{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023961661341853034, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.670212765957447, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Deaf Culture and Competing Discourses in a Residential School for the Deaf: “Can Do” Versus “Can't Do”

From an ethnographic case study of a state-funded residential school for the Deaf, the authors employed Critical Discourse Analysis to identify competing discourses in the talk of educators. These discourses are embedded in the historical oppression and labeling of deaf people as disabled and the development of Deaf culture as a counter-discourse. Implications include changing teacher/administrator hiring practices, improving professional development options, and distributing power between Deaf and hearing educators.