This section focuses on the many issues related to inclusive postsecondary education related to individuals who identify themselves as Deaf (or deaf) as well as students with different hearing impairments. Lower case “deaf” or upper case “Deaf” has been used as is in citations, abstracts and descriptions as published unless otherwise indicated; however, this does not necessarily reflect whether or not a person, program, or situation may or may not identify with Deaf culture.
Albertini, J. A., Kelly, R. R., & Matchett, M. K. (2012, Winter). Personal factors that influence deaf college students’ academic success. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(1), 85-101.
Research tells us that academic preparation is key to deaf students’ success at college. Yet, that is not the whole story. Many academically prepared students drop out during their first year. This study identified entering deaf college students’ personal factors as assessed by their individual responses to both the Noel-Levitz College Student Inventory Form B and the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, second edition (LASSI). Entering students in 3 successive cohorts (total n =437) participated in this study. Results show that in addition to entry measurements of reading and mathematics skills, personal factors contributed to the academic performance of students in their first quarter in college. The Noel-Levitz provided the comparatively better predictive value of academic performance: Motivation for Academic Study Scale (e.g., desire to finish college). The LASSI also showed statistically significant predictors, the Self-Regulation Component (e.g., time management) and Will Component (e.g., self-discipline), but accounted for relatively less variability in the students’ initial grade point averages. For this group of underprepared students, results show that personal factors can play a significant role in academic success. Deaf students’ personal factors are discussed as they relate to other first-year college students and to their subsequent academic performance and persistence.
Bochner, J. H., & Walter, G. G. (2005, Summer). Evaluating deaf students’ readiness to meet the English language and literacy demands of postsecondary educational programs. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(3), 232-243.
The purpose of this study was to investigate alternative methods for evaluating deaf students’ readiness to meet the English language and literacy demands of postsecondary educational programs. In the first part of the study, scores obtained by a large sample of deaf students on the ACT Assessment (ACT Composite score and scores on the ACT English and Reading tests) were compared to their scores on various measures of English language and literacy skills. In the second part of the study, the performance of a smaller sample of deaf students on the ESL Reading and ESL Grammar/Usage components of COMPASS/ESL was compared to their performance on a set of concurrent measures of English skills. The results of this investigation demonstrate that neither the ACT Assessment nor COMPASS/ESL are appropriate for the full range of deaf students seeking admission to postsecondary educational programs. However, the ACT Assessment is appropriate for deaf students seeking admission to transferable (BS and AAS) degree programs, and the ESL Reading and Grammar/Usage tests appear to be appropriate for deaf students seeking admission to nontransferable (AOS) degree programs. Taken together, the combination of the ACT Assessment and COMPASS/ESL appear able to provide a valid, reliable, and coherent approach to admissions screening assessment for the full range of deaf students seeking admission to postsecondary programs.
Boutin, D. L., & Wilson, K. (2009). An analysis of vocational rehabilitation services for consumers with hearing impairments who received college or university training. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 52(3), 156-166.
The purpose of this study was to determine the predictive ability of vocational rehabilitation services for deaf and hard of hearing consumers who received college and university training. The RSA-911 database for fiscal year 2004 was analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of 21 services in leading to competitive employment. A model predicting competitive employment included job search assistance, job placement, maintenance, rehabilitation technology, transportation, information and referral services, and other services. Results from the logistic regression analysis are discussed in relation to the implications to practitioners and educators.
Cawthon, S. W., Nichols, S. K., & Collier, M. (2009, Winter). Facilitating access: What information do Texas postsecondary institutions provide on accommodations and services for students who are deaf or hard of hearing? American Annals of the Deaf, 153(5), 450-460.
Students who are deaf or hard of hearing often require accommodations in order to participate in essential functions of college life. Although federal law mandates access to campus activities, real access for these students varies by site. The present study investigated the level of access of students who are deaf or hard of hearing at Texas postsecondary institutions. These schools’ online accommodations policies were reviewed in fall 2006. A systematic review of published policies was used to summarize accommodations and services available for instruction, assessment, and campus life. About half of the 157 schools provided information online. Examples of classroom accommodations included note takers during class lectures and extra time for tests. Nonacademic services included referrals to community resources and course registration assistance. Results are discussed in the context of information that prospective students may need to make informed choices regarding postsecondary education.
Convertino, C. M., Marschark, M., Sapere, P., Sarchet, T., & Zupan, M. (2009). Predicting academic success among deaf college students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14(3), 324-343.
For both practical and theoretical reasons, educators and educational researchers seek to determine predictors of academic success for students at different levels and from different populations. Studies involving hearing students at the postsecondary level have documented significant predictors of success relating to various demographic factors, school experience, and prior academic attainment. Studies involving deaf and hard-of-hearing students have focused primarily on younger students and variables such as degree of hearing loss, use of cochlear implants, educational placement, and communication factors—although these typically are considered only one or two at a time. The present investigation utilizes data from 10 previous experiments, all using the same paradigm, in an attempt to discern significant predictors of readiness for college (utilizing college entrance examination scores) and classroom learning at the college level (utilizing scores from tests in simulated classrooms). Academic preparation was a clear and consistent predictor in both domains, but the audiological and communication variables examined were not. Communication variables that were significant reflected benefits of language flexibility over skills in either spoken language or American Sign Language.
Cuculick, J. A., & Kelly, R. R. (2003, Fall). Relating deaf students’ reading and language scores at college entry to their degree completion rates. American Annals of the Deaf, 148(4), 279-286.
Graduation patterns were examined for 905 deaf students (1990-1998) at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. Students with higher reading and language skills had the best overall graduation percentage. Comparison of recipients of different degrees–bachelor of science (BS) versus fine arts (BFA); associate of applied science (AAS) versus occupational studies (AOS)–showed 92% of BS and 82% of AAS graduates reading at the 9th-grade level or above, versus 65% of BFA and 47% of AOS graduates. Interestingly, 80% of non-degree-earning students read at the 9th-12th grade levels; in absolute terms, they outnumbered graduates with similar reading skills in the AAS and BFA programs combined, and in the BS program. This indicates a need for improved counseling, placement, and retention strategies. Students performed similarly across degree categories, regardless of curriculum requirements and difficulty. Only non-degree-earning students had significantly lower grade averages.
Foster, S., Long, G., & Snell, K. (1999). Inclusive instruction and learning for deaf students in postsecondary education. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 4, 225-235.
This article explores how students who are deaf and their instructors experience mainstream college classes. Both quantitative and qualitative procedures were used to examine student access to information and their sense of belonging and engagement in learning. Instructors were asked to discuss their approach to teaching and any instructional modifications made to address the needs of deaf learners. Results indicate that deaf students viewed classroom communication and engagement in a similar manner as their hearing peers. Deaf students were more concerned about the pace of instruction and did not feel as much a part of the ‘university family’ as did their hearing peers. Faculty generally indicated that they made few if any modifications for deaf students and saw support service faculty as responsible for the success or failure of these students. We discuss results of these and additional findings with regard to barriers to equal access and strategies for overcoming these barriers.
Freebody, P., & Power, D. (2001, Spring). Interviewing Deaf adults in postsecondary educational settings: Stories, cultures, and life histories. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6(2), 130-142.
This article provides a brief examination of how Deaf adults describe their life histories as learners and as workers in the workforce. We show how these histories are intricately tied to the movements in and around the participants’ social positions as Deaf persons in a hearing world. Three discursive positions are evident in the talk of these interviewees in relation to Deafness: as disability, as logistic complexity, and as community/culture. We also show how the life stories produced in the interviews entail variations on the theme of fragmentation: the losing, missing, and finding of viable life circumstances. In addition, we discuss how the interviewer-interviewee relationship comes to embody a hearing community’s interests, recasting a Deaf interviewee’s everyday life into a series of curiosities.
Hyde, M., Punch, R., Power, D., Hartley, J., Neale, J., & Brennan, L. (2009, February). The experiences of deaf and hard of hearing students at a Queensland University: 1985-2005. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 85-98.
This article reports on the experiences of deaf and hard of hearing students at a Queensland university, which offers an extensive deaf student support program. Seventy-two current students and graduates since the program’s inception twenty years ago completed a survey about their experiences, highlights, challenges and use of communication tools and support services at university. Findings indicate, both quantitatively and qualitatively, that students valued the specialised support services they received, although challenges in accessing the academic curriculum remained for many students. In the important area of social factors, many students reported enjoying satisfying friendships and a sense of belonging with other deaf people, often for the first time, while others experienced feelings of social isolation in a largely hearing peer group. Overall, deaf and hard of hearing students who had attended Griffith over the 20 years had a high rate of graduation, comparing favourably with other university students.
Komesaroff, L. (2005, October). Category politics: Deaf students’ inclusion in the ‘hearing university.’ International Journal of Inclusive Education, 9(4), 389-403.
This article investigates the way in which deaf tertiary students’ identity is constructed within the university—an overwhelmingly ‘hearing’ institution. It is a descriptive and analytical account of the experiences of two deaf teacher education students as they reflect on their progress and experiences in higher education. Data have been analysed within an interpretive framework of category politics and the construction of difference. The study found that providing the same access to the same information in the same form did little to address the discursive marginality of these students.
Lartz, M. N., Stoner, J. B., & Stout, L. (2008, Fall). Perspectives of assistive technology from Deaf students at a hearing university. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 5(1), 72-91. Retrieved from: http://www.atia.org/files/public/ATOBV5N1ArticleSEVEN.pdf.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the perspectives of Deaf students attending a large ‘hearing’ university regarding their use of assistive technology (AT). Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants and responses were videotaped and transcribed from sign language to English. A collective case study approach was used to analyze the data. Three primary categories concerning perspectives of AT emerged from the qualitative analysis: (a) self-reported use of assistive technology and overall benefits, (b) barriers to AT use, and (c) facilitators to AT use. Discussion centers on the struggle to balance the triad of information that deaf students encounter in the university classroom and offers recommendations to assist deaf students in ‘hearing’ classrooms at the university level.
Lang, H. G. (2002). Higher education for deaf students: Research priorities in the new millennium. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 7(4), 267-280.
A review of research on deaf students in higher education reveals a significant body of knowledge about the barriers these students face in gaining access to information in the classroom. Much less is known about the potential solutions to these problems. In addition, there is a dearth of research on the effectiveness of such support services as interpreting, note taking, real-time captioning, and tutoring, particularly with regard to their impact on academic achievement. This article summarizes relevant research and suggests directions for educational researchers interested in enhancing academic success and the retention of deaf students in higher education programs.
Marschark, M., Richardson, J. T. E., Sapere, P., & Sarchet, T. (2010, Fall). Approaches to teaching in mainstream and separate postsecondary classrooms. American Annals of the Deaf, 155(4), 481-487.
The study examined attitudes toward teaching reported by university instructors who normally teach hearing students (with the occasional deaf or hard of hearing student) and by instructors who normally teach deaf and hard of hearing students at the same institution. Overall, a view of instruction as information transmission was associated with a teacher-focused approach to instruction, whereas viewing instruction as a means of promoting conceptual change was associated with a student-focused approach. Instructors in mainstream classrooms were more oriented toward information transmission than conceptual change, whereas instructors experienced in separate classrooms for deaf and hard of hearing students reported seeking to promote conceptual change in students and adopting more student-focused approaches to teaching. These results are consistent with previous findings concerning instructors’ approaches to teaching and deaf and hard of hearing students’ approaches to learning, and may help explain recent findings regarding student outcomes in separate versus mainstream secondary classrooms.
Marschark, M., Sapere, P., Convertino, C., & Seewagen, R. (2005, Winter). Access to postsecondary education through sign language interpreting. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(1), 38-50.
Despite the importance of sign language interpreting for many deaf students, there is surprisingly little research concerning its effectiveness in the classroom. The limited research in this area is reviewed, and a new study is presented that included 23 interpreters, 105 deaf students, and 22 hearing students. Students saw two interpreted university-level lectures, each preceded by a test of prior content knowledge and followed by a post-lecture assessment of learning. A variety of demographic and qualitative data also were collected. Variables of primary interest included the effects of a match or mismatch between student interpreting preferences (interpreting vs. transliteration) and the actual mode of interpreting, student-interpreter familiarity, and interpreter experience. Results clarify previous contradictory findings concerning the importance of student interpreting preferences and extend earlier studies indicating that deaf students acquire less than hearing peers from interpreted college-level lectures. Issues relating to access and success in integrated academic settings are discussed as they relate to relations among student characteristics, interpreter characteristics, and educational settings.
Matteson, J., Kha, C. K., Hu, D. J., Saul, L., & Robins Sadler, G. (2008). Campus community partnerships with people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Assistive Technology Outcomes and Benefits, 5(1), 29-44. Retrieved from: http://www.atia.org/files/public/ATOBV5N1ArticleFOUR.pdf.
In 1997, the Moores University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Cancer Center and advocacy groups for people who are deaf and hard of hearing launched a highly successful cancer control collaborative. In 2006, faculty from the Computer Science Department at UCSD invited the collaborative to help develop a new track in their doctoral program. This track would train computer scientists to be culturally competent when working with people who have hearing and visual challenges, with the ultimate goal of developing assistive living devices that would be welcomed by, and useful to, the anticipated end users. Faculty and students began developing ideas for technological advances that were anticipated to benefit people who are deaf and hard-of-hearing. Computer science graduate students and faculty worked with the medical school faculty, staff, and undergraduates to design culturally competent focus groups for people who were deaf and hard-of-hearing. The focus groups were designed to gather opinions of these presumed end users about three, very promising ideas for assistive listening devices. The result was a productive interchange between the computer science team and focus group members. The insights garnered have subsequently been used to refine the three devices. This paper provides an overview of how computer science students were trained to present their technological innovations to people who are deaf and hard-of-hearing and to gain feedback on how their devices might best serve them.
Napier, J., & Barker, R. (2004). Accessing university education: Perceptions, preferences, and expectations for interpreting by deaf students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9(2), 228-238.
This paper provides a brief review of the history of deaf education in Australia, Australian Sign Language (Auslan), and Auslan interpreting. A panel of Australian deaf university students from diverse linguistic and educational backgrounds provides insights into their perceptions of sign language interpreting provision in university lectures. They commented on their interpreting preferences after viewing two videotaped segments of university lecture interpretation, one demonstrating a predominantly free approach and the other a predominantly literal approach. Expectations of the deaf students were explored in relation to the educational backgrounds and qualifications of university interpreters; comprehension of interpreters is also discussed. Results suggest that the university students preferred interpreters to combine both interpretation styles, switching between literal and free approaches when appropriate. In doing so, students can access lecture content in Auslan while accessing subject-specific terminology or academic language in English. In terms of qualifications, the students advocated for interpreters to have a university qualification in general, especially if they are working in a university context. However, the students also acknowledged that interpreting did not provide them with full access in educational settings.
Parasnis, I., & Fischer, S. D. (2005, Fall). Perceptions of diverse educators regarding ethnic-minority deaf college students, role models, and diversity. American Annals of the Deaf, 150(4), 343-349.
In a qualitative study, the researchers documented the perceptions of deaf and hearing ethnically diverse university faculty and staff regarding issues related to the education of ethnic-minority deaf college students. These experienced educators commented on the importance of ethnic-minority role models for deaf college students, the academic preparedness of ethnic-minority deaf students, these students’ level of comfort on campus, and the success of institutional efforts to increase awareness regarding ethnic diversity. The insightful reflections of these diverse educators can be informative in improving the educational experience of ethnic-minority deaf students.
Pearson, H. (2010). Complicating intersectionality through the identities of a hard of hearing Korean adoptee: An autoethnography. In L. D. Patton, R. A. Shahjahan; & N. Osei-Kofi (Eds.), Emergent Approaches to Diversity and Social Justice in Higher Education [Feature Issue]. Equity & Excellence in Education, 43(3), 341-356.
Within education and social justice, the lenses of race, class, and gender are prevalent in analyzing multifaceted oppression, but there is a need to expand beyond those in order to obtain a more in-depth understanding of the intricacies of oppression. The autoethnographic approach enables me to use my experiences a Korean adoptee with a disability as an entry point to examine intersectional and interlocking oppression and to offer a different frame of reference that is absent in the literature: the integration of Korean adoptee and Disability Studies literature to further problematize each field and to complicate and advance the understanding of oppression. The critical self-reflexive process of writing allowed me to contest the prevailing representation and knowledge through my experiences and to develop an awareness of how we all are ensnared in this process of constructing/deconstructing oppression; thus personal and societal experiences of oppression and privilege are not easily separated. In order to shift toward a collaboratively oriented social justice, we must realize that focusing on one or multiple forms of oppression, but not all, cannot lead to true social justice change and transformation because all forms of oppression interact in a convoluted manner that reinforce or undermine each other in an entangled labyrinth.
Punch, R., Hyde, M., & Power, D. (2007). Career and workplace experiences of Australian university graduates who are deaf or hard of hearing. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12(4), 504-517.
This article reports on the experiences of a group of deaf and hard-of-hearing alumni of Griffith University in south-east Queensland, Australia. Participants completed a survey answering questions about their communication patterns and preferences, working lives, career barriers or difficulties anticipated and encountered, and workplace accommodations used or sought. Results revealed a range of career barriers and workplace difficulties encountered by these participants, as well as solutions found and strategies used by them. Differences in employment sector, job-search activities, difficult workplace situations, and use of accommodations were noted between 2 groups: those who communicated primarily in Australian Sign Language and considered themselves to have a Deaf or bicultural identity and those who communicated primarily in spoken English and considered themselves to have a hearing identity. Implications for university services supporting deaf and hard-of-hearing students are outlined, and suggestions for further research are made.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2001). The representation and attainment of students with a hearing loss at the Open University. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3).
An analysis of the representation and attainment of students with hearing loss is carried out, based upon students who were registered on undergraduate courses at the Open University in 1996. Students with hearing loss were older, more likely to be female and had begun their studies with a lower-level of prior education than students with no reported disability.
Richardson, J. T. E., Long, G. L., & Foster, S. B. (2004). Academic engagement in students with a hearing loss in distance education. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9(1), 68-85.
This investigation compared 267 students with a hearing loss and 178 students with no declared form of disability who were taking courses by distance learning in terms of their scores on an abbreviated version of the Academic Engagement Form. Students with a hearing loss obtained lower scores than students with no disability with regard to communication with other students, but some felt that communication was easier than in a traditional academic situation. Students who were postvocationally deaf had lower scores than students with no disability on learning from other students, but they obtained higher scores on student autonomy and student control. In general, the impact of a hearing loss on engagement in distance education is relatively slight.
Richardson, J. T. E., MacLeod-Gallinger, J., McKee, B. G., & Long, G. L. (2000). Approaches to studying in deaf and hearing students in higher education. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(2) 156-173.
We conducted a survey to compare the responses of 149 deaf students and 121 hearing students taking the same courses to a shortened and adapted version of the Approaches to Studying Inventory. In general, the impact of deafness on approaches to studying was relatively slight, and deaf students appeared to be at least as capable as hearing students of engaging with the underlying meaning of the materials to be learned. We used factor analysis to identify eight scales, and differences between the two groups were statistically significant on four of these scales. Discriminant analysis indicated that deaf students found it more difficult to relate ideas on different topics and that this was more marked in those who preferred to communicate using sign. However, deaf students were more likely than hearing students to adopt a critical approach and to analyze the internal structure of the topics studied.
Richardson, J. T. E., Marschark, M., Sarchet, T., & Sapere, P. (2010). Deaf and hard-of-hearing students’ experiences in mainstream and separate postsecondary education. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 15(4), 358-382.
In order to better understand academic achievement among deaf and hard-of-hearing students in different educational placements, an exploratory study examined the experiences of postsecondary students enrolled in mainstream programs (with hearing students) versus separate programs (without hearing students) at the same institution. The Course Experience Questionnaire, the Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory, and the Classroom Participation Questionnaire were utilized to obtain information concerning their perceptions, participation, and access to information in the classroom. Both groups were concerned with good teaching and the acquisition of generic skills. Both were motivated by the demands of their assessments and by a fear of failure while being alert to both positive and negative affect in their classroom interactions. Overall, students in separate classes were more positive about workload expectations, instructor feedback, and the choices they had in coursework. Students in mainstream classes were more positive about their acquisition of analytic skills (rather than rote memorization) and about their instructors’ interest in them, including flexibility in methods of assessment.
Richardson, J. T. E., & Woodley, A. (2001). Perceptions of academic quality among students with a hearing loss in distance education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 563-570.
There has been little research on the experiences of students with a hearing loss in mainstream higher education. This investigation compared perceptions of academic quality in 265 students with a hearing loss who were taking courses by distance learning and 178 students taking the same courses who had no declared form of disability. Students who were classified as hard of hearing (rather than deaf) produced significantly lower ratings of the appropriateness of their academic workload than did the students with no declared disability, but the ratings produced by students who were classified as deaf were not significantly different from those produced by the comparison group. In other respects, the students with a hearing loss were remarkably similar to the students with no declared disability in their perceptions of academic quality and their overall satisfaction with their courses.
Scherer, H. L., Snyder, J. A, & Fisher, B. S. (2010, November 17). Victimization risk among a national sample of disabled and deaf college students. Paper presented at the ASC Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California. Retrieved from: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p431569_index.html.
Recent estimates from the 2007 National Crime Victimization Survey demonstrate that individuals with physical and cognitive disabilities experience a significantly higher risk of violent and sexual victimization than those without disabilities. Although these findings are important for establishing that disabled individuals are more likely to be victimized, they do not shed light on the specific lifestyle and routine activities of disabled victims that may influence their risk of victimization. Using data from the 2008 American College Health Association’s (ACHA) National College Health Assessment II (NCHA-II), we apply the lifestyle-routine activities theory to subsamples of hearing impaired, physically disabled, and visually impaired students to determine what lifestyle factors influence their risk of victimization for violent and sexual offenses. The ACHA-NCHA-II is a large-scale survey administered to college students (N=26,685) in the US that includes specific and direct measures of lifestyle and routine activities. We hypothesize that differences in risk of victimization among physically disabled and hearing and visually impaired students can be attributed to variations in lifestyle and routine activities. Additionally, we predict that while controlling for lifestyle characteristics, disabled and impaired students will be more likely to be victimized than those without disabilities due to their heightened vulnerabilities.
Schley, S., & Albertini, J. (2005, Winter). Assessing the writing of deaf college students: Reevaluating a direct assessment of writing. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(1), 96-105.
The NTID Writing Test was developed to assess the writing ability of postsecondary deaf students entering the National Technical Institute for the Deaf and to determine their appropriate placement into developmental writing courses. While previous research (Albertini et al., 1986; Albertini et al., 1996; Bochner, Albertini, Samar, & Metz, 1992) has shown the test to be reliable between multiple tesFASt raters and as a valid measure of writing ability for placement into these courses, changes in curriculum and the rater pool necessitated a new look at interrater reliability and concurrent validity. We evaluated the rating scores for 236 samples from students who entered the college during the fall 2001. Using a multiprong approach, we confirmed the interrater reliability and the validity of this direct measure of assessment. The implications of continued use of this and similar tests in light of definitions of validity, local control, and the nature of writing are discussed.
Stinson, M., Liu, Y., Saur, R., & Long, G. (1996). Deaf college students’ perceptions of communication in mainstream classes. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 1(1), 40-51.
Fifty deaf and hard-of-hearing students who were mainstreamed in postsecondary classes rated their classroom communication ease with hearing instructors, hearing peers, and deaf peers. A subgroup of these students participated in an in-depth interview that focused on perceptions of communication ease, support services, and attitudes of teachers and students toward deaf students in mainstreamed classes. Quantitative analyses indicated that students more comfortable in using speech in this setting reported being able to receive and send a greater amount and a higher quality of information than did students who were less comfortable in using speech. Both quantitative and quantitative results indicated that students varied considerably in their communication with hearing peers and professors, in their relations with deaf peers, and in their concerns about access. It is a challenge for interpreting and other support services to serve these various needs, especially when it is not unusual for these variations to occur in the same classroom.
Storbeck, C., & Martin, D. (2010, Fall). South African Deaf Education and the Deaf Community [Special Section]. American Annals of the Deaf, 155(4).
Within this special section is a subsection on “Postgraduate Education and Employment” as well as perspectives from parents and children, one of whom is a college graduate.
“Now that school-level education has been discussed, the following section will address the postschool path, which includes postgraduate education and employment for Deaf South Africans. The contributions come from education providers (both academic and vocational) as well as a Deaf learner who has been through the process. This section ends with a contribution from the employment sector, which addresses the needs of the Deaf community in gaining employment” (p. 502).
Articles in this section include:
- Postgraduate Study for Deaf South Africans
- The Postgraduate Deaf Experience
- Perspectives of Children and Parents: Family 1: The Experiences of a University Student Who Is Deaf—A Child’s Perspective
Taylor, G. & Palfreman-Kay, J. M. (2000). Helping each other: Relations between disabled and non-disabled students on Access programmes. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 24(1), 39-53.
This article highlights issues concerned with the nature of relationships between disabled students and their non-disabled peers in further education. An investigation of the relationships between disabled and non-disabled students is undertaken within a critical ethnographic framework. The interaction between students is located within a wider societal context, with a particular emphasis upon identifying the impact of oppressive social forces. Deaf students, and students with dyslexia are the particular focus of this article as a case study within a wider disability debate. The findings point to a lack of contact between disabled and non-disabled children in primary and secondary education as being an important factor in relationships between these two groups in tertiary education. A variation in experience is highlighted between the different colleges and also different Access programmes within the same institution, which raises questions about notions of fairness and equality within the Access system. Recommendations are made for the recruitment and induction of disabled and non-disabled students leading to a more integrated approach.
Tidwell, R. (2004). The “invisible” faculty member: The university professor with a hearing disability. Higher Education, 47(2), 197-210.
This article reviews the characteristics of age-related hearing loss and discusses the consequences of hearing loss for senior professors at our universities and colleges. It presents some of the strategies, for use by the hearing-impaired and the non-hearing-impaired, to adapt successfully to age-related hearing impairments. Examples are cited for the classroom and for the general university environment. By commenting on her personal experiences as a senior faculty member, the author hopes to illuminate some important issues raised when a professor has impaired hearing.