№ lp_2_3_21513
File format: docx
Character count: 6306
File size: 28 KB
Undergraduate curriculum description outlining requirements, course sequences, prerequisites, and approved course options for the American Sign Language and Deaf Cultural Studies minor in the 2024-2025 academic year at Rochester Institute of Technology.
Academic Year:
2024-2025
Calendar Type:
Semester
Credit Requirement:
Minimum 15 semester credit hours
Program Type:
Undergraduate minor
Field of Study:
American Sign Language and Deaf Cultural Studies
Institution:
Rochester Institute of Technology
Eligibility:
Students enrolled in bachelor’s degree programs
Entry Requirement:
Completion of Beginning American Sign Language I or equivalent proficiency
Course Structure:
Sequence 1a or 1b and Sequence 2, depending on ASL placement and major
Minimum Courses Required:
Five courses
Advanced Requirement:
At least one course at the 300 level or higher
Ineligible Students:
n/a
Effective Term:
2241 (latest modification)
Curriculum Modifications:
Addition and removal of specified ASL and DCS courses; updates to prerequisites
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Note:
Year
Topic:
Sensory Services, Vocational Rehabilitation, Independent Living
Document Type:
Informational Brochure
Organization:
Georgia Vocational Rehabilitation Agency (GVRA)
Target Audience:
Individuals who are Blind, Low Vision, Deaf, DeafBlind, or Hard of Hearing
Year:
2016
Region / City:
Virginia
Theme:
Working memory, deaf education, cognitive development
Document Type:
Webinar
Organization / Institution:
Gallaudet University, Virginia School for the Deaf and the Blind
Author:
Dr. Daniel S. Koo
Target Audience:
Educators, family members of children who are deaf or hard of hearing
Period of Action:
March 16, 2016
Approval Date:
March 16, 2016
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2025
Region / City:
California
Theme:
Employment Services for Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Document Type:
Solicitation for Proposals
Organization / Institution:
Employment Development Department
Author:
Employment Development Department
Target Audience:
Public agencies or private non-profits
Period of Action:
July 1, 2025 - June 30, 2026
Approval Date:
April 2025
Date of Changes:
None
Date:
May 11, 2016
Time:
2:00 PM–4:00 PM
Location:
4600 Valley Rd, Classroom 4A, Lincoln, Nebraska
Region:
Nebraska
Type of document:
Meeting minutes
Organ / institution:
Nebraska Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Committee:
Mental Health Advisory Committee
Chairperson:
Vicki Steinhauer-Campbell
Minutes recorded by:
Cindy Woldt
CART provider:
Margaret “Mydge” Heaney / Exclusive Reporting
Interpreters:
Sharon Sinkler; Crystal Pierce
Participants:
Jill Bird; Vicki Steinhauer-Campbell; Kathleen Valle; Peggy Williams; John Wyvill; Lisa Vogel; Barb Woodhead
Absent members:
Jan Goracke; Jackie Prater; Ann Thompson
Key topics:
Legislative interim studies; closed captioning in movie theaters; hearing aid insurance coverage; advocacy handbook in ASL; public outreach events; Hearing Aid Bank donations; behavioral health service access
Approval actions:
Agenda approved; December 2, 2015 minutes approved with corrections; February 9, 2016 minutes approved with corrections
Announcements:
Peggy Williams retirement effective July 1, 2016; Behavioral Health Coordinator interview process; committee resignations
Period covered:
Legislative interim period following the 2016 Nebraska legislative session
Language:
en
Title:
Sally & Possum Teaching and Learning Guide for Auslan in the Australian Curriculum
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Education, Sign Language, Auslan
Document Type:
Educational Resource
Organization / Institution:
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
Teachers, Educators, Students with hearing impairments
Period of Validity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Washington State
Topic:
Telecommunication Equipment Distribution
Document Type:
Application Form
Agency / Organization:
Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH)
Target Audience:
Deaf, hard of hearing, late-deafened, deaf-blind, speech-disabled individuals in Washington State
Phone Numbers:
(800) 422-7930 V/TTY, (360) 725-3450 V/TTY, (360) 725-3456 FAX
Email:
[email protected]
Website:
http://odhh.dshs.wa.gov
Video Phone:
360-339-7382
Year:
2024
Region / City:
Oakland, California
Topic:
Telecommunications Access for the Deaf and Disabled
Document Type:
Meeting Minutes
Organization:
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
Author:
N/A
Target Audience:
TADDAC and EPAC Members, CPUC Staff, General Public
Effective Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Amendment Date:
N/A
Year:
2021
Region / City:
England
Theme:
Disability Rights, United Nations, Campaigns
Document Type:
Press Release
Organization:
DDPOs, Inclusion London
Author:
Svetlana Kotova, Michelle Daley, Ellen Clifford
Target Audience:
Deaf and Disabled People, Human Rights Organizations, Government Bodies
Period of Action:
2021
Approval Date:
20th October 2021
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
1967
Region / City:
United States
Theme:
Deaf culture, theater, education, performance
Document Type:
Historical overview
Organization / Institution:
National Theatre of the Deaf
Author:
Not specified
Target Audience:
General public, theater enthusiasts, scholars of deaf culture
Period of Activity:
Ongoing
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Changes:
Not specified
Year:
2021
Region / City:
Victoria, Melbourne
Theme:
Disability Inclusion, Legal Reform
Document Type:
Submission
Organization / Institution:
Victoria Legal Aid
Author:
Louise Glanville
Target Audience:
Victorian Law Reform Commission, Legal Professionals, Disability Advocacy Groups
Effective Date:
February 2021
Date of Approval:
February 2021
Date of Amendments:
Not specified
Institution:
Royal School for the Deaf
Document type:
School lunch menu
Season:
Winter
Years covered:
2025, 2023
Weeks covered:
Week 2, Week 3
Menu structure:
Monday to Friday
Food categories:
Main courses, sides, salad bar, desserts
Dietary options:
Vegetarian (V), Halal (H)
Allergen information:
Included for Winter 2025 Week 3
Allergen notice:
If unsure always check with the cook
Additional note:
Bread, fresh fruit and yogurt available every day
Version:
V1
Program Name:
Special Education: Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Document Type:
Program Standards Report
Field:
Special Education
Focus Area:
Deaf and Hard of Hearing Education
Standards Included:
American Sign Language Competency; Philosophical, Historical, and Legal Foundations; Models of Practice; Impact of Disabilities; Educational Assessment; Diverse Learners; Instructional Language Proficiency; Motivation and Behavior; Communication Skills; Professional Collaboration; Professional Conduct and Leadership
Required Assessments:
Commission-approved SPED Subject Test; ASLPI (3.0 or above); SLPI (Advanced); Licensing Tests; edTPA
Clinical Requirements:
Supervised Teaching; Internships; Field Experiences with Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Learners
Competency Areas:
Cultural Competency; Equitable Practice
Target Candidates:
Teacher Candidates in SPED: Deaf and Hard of Hearing Endorsement Program
Classification:
Senior Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor, Qualified Rehabilitation Professional
Job Title:
Senior Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor, Qualified Rehabilitation Professional
Position Number:
813-250-XXXX-XXX
Reports To:
TM/Staff Services Manager
IFLSA Status:
Non-Exempt
Division:
Vocational Rehabilitation Employment Division
Location:
San Jose District / may be housed in another DOR district
Primary Assignment:
Provide Vocational Rehabilitation Services to Deaf and Hard of Hearing and Generalist Consumers
Core Duties:
Determining VR eligibility, priority for services, development and amendments of IPE, determining successful employment outcome and case closure
Communication Requirements:
American Sign Language (ASL)
Service Scope:
Federal Title I Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program
Work Mode:
Remote with occasional in-person requirements
Essential Functions:
Counseling, team coordination, eligibility determination, community outreach, ASL interpretation, documentation
Marginal Functions:
Training, participation in workgroups
Document Type:
Duty Statement / Job Description
Organization:
British Deaf Association
Document Type:
Employment application form
Confidentiality:
Strictly Private and Confidential
Submission Method:
Email to [email protected]
Country:
United Kingdom
Legislation Referenced:
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
Background Check Authority:
Disclosure and Barring Service
Data Protection:
Compliance with current Data Protection legislation
Retention Period (Unsuccessful Applicants):
6 months
Sections Included:
Personal Details; Education / Training; Employment History; Person Specification; References; Additional Information; Declaration; Equal Opportunities Statement; Recruitment of Ex-Offenders Information
Year:
1998
Region / City:
Australia
Topic:
Deaf education, Auslan, literacy and numeracy
Document type:
Educational resource
Organization / Institution:
Sally & Possum program, Queensland Department of Education
Author:
T. Johnston
Target audience:
Teachers, educators, early childhood students
Curriculum links:
Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF), Queensland Kindergarten Learning Guideline (QKLG), Australian Curriculum – General Capabilities
Purpose:
Support profoundly deaf or hard of hearing children in literacy and numeracy and raise deaf awareness in classrooms
Format:
Activity suggestions aligned with television episodes
Accessibility focus:
Use of assistive hearing devices, Auslan communication, visual access considerations
Year:
2020
Region / City:
Virginia
Subject:
Interpreter Services, Sign Language, Government Agencies
Document Type:
Manual, Agreement
Organization:
Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
Target Audience:
Qualified Sign Language Interpreters, State and Local Government Agencies
Effective Date:
January 1, 2020
Date of Approval:
January 1, 2020
Date of Last Update:
January 1, 2020
Note:
Year
Region / City:
Burlington
Subject:
Signage Regulations
Document Type:
Application Form
Authority / Institution:
Burlington City Government
Target Audience:
Property owners, contractors, and individuals applying for sign permits
Program name:
Ashland Sign & Façade Program
Document type:
Application form
Grant type:
Reimbursement grant
Administering organization:
Town of Ashland
Administering program:
Ashland Economic Development Incentive Program
Location:
Ashland, Massachusetts
Eligible applicants:
Businesses located in Ashland
Eligible improvements:
Exterior façade and sign improvements
Maximum funding amount:
Up to 50% of project cost or $5,000
Funding source:
Town funding
Approval authority:
Ashland Economic Development Advisory Group; Town Manager; Board of Selectmen
Submission requirements:
Completed application, bids, permits, supporting documents
Contact person:
Economic Development Director
Contact address:
101 Main Street, Ashland, MA 01721
Contact email:
[email protected]
) and join the S1NET. For guides with in depth examinations of performance measure definitions, go to:
https://www.milsuite.mil/book/docs/DOC-129783
Table of Contents (Hyperlinks to Sections):
Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ OER Narratives: Notes, Rules, and Instructions OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: Negative Comment Rules Referred OERs Narrative Comment Examples Block a. APFT and HT/WT Block b. Overall Performance Block c. Character (to include SHARP comments) Block d. Presence Block e. Intellect Block f. Leads Block g. Develops Block h. Achieves Senior Rater Potential Senior Rater Narrative Examples Senior Rater Narrative Comment Examples (for potential, promotion, school, etc.) Successive Assignments Other SR Comments (explanations of anything unusual about OER) Effective Words for Evaluations JUNIOR OFFICER PLATE (DA FORM 67-10-1) NOTE: 2LTs who have NOT completed BOLC, will not receive an OER until they complete BOLC (AC and ARNG; USAR officers can receive an OER before completing BOLC). The FROM date will be their commissioning date. All time until their BOLC graduation will be NONRATED on their first OER. OER PROFILING: OERs: Rater and Senior Rater Profiles are CONSTRAINED, meaning Officers are only allowed to grant 49% of each rank they rate with either an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). HOWEVER, if you have an immature profile, and have only just begun rating/senior rating Officers of a certain rank, you are allowed a ONE TIME option of giving one of the first two evaluations you make at a particular grade, an “EXCELS” (as Rater) or “MOST QUALIFIED” (as Senior Rater). OER (OER SUPPORT FORM) PART III: Developing ‘Significant Duties and Responsibilities’ (blocks a., b., and c.): Refer to DA PAM 611-21 (https://www.milsuite.mil/book/groups/smartbookdapam611-21
) and DA PAM 600-3 (Commissioned Officer Professional Development and Career Management), to assist in the development of PART III, block d. As a minimum, the duty description will include pr:
- Number of personnel supervised, - Amount of resources under the rated officer’s control, - Scope of responsibilities. 3) Descriptions must be clear and concise with emphasis on specific functions required. 4) Note conditions unique to the assignment; e.g. RA officers assigned to FT support duties with RC units or USAR officers assigned to RA units OER NARRATIVES: Notes, Rules, and Instructions Rater and Senior Rater Narratives: - Requires candor and courage; frank and accurate assessment. - Quantify officer’s value relative to peers and do so in concert with rater/senior rater box check. - Are short; tell a simple story about the quality of officer being evaluated. - Are interesting and compelling. - Are looked at by selection board members when they are looking for in-depth information about a rated officer’s performance and potential. - Numbers; 1-10, write them out (e.g. one, two, ten). 11 or higher, write the number; e.g. 11, 15, 105. Exception, when a 1-10 is WITH an 11 or higher; e.g. “5 tool kits with 20 tools each.” - Fashion the narrative to the officer; double check use of “he/his” vs. “she/hers.” - Awards: Awards and/or special recognition received during the rating period may be cited in evaluation comments (for example, “received the Humanitarian Service Medal” or “named the Instructor of the Year”). - Raters and SR CAN use the officer’s name in the narrative; e.g. “1LT Joe was ….” Rater and Rater Narratives: - Focus on PERFORMANCE; explaining what the rated officer did and how well he/she did it. - Focus on specifics to quantify and qualify performance. - Raters should advocate the rated officer to the SR. - When there is no SR (due to lack of qualifications), rater’s narrative provides the input on both performance and potential. Senior Rater (SR) and SR Narrative (see SR Rater Narrative section for examples): - Focus on POTENTIAL, 3-5 years out (promotions, command, school, & assignments). - Can amplify box checks by using the narrative to clearly send the appropriate message to selection boards. - CANNOT mention Box Check. - Additional information for when SR is also Rater can be found in DA PAM 623-3, pg. 26, “DA Form 67–10–1, part VI: block c—Senior Rater Narrative.” OER Narrative Prohibited Techniques, Inconsistencies, No-Go’s: - School/Course Comments: Bullets about how a Soldier did in a school or course are ONLY allowed if that school did not produce an AER/DA Form 1059. - Narratives are not a laundry list of superlatives – more is not necessarily better. - Brief, unqualified superlatives or phrases, particularly if they may be considered trite. - Excessive use of technical acronyms, or phrases not commonly recognized. - Techniques aimed at making specific words, phrases, or sentences stand out from the rest of the narrative; e.g. excessive use of capital letters; unnecessary quotation marks; repeated use of exclamation points; wide spacing between selected words, phrases, or sentences to include double spacing within a paragraph or between paragraphs. - Inappropriate references to box checks; e.g “Would be TOP BLOCK if profile allowed” or “absolutely far exceeded the standard”. - Trying to quantify (e.g. “top 2% of my captains”) with a small population. - Stay in your lane/level; avoid comments like “Best 1LT in the Army” unless you’re the Army CoS. - Stating “the best ever”; having 10 in the population, 50 in the profile. - Using overused phrases and clichés that are counterproductive or overused; e.g. stellar, historic, “delivered a dazzling performance,” “hit the ground running,” consummate professional, and unlimited potential. - Using specific selection board-type language. Examples of this include, “definitely a 6+ Soldier”. - Don’t exaggerate; “If I could prove it, CPT X is an LTC disguised as a CPT.” - Be mindful of what IS NOT said; it can have the same impact as what is said; e.g. NOT having numbers, or quantifiable points. - Don’t say the sa
Note:
en
Topic:
Officer Evaluation, Narrative Guidelines
Document Type:
Guide
Target Audience:
Raters, Senior Raters