Because the surveys will be sent to NTID or cross-registered classes, it is expected that the representation of deaf or hard of hearingstudentsamong survey
respondents would be greater than the roughly 9% of the general RIT student population that they make up. This is an effective convenience sampling due to the researcher’s affiliation with the school and the ability to gain access to resources necessary to conduct the research. I would use a computerized survey similar to NCDHR’s and distribute it in a similar fashion to the Student Ratings of Teaching Effectiveness (SRATE). Currently when a student logs in to fill out a survey about the effectiveness of their professors, there is a link that allows you to view the survey in ASL or in English. I would inquire about receiving permission to use the SRATE system because students are already familiar with it. Although this study will survey the student body, the individual students are the units of analysis. The study will be cross-sectional because the survey is assessing lifetime prevalence of victimization up to the point of the survey so a longitudinal approach is not
Age. Cappelli, Daniels, Durieux-Smith, McGrath, and Neuss (1995) found that age was a significant predictor of peer rejection among 23 elementary students with hearing loss. Older children experienced higher peer acceptance than younger children. For collegestudents, first- year students tend to have more social difficulties in developing social bonds with peers. Kersting (1997) interviewed deafcollegestudents with little or no exposure to Deaf culture and language before enrolling in universities that are not geared specifically to deafstudents. During their college orientation and the first year, feelings of loneliness, isolation, and resentment were the most intensive. Without familiarity with Deaf culture and skills in sign language, the deafstudents experienced alienation from their deaf peers. Simultaneously, they were separated from hearing peers because of communication barriers and stereotypes. However, these students’ social life had improved during the second and fourth years since more deaf and hearing friends were included in their social networks. The reasons for these changes might be due to improved communication skills and increased participation in social activities.
overcoming barriers (e.g. disability), Maori, Pasifika, Academic, students who are parents, hardship, mature students over 20 years of age. Students need to be enrolled in a teaching course at the UC College of Education; and are full financial members of EdUC8; and have been members of EdUC8 throughout their enrollment at the University of Canterbury.
P OSTSCRIPT PERTAINING TO LAWS AND REGULATIONS 1
This report does much to dispel the notion that note- taking is “no big deal.” It is clear from the level of detail regarding substantive notetaking skills as well as the detail regarding the establishment of policies, practices, and procedures for coordinating the provision and use of notetaking services that service providers should give a great deal of thought to the notetaking services provided by their institutions. Key points addressed include the fact that notetaking is itself a critical service and is not redundant to interpreting, for example. In addition, the recogni tion should be made that notes that may be adequate for or useable by hearingstudents may not be either adequate for or useable by deaf and hard of hearingstudents. The relevant language issues must be dealt with in a systematic and educated fashion. This chapter offers a “best practice” model of notetaking while discussing less thorough models which are nonetheless prevalent, and indeed adequate, on many college campuses. While the law does not require that institutions provide “Cadillac” note- taking services, a clear rationale for doing so is contained in this report.
Experiences of students with ASD in the Mississippi community college system. The main purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of how students with ASD
experience the community college setting in Mississippi. Students with ASD more frequently attend community colleges than four-year institutions (Roux, et al, 2015), thus creating the potential for an influx of students with ASD in community college systems. The analysis of the combined lived experiences of research participants with ASD helped identify student-related, structural and organizational, and environmental themes that affect academic success at the community college level. Because research suggests that students with ASD are less likely to complete post-secondary education than their neuro-typical peers, it is important to look more closely at ways to prevent student attrition. The primary goal of the study was to contribute to the literature that addresses lived experiences of students with ASD in higher education, specifically in the Mississippi community college system. The study also aimed to provide recommendations, which can be applied to the environmental and social structures in a community college environment and can subsequently support academic success for students with ASD. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews and was analyzed and organized into primary themes. The study was guided by three research questions:
Deaf community at NTID, while often integrated with the hearing population of RIT, serves as an extremely large and influential microsystem for the students who attend this institution. It is important to note that NTID is one of the nine colleges that are a part of RIT. Students who are registered under the NTID name who prefer a more mainstream education can attend classes with assistive support services such as C-PRINT, interpreting, and notetaking. While NTID is situated near the dormitory and main dining hall section of the campus, DHH students often gather in the common areas of the NTID college, socializing before, in-between, and after classes. This open public space, also known as the Shumway Dining Commons, provides an opportunity for students to socialize and share information about their engagement and political beliefs. At the Commons, the majority of the students use ASL. Additionally, there are various campus groups that are characterized as on-campus clubs. These clubs provide gateway
Third-party Interpreters at College C
Approximately two years ago, College C ceased directly employing interpreters and coordinators. The institution contracts exclusively with a single third-party provider, and contacts note that students, faculty, and staff all report a higher level of service compared to the previous in-house interpreters and coordinator. The agency charges the institution with two hourly rates—daytime (8:00 am to 5:00 pm) and weekend rates—and the agency’s full time coordinator is stationed on campus. Contacts state that interpreters are always available when required, and students may request an interpreter with as little as 48 hours notice. Contacts report, however, that agency availability may be limited in other regions;
collaborate in teaching the definition and different forms of bullying and cyberbullying prevention to both students and staff. It is important to note that “…students with certain communication or processing disabilities may need to have the bullying definition explained in terms of concrete behaviors rather than relational terms” (pg. 64). Bullying prevention efficacy refers to the ability of students and staff to recognize and act to stop a bullying incident that occurs whether it is on or off-campus. In many cases, all public or private schools must have a clearly written anti-bullying policy that is available for viewing at any time via electronic or paper means. This anti-bullying policy should establish a step-by-step reporting procedure and make known the consequences of bullying to all stakeholders – parents, students, employees, and community members.
unforgettable journey. First, and foremost, I thank the students who participated in my study. I admire their spirit and am humbled by their courage and their willingness to share their stories with me. I also am grateful to my dissertation committee—my chairperson, Dr. Jeannine Dingus-Eason, and my committee member, Dr. Shannon Cleverley-Thompson—for always challenging me to dig deeper and go further. This study would not be what it is without them. I am thankful for the time and dedication of all of the faculty members who taught the courses I took in the Executive Leadership program at St. John Fisher College, and for Betsy Christiansen, who truly is the glue who holds the program together. Finally, I owe a deep debt of gratitude to my family, friends, and colleagues who believed in me, cheered me on, and gave me strength when I needed it most. This dissertation is dedicated to all of the people in my life whose love,
Students who are deaf or hard of hearing bring a unique set of strengths and experiences to college. While many may learn in different ways, these differences do not imply inferior capacity to learn. Accommodations may be needed, as well as modifications in the way information is presented and in methods of testing and evaluation. Faculty will be aided in these efforts by understanding students' prior learning experiences, using available resources at SAIC and collaborating with support services staff.
Ranging from Agriculture to World Languages, there are more than 80 Praxis tests, which contain selected- response questions or constructed-response questions, or a combination of both.
Who takes the tests and why?
Some colleges and universities use the Praxis Core Academic Skills for Educators tests (Reading, Writing, and Mathematics) to evaluate individuals for entry into teacher education programs. The assessments are generally taken early in your college career. Many states also require Core Academic Skills test scores as part of their teacher licensing process.
During class discussion, allow time for the deaf student to participate. Pause to give the deaf student time to communicate through the interpreter and for the interpreter to voice a question or answer back to you. If you are reading out loud, don’t read so quickly that the deaf student and interpreter can’t keep up with you and the rest of the class. This is just as important for the hard of hearing student who is speechreading or using an assistive listening device. You want all your students to have access to the best education possible, so be sure the interpreter is knowledgeable and qualified. Qualified interpreters have specialized training, a code of ethics and hold state and/or national certification. State rehabilitation services, college interpreter training programs, and state chapters of the Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf can assist. When the student relies on an interpreter, remember these points: Look at the deaf person not the interpreter when talking. Speak directly to that student, and don’t use third person speech. Make sure the student has a clear line of sight to you and the interpreter. Avoid having the interpreter sit or stand in shadows or in front of bright lights and windows. Don’t have the interpreter near sources of noise. Avoid private conversations with others in the presence of a deaf person because the interpreter must interpret everything said. Speak naturally; interpreters will ask you for clarification or to slow down. Finally, consider breaks if you have a long lecture. Signing and watching an interpreter require a lot more energy than simply listening.
Fully Accessible Campus
With more than 1,200 deaf and hard- of-hearingstudents in our college community, RIT has made sure our campus is fully accessible. Specially designed dorm rooms include strobe fire alarms and doorbells. Visual emergency warning systems are present in academic buildings, and an emergency notification system is in place for increased campus safety. RIT also provides high-speed computing access that is hard to beat anywhere. In fact, The Princeton Review consistently ranks RIT among the most connected campuses in the country.
Educational audiologists spend considerable time and energy researching, assessing, ameliorating and generally grappling with the challenges and issues of classroom acoustics, and creating environments conducive to learning for all students. There is a wealth of evidence available documenting the speech perception, learning, and behavior challenges that result when small children are expected to learn under adverse acoustical conditions, particularly when those children also experience hearing loss (Crandell & Bess, 1986; Finitzo-Heiber & Tillman, 1978; Flexer, 2004). However, less has been written about the challenges of students with hearing loss at the post-secondary level. Students with hearing loss entering a college or university not only face the usual uncertainties and fears, but also contend with the abysmal acoustics of many lecture halls, large class sizes, uninformed or unsympathetic professors, uneven support services for students with disabilities, lack of accessibility to assistive devices, and sudden withdrawal of the academic support typically available at the high school level for students with hearing loss.
dents will occur only if there is careful analysis of the problems in educating students with this approach, if there are intelligently designed instructional programs for addressing these problems, and if there is thorough study of these programs (Kauffmann, 1993). These considerations apply regardless of the specific educa- tional placement of the student in the continuum of op- tions. In describing the general field of special edu- cation, Kauffman commented that little is known regarding how placement combines with instructional approaches and student characteristics result in educa- tional outcomes, and this comment is also at least as applicable to the field of education of D/HH students. Research on e ffectiveness of different placement ap- proaches is di fficult to conduct with D/HH students, as with other special populations, because students placed in different types of settings are rarely similar even when researchers attempt to control for student characteristics (Hocutt, 1996; Kluwin & Stinson, 1993). In addition, the dispersion of students who are extensively mainstreamed among different local schools contributes to logistical complications that can make it di fficult for researchers to collect data from a large enough sample to produce reliable results.
HH students are enrolled in RIT classes; their learning is supported with sign language interpreters and live captionists. Communication among D/HH students and their hear- ing peers in the F2F courses is challenging for a variety of reasons. Although the D/HH students can use a support service to participate in class discussions with their hearing peers, they are limited by communication-related challenges such as the processing time required for the interpreter to convey the message. Lack of knowledge of interpretation protocols is also a concern as instructors often call on a hearing student for an answer be- fore the interpreter has finished signing the original question. Furthermore, observation of mixed groups of D/HH and hearingstudents indicates that in small groups members often communicate directly with each other (hearing to hearing and deaf to deaf) instead of go- ing through a service provider for communication between deaf and hearing participants (Stinson, Liu, Saur, & Long, 1996). Direct communication between D/HH and hearing stu- dents is often a challenge and decreases the level of participation by some or all members of the group. These communication difficulties often lead to student passivity (Saur, Layne, Hurley, & Opton, 1986) and decreased learning for the deaf and hard-of-hearingstudents (Richardson, Marschark, Sarchet, & Sapere, 2010).
Local norms for deaf and hard-of-hearingstudents
Kecia A. Boncek
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
ODHH understands that purchasing hearing aids is very expensive and many health insurance providers may not cover a portion of the cost between testing and hearing aids. As mentioned earlier, ODHH does not provide funding assistance for hearing aids; however, we have listed organizations below that do provide funding assistance for those who qualify. The listing is categorized under national, state, and local resources. We hope this gives you an opportunity to make the purchase of hearing aids possible.