Palacky University Olomouc a Comparative Study Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Palacky University Olomouc Institute of Special Education Studies, Faculty of Education A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan Regions and Czech Republic Ge Chen ME.d PhD Study Program——Special Education Promoter: Prof. PhDr. PaedDr. Miloň Potměšil, Ph.D. Olomouc 2014 Ge Chen A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan regions and Czech Republic Declaration of Originality I, Ge Chen (Student number 80024895) declare that this dissertation entitled “A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han Region, Tibetan Region, and Czech Republic” and submitted as partial requirement for Ph.D. postgradual study program of Special Education is my original work and that all the sources in any form (e.g. ideas, figures, texts, tables, etc.) that I have used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged in the text as well as in the list of reference. Signature Date Ge Chen A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan regions and Czech Republic Acknowledgements At the end of my hard and challenging study, I wish to express my sincere gratitude and respect to the following people who contributed fully towards the completion of my study: My supervisor Prof. PhDr. PaedDr. Miloň Potměšil, Ph.D. provided much needed guidance in my four years study, especially throughout the process of research design, questionnaire survey implementation, and dissertation writing. The members of my dissertation committee-- Prof. PaedDr. Milan Valenta, Ph.D, doc. Mgr. Kateřina Vitásková, Ph.D, Mgr. Jiří Langer, Ph. D --for their suggestions, and thoughtful questions and comments, which undoubtedly improved the quality of my dissertation. The principle of Deaf community in Prague, Sárka Prokopiusová and the principle of Deaf community in Olomouc;The headmaster of Ganzi Special Schools, Liu Yunchang; The headmaster of Lhasa Special school, Guisang; The principle of Sichuan Disabled Persons Art Group, Ming Jun; The headmaster of Luohe Special School, Jin Feng and lots of staff in these groups, such as Tiao Xiaoling, Zaxi Pengcuo, Chongqu Zhen, Luofan, and etc. who had helped me collect questionnaires for my research. Secretary of Office for Foreign Affairs in Faculty of Education, Emilie Petříková, Jitka Kralikova, the and my classmates and friends, Ludimila Matanová, Monika Kunhartova, Evana, Eva Urbanovska, Michelle, my Chinese colleagues Xie Yuhan, Lei Yong and Zhou Yu, who had provided me with necessary help when I was in need and had accompanied the process of my studying. The professor Venetta Lampropoulou in Patras University, Greece who gave me lots of carefully guidance and great advices in my research when I took part in the Erasmus program in Patras University. My pervious supervisor, colleagues, and friends Prof. Badeng Nima, Prof. Liu Shenglin, Peng Yan, He Fangqi, Wu Chunyan and Huang Lihui in Sichuan Normal University who gave me wonderful suggestions Ge Chen A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan regions and Czech Republic for my studies and commented me with the headmaster and principle of special education in Han and Tibetan region. The experiences and responds of respondents, Ying, Hui, Hong, Bianzhen, Baima, He Fangqi and all the respondents who participated in the survey enrich my research. I must to say thanks to all of them. My family in China, my husband, my parents, my parents-in-law and my younger sister always stood behind me and encouraged me, especially when I study in Czech. My younger sister and her husband take care of my old parents. My husband, Li Xiaoshan, unconditional supports my choice when we had been married only one year. He gave me great support and strength to insist on studying when I was in Czech, the “thank you” entirely inadequate to tell him my feelings. Ge Chen A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan regions and Czech Republic Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................... 1 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Abstract ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Section 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 6 1. Origins of Present Problem ............................................................................................... 7 1.1“Tragedy” and “Difference”: The views to deafness ................................................... 7 1.2 “Han”,“Tibetan” and “Czech”: Three cultural contexts ........................................... 8 2. Research purpose ............................................................................................................ 14 3. Research questions .......................................................................................................... 15 4. The structure of present research .................................................................................... 16 Section 2: Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 17 1. Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 17 1.1 Deafness .................................................................................................................... 17 1.2 Deaf Community ....................................................................................................... 21 1.3 Deaf Culture .............................................................................................................. 26 1.4 Ethnic Minority Group .............................................................................................. 28 2. The theory of Deaf Identity ............................................................................................. 30 2.1 The theory of Deaf Identity by Neil S. Glickman ..................................................... 30 2.2 The ideas of subsequent researchers ......................................................................... 34 3. The theory of deaf identity development ........................................................................ 35 4. Influential factors of deaf identity development ................................................................. 37 4.1 The environment of family ........................................................................................ 38 4.2 Educational experience ............................................................................................. 40 4.3 The mode of communication ..................................................................................... 42 4.4 The status of hearing loss .......................................................................................... 44 5. Summary ......................................................................................................................... 45 Section 3: Theoretical Approaches .................................................................................................. 47 1. Three levels of cultural theory ............................................................................................ 47 1.1 Cultural Iceberg Model by Edward T. Hall ............................................................... 48 1.2 The Onion Theory of Culture by Gerard Hendrik Hofstede ..................................... 49 1.3 The Model of Organizational Culture by Edgar Henry Schein ................................. 50 1.4 Three Levels Culture Theory in present research ...................................................... 52 2. Social Constructionism ....................................................................................................... 53 2.1 Symbolic interactionism ............................................................................................ 53 2.2 Social Constructionism and self ................................................................................ 55 Section 4: Research methods .......................................................................................................... 57 1. Research methodology .................................................................................................... 57 1.1 Combination of quantitative and qualitative research ............................................... 58 1.2 Both emic and etic approaches .................................................................................. 60 2. Concrete research methods ............................................................................................. 62 2.1 Comparative research method ................................................................................... 63 Ge Chen A Comparative Study of Deaf Identity in Chinese Han, Tibetan regions and Czech Republic 2.2 Questionnaire Survey ................................................................................................ 64 2.3 Interview ................................................................................................................... 75 2.4 Narrative inquiry ....................................................................................................... 80 Section 5: Results ...........................................................................................................................