The Effects of Family and Education Backgrounds on the Self- Identification of Deaf and Hard-Of-Hearing Persons in Utah
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 5-2000 The Effects of Family and Education Backgrounds on the Self- Identification of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Persons in Utah Petra M. Rose Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Rose, Petra M., "The Effects of Family and Education Backgrounds on the Self-Identification of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Persons in Utah" (2000). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 4815. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4815 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EFFECTS OF FAMIL Y AND EDUCATION BACKGROUNDS ON THE SELF-IDENTIFICATION OF DEAF AND HARD-OF-HEARING PERSONS IN UTAH by Petra M. Rose A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In Sociology Approved: Gary Kiger Ann Leffler Major Professor Committee Member AIUle M. Butler Jon Moris Committee Member Committee Member J. Freeman King Pamela J. Riley Committee Member Committee Member Noelle Cockett Interim Dean of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2000 11 Copyright © Petra M. Rose 2000 All Rights Reserved HI ABSTRACT The Effects of Family and Education Backgrounds on the Self-Identification of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Persons in Utah by Petra M. Rose, Doctor of Philosophy Utah State University, 2000 "'. Major Professor: Gary Kiger Department: Sociology This study examined the effects of family and educational background factors on three dimensions of social identity among 35 deaf and hard-of-hearing respondents in Utah. Three dimensions of social identity- were distinguished: self-definition (i.e., the degree to which a respondent defined himself or herself as deaf), self-evaluation (i.e., the degree to which a respondent attached value and emotional significance to identifying himself or herself as deaf), and group introjection (i.e., the degree of commitment, belonging, and loyalty a respondent attached to membership in the Deaf community). Semi-structured, videotaped interviews were conducted with 35 deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals in Utah. Respondents were recruited via snowball sampling techniques. The results of the qualitative data analysis showed that the respondents identified themselves as: (a) non-deaf (i.e., little identification with a Deaf identity or with the Deaf community), (b) marginalized (i.e., identifying with neither a hearing identity nor with a Deaf identity), and (c) big "D" Deaf (i.e., strong identification with a Deaf identity and IV the Deaf community). Strong family support, for example, family members who used sign language, was associated with strong self-identification as Deaf, positive self evaluation, and strong group introjection. Similarly, supportive educational experiences, for example, attendance at a residential school for deaf students, were associated with strong self-identification as Deaf, positive self-evaluation, and strong group introjection. Policy implications regarding parent education, school teacher in-service training, and medIcal services were discussed. (188 pages) v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind for the opportunity to learn about the agency's system and its educational programs. I would also like to thank the Deaf community members for their referrals to individuals for this study. In addition, I would especially like to t~ank my committee members, Professors Gary Kiger, Anne M. Butler, J. Freeman King, Ann Leffler, Jon Moris, and Pamela J. Riley, for their support and assistance throughout the entire process. I give a ~pecial thanks to my husband, Ricky, and children, Riehel, Ricke, and Renate, for their encouragement, understanding, and patience as I worked my way from the initial proposal to this final document. I could not have done it without all of you. Petra M. Rose VI CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ iii ACKN"OWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................... v LISTOFTABLES ............................................................................................................. viii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1 Statement of the Problem ................................... i ............................. .4 Social Structure................................................................................. 6 Objectives of the Study ..................................................................... 8 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURB ............................................................ 12 Introduction...................................................................................... 12 Identity Theory ................................................................................ 13 Social Identity Theory ..................................................................... 19 Self-Categorization, Theory ............................................................. 23 Identity and Social Identity Theory Summary ................................ 26 This Study's Approach ................................................................... 26 The Hearing W orId: Perception of the Deaf................................... 29 Hearing Parents with DeafChildren............................................... 35 Deaf Experience in Public School. ................................................. .40 The DeafWorld.............................................................................. 43 Deaf Parents ofDeafChildren....................................................... .49 DeafSchools ..................................................................................... 51 Summary......................................................................................... 54 III. METHODOLOGy...................................................................................... 57 Introduction .................................................................................... 57 Sample ............................................................................................ 58 Data Collection ................................................................................ 60 Research Questions ...... :.................................................................. 62 Operationalization of V ariables ...................................................... 63 Data Analysis .................................................................................. 69 Limitations ofthe Data.................................................................... 73 Predictions ...................................................................................... 76 Vll IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA.............................................................................. 78 Introduction ..................................................................................... 78 Dependent Variables ........................................................................ 79 Independent Variables: Diversity................................................... 103 Summary ........................................................................................ 146 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................ 147 Introduction .................................................................................. 147 Non-Deaf Group .......... : ................................................................. 148 Marginalized Group ...................................................................... 150 DeafGroup .................................................................................... 153 Conclusions ................................................................................... 157 Recommendations for Future Research ......................................... 15 8 REFERENCES: ................................................................................................................. 160 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 172 Appendix A. Informed Consent Form........................................... 173 Appendix B. Semi-Structured Interview ........................................... 175 CURRICULUM VITAE .................................................................................................... 179 VI11 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Number of Respondents Interviewed in Each Group ...................................... S9 2 Percentage Distribution for Relationship Between Family Background and Self-Definition ........................................................ 94 3 Percentage Distribution for Relationship Between Education Background and Self-Definition ................................................... 95 4 Percentage Distribution for Relationship Between Family Background and Self-Evaluation........................................................ 97 5 Percentage Distribution for Relationship Between Education Background and Self-Evaluation..................................................