The Deaf Their Position in Society and the Provision for Their Education in the United States — Background and Themes

A Survey, Not a Story

Best describes his work as a 'survey' in the sense used by social economists, and he popularizes it as 'the story of "the deaf and dumb."' This framing is significant: the book is not a narrative of individual lives but a systematic collection of data. The author relies heavily on institutional documents—reports from schools, charities, and state departments—and acknowledges a particular debt to the American Annals of the Deaf. The voice is detached, with phrases like 'the design may be said to be' and 'regard is had not only to the interests of the deaf themselves.' This impersonal style persists throughout the excerpts, emphasizing classification over personal testimony.

Governing the Schools: A Patchwork of Boards

A substantial portion of the text details the governance structures of schools for the deaf. Best enumerates the types of boards—trustees, directors, managers, visitors—and their methods of appointment. He notes that semi-public institutions began as private concerns under self-perpetuating boards, while state-run schools are typically appointed by governors or legislatures. The level of detail is striking: he lists which states have special boards, which fall under state boards of control, and which are supervised by education departments. For example, in eight states the schools are under special boards without external regulation, while in eighteen others a state board of charities may visit or advise. This catalog-like approach reflects the book's taxonomic ambition.

The Problem of 'Feeble-Minded' Students

Best includes a brief but telling passage on students deemed 'feeble-minded' who apply to schools for the deaf. He reports that many are denied entry, but some are admitted, creating a 'difficult problem.' Those involved in deaf education feel such students 'should be removed to a regular institution for the feeble-minded.' The language is clinical and administrative: 'It is felt by those concerned in the education of the deaf that they are out of place here.' This moment reveals the era's categorical thinking about disability and the boundaries between institutions. Best does not editorialize; he simply records the prevailing opinion, leaving the reader to infer the social assumptions behind it.

Best's study is best approached as a reference work rather than a continuous argument. Readers interested in the history of deaf education will find its detailed breakdown of state-by-state governance invaluable. The book's value lies in its accumulation of facts—lists of board sizes, appointment methods, and institutional relationships—rather than in narrative or analysis. For those seeking the lived experience of deaf individuals, this text offers only indirect glimpses, filtered through administrative records. It is a document of its time, revealing how early 20th-century social science categorized and managed a marginalized population.