Introduction
In America, we strive for equality in the workplace, at home, and at school. The US Constitution is our foremost protection against discrimination and oppression. As recently as 40 years ago, we established legislation to protect Civil Rights for African Americans, and, most recently, we passed the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for disabled people. But in the real world we are not equal. There are many classic examples of inequality in America at different levels.
 

One of the most important components of Deaf Studies programs is an analysis of the power structure in the Deaf community. We struggle daily for equality without and within the Deaf Community. To work together success fully at the political level in the American mainstream society, we first need to understand ourselves in relation to the power structure in society and in the Deaf community.
 

Who has more power in the Deaf community: native ASL users or signed English users? Deaf adults with Deaf parents or hearing parents? Deaf people from mainstream schools or Deaf schools? Those who choose to use speech or those who don't choose to use speech? Born-deaf or deafened people? The author of this paper approaches these questions by developing an understanding of hierarchies of power and paradigms currently prevalent in the Deaf community, and proposing strategies to challenge the hierarchies and shift paradigms.

Parallels of Oppression
 

An important part of the development of my own understanding has been to see clearly the parallel between Deaf people's experience and the experience of other oppressed groups. Patricia Collins, an American black feminist, challenges society by developing the social construction of a black feminist theory:
 

Black women's everyday acts of resistance challenge two prevailing approaches to studying the consciousness of oppressed groups. One approach claims that subordinate groups identify with the powerful and have no valid independent interpretation of their own oppression. The second approach assumes that the oppressed are less human than their rulers and, therefore, are less capable of articulating their own standpoint. Both approaches see any independent consciousness expressed by an oppressed group as being not of the group's own making and/or inferior to the perspective of the dominant group.
 

The result of oppression is the internalization of the approaches that invalidate the oppressed group. For example, there are some Deaf people who identify with the powerful (hearing people) and seem to have no valid independent interpretation of their own oppression. Also, many Deaf people think they are inferior to hearing people, therefore, they believe that they are less capable of articulating their own standpoint. Looking at the hierarchies provides a base for analyzing this internalized oppression.
 

Hierarchies of Power
 

The following definitions of power are useful:
 

Wrong (1979) offers this basic definition: "Power is the capacity of some persons to produce intended and foreseen effects on others." He moves on to differentiate intentional from unintentional influence. Intentional influence may be achieved through authority (a contractual acceptance of another as competent to wield power), manipulation (concealed power, persuasion, argumentation), and force (physical or psychic).
 

The best way to describe power is through interaction in a multiplicity of relationships (Foucault). Power comes from below as well as above, in a shifting relationship of force and resistance. Foucault encourages us to study the specifics of power relationships within a particular institution at a particular time (Kramarae, Schulz, & O'Barr, 1984, p. 12). Power can be described by looking at the hierarchy of types of people who are most powerful. The following is a general hierarchy of power as it operates in society:

 

This hierarchy of power tells us that generally, from the point of view of Deaf people, the most salient feature is hearing status. All hearing people, regardless of gender and minority groups, are placed above all Deaf people. Secondly, race and gender are important to get to the top of the hierarchy of power. White hearing men have the most power, especially in terms of economics and politics. As with any oppressive structure, the people on the bottom are the ones most aware of how it operates. When I make this presentation to hearing people, they have never thought of it this way; Deaf people understand it at once.

I propose that there are two hierarchies of status and power in the Deaf community. One hierarchy represents status in the community of hearing people from the educators' point of view; the other hierarchy represents status in and access to the Deaf community. The second hierarchy is the direct opposite of the first one. The first one is a direct reflection of the general hierarchy of power already described.
 

In the Deaf community, we are under pressure from educators about the importance of being like hearing people. They say they are preparing us to live in a world of hearing people by training us to talk and behave like hearing people. Really, they are preparing us to take our place in the hierarchy. As a result, some Deaf people believe that it is better to be like hearing people by wearing a hearing aid or talking or signing in English. As Deaf people see it, the educators place Deaf people on the following hierarchy depending on how they fit into the "hearing community":

 

The most salient feature of this hierarchy is cultural and linguistic identity: the most powerful person is an ASL user and attended a Deaf school or is culturally Deaf. The hearing person is the least powerful.

What will happen if I combine both hierarchies by overlapping the transparencies? You cannot read the two overlapping transparencies; that is a visual image of the confusion Deaf people experience. The conflict of the internalized hierarchies creates tension and struggle for Deaf people.

Deaf people who are caught between two hierarchies tend to feel confused about their identities and their use of languages. The questions those deaf people ask themselves all the time are:
 

• Where do I fit—in the Deaf community or the hearing community?
• Am I better off to be like hearing people or Deaf people?
• Should I place my deaf child in a Deaf school or a mainstream school?
• Should I use ASL or English with my deaf child?
• Should I call myself "HH" or "Hearing Impaired"?
• If I use ASL, will my English or my speech deteriorate?
   

Those deaf people are ambivalent toward their languages, ASL and English, and their cultures, Deaf and American mainstream. They feel they must choose one over another. They believe that if they embrace ASL and Deaf culture, they must give up English and American mainstream culture or vice versa. Deaf people in America face a competition between two languages and two cultures. Once we understand why this happens in the Deaf community, we begin to break away from old definitions of ourselves. If we succeed, we experience a paradigm shift.

Paradigm Shift
 

Paradigm shift refers to a conscious and deliberate "shift" in the way we view the world—our way of seeing and thinking about the world and every thing in it. The word "paradigm" literally means a pattern or a model. It is a set of rules and regulations. Sometimes we are conscious of these sets of rules, and sometimes we are not. They establish boundaries for us—and tell us how to solve problems successfully within those boundaries (Tools for Transformation: A Community Empowerment claiming Cultural Traditions).
 

The power of a paradigm is that it shapes our perceptions and practices in nearly unconscious, and thus unquestioned, ways. It shapes what we look at, and how we look at things. As educators, activists, researchers, professionals working with Deaf people, we are all influenced by the dominant paradigm, or by an alternative paradigm.
 

To understand Deaf people as an oppressed group, we must look at the historical development of the dominant paradigm used to define Deaf people. Once conscious of our oppression, we can redefine ourselves and shift to an alternate paradigm. The dominant paradigm is the pathological or hearingization" (Nover) paradigm; the alternate paradigm is cultural or "The Deaf Person." This presentation will give examples of paradigm shifts which indicate we have the power to redefine what it means to be Deaf:
 

These paradigms show two completely different approaches to defining what it means to be Deaf. At first we Deaf people believed that we are power less to change the definitions of ourselves. Now we begin to understand our power. By examining and consciously shifting paradigms, we are really meaning makers (Paul, 1992) and change agents. We develop our own self- definitions by shifting to the alternate paradigm. Yes, we are in the process of change which is chaotic and reveals our confusion and ambivalence. But I believe we are in the process of changing for the better.
We can think even more boldly about paradigm shifts by developing three types of models: The Deaf Person Model, The Deaf Teacher Model, The Deaf Parent Model. The shift to the Deaf Person Model is demonstrated above. The shift from the Hearing Teacher Model to the Deaf Teacher Model means that we have been learning the hearing way of teaching Deaf children. Now is the time to teach hearing graduate students the Deaf way to teach Deaf children. Also, we should teach hearing parents with Deaf children the Deaf Parent Model of raising Deaf children.
 

Conclusion
Once we understand paradigm shifts and the hierarchies of power, we must ask how we can resolve the conflict of the two hierarchies. The answer lies in the role of education in identity development among Deaf children. Deaf community members and educators have different views on how Deaf children should develop their identity. Educators impose a "hearing" identity on Deaf children and want them to mainstream into a larger community of hearing people.
 

The understanding of the hierarchies of status and social identity and the dynamics of power and oppression gives Deaf people tools for self-understanding and community building. With a clearer and stronger sense of their individual and community identity, they can go far in empowering other Deaf people. They can take control of the education of Deaf children and create a system that eliminates the ambivalence and power struggle between the two hierarchies. That's why it is very important to place the study of the power structure in the Deaf community in Deaf Studies programs.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 

Collins. P. H. (1989). The social construction of black feminist thought, signs. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 14(4), 745-773.

Kramarae, C., Schulz, M., & O'Barr, W. (1984). Introduction: Toward an understanding of language and power. In C. Kramarae, M. Schulz, & W. O'Barr (Eds.), Language and power. (p. 12). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Nover, S and Ruiz, R. (1992). ASL and language planning in deaf education. Unpublished manuscript, University of Arizona, College of Education, Tucson, AZ.

Paul, E (1992). Diversity and systems. Unpublished manuscript. Washington, DC.

Tools for transformation: A community empowerment approach to reclaiming cultural traditions. (nd.). The Illinois Prevention Resource Center (Ed.). (pp. 19-24).