Accessing University Education: Perceptions, Preferences, and Expectations for Interpreting by Deaf Students

Abstract

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.

The experiences of deaf and hard of hearing students at a Queensland University: 1985–2005

“…In a study of sign language interpreting for deaf Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) students, Marschark, Sapere, Convertino and Seewagen (2005) found that the students did not acquire as much information from lectures as their hearing peers even with experienced interpreters who were familiar to the students. In Australia, Napier and Barker (2004) conducted a study involving four deaf university students in a panel discussion about their perceptions of interpreting in lectures. These students reported that they never accessed 100% of a university lecture, with estimates of how much they understood through sign language interpreting ranging from 50-90% of lecture material.…”

“…An Australian study investigating the transition to tertiary education of eleven deaf and hard of hearing students found that many believed that they had been unprepared for the hearing-related difficulties they encountered at colleges of Technical and Further Education (TAFE) or university (McLean, Osborne, McAuliffe, Housden, & Revens, 1999). Like the other two Australian studies cited above (Komesaroff, 2005;Napier & Barker, 2004), the study involved relatively few deaf and hard of hearing participants.…”

Attitudes of Preservice Teachers Towards Teaching Deaf and ESL Students

“…It seems that preservice teachers may not recognise that deaf students, like ESL students, have a unique language and a unique culture. It is important for teachers to know that Auslan is a complete and distinct language that is not only very different to English, but quite different to spoken languages altogether (Napier & Barker, 2004).…”

“…In Australia, the majority of children with any degree of hearing loss are included in mainstream classrooms whether they rely on speech-reading, residual hearing, or sign language (Hyde, 2004;Napier & Barker, 2004). Deaf students who use Australian Sign Language (Auslan) as their first language are likely to have similarities to other students who are learning English as a second language (ESL), since both groups of students attend classes that are not in their primary language.…”

Curricular Adaptations for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students at Uned University

“…Nevertheless, few scientific studies have been conducted on deaf and hard of hearing university students. Those existing ones have focused on variables such as academic performance (Lang, 2002;Napier & Barker, 2004;Richardson, Barnes & Fleming, 2004;Richardson, Long & Foster, 2004;Richardson, MacLeod-Gallinger, McKee & Long, 2000). Furthermore, we were unable to identify scientific studies that had confirmed "the effectiveness of indicators of relevant actions and good practice concerning equality of opportunity in higher education for people with disability, that would enable progress in the formulation of standards for programmes and services aimed at university students with disability" (Alonso & Díez, 2008: 82).…”