BASIC ACADEMIC PREPARATION

INTRODUCTION

The basic academic preparation expected of most entering college students encompasses a wide range of skills. Like students in general, entering deaf and hard of hearing students vary in their preparation for college. Some have better academic foundations than others, and some are better prepared psychologically and socially for the college environment and its expectations.

The primary focus of this report is on deaf and hard of hearing college freshmen in need of remediation in one or both of two areas: (i) reading and writing in English, and (ii) mathematics. It will also explore the kinds of assessments most commonly used in these areas, suggest modifications for testing basic instruction and remediation, and make some suggestions of a programmatic kind. The report will close with a more generic discussion of needs and approaches to basic academic preparation and its corollaries, under the topic of "the first year experience".

It should be said at the outset that classroom support services such as interpreting, classroom assistive listening devices, and notetaking, important though they may be to many students, cannot substitute for basic academic preparation. These services go a long way toward removing obstacles to communication, but they alone will do little to bring the unprepared student up to the level of academic competence required by most college courses.

ASSESSMENT OF BASIC SKILLS

Regardless of their student populations, virtually all postsecondary institutions today mandate outcome assessment in order to document student progress and to assist in program evaluation and planning. For placement purposes, institutions with open enrollment practices tend to assess students more carefully today than they have in the past.

Postsecondary institutions with enrollments of deaf and/or hard of hearing students need to be aware of special considerations regarding academic assessment measures and procedures with these students. The following suggestions may be helpful in providing more accurate assessment involving these students.

• For the student who is more fluent in sign language than in English, consider alternative testing methods which allow for sign language interpretation of instructions or the examination itself. Just as dyslexic students are sometimes given oral rather than written examinations, students who are deaf or severely hard of hearing and more comfortable with sign language than English may benefit from written examinations that are interpreted in sign language. However, since interpreted tests cannot be monitored by non-signing instructors, a bond of professional trust must exist between the instructor and the interpreter to make this feasible.
• Avoid unnecessarily complex instructions and vocabulary that are subject to different interpretations. If the deaf or hard of hearing student has difficulty deciphering reading material, it is likely that both vocabulary and grammar are involved. If so, this is probably evident also in his/her written work. Care should be taken that reading and writing deficiencies not be allowed inadvertently to mask the student's proficiency in the topic being tested.
• Regardless of the strategy, extended testing time is normally necessary for any tests that involve more than limited reading. If the deaf or hard of hearing student exhibits reading/writing weaknesses, extending the testing time may reduce the effect of these weaknesses on his/her test performance.
• Don't rely on any single assessment tool, particularly for the student whose test performance falls below the expected level. Multiple assessments should be used for admissions placement and for documentation of progress. Accurate assessment of any student's ability can only be achieved by multiple measures. Since the performance of deaf and hard of hearing students often is assessed by tests that were not designed for them, this becomes even more critical for these students.

---

page 2 of 15

---