A Dialogue on the Multiple Facets of Sustainability.

This chapter contains excerpts from a conversation among the contributors to Sign Language, Equal Opportunities, and Sustainable Development (De Clerck & Paul, 2016) during a workshop that preceded the International Conference on Sign Language, Sustainable Development, and Equal Opportunities (Ghent University, Belgium, April 2014). The objective of the conversation was to illustrate an open-ended, dialogical approach that added an interactive component to the book and inspired further thoughts and exchanges. Videos of the conversation were posted online by the European Union of the Deaf at http://www.eud.eu/news/university-gent/.

Writing Signed Languages: What For? What Form? A Response.

In his article in an American Annals of the Deaf special issue that also includes the present article, Grushkin divides his discussion of a written sign system into three basic parts. The first presents arguments against the development of a written form of American Sign Language; the second provides a rationale for a written form of ASL; the third advances opinions of the form such a system might take. The arguments in the first part are weak and reflect the same bias that historically has been shown against ASL itself. The third section advances some ideas that should provide the basis for interesting discussions. Among these are the relationship, if any, of a written sign language to English print, the extent to which it should be alphabetic and horizontal, and its role in the current American educational system.

One size does not fit all: individualized instruction in a standardized educational system.

This essay is based on a keynote address, "A Tour of the Horizons," presented to the 2012 annual conference of the Association of College Educators/Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ACE/DHH), held in Atlantic Beach, Florida.

Introduction: toward an understanding of epistemology and deafness.

The major concept of epistemology--or epistemologies--is discussed, as well as related terms such as paradigm and science. Also covered are two broad paradigms, the clinical and the cultural, that seem to drive theorizing, research, and practice regarding individuals who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing. The two paradigms emanate from different epistemologies and might account for much of the tension in research and practice. Finally, the authors present their view on the nature of scholarly inquiries-namely, that theory, research, and practice should adhere to the principles of a multiparadigmatic science.

Epistemologies, deafness, learning, and teaching.

The study of Deaf epistemologies is in a nascent stage relative to, e.g., the study of feminist or African American epistemologies. It has only recently begun attracting the widespread attention it deserves. The present article addresses Deaf epistemologies as they relate to the sometimes conflicting trends in American society and education. In a relatively short period, the education of deaf students has gone from an independent enterprise under the aegis of special education to heavy influence by No Child Left Behind legislation that applies to virtually all American students. American education at one and the same time embraces and celebrates diversity, imposes uniform, rigid learning standards for all children, and mandates that all children be tested in the same way. An oxymoron exists of individualized educational planning and one-size-fits-all curricula and assessment of academic achievement. Implications for teaching and learning of deaf students are explored.