Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller theodore procter kelly quinn meagan rose
Download
1 / 19

Margarita Geller Mariya Gorelik Liz Kim Matt Mosteller - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 74 Views
  • Uploaded on

Margarita Geller Mariya Gorelik Liz Kim Matt Mosteller Theodore Procter Kelly Quinn Meagan Rose. Research Problem Literature Review Research Question Timeline. Employment and income of deaf individuals is lower than that of hearing individuals 1,2

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Margarita Geller Mariya Gorelik Liz Kim Matt Mosteller' - mura


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller theodore procter kelly quinn meagan rose

Margarita Geller Mariya Gorelik

Liz Kim Matt Mosteller

Theodore Procter Kelly Quinn

Meagan Rose


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

mainstream schools of hearing individuals

(+) Improved development of oral language skills when immersed in a “natural linguistic environment”4

(-)Less help for deaf and hard of

hearing students due to lack of

differentiation in the curriculum5

(-) Less participation in the classroom5


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

specialized schools of hearing individuals

(+) More friends and more

opportunities for communication5

(+) Students are more comfortable

communicating with their peers6

(-) Communicate in a homogeneous

environment


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

career preparation of hearing individuals

  • Dependent upon agencies for employment and family for financial security7

  • Programs to start career planning in high school through RIT8

  • Gallaudet students in the business program must have one internship in order to graduate9


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

recent trends of hearing individuals

  • American Disabilities Act

  • Cochlear Implants

  • IEP (Individualized Education Plan)

    • Ends when the student gets to college6


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

gaps in the literature of hearing individuals

  • Focus on younger students

    • very little post-secondary education research

  • Many studies compare hearing to deaf, but not many compare deaf to other deaf


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

Are specialized or mainstream of hearing individuals

universities more effective at teaching

their deaf students communication

skills that are necessary to succeed

in the workforce?


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

recruiting participants of hearing individuals

  • Use of Disability Support Services (DSS)

  • Liaison at Gallaudet


Written surveys
written surveys of hearing individuals

  • Online surveys, through email

  • Original instrument created by the team


Interviews
interviews of hearing individuals

  • During

    • Maryland & Gallaudet

    • Interpreter

    • Class environment, academic requirements, career development

  • After

    • Analysis of communication skills

    • Existing rubric

      • Comm. department, online, Gallaudet


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

spring 2008: gantt chart of hearing individuals


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

junior year of hearing individuals

  • Junior Colloquia

  • Draft & distribute online survey

  • Conduct interviews

  • Statistical & qualitative analysis

  • Begin to draft thesis

  • Begin to draft journal article


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

senior year of hearing individuals

  • Final thesis paper

  • Apply for academic journal publication

  • Team Thesis Conference


Questions
Questions? of hearing individuals


Margarita geller mariya gorelik liz kim matt mosteller

  • 1 of hearing individualsWheeler-Scruggs, K. (2002). Assessing the employment and independence of people who are deaf and low functioning. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(4), 11-17.

  • 2Winn, S. (2006). Is there a link between hearing aid use, employment, and income. American Annals of the Deaf, 151(4), 434-440.

  • 3Bullis, M., Davis, C., Bull, B., & Johnson, B. (1997). Expectations versus realities: examination of the transition plans and experiences of adolescents who are deaf and adolescents who are hearing. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 40(4), 14-251.

  • 4Herring-Harrison, T. J., Gardner III, R., & Lovelace, T. S. (2007). Adapting peer tutoring for learners who are deaf or hard of hearing. Intervention in School & Clinic, 43(2), 82-87.

  • 5Angelides, P., & Aravi, C. (2007). A comparative perspective on the experiences of deaf and hard of hearing individuals as students at mainstream and special schools. American Annals of the Deaf, 151(5), 476-487.

  • 6 Bonds, B. G. (2003). School-to-work experiences: Curriculum as a bridge. American Annals of the Deaf, 148(1), 38-48.

  • 7Wheeler-Scruggs, K. (2002). Assessing the employment and independence of people who are deaf and low functioning. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(4), 11-17.

  • 8Bradley, M. (2004). A quiet success: career and technical education for deaf students. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers, 79(2), 17-24.

  • 9 Bollag, B. (2006). The debate over deaf education. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(36), 18-21.