Invited Article: The Bright Triad and Five Propositions: Toward a Vygotskian Framework for Deaf Pedagogy and Research

Skyer, Michael E.

doi:10.1353/aad.2020.0004

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Developing the broadest possible pedagogical-discursive toolkit is the only way to differentiate for the heterogenous discursive toolkits of deaf learners. All deafperceptible modes are equipotential and necessary for teaching diverse deaf learners in an interaction framework (Skyer 2020;Skyer and Cochell 2020;Swanwick et al 2022). My description of MT elevates non-language and quasi-language modes to be on par with language modes and suggests that communication transduction is of equal importance to language transduction.…”

Section: On Discourse and Axiologymentioning

confidence: 88%

“…My stance about reclassifications is an empirical affirmation of Wei's (2022) claim that researchers and teachers must "refus[e] to privilege particular modes and methods of meaning making over others" (p. 1). My proposed shift is foundationally oriented toward multimodal discourse analysis, as opposed to linguistics, and configures multimodality (not language) as the fundamental basis for ethical pedagogy and curriculum (Kress 2010) in deaf education (Skyer 2020(Skyer , 2022. My study of MT empirically describes what much of translanguaging theory only suggests.…”

Section: Reclassifying Translanguaging As Multimodal Transductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…My findings were interpreted through a conceptual framework about dissensus and (Rancière 2010) axiological conflicts of deaf pedagogy (Kress 2010;Vygotsky 1993). It is beyond the scope of this article to fully discuss the history of dissensual conflict in deaf education (See: Skyer 2021), particularly in relation to sign languages, but it should be noted that several dilemmas exist about the epistemic worth of deaf people's learning and teaching using visual modes (Skyer 2020). One element is an ongoing devaluation and subsequent marginalization of multimodal discourses in deaf education (Thoutenhoofd 2010).…”

Section: Impetusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, communication transduction and MT are pedagogic in origin and orientation and readily bypass the limits of languages, specifically the limits of language in deaf pedagogy and its research traditions. While multimodal discourses can be mutually comprehensible for all deaf agents (Skyer 2023), if they are devalued in research, they will also be devalued in pedagogy, curriculum, assessment, learning, and in the administration of deaf education.…”

Section: Reclassifying Translanguaging As Multimodal Transductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Multimodal Transduction and Translanguaging in Deaf Pedagogy

Skyer

2023

Languages

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multimodal transduction is an interaction of teaching and learning. It traverses changes in epistemology and ontology through judgements about axiology. Using multimodal transduction (MT), students and teachers transcend languages and employ nonlanguage and quasi-language modes (e.g., drawing, color, line, math, infographics, and even sculptures). This study uses qualitative empirical data via grounded theory and case study designs to make theoretical claims about MT in a deaf higher-educational context. The data for this multi-year project were sourced through interviews, document analysis, observations, and stimulated recall with six university professors who are deaf. My analysis shows that these deaf faculty-members employ MT to convert inaccessible modes to become accessible for deaf learners. By changing modalities through MT, deaf faculty enhance comprehensibility and equity for deaf learners. This theoretical account of MT contends, extends, and clarifies aspects of translanguaging theory. As I argue, both operations transform power relations in the classroom by addressing ethics through deaf-centric aesthetics. In deaf education, MT is equally important for faculty in teaching and students’ learning. MT is widely and creatively used, owing to its flexibility and adaptivity. MT is useful for all deaf agents, regardless of additional disabilities, language competencies, or language deprivation. The MT process is inexplicit and undertheorized in the literature about deaf pedagogy and in translanguaging research. My study provides empirical support for theoretical claims about underlying mechanisms of translanguaging. One focus is to explore how MT and translanguaging (and similar theories) align or diverge. I argue that MT is a core mechanism that supports changes between all modes of discourse that enable information exchange, including but surpassing languages and translanguaging. In sum, MT is an interaction whereby deaf agents change the forms of knowledge; meanwhile, new realities and new power relations are manifested.

show abstract

Section: On Discourse and Axiologymentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Reclassifying Translanguaging As Multimodal Transductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Impetusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reclassifying Translanguaging As Multimodal Transductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multimodal Transduction and Translanguaging in Deaf Pedagogy

Skyer

2023

Languages

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 The present review focuses on the communicative needs of those people who irrespective of how they self-identify use sign language as their primary/preferred method of communication and who, therefore, would prefer sign over text while completing self-reported questionnaires. These people have historically been experiencing inequalities in accessing appropriate education (Skyer, 2020), healthcare or employment (Grote & Izagaren, 2020), or simply general information (du Feu & Chovaz, 2014). Evidence suggests that, overall, deaf people experience a greater number of mental health problems (du Feu & Chovaz, 2014;Horne & Pennington, 2010) and have a poorer quality of life relative to the hearing population (Cieśla et al, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%