COMPARACIÓN DE RESULTADOS

The life course perspective makes clear the fluid and dynamic nature of a post- secondary transition. Although the “deaf can” attitude is consistent across all of this study’s cases, no two post-secondary transitions will be the same for each respondent’s life course is different and reflects a different series of trajectories, turning points, transitions, and social influences. As such, it is important to explore the transitional choices of individuals over the life course and to understand the intersecting influences that shape their choices to pursue (or not pursue) higher education. While the participants in this study highlighted family, education, and Deaf community involvement as being key factors in their decision making processes, a broader and more theoretical approach can be adopted by investigating the different levels of social analysis. This framework can be useful in highlighting additional factors that should be considered in conjunction to those identified by my participants.

8.4.1 Macro

The life course is impacted by the broader social structure. For example, considering how history, time, and space shapes social institutions (i.e. government, the

economy, culture, etc.) is critical to understanding the resources, opportunities, and constraints that individuals will experience as a result of their social positions.

For deaf people, this consideration is particularly important. As touched on previously, social attitudes towards deafness have changed dramatically over the past few decades. Previously, Oralist views that perpetuated deafness as a disability were most common. During these times, deaf students were forced into programs where sign language was not accepted and verbal speech was mandated (Ladd 2003). More recent shifts towards the sociocultural model of disability now informs Ontario legislation and policy to encourage accessibility and equality, shaping new opportunities and resources available to deaf students at the meso level, including schooling environments, familial supports, and Deaf community involvement.

8.4.2 Meso

Macro institutions shape personal negotiations within meso level contexts. This level of analysis plays an important role in facilitating opportunities for efficacy development in a variety of different social settings. Participants in this study emphasized the role that their families, their schools, and their communities played in helping them to believe that ‘deaf can.’

First, familial resources significantly influence the plans that deaf persons in this study set for themselves. Parents who had saved for their education and who had high levels of economic capital to offset tuition costs, were encouraging of their children’s attendance at college or university. For example, Jill’s parents saved money for her so (unlike her mother), she could afford to pursue higher education. In comparison, until moving to her foster home, Beth’s family did not have enough money to facilitate her

transition to higher education. It was not until she moved to her new environment and was offered financial support by her foster placement organization and Children’s Aid Society, that she recognized this as a viable option.

Similarly, participants highlighted how hearing and deaf families can provide access to different types of cultural and social capital. Respondents who had deaf parents, like Jill and Taylor, acquired sign language more quickly and related to other deaf individuals at a younger age. These unique opportunities helped both women to start at their school for deaf students with a stronger linguistic background than many of their deaf peers from hearing homes, making their academic success more likely. They also fostered feelings of acceptance of their deafness, consistent with a matured Deaf identity. Seth and Beth on the other hand, did not learn sign language until they were teenagers, and had hearing parents that focused on integrating them into the ‘hearing world.’ Enrolled at mainstream schools, their difference from other students was made obvious by communication barriers and their academic performance reflected these limitations. Accordingly, familial knowledge of deafness and interpretation of hearing loss (ex. as a disability or as an identity) can impact the early experiences that deaf youth have and the resources and supports that are made available to them. These differences will influence the choices that parents make on behalf of their children, like where to send them to school and the peer groups they are a part, shaping the trajectories that they will follow and the ways in which self-efficacy is nurtured or challenged.

Beyond the family, schools play an important role in facilitating opportunities for efficacy development and affirmation. Beyond the encouragement and support of parents, participant’s perceptions of their abilities were shaped by how they academically

compared to their peers (deaf and hearing) and the ways in which their teachers treated them. Particularly important to these experiences of mastery were resource availability and educational setting. Taylor and Jill, who both attended schools for deaf and hard of hearing students, were well supported in their environments and found education accessible. Seth and Beth had a more challenging time in their original mainstream spaces where they were not adequately supported and where their hearing loss appeared to be relied on by their teachers as a determining factor of their ability. Without suitable interventions in their learning spaces to support them, Beth and Seth’s opportunities for efficacy development were limited. In contrast, Jill and Taylor were provided with instruction in ASL, culturally sensitive curriculum, and supported by the experiences of other deaf people, facilitating frequent opportunities for their efficacy development.

Finally, involvement in the Deaf community aided respondents in acquiring social and cultural capital. Participants described how these resources were foundational to the ‘deaf can’ attitudes that they possess. First, cultural capital provided respondents with cultural solidarity and linguistic insight. Each case study highlights the importance of these considerations in shaping the identities of participants as Deaf people who understand their hearing loss as a small piece of their broader self-concept in relation to others. Second, social capital between members of the Deaf community helped to expose deaf youth to other deaf people who had been successful despite their hearing loss. These ties appear to give participants access to their network’s resources and subsequently, to provide considerable opportunities for self-efficacy development and affirmation of efficaciousness by other deaf persons.

Though there are many other meso social contexts that can be examined in relation to the development of self-efficacy, the three identified by this study’s participants highlight the interconnection of social spheres and the multiple resources that are impactful in shaping the experiences of social actors within these contexts.

8.4.3 Micro

Social contexts are influential in shaping the micro interactions between social actors and subsequently, the perceptions that individuals have of these exchanges. Self- efficacy can be affirmed or challenged within niche encounters - especially between individuals and their significant others.

For example, Beth’s self-perceptions were frequently challenged by her biological parents, whose attitudes she interpreted as discriminatory and limiting. Without others to affirm her abilities or to encourage her success, Beth believed herself unable and unalike her family because of her hearing loss. On the other hand, after moving to her foster family who were accepting of her, and transferring to a school for deaf and hard of hearing students, Beth’s interpretations of her deafness as ‘limiting’ was challenged by finding support and more frequent positive interactions with other deaf people who had been successful.

These personal interactions exemplify the ways that self-efficaciousness can be challenged but also positively impacted over time. In exchanges where deaf youth are encouraged and accepted, efficacy development is more likely. In instances where hearing loss is perpetuated as a disability and youth are academically and socially dissuaded, perceptions of efficacy may be lowered.

8.4.4 Self-Efficacy as Socially Informed

The above discussion emphasizes many of the different social forces that influence the development of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is not innate or created independently of the social world. Drawing on the notion of agency within structure (see Settersten 1999), this study shows that the ‘deaf can’ attitude, although shared by all four participants in this study, developed in different ways, depending on their access to economic, social and cultural capital.

While this study explores the role of self-efficacy in relation to deafness on transitions, there are many other socially ascribed characteristics that further mediate social interaction and perceptions of personal ability. For example, future studies should also consider the intersectionality of attributes including gender, race, ethnicity, and sexuality - in addition to deafness - to reflect on ways that the development of self- efficacy is enabled or limited within different social contexts AND to better understand alternative influences that could shape post-secondary transitions. Figure 5. illustrates how different social forces impact the development of self-efficacy across multiple levels of analysis over time.