A Journey into the Deaf-World (review)

A Journey into the Deaf-World by Harlan Lane, Robert Hoffmeister, and Ben Bahan (DawnSignPress, San Diego, CA 1996, 512 pages, hardcover) The authors intend this book as an introduction to deafness, Deaf culture, and signed languages for use by hearing professionals who work with children , youth, and adults who are deaf, particularly those who are culturally Deaf. All three authors are passionate advocates for Deaf culture and readers who approach the book understanding this will find much to like. Dr. Lane, a celebrated historian on deafness, is well known for his strong views in support of Deaf culture. His When the Mind Hears is a major contribution to the literature on deafness. Dr. Hoffmeister is director of the Boston University Deaf Studies program, and an active leader of Children of Deaf Adults (CODA). Dr. Bahan is an assistant professor of Deaf Studies at Gallaudet University, and is a vice president of DawnSignPress, the publisher of this book. The former two are hearing, the latter is culturally Deaf. Journey offers an excellent overview of linguistic features of American Sign Language, expresses a deep appreciation for Deaf culture and its history , and offers a strong review of the state-of-the-art in deafness education today. These features make Journey a solid choice for supplemental reading by students in ASL classes and a suitable candidate for supplemental reading in university teacher-training programs and for inservice training for teachers and teacher aides in public school programs. Ironically, Journey's weaknesses keep pace with its strengths. Although intended for hearing professionals, Journey contains a lot of anger, most of which is directed toward hearing Americans, ostensibly the book's primary audience. Of greater concern to me is that the authors make little pretense at academic objectivity. Rather, Journey presents an impassioned argument on behalf of Deaf culture, and an equally passionate denunciation of the dominant hearing culture. The authors state, for example, that the American Deaf community did not embrace Gallaudet University until after the Deaf President Now movement — a claim I find surprising, given the deep affection I and others of my generation have long felt for Gallaudet. They add that the dominant hearing culture's aims include eradicating Deaf culture, which also strikes me as a stretch. Most hearing people I know are genuinely interested in understanding deafness, and in being more sensitive to people like me. How else could one explain high enrollments in ASL classes nationwide , year after year? Although the statements in Journey about Gallaudet and about the general public's attitudes toward deafness do contain germs of truth, a more balanced articulation of those core concepts would be more effective in sensitizing Journey's primary audience. To further illustrate how passion overwhelms scholarship, consider Journey's treatment of bilingual approaches in education. According to the authors, the research evidence on bilingualism is unequivocal in showing its effectiveness. They urge that the Bilingual Education Act (BEA) be used to finance ASL/English bilingualism in schools and programs serving deaf students. I chaired the Commission on Education of the Deaf (COED), which explored bilingual approaches in the education of the deaf. While seeking implementation of the 52 recommendations in the Commission's report I learned that bilingualism, in fact, is a hotly controversial approach on which the research evidence is sharply divided. I also learned that the BEA was far less promising as a vehicle for promoting ASL than the COED first thought (and than the book's authors assume it to be). Only very small sums of money would be available to finance ASL/ English bilingualism in schools and programs serving deaf students, even if ASL were added to the list of languages approved for BEA funding — itself an unlikely event. Also, in 1992, I helped bring together some of the nation's top scholars and educators to debate this evidence as it applies to bilingual/ bicultural (bi/bi) approaches in deafness education (see Walworth, Moores, & O'Rourke, 1992). Our conclusion , as summarized in my closing chapter to that book, was that we had a great many unanswered questions and unquestioned answers. We still do. Journey's authors are unaware of, or choose to overlook, evidence on bilingual...