Names are both personal and political, as they relate to identity. Woodward's 1975 etic article first mentioned a naming convention for D/deaf and prominent scholars have debated the issue since. To evaluate current preferences, the research team used an online questionnaire to gather emic insights and opinions from the community, as well as a more etic perspective from hearing individuals for work with these issues. Data from these three self-identified groups of participants, Deaf, deaf, and hearing, were analyzed.Results found high variability among responses related to the terms, D/deaf, and whether or not certain terms should remain in the lexicon. Results are discussed and presented both to contribute and to further research in the field. It is recommended that the usage of existing term(s) be adhered to and that an individual's preferred naming conventions be respected and utilized whenever possible.

While the goal of increasing numbers of underrepresented faculty members, especially Deaf professionals, has been accomplished to some extent, many are stymied in publishing their dissertation findings in peer-reviewed journals, and therefore have difficulty earning tenure. To address this need, a case study approach was utilized to investigate the development of Deaf professionals' academic writing during a five-day writing retreat. This paper discusses specific academic writing challenges including organizing ideas, finding an appropriate journal, editing, submitting, as well as handling peer reviews, rejections, and revisions. Information is provided on the final writing products, types of support, guidance, and mentorship that were employed. Findings showed that 75% of papers worked on during the retreat were successfully published in peer-reviewed journals. The importance of published work by Deaf scholars and plans for future retreats are described.

No abstract