Receipt date: 20/04/2021 / Revision date: 22/09/2021 / Acceptance date: 07/03/2022

EL NO LUGAR DE LA DISCAPACIDAD AUDITIVA INFANTIL EN LA CULTURA OYENTE

Introduction to the subject of study

"Deafness is not only a medical diagnosis, it is a cultural phenomenon in which patterns and social problems interrelate, emotional and linguistic" (Oliver Sacks).

One of the most frequent questions in disability studies is the following: What spaces are considered safe for children? Based on this question, it is assumed that children require spaces that enhance their personal development -such environments-, spaces that may be in favor or against such development. Based on the above, the role as parents (Cuervo, 2010) implies the need to dimension the different spaces for the child's development; this inasmuch as thinking about education and pedagogy (Bolaños, Casallas & Sabogal, 2020) for the different childhoods¹, indirectly determines how to think about the environment of childhood in its own complexity of possibilities. Thus, this research seeks to expose the realities of a group of 24 hearing impaired children, together with their respective families, all attached to one of the educational institutions of the city of Villavicencio (Colombia), an institution where deaf and hearing children are attended equally. 

¹ The children's parents, during a good part of the research process, also took part in school educational processes, with exercises aimed at strengthening Sign Language. 

Regarding the context of the research, it is necessary to make a general clarification about the present text. Although the human group, in its totality, is part of the aforementioned educational²institution, the data emerged from three different contexts: the family, the school context, and finally, the neighborhood. It was thought from the beginning that the three mentioned spaces constitute a relevant triad in the study of childhood, so we sought to offer a broad view of this phenomenon, observing the experiences of a specific population. The expansion of the information collected implied dimensioning two human groups: first, the majority hearing population and then, the minority population in a situation of functional diversity. As it is expected to be developed in the space of the results, the research actors agree that children with hearing impairment are excluded from the majority culture. This is due in part to the marked differences in the order of language, originating a no-place within the social group to which the deaf population would eventually like to have access. While it is clear that one of the purposes of modern states (Laval and Dardot, 2013; Laval and Dardot, 2015) is to enable safe spaces for the personal fulfillment of the commoners; although there are safe spaces for some, these same spaces are not equally safe for the deaf population. In terms of the actors with whom the present research was conducted, a group of experiences was analyzed, of 24 children with hearing impairment, who -in their diverse contexts-, are exposed to various forms of exclusion. 

² The research began with 24 people; however, by the year 2020 there were parents who changed housing location, or changed educational institution, so that by 2020 and 2021 there are only 18 households. 

It was deemed necessary to inquire about the inclusion needs that arise in the family since it is estimated that this is the first experience of life in community (Jaramillo et al., 2014) for children with hearing impairment. At the same time, it is estimated that the school is a space where actions or omissions can cause difficulties in inclusion. It is in school where the needs of each [disabled] individual must be given primary attention within the general needs of the normal [or hearing] student body since: "inclusion presupposes individualized levels of didactic objectives compatible with each student" (Souza, 2006, p. 357). The third context addressed, the neighborhood, was investigated in the present study since it was considered necessary to identify "the contextual factors that may constitute barriers to participation... (assessment, diagnosis, and intervention) in a comprehensive manner because it promotes the recognition of the impact of the environment [towards a] modification through particular actions" (Serrano et al., 2013, p. 42). 

Regarding the cultural relationship between the deaf population and the context in which it interacts -if it is about background-, there is research on topics such as deaf culture (Paz & Salamanca, 2009), the hearing-impaired minority as a population within the cultural framework (Pérez de la Fuente, 2014), identity (López & Llorent, 2013), and interculturality at school (Morales & Morales, 2018). However, once the state of the art was conducted, it was possible to identify that the literature on cultural environments is not equally satisfactory, so it was considered possible to contribute to this field of knowledge, based on this paper. In this order of ideas, Marc Auge (2000) raises the possibility of understanding the phenomena of urban spaces, from the "anthropology of the close" (p. 15), attending to those people who do not have a place within globalizations. Auge says that urban environments are a phenomenon of a modernity among different, thus originating a no-place, as a distance between the spectator and the spectacle, the spectator being the subject and the spectacle, its culture. 

It was determined that the object of study would be the phenomenon of exclusion (López, 2008), which is estimated to be exercised by the majority group towards a human group with hearing impairment. From the beginning of the process, it was suggested that the research question would be the following: What impact does the context in which the child with hearing diversity lives and interacts have on the good practices of school inclusion and citizenship of the hearing-impaired child in Villavicencio? That is why it was proposed to investigate the different cultural environments on the processes of inclusion or exclusion, exercised within human collectives. 

Some key concepts. Inclusion, language, and culture

Throughout the history of the Social Sciences (Iglesias and Martín, 2019), the concept of inclusion has been the standard-bearer -and perhaps responsible- for ensuring attention to differences to the excluded and to those who are left behind in their various manifestations. Today, the importance of the concept of inclusion in scientific work is undeniable and -although there are new perspectives in this regard- it is also undeniable that, under this concept, multiple rights -formerly denied- have been won to the various forms of functional diversity. On the other hand, diversity is seen as a richness that underlies the cultural and/or linguistic order since "there is no risk but richness in linguistic and cultural diversity, provided that contexts of communication between differences are created" (Fridman cited by Gómez, 2013, p. 95). However, on many occasions -and it is cruel to say it-, the existence of a signer [hearing impaired] in the family tends to be seen more as a calamity by the collective, than as a factor of linguistic and cultural richness already mentioned. 

Then, inclusion taken to the school context implies dimensioning "safe spaces for children that provide support for learning, development of competencies, and psychosocial interventions" (UNICEF, 2008, p. 34); however, diversity also implies conflicts to the detriment of the "most vulnerable or disadvantaged, as they are the ones most exposed to situations of exclusion" (Belén, 2009, p. 46). In this order of ideas, it was determined to approach inclusion from a cultural perception, where through the culture-language relationship, inclusion could be observed through the relationship between both concepts. Thus, when investigating the concept of language, it is indicated that making good use of language "also requires metacognitive, cognitive, and affective skills to make conscious and functional use of language" (Miranda, 2011, p. 163), language being understood as: "a set of signs, symbols and signals... that has a context of use and certain formal combinatory principles" (Pozzo and Soloviev, 2011, p. 176). Then, establishing a language-culture relationship, it would be said that it is a "set of cultivated ways of thinking and living, usually designated by the name of civilization" (Altieri, 2001, p. 15). Thus, the notion of the national collective -or normal- can thus come to exclude differences in their various forms of disability. In this regard, the following are established: 

consequences concerning the relationship between language and the so-called national culture and identity. On the one hand, it necessarily entails socio-political conflicts, since it promotes one of the languages (and their native speakers) to the detriment of the rest. Moreover, the resulting hierarchization brings with it the tendency to associate the language promoted in each country with the so-called national culture (Ambadiang and García, 2006, p. 69).

Finally, there are multiple concepts within the present study, and the complexity of such contexts is related to the dimensioning [at a very general level] of aspects, such as culture, language, and inclusion. Consequently, it was thought to develop an "investigation in an urban conglomerate... [in which it would be possible] today of an anthropological investigation" (Auge, 2000, p. 23). In the same way, this paper intends to recognize the different places where auditory diversity manifests itself in order to "deconstruct them, although knowing that it is useless to hide their positions because no matter how much you try to speak from a no-place, you will never succeed in making the world an aseptic spectacle" (García, 2005, p. 97) or at least distanced from the researcher. All of the above indicates the need to create bridges between the various research competencies, as well as interdisciplinary research with a similar object of study in order to generate laboratories of inclusion in the various contexts. 

Research methodology

The research presented here was intended to generate a broad interpretation of the social realities (Alvarez & Jurgenson, 2009) of a group of parents who face a majority culture that is [or has been] adverse to their children with disabilities. The research approach was qualitative (Pasek, 2008) and sought from the beginning to describe the realities of a group of hearing-impaired children in their respective contexts. Thus, dialogues were generated with various research actors, so that they would reveal aspects of their life stories (Huchim and Reyes, 2013; González, 2019), evidencing their experiences in three different contexts. To this end, it was necessary to employ three research collection strategies, activities that will be succinctly presented in the following lines. 

1. The interview. At first, it was carried out with the parents of the disabled children and in the educational institution. Then, around March 2019, these activities - due to the confinement measures - were carried out through magnetic meetings by cell phone and computer. In these dialogues, we sought to identify in depth the life experiences around the disability of their child, to understand "the life of the other, to penetrate and detail the transcendent, to decipher and understand the tastes, fears, satisfactions... relevant to the interviewee; it consists of building step by step and thoroughly the experience of the other" (Robles, 2011, p. 40).
2. Social mapping. It was implemented at the same time as the interviews in which it was intended that the children with functional hearing diversity would express their contextual realities. A good part of this activity was accompanied by the parents, who generated new and valuable data for the present study. Thus, social mapping sought to generate "a map of networks and semiotic relationships that is built from subjectivity at the individual level and from the collective thinking of the communities" (Bolaños, Astaiza and Jiménez, 2020, p. 13).
3. The focus group. This was one of the last activities of the research process. It was carried out with three teachers of the educational institution, knowledgeable in Colombian Sign Language, who communicated the realities of hearing-impaired children in their educational institution. The group interviews took place at the educational institution, and with them, we sought to find all kinds of answers and questions about the same questionnaire (Belén, 2003). Finally, in search of quality criteria, an analysis group was managed, so that "new ideas and ways of seeing things and those that have been studied" could be found (Flick, 2014, p. 92). It is also necessary to indicate that, although the authors are aware that "it is considered that the adequate number [for a focus group...] is given from five people" (Arboleda, 2008, p. 73), it was not possible to count for the session with a number greater than three people for the research. At the same time, it was intended that the persons invited to the session should all be equally suitable, and that their corresponding speeches should have equal value within the data collection. With the above, we sought -from different points of view- to broaden the conception of the attention to the social and cultural problems of children with hearing impairment. Later, the data collected were categorized and analyzed through the ATLAS.ti software (9Kalpokaite and Radivojevic, 2018), thus originating the first research categories and subcategories of this study (See Figure 1).

Figura 1.Diagram created in Atlas.ti

Nota: Source: Own elaboration.

The category: The no-place of childhood hearing impairment in the hearing culture generated 39 points of rootedness in the testimonies issued by the research actors, and 8 points of density in relation to the research subcategories, which is why it was determined that this would be the guiding category of the present presentation of research results. 

Results

From the research process carried out in 2019, 2020, and 2021, it was possible to generate as a result the central category of this text, which refers to the relationship between deaf children and hearing people and is called: The no-place of children's hearing impairment in the hearing culture. This category is expected to be broadly exposed in the following pages, with the help of three subtitles that indicate the various cultural contexts [see figure 2] on which the data offered by the population approached were focused; contexts in which the non-existence of a place for deaf children is estimated.

The no-place of children's hearing impairment in the hearing culture

The family

One of the characteristics observed in many of the testimonies given by parents is the fact that they recall -as a historical exercise- how they discovered their child's deafness. Many of them -when recalling- say that when they saw that their offspring did not "pay attention" to them, they talked to their child, with a louder and louder voice, and then yelled at him/her, hoping that with this "strategy" they would listen to them. Thus, it is understood that shouting at the child would make him/her "listen or understand" their message in Spanish. In this regard, the testimonies coincide in that: 

You have to talk to him very hard, we thought... We talked to him hard and showed him the things we wanted... We talked to him hard and held his face so he would understand us... We yelled hard, so he would lend us the ball [they told anecdotally]... We yelled hard... I point things out to him because it is difficult to learn sign language... We talked hard so he would understand, and I point things out to him, I show him things... I show him things... When he comes [to try to integrate]... we talk to him hard and touch him [but] nothing... Sometimes we have to talk to him hard and touch him, [but] he does not understand. I show him things and talk to him really hard... When he comes [to try to integrate]... we talk to him hard and yell at him [but] nothing... Sometimes, we have to talk to him hard and touch him, so that he listens and I point to him or show him things (Interviews conducted with various parents and hearing neighbors of children with hearing impairment, in a session held during the month of April 2019).

From the above, it should be noted that it is paradoxical that some families resorted to shouting, even though they already knew that their child had a hearing impairment. In this order of ideas, it could be said that the family had idealized that with this action they would be able to make their child an equal person, hearing or speaking. Attempting to bring the hearing-impaired person from the "other language" to "our language" [or oral language], it already has antecedents in history as since the Middle Ages there was the belief that the hearing-impaired person was an "incomplete" being, and that he/she needed to learn to speak in order to "complete him/herself" (Ladd, 2011, p. 118)³.

³ But the above is only a sample, as the whole of Latin America is witness to an extensive campaign of Castilianization by the Spanish Crown. Similar actions are implemented today with English, French, and Mandarin, which are considered languages of power (Niño, 2013).

Figura 2.Figure made in Creately

Nota: Source: Own elaboration.

It could be said that the idea of teaching lip-reading to children with hearing impairment has prevailed since it is believed that -they should be the ones- who should adapt to the hearing culture, all under the precept that "a person born deaf did not have to be inexorably mute" (Ponce de León cited by Trillos, 2016, p. 1). Approaching the matter from a semantic perspective, in terms of the present writing, hearing culture is understood as the human group whose form of social interaction is mediated by sound and verbal communication. The previous term is opposed -in this study- to the communication model developed by the minority culture in condition of hearing impairment (Pérez de la Fuente, 2014), where communication is determined by a visuo-gestural language. From a critical stance, indicating to the disabled the need to learn lip-reading is like saying: "you must learn to understand us," objectifying in the disabled the responsibility of learning the language of the majority culture⁴. In the same vein since the family is the first space for the practice of democracy and for the learning of culture (Martínez, 2008), it is perceived that the disabled person does not have, as such, a place of being within his own family. 

⁴ In this regard, it is also necessary for the hearing person to learn the deaf person's language since the obligation must be mutual and not unidirectional.

The family is generally the first scenario where social inclusion comes into play since depending on the type of interactions that are built among family members, it may or may not favor the ability to subsequently become involved in other areas of community life (Jaramillo et al., 2014, p. 477).

Assuming the above from a critical perspective, it is observed that the family wants their disabled children to become hearing or oralizable subjects, and by luck of shouting. Teaching lip-reading to non-hearing offspring is tantamount to bringing the different [in hearing diversity] into our cultural scheme, which disregards the creation of a place -at the level of language- for a non-hearing person in the family. Added to the above are other disallowing factors, such as: 

When my daughter was born everything was normal, but when we saw that she did not listen and we had to yell at her..., we saw that she was deaf, we felt very sad, it was very hard for the whole family, the father did not want to help her... he did not want to have a deaf daughter, he said that he felt sorry for his family, and he never wanted the family to look at the child... [to this is added the rejection of the family]... he has no one else in the house, he fights with the cousins and I feel that they reject him. (Testimony of a mother. Session conducted during the month of April 2019). 

With the above, it is clear that a different [in hearing diversity] is not wanted in the family, and with regard to the quote immediately above, they did not want their daughter to be part of the family group. With this, two cultures can be identified, a broad and majority one, similar to each other, and with basic communication capacities [hearing people], who are the parents of the family, and another minority one, normally marginalized from the cultural environment [hearing functional diversity], but in this case, their own children are part of it. 

Migrating from the context, the difficulties to be inserted in the established cultural spaces do not end at home, the problem transcends to the Colombian elementary school, a topic to be developed below. 

The school 

From the early school years, deaf children are often exposed to all kinds of discrimination by the hearing majority group. In this regard, parents say they are aware of the frequent difficulties in generating spaces of unity or reciprocity, as far as school spaces are concerned. The cultural duality that underlies communication between the hearing and the deaf (Paz and Salamanca, 2009) is also manifested in the school environment, even more so if the school is not - by nature - specialized for deaf children. Regarding the above phenomenon, some teachers presented some school dynamics managed by themselves, with the aim of generating inclusion. 

If we want to relate the children, we have to relate them to others, we have to teach them that they have their own culture but that they are part of one [the culture of the majority] ... we are contaminated by a hearing community... We put ourselves in their shoes, but it is not our space: it's not our space... And when the Sign Language workshops begin, they are the ones who have to get their parents into the story of what [their own parents] are part of their culture (Taken from a discussion workshop conducted with three teachers in the disability field, August 2019).

Nevertheless -and in contradiction with the proposal formulated by the teachers, who have a good level of knowledge of Sign Language- parents do not see themselves as part of the cultural framework (González, 2003) of their own children⁵; in fact, they see themselves as outside of it. Although the efforts made by teachers to generate acts of integration -or inclusion- between the deaf and hearing are highlighted, it is also understood that obligation is not the most assertive way; however, interest in the existence of inclusion is observed. 

⁵ However, the parents indicated that they did not have time to do so: "We attend the Sign Language classes, but it is very difficult because we work all the time" (In personal communication with a mother, September 2009).

If we want to relate to the children we have to relate to others, we have to teach them that they have their own culture, but that they are part of a hearing community, and that they have to learn to relate to each other. Then a teacher told me that the deaf children arrived and were all in a small group, so he started to do an exercise where they were separated and it was their turn to interact with their classmate and the hearing one [and in this way...] they were forced to talk with them (Interview with three hearing teachers of deaf children, during a focus group, May 2019). 

The deaf population -for many sectors- has not been recognized as part of a different culture, which has led to the fact that many times disabled people have to look for institutions or create cooperatives to help each other. In the opinion of practicing teachers, efforts are made from the teaching profession so that the deaf population does not feel excluded from their own school context. Their struggle is constant and at the same time enthusiastic, for which they -through their own testimonies- seem to feel satisfied. 

from teaching many efforts have been made, people kind of acquire Sign Language, at least the basics..., [but] people many times because of ignorance push them aside, they point them out, so we do our bit so that this does not happen (Interview with three hearing teachers of deaf children, in focus group month, May 2019).

To the efforts made by the educational institution [which tries to be inclusive], and in it by the three teachers interviewed, non-hearing children feel fortunate to belong to an institution that understands them. This is reflected in statements by students, such as: "I am here thanks to my mom. I am integrated into a society thanks to my dad and my mom, so that I can achieve this goal and all" (Personal communication with students, August 2019). In the same vein, some parents highlight the work of the school in creating a space for their children: 

thank God at school with their peers with the same disability so that they can communicate with their language... in the child's home they are living in a world, isolated, where they cannot express their real needs, their likes, dislikes and so on... so that they are not discriminated against by society (Interview with a mother, May 2019).

Although it is clear that the teachers intend to generate inclusion through the exercise of authority as teachers, this shows that the relationship between them does not emerge spontaneously, but on the contrary, there is a previous rejection of the difference. In this regard, although historically, there may have been cases of violence against deaf children, the frequent issue is not bullying as such but exclusion, and it is precisely this that leads to the need to generate acts of inclusion. Although compulsory education is perhaps not the most assertive way, it is observed that the community of hearing-impaired students is grateful for it⁶.

⁶ However, the criticism should not be dismissed that better inclusion strategies may exist, only that they have not been consulted or implemented by the faculty.

Moving on to another space in the life of the deaf, along with the family and the school, there is another multiplicity of spaces in which the tensions between cultural and linguistic differences operate -perhaps with fewer rules-. Reference is made to the neighborhood environments (García, 2008) where the deaf culture and the hearing culture live without precepts and surveillance.

The Neighborhood

Much of the social and cultural development of children takes place in the so-called neighborhood environments (Barbero, 1993; Barbero, 2003), and similarly, it is estimated that the same can occur in the so-called neighborhoods and residential complexes. Unfortunately, and based on the data emerging from the present study, it could be said that it is precisely in these types of spaces where children are more strongly exposed to all kinds of discrimination and mistreatment. The negative anecdotes are so frequent that the examples given here are only a sample of the social situation of deaf children in their respective neighborhoods. Common spaces (Laval and Dardot, 2015), such as stores, parks, and playgrounds, among others, are perceived -very surely-, by some people as spaces free of rules, which makes mistreatment possible, given that in them there is less surveillance or moral authority. In this regard, it is reported:

the children in my neighborhood hit him a lot, they make fun of him, they call him a fool and I almost don't let him go out to play. I prefer him to be with me in the car when there is no school... [the children often tell him...] That child is sick in his ears and cannot hear words, I do... We hit him hard and show him the ball... He is sick in his ears... they are sick children who cannot listen (Interview with a parent, April 2019).

Neighborhood environments are often so adverse for deaf children that the testimonies can be very crude in this regard. Among the stories is that of a father of a cab driver family, who expresses that he had to isolate his son from a neighborhood context -evidently aggressive-, indicating that he did not know what to do with his respective reality; in his crude words, he says that "sometimes I would like to take my life with him because I feel very helpless not knowing what to do with him" (Interview with a father, April 2019). The interviewee states that it was complex for him to continue leaving his son in the house where he lived and in the neighborhood where he lived, given the situations of mistreatment in both places. Based on the idea that most of the problems originate in the area of communication, it should be noted that gestural communication (Vanegas and Marín, 2010) and non-sound communication -in Spanish- imply many more problems than those perceived at first sight. The difference between languages seems to lead to discriminatory and violent acts and, although a mutual cultural enrichment would be expected, unfortunately the opposite occurs. To exemplify the above: 

One day, my son was playing with all the children in the neighborhood, I got very worried and went to look for him... My son was not with them, I kept looking for him and at night, a child from the neighborhood told me that my son had been buried in the sand, with his head outside and covered with boards... I found him and after treating his asthmatic condition, they saved his life... One of the children said that they had buried him because he was dumb... [and when I complained to his parents, they said...] see what you can do with your son because he should not be with our children (Account of a mother in personal communication, April 2019). 

With the above testimony, it can be observed that the position adopted by the minors is in direct correspondence - at least - with an absolutist and exclusionist perspective, inculcated by their own parents. However, all the above mentioned, there are more examples in this regard:

An enraged woman was insulting my deaf son... [she said to him] dumb, stupid, idiot... your son pushed my daughter... when I complained to him, the idiot started monkeying around with his hands, making fun of me.... I apologized to her, told her that my son was deaf and was trying to communicate with her through his hands... [the woman said] a dumb child should not be on the street, he can hurt other children (Mother's account in personal communication, April 2019).

And to all of the above is added one more factor. Reference is made to the fact that, while it is true that there are unscrupulous people [hearing] who try to take advantage of people [also hearing] with whom they do business, these same people identify in the deaf minor a defenseless person, whom they can steal more easily. 

When I sent my child to the store, the man never attended him, we wrote him everything... many times he subtracted money from the money orders and claimed to have given them to him... sometimes he would arrive without the purchase and said that the storekeeper had the money... after several similar complaints, with the help of a neighbor, we discovered the thieving shopkeeper... we accused this man in the administration of the complex, but the administration never did anything... we decided to move out of the place (Report of a mother in personal communication, magnetic encounter in July 2020).

With all the above, it is hoped that the need to place the issue of inclusion of the deaf population in the field of culture or cultural systems (Cadenas, 2014) has been made clear, as long as there are new dynamics that manage to transcend the idiomatic, towards a broader understanding and cultural type. Historically, studies on disability have been located in the field of medicine, linking deafness with the concept of disease. In this regard, without dismissing this or that discipline, it is necessary to indicate that studies on disability should be expanded to new disciplinary horizons, not only derived from Biology; reference is made to the various research possibilities in the field of Humanities and Educational Sciences. 

Discussion and Conclusions

A probable generalization -which is left as a possible proposal within the present study- is the fact that the contextual problems exposed are replicable in other contexts and with other types of disability. One of the difficulties in the development of this research was the fact that there are limitations to find the actors taken into account in it; it is expected that the testimonies reported in the previous sections are sufficient to support the categories presented in this study. The above, with the ultimate goal of generating an articulation of cultural type on the realities of context where deaf children live and interact. Contrary to the realities exposed by some authors, and going to the level of discussion, there are expressions in the field of science, where it is stated that: "the family's main function is to socialize their children according to the dominant culture and contribute to social change: modernity" (Ruiz, 2004, p. 3). These socialization strategies -in many cases- aim to indirectly develop qualities and capacities in the deaf, of benefit to the majority. 

Lip reading is a clear example. The purpose of this study is not to establish forms of cultural relationships between one and the other; on the contrary, it seeks to define the absence of relationships, which leads the disabled to establish forms of culture among their own community of peers, who are also in a condition of functional hearing diversity. That is why the ideal of a "socialization of... ethnic-linguistic minorities" (Cuevas, 2013, p. 710) is understood - in terms of the present study - as a relationship between two cultures (Castillo, Fuzga & Laguna, 2019) and not between two languages, where one of them - the minority one - is inserted within the great cultural spectrum of: the majority. 

Wanting the child to adapt to the language of the majority -in this case the family-, causes its members to yell at their child so that he/she "listens," so that he/she understands in Spanish, resulting in a model of mistreatment of the child. Similarly, and taking a cultural look at the school environment (Fuentes, García, Amezcua & Amezcua, 2021), teachers find it necessary to force hearing and non-hearing students to participate in community activities established by the linguistic-cultural majority. Thus, it is observed that communication relationships do not emerge spontaneously but [in this case] by coercion. On the other hand, the neighborhood environment, being a space free of rules -or institutional surveillance-, evidenced cruel actions towards the minority in condition of functional diversity. In this way, actions directly related to various forms of mistreatment were found in their own cultural environment. We hope to have sufficiently exemplified the danger of intolerance that is generated in the different neighborhood spaces. Within the research, exclusion was estimated or presented as a cultural phenomenon, rooted in three spaces -exposed as a sample-, of the great context of society. With this, it is also necessary to indicate that these spaces are in essence determinant for the development of every citizen in the western world. For all of the above, it is a pity that the three environments coincide precisely in the exclusion factor and not in any other way of proceeding towards their neighbors or peers. 

On the other hand, considering the impossibility of making generalizations -given the limits offered by a qualitative approach study- it is proposed to advance in the research from the study of new contexts of western society, in such a way that the perspectives addressed in this research can be verified or contradicted. The sum of studies such as this one will later allow the detection of needs of the hearing-impaired population and also the planning of alternatives for the improvement of their social problems. This could be one of the goals for the present century, and it is the academy that should take the first step in this direction.

References

Altieri Megale, A. (2001) ¿Qué es la cultura? La Lámpara de Diógenes. 2(1). 15-20. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/844/84420403.pdf

Álvarez Gayou, J. & Jurgenson, G. (2009). Cómo Hacer Investigación Cualitativa Fundamentos y Metodología. Paidos.

Ambadiang, T. & García Parejo, I. (2006). La cultura lingüística y el componente cultural en la enseñanza de lenguas no maternas: observaciones sobre algunos paradigmas de la competencia cultural. Didáctica (Lengua y Literatura) 18(1) 61-92. https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/DIDA/article/view/DIDA0606110061A

Arboleda, L. M. (2008). El grupo de discusión como aproximación metodológica en investigaciones cualitativas. Revista Facultad Nacional de Salud Pública, 26(1), 69-77. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/120/12026111.pdf

Auge, M. (2000). Los no lugares, espacios del anonimato. Una antropología de la sobremodernidad. Gedisa.

Barbero, J. M. (1993). La comunicación en las transformaciones del campo cultural. Alteridades, 3(5) 59-68. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/747/74745548005.pdf 

Barbero, J. M. (2003). Los laberintos urbanos del miedo. Universitas Humanística, 1(56), 69-79. https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/univhumanistica/article/view/9697

Belén, M. B. (2003). El taller y el grupo de discusión en investigación: cuando investigar es un acto colectivo de pronunciamiento de la palabra. Oficios Terrestres, 13(1). http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/48554

Bolaños Motta, J. I. & Astaiza Grande, Z. y Castellanos Jiménez, E. (2020). Hacia una descripción densa desde la cartografía social. Educación y Humanismo, 22(38), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.17081/eduhum.22.38.3623

Bolaños Motta, J. I., Casallas Forero, E., & Sabogal Gamez, V. J. (2020). Del activismo docente, el saber pedagógico del maestro y su impacto en la realización profesional de sus estudiantes sordos. Revista Colombiana de Educación. 1(80), 153-172. https://doi.org/10.17227/rce.num80-10021

Cadenas, H. (2014). Cultura y diferenciación de la sociedad: La cultura en la sociedad moderna. Polis, Latinoamericana. 13(39), 249-274. https://journals.openedition.org/polis/10487

García Canclini, N. (2005). Diferentes, desiguales y desconectados. Mapas de la Interculturalidad. Gedisa Editorial.

Castillo Villalobos, A., Fuzga Hernández, M., & Laguna Acosta, A. (2019). El rol de la familia en el desarrollo de los enfoques comunicativos en las personas con discapacidad auditiva. [Tesis de pregrado, Fundación Universitaria Los Libertadores]. https://repository.libertadores.edu.co/bitstream/handle/11371/1841/Castillo_Anguie_Fuzga_Mar%c3%ada_Laguna_Anguie_2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Cuervo Martínez, Á. (2010). Pautas de crianza y desarrollo socioafectivo en la infancia. Diversitas: Perspectivas en Psicología. 6(1), 111-121. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/679/67916261009.pdf

Cuevas, H. (2013). El gobierno de los sordos: el dispositivo educacional. Revista de Ciencia Política. 33(3) 693-713. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-090X2013000300006 

Belén Domínguez, A. (2009). Educación para la inclusión de alumnos sordos. Revista Latinoamericana de Educación Inclusiva. https://sid.usal.es/idocs/F8/ART11921/educacion_para_la_inclusion_de_alum_sordos.pdf

Flick, U. (2014) La Gestión de la Calidad en la Investigación Cualitativa. Ediciones Morata S.L.

Fuentes Gutierrez V., García Domingo, M., Amezcua Aguilar, P., & Amezcua Aguilar, T. (2021). La atención a la diversidad funcional en educación primaria. REI-CE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 19(1), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.15366/reice2021.19.1.006

García Sánchez, B. (2008). Familia, escuela y barrio: un contexto para la comprensión de la violencia escolar. Polémicas. 1(55), 109-124. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/4136/413635249006.pdf

Gómez Tovar, M. R. (2013). La Inclusión de la Persona Sorda a la Educación Superior. Latinoamericana de Educación Inclusiva. 8(1), 93–108. http://www.rinace.net/rlei/numeros/vol8-num1/art6.html 

González, J. L. (2003). Psicología social y el entramado cultural Un camino hacia nuevas perspectivas y desarrollos. Boletín de Psicología. 1(77), 7-18. https://www.uv.es/seoane/boletin/previos/N77-1.pdf

González Giraldo, O. E. (2019). La narrativa biográfica como una prometedora experiencia (auto) formativa en el trayecto de la formación docente. Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos, 15(1). http://vip.ucaldas.edu.co/latinoamericana/downloads/Latinoamericana15(1)_5.pdf 

Huchim Aguilar, D. & Reyes Chávez, R. (2013). La Investigación Biográfico-Narrativa, una Alternativa para el Estudio de los Docentes. Revista Electrónica “Actualidades Investigativas en Educación”. 13 (3). E-ISSN: 1409-4703 https://www.redalyc.org
/pdf/447/44729878019.pdf

Iglesias Rodríguez, A. & Martín González, Y. (2019). La producción científica en educación inclusiva: avances y desafíos. Colombiana de Educación, 1(78), 383-418. https://doi.org/10.17227/rce.num78-9885

Jaramillo Pérez, J. M., Ruiz Cubillos, M. I., Gómez Deantonio, A. N., López Peinado, L. D. & Pérez Álvarez, L. (2014). Estrategias para la inclusión de niños, niñas y adolescentes en contextos familiares. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 32(3), 477-493. https://doi.org/10.12804/apl32.03.2014.05 

Kalpokaite, N . & Radivojevic, I. (2018). Teaching qualitative data analysis software online: a comparison of face-to-face and e-learning ATLAS.ti courses. New York: International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1687666 

Ladd, P. (2011). Comprendiendo la cultura sorda: en busca de la sordedad. Nacional de la Cultura y las Artes,. Impreso.

Laval, C. & Dardot, P. (2013) La Nueva Razón del Mundo. Ensayo Sobre la Sociedad Neoliberal. Gedisa.

Laval, C. & Dardot, P. (2015). Común. Ensayo sobre la revolución en el siglo XXI. Gedisa.

López Torrijo, M. (2008). De la exclusión a la inclusión: políticas y prácticas de la universidad española respecto a los alumnos con déficit auditivo. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, 16 (1), 1-31. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=275020545005

López González. & M. & Llorent, V. (2013). Illness, disability or cultural identity? interpretation of deafness and answers from the spanish educational system. CEFAC. 15(6), 1664-1670. https://www.scielo.br/j/rcefac/a/5KCTY9kGWBC8ykJFCf8rt9C/?lang=en&format=pdf 

Martínez García, B. (2008). El aprendizaje de la cultura y la cultura de aprender. Convergencia. Ciencias Sociales, 15(48), 287- 307. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/105/10504811.pdf

Miranda Calderón, L. A. (2011). Lenguaje: Algo más que un mecanismo para la comunicación. Electrónica Educare, 15(1) 161-170. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/1941/194118804013.pdf

Morales Acosta, G. V. & Morales Navarro, M. (2018). Diversidad Sorda: educación y sensibilidad intercultural en una escuela especial de Santiago de Chile. Psicogente 21(40). https://doi.org/10.17081/psico.21.40.3083

Niño Puello, M. (2013). El inglés y su importancia en la investigación científica: algunas reflexiones. Colombiana de Ciencia Animal. 5(1) 43-254. https://doi.org/10.24188/recia.v5.n1.2013.487

Oviedo, A. (Enero de 2015). Reseña Gascón y Storch de Gracia, 2004: “Historia de la educación de los sordos en España”. https://cultura-sorda.org/resena-gascon-y-storch-de-gracia-2004-historia-de-la-educacion-de-los-sordos-en-espana/

Pasek, E. (2008). La Construcción del problema de investigación y su discurso. Cabudare. Cabudare. Ponencia. Universidad Fermín Toro. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=70930908

Paz, C. M. & Salamanca Salucci, M. (2009). Elementos de la cultura sorda: una base para el currículum intercultural. REXE, 8(15), 31-49. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=243116377002

Pérez de la Fuente, O. (2014). Las personas sordas como minoría cultural y lingüística. DILEMATA, 1(15) 267-287. https://cultura-sorda.org/las-personas-sordas-como-minoria-cultural-y-linguistica/ 

Robles, B. (2011) La entrevista en profundidad: una técnica útil dentro del campo Antropofísico. Cuicuilco, 18 (52). http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0185-16592011000300004 

Ruiz Ordoñez, C. (2004). El papel de la familia en la transmisión sociocultural y de la salud mental Nómadas, 9(1). https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/181/18100924.pdf 

Serrano Ruiz, C. P., Ramírez Ramírez, C., Abril Miranda, M. J., Ramón Camargo L. V., Guerra Urquijo, L. Y., & Clavijo González, N. (2013). Barreras contextuales para la participación de las personas con discapacidad física. Universidad Industrial de Santander, 45(1) 41-51. https://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistasaluduis/article/view/3299

Souza Dos Santos, S. (2006). Inclusión, ¿para qué? Diversitas: Perspectivas en Psicología, 2(2) 351-359. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/679/67920213.pdf

Trillos Leal, C. (2016). Percepciones sobre el sordo con relación al oyente a la luz de siete textos narrativos. [Tesis de maestría, Instituto Cuervo]. http://bibliotecadigital.caroycuervo.gov.co/1269/1/2016-1095800987.pdf 

UNICEF. (2008). Guía Inclusión de los niños y niñas con discapacidad en la acción humanitaria. Ciudad de Panamá. https://www.unicef.org/lac/sites/unicef.org.lac/files/2018-06/1-General-Booklet-ES_28-04-2018_0.pdf

Vanegas, J. & Marín, F. (2010). Comunicación Gestual y Discapacidad. Hacia la Promoción de la Salud, 15(2), 158–172. https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/hacialapromociondelasalud/article/view/1990