Enhancing the Learning Environment of Deaf Students Ann E. Kelley Sobel
Joseph C. Hill
Miami University 230 J Kreger Hall Oxford, Ohio 45056 (513)529-7541
[email protected]
Systems Analysis Department Oxford, Ohio 45056 (513) 529-5928
[email protected]
Abstract The experiences of teaching a CS 1 course that included a deaf student are presented. The intention of this presentation is to provide guidelines for improving the learning environment for future classes of similar student composition.
1,
Introduction
reduce the amount of shadowing that can also obstruct the face of the instructor.
In the past academic year, it became clear that my usual approach to teaching a standard CS1 course would require adjustment when my first lecture was translated into sign language. Even the simple presence of the interpreter increased the formality of the delivery of my lecture since the sheer act of translation somehow elevated the importance of each spoken word.
The use of a computerized classroom leads to a plethora of visual obstructions. Whenever possible, try to minimize the number of terminals between the instructor and the deaf student. When working at the instructor's station, stand and look about the room when using the terminal, as long as you do not obstruct the projected image. If the room is equipped with an overhead projector, remove it from the front of the classroom since it can obstruct the student's line of sight to the interpreter and/or instructor.
Since I clearly lacked experience in this area, I strove to learn how to provide an enriching learning environment for all my students. From some simple inquiries, I found that no standard signs for computer science exist in American Sign Language [2]. Our disabilities resource office had no guidelines regarding how to teach a class consisting of both hearing and deaf students [1]. The teaching experts from Gallaudet and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf that I consulted had experience in teaching classes composed exclusively of deaf students; not with teaching classes that contained both hearing and deaf students [3,4].
3.
The computerized classroom provides the instructor with the ability to give hands-on demonstrations during a lecture. Unfortunately, the deaf student is unable to watch the interpreter, the instructor's movements, and the projection of the material displayed on the terminal at the same time. Therefore, demonstrations should be re-enacted at a slower pace after class, with the deaf student in front of the terminal. In addition, one should provide any supplemental material before the demonstration would help the deaf student to prepare for the content of demonstration.
With the enormous help and patience of my deaf student, we were able to work together to form a successful and rewarding class. It is our hope that this report of our experience will help other instructors who have a similar composition of students.
2.
Classroom
Environment
It is best for the instructor to remain in close proximity to the deaf student. This may be difficult to maintain if you have a tendency to move about the classroom, ff an interpreter is present, you may exhibit more freedom in your movement; however, be mindful to try to keep the interpreter positioned between you and the deaf student so that he/she remains in the line of sight,
A common problem in computer science centers on the inability for a client to convey adequately his problem to the programmer since the client has a thorough understanding of the context of the problem and the programmer does not. This problem also arises in the classroom with an interpreter who does not even have a cursory knowledge of computer science. We should note, however, that not all interpreters are devoid of knowledge concerning the subject matter they are translating. At the beginning of the semester, the interpreter would choose a reasonable translation; e.g., writing down one's initials for
Using an overhead projector is discouraged since it requires turning off the overhead lights. The lack of bright lighting not only makes it difficult to see the interpreter but almost impossible to see the face of the instructor. If the classroom has windows, then one should draw the shades to
Vol 31. No. 2 June 1999
Instructor
Through my experience as an instructor, I have learned to incorporate writing on the board without breaking the pace of the delivery of my lecture. This style of delivery requires modification if an interpreter is not present, since one must avoid speaking directly to the board.
71
~z:~
SIGCSE Bulletin
Deaf Students
A deaf student identifies and has similar interests/experiences with other deaf students. Some deaf students are self-conscience about their disability when around hearing students; others may fear that some hearing students may not have the patience to interact them. I thought that if my interaction with a deaf student was markedly different, I would be perceived as condescending. I came to realize that I should slightly slow my pace of delivery, speak distinctly, and look directly at the student. Communication should be a pleasant activity for both parties; the deaf student should not have to work so hard lipreading that the conversation becomes a chore! On the other hand, if a deaf student doesn't attempt to interact with other hearing students, especially when virtually the entire student body has no hearing impairment, their circle of friends may be quite limited. All students can benefit from having at least one friend that is a major in order to gain another source and interpretation of material presented in their courses.
(continued from page 71)
initialize. However, the smiles from the deaf student made it clear that the interpreter chose an inappropriate meaning. As the semester progressed, the interpreter would just ask for the meaning; e.g. to signal by changing the value of a flag. It may take some time for the interpreter to voice the precise meaning of what the deaf student is signing. The interpreter and the student may engage in several exchanges of communication before the interpreter will vocalize the intended comment or question. An instructor must be mindful of these situations and have patience when waiting for the interpreter's response. Just as the instructor was ignorant to the best way to communicate with a deaf student, so too are the other students in the class. In an attempt to break the ice, each class member was paired with the deaf student to work on in-class assignments to increase the amount of classmate interaction. Most students were as rigid as they are working with any student they do not already know. However, all students who were so paired successfully completed the assignment and received the highest grade.
5.
When interacting with the deaf student one-on-one, speak directly and distinctly to the student and avoid chewing gum or wearing sunglasses. The instructor must also remember to keep their face visible to the deaf student; e.g. do not cover your mouth when speaking. Lastly, do not refer to the deaf student in the third person when an interpreter is present; this form of reference is perceived as an insult.
4.
Conclusions
I believe my greatest challenge was to not let my insecurities inhibit the educational enrichment of a deaf student. Initially, I felt remiss for not inherently knowing what accommodations I should make in my classroom when a student is deaf. However, my student was an excellent, natural source for this information and appreciated my desire to learn how to enhance his learning experience instead of resenting my ignorance. It is the instructor's attitude and behavior towards a deaf student that will influence the other hearing students in the class to react in the same manner. Lastly, and above all else, please enjoy this chance to enrich your teaching skills.
Student
6.
Acknowledgments
When the classroom consists of all deaf students, the instructor's lecture pace is determined by the expression of the lecture using sign language. Given that the instructor is speaking at a pace for hearing students, the interpreter may have difficulty translating at this relatively fast pace. In particular, the signing of enclosing C++ symbols, e.g. { }, ( ) , and [ ], requires tracing these symbols with such care so that they can not be confused with each other; a very time intensive process! The deaf student can suggest substitute signs that are both quick to sign and easily identifiable with the particular pair of enclosing symbols to help the interpreter maintain the pace.
We extend our appreciation to both Gallaudet and RIT's National Technical Institute for the Deaf for responding to our requests for assistance. We extend a special thanks to the interpreter supplied by Miami University through the Community Services for the Deaf who enriched my knowledge of interacting with deaf students. Lastly, I [Sobel] cannot thank my co-author [Hill] enough for choosing to attend my section of CS1; I truly believe this experience has improved my teaching skills.
It is difficult to assimilate what the instructor is writing on the board and the interpreter's translation of the instructor's words as well as attempting to watch two things at once! It is desirable to enlist a fellow student to take notes using carbon paper so that you have a ready copy of his notes. Most students will naturally copy what is on the board and will embellish it with an explanation of its meaning. Using a fellow student to obtain class notes is desirable since the student has some understanding of the context and a transcriptionist probably has none. However, a transcriptionist will copy every spoken and written word, which becomes a written copy of the entire lecture. The deaf student can then generate their own class notes, outlining their personal interpretation of the salient details.
References
SIGCSE Bulletin
'~.:\~ ~:!7~
[1] Private communication, Office of Disability Resources, Miami University, 1998. [2] Private communication, Community Services for the Deaf, Southwestern Ohio region, 1998. [3] Private communication, Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, Gallaudet University, Washington, D.C., 1998. [4] Private communication, Applied Computer Technology Dept., National Institute for the Deaf, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, 1998.
72
June 1999 Vol 31. No. 2
