In this master’s thesis we present the obstacles and the adjustments faced by the deaf students in higher education. We focused especially on their higher education teachers, whose views and willingness to provide adjustments greatly influence the success of students with special needs.
The theoretical part is divided into four bigger sections. In the first section we focused on different definitions of deafness and at the same time we drew attention on its complexity. Furthermore, we presented the meaning of sign language, the meaning of sign language interpreters, means of communication with a deaf person and the consequences of deafness. In the second section we focused on the education of deaf people. With the help of historical summary, we wanted to draw attention to the long-lasting discrimination of deaf people in the field of education. Keeping in mind the different current situation, we focused on the adjustments of higher education for deaf students in the third section. We presented the legal basis, including international and Slovene documents, where the adjustments are legally defined. We wrote about the recommendations entitled Prijazen študij za študente invalide (Mauko 2010) (Friendly study for disabled students) intended for higher education teachers who are also teaching disabled people. The analysis of the recommendations was followed by an analysis of trainings available for the teachers and by propositions on how these trainings could be improved. Moreover, we presented the interpreting in higher education as an essential adjustment for deaf students. In the final part of the theoretical part we compared the current situation in the Slovenian higher education to the situations in the USA and in Italy.
In the empirical part of the thesis we researched the obstacles faced by deaf students during their studies, the available adjustments, the types of communication that students choose and why they choose them. By interviewing their higher education teachers, we tried to find out about the obstacles that they are encountering while working with deaf students. We also tried to find out what kind of adjustments they know and provide, what influences their actions and if they want to change them. We were interested in their opinion whether they feel qualified enough to work with deaf students and whether they were offered a training that could enhance their ability to work with people with special needs. At the end of the interview we offered every participant the possibility of glance into the future. At the end of the empirical part we presented their wishes or propositions for the improvement of the current situation.
|
