Keywords: Deaf studies, program assessment, internship, alumni survey

Transcription

1 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 373 Cooper, S. B., Emanuel, D. C., & Cripps, J. H. (2012). Deaf studies alumni perceptions of the academic program and off-campus internship. American Annals of the Deaf, 157(4), xxx xxx. DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS OF THE ACADEMIC PROGRAM AND OFF-CAMPUS INTERNSHIP A SHERYL B. COOPER, DIANA C. EMANUEL, AND JODY H. CRIPPS ALL THREE AUTHORS ARE AFFILIATED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF AUDIOLOGY, SPEECH- LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY, AND DEAF STUDIES, TOWSON UNIVERSITY, TOWSON, MD. COOPER IS THE COORDINATOR OF THE DEAF STUDIES PROGRAM, EMANUEL IS DEPARTMENT CHAIR, AND CRIPPS IS AN ASSISTANT PROFESSOR. LU M N I of an undergraduate Deaf studies program completed an online survey about their education and employment after graduation and their perceptions of their internship and undergraduate academic program. Demographically, this population of Deaf studies alumni represented a higher percentage of women and dual-major graduates than was present in the general university population. It was found that most of the alumni reported using the knowledge and skills from the Deaf studies program in their current job. Current employment among alumni was almost 100%, and most of the alumni had positive perceptions regarding their personal, academic, and professional growth as it related to their internship and undergraduate Deaf studies program. The study findings underscore the need for continued support of Deaf studies programs. Suggestions are provided for program directors regarding the development of internships and academic programs for students in Deaf studies. Keywords: Deaf studies, program assessment, internship, alumni survey Deaf Studies: A Review of the Academic Discipline and Internship Experiences Deaf studies can be defined as the study of signed language and the community and culture of deaf people. A relatively new field, Deaf studies is associated with sociological, anthropological, and ethnographic consideration of deaf lives (Marschark & Humphries, 2010). The multidisciplinary nature of the field enables Deaf studies to function as a multiparadigmatic discipline, with the inclusion of quantitative and qualitative research methods from many different constituent fields. To date, there have been no studies of the effectiveness of Deaf studies programs or internship experiences in which students apply the collective knowledge and skills learned throughout their academic program. In the present article, we provide data on the internship experience and overall academic curriculum of alumni of one Deaf studies program. This article provides insights into the impact of an undergraduate Deaf studies degree on the career paths, perspectives, and 373

2 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 374 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS skills of alumni, and in so doing supports the value and relevance of this multidisciplinary field. Much has been written and discussed about Deaf culture and the Deaf community. These topics are a significant part of the pedagogy of an undergraduate Deaf studies program, and need to be presented to students in an effective yet factual way. Deaf epistemology frequently relies heavily on the personal testimonies, experiences, and accounts of deaf faculty members rather than carefully controlled scientific studies (Holcomb, 2010). Paul and Moores (2010) suggested that many perspectives are needed to arrive at a framework upon which Deaf epistemologies are developed, using an array of social, cultural, and historical variables unique to this group. Characteristics lending validity to the knowledge that is imparted include lineage (deaf children of deaf parents), attendance at residential schools, Deaf identity, and use of American Sign Language (ASL). Paul and Moores (2010) expressed concern that it is possible to justify some commonly held beliefs and observations without, in some instances, meeting the requirements associated with traditional objective science. When this is the case, these beliefs and observations must be presented to the students as such, with clarity regarding the difference between science and beliefs and informal observations. Deaf studies can provide opportunities for students to gain insights into the cultural idiosyncrasies, language, and related pedagogy using standard scientific paradigms including hypothesis testing, data collection and analysis, and logical reasoning leading to supportable conclusions and related discussion. This process can then lead to further research, meta-analysis, and the formulation of generalized principles within a field (e.g., Lehrer, 2000; Pring, 2004; Ritzer, 2001) that are used to enhance the quality of education in Deaf-related fields, as well as provide insight and tailor support mechanisms to the greater community. There is limited research on the effectiveness of Deaf studies pedagogy and the relationship among academic preparation, the integration of skills (such as signing skills and interpersonal skills) from the academic program to the employment setting, and the long-term occupational outlook. This area of research is critical in a time of academic evolution, in order to justify the continued need for and effectiveness of the academic discipline. It is also important for planning academic priorities and training the future workforce. Related fields, such as African American studies, women s studies, and LGBTQ (lesbian, gay bisexual, transgender, and queer) studies, have evolved in similar ways. The early foundations of these areas of study were created in response to emerging political needs rather than intellectual and academic imperatives (Beemyn & Elianon, 1996; Boxer, 1988; Hine, 1990; Kornbluh, 1990; McKay, 1990). As in these parallel fields, qualified professionals are needed to teach in the field of Deaf studies. Additionally, curricula must be evaluated through systematic studies, and data should be validated and disseminated. In the field of Deaf studies, curricula should be developed with significant input from deaf professionals with appropriate qualifications (e.g., academic degrees, teaching experience, significant life experiences in the Deaf community), and, if possible, from hearing professionals who use sign language and have extensive experience working with deaf people. In the case of Deaf studies, curricula should include content areas such as Deaf culture, Deaf history, and ASL linguistics and literature. To date, there have been no studies of the effectiveness of Deaf studies programs or of internship experiences in which students, both deaf and hearing, apply the collective knowledge and skills learned throughout their academic program (e.g., Deaf epistemologies). For the present study, we gathered much-needed data to evaluate the overall academic program for potential improvement. The results provide data on the internship experience and overall academic curriculum from alumni of one Deaf studies program and on how the knowledge and skills gained from these experiences are applied to current vocations. Internships in General Internships have been defined as structured and career-relevant work experience obtained by students prior to graduation from an academic program (Taylor, 1988, p. 393). The Council for Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (cited in O Neill, 2010, p. 6) has stressed that internships are an integral part of a college education, unique and distinguished from didactic and self-study learning methods. Internships should be conducted with dedicated mentors and supervisors who foster deliberate reflection and provide feedback and other forms of response to the experience (O Neill, 2010). Hegert (2009) found that internships generally had a positive impact on career development and networking leading to employment. He noted that student ratings of internship value were associated with the structure of the internship, the pedagogical approach, the degree to which the internship was integrated into the curriculum, and the demographic profile of the student. Hegert concluded that internships play a crucial 374

3 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 375 role in helping a student make connections between classroom and workplace, particularly when they have a direct connection to the student s ultimate career goals. Internships provide critically important opportunities for students to apply knowledge and further develop skills. In internship environments, students are likely to encounter unstructured and real-world types of experiences that allow them to better examine ethical issues and global perspectives in the workplace, develop realistic expectations, and more effectively transition from school to employment (Raymond, McNabb, & Matthaei, 1993). Additionally, the internship experience has been shown to develop critical thinking, writing, and interpersonal skills that em - ployers expect from new graduates (Maskooki, Rama, & Raghunandan, 1998; Perry, 1989; Raymond, et al., 1993). The additional benefits offered by internships to students in Deaf studies programs include language immersion and heightened understanding of and increased sensitivity to Deaf people and Deaf culture. These topics may have been discussed in classes and readings, but an internship provides hands-on application. Internships in Deaf- Related Fields As Deaf studies is a newly emerging discipline, related fields were researched to identify related studies and findings. In the field of Deaf education, Dodd and Sheetz (2003) found that student teachers participated in a variety of internship and student teaching experiences and judged their preparation programs to be appropriate, although no rating scale was used to determine the level of satisfaction with the internships or the impact of the internships on the student teachers later careers. Additionally, Roberson, Woosley, Seabrooks, and Williams (2004) conducted a study to examine student teacher behavior in the classroom; however, their study did not provide conclusions regarding student teacher satisfaction with the offcampus experiences. Both the Dodd and Sheetz and Roberson et al. studies had small samples, and neither study provided an overview of the interns satisfaction with the quality or content of their internship experience or academic program experience. No research could be found on the impact or satisfaction in regard to internships in the field of Deaf studies; the present study was thus conducted to provide baseline data. Academic Program Evaluation The concept of academic program evaluation has been applied across different disciplines for many years. The goal is to provide a way of determining whether or not a program is meeting its goals (Tuckman, 1979). Stark and Lattuca (1997) reported that they found few systematic processes for collecting program evaluation information, a finding that suggested that most faculty used informal methods to determine how their program plans were working. Furthermore, issues were only addressed when problems were identified through expressions of student dissatisfaction or poor results on examinations, rather than an ongoing proactive process with multiple inputs. Gaff (1991) explained that student opinions may be seen as untrustworthy, of limited perspective, and not necessarily constructive, although Stark and Lattuca (1997) found that obtaining feedback via electronic responses appeared to be more effective than face-to-face data collection, as students felt freer to reply honestly. Kemp (1998) and Stark and Lattuca both questioned the credibility of an internal evaluation or self-study, suggesting that data gathered in this way should be questioned and scrutinized, because it is difficult for program directors and faculty to maintain objectivity while evaluating their own programs. Stark and Lattuca suggested that program evaluations involving professional judgment from external sources, including alumni, may be more accurate than data from student evaluations. It appears that the most effective approach to program evaluation may be one that includes data from multiple sources. Sources for data should include (a) current students, responding electronically; (b) program coordinators performing self-studies; (c) alumni serving as evaluators, responding electronically; and (d) external reviewers who can provide expertise and a broader perspective than directors. Each of these sources can provide a reflective assessment with different perspectives and biases. Evaluation of Sign Language Programs Little research exists on program evaluation in Deaf-related fields. Two publications by Kemp (1988, 1998) provided guidelines for evaluating the effectiveness of programs teaching signed language. He suggested a model for gathering data regarding personnel selection, curriculum, placement interviews, media utilization, teacher performance, environmental aspects, supervisory effectiveness, and budget. These types of data would be helpful to program coordinators; however, no data were found using this model for evaluating sign language programs. Immediately prior to the publication of Kemp s work, the lead author of the present article published data collected during the academic year in most of the abovementioned categories (Cooper, 1997), 375

4 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 376 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS based on a program evaluation design used by the Modern Language Association (Huber, 1989, 1990, 1992, 1993). A comparison study was completed in (Cooper, Reisman, & Watson, 2008, 2011), which included a survey of program administrators and faculty regarding the structure of their sign language programs. These studies provided an administrative/self-study perspective on the increasing entrenchment and acceptance of signed language as an academic discipline on college campuses. The study also summarized trends in sign language instruction, changes in qualifications of faculty and administrators, and recommendations from program coordinators regarding future directions for sign language programs. Program Assessment in Deaf Studies The first academic programs in Deaf studies were established in the mid- 1980s (Sanders, 1986). With no previous self-studies, Sanders conducted a student survey that revealed a need for a degree program that combined the fields of sign language, linguistics, history, psychology, sociology, and interpreting. This research indicated that Deaf studies was not a passing phenomenon, but an academic field of intense and continued interest with a myriad of potential employment possibilities and career pathways. A similar but smaller project was conducted by the lead author of the present article to determine the efficacy of establishing a Deaf studies major at a mid-atlantic university, with similar results. These two studies used student perspectives to support the need for the creation of a college discipline of Deaf studies. The goal of the present study was to provide an approach to Deaf studies program assessment that would be different from the previous research an approach designed to gather perspectives from outside the program. This study examined alumni perspectives on the effectiveness of both a Deaf studies program and its capstone internship experience. Specifically, the study was conducted to obtain perspectives on the first 10 years of the existence of a bachelor s degree program in Deaf studies in order to examine 1. the long-term education and employment status of alumni, including the relationship between current employment and the use of Deaf studies knowledge and skills 2. alumni perspectives on the Deaf studies internship, and the relationship among these perspectives, year of graduation, and internship factors 3. alumni perspectives on the Deaf studies program, and the relationship between these perspectives and year of graduation The year of graduation was considered an important factor in the analysis, based on the evolution of the program over its 10-year history. Methodology A survey, titled Deaf Studies Alumni Survey 2011, was developed (see Appendix) to investigate the perceptions of alumni regarding their off-campus internship experiences and the Deaf studies program in general. The online survey consisted of 40 questions, including 38 forced-choice questions and 2 open-set (additional comment) questions regarding the internship and the program. The alumni perception questions were Likert style, with five possible responses: strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree. Demographic questions (e.g., questions on further education and current employment) explored possible relationships between the internship and long-term career outcomes. Survey Validity The survey was developed in early We discussed the assessment needs of the program, reviewed published surveys for content and format, and created an initial draft. This initial draft was pilot-tested with 20 Deaf studies interns in the spring of Each intern was asked to imagine where he or she would be in 5 years, then complete the online survey as if it were The completed survey and feedback from participants regarding question clarity and completeness were used to create a final survey. Participants The survey was sent to Deaf studies alumni at a large (20,000-student), state-supported university in the mid- Atlantic region of the United States. Program documentation indicated that there were 322 students who had graduated from the bachelor s degree program in Deaf studies at this university between Spring 2002 and Spring We attempted to obtain the addresses of all alumni via the university alumni database, social networking sites, and personal contacts. The survey was distributed via by the StudentVoice (Campus Labs) survey system ( The survey was ed to 221 alumni, representing 69% of the graduates of the program. Additionally, a web link to the survey was posted through a Facebook group for Deaf studies alumni so that alumni could access the survey even if they were not sent a link through StudentVoice. Both communications through StudentVoice and Facebook included a deadline for completion of the survey 376

5 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page weeks after the initial was sent. To increase the response rate, a second was sent on the deadline date, which stated that the deadline had been extended for 3 more weeks. Data Analysis In addition to data collection, the StudentVoice survey system provided a compilation of results and filtering. Summary data for each question were compiled into a table (see Appendix). Filtering allowed for the creation of cross-tabulation of data for descriptive and chi-square analysis. Additional analyses were conducted with the SPSS software program. The present study had three goals: (a) to gather data on the demographics of graduates who had completed the bachelor s degree in Deaf studies (e.g., employment status), (b) to obtain alumni perspectives on the value of their Deaf studies internships, and (c) to obtain alumni perspectives on the effectiveness of the Deaf studies program. To achieve these goals, we looked at the demographic characteristics of the student population, feedback on internship experiences, and feedback on the overall Deaf studies program. Results Responses were received from 120 of the 221 alumni, a response rate of approximately 54%. The actual response rate may have been slightly lower because some students did not receive the but completed the survey using the Facebook web link instead. The number of respondents for each question (and the percentage for each response category) are provided in the Appendix. A summary of the data most relevant to the research questions is provided here. With the exception of participant age and qualitative data from comment boxes, all data were nominal or ordinal. Relationships among variables were examined primarily via nonparametric statistics (e.g., frequency count, chi-square analysis, Spearman rankorder correlation) to examine if there were relationships between demographic variables, internship-specific variables, and alumni perceptions of the internship and the Deaf studies program. The possible effects of student hearing loss on perceptions could not be examined because only 4% of the sample self-identified as deaf or hard of hearing. Similarly, the effect of internship and program demographics on employment in general could not be examined because only 1% of the sample self-identified as unemployed. Whereas most survey items required responses yielding nominal data, the alumni perception questions (Q21 Q38) were treated as ordinal data indicating a rating of agreement with each statement in the survey (e.g., The internship experience enhanced my interpersonal skills ); therefore, the responses, strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree, were coded as 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Demographics As the Appendix shows, large majorities of the sample were female (97%) and Caucasian (87%). Ages ranged from 21 to 63 years (M =28). The vast majority of respondents (89%) had graduated between 2004 and 2010, with a fairly even distribution averaging 15 respondents per year over this period. About 38% of respondents had completed two majors, with psychology and speech-language pathology/audiology being the most common second majors. About 98% of alumni were traditional students, that is, had entered the program after high school or completing an associate s degree. About 97% of alumni identified themselves as hearing. As in all of the responses, hearing status was self-reported; however, based on the known demographics of the graduates, the category hard of hearing describes individuals with some degree of hearing loss who entered the Deaf studies program following education in mainstreamed high school programs with little to no sign language skills and who developed their signing skills during their college experience. The majority of alumni (89%) reported having no family members with hearing loss. Long-Term Educational and Employment Status About 78% of the alumni respondents reported that they continued their education after completing the Deaf studies bachelor s degree program; most of these (64%) had completed master s degree programs. About 32% of the alumni who continued their education completed subsequent degrees in education (32%); the next two most common areas of postbaccalaureate study were interpreting (15%) and counseling (12%). Alumni who were still enrolled in educational programs accounted for 28% (n = 34) of the total sample. Almost half of these respondents (n = 12) were enrolled in interpreter preparation programs and most of the remaining alumni were enrolled in health related (n = 9) or education-related (n = 5) programs. Almost all alumni (99%) were employed or in school; this includes 5% of the sample who were full-time students and not simultaneously employed. The majority (65%) were employed full-time. The most commonly reported types of employment were teacher/aide not with Deaf students (17%) and interpreter/ interpreter/educator (14%). We 377

6 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 378 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS grouped a large segment of miscellaneous careers to include those careers in which interaction with deaf individuals and/or using sign language were likely (10%), possible (17%), or rare/ unknown (14%). The majority of alumni reported using signed language (61%) and using the knowledge and skills from the Deaf studies degree (80%) in their current job or educational program. To examine if the evolution of the program over the years resulted in a greater chance that alumni would use the Deaf studies knowledge and skills, a chi-square analysis was conducted between time since graduation and use of knowledge and skills. Data were grouped in 2-year chunks in order to meet chi-square analysis assumptions. There was no significant relationship between years since graduation and the likelihood that the Deaf studies knowledge and skills would be used on the current job ( 2 = 4.086; df = 4; n = 103; p =.394), or that sign language would be used on the current job ( 2 = 20.96; df = 4; n = 103; p =.718). Furthermore, it was not more likely that alumni who graduated with two majors used sign language ( 2 = 0.117; df = 1; n = 103; p =.732) or Deaf studies knowledge and skills ( 2 = 0.001; df = 1; n = 103; p =.932) in their current job. Following completion of the Deaf studies undergraduate degree, 50% of alumni reportedly continued their education. A chi-square analysis was conducted to determine if alumni who furthered their education were more likely to report using Deaf studies knowledge and skills for their current job. This analysis was not significant ( 2 = 3.064; df = 1; n = 103; p =.079). Also nonsignificant was the comparison between continuation of education and use of sign language skills on the job ( 2 = 0.836; df = 1; n = 103; p =.361). Alumni who had completed two majors were not more likely to continue their education compared with single-major alumni ( 2 = 0.889; df = 1; n = 120; p =.346). Internship Characteristics From 2002 until 2010, alumni were permitted to choose an internship for 2 credits (60 hours in the field), 3 credits (90 hours in the field), or 4 credits (120 hours in the field). A large plurality, about 38%, chose 3 credits. Almost half of the internships (47%) were in academic settings. The majority of alumni (68%) estimated that over 50% of their communication during internship involved the use of signed language. Most alumni worked with an internship supervisor who was hearing (77%). For statistical analysis purposes, supervisors who were hard of hearing were grouped with supervisors who were deaf. A cross-tabulation was conducted to examine if time spent communicating by means of signed language was related to type of placement site (see Table 1). The sites in which the majority of alumni reported signing for greater than 50% of the time included public schools (52% of alumni), a college or university (86%), a school for deaf students (100%), and the statewide comprehensive rehabilitation facility (100%). Due to the small cell sizes, data were collapsed for the chi-square analyses so that time spent communicating by means of signed language was grouped as less than 50% or greater than 50%, and sites with fewer than five alumni were omitted. The analysis indicated that time spent communicating with individuals who were deaf was significantly related to the type of placement site ( 2 = ; df = 5; n = 109; p <.01). Alumni Perceptions of Internship Responses to the perception questions about internship are illustrated in Figure 1. Examination of Figure 1 indicates that the majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the internship experience enhanced interpersonal skills, ASL skills, and knowledge of Deaf culture, and that the internship helped them make career decisions, mature and develop as a person, and prepare for a job after graduation. The greatest degree of agreement (>50% selecting strongly agree) occurred in response to the statements My internship supervisor respected me and I respected my internship supervisor. The greatest degree of disagreement occurred in response to the statement The internship experience enhanced my writing skills. Here, only 21% agreed or strongly agreed. Table 2 includes the results of Spear man rank-order correlations between student perceptions of the internship and one demographic and two internship factors. Specifically, the factors were (a) time spent using signed language during the internship, (b) graduation year, and (c) total number of credits (i.e., hours per week of internship). The self-reported percentage of time spent using signed language was significantly correlated with the enhancement of interpersonal skills, ASL skills, knowledge of Deaf culture, personal development, and job preparation. In other words, alumni felt that the more time they spent signing during the internship, the more valuable the overall experience was in these areas. Graduation year was significantly correlated with enhancement of interpersonal skills, ASL skills, writing skills, help with career decisions, and the perception that the supervisor respected the stu- 378

7 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 379 Table 1 Cross-Tabulation of Q18 (time spent communicating with individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing) and Q19 (internship placement) Proportion of time spent signing during internship Internship site < 25% 26% 50% 51% 75% 76% 100% Total Public school a College/university a State school for the deaf a State school for the blind State comprehensive rehabilitation center a Social service organization a Government agency Consumer advocacy organization Medical Other a Sites where more than half of the students spend 51% or more of their time communicating in sign language. dent. These correlations were all positive, indicating that higher ratings were associated with more recent graduates. Chi-square analyses were used to determine if alumni who had a deaf or hard of hearing supervisor (n = 28) during the internship had an enhanced learning experience when compared with alumni who had a supervisor who was hearing (n = 91). Chi-square analyses indicated there was no significant relationship between the supervisors hearing status and time spent signing during the internship ( 2 =2.131; df = 3; n = 119; p =.546), or between supervisor hearing status and any of the percep- Figure 1 Responses to Alumni Perception Questions Regarding the Deaf Studies Program as a Whole and the Internship Specifically Notes. I, internship. DS, Deaf studies program. ASL, American Sign Language. 379

8 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 380 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS Table 2 Spearman Rank-Order Correlations (and p Values) Between Internship-Specific Variables and Student Perception Ratings Hours signing Graduation Internship during internship year credits The internship experience enhanced my interpersonal skills. (Q21).493 (.000)**.273 (.004)**.034 (.775) The internship experience enhanced my ASL skills. (Q22).620 (.000)**.221 (.021)*.184 (.114) The internship experience enhanced my knowledge of Deaf culture. (Q23).468 (.000)**.173 (.074).049 (.678) The internship experience enhanced my writing skills. (Q24).049 (.616).211 (.028)*.073 (.532) The internship experience helped me make career decisions. (Q25).140 (.149).269 (.005)*.010 (.933) The internship experience helped me mature and develop as a person. (Q26).224 (.02)*.111 (.252).116 (.321) The internship experience helped me prepare for a job after graduation. (Q27).387 (.000)**.167 (.085).108 (.357) I respected my internship supervisor. (Q28).018 (.855).121 (.211).095 (.419) My internship supervisor respected me. (Q29).040 (.681).263 (.006)**.102 (.386) * p <.5. ** p <.01. Table 3 Spearman Rank-Order Correlations (and p Values) Between Student Perception Ratings and Graduation Year and Between the Perception Ratings for the Program Compared With the Parallel Questions Regarding the Internship Parallel question Graduation year regarding internship The Deaf studies program enhanced my interpersonal skills. (Q30).105 (.277).451 (.000)** The Deaf studies program enhanced my ASL skills. (Q31).128 (.582).385 (.000)** The Deaf studies program enhanced my knowledge of Deaf culture. (Q32).173 (.742).173 (.073) The Deaf studies program enhanced my writing skills. (Q33).015 (.515).455 (.000)** The Deaf studies program helped me make career decisions. (Q34).053 (.005)**.454 (.000)** The Deaf studies program helped me mature and develop as a person. (Q35).111 (.455).580 (.000)** The Deaf studies program helped me prepare for a job after graduation. (Q36).032 (.085).580 (.000)** I respected my Deaf studies professors. (Q37).021 (.832).390 (.000)** My Deaf studies professors respected me. (Q38).040 (.683).309 (.001)** ** p <.01. tion rankings for areas listed in Table 1 regarding the internship: 2 = 5.69 (Q21), (Q22), (Q23), (Q24), (Q25), 3.584(Q26), 2.544(Q27), 1.412(Q28), 0.955(Q29). For all comparisons, df = 4, n = 108, and p >.05. This suggests that the perceptions of alumni across all assessed items were not affected by the hearing status of their supervisor. Alumni Perceptions of the Deaf Studies Program Table 3 includes the results of Spearman correlations between student perceptions of the Deaf studies program (left column) and graduation year. Only one item, the perception that the Deaf studies program helped with career decisions, was significantly correlated with graduation year. Alumni perception ratings for the program are provided in Figure 1 side by side with the parallel questions asked about the internship. The majority of alumni agreed or strongly agreed that the Deaf studies program helped them develop personal and academic skills, and that they respected and were respected by their professors, and about half agreed that the program helped them prepare for a job after graduation. The lowest rankings were associated with the assertion that the Deaf studies program enhanced the development of writing skills. Twenty-six percent of alumni agreed or strongly agreed with that statement. Table 3 (third column) shows correlations between the perception ratings for the internship and perception ratings for the parallel questions about the program. All of the items were statistically significant at the p <.01 level except the statement that the program enhanced knowledge of Deaf culture. The median rating for this question relative to the internship was 4 (M = 380

9 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page ), and relative to the program was 5 (M = 4.6), which indicates significantly stronger agreement that the program enhanced this knowledge compared with the internship. Discussion The present study, part of an ongoing and systematic program evaluation, provided an opportunity to examine the impact of the Deaf studies internship and the Deaf studies program on alumni. Overall, the study indicated that most alumni reportedly use the knowledge and skills from the Deaf studies program in their current job. Current employment among alumni was almost 100%, and most alumni had positive perceptions of their personal, academic, and professional growth as it related to the internship and Deaf studies program. The findings from the present study were based on alumni of a relatively large, state-supported university on the Atlantic coast of the United States. The demographics of the Deaf studies program differ slightly from the university s general student demographics. Data from for the university as a whole indicate that 40% of undergraduates were male, 20% were minority, and 5% were enrolled in two majors. In comparison, the Deaf studies major had 4% males, 13% minority students, and 40% dualmajor students; thus, the Deaf studies major represented a subset of the university population with fewer males and minorities and a larger number of students with two majors compared with the university population as a whole. In the present sample, 3% of respondents were male, 13% were minority, and 38% had completed two majors, which suggests that the sample was demographically representative of the total population of Deaf studies alumni, even though only 120 of the possible 322 alumni participated in the survey. One question was included in the survey as an indicator of internal validity. This question asked if the internship and academic program enhanced writing skills. Results indicated this was the only question in which the majority of alumni disagreed with the statement that the skill was enhanced by the internship and program. Writing is not a focus of the Deaf studies program and, in fact, there are no writing courses within the discipline. Written English is intentionally avoided in all of the ASL language classes in the Deaf studies program. All evaluations in these classes are executed through expressive and receptive sign skills, with no use of English. Even reaction papers are signed and presented to the instructor for grading via YouTube or other video technology. Papers written in English are only used in content courses (Deaf Culture, Deaf Literature, Career Exploration, Social Services in the Deaf Community, etc.). The syllabi for the courses in the program have been developed to avoid a focus on students English writing skills; rather, there is a deliberate focus on content specific to Deaf studies. Writing is rarely critiqued within the major. However, because the general university requirements include both an introductory and an advanced writing class, it is expected that students will develop their writing skills in other parts of their academic experience. The distinct difference in the responses to the writing skills question, in comparison with all other questions, supports the validity of the survey instrument. Long-Term Educational and Employment Status The present study provided data in support of the continued existence and enhancement of Deaf studies programs, especially in the current fiscal environment in which university financial resources are often stretched and program evaluations are conducted for possible elimination of weaker programs. Findings from this study indicated that almost all graduates were employed, many of the graduates were successfully enrolled in advanced degree programs, and the majority of alumni were using skills from their undergraduate degree program in their current job. These findings provide support for the long-term usefulness of the academic major. Additionally, graduates were contributing to society in key areas of need professions that emphasize human interaction. Specifically, the majority of graduates reported employment in the education, health care, and interpreting fields. Most alumni reported that they were applying the knowledge and skills from their undergraduate program in their current jobs, and this application was not related to whether or not they had continued their education beyond the bachelor s degree, so it is evident that the undergraduate degree alone is of considerable longterm value. The use of the knowledge and skills was not related to whether alumni had completed two majors, a finding that suggests that the Deaf studies degree has value on its own, regardless of other areas of study. With that said, the large percentage of students graduating with two majors suggests that Deaf studies students tend to pursue a broad-based education rather than one focused solely on Deaf studies. Although alumni who completed two majors were not more likely to use the Deaf studies knowledge and skills, the diversity of occupations reported by alumni suggests that a broad-based education 381

10 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 382 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS may enhance career opportunities. Data regarding the types of occupations pursued by alumni and the longterm employment outlook can be included as part of career counseling with current and prospective students and as part of marketing efforts for recruitment at the high school and community college levels. Students and their parents often seek more than just an interesting major, but one that is associated with future employment opportunities and that will result in the development of skills that will be used in the workplace. These results can be seen as support for Deaf epistemology, the effective use of deaf faculty to convey the richness of their language, culture, and history to both deaf and hearing students. In addition to the long-term employment outcomes, the high perception ratings associated with the enhancement of knowledge and skills and the mutual respect between students and internship supervisors and between students and professors suggest that students may become ambassadors for the program. Positive outcomes achieved via alumni feedback provide yet another metric for supporting the need for continuation of Deaf studies as an academic major. Internship Characteristics and Alumni Perceptions Positive ratings from alumni were significantly related to the amount of time spent communicating with people who were deaf, and this varied based on the type of site. For this reason, it is important for Deaf studies program directors to critically assess the type of internship placement site and periodically survey students regarding the amount of time they spend in direct communication with individuals who are deaf. This quality of communication aspect of the internship appears to be far more important than the hearing status of the supervisor and the number of hours per week on site, neither of which was significantly related to perception ratings. It should be noted that the study included only hours over the entire 15-week internship, so these finding may not apply to internships with fewer or greater hours, or longer duration. We hypothesized that an internship with a deaf supervisor would result in higher perception ratings for the internship, especially in the areas of signed language and Deaf culture, based on the data supporting immersion language programs for foreign languages (e.g., Sternfeld, 1988; Swain, 1996). However, this hypothesis was not supported by the data. There was no significant difference between perception ratings by students with hearing supervisors and those with deaf supervisors. Therefore, Deaf studies programs with large numbers of students should not be overly concerned if they cannot locate deaf supervisors for all internships, since the critical factor in successful internship experiences appears to be time spent signing rather than the hearing status of the supervisor. One other finding that was significantly related to the perception ratings was graduation date. Specifically, the perspective ratings were found to be significantly higher for more recent graduates. As a general finding, this might have indicated that (a) earlier graduates had developed further education and life skills that they felt contribute more to their development than the internship; (b) earlier graduates could not remember as clearly because of the time between the program and the survey, which resulted in a regression of scores toward neutral; or (c) changes to the internship specifically, or to the overall Deaf studies program, resulted in changes in perception. Any or all of these may have occurred; however, it is likely that the higher ratings were due, at least in part, to the significant changes that occurred in the administration of the internship over the history of the Deaf studies program. These changes were made as the result of self-study and of informal student evaluation. However, the present study is the first indication that these changes may have resulted in a documentable positive outcome. Evolution of the Deaf Studies Internship Changes to the Deaf studies internship over the history of the program have included the method of selection for internship sites, the number and type of available sites, and the method of quantifying student skill prior to externship. For the first few years of the program, the program administrator placed students at internship sites without consideration of student preferences. Beginning in 2004, students were able to select internship sites from a list of available sites. This selection process allowed students to select a site based on their priorities, such as personal needs (e.g., class and work schedules, transportation, and geographical preferences) and professional needs (e.g., career plans, ASL development). This type of freedom would be expected to result in a more positive perception of the internship. The number and type of available sites has evolved over the program in response to informal evaluation of student internship experiences and the availability of new opportunities as a result of networking by the program administrator. Informal observation of the satisfaction with each site occurred during student advising, biweekly class discussion, student journaling, and course evaluations. These 382

11 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 383 observations indicated that some students were providing direct services to deaf individuals, while others were performing more administrative work or observation with less signed in - teraction. In the early years of the internship experience there was no requirement for a minimum amount of time to be spent signing, but the internship was modified in 2007 so that at least one third of the internship hours had to be spent in signing interaction with others. Adherence to this requirement was monitored through regular communication with supervisors and review of student weekly journals, although it was not formally quantified by the program administrator or student. Students who reported less signed interaction reported less satisfaction with the experience on course evaluations. In addition, the program administrator also observed that when students had more opportunity to use ASL during their internship, their signing skills improved more quickly than those of students at placements with fewer interactions. Based on these reports and observations, the program administrator made changes to the available internship sites, eliminating some and adding others to enhance the students experiences. For this reason, it is not surprising that perception ratings improved significantly based on graduation date. The interns autonomy, duties, and experiences varied considerably across the internship sites. Commonalities included the requirement that all interns serve deaf students or clients and that the supervisor be competent in evaluating the intern s ASL skills. Differences included time spent communicating with people who were deaf (previously discussed), type of site, and ASL competency of the student. From 2002 until 2007, students were allowed to enter the internship upon completion of ASL 2, since some classes were only offered every other semester and waiting until the completion of ASL 4 would have significantly delayed their graduation. However, in 2007, growth in the size of the program allowed the university to offer all ASL classes every semester, so it was possible to institute the requirement to complete ASL 4 prior to internship. There was no other formal evaluation of ASL competency used to determine readiness for internship during those years. The need to demonstrate a minimum level of ASL competency has been addressed more recently with a 2011 requirement for students to be evaluated by an outside agency and to achieve a specific competency rating prior to internship. Specifically, students must earn a score of greater than 2+ on the nationally standardized American Sign Language Proficiency Interview (ASLPI) screening prior to beginning an internship. This new requirement moved the gatekeeping responsibility for skill evaluation away from the faculty in the program to an independent evaluator, and removed any appearance of instructor bias. Implementation of this new requirement also removed the need for the internship supervisor s rating of the intern s signing skills. Because the change in competency requirements was made after the survey for the present study, it is unlikely that the ratings were affected by this process. However, students with poorer signing skills may have struggled with communication during the internship, and this may have affected their ratings of the internship. In the early years of the program, sites were limited by the network of the program administrator and biases of external sites. Over time, the reputation of the program and the success of student internship experiences resulted in a greater number of sites. For example, a policy change at the state school for the deaf in 2007 allowed the Deaf studies program to use that site for internship experiences. Students pursuing careers in Deaf education were encouraged to take advantage of the classroom and residential internship opportunities at the state school for the deaf when these opportunities became available. Alumni Perceptions of the Deaf Studies Program Data from the present study indicated that the Deaf studies program significantly enhanced students development across a number of skills. The significant correlations presented in Table 3 suggest that for all areas except Deaf culture, students who reported a positive perception of the program reported a similarly positive perception of the internship. This could mean they had bundled satisfaction that is, that the perceptions of the internship influenced the perceptions of the program. Causality cannot be implied by correlation, so it is unknown if the perceptions of the program influenced the perceptions of the internship, or vice versa, or that some alumni were just generally satisfied and some were not, regardless of which aspect was being assessed. As a capstone experience, the internship represents the culmination of the program, so it is likely impossible to completely separate alumni perceptions across these two entities. The significantly higher perception rating for Deaf culture for the program compared with the internship is not un - expected, given the focus on Deaf culture in the program and the variety of internship experiences that may have limited Deaf culture exposure (e.g., public school placements). Overall, the data indicated that students with more recent graduation 383

12 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 384 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS dates benefited more from the program than their predecessors. In addition to the aforementioned changes in internship, the curriculum changed over time to include a greater discipline-specific course load and greater rigor. Although time could be considered a confounding variable in that different alumni were evaluating somewhat different programs, this need not be seen as a negative aspect of the present study. It is likely that the significantly higher ratings for more recent graduates is a positive outcome associated with the dynamic evolution of a program in response to an effective and systematic program review. Limitations and Future Research As with any survey, respondents were self-selected and responses were subject to bias based on individual experiences in the academic program or internship, or at the university in general. Further, surveys sent to alumni who graduated 1 to 10 years ago may be affected by memory and the influence of experiences that occurred after graduation. Questions in which respondents were asked to provide estimates are subject to memory and judgment errors. Long-term memory was not under our control as researchers, but judgment errors can be minimized with clarity of survey items. In one case (Q18), alumni were asked to estimate the percentage of time spent communicating with individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing during the internship. In addition to assuming the possible existence of estimation errors, we made an assumption that since all supervisors were required to sign, and most clients, consumers, and students signed, the use of sign language was implied. This assumption may not have been correct. For subsequent surveys, this question will be clarified to specify methods of communication used. Other factors that must be con - sidered include the changing requirements of the program and the internship. Over the years, the curriculum has been altered with the addition of new courses and requirements. Additionally, the internship has changed with regard to available sites, number of on-site hours required, and schedule of class meetings. These changes were not considered in the survey and might constitute a limitation of the study and its results. When the present study was conducted, the Deaf studies program considered in the study had not yet implemented the use of the ASLPI screening to determine students signing proficiency. Suggestions for future research include an assessment of the impact of an intern s signing skills based on a subsequent ASLPI test after the internship experience, a discourse analysis between an intern and a client, or analysis of the actual duties of interns. One other suggestion for future alumni surveys is to determine if students feel that requirements outside the department are meeting the need to develop strong writing skills, or if there are ways in which the Deaf studies program can enhance students writing skills. Conclusions The present study allowed the Deaf studies faculty at a large public East Coast university to examine alumni behaviors and perspectives after graduation, including subsequent education and vocation, and the relationship between internship factors and alumni perceptions. These data are useful for the continued evolution of the Deaf studies program; as suggested by Stark and Lattuca (1997), obtaining an external perspective as part of a program evaluation can yield data unlike that from a self-study. These data, along with the discussion regarding the evolution of this particular Deaf studies program, can be used by faculty and program directors to develop or modify program assessments, critically review curriculum and internship protocols, and provide documentation needed to justify development of new programs or enhancement of existing programs. The results of the present study indicated that that the Deaf studies program and the internship experience had a significant positive impact on the career development of the program s graduates. The program and the internship enhanced the interpersonal skills, ASL skills, and knowledge of Deaf culture of alumni, and helped them with career decisions. In addition, the internship was found to help alumni prepare for a job after graduation. Most alumni used the knowledge and skills from the program, regardless of professional field or further education. Findings from this study will be used to (a) make data-driven changes to internship assignments, such as elimination of internship sites with limited time spent communicating through signed language; (b) suggest adjustments to the academic program; and (c) provide academic advising to Deaf studies students and potential students regarding career paths. We hope that other programs will also benefit from this research, using the results to develop or enhance programs to meet the growing interests of students and the needs of the Deaf community. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the significant contributions made by Dr. Samuel Supalla and Joel Reisman through their input to the present article. The Authors 384

13 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 385 References Beemyn, B., & Elianon, M. (1996). Queer studies: A lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender anthology. New York, NY: New York University Press. Boxer, M. J. (1988). For and about women: Theory and practice of women s studies in the United States. In E. K. Minnich, J. O Barr, & R. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Reconstructing the academy: Women s education and women s studies (pp ). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Cooper, S. B. (1997). The academic status of sign language programs in institutions of higher education in the United States. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC. Cooper, S. B., Reisman, J. I., & Watson, D. (2008). The status of sign language instruction in institutions of higher education: American Annals of the Deaf, 153(1), Cooper, S. B., Reisman, J. I., & Watson, D. (2011). Sign language program structure and content in institutions of higher education in the United States, Sign Language Studies, 11(3), Dodd, E. E., & Sheetz, N. A. (2003). Preparing today s teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing to work with tomorrow s students: A statewide needs assessment. American Annals of the Deaf, 148(1), Gaff, J. G. (1991). New life for the college curriculum: Assessing achievements and further progress in the reform of general education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hegert, M. (2009). Student perceptions of the value of internships in business education. American Journal of Business Education, 2(8), Hine, D. C. (1990). Black studies: An overview. In R. L. Harris, D. C. Hine, & N. McKay (Eds.), Black studies in the United States: Three essays (pp ). New York, NY: Ford Foundation. Holcomb, T. K. (2010). Deaf epistemology: The Deaf way of knowing. American Annals of the Deaf, 154(5), Huber, B. J. (1989, December). Characteristics of college and university foreign language programs. Profession, pp Huber, B. J. (1990). Compensation and support for foreign language department chairs: A survey of 1989 ADFL seminar participants. ADFL Bulletin, 21(3), Huber, B. J. (1992). Characteristics of foreign language requirements at U.S. colleges and universities: Findings from the MLA s survey of foreign language programs. ADFL Bulletin, 24(1), Huber, B. J. (1993). Characteristics of college and university foreign language curricula: Findings from the MLA s study. ADFL Bulletin, 24(3), Kemp, M. (1988). Self-assessment of a sign language program. American Annals of the Deaf, 133(5), Kemp, M. (1998). Fundamentals of evaluating sign language programs: Checklists for program assessment. San Diego, CA: Dawn- Sign Press. Kornbluh, A. (1990). Women s studies at Ohio two-year colleges: A survey and suggestions for successful programs. Journal of the American Association of Women in Community and Junior Colleges, pp Lehrer, K. (2000). Theory of knowledge (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview. Marschark, M., & Humphries, T. (2010). Deaf studies by any other name? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 15(1), 1 2. Maskooki, K., Rama, D. V., & Raghunandan, K. (1998). Internships in undergraduate finance programs. Financial Practice and Education, 8, McKay, N. (1990). Black studies in the Midwest. In R. L. Harris, D. C. Hine, & N. McKay (Eds.), Black studies in the United States: Three essays (pp ). New York, NY: Ford Foundation. O Neill, N. (2010). Internships as a high-impact practice: Some reflection on quality. AAC&U Peer Review, 12(4), 4 8. Paul, P. V., & Moores, D. F. (2010). Introduction: Toward an understanding of epistemology and deafness. American Annals of the Deaf, 154(5), Perry, P. (1989). Firms want more from marketing schools. Marketing News, 23, 1 2. Pring, R. (2004). Philosophy of educational research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Continuum. Raymond, M. A., McNabb, D. E., & Matthaei, C. F. (1993). Preparing graduates for the workforce: The role of business education. Journal of Education for Business, 68, Ritzer, G. (2001). Explorations in social theory: From metatheorizing to rationalization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Roberson, L., Woolsey, M. L., Seabrooks, J., & Williams, G. (2004). Data-driven assessment of teacher candidates during their internships in deaf education. American Annals of the Deaf, 148(5), Sanders, G. E. (1986). The establishment of a deaf studies major. Journal of American Deafness and Rehabilitation Association, 19(3 4), Stark, J. S., & Lattuca, L. R. (1997). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in action. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Sternfeld, S. (1988). The applicability of the immersion approach to college foreign language instruction. Foreign Language Annals, 21(3), Swain, M. (1996). Integrating language and content in immersion classrooms: Research perspectives. Canadian Modern Language Review, 4, Taylor, S. M. (1988). Effects of college internships on individual participants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, Tuckman, B. W. (1979). Evaluating instructional programs. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. 385

14 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 386 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS Appendix Deaf Studies Alumni Survey 2011 Note. Throughout the survey, percentages may not total because of rounding. Q1. In what year did you graduate from [*] University with a degree in Deaf studies? Year Before *The name of the university was included on the distributed survey but is omitted here. N = 120. Q2. Did you complete a double or combined major while at [*] University? Yes No N = 120. Q3. What was your second major? Psychology Speech-language pathology/audiology Elementary education Sociology Nursing Special education Family studies Other N = 45. Q4. What was your highest level of education before completing the Deaf studies program? High school Associate s degree Bachelor s degree or higher N =

15 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 387 Q5. Did you continue your education after you completed your Deaf studies degree at [*] University? Yes No Currently enrolled* *Interpreter training = 12; education/teacher certification = 5; audiology = 3; speech-language pathology = 2; health/nursing = 2; social work = 2; other = 7. N = 120. Q6. Which of the following did you complete after your Deaf studies degree? Further classes not leading to a degree Currently in degree program Professional certificate Bachelor s degree Master s degree Doctoral degree Interpreter program N = 59. (The respondents could select more than one answer.) Q7. Which academic discipline did you pursue or are you currently pursuing after your Deaf studies degree? Interpreting Counseling, psychology, social work Rehabilitation counseling Deaf education Speech pathology Education, not Deaf Linguistics Audiology Medicine Nursing Law Other N = 59. Q8. What is your current age? Statistic Years M (SD) 28.0 (6.7) Mdn (Mode) 27 (23) Range N = 118. Q9. What is your gender? Female Male N =

16 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 388 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS Q10. What is your race? African American/Black American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian Caucasian/White Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Other N = 119. Q11. What is your current employment status? Employed full-time Employed part-time Unemployed Contractual/freelance Full-time student Other N = 120. (Respondents could select more than one answer.) Q12. What is your current job title/description? Interpreter/interpreter educator Teacher/aide of the Deaf Teacher/aide not with Deaf students Speech-language pathologist Audiologist Counselor/social worker/psychologist with the Deaf Other (likely interaction with deaf/signing) Other (possible interaction with deaf/signing) Other (no specific interaction with deaf/signing) N = 103. Q13. Do you use signed language in your current job? Yes No N = 103. Q14. Do you use the knowledge and skills from the Deaf studies program in your current job or educational program? Yes No N =

17 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 389 Q15. Please indicate your hearing status. Hearing Hard of hearing Deaf N = 119. Q16. Are any members of your family Deaf/deaf? One parent Both parents Siblings Other None N = 119. Q17. When you were in the Deaf studies program, in which internship course were you enrolled? 2 credits (60 hour on site) credits (90 hours on site) credits (120 hours on site) Other I can t remember N = 119. Q18. During your internship, approximately what percentage of your time was spent communicating with individuals who were Deaf or hard of hearing? Less than 25% % 50% % 74% % 100% N = 119. Q19. Where was your internship located? Public school (K 12) College/university State school for the deaf State school for the blind State comprehensive rehabilitation center Social service/nonprofit agency Government agency Consumer advocacy organization Medical Other N =

18 18333-AAD157.4_Fall /15/12 2:16 PM Page 390 DEAF STUDIES ALUMNI PERCEPTIONS Q20. What was the hearing status of your internship supervisor? Hearing Hard of hearing Deaf N = 119. Q Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements regarding only the Deaf studies internship experience. (Cells contain number of respondents and percentage of respondents for each question; the most common response to each question is highlighted.) Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree The internship experience enhanced my interpersonal skills. 4 (3.7%) 5 (4.6%) 19 (17.6%) 44 (40.7%) 36 (33.3%)... my ASL skills. 6 (5.6%) 15 (13.9%) 21 (19.4%) 30 (27.8%) 36 (33.3%)... my knowledge of Deaf culture. 4 (3.7%) 5 (4.6%) 22 (20.4%) 45 (41.7%) 32 (29.6%)... my writing skills. 17 (15.7%) 32 (29.6%) 38 (35.2%) 14 (13.0%) 7 (6.5%) The internship experience helped me make career decisions. 6 (5.6%) 8 (7.4%) 23 (21.3%) 42 (38.9%) 29 (26.9%)... mature and develop as a person. 3 (2.8%) 5 (4.6%) 27 (25.0%) 48 (44.4%) 25 (23.1%)... prepare for a job after graduation. 11 (10.2%) 15 (13.9%) 26 (24.1%) 35 (32.4%) 21 (19.4%) I respected my internship supervisor. 1 (0.9%) 0 (0.0%) 8 (7.4%) 25 (23.1%) 74 (68.5%) My internship supervisor respected me. 1(0.9%) 1 (0.9%) 10 (9.3%) 29 (26.9%) 67 (62.0%) N = 108. Q Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements regarding the Deaf studies program as a whole. (Cells contain number of respondents and percentage of respondents for each question; the most common response to each question is highlighted.) Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree Overall, the Deaf studies program enhanced my interpersonal skills. 1 (0.9%) 2 (1.9%) 24 (22.2%) 51 (47.2%) 30 (27.8%)... ASL skills. 2 (1.9%) 2 (1.9%) 9 (8.3%) 30 (27.8%) 65 (60.2%)... knowledge of the culture of the Deaf/signed language community. 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (4.6%) 33 (30.6%) 70 (64.8%)... writing skills. 11 (10.2%) 24 (22.2%) 47 (43.5%) 18 (16.7%) 8 (7.4%) Overall, the Deaf studies program helped me make career decisions. 8 (7.4%) 6 (5.6%) 21 (19.4%) 36 (33.3%) 37 (34.3%)... mature and develop as a person. 4 (3.7%) 5 (4.6%) 27 (25.0%) 40 (37.0%) 32 (29.6%)... prepare for a job after graduation. 11 (10.2%) 14 (13.0%) 19 (17.6%) 42 (38.9%) 22 (20.4%) Overall, I respected my Deaf studies professors. 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 10 (9.3%) 47 (43.5%) 51 (47.2%) Overall, my Deaf studies professors respected me. 2 (1.9%) 2 (1.9%) 17 (15.7%) 44 (40.7%) 43 (39.8%) N = 108. Note. In addition to the 38 forced-choice questions, the survey included 2 open-set questions. 390