No abstract

Scientists are shaped by their unique life experiences and bring these perspectives to their research. Diversity in life and cultural experiences among scientists, therefore, broadens research directions and, ultimately, scientific discoveries. Deaf individuals, for example, have successfully contributed their unique perspectives to scientific inquiry. However, deaf individuals still face challenges in university science education. Most deaf students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines interact with faculty who have little to no experience working with deaf individuals and who often have preconceptions or simply a lack of knowledge about deaf individuals. In addition to a lack of communication access, deaf students may also feel unwelcome in STEM, as do other underrepresented groups. In this essay, we review evidence from the literature and, where data are lacking, contribute the expert opinions of the authors, most of whom are deaf scientists themselves, to identify strategies to best support deaf students in university STEM education. We describe the journey of a hypothetical deaf student and methods for faculty to create a welcoming environment. We describe and provide recommendations for classroom seating and layout, accommodations, teaching strategies, and research mentoring. We also discuss the importance of including deaf scientists in research about deaf individuals.

People with relatively limited English language proficiency find the Internet’s cancer and health information difficult to access and understand. The presence of unfamiliar words and complex grammar make this particularly difficult for Deaf people. Unfortunately, current technology does not support low-cost, accurate translations of online materials into American Sign Language. However, current technology is relatively more advanced in allowing text simplification, while retaining content. This research team developed a two-step approach for simplifying cancer and other health text. They then tested the approach, using a crossover design with a sample of 36 deaf and 38 hearing college students. Results indicated that hearing college students did well on both the original and simplified text versions. Deaf college students’ comprehension, in contrast, significantly benefitted from the simplified text. This two-step translation process offers a strategy that may improve the accessibility of Internet information for Deaf, as well as other low literacy individuals.

To investigate preferences for mobile and wearable sound awareness systems, we conducted an online survey with 201 DHH participants. The survey explores how demographic factors affect perceptions of sound awareness technologies, gauges interest in specific sounds and sound characteristics, solicits reactions to three design scenarios (smartphone, smartwatch, head-mounted display) and two output modalities (visual, haptic), and probes issues related to social context of use. While most participants were highly interested in being aware of sounds, this interest was modulated by communication preference-that is, for sign or oral communication or both. Almost all participants wanted both visual and haptic feedback and 75% preferred to have that feedback on separate devices (e.g., haptic on smartwatch, visual on head-mounted display). Other findings related to sound type, full captions vs. keywords, sound filtering, notification styles, and social context provide direct guidance for the design of future mobile and wearable sound awareness systems.

No abstract