Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
The sociopolitics of deaf students' access to higher education
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

The sociopolitics of deaf students' access to higher education

897
views

Published on

Presentation by Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd and Beppie van den Bogaerde at the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Conference 2010, Vienna, 14–16 July 2010.

Presentation by Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd and Beppie van den Bogaerde at the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Conference 2010, Vienna, 14–16 July 2010.

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
897
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • When we mention ‘Deaf/hoh’ we mean the full range of hearing impairment. 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Don’t forget to mention: these are UK research figures: no reliable incidence data for NL Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010
  • Uit: http://www.scienceguide.nl/200901/studiesucces,-rendementen-en-uitvallers.aspx Zie kruistabel van Rob vraag 9 (studievertraging opgelopen) en vraag 43 (studievertraging door D/HoH) IN HUN EIGEN PERCEPTIE CBS-cijfers geven aan dat van de studenten die in de periode 1995–2002 aan een voltijdstudie op het hbo begon, ongeveer 57 procent de opleiding binnen vijf jaar afrondde. Bij de deeltijdstudies ligt dit rond de 47 procent. Van de voltijdse hbo-studenten die in 2000 aan hun studie begonnen, haalde circa 40% na 4 jaar een diploma, 55% na vijf jaar en na 6 jaar blijkt dat 62% een hbo- diploma en 2% een wo-diploma heeft gehaald. Van de deeltijders heeft minder dan de helft na 6 jaar de finish bereikt. Uitval Van de hbo’ers die in 1995 of later aan een voltijdstudie begonnen, haakte al na 1 jaar ongeveer 1 op 7 af. Bij de cohorten 1995–1999 verliet uiteindelijk ongeveer 25% het hbo zonder af te studeren. Van cohort 2000 is na 6 jaar 22% uitgevallen en 14% nog steeds bezig met de opleiding. Vergelijken we dit met het wo dan zien we dat de uitval na 7 jaar op 13% [hierbij wordt een overstap naar het hbo niet als uitval bezien] ligt en dat ook hier 14% nog steeds bezig is. Ongeveer 73% van de voltijdse wo-studenten haalde na 7 jaar een diploma in het hoger onderwijs, deels na omzwaai naar het hbo. De uitval uit het wo na 7 jaar is ongeveer 13% (overstap naar het hbo wordt niet als uitval gerekend), terwijl na 7 jaar nog 14% van de studenten bezig is met de studie. 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 45% komt van thema 2, vraag 2,3,4 77% wil wel: vraag 28 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • vraag 3.1 of 29. 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Vraag 3.3 of 30 Aanpassingen in het onderwijs..20-vd 27 hebben dit beantwoord. Zie diagram in Survey Monkey > naar Excel Moet evt vertaald worden en duidelijker gemaakt…. 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Vraag 32 of 3.4 – Materiële ondersteuning… vooral verschil in gekregen en gewenst…. 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Vraag 3.2 of 30 … idem 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Speciale bril dat geluiden kan omzetten in de leesbare ondertiteling op de lenzen. Vraag 3.5/3.6 of 33/34…. In eerste tekstblok 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 4.2, 37 en 4.3, 38 vragen combineren 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • 15-16 July 2010 EDI 2010 Thoutenhoofd & Van den Bogaerde
  • Transcript

    • 1. The sociopolitics of access Deaf students in Dutch higher education Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd, University of Groningen Beppie van den Bogaerde, Hogeschool Utrecht Paper presented at Equality Diversity Inclusion (EDI) 2010 Conference Vienna, Austria 14-16 July 2010 In collaboration with: Expertisecentrum handicap + studie Signo Ergo Sum | Jongerencommissie
    • 2. Contents
      • There is reported concern about the participation of disabled students in Dutch higher education. Deaf and hard-of-hearing (hoh) students have themselves pointed to clear concerns, but also noted their willingness to help find solutions.
      • In response to that impulse a new initiative developed to research and improve the participation of deaf/hoh students in Dutch higher education over time.
      • This presentation introduces that national initiative.
    • 3. Background
      • Dutch FE/HE institutions do not monitor the number of disabled students.
      • Recent research suggests serious shortcomings in the access provisions of FE/HE institutions. (Risbo/SEOR 2009: Studeren met een functiebeperking)
      • There is added concern about the participation rates and study-success of disabled students in dutch FE/HE. (OCW 2010: Onbelemmerd Studeren)
      • Dutch (demissionary) secretary of state for education recently called for access criteria in FE/HE accreditation system. (Marja van Bijsterveldt-Vliegenthart, letter from OCW to Parliament dated 12 March 2010)
      • A national organisation, handicap+studie, is tasked with sharing expertise in relation to access arrangements in tertiary education.
    • 4. Deaf/hoh students themselves discussed access in terms of empowerment . They called for improvements in the FE/HE support infrastructure. SESposium, Amsterdam, January 2010
    • 5. Earlier study: Scotland (2005) An earlier study focussed on the linguistic nature of deaf/hoh access needs and support. It called for the establishment of a national expertise centre for linguistic access. The centre would benefit a diverse range of students including also dyslexic, foreign, and ethnic minority students. (Brennan, Grimes and Thoutenhoofd 2005: Deaf students in Scottish Higher Education; The Scottish Funding Council)
    • 6. Assumptions in the Dutch context
      • The following background assumptions guided the development of the current initiative:
      • There is reported structural underperformance of primary/secondary deaf education.
      • Deaf youngster are at-risk in school-work transitions, and at risk of relative under-employment.
      • They are at habitual risk of social exclusion in- and outside education.
    • 7. Access to higher education
      • Institutions offer minimal proactive support for deaf/hoh students, since
        • Secondary school results contra-indicate tertiary education
        • Policy measures punish institutions for study delays
        • There is unwillingness to be a magnet for sub-optimal students
        • There is negligible legal imperative or grass-roots activism
        • Contextual data collection is culturally impopular
        • There is comparatively modest public awareness or disquiet
        • Access arrangements need to be instigated by students
      • Under these conditions, underparticipation is an anticipated finding of the current research initiative.
    • 8. Objectives
      • The objectives of the research initiative are to:
      • Network deaf/hoh students during their study;
      • Embed the network in FE/HE;
      • Research practice through practical interventions;
      • Encourage professionalisation of access support;
      • Distribute and publicly discuss results, and
      • Improve successful participation rates among deaf/hoh students.
    • 9. Methodological approach
      • Establish a student network of action research
        • Include FE/HE support professionals
        • Host frequent learning conversations
      • Train deaf/hoh students in collaborative action-research
      • Support the network with research skills and resources
      • Host annual surveys
      • Publicly report intentions, activities and findings
      • National network-building scheduled to start 2010-2011
    • 10. How many students are deaf/hoh?
      • There is no reliable ascertainment research that indicates the national number of deaf people or deaf learners in the Netherlands.
      • The incidence of deaf/hoh youth in the UK is 2.16 per 1,000 population.
      • Assuming the UK incidence figure, the incidence of deaf/hoh learners in the Dutch population can be estimated as follows:
        • in 1,553,000 pupils in primary ≈ 3,354 may be deaf/hoh
        • in 941,000 pupils in secondary ≈ 2,032 may be deaf/hoh
        • (total figures based on CBS jaarboek 2009)
        • in 375,000 students in FE ≈ 810 may be deaf/hoh
        • in 213,900 students in HE ≈ 462 may be deaf/hoh (total figures based on OCW kerncijfers 2008)
    • 11.
        • Deaf / hoh students may follow lectures using a Dutch sign language (NGT) interpreter and/or a speech-to-text interpreter. We asked one national agency (Tolknet) to let us have the number of persons booking interpreters for higher education purposes.
      Interpreter bookings
    • 12. Interpreter bookings 2010 The table shows the educational users of Tolknet. 46 deaf/hoh persons booked interpreters for higher education study in jan-june 2010. type of education number Primary education 7 Secondary education 20 MBO (intermediate vocational education) 48 Lifelong learning or Placement 26 Higher education 46 Unknown 15 Total 162
    • 13. Baseline questionnaire (n=27)
      • The research team hosted a first pilot survey about access support arrangements in higher education in May/June 2010. It is an initial inventory of deaf/hoh student participation.
      • The survey covered five themes:
        • Basic information about the chosen study
        • Registration and making contact about support
        • A comparison of granted and wished for support
        • A measure of social acceptence/motivation
        • Study predictions—how well do deaf/hoh students think they are progressing with their studies?
      • In the first trial 45 students were identified; 27 (60%) completed the survey.
    • 14. General findings
      • 16 (62%) of respondents are in higher professional training. 6 (23%) are in university. 4 (15%) have dropped out. 17 (65%) of respondents are >5 yrs into their study. 11 (41%) are 1 year delayed in their study. 3 (11%) are 2 years delayed in their study.
      • There is a strong, significant interaction between deaf/hoh status and study-delay (Cramer’s V=.65, p =0.005). However, this interaction has yet to be compared with study-delay among hearing students generally, and it is based on a small sample size.
    • 15.
      • Of the respondents, 16 (n=23, 70%) could not specify their deaf/hoh status during registration. 17 respondents (n=22, 77%) have no objection to this.
      • However, 13 (n=24, 54%) students explicitly declined to specify their deaf/hoh status. The reasons that were provided include:
        • do not think it necessary (2)
        • do not see myself as functionally impaired (2)
        • did not know that this was possible (8)
        • left registration to previous institution (1)
      • Despite issues with indicating their deaf/hoh status, most respondents did have a meeting with an advisor or coach at the start of their study.
      Registration and advice
    • 16. Detailed findings
      • The following slides show response-graphs in relation to various forms of support. In each case they address the support repondents were granted, and what they (in addition) would wish for, in terms of:
      • Course adaptations
      • Assessment adaptations
      • Human and material support
      • Technical and general support
      • Additional forms of support, and
      • Social acceptance and belonging
      • The total number of responses may vary per question and item.
    • 17. Course adaptations
    • 18. Assessment adaptations
    • 19. Human and material support
    • 20. Technical and general support
    • 21. Additional forms of support
      • The following was given in response to an open question about which additional forms of support the deaf/hoh respondent would like to use:
      • Facebook and other ‘web-02’ facilities; Instant message networking; Smartphone communications; Interpreter to correct language of written assignments; Audio-recorders during contact hours; Speech-to-text interpreter for text-transcription, and
      • Special glasses that can change speech into subtitling on the lenses.
    • 22. Social acceptance & motivation
    • 23. Conclusions The following conclusions can be drawn from this initial survey. There is cause to suppose considerable under-participation of deaf/hoh students in dutch FE/HE. Deaf/hoh students get general support, but wish for specific support. With respect to assessments, deaf/hoh students benefit from adjustments already in place for dyslectic students (e.g. extra time, adapted assignments). Deaf/hoh students wish for cutting edge technical support, of which there is very little provided.
    • 24. Initial recommendations
      • In view of our preliminary findings, we think the following initial recommendations may be proposed to further guide our project:
      • Public agencies might collect incidence data;
      • Institutions might proactively engage at-risk populations;
      • Deaf/hoh students might actively circulate solutions.
      • This last point calls for a change in access culture with respect to co-owning issues, generating relevant data, establishing self-critical dialogue, and collective intervening in current practice.
    • 25. Email contacts Queries about this project may be directed to: Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd (e.d.thoutenhoofd@rug.nl) or Beppie van den Bogaerde (beppie.vandenbogaerde@hu.nl)
    • 26. Thank you for your attention Deaf students in Dutch higher education Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd, University of Groningen Beppie van den Bogaerde, Hogeschool Utrecht Paper presented at Equality Diversity Inclusion (EDI) 2010 Conference Vienna, Austria 14-16 July 2010 In collaboration with: Expertisecentrum handicap + studie Signo Ergo Sum | Jongerencommissie