ASL 2510-Request to Add to Social Sciences Gen Ed

The CCC would like your feedback on the request to place ASL 2510 into the Institutional hours of General Education within the Social Science division.  Below is the Opt-In Template with the assessment information and rationale.

General Education Opt-In Template

Division: _____ Communications _____Humanities _____Math _____ Science __X___ Social Science / Discipline Sign Language Interpretation

Course Title: Deaf Culture

Course Prefix: ASL                    Course Number:                       2510                                             Current Completed Course Outline: ___x__Yes (attach) _____ No


Gen Ed Principles: Does this course, when added to the Gen Ed Program:

Contribute Significantly to the Gen Ed Outcomes Satisfy the mission of the College Rely on a specific faculty member for instruction Focus on a specific occupation Transfer to an upper division program Have a prerequisite that is not a Gen Ed course
Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Assessment of Gen Ed Outcomes: Please select both a primary and secondary contribution and provide a bulleted list of how you will assess for the outcomes.

Gen Ed Outcomes Cultural and Historical Understanding QuantitativeReasoning ScientificReasoning Interpersonal Communication Oral Communication Written Communication Ethical Responsibility Information Literacy Critical Thinking
Primary contribution Students will be able to critically define and discuss the American Deaf community and the oppression they face as being defined by the majority as a disabled group instead of a linguistic minority group.·    As a cumulative assessment to evaluate learning throughout the course, students will respond to the following prompt:

“In 1991 the American with Disabilities Act was implemented across the United States. Deaf individuals do not consider themselves disabled, however they benefit from legislations created to end discrimination against disabled people. Discuss in detail how these conflicting beliefs can lead to feelings of empowerment and equality among the American Deaf community, while at the same time further imbed within mainstream society attitudes of paternalism and audism towards the American Deaf community?

Students will write a 4 page (1,000 word) paper in response to this prompt.


Secondary contribution Students will be able to define culture and discuss and define the sociological implications of American Deaf Culture and the American Deaf perspective of hearing Americans.·    Students will read “A Journey Into the Deaf World.” – Students will respond to questions for each chapter (16)

·    Students will wear ear plugs and engage in activities only in a manner in which Deaf could/would engage in these experiences. –

Students will   write a 4 page (1,000 word) reaction paper to their experience


Students will be able to discuss educational decisions, family nucleus make-up, and SES in regard to Deaf, and how these norms affect discourse found in American Deaf community. Student will be able to discuss differences, similarities, and perspectives of American Deaf and American hearing culture.·       Students will watch:

1)     ”Through Deaf Eyes”

2)     “See What I’m Saying”

3)     “Audism Unveiled”

Students will respond to several prompts, relating information learned from the films to an application of an understanding of things disclosed in the films.

Students will write a 2 page (500 word) paper using prompts to guide their writing for each of the three films.


Narrative of Contribution to Gen Ed:

ASL 2510, Deaf Culture, satisfies all of Valencia’s Strategic Goals. This course allows pathways to be built, assures that learning is taking place, creates opportunities to invest in each other, and helps to further create partners with the community. The manner in which many of Valencia’s Strategic Goals are met in Deaf Culture is evident by the assessments prompted by the learning outcomes created for Deaf Culture. This course offers a wide range of general sociological-based learning outcomes. Although the focus of the course is the culture of Deaf community, the course offers broader sociological implications of understanding differing centers of being. The scope of ASL 2510 puts into perspective an understanding and learned ability to discuss sociological implications of disabilities in general, and making connections between perceived norms and mores, and the norms and mores as are perceived from a group with a differing center of being. Specifically, ASL 2510 provides the student with a broader enlightened understanding of diversity as it pertains to, not only ethnically differing groups, but also groups which differs from mainstream society because of the label of being disabled.

ASL 2510, Deaf Culture, is a requisite course for Valencia’s pre-major AA Sign Language Interpretation. This course is a pre-requisite for Deaf Education majors at UNF, and Sign Language Interpreting majors at UNF and USF. Additionally, ASL 2510 , Deaf Culture, is one the requisite courses to obtain the FDOE’s ASL Endorsement for K-12 teachers desiring to be K-12 American Sign Language teachers.



16 Responses to “ASL 2510-Request to Add to Social Sciences Gen Ed”

  1. Jovan Trpovski

    This course reads as a Sociology course. As such, it fits perfectly into the realm of the department’s work, mission, and divisions. I support its inclusion into the institutional hours for general education.

  2. Carl E Creasman Jr

    ASL is, at least on East, within the Social Science division. I support it’s inclusion. My one request here would be for ASL or maybe the Curriculum Committee structure the “rules” for enrolling to be limited to ASL students only, whether AS or BS seeking.

  3. Anthony Beninati

    ASL 2510 appears to mesh well with the broad learning objectives of the Social Sciences core. I support its inclusion in our Gen Ed area.

  4. Carl E Creasman Jr

    Was thinking about this more this morning, and wanted to add that my hope for “limiting it to ASL students only” could somewhat be accomplished through a pre-req. ASL could choose one of the early courses in the program (one that works for both AS and BS students. If the point is to aid students making it through this program and not going over hours, we don’t need 100s of other students taking this to satisfy their Gordon Rule requirements, and thus taking up necessary seats for the ASL students. I hope Curriculum Committee will strongly push to have an ASL pre-req.

    • Sean P. Jennings

      Carl, by definition limiting the course to ‘ASL students only’ makes it inappropriate for Gen Ed. Unless you suggest all courses in the institutional hours be limited to majors specific to the courses being taken. Meaning, only declared History majors could take any of the History classes, only declared Poli Sci majors could take Political Science classes, and only Psych majors (second largest transfer major) could take some psych classes that we could put in the bucket. Are you wanting to limit enrollment of your classes to only History majors???

  5. Scott R. Crosby

    While I respect the idea that there are some sociological concepts in the course, it seems far too discipline specific to be included in the institutional hours for general education. As a result, I cannot support inserting this course into the institutional hours.

  6. Melonie Sexton

    This sounds like a really great class; I think students can definitely benefit from learning more about Deaf culture. However, I am not sure it falls under the Social Sciences. This class seems more like a Humanities course using social science elements – much like an African-American studies class would use aspects of psychology and sociology to explain its culture and history.

    • Karen Borglum

      There is an Introduction to the African American Experience, AFA 2000 in the Social Science division

  7. Sean P. Jennings

    It seems like a very good fundamental course for someone entering sign language as a major or minor. I am not sure it fits with Gen Ed. I am wondering why it is not being added to the Communications Division’s Institutional Hours, it seems a very logical and a natural fit. I think someone told me it was being proposed because Sign Language is in Social Sciences on East. Isn’t Sign Language in a Communication’s Division on some other campus and can be proposed to be in the Communication’s Institutional Hours? Is Sign Language on any other campus?

    • Karen Marie Borglum

      My understanding is that ASL is only offered on East. Many years ago, it was offered under the Communications division on West, but it was moved to Humanities/Foreign Languages, and then removed after difficulties in finding adjuncts. We can follow back up to make sure this is still accurate.

  8. Adrienne Mathews

    I would not support the addition of ASL 2510 at this time. I would be happy to reconsider my position once a better defined rubric on gen ed principles has been created.

  9. Tyler Alexander Branz

    I do not support the admission of ASL 2510 as I find it too specific a course for the general education program.

    Also, I perceive this course as an extension of a language, and perhaps it would fit better in the Valencia FLPR, even though, “American Sign Language cannot be used to fulfill the foreign language graduation requirement at many universities.” Many of the current gen ed courses transfer easily into the university setting, but ASL 2510 might meet some roadblocks, even though it most assuredly qualifies as a language, foreign or otherwise.

  10. Diane Ashe

    I am not in support of adding ASL 2510 since I don’t see it as good fit as a Social Science General Education course .

  11. Sean P. Jennings

    Karen thank you for adding the background information, that really helps in understanding when I had done a class search and only saw Sign Language classes being offered online and on East Campus.
    1) Does that mean sign language was unable to be supported on multiple campuses?
    2) Is it a problem the class is only offered in one format (online) to the rest of the college beside East?
    3) Would that go against our strategic goal of diversity since we know some students do not perform well in the online environment and prefer face to face classes resulting in undue hardship to travel to a campus that may be far from their home campus?
    4) Is ‘Rely on a specific faculty member for instruction’ similar to ‘Rely on a single campus for instruction’?
    I agree with Adrienne about the need for inclusion vs. exclusion criteria for Institutional Hours. It would seem the social sciences would prefer to have operational definitions. I am also confused why we cannot seem to align our disciplines (sometimes called departments) within divisions (sometimes called departments) similarly across campuses or create a common vernacular in order to have relevant conversations. It would seem we have grown (2nd largest community college in the nation) to the point we could have uniform structure across campuses.

    • Karen Marie Borglum


      My understanding was that is was difficult to find instructors to teach the ASL courses which is why it stopped being offered on other campuses. I don’t know if it is still an issue or if the other campuses have tried to find instructors. When I think of online instruction, I think of it as open to all students not just a particular campus, same as a face-to-face, so I am not sure that I see it as a problem. This is probably a conversation the deans need to have with regards to course offerings. The CCC has not historically thought about “relying on a specific campus” for instruction. The idea of “relying on a specific instructor” is taken directly from SACSCOC language. We look to see how many people would be credentialed to teach the course; the deans make the decision about what courses to offer. I do agree that it would be helpful if the disciplines, departments, and divisions were aligned across campuses.

  12. Karen Borglum


    I posted that “relying on a specific instructor” came directly from SACS language, and I misspoke. All of the principles are taken from SACS language, the questions that resulted were to address the issue of breadth, because the CCC and Faculty Council determined that measuring “breadth” would be challenging.

    Allow me to give you some the history, when I took this job in 2006, there were NO guidelines for courses being put into Gen Ed, and as a result even special topics courses were in the program. In 2007, the college began working on the Gen Ed outcomes, and the CCC determined (September 2007) that we needed guidelines/principles to determine how courses were approved into Gen Ed. A small task force with CCC members and Michael Shugg who was VP of Faculty Association, drafted principles and the questions. The conversation continued at the CCC October 2007 meeting, and then the draft went to Faculty Council at their October 2007 meeting. The CLC approved the principles later in the year. My apologies for my unintentional misstatement.


Leave a Reply