next »

[ticklemepink]

I have used the search function in various boards to find a particular topic that I am curious about but no success.

I am currently a MA student in humanities and profound deaf.  I do speak orally and use cochlear implant/hearing aid to hear things.  Many times people do not realize that I am deaf when I converse with them through telephone or in-person because my hearing aid is so well hidden and I speak clearly.  They are usually pretty surprised and just go with the flow.  I do not make my deafness an issue because I have been mainstreamed all my life and worked here to get this far using a variety of accommodations. 

What is surprising as I have been finding out lately is that there is a mixed of attitudes in the academia towards Deaf people as I am now reflecting back to the last 3 1/2 semesters of grad school.  Some professors expressed skepticism at first but then realized that I was a good student who worked hard, wasn't afraid to ask for clarification, and loved to participate in class.  Others largely focused on my big ideas and helped me make them presentable when I went over paper proposals and outlines.  A few criticized my writing to the point where they said "go to the writing center" or "you should've handed me a rough draft."  Of course by then, it's too late, grades were handed in.  Ouch.

I am very aware of my weaknesses, largely my English sounding a bit like an ESL speaker.  Another graduate student and an outside professor suggested that I should have sat down with each of my professor early in the semester and explained how deafness and language work.

A professor told me that there's just no way that academics (especially in humanities) would accept a PhD applicant if there's a history of language issues and "that's just the way it works."  Yes, I am aware that history demands sharp writing and that's why I worked hard throughout undergrad to bring up my writing level.  She usually respects me but I wondered if it was a bit out of line to be that passive.

At the same time, I've received compliments by other professors for my research ideas and paper content.  One of them, (incidentally) an English professor, who is my second thesis reader, wants me to publish a chapter of my thesis.  I actually have had a book review published in a peer-reviewed journal (I was actually surprised that they accepted it and it only took a few drafts to have it all ready to go).

I am very confused.  I have been turned down by 2 Ph.D. programs so far and am still waiting on a few more.  I have yet to contact to see what was the issue with my application.  I feel like I'm hitting a brick wall for my deafness as in, "A master's?  Is that all a deaf person can achieve?" 

While writing my Ph.D. applications last fall, I waffled about playing the deaf card and doing an addendum.  But only one of my schools offered a diversity statement so I played it and showed how I've overcome all the challenges that came with my deafness.  For others, I showed that essay to my LOR writers and asked them to say a few words if they felt it would clarify a few things about my application (namely the GRE verbal and some of the grades).  My SOP and writing sample were otherwise strong.

Anyone in the social sciences or humanities who can give some kind of insight on this issue of how deaf people are treated in writing-heavy areas?  Any advice on the best course of action for another round of application if it comes to that?  And as professors, what would you want from a deaf student?  Given the inconsistency in professors' attitudes, what's the best way to handle my issues in the future?

[msparticularity]

Hi, and welcome to the Fora. I want to ask a couple of questions for clarification. Am I correct in believing that although you use a cochlear implant and speak well, ASL is your first language? Also, did you have an interpreter for the classroom earlier in your educational career? If all of this is the case, then I agree that it certainly makes sense that you would have some second language learning issues--specifically in the area of grammar.

The thing you need to know is that while you would absolutely be entitled to the classroom accommodations that you need to succeed in postsecondary education (although it sounds as if you don't need any), there is no such thing as a grading accommodation at this level. Thus, graduate admissions and graduate grades would be based entirely upon your actual written product. Being a second language learner and/or Deaf is not something that would entitle you to having your work considered in a way that is different from that of other applicants. It might certainly be the case that you should be considered as a diversity candidate, but for the programs that do incorporate that as a consideration, it is generally a tie-breaker among equally-qualified candidates.

Also, and perhaps more importantly, you say that you are applying to PhD programs in history. Are you aware of how bad the market is in history? You really, really need to read the threads here on that topic and speak very frankly with your professors before you even consider going ahead. Further, it sounds as if you may be having a bit of difficulty with your current professors; you should also realize that you have very little chance of being accepted into a PhD program without their very active support. What have they had to say about your application process so far? And what kinds of programs have they advised you to apply to?

[ticklemepink]

I'll respond now to help future responders.

No.  I never learned ASL.  My parents were strong believers of raising an oral child so I didn't actually start to hear until I was about 4, past the critical language development stage.  I never had an interpreter.  I rely on my own hearing and lip-reading skills and peers to keep in the loop.  I also sometimes bring classroom strategies to professors (such as using the blackboard more often) that end up benefiting the whole class.  I never asked for grade accommodation or ever asked for extension for more time to edit my papers to make sure they were written in proper English (except for last semester due to an illness during finals).

And yes, I am aware of the market in history.  And to be frank, I have other ideas for my history Ph.D. other than the academia and my professors are actually supportive of my vision for the Ph.D.  I'm sure if I had said that I wanted to work in the academia, they would've discouraged me just like they would discourage others.  I chose my LOR writers based on who I felt could be my biggest advocates and knew me the best and had personal connections with people I wanted to work with.  I did not choose anyone who gave me lower than a B+.  We picked programs that used more holistic admissions process, not those who put writing on the very top of their list like Yale and Penn.  My schools weren't in top 10 but more like in top 30s but well regarded in my subfield.  I think that they had trouble arguing against my application because of my thesis topic and my proposal for doctoral study as well as language preparation (will have 3 reading languages by fall).  I even expressed doubts at time about my SOP and they said that there didn't see any issue with it.  So I went ahead...

[systeme_d_]

I am finding your posts to be very interesting.  While anecdote is not data, of course, I had a colleague in my MDiv program who was profoundly deaf. ASL was her first language.  She went on to a PhD in a humanities field at Columbia. She is not currently working in academia, but I believe she had other plans anyway.

I do know that there are definitely Deaf professors in writing fields who are quite successful.  There's Brenda Brueggemann (spelling?) in English at OSU, for example.  You might google her for more info.  You might even decide to contact her - I understand that she's very approachable.

If you are not successful in admissions this time, you might want to mention your deafness in your applications next time.  I say this because it might provide a bigger picture to admissions committees.  I certainly don't think mentioning your deafness would hurt your application in any way -- at least I can't see any reason why it would.

I hope this helps, at least in a small way!

[paultuttle]

I was going to suggest Brenda as well.  See http://english.osu.edu/people/person.cfm?ID=231.

[paultuttle]

There's also a person listed at http://www.robbiedeanpress.com/Our_Books/Essential_Writing/body_essential_writing.html who might be of assistance.

And Katrina Miller at Emporia State might be of assistance.  I know her personally, and she's very approachable.  See http://www.emporia.edu/parm/Miller.htm.

[anon99]

When I was a grad student, one of the candidates interviewing for a job was deaf.  She had an interpreter.  I couldn't recall her name, but a google search showed a long list of deaf scientists.
http://sci.gallaudet.edu/DS/deafsciF.html.  I know they aren't historians.  I can't see why you'd be discriminated against, but perhaps I am naive.

[zuzu_]

Here is a fairly recent thread on somewhat related topic:

http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,64879.0.html

[takapa]

I'm deaf, ASL is my "first" language, and I've been in the business of higher ed for quite some time now in allied health.  I read lips pretty well and can speak.  Written English was, in my youth, something I needed to master and I had some difficulties in that.  Any grad program worth anything will indeed want and expect you to have complete mastery of written English.  I can't speak for history programs, but I can't say I had a difficult time with admissions based on my being deaf.  It has posed some challenges as most people are not ASL literate though...

Don't assume that the application denials are tied to this.  It could be, but possibly not.  Sure, some hearing people find the thought of not being able to hear frightening.  But, for the most part I haven't been denied much of anything in my career.  I've had some of those experiences, but largely outside academe.  Message me if you want me info.

[msparticularity]

Any grad program worth anything will indeed want and expect you to have complete mastery of written English.  

Chime with this; it is what I was trying to get at upthread. Even for programs that are more holistic and that are not Top 10, a low GRE verbal score along with grades that indicate trouble with writing (both of which you mention) will set off alarms for an admissions committee for almost any PhD program in that first tier--and especially so in the humanities.

Also, on the issue of "playing the deaf card," my experience has been that programs that incorporate diversity into their considerations are often less interested in whether an applicant just happens to embody diversity personally, than in whether and how they bring knowledge and understandings from their experiences to their scholarship and/or service and teaching. (We had a thread on this in relation to hiring at the postsecondary level recently, and I think it may extend to graduate admissions as well.)  Ticklemepink, does your SOP clearly make these connections? If not, your deafness may "read" to them like one more piece of interesting information that doesn't really inform their decision-making.

[ticklemepink]

Any grad program worth anything will indeed want and expect you to have complete mastery of written English. 

Chime with this; it is what I was trying to get at upthread. Even for programs that are more holistic and that are not Top 10, a low GRE verbal score along with grades that indicate trouble with writing (both of which you mention) will set off alarms for an admissions committee for almost any PhD program in that first tier--and especially so in the humanities.

Also, on the issue of "playing the deaf card," my experience has been that programs that incorporate diversity into their considerations are often less interested in whether an applicant just happens to embody diversity personally, than in whether and how they bring knowledge and understandings from their experiences to their scholarship and/or service and teaching. (We had a thread on this in relation to hiring at the postsecondary level recently, and I think it may extend to graduate admissions as well.)  Ticklemepink, does your SOP clearly make these connections? If not, your deafness may "read" to them like one more piece of interesting information that doesn't really inform their decision-making.

My SOP was nothing but a proposal for my research (ideas and current projects) and why the program was a great fit.  Absolutely nothing personal about it other than I traveled to these specific, related countries (that I have found brought in great perspectives in my seminars).  So if you read it, you would have no idea about my deafness until you looked at my LORs.  My LOR writers are very aware that I work very hard at my writing as I actually listened to their comments, questioned their edits, and fixed wherever there was a mark.  I have had honest conversations about my writing with them.

To be honest about the GRE, one of my LOR writers (also my UG and thesis advisor) knew I was going to bomb it.  When I came back and told her my verbal score, she said, "Take it again.  Prove to them that you suck at standardized tests.  It wasn't a bad day."  She literally pushed me to re-take the exam.  In the fall, it will be 3 years old so I don't know whether it'd be a good idea to try re-taking it even if I try to study and figure out how to "teach" my brain to think the other way.

I will not assume that I've been denied for my deafness.  Apparently one program saw a lot in me- I just got waitlisted at a top 20 history program and I am very excited about it.   I even asked if there was anything I could do to improve my application should I have to re-apply and they said no.

I do think that I do need to start finding "mentors" in the academia especially as I've found deaf graduate students at my university to be in different position than of I am beyond our usual frustrations.  They listen to me but cannot provide the same guidance as a more experienced deaf academic.  Thank you to all who provided names.  I will get in touch with some of them.

Thanks for the link to the other thread.  It was helpful to see a range of attitudes.  I will just have to continue educating others about how I work, picking up from where I left off early in my undergraduate years, regardless of where I am and how long I've been in the program.  I just find the idea of having to be candid about my learning style to be... very forward.  But those who did get that kind of talk seemed to be more relieved and pleased in knowing how to push my buttons.

[msparticularity]

If you're going to think of retaking the GRE at some point, I would suggest that you consider embarking upon a very intense program of reading. But here's the part that may come as a surprise: what helps the most is not academic reading, per se; it's just reading really well-written works. The goal is for well-written English to become second nature, so that things that are awkward or just plain wrong "sound" funny when you read them. Also, studying vocabulary is fine, but seeing how it is actually used in context can be far more helpful in many of the GRE Verbal tasks.

My best suggestion for you if you want to improve your written language skills is to find some genre of literature that you enjoy very much, then read writers who are highly literate. I, for example, have an addiction to mysteries. Among the terrific writers I read are classic authors like Dorothy Sayers and Dashiell Hammett, and contemporary writers including Elizabeth George, Sarah Paretsky,Elizabeth Peters and Sharyn McCrumb. All of these are well-educated individuals who write in complex and interesting ways, and they have truly helped me to internalize the mechanics of writing so I don't have to think about what is "correct."

[leopard]

Some professors expressed skepticism at first but then realized that I was a good student who worked hard, wasn't afraid to ask for clarification, and loved to participate in class.  Others largely focused on my big ideas and helped me make them presentable when I went over paper proposals and outlines.  A few criticized my writing to the point where they said "go to the writing center" or "you should've handed me a rough draft."  Of course by then, it's too late, grades were handed in.  Ouch.

I am very aware of my weaknesses, largely my English sounding a bit like an ESL speaker.  Another graduate student and an outside professor suggested that I should have sat down with each of my professor early in the semester and explained how deafness and language work.

Based on this information, I'm wondering whether you ever sat down and spoke to your professors/advisors before or during the classes? When did they learn you were deaf and how did they respond? Did you have accommodations in classes? Assuming they weren't surprised at some point to learn that you were deaf, did they offer any advice/help/assistance in classes? Did they ever offer you feedback about your participation in class?

I wouldn't take offense to the suggestion of going to the writing center. Writing centers exist to help all students; as someone who has worked at several writing centers, I think most would be happy to regularly work with a graduate student. First, in my experience, most writing centers are process-oriented and thus appreciate those who make the commitment to improving writing over time. While I have not worked with deaf students, I've worked with a lot of ESL students (undergrad and grad) and regular work does help. Second, most writing tutors appreciate students who really want to improve and aren't there just for the grade or because their professor told them to go. If possible, I'd suggest making regular appointments at the writing center from now until the end of your program. See if there is someone there who has experience working with deaf people but even if not, go in with concrete questions/issues and work on them. It's not unreasonable for programs to only take those whose mastery of English is unquestionable, and this applies to ESL students as well. No program is going to take someone who they think will not be able to pass muster at the basic level of written fluency.

It sounds like you're struggling with some of the faculty you've encountered. I'm not sure if this includes your advisor or not, but a frank discussion -- in which you're willing to hear things you don't want to hear and consider them -- would be wise. What do your faculty/advisors think are your greatest strengths and weaknesses, as a writer, scholar, and interlocutor? How do what they say compare to what you think? Sometimes faculty and students are are radically different planes about where the student stands and what needs improvement. If you're getting LORs from them, you need to know what they (honestly) think: do they chalk up issues to deafness or are they identifying other weaknesses that may or may not relate to deafness? Do they have concerns about your ability to teach (a la the other thread)? If so, are those concerns that could be alleviated with info about accommodations (I don't know what accommodations schools provide for deaf teachers/TAs but I imagine that there must be some) or are they concerns that don't derive from deafness but deafness becomes a convenient excuse for not thinking about the core issue?

You say you sound like an ESL student -- is that what others have told you? I ask because I know deaf people and I have friends who work in deaf communities and that's not a description I've encountered (but perhaps I'm limited and this means nothing). I therefore wonder if that characterization bespeaks more than mere sound and thus if there is something you can do to rectify it. This is in part about how others react to you but also about how you present yourself to others. Are there things you can do to improve your self-presentation, whether related to hearing or not?

Are there other graduate students -- your advisor's students or otherwise -- that you can have a frank conversation with about your classroom presence and writing skills? Again, if you want to move forward productively, you want honest appraisals and sometimes peers can help you self-assess or offer blunt but caring details. This is risky and could be emotionally challenging, but could also be revealing and helpful.

My best suggestion for you if you want to improve your written language skills is to find some genre of literature that you enjoy very much, then read writers who are highly literate. I, for example, have an addiction to mysteries. Among the terrific writers I read are classic authors like Dorothy Sayers and Dashiell Hammett, and contemporary writers including Elizabeth George, Sarah Paretsky,Elizabeth Peters and Sharyn McCrumb. All of these are well-educated individuals who write in complex and interesting ways, and they have truly helped me to internalize the mechanics of writing so I don't have to think about what is "correct."

I totally agree. Thoughtful reading begets good writing. Read like a writer, think about how those writers accomplish their craft. If you're in history, find some great history writers -- popular and academic -- and read them for the prose alongside the analysis/content. Do the same thing with well-written periodicals. Regular reading and thinking about the style and mechanics will help you assimilate important language skills.

Finally, why not take some time off before additional grad school? Work a job, work on your language skills in a pleasurable setting/at a non-frantic pace, and see