoric during visits to
deaf dream worlds (in Flemish Sign Language, WORLD DREAM): places
with ideal conditions for deaf people. Such global deaf encounters
(Breivik, Haualand, & Solvang, 2002) lead to the “insurrection of subjugated
[deaf] knowledges” (Pease, 2002, p. 33). Whereas deaf education
had never provided them with deaf cultural rhetoric and was
depositing upon them oppressive societal conventions (Jankowski,
1997), a common sign language (Mottez, 1993) and global deaf experience
(Breivik et al., 2002; Murray, in press) in barrier-free environments
(Jankowski, 1997) provided deaf ways of deaf education (Erting,
GOEDELE A.M. DE CLERCK 1996; Reilly, 1995).
DE CLERCK, A VISITING RESEARCHER AT
GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC,
IS A PH.D. CANDIDATE IN THE DEPARTMENT
OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, GHENT UNIVERSITY,
BELGIUM.
In the last 30 years, a new rhetoric has
emerged: Deaf people are perceiving
themselves as an ethnolinguistic minority
group with their own culture
(deaf culture) and their own language
(sign language). 1 Deaf people with this
worldview reject the medical model of
deafness, which views deaf people as
having a physical problem that needs
to be cured (Jankowski, 1997; Lane,
1993). Adopting a cultural perspective
on deafhood liberates deaf people
from oppression and empowers them:
They turn their negative perceptions
of themselves into a positive deaf identity
of which they are proud, a deaf
identity that can challenge the nega-
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
tive attitudes of the majority society
and redistribute power between deaf
and hearing people (Jankowski, 1997;
Ladd, 2003; Widell, 2000).
Studies of deaf people worldwide
(e.g., Breivik, 2005; Monaghan, Schmaling,
Nakamura, & Turner, 2003) suggest
that increased international contact
with politically empowered deaf people
and the rapidly changing consciousness
in deaf communities is largely responsible
for the empowerment of deaf
people. For her diachronic study on the
rhetoric of the deaf social movement
in the United States, Jankowski (1997)
analyzed published documents and
events, highlighting crucial movements
5

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
of change such as Deaf President Now.
Widell (2000) explored the emergence
of deaf empowerment in Denmark by
examining “the dynamics between the
education system, the labor market,
and deaf culture” (p. 26). For my research
project, I examined deaf empowerment
in Flanders, the northern
half of Belgium, through the collection
of life stories of Flemish deaf leaders.
This case study is being linked with an
exploratory case study (Stebbins, 2001;
Yin, 1994) at Gallaudet University of
deaf empowerment as exemplified
in the lives of international deaf role
models.
Research on deaf life stories reveals
turning points in deaf people’s lives
when they learned about deaf cultural
rhetoric—mostly highlighting transformations
when these people moved
from an oral environment to a signing
and deaf cultural environment.
Amparo Minguet Soto (2003), for
example, uses the metaphor of “Deaf
awakening” in her life story to give
meaning to the turning point in her
life after coming into contact with sign
language, deaf culture, and (international)
deaf leaders. She connects this
experience with the metaphorical
transition from darkness to light that
is often used to describe deaf people’s
entering the deaf community and
learning sign language (Padden &
Humphries, 1988). Soto does not reveal
whether this experience is expressed
by a sign that refers to a
shared deaf experience in her community,
like the WAKE-UP sign in my
research (see below, “Waking Up and
the Circle of Deaf Empowerment”).
Although changes in deaf people
who grew up in a deaf cultural environment
have been sporadically examined
(Breivik, 2005; Ladd, 2003;
List, 2003; Taylor & Darby, 2003), the
phenomenon of deaf empowerment
and its rhetoric have never been examined
through ethnographic life-
6
story research in a group of people
who have assumed leadership roles in
a local deaf community. Also, though
“there is no guarantee that a particular
discourse or form of knowledge
will lead to emancipatory practices”
(Foucault, 1984, cited in Roets et al.,
2005, p. 47), narrative research with
survivors can indicate keys to the success
of life paths (Roets et al., 2005).
The analysis of Flemish deaf narratives
in the present article leads to the
hypothesis that visits to barrier-free
deaf environments (Jankowski, 1997)
such as Gallaudet University (United
States), the Centre for Deaf Studies in
Bristol (United Kingdom), and deaf
associations in the Nordic countries
are transformative for deaf people.
The universal nature of sign language
(Mottez, 1993) and the common
transnational experiences of deaf people
as a “visual minority in an auditory
world” (Murray, in press) create the
conditions for an alternative deaf education
or education in the deaf way.
Only 20% of all deaf people in the
world have the opportunity to go to
school (Wilson, 2005), and consequently
to gain deaf awareness and
knowledge about sign language. In
the world, and especially in developing
countries, there is a “lack of respect
for and understanding of Deaf
Culture and sign language (Lane, 1992;
Lemmo, 2003)” (Wilson, 2005, p. 293).
The goal of the present article is to
sketch alternative opportunities for
deaf students all over the world to
come into contact with deaf cultural
rhetoric and experience barrier-free
deaf environments (Jankowski, 1997)
and to create the conditions to
achieve their civil, political, social, and
economic rights (Harris & Enfield,
2003; Ladd, 2003).
Since 1993, Belgium has been a
federalized monarchy comprising two
states: Flanders in the north and Wallonia
in the south. The official spoken
languages of Flanders and Wallonia
are, respectively, Dutch (Flemish) and
French. The differences between
Flemish and Dutch can be compared
to the differences between British and
American English. In eastern Belgium
there is also a small German-speaking
jurisdiction (Van Herreweghe, 2002).
A first (unrepresentative) demographic
research study suggests that
about 4,500 deaf signers use Flemish
Sign Language, Vlaamse Gebarentaal
(VGT; Loots et al., 2003). Only recently,
on April 26, 2006, the Flemish parliament
recognized VGT as the “first or
preferred language of the Deaf community
in Flanders” (Heyerick, 2006).
Deaf people in the southern part of
Belgium use Belgian-French Sign Language
(Langue des Signes de Belgique
Francophone, LSFB), which was officially
recognized in 2003 (Timmermans,
2005). Although the spoken
languages in Flanders and the Netherlands,
on the one hand, and in Wallonia
and France, on the other, are
similar, VGT differs from NGT (Nederlandse
Gebarentaal, Sign Language
of the Netherlands), and LSFB is different
from LSF (Langue des Signes
Françaises, French Sign Language).
Since the national deaf federation
Navekados divided in the 1970s, the
Flemish deaf community has been
represented by Fevlado (Federatie
van Vlaamse Dovenorganisaties—
Federation of Flemish Deaf Organizations);
the Walloon deaf community
has its own national federation, FSSB
(Fédération Francophone des Sourds
de Belgique—French Federation of
Belgian Deaf). Because the Flemish
and Walloon deaf federations are
funded by their own sources and have
their own agendas, Flemish and Walloon
deaf people meet and interact
less than before the split of the national
deaf federation, and Flemish
Sign Language and Walloon Sign Language
continue to “develop separately
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

and deviate further from each other”
(Van Mulders, 2005, p. 51).
The present article focuses on deaf
people in Flanders, the north of Belgium.
Deaf schools in Flanders were
established between 1820 (when the
Ghent deaf school opened) and 1883
(when the St. Agatha Berchem deaf
school opened). Before oralism, a couple
of deaf teachers from Belgium left
to study in Paris; when they returned
home, they contributed significantly to
deaf education (Buyens, 2005; Gerday
& Thomas, 2001; Le Maire, 1996,
1997). Deaf teachers were banned
from deaf schools in times of oralism,
such as after the Milan Conference of
1880, which had a strong influence on
deaf education in Belgium (Gerday &
Thomas, 2001). Following an international
trend, in 1979 one Flemish
deaf school decided to implement
the Total Communication approach,
teaching in “Signed Dutch,” a signed
system accompanying speech, rather
than in a natural sign language (Van
Herreweghe, 2002). Van Herreweghe
(2002) has written, “Consequently, all
the adults in Flanders, including deaf
and Deaf adults, were educated orally,
either in a special education setting or
in a mainstream setting (although a
small minority of young adults in this
group were educated in Total Communication
programs using what is called
‘Nederlands met Gebaren,’ or ‘Signed
Dutch’)” (p. 75). In 1998, the first bilingual
program was set up in a Flemish
deaf school (De Weerdt, Vanhecke, Van
Herreweghe, & Vermeerbergen, 2002),
yet “most deaf children are still educated
orally today, although signs are
no longer banned and interest in
bilingual-bicultural education is growing
rapidly” (Van Herreweghe, 2002,
p. 75). Three Flemish deaf people have
been certified to teach deaf students,
and a few are currently enrolled in education
classes, but larger numbers of
deaf people are either teaching sign
language courses or working as
teacher assistants in deaf schools.
Deaf clubs in Flanders were established
close to deaf schools in the second
half of the 19th century and the
first half of the 20th century. Although
deaf people participated in the boards
of the schools, clergy from the schools
played a larger role (Scheiris & Raemdonck,
in press). Flemish deaf people
were active on the board of the former
national deaf federation Navekados.
Yet the establishment of the federation
was rooted in and strongly dominated
by Catholic paternalism (Scheiris &
Raemdonck, in press). Only since
1996, when deaf leaders began to experience
ideal deaf places, have all
board members of Fevlado been deaf
(De Clerck, 2005).
In 1980, the Flemish Federation of
the Deaf established a “sign committee”
to develop and promote “Signed
Dutch.” In the 1990s, two research
projects on Flemish Sign Language
were set up by hearing researchers
(Van Herreweghe, 1995; Vermeerbergen,
1996), and deaf people visited
and received training in deaf centers
around the world. Following international
tendencies in favor of natural
sign languages, in 1997 Fevlado officially
decided to promote and teach
Flemish Sign Language instead of
Signed Dutch (Van Herreweghe &
Vermeerbergen, 2004). The first Flemish
Sign Language dictionary was published
in 2004 (Van Mulders, 2004).
Research Method
and Analysis
Because the phenomenon of deaf empowerment
as it is experienced in life
stories had not yet received systematic
empirical scrutiny, I chose to conduct
an exploratory qualitative case
study (Stebbins, 2001; Yin, 1994). The
participants were asked whether coming
into contact with deaf culture was
a turning point in their lives. A positive
response to this question was a prerequisite
for participation in the study.
In ethnographic interviews (Spradley,
1997), Flemish deaf people were
asked to reflect on key moments in
their lives concerning their deaf empowerment,
identity, and agency.
My recruitment and sampling methods
included both the use of a flyer
that was posted in a regional deaf club
(by means of e-mail and deaf club magazines)
and snowball sampling (Denzin
& Lincoln, 1994). An initial core group
of deaf people recognized as leaders
(Ladd, 2003), who had already spread
deaf cultural rhetoric in the Flemish
deaf community and society, named
other deaf people who had experienced
the same phenomenon in their
lives. As a deaf participant in deaf activism,
I knew that deaf role models
tend to know each other and exchange
experiences (De Clerck, 2005).
The research data were generated
by videotaped ethnographic interviews
in Flemish Sign Language with
15 Flemish deaf role models. The indepth
interviews took a maximum of
3 hours each and followed a list of
questions: for example, What/who has
been important in your deaf empowerment?
What is positive? What is negative?
Do you prefer the present or
the past? Did you go abroad and meet
international deaf people? Did that
change something? Can you describe
what happened? You are active—what
does that mean for you? What is important
for other deaf people to
know? What is important for hearing
people to know?
To ensure respondent validation
(Denzin & Lincoln, 1994), the emergent
themes, interrelations, and generalizations
were discussed with the
research participants to determine
that my research findings seemed
plausible from their perspective (Stebbins,
2001). This research was discussed
in a regional deaf club as well
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
7

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
as in meetings with smaller groups of
research participants at my home.
Grounded analysis is a process.
“Ideas and recommendations which
the research develops and makes
emerge from the data are grounded
in what the key participants have
contributed through their worlds and
experiences” (Goodley, Lawthom,
Clough, & Moore, 2004, p.119). I
coded my research data into categories
(e.g., waking up, circle of deaf
empowerment, deaf cultural rhetoric,
global encounters) and identified relationships
between those categories
(e.g., Flemish deaf people wake up
through informal exchanges of deaf
cultural rhetoric in global encounters
with international empowered deaf
people (Breivik, Haualand, & Solvang,
2002; Murray, in press). That led to
tentative generalizations and theory
development (Leedy & Ormrod, 2003;
Stebbins, 2001).
Study of 15 deaf role models led to
the emergence of three categories distinguishing
different factors leading to
the empowerment of the Flemish deaf
community. In regard to the first place
and earliest time frame (early 1990s),
deaf study participants mentioned participating
in a deaf awareness course,
having contacts with international empowered
deaf people, and visiting ideal
deaf places, or deaf dream worlds.
Concerning the second stage (mid-
1990s), Flemish deaf leaders mentioned
being empowered by hearing
sign language researchers and their information.
In the third stage, the Flemish
deaf community was able to
empower its own people through deaf
activism and collaboration with hearing
allies, a movement that began in
the second half of the 1990s and is still
going on today (De Clerck, 2005). (In
the course of my research, interviews I
conducted in the 2000s with young
deaf people studying abroad in barrierfree
environments revealed experi-
8
ences of empowerment similar to
those experienced by deaf people during
short trips in the 1990s.)
The present article explores the
first stage of Flemish deaf empowerment
and the concepts of visiting deaf
dream worlds and global deaf encounters
that emerged from the data
and categorization of the data (Stebbins,
2001; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
This will bring up a “new body of
knowledge” on deaf empowerment,
deaf identities, and deaf activism “that
is uniquely grounded” (Goodley et al.,
2004, p. 121) in the life stories of Flemish
deaf people. Life stories illustrate
how “narrators present stories in ways
that accent resilience in adversity as
to maintain a sense of coherence and
personal integrity” (Goodley, 2001,
p. 219, cited in Roets, Reinaart, & Van
Hove, in press). Deaf subjectivities
were chained in the meanings that institutions
and hearing society forced
upon them (Goodley et al., 2004), yet
deaf hands, though ignored by hearing
master narratives, never stopped
signing. Discourse analysis can highlight
the “sense of discursive oppression
and resistance” that “runs
throughout the narrative” (Goodley et
al., 2004, p. 101).
To explore this first stage of Flemish
deaf empowerment, I use a montage of
“composed” (Ellis & Bochner, 1996)
ethnographic narratives of deaf empowerment
constructed through narratives
by Edward, Gaby, Ronny, Filip,
and Vincent, the group of research participants
who took the deaf awareness
course set up by the Flemish Federation
of the Deaf in 1990 and joined in
study trips abroad between 1992 and
1994. Edward, Gaby, Ronny, Filip, and
Vincent were all born in the 1960s and
have known each other for a long time.
Ethical use of (re)constructed insiders’
perspectives is a legitimate method for
the representation and validation of
qualitative research (Roets et al., 2005).
I combine this life story research with
the historical research of written documents
(Jankowski, 1997). The analysis
of reports of the deaf awareness course
and articles in deaf magazines offer additional
primary sources for the exploration
of Flemish deaf cultural rhetoric.
I translated all interviews from
Flemish Sign Language into Dutch, and
then from Dutch into English. All research
participants read and approved
the Dutch translations of the interviews
presented in my research, and
decided either to be identified or to be
anonymous. Those who preferred not
to be identified asked me to suggest a
name, which they would then approve.
One research participant also asked
me not to indicate gender. Therefore,
gender is not discussed. I eliminated or
changed the names of places, deaf
schools, family structures, etc., to protect
my research participants.
Background of the Study
In September 1990, the Flemish Federation
of the Deaf, Fevlado, started a
deaf awareness course, called the
kadercursus.The Flemish/Dutch word
kader means “board,” and cursus is
Dutch for “course.” The deaf awareness
course was originally intended as
a training experience for board members
of the deaf clubs associated with
Fevlado (Buyens, 1990). The purpose
of the course was to generate discussion
of different aspects of the deaf
community in Flanders and draw comparisons
with other countries. (The information
provided here on the
kadercursus is based on analysis of unpublished
and unnumbered reports of
the Kadercursus voor Doven, prepared
by Studiecentrum Fevlado between
1990 and1994 and documented
and collected in the Fevlado archives,
Ghent, Belgium.) The kadercursus
was announced in Flemish national
newspapers, as it was the first time in
Flemish deaf history that a deaf aware-
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

ness course had been set up. The
course was linked to the activism of
the deaf federation and presented
deaf people as a community that
shared the same language, habits, traditions,
and history. It also offered deaf
people a rhetoric of equal opportunities,
rights, participation, oppression,
deaf culture, emancipation, integration,
etc. Deaf people received information
about deaf education in
Flanders, services for deaf people,
government services and organizations
for people with disabilities, beginning
scientific research on deaf
people and sign language in Flanders,
and international organizations for
deaf people such as the World Federation
of the Deaf (WFD) and the European
Union of the Deaf (EUD,
formerly ECRS). The course encouraged
deaf people to take responsibility
and participate in existing governmental
structures and institutions for deaf
people. Although the course stressed
signs as the natural means of communication
for deaf people and advocated
the recognition of sign language,
sign language was defined as Signed
Dutch, which should serve as a bridge
between hearing and deaf people. It
was the first time that Flemish deaf
people were provided with information
about their rights, their place in
society, and other aspects of their history.
They learned a lot from the information
in the course, which was all
new to them. Yet in their life stories for
the present study, Flemish deaf people
did not elaborate on the content of
the kadercursus and the issues discussed
in the course.
The research participants were
more excited about their global encounters
with transnational empowered
deaf individuals (Breivik et al.,
2002; Murray, in press) in Flanders and
abroad. Their eyes gleamed when
they recounted detailed memories of
their experiences in deaf dream worlds
abroad (see below, “Deaf Cultural
Rhetoric and Ideal Deaf Places”).
Between 1992 and 1994, the Flemish
Federation of the Deaf organized
trips to Denmark (1992), the Netherlands
(1993), the United States (1994),
and England (1994). In Denmark and
the Netherlands, the group received
information about the national deaf
federations, organizations of parents
of deaf children, sign language classes,
services for deaf people, and educational
opportunities, among other
things. When visiting the Danish national
deaf federation, deaf people
also learned about bilingual education,
the perception of deaf people
as a linguistic minority, and how deaf
people could run their organization
and participate in government decision
making.
In the United States, at Gallaudet
University, the group followed a oneweek
schedule including meetings
with university president I. King Jordan,
Gallaudet professor Yerker Andersson,
and others; visits to the university
library, Kendall Demonstration Elementary
School, and the Model Secondary
School for the Deaf; and
presentations on study at Gallaudet.
The Flemish deaf people were impressed
with the use of sign language
everywhere on campus and in all classrooms.
They had learned about bilingual
education in Denmark, and after
visiting Gallaudet they were 100% convinced
that bilingual education was the
best teaching method for deaf children
(see also “Studiereis naar Gallaudet,”
1994).
At the Centre for Deaf Studies in
Bristol (England), the group had a
short training session for deaf sign language
teachers. The trip to Bristol was
crucial for the Flemish deaf people in
their search for effective arguments
for the position that Flemish Sign Language
should be used in deaf schools
rather than Signed Dutch.
When members of the Flemish deaf
community are explaining about the
kadercursus, it is clear that they have
been provided with a new rhetoric
that breaks with the past. Social movements
“provide their members with an
alternative rhetoric that brings a different
ideology, different behaviors, and
different identity into day-to-day life”
(Jankowski, 1997, p. 4). As I illustrate in
the present article, the power of the
kadercursus is in its wake up, or awareness
raising:
Now empowered with a rhetoric that
brings a different ideology to day-today
life, the oppressed have a new
power to celebrate their heritage, to
reject labels imposed on them by
their oppressors, and to acquire new
traits that enhance feelings of pride
and power (Jankowski, 1997, p. 6).
Research Findings
The stage in their lives before they
come into contact with cultural rhetoric
is described by Flemish deaf people
as sleeping. After examining the sleeping
stage, I will highlight the deaf cultural
rhetoric that will lead to Flemish
deaf people’s empowerment. I will argue
that deaf empowerment can be
defined as the “insurrection of subjugated
[deaf] knowledges” (Pease,
2002, p. 33), thereby illustrating how
deaf people create their own education
through a common sign language
(Mottez, 1993), deaf experience (Murray,
in press), and the experience of a
barrier-free environment (Jankowski,
1997), or deaf dream world. To conclude,
I will reflect on the transitions
that deaf identities experience in this
process of empowerment, distinguishing
stages of wake up and the circle of
deaf empowerment.
Sleeping
Flemish deaf role models distinguish
stages of before and after in their life
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
9

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
stories, marking the changes global
deaf encounters brought to their
lives. The sleeping metaphor refers to
the oppression deaf people experienced
during oralism and the absence
of deaf cultural rhetoric. To understand
the standard hearing view that
Flemish deaf people had internalized
(Freire, 2005; Jankowski, 1997), I will
illustrate how oralism controlled the
information provided to the deaf
community in both deaf schools and
deaf clubs.
As Filip Verstraete (translated interview,
2003), a Flemish deaf leader, explained,
there was no deaf cultural
rhetoric transmitted in deaf families:
Yes, my parents are deaf and when I
was a kid, nothing was ever said about
what it meant to be deaf, about who
you are as a deaf person, a deaf identity,
deaf awareness. Really nothing;
that was not discussed at all, never. I
knew deafness that is a disability, that
is the way it is.
Ronny Van Landuyt (translated interview,
2004), who joined the Gallaudet
trip, reflected upon the absence of
deaf cultural rhetoric in deaf clubs and
deaf schools before:
When we were 12 years old, we went
to high school. In high school, the
school level was higher; that was
good. In the dormitory, we had a
priest. He organized well, priest X,
who passed away. Things were better;
there were a couple of teachers who
used signs. There were two teachers
who really signed enough; the others
were oral. But it was not the case that
we broadened our horizons about
“deaf,” no, nothing. It was always the
same: lesson, lesson, lesson. Speech
exercises, language exercises, math
exercises. Narrow minded. Nothing
about history, nothing about the
10
world, nothing about interesting
things. . . .
When I finally went to the deaf
club, it was not interesting. It was always
soccer, soccer. Really for hours.
Now I can say that was bullshit, but
before I didn’t realize that. For me,
that was not interesting. It was just
about one theme; other topics were
not discussed.
The individuals I interviewed for my
research all talked about times after
the 1960s, when indeed all deaf cultural
rhetoric, deaf history, and community
knowledge seemed to be gone.
Nonetheless, there has always been a
small group of people to whom deafhood
is transmitted (Ladd, 2003). A
small group of deaf people has always
played a role in the Federation of the
Deaf (although it was established and
dominated by clergy), and in the 1970s
there was a group of deaf people who
wanted to set up a federation run by
deaf people themselves (Scheiris &
Raemdonck, in press). Yet apart from
this small group, the majority of deaf
people were left in the dark. Any alternative
discourse that perceived deaf
people as an ethnolinguistic minority
rather than a group of disabled people
was blocked.
In the interviews, research participants
explained how they provided
deaf friends with information gathered
in their own deaf families and from
mainstream news media. They strongly
reacted against teachers in schools for
the deaf who were not able to communicate
with deaf students who depended
on sign language. Deaf people
were also blocked from gathering general
background knowledge about the
world. Flemish deaf people refer to
this stage, which is marked by fixed
(medical) identities (Braidotti, 1998)
and the absence of deaf cultural rhetoric,
as sleeping.
Deaf Cultural Rhetoric and
Ideal Deaf Places
The rhetoric of deaf people perceiving
themselves as an ethnolinguistic
minority group was presented to the
world for the first time in the Gallaudet
revolution in 1988 (Jankowski,
1997). Jankowski explains that three
important rhetorics can be identified
that have been empowering for deaf
people in the United States. First,
there is the rhetoric of sign language
as a formal language, supported by a
sign language dictionary and sign language
research in the 1960s and
1970s. Second, there is the rhetoric of
deaf culture, which allowed deaf people
to perceive mainstreaming and inclusion
as cultural genocide and to
defy the label of disabled. The rhetoric
of the deaf community as an ethnolinguistic
minority opened the doors
for the empowering third rhetoric:
the can-do rhetoric. This rhetoric of
equality liberated deaf people from
the rhetoric of hearing paternalism
and from their internalized oppression.
Deaf people are now proud to
be deaf, and can decide about their
own lives. The latter stage can be illustrated
by I. King Jordan’s famous and
empowering statement, “Deaf people
can do anything that hearing people
can except hear” (Christiansen &
Barnartt, 1995, p. 164).
Making comparisons to the rhetoric
that was empowering for deaf people
in the United States brings the
parallels with deaf cultural rhetoric in
Denmark and Flanders to the fore.
The rhetoric of deaf people as an ethnolinguistic
minority group, which
can be proud of itself, which believes
in its ability, equality, and independence,
and which actively advocates for
better deaf lives, seems to be empowering
for deaf people in different localities
in the world (De Clerck, 2005;
Widell, 2000). Regarding his trip to
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

the Netherlands in 1991, Filip Verstraete
said,
We tried to set up an exchange with
the Netherlands, and so I saw: “Wow,
with that and that and that, the
Netherlands is more advanced!”
Yeah, we had established Jong-
Fevlado [Federation of Flemish Deaf
Youth Organizations] to discuss
things about activities, make sure we
had the same dates, etc., but about
what it meant to be young and
deaf—access, participation, advocacy
. . . we had never thought about
that. And then we went to the
Netherlands, and we saw that they
were more advanced, more aware of
deafness: We have to put pressure,
make demands: that and that and
that. . . . Oh, I had never thought
about things in that way, but that’s
how things grew. I had more and
more foreign contacts, and my eyes
opened: I swallowed everything,
grabbed everything. I became more
aware: I got it!
I had always thought, “Deaf, that
is a disability and then you can do
fewer things.” But through those foreign
contacts and the information
that I received, I developed. I do
mind that it only started then; I was
already grown up! Maybe I was 21 or
22 when I became more aware of
deafness, when I started to develop,
when I could grab all those things.
When I was 18 and had just started to
work in the world of signs, I didn’t
have much information yet. I only
started to develop when I worked
here [Flanders]. I learned so much
through the information that I received
and could exchange. I feel a
huge difference between now and
10, 15 years ago. I was never ever
taught something, never. Good that
we had those contacts abroad; also
[my boss] gave a lot of information
on what exists. Deaf people are
strong; deaf people can! That’s how I
became more aware, completely
changed! (translated interview, 2003)
The difference between the dominant
rhetoric of oralism and the
counter-rhetoric of deaf culture that
led to Flemish deaf people’s waking
up is summarized in Figure 1. The arrow
in the chart illustrates the gradual
character of the changes in deaf people’s
worldviews from negative perceptions
of themselves, language, and
culture, and the absence of discussion,
to positive deaf identities, deaf cultural
and linguistic pride, and opportunities
for discussion. This process has been
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
called positive revaluation, a transformation
that has also been experienced
in African American communities and
gay communities (Moos, 1990).
Filip Verstraete’s narrative connects
the coming into contact with
deaf cultural rhetoric with the experience
of a different everyday life in a
deaf dream world, or a world with
ideal conditions for deaf people. The
concept of “dream world,” indicated
by the Flemish sign WORLD DREAM,
is central in the narratives of the people
who participated in the present
study, and reflects their perspective
on a short trip to deaf environments,
which, in comparison with more oppressive
environments in Belgium,
Figure 1
Rhetoric of Oralism Versus Deaf Cultural Rhetoric as Experienced by Flemish
Deaf Role Models
Note. Capital letters are used to represent signs in English translation (Padden & Humphries, 1988).
Flemish Sign Language signs are translated into Dutch, then translated into English.
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
11

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
looked like a “dream world” in their
eyes. If they had stayed longer, they
would have noticed that the dream
worlds are not perfect and have their
own struggles; yet these “imperfect”
barrier-free environments are still empowering
for those starting from the
Belgian deaf experience.
Filip also stressed this experience
when talking about his visit to Gallaudet
University (translated interview,
2005): “Then there was the study trip
to Gallaudet: See, see!” Seeing this
barrier-free environment, and comparing
it with the lived experience of barriers
in Flanders, was empowering.
Deaf people “learn the full meaning of
access and apply that awareness to
their future lives in the wider society”
(Jankowski, 1995, p. 1, as cited in
Jankowski, 1997, p. 158). Although
empowerment through rhetoric has
been studied for deaf people and people
with disabilities (Charlton, 1998;
Jankowski, 1997), this theme of deaf
empowerment through the connection
of the coming into contact with
deaf cultural rhetoric and comparison
of deaf dream worlds with barrier environments,
as it appears in the life
stories of Flemish deaf leaders, has not
been examined yet. In the present article,
I argue for further research on this
topic.
“The Insurrection of [Deaf]
Subjugated Knowledge”
The new empowering rhetoric that
Flemish deaf people carry with them
can be connected to their previous
resistance against standard views
and oppression and their subjugated
knowledge of the deaf way of life. This
is illustrated by the educational experiences
of deaf people in deaf schools.
Crucial for deaf people in connecting
in global encounters is the discussion
in their own language, sign language,
and a shared experience of being deaf
in a world that is hearing (Murray, in
12
press). Vincent Ameloot (translated
interview, 2004), a Flemish deaf leader,
described his experiences when visiting
Denmark in 1992:
Before, I had a lot of international
contacts. International sign language?
No problem. I was very strong in
sports, but deaf aware? Nothing. Inside,
I had a lot of questions. I asked
and asked, but I didn’t get answers,
nothing. I thought, “It will always be
the same: Deaf, that will always be a
problem, that will always be.”
Then I went to Denmark, and
there was a lecture by Asger Bergmann.
I thought about myself, how I
was as a person, and I connected
that with Asger Bergmann. My eyes
opened. He talked for 4 or 5 hours,
about many different topics. I watched
and I was surprised: Deaf people can
do that, that, that! And a lot more
information, deep, deep, deep. I
thought: “My brother, my sisters, can
go to university, and so can he: That
is possible there through an interpreter!”
Deep, deep, deep about
deaf culture, education, sign language
courses for kids and adults.
And a lot more. I threw my problems
away, and I took a new identity!
Then there was another lecturer,
Knut Sondergaard. He also lectured
for 2, 3 hours. Oh, my mind went
open, but then I was so tired that I
could hardly keep my eyes open.
Now I was tired. So that went on. But
when it was done, they all said, “Oh,
good, good!” But I was quiet, calm. I
went to bed. I got up, and suddenly I
was strong. A bomb had exploded!
That, that. . . .
I would like to change those
things when I am back in Belgium!
Things have to be the same as in
Denmark: strong! More and more,
my deaf awareness grew. I was already
25 when I started to become
more aware. I had gone abroad, and I
felt, “We have to do that and that and
that!” But the other deaf had stayed
in Belgium, oh, oh. “You all have to
go!” [Talking to me, Goedele de
Clerck:] Just like you have been to
Gallaudet. Then they would grow
too! They noticed that was strong. I
had exploded; they, not yet.
The term empowerment has been
interpreted in many ways and has become
popular (at least in the United
States), yet it is not always clear how
the term is used (Chamberlin, 1997).
Most writers stress the “process of
helping people gaining control over
their own lives” (Pease, 2002, p. 29).
Adams (1995, p. 5, as cited in Pease,
2002, p. 29) defines empowerment as
“the means by which individuals,
groups, and/or communities become
able to take control of their circumstances
and achieve their goals.” Deaf
people become more empowered
when they have more opportunities
to make choices (Fosshaug, 2004).
Jankowski (1997) stresses the agency
of oppressed groups. She defines empowerment
as “a process through
which a marginalized group alters the
distribution of power between itself
and the dominant culture” (p. 6).
Chamberlin (1997), in her research
toward “a working definition for empowerment”
(p. 43), found that empowerment
has both an individual
and a group dimension: “Empowerment
does not occur to the individual
alone, but has to do with experiencing
a sense of connectedness with other
people” (p. 45; see also Van Hove &
Roets, 2000).
Key factors in empowerment are
“access to information, ability to
make choices, assertiveness, and selfesteem”
(Chamberlin, 1997, p. 43).
Fosshaug (2004) observes that “empowerment
on the social level increases
when deaf people have the
possibility of political influence in the
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

majority society. Standing together as
a group can increase deaf people’s influence”
(p. 6). For Charlton (1998),
empowerment leads to more opportunities
for people with disabilities:
“Empowerment must translate into a
process of creating or acquiring power.
When power is taken, it is taken from
someone. Someone loses” (pp. 122–
123). Fosshaug (2004) quotes Lars
Havstad, the 19th-century Norwegian
who was the first deaf person to attend
university in Norway: “Deaf people are
getting together not to isolate themselves,
but to gather power and information
for life in a society where
sounds and spoken languages are
prevalent” (p. 6).
To highlight the meaning of “gather
power and information,” I prefer to
draw upon Pease’s (2002) reconstruction
of empowerment as “the insurrection
of [deaf] subjugated knowledge”
(p. 33). Identifying oppressed people’s
“strengths and knowledges” and
spreading that knowledge over the
community “can be a force for social
change” (Pease, 2002, p. 35). Pease argues
that discourse is one of the
means through which majority groups
dominate minority groups. Therefore,
empowerment can be understood as
producing alternative power-saturated
knowledge rather than as seeking
to seize or take power. Political
struggle can thus be conceptualized
as the struggle between different
knowledges (Ranson, 1993). If knowledges
and power are inseparable
from one another, as Foucault (1980,
1988) suggests, then we must recognize
the link between the empowerment
of oppressed people and
the development and distribution of
knowledge (Hartman, 1992). (Pease,
2002, p. 33).
Foucault’s concept of power governmentality
(1980, cited in Pease,
2002) is crucial to an understanding
of the stress on oppressed people’s
agency: “Governance is not only something
done to us by those in power; it
is something we do to ourselves. We
thus act upon our own subjectivity to
govern ourselves” (Pease, 2002, p. 32).
For Foucault (1978, cited in Pease,
2002), power and resistance go hand in
hand. That does not imply that people
always contest; people can internalize
oppression, accept the dominant rhetoric,
and—as such—not always liberate
themselves (Charlton, 1998; Freire,
2005; Pease, 2002). Yet Pease (2002)
states that we can “support marginalized
people’s resistance and assist in
the insurrection of subjugated knowledges”
(p. 33). Crucial to this is that
marginalized people come into contact
with new discourses that produce new
knowledges and promise free and alternative
ways of living (Jankowski,
1997). This is what Flemish deaf people
experienced through participating
in the kadercursus, seeing Gallaudet
University and the Danish Federation
of the Deaf, and talking to empowered
deaf people.
As I have previously mentioned, it
seems that deaf cultural rhetoric was
gone after the 1960s (see also Ladd,
2003). As the life stories of Flemish
deaf activists reveal, deaf cultural rhetoric
was not taught in deaf schools. It
was not discussed and passed on in
the deaf community and through deaf
families. Deaf education had been
very minimal; as a result, many deaf
people not only graduated as functional
analphabetics but were also
seriously limited in their knowledge
about the world (Broeckaert, Bogaerts,
& Clement, 1994; Van Herreweghe,
1995). Therefore, deaf people
did not have access to liberating rhetoric
from other social movements in
Flanders through media such as newspapers
and television. It was not until
1992 that the television news was cap-
tioned, and therefore made accessible
to deaf people (D’Hoore, Vandevelde,
& Verstraete, 1998). Many people
were frustrated by deaf education.
Gaby (translated interview, 2004), a
Flemish deaf leader, looked back on
her deaf school years:
I loved to study; I am a curious person:
practice a lot, learn a lot, and
know a lot. But I was very frustrated
that the teacher always taught about
speaking, speaking properly. That
was such a waste of time. Really, the
goal of learning: information, knowledge
. . . we didn’t see much of that.
Freire’s (2005) banking concept of
education can be applied when light is
shed on Flemish deaf education as
sketched in the life stories of Flemish
deaf people. The teacher deposits his
or her narrations on the students, who
passively receive the information,
store it in their brains, and reproduce
it on command. Education and knowledge
are not perceived as a process of
mutual and dialectic inquiry between
students and teacher, but rather as a
deposit by people who have knowledge
into people who lack knowledge.
Students get used to deposit storing
and become passive acceptors of the
world rather than active transformers
of the world:
The capability of banking education
to minimize or annul the students’
creative power and to stimulate their
credulity serves the interests of the
oppressors, who care neither to have
the world revealed nor to see it transformed.
The oppressors use their
humanitarianism to preserve a profitable
situation (Freire, 2005, p. 73).
As Filip Verstraete (translated interview,
2003) explained, there was no
alternative; lives and identities were
fixed: “That is the way it is.”
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
13

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
Of course, oppressors aim to continue
their domination, and the combination
of the banking concept of
education and paternalism has proved
to be a successful strategy (Freire,
2005). Yet there is one thing that bank
depositors seem to overlook: “The
deposits themselves contain contradictions
about reality” (Freire, 2005,
p. 75), and therefore push oppressed
people to reflection: “If men and
women are searchers and their ontological
vocation is humanization,
sooner or later they may perceive the
contradiction in which banking education
seeks to maintain them, and then
engage themselves in the struggle for
their liberation” (Freire, 2005, p. 75).
Edward (translated interview, 2005),
another Flemish deaf leader who
joined in the Gallaudet trip, reflected
on his school time:
When I was in the first class in X [a
deaf school], I was in a group of peers.
There were six of us. Two students experienced
difficulties; they were a bit
behind. I was bored all the time. Then
I said, “Oh, come on,” and the teacher
replied that I had to be patient, tolerant.
It was easy for him to say that, but
I was sitting there all the time twiddling
my thumbs. Half an hour later, I
was really fed up: I attended school
because I wanted to learn, not because
I wanted to sleep. I got into a serious
argument with the teacher. I
said, “I’d better stay at home.” The
teacher got really mad and sent me to
the director. I didn’t care. So, I went
to X [the director] and he said, “The
teacher told me that you have to calm
down a bit.” “Me? Calm down? Why do
I attend school?” The director used to
say that we all go to school to learn.
So . . . he couldn’t really say something.
. . . Then the class was split up
in two groups and then I developed
better. Oh, that was impossible, splitting
up the class, that was really not
14
possible. Until they started to think,
and then things changed.
As Vincent and Edward emphasized,
they had a lot of questions before.
As searchers, they noticed the
contradictions in the system, and
their “subjugated [deaf] knowledges”
(Pease, 2002, p. 33) told them that
something was wrong. Yet Vincent
stressed that he was not able to find
the answers himself. As paternalism
and oralism blocked any information
that included the perception that deaf
people were an ethnolinguistic minority,
and they themselves did not
have access to majority society and
the liberating rhetoric developed in
other minority groups, deaf people
needed to come into contact with
their signing peers from abroad in order
to acquire deaf cultural rhetoric
and become empowered. The alternative
to banking education is dialogue
(Freire, 2005). Dialogue, questions
and answers, and discussions are core
themes in the life stories. Passivity and
acceptance are replaced by critical
thinking (Freire, 2005). Starting from
the concrete reality of the Flemish
everyday experience, and the confrontation
with a better reality in deaf
dream worlds, dialogue will wake up
Flemish deaf people. The world is no
longer something outside deaf people’s
lives, but becomes a world that
can be changed and in which deaf
people actively participate (Freire,
2005). Jerry (translated interview,
2004), a Flemish deaf leader, reflected
on this process, which he experienced
when he met empowered deaf
people in Denmark and at Gallaudet:
Then there was a study trip to Denmark.
The first day of our trip, my
eyes opened several times. It was already
enough for me. It was too
much for me to deal with. After that,
X set up another study trip to Gal-
laudet. That was a 5-day trip, 1 week.
I joined. Then I started to feel, “Oh,
actually I lost many years.” Then it all
started.
Back in Flanders, I was really
strong. I had changed. Then I became
really active. . . . Also, I will
never forget that—I was on my honeymoon
in the south of France. I was
young and we were married. And
then there were two people: “Are you
deaf too?” “Yeah, we are deaf too.”
Those people were Americans. That
was a smart man. Very interesting.
The things he told! He signed very
relaxedly. And I looked and looked
. . . with my mouth open. At night, in
bed, I couldn’t sleep. It swirled
around in my head. Oh, that was
such an interesting man! There are
deaf people who can do that! That
man is an interesting deaf man! That
is possible! I wanted to turn myself
into an interesting deaf man too; I
had to. Because of those people I
met, always because of those people
I met. And afterward I was thinking,
and I realized, “I can do that too!”
The school had never showed me: I
can do the same things.
It is only through meeting deaf
adults who were smart that I started
thinking and got the feeling, “I would
like to become the same! I am
strong! I can do that too!.” . . . We had
direct communication, we had eye
contact, and in 1 hour I grabbed so
much information. . . . And then, at
the deaf school, it took me so long
for that. Through signs, I understood
everything easily, and I let it all come,
absorbed it all.
Flemish deaf people, lacking
strong Flemish deaf cultural identities,
and sharing transnational commonalities
of deaf lives in a hearing
world (Murray, in press), easily connect
with empowered deaf people
from abroad. This also illustrates the
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

universal character of sign language:
Differences in national sign languages
are easily bridged (Mottez, 1993). Empowered
transnational deaf people
“insurrected” Flemish local “subjugated
[deaf] knowledges” (Pease,
2002, p. 33) through a common language
(Mottez, 1993) and a common
global deaf experience (Murray, in
press).
Waking Up and the Circle of
Deaf Empowerment
What happens to deaf identities when
deaf people experience this process of
deaf empowerment? The analysis of
the life stories collected and confirmed
by the research participants in lectures
and discussions reveals that deaf empowerment
can be conceptualized as a
circle of stages, transitions in their
identities (Yang, 2000). When coming
into contact with deaf cultural rhetoric
and learning that SIGN LANGUAGE
NATURAL LANGUAGE, DEAF HEAR-
ING EQUAL, DEAF CAN, etc. (see also
Jankowski, 1997), Flemish deaf people
wake up and experience a change in
their lives. That moment of awakening
is indicated by the Flemish signs
WAKE-UP and TURN-A-BUTTON-IN-
THE-HEAD, and is visualized in Figure
2. Figure 2 shows a light symbolizing
the waking up and the transformation
that deaf people experience, dividing
their lives into stages before this
change and after (i.e., now). Coming
into contact with deaf cultural rhetoric
makes deaf people wake up: deconstructing
and reconstructing their lives
and leading them towards FIRE, the
Flemish sign for deaf activism. Gaby
(translated interview, 2004) explained
how she woke up when visiting Gallaudet
University in 1994:
Going to Gallaudet, there were many
things that I absorbed with my eyes.
First, when we entered, there were
lots of posters: deaf history, etc. Then
Figure 2
Wake Up
Note. Figure 2 was designed by dotplus, Belgium. Copyright © 2005 by Goedele De Clerck.
there was the reception: The secretary
signed while she was on the
phone! Deaf people could follow the
conversation, like hearing people
could hear it! My mouth fell open
with surprise. I more and more woke
up. Also, hearing and deaf people,
they all signed. I met a person, and I
didn’t know whether he/she was
hearing or deaf! That was the first
thing that woke me up: Hearing people
signed too! That was impossible
here [Flanders]; I thought that was
really impossible here. I had never
seen that here. Also, when two hearing
people and one deaf person walk
together, then the two hearing people
will definitely talk. At Gallaudet,
they sign! I don’t know whether
they are deaf or hearing. Also, TV:
full captioning there, full. My mouth
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
fell open with astonishment, really
amazing. Oh, I felt at home, really a
dream world, dream world. That is
possible here too! We have to fight,
we have to fight! We have to form a
group! Also the president is deaf!
That is possible, a deaf president! Before,
I always thought, a deaf president,
that is impossible; but it is not!
Because of all those things, I started
to think “deaf ” that also means possibilities.
Why did I always think negative?
Cannot, cannot. Because the
president is deaf, and because of
other things, I started to think differently:
If he can do that, I can do that
too! I started to change inside. They
all signed: That woke me up!
Gaby’s inward reflection was linked
to the growth of an outward turn to
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
15

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
Figure 3
Circle of Deaf Empowerment
Note. Figure 3 was designed by dotplus, Belgium. Copyright © 2005 by Goedele De Clerck.
other people (Yang, 2000) and the
birth of deaf activism in Flanders. A circle
of deaf empowerment can represent
this process (see Figure 3). This
circle starts from the input of deaf cultural
rhetoric, and indicates stages of
transformation beyond wake up and
the development of a strong identity to
activism and the spreading of deaf cultural
rhetoric, the latter making the circle
round. (In the interviews, Flemish
deaf people mentioned waking up and
experiencing the circle of deaf empowerment
more than one time in
their lives, like a cyclical movement
each time adding depth and new dimensions.)
If commonalities in the life
stories are paraphrased (Stebbins,
2001) by means of common signs and
common themes, this process can be
described as follows:
Deaf cultural rhetoric and WORLD
DREAM make deaf people’s MOUTH-
16
FALL-OPEN-WITH-SURPRISE. Deaf
people SEE, SEE, OPEN-EYES, and AB-
SORB the new information and world
without barriers. The information of
“DEAF CAN!! OWN LANGUAGE!!!
OWN CULTURE!!!” OPENS deaf people’s
MINDS: They THINK and consider
their lives. They WAKE-UP and
develop a strong personal awareness
of deafness: DEAF IDENTITY
GROWS! They TURN-A-BUTTON-IN-
THE-HEAD: reject their old negative
(medical) deaf identity and take on a
new positive cultural deaf identity,
which makes them STRONG and
EQUAL to hearing people. Hearing
people no longer DECIDE for deaf
people: Deaf people are INDEPEN-
DENT and DECIDE for themselves.
Deaf people finally feel PROUD:
They feel that they are HUMAN too.
Deaf people finally BLOOM. They
GRAB all the chances and opportunities
they have missed in the past;
they will make their future themselves.
As deaf people see their lives
positively changed, with more selfcontrol,
self-esteem, and agency,
they BOIL with ANGER and FRUS-
TRATION. The deaf FIRE makes
them ACTIVE. It is important to
SPREAD information about deaf
culture and deaf people and FIGHT
for deaf RIGHTS and their own
WORLD DREAM. Deaf people have
to ACHIEVE-GOALS. Both deaf and
hearing people SHOULD KNOW:
They should WAKE-UP from their
SLEEP so that deaf people can have
better lives. When deaf people come
into contact with deaf cultural rhetoric,
they will WAKE UP, become empowered,
and start to WAKE-UP and
empower other deaf people: The circle
is round.
However, the deaf world will not be
able to create more opportunities as
long as hearing people are still asleep.
Therefore, deaf people have to be AC-
TIVE in both the hearing and deaf
worlds. Deaf people should SHOW
hearing people a deaf way of living,
SPREAD INFORMATION, so that they
can gain hearing people’s RESPECT.
Deaf people still have a long way to
go, to BREAK-THROUGH-BARRIERS
and GO-ON and ON.
In the hearing world, deaf people
fight for the recognition of sign language,
better education for deaf children,
bilingual-bicultural education and
mainstreaming with interpreters, more
captioning on TV, more hours of interpreting,
less discrimination at work.
Conclusion
Through the life stories of Flemish deaf
role models, people who have actively
and openly assumed leadership in the
deaf community (Ladd, 2003; also see
Charlton, 1998), I explored the empowering
transformation (Yang, 2000)
of deaf identities. Grounded analysis of
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

the research data led to the development
of tentative generalizations and
hypotheses (Stebbins, 2001). Flemish
deaf people mention waking up when
coming into contact with deaf cultural
rhetoric: They reconstruct and deconstruct
their lives, finding both an inward
new identity and outward
agency (Yang, 2000). This can be
represented by a circle of deaf empowerment.
Flemish deaf people’s global encounters
led to the “insurrection of
subjugated [deaf] knowledges”
(Pease, 2002, p. 33). Whereas deaf
education had never provided deaf
people with deaf cultural rhetoric
and was depositing oppressive societal
conventions (Freire, 2005; Jankowski,
1997), deaf global encounters
and sign language conversations were
spaces of dialogue, paving the way
for liberation and activism (Freire,
2005).
Flemish deaf people woke up
through seeing deaf dream worlds or
places with ideal conditions for deaf
people. These deaf dream worlds, in
comparison with their lived experience
of barrier environments, provided
them with a barrier-free model to
shape their future lives (Jankowski,
1997). Further research should bring
more insight into deaf empowerment
through the connection between coming
into contact with deaf cultural rhetoric,
on the one hand, and seeing
barrier-free alternatives, on the other
hand, as revealed in the research for
the present article.
Global deaf encounters and visits
to ideal deaf places, or deaf dream
worlds, empowered Flemish deaf
people who became role models. In
the present article, I strongly advocate
for deaf culture classes in deaf schools
and the incorporation of deaf cultural
information in programs for mainstreamed
deaf students. Deaf teachers
and deaf adults in deaf schools and
deaf clubs are crucial to the transmission
of deaf cultural information to
young deaf people, as well as to their
identification with deaf role models.
Opportunities should be created and
encouraged for deaf people to network
with empowered deaf peers:
Opportunities such as international
deaf youth camps and sports competitions
should be supported and sponsored.
Short visits to culturally strong
deaf sites such as Gallaudet University
(United States), the Centre for Deaf
Studies in Bristol (United Kingdom),
and deaf federations in the Nordic
countries empower young deaf individuals
and should be included in
school programs or be sponsored by
the government. All these factors contribute
to the empowerment of young
deaf people and the deaf community;
advocacy and information sharing will
also inform the majority society about
deaf ways of life.
Notes
1. In Deaf studies, the distinction between
“deaf ” and “Deaf ” is often
used to refer, respectively, to “the audiological
condition of not hearing”
and “a particular group of deaf people
who share a language and a culture”
(Padden & Humphries, 1988, p.
2). For the present article, I prefer to
draw on the work of Breivik and colleagues
(2002), who note that “today,
however, the terms and distinction
are not only confusing, as Fjord (1996)
states, ‘but in a constant state of flux
within the deaf community’ (1996:
66),” and decide not to follow “the established
practice of using this distinction”
(p. v).
The research for the present study was
funded by Ghent University (BOF), the
Belgian American Educational Foundation
(BAEF), and the National Union
in Support of Handicapped People
(NVSG).
I want to give special thanks to
Jerry, Edward, Gaby, Vincent Ameloot,
Ronny Van Landuyt, and Filip Verstraete
for sharing their life stories.
Thanks to deaf club Nowedo vzw for
supporting my research. Thanks to
my Ph.D. supervisor, Dr. Geert Van
Hove, and my Ph.D. cosupervisor, Dr.
Hendrik Pinxten, Ghent University.
For proofreading, feedback, and personal
assistance on drafts of this article,
I am very grateful to Dr. Yerker
Andersson, Dr. Susan Burch, Robert
C. Johnson, and the Office of International
Programs and Services at
Gallaudet University, and to Griet
Roets and Dr. Mieke Van Herreweghe
at Ghent University. I also thank
Rossana Reis, Cathy McCormack,
Corrie Tijsseling, and Delphine le
Maire.
This article is based on my Ph.D.
research on deaf empowerment,
identity, and agency in Flemish deaf
people and international deaf people
at Gallaudet University. Preliminary research
findings and a report of the
study in Flanders were published by
Ghent University in 2005: De Clerck,
G. (2005). WAKE UP WAKE UP. Stories
of Growth, Strength and Fire. MEET
MEET, VISIT VISIT: Nomadic Deaf
Identities, Deaf Dream Worlds, and
the Imagination Leading to Translocal
Deaf Activism. Ghent, Belgium:
Ghent University, Department of Special
Education. Some of the data were
also presented in the I. King Jordan
Lecture Series: The Legacy of DPN, at
Gallaudet University, on March 7,
2006, in a panel presentation titled
“Deaf Empowerment in Belgium and
the Influence of DPN Spirit on Flemish
Deaf People.”
Correspondence concerning the
present article should be addressed to
Goedele De Clerck, Palingstraat 61,
2870 Puurs, Belgium; e-mail Goedele.
DeClerck@UGent.be; fax 032 3 899
62 00.—The Author.
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
17

DEAF WAYS OF EDUCATION LEADING TO EMPOWERMENT
References
Braidotti, R. (1998). Difference, diversity, and
nomadic subjectivity. Retrieved November
23, 2005, from http://www.let.uu.nl/~Rosi.
Braidotti/personal/rosilecture.html
Breivik, J. (2005). Deaf identities in the making:
Local lives, transnational connections.
Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Breivik, J., Haualand, H., & Solvang, P. (2002).
Rome—A temporary deaf city! Deaflympics
2001 (Working Paper No. 2–2003). Bergen,
Norway: Stein Rokken Center for Deaf Studies,
University of Bergen. Retrieved October
12, 2005, from http://www.ub.uib.no/elpub/
rookkan/N/N02–02.pdf
Broekaert, E., Bogaerts, J., & Clement, J. P.
(1994). Wat doven zeggen: Onderzoek
naar de socio-educatieve leefsituatie van
volwassen doven en slechthorenden uit het
buitengewoon onderwijs in Vlaanderen.
[What deaf people say: Research on the social-educational
life situation of adult deaf
and hard of hearing people with special education
backgrounds in Flanders]. Leuven,
Belgium: Garant.
Buyens, M. (1990). Commentaar [Editor’s comment].
Onze Vriend, 66(7), 1.
Buyens, M. (2005). De dove persoon, zijn
gebarentaal en het dovenonderwijs. [The
deaf person, his sign language, and deaf education].
Antwerpen, Belgium: Garant.
Chamberlin, J. (1997). A working definition of
empowerment. Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Journal, 20(4), 43–46.
Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without
us: Disability, oppression, and empowerment.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Christiansen, J. B., & Barnartt, S. N. (1995).
Deaf president now! The 1988 revolution at
Gallaudet University. Washington, DC: Gallaudet
University Press.
De Clerck, G. (2005). WAKE UP WAKE UP. Stories
of growth, strength, and fire. MEET
MEET, VISIT VISIT: Nomadic deaf identities,
deaf dream worlds, and the imagination
leading to translocal deaf activism.
Ghent, Belgium: Ghent University.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Handbook of
qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
De Weerdt, K., Vanhecke, E., Van Herreweghe,
M., & Vermeerbergen, M. (2002). De
dovengemeenschap in Vlaanderen: Doorlichting,
sensibilisering, en standaardisering
van de Vlaamse Gebarentaal. Luik 2:
Lexicografisch onderzoek. Eindrapport
[The deaf community in Flanders: Investigation,
sensitization, and standardization
of Flemish Sign Language. Part 2: Lexicographic
research. Final report]. Ghent, Belgium:
Ghent University.
D’Hoore, R., Vandevelde, P., & Verstraete, F.
(Eds.). (1998). Eindrapport over het onderzoek
naar de status van de gebarentaal in
Vlaanderen [Final report about the research
18
on the status of sign language in Flanders].
Destelbergen, Belgium: Cultuur voor Doven
vzw.
Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (1996). Composing
ethnography. Alternative forms of creative
writing. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Erting, C. (1996). Introduction. In C. Erting, R. C.
Johnson, D. L. Smith, & B. D. Snider (Eds.),
The Deaf way: Perspectives from the international
conference on Deaf culture (pp.
xxiii–xxxi). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University
Press.
Fosshaug, S. (2004). Deaf sports: An empowerment
perspective. WFD News, 17(2), 5–6.
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed.
New York: Continuum.
Gerday, C., & Thomas, V. (2001). L’histoire des
sourds [History of the deaf]. Lieèagge, Belgium:
Centre Robert Dresse.
Goodley, D., Lawthom, R., Clough, P., & Moore,
M. (2004). Researching life stories: Method,
theory, and analyses in a biographical age.
London: Routledge Falmer.
Harris, A., & Enfield, S. (2003). Disability, equality,
and human rights: A training manual
for development and humanitarian organisations.
Oxford, England: Oxfam Publishing.
Heyerick, I. (2006). Flemish Sign Language
(VGT) unanimously recognized. Retrieved
October 31, 2006, from the Fevlado Web site:
http://www.fevlado.be/themas/gebarentaal/
overzicht.aspx
Jankowski, K. A. (1997). Deaf empowerment:
Emergence, struggle, and rhetoric. Washington,
DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Ladd, P. (2003). Understanding Deaf culture:
In search of Deafhood. Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Lane, H. (1993). The mask of benevolence. New
York: Vintage Books.
Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2003). Practical
research: Planning and design. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Le Maire, B. (1996). Joseph Henrion: Premier
professeur sourd de Belgique [Joseph Henrion.
First deaf teacher in Belgium]. Liège,
Belgium: Centre Robert Dresse.
Le Maire, B. (1997). Histoire des sourds en Belgique,
en France, et dans les autres pays:
Deuxième partie [History of the deaf in Belgium,
France, and other countries: Part 2].
Liège, Belgium: Centre Robert Dresse.
List, G. (2003). Life histories of the deaf in an
oralist world: Preliminary reflections on a pilot
project. In R. Fischer & H. Lane (Eds.),
Looking back: A reader on the history of
deaf communities and their sign languages
(pp. 503–514). Hamburg, Germany: Signum.
Loots, G., Devise, I., Lichtert, G., Hoebrechts,
N., Van De Ginste, C., & De Bruyne, I.
(2003). De Gemeenschap van doven en
slechthorenden in Vlaanderen: Communicatie,
taal en verwachtingen omtrent
maatschappelijke toegankelijkheid [The
community of deaf and hard of hearing
people in Flanders: Communication, language,
and expectations of access to society].
Ghent, Belgium: Cultuur voor Doven
vzw.
Monaghan, L., Schmaling, C., Nakamura, K., &
Turner, G. H. (Eds.). (2003). Many ways to
be deaf: International variation in Deaf
communities. Washington, DC: Gallaudet
University Press.
Moos, R. H. (1990). Coping responses inventory
manual. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University,
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral
Sciences.
Mottez, B. (1993). The deaf mute banquets and
the birth of the deaf movement. In R. Fischer
& H. Lane (Eds.), Looking back: A reader on
the history of deaf communities and their
sign languages (pp. 143–155). Hamburg,
Germany: Signum.
Murray, J. (in press). Coequality and transnational
studies: Understanding deaf lives. In
D. Bauman (Ed.), Sightings: Explorations in
deaf studies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Padden, C., & Humphries, T. (1988). Deaf in
America: Voices from a culture. Boston:
Harvard University Press.
Pease, B. (2002). Rethinking empowerment: A
postmodern reappraisal for emancipation
practice. Sociale Interventie, 11(3), 29–37.
Reilly, C. B. (1995). A deaf way of education:
Interaction among children in a Thai
boarding school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Maryland, College
Park.
Roets, G., Ramboer, I., Verstraeten, M., Demaagd,
M., Van Hove, G., & Vanderplasschen,
W. (2005). Op zoek naar werk met
mensen met psychische problemen [Looking
for employment with people who have
psychological problems]. Ghent, Belgium:
Academia Press.
Roets, G., Reinaart, R., & Van Hove, G. (in
press). Intersecting the disciplinary characters
of gender studies and disability studies:
Discovering a sense of nomadic subjectivity
throughout Rosa’s life story. Journal of Gender
Studies.
Scheiris, I., & Raemdonck, L. (in press). Ongehoord
verleden: Doofbewustzijn in historisch
perspectief. [Unheard past: Deaf
awareness from a historical perspective].
Ghent, Belgium: Fevlado-Diversus vzw.
Soto, A. M. (2003). The awakening. In G. Taylor
& A. Darby (Eds.), Deaf identities (pp.
258–267). Coleford, England: Douglas
McLean.
Spradley, J. P. (1997). The ethnographic interview.
New York: Wadsworth.
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in
the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative
research: Grounded theory procedures
and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF

Studiereis naar Gallaudet, 26 februari tot 5
maart 1994 [Study trip to Gallaudet, 26 February
to 5 March 1994]. (1994). Fevladoblad,
70(4), 2–8.
Taylor, G., & Darby, A. (Eds.). (2003). Deaf identities.
Coleford, England: Douglas McLean.
Timmermans, N. (2005). The status of sign
language in Europe. London: Council of
Europe Publishing.
Van Herreweghe, M. (1995). De Vlaams-
Belgische gebarentaal: Een eerste verkenning
[Flemish-Belgian Sign Language: A first exploration].
Ghent, Belgium: Academia Press.
Van Herreweghe, M. (2002). Turn-taking mechanisms
and active participation in meetings
with deaf and hearing participants in Flanders.
In C. Lucas (Ed.), Turn-taking, fingerspelling,
and contact in signed languages
(pp. 73–103). Washington, DC: Gallaudet
University Press.
Van Herreweghe, M., & Vermeerbergen, M.
(2004). Flemish Sign Language and some
risks of codification. In M. Van Herreweghe &
M. Vermeerbergen (Eds.), To the lexicon
and beyond: Sociolinguistics in European
Deaf communities (pp. 111–135). Washington,
DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Van Hove, G., & Roets, G. (2000). Empowerment
en volwassenen met een verstandelijke
beperking. [Empowerment and adults with
learning disabilities]. Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek,
39(12), 41–52.
Van Mulders, K. (2004). Informatie [Information].
Retrieved November 5, 2005, from
http://gebaren.ugent.be/informatie.php
Van Mulders, K. (2005). Name signs in Flemish
Sign Language. Deaf Worlds, 21, 49–78.
Vermeerbergen, M. (1996). ROOD KOOL TIEN
PERSOON IN: Morfosyntactische aspecten
van Gebarentaal [RED CABBAGE TEN
PERSON IN: Morphosyntactic aspects of
sign language]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels,
Belgium.
Widell, J. (2000). The Danish Deaf culture in European
and Western society. In A. Bergmann
& T. Ravn (Eds.), Deaf language culture
(pp. 26–45). Destelbergen, Belgium: Cultuur
voor Doven vzw.
Wilson, A. (2005). The effectiveness of international
development assistance from American
organizations to Deaf communities in
Jamaica. American Annals of the Deaf, 150,
292–304.
Yang, G. (2000). The liminal effects of social
movements: Red Guards and the transformation
of identity. Sociology Forum, 15,
379–406.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design
and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
VOLUME 152, NO. 1, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF
160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
19

160
O n e H u n d r e d a n d S i x t y Y e a r s
356
E RRATA
On the cover of the Spring issue of the Annals (vol. 152, no. 1), the first article title
should read “Meeting Global Deaf Peers, Visiting Ideal Deaf Places: Deaf Ways of Education
Leading to Empowerment, An Exploratory Case Study” rather than “An Explanatory
Case Study. The Annals regrets any inconvenience or confusion this error may have
caused our readers.
VOLUME 152, NO. 3, 2007 AMERICAN ANNALS OF THE DEAF