148 Deaf Epistemologies, Identity, and Learning
Flights oF Nomadic deaF citizeNship aNd Further
emaNcipatioN iN Flemish deaF parliameNt
The former section threw a light on different views of deaf community members
and deaf clubs, and their questions in relation to societal transitions and the chal-
lenges of a sustainable future. This section starts with perspectives that emerged in
dialogues with deaf schools and teachers of deaf children, and pertinent questions
in these settings. These perspectives reveal both uncertainty and a need for further
expertise in relation to identity development, especially concerning the changing
educational landscape and diverse population of deaf learners. This section then
aims to respond to these needs, by providing further insight into transitions from a
second stage of emancipation that concentrates on collective identity, to individual
explorations of third-stage “flights” of emancipation, as these trajectories are called
in nomadic theory. I argue that the challenges surrounding deaf identity are related
to moving away from a second stage of emancipation. These dynamics are currently
overshadowed by advocacy, achievement, deaf studies theories, and the promotion
of well-known notions of identity; however, dialogues in Flemish Deaf Parliament re-
veal alternative forms of deaf citizenship, which manifest in diverse ways. Here these
flights of deaf citizenship are illustrated through the stories of community members
engaging in dialogues on age, entrance and inclusion, success, border/boundary
marking, intergenerational interaction, and migration.
During my preparation for the international conference titled “Sign Language,
Sustainable Development, and Equal Opportunities,” that preceded the homony-
mous volume (De Clerck & Paul, 2016), I worked with deaf schools and clubs to
provide another platform for dialogue on sustainable responses to transitions. The
conference was held at Ghent University, Belgium, on 29 and 30 April 2014. Identity
was a central theme in this platform, as well as in Flemish Deaf Parliament. I met
with school staff, directors, and itinerant teachers to discuss challenges they were
experiencing and strengths in their services and to explore how I could support
them in their work.
The schools differed in their populations and pedagogical approaches (including
their views on Flemish Sign Language) and, as such, also in their range of initiatives.
However, all the schools shared concerns on deaf identity formation in young peo-
ple, particularly in mainstreamed settings. The challenges included role models,
teaching methods, extracurricular activities to enable deaf peers to socialize, and
the emergence of multiple deaf identities (across intersecting axes of gender, sex-
uality, ethnicity, disability, and diverse educational backgrounds). The schools also
tried to find their own position between deaf identity discourses promoted by Fe-
vlado, their own historically situated ideology, and recent scientific debates. For the
latter, schools that followed developments in the Netherlands referred to Knoors
and Marschark (2012), who argued that, from a linguistic perspective, bilingual
education may no longer be adequate for the current population of deaf children.
In one school, teachers felt a need for deaf professionals and role models to
support pupils in their identity process. Two schools expressed a need for their
students, especially those in vocational programs and with learning difficulties, to
participate in the deaf community and have a “voice” in debates on deaf education.