Disparate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on deaf college students

Abstract

This study explores the experiences of deaf college students during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic to examine institutional capacity to retain their most vulnerable students during this time of crisis. A secondary analysis of the National Center for Education Statistics dataset, the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, was conducted to explore deaf students’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic with communication from their college and disruptions related to finances, housing, or academics and to determine whether deaf students were more likely to leave their institutions than hearing students. The findings demonstrated that despite deaf students receiving similar amounts of helpful communication as their hearing peers and experiencing fewer economic disruptions, they were still nearly twice as likely to take a leave of absence or withdraw from their institution during the pandemic. These findings highlight the vulnerability of deaf college students to leaving college despite receiving institutional support.

Introduction

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant national disruptions in higher education settings across the country. As colleges and universities abruptly moved instruction online, students were forced to adapt to rapidly changing dynamics at school and at home.

College students reported mood changes, increased anxiety and depression, and reduced motivation during this time (Copeland et al., 2021; Li et al., 2021; Tasso et al., 2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was widely distributed; the majority of college students (87%) experienced a disruption or change in their enrollment (Cameron et al., 2021) and were concerned about completing the academic year successfully (Tasso et al., 2021). However, as we know, the COVID-19 pandemic has had disparate impacts on the most marginalized communities in the United States—people of color, low-income communities, and people with disabilities (Lopez et al., 2020).

Within higher education settings, the COVID-19 pandemic has also had disparate impacts on the most marginalized students. In this paper, we highlight the experiences of deaf college students to better understand how this population, which is historically at risk for not completing college degrees, experienced the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Fewer deaf people in the country have college degrees (Bloom et al., 2024) than their hearing counterparts, and deaf people are largely underrepresented at colleges and universities across the country—only approximately 1.4% of undergraduate students are deaf (Bloom & Palmer, 2023). The experiences of deaf college students provide an opportunity to examine whether higher education institutions have robust systems of support that can retain their most precarious students during times of crisis.

The number of disabled students enrolled in higher education has steadily increased over time (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2023), as has the number of deaf students (Bloom et al., 2024; Bloom & Palmer, 2023). However, colleges and universities have not always been able to meet the increased demand for services and support for disabled and deaf students. Though access to accommodations has increased for college students across the nation, this increase is largely driven by selective and private institutions and not 2-year institutions; thus, many students who need accommodations are not receiving them (Weis & Bittner, 2022). Many institutions lack robust and consistent support or policies surrounding the provision of accommodations (Mamboleo et al., 2020). Disabled college students frequently express discomfort with disclosing their disability, instructors’ unwillingness to implement accommodations, classmates’ lack of knowledge, and insufficient support from disability services personnel (Mamboleo et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2021).

Deaf students, in particular, express challenges with receiving consistent and high-quality accommodations in higher education settings and are likely to experience accommodation fatigue from having to advocate for equitable access (Palmer et al., 2020, 2023). Additionally, deaf college students often face social isolation and a lack of peer support, further hindering their well-being and motivation (Johnson, 2016; Schooler et al., 2021). Deaf students of color and deaf students with additional disabilities report even greater difficulties, as they must navigate intersecting forms of marginalization and discrimination (Chapple et al., 2021; Thompson-Ochoa, 2020; Wolsey, 2020). Deaf and disabled students already exist on the margins of the institution. The COVID-19 pandemic highlights how institutions responded to the crisis and whether they had sufficient resources to retain their most vulnerable students.

Institutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic

Higher education institutions responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by implementing a variety of strategies, including lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, mask mandates, social distancing, and switching to online or hybrid instruction. Institutional systems of support and communication about the implementation of these strategies vary widely, leaving students struggling to keep up with rapidly changing conditions (Tasso et al., 2021). Students reported that communication from their institutions about academic impacts, such as access to coursework or degree program progress, was more helpful than communication about financial impacts, such as financial aid or employment (Cameron et al., 2021). Campus wellness programs, in some cases, mitigated some of the negative impacts of COVID-19 on student mental health and wellness (Copeland et al., 2021).

However, campus communication efforts and wellness programs may not have been effective for disabled and deaf students. Though one study found that students with disabilities reported receiving more support from their institution during the pandemic than their nondisabled classmates (McMaughan et al., 2021), another study found that disabled college students reported more difficulty receiving mental health services from their institution (Lederer et al., 2024). Generally, disabled college students were less likely to agree that their campuses supported them during the pandemic than students without disabilities (Soria et al., 2020). Many deaf college students reported feelings of isolation and challenges with the transition to online instruction, such as not receiving access to remote accommodations or course materials (National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes, 2020). Some institutions implemented strategies to ensure that online instruction was accessible to deaf students, such as adding synchronous components, ensuring access to interpreters, and enabling course modifications and adjustments (Bowman & Crowe, 2023; Lynn et al., 2020). Many other institutions do not have the resources to ensure seamless accessibility. Thus, deaf students are often left behind in the transition to online or hybrid instruction, as are many other students who exist on the margins.

Disparate impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on college students

The COVID-19 pandemic had compounding effects on college students who were already experiencing systemic marginalization. College students of color, women and gender-nonconforming students, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, or asexual (LGBTQIA+) students, students without family support, disabled students, and deaf students experienced greater challenges during the pandemic. Students of color reported more disruptions in finances, living situations, academic performance, educational plans, and career goals, along with stress, anxiety, and depression (Molock & Parchem, 2022).

For example, Black, Latinx, Indigenous, or multiracial students are more likely to experience challenges with food instability than White or Asian students (Cameron et al., 2021). Women, gender-nonconforming, and LGBTQIA+ students experienced greater difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic, including stress, and challenges with housing, childcare, and schoolwork (Birmingham et al., 2023; Browning et al., 2021; Cameron et al., 2021; Lederer et al., 2024).

Research on the experiences of disabled and deaf college students during the COVID-19 pandemic is sparse, but it appears that they may have experienced greater stress and disruption than nondisabled college students. Students with disabilities largely experienced more stress than students without disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly related to concerns about finances, housing, medical bills, loneliness, anxiety, depression, and changes in sexual activity (Lederer et al., 2024; McMaughan et al., 2021; Soria et al., 2020). Many deaf college students reported feeling isolated, tired, and anxious and described stress about the transition to online learning and the increased demand for text communication in English (National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes, 2020; Sommer, 2020). Though the majority of deaf college students felt that the transition to online learning was difficult, older deaf students (age 25-plus) may have had a harder time—they reported lower levels of well-being during the pandemic (Bowman & Crowe, 2023). It is clear that students who are already at risk of not completing postsecondary education—students of color, disabled and deaf students, women and gender-nonconforming students, and LGBTQIA+ students—were likely to experience greater disruptions and difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Leaving college during the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 has drastically changed postsecondary enrollment and retention patterns across the country, which had already been steadily declining. In the first academic semester of the pandemic, college students had already started leaving their programs because of COVID-19. In the spring of 2020, 4.4% of undergraduate students had withdrawn from their institution and 3.8% had taken a leave of absence because of the COVID-19 pandemic (Cameron et al., 2021). By the fall of 2020, already declining enrollment trends dropped even more, particularly at community colleges and 2-year colleges (Howell et al., 2021; National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2020).

Enrollment patterns have decreased even more significantly among students of color, first-generation students, and lower-income students, particularly at 2-year colleges (Howell et al., 2021; National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2020). The highest withdrawals and leaves of absence due to COVID-19 have occurred among students at 2-year institutions, Black students, gender-nonconforming students, and older students (Cameron et al., 2021). Students with less family support are also more likely to withdraw from college than those with more support (unmarried students vs. dependent or married students; Cameron et al., 2021).

Many students who discontinued their studies between the spring and fall of 2020 did so because of financial concerns (Fishman & Nguyen, 2021). The majority of these students (57%) stated that it was likely that they would enroll in the future, but many said they did not know whether they would return (Fishman & Nguyen, 2021). Students who leave college without completing their degrees, particularly if they have student debt repayment obligations, have greater financial stress over time (Jabbari et al., 2023).

The current study

Through a secondary analysis of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) dataset, which collected data during the 2019–2020 academic year, this study aims to increase the understanding of deaf college students’ experiences at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This timeframe captures the initial impact on deaf college students during this time of significant disruption. Research questions examine deaf students’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic with communication from their college and disruptions related to finances, housing, or academics and examine whether deaf students are more likely to leave their institutions than hearing students.

Method

Analyses were conducted using NCES PowerStats software, with publicly available data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 2020 (NPSAS:20). The research questions are as follows:

1. To what extent did deaf college students have access to helpful COVID-19 pandemic communications from their college compared with hearing students?

2. To what extent did deaf college students experience economic or housing disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hearing students?

3. To what extent did deaf college students experience academic disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hearing students?

4. Were deaf students more likely to take a leave of absence or withdraw during the COVID-19 pandemic than hearing students, even when accounting for demographic variables and level of risk?

Data sources

These data come from the NPSAS, a cross-section of college students nationally collected by NCES. The NPSAS is conducted every 4 years and collects data about currently enrolled college students from institutional and U.S. Department of Education records and student interview data. The NPSAS uses clustered stratified random sampling involving the selection of a nationally representative sample of postsecondary education institutions and students within these institutions. Though the primary purpose of the NPSAS is to measure how students and their families pay for college, the extensive demographic information collected enables researchers to explore the experiences of various marginalized student groups. This dataset stands out among the few federal datasets that pose multiple questions about disability, making it a premier source for delving into the experiences of deaf college students.

The sample analyzed comes from the NPSAS:20, which includes undergraduate students enrolled at any time between July 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020. The NPSAS:20 student survey sample included 145,490 undergraduate students. During data collection, NCES added items about COVID-19, and approximately 61,000 students completed this supplemental survey (Cameron et al., 2021). The main variables of interest, leave of absence and withdrawal, were only available as part of this unique dataset created in response to the pandemic and are not available for previous years (See Appendix). Within the NPSAS:20, an estimated 1.3% of all students, or approximately 15,000 students, identified as being deaf or having severe difficulty hearing, hereafter referred to as “deaf.” The NPSAS uses two statistical weights: one for undergraduate students in the survey and another for undergraduate student administrative data analysis at the state level. Adjustments are made to address nonresponse bias and ensure that the weighted sample represents the overall student population on the basis of various data sources (Wine et al., 2023). Only weighted data were used for these analyses.

Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics for this study’s analytical sample. There are some demographic differences between deaf and hearing students. Deaf students, on average, were older than hearing students (29.5 vs. 25.1) and had a greater percentage of students with one or more risk factors (84.3 vs. 73.6). The demographic distributions of deaf and hearing students also slightly differed. A greater percentage of deaf men than deaf women were part of the sample; the opposite was true for hearing students. A lower percentage of Black deaf people than Black hearing people were included in the sample. Deaf college students were enrolled in certificate or associate programs at higher rates than their hearing peers, who enrolled in bachelor’s degree programs at higher rates.

Analysis

A series of t tests and multivariate logistic regressions were conducted to answer the research questions of interest in this study using NCES PowerStats software. NCES PowerStats software uses balanced repeated replication to estimate standard errors, confidence intervals, and t statistics (Wine et al., 2023). The use of NCES PowerStats allows other researchers to replicate these analyses, which is essential for validating findings and building upon existing research.

T tests were conducted to determine the extent to which deaf college students received helpful communication from their college during the COVID-19 pandemic and experienced disruptions and difficulties in comparison with their hearing peers. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to assess the probability of deaf and hearing students taking a leave of absence from their institution or withdrawing from their institution because of COVID-19.

Because the outcomes of interest (dependent variables) in this study were dichotomous variables, logistic regression was selected as the appropriate approach. The dependent variables in this study were whether students had taken a leave of absence or withdrawn from their institution. Age, deafness or severe hearing difficulty, gender, race and ethnicity, and the index of risk were used as independent variables. The index of risk is a variable created by the NPSAS on the basis of seven possible characteristics that adversely affect persistence and attainment. These characteristics include delayed enrollment, not having a high school diploma, part-time enrollment, being financially independent, having dependents, having single-parent status, and working full-time while enrolled. All the names of the variables used in this analysis are available in the appendix. NCES addresses missing data before releasing datasets to the public (Cameron et al., 2021), using a weighted sequential hot deck imputation method for demographic variables. However, variables of interest that contain missing values were excluded from the logistic regression, resulting in differing sample sizes across models.

Results

To answer research question 1, t tests were conducted to explore the extent to which deaf college students received helpful communication from their college during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hearing students (Table 2). These findings reveal a statistically significant difference in helpful communication in accessing coursework between hearing and deaf students; hearing students reported a higher percentage (69.2%) than deaf students (63.5%), with a t test value of 2.11 and a p value of .04. However, when communication about degree program progress, employment at the institution, financial aid, and campus housing were examined, the differences between hearing and deaf students were not statistically significant. There was a marginal difference in helpful communication about degree program progress, with hearing students at 57.5% and deaf students at 55.1%, yielding a t test value of .88 and a p value of .38. Similarly, communication regarding employment at the institution, financial aid, and campus housing exhibited negligible variations between the two groups, as indicated by t test values of .71 (p = .48) for employment, .90 (p = .37) for financial aid, and .56 (p = .58) for campus housing.

To answer research question 2, t tests were conducted to explore the extent to which deaf college students experienced economic and housing disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hearing students (Table 3). Comparisons between hearing and deaf students revealed no statistically significant differences in the percentages experiencing job loss or income reduction (p = .34) or difficulties finding childcare (p = .93). Approximately 30.5% of hearing students and 28.2% of deaf students reported job loss or income reduction, whereas 32.2% of hearing students and 31.6% of deaf students faced challenges accessing childcare. Some significant differences were evident, including deaf students being more likely to encounter difficulties finding stable housing (6.3%) than hearing students (3.2%, p = .003) and deaf students receiving emergency aid at a significantly lower rate (9.2%) than hearing students (13.0%, p = .007).

However, deaf students were significantly less likely to face difficulty accessing food than hearing students (p = .002). Nearly 14.5% of all hearing students had difficulty accessing food, whereas only 9.5% of deaf students experienced the same difficulty.

To answer research question 3, t tests were conducted to explore the extent to which deaf college students experienced academic disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with hearing students (Table 4). Significant differences were observed in several areas affecting academic stability. Deaf students experienced a significantly higher rate of class cancellations than hearing students (p = .02). Specifically, 14.2% of the deaf students faced canceled classes, whereas only 9.5% of the hearing students encountered similar disruptions. Moreover, significant disparities were found in the rates of institutional withdrawals and leaves of absence between hearing and deaf students. Compared with hearing students, deaf students were more likely to withdraw from their institution (p = .007), with 8.0% withdrawing during the specified period.

Similarly, deaf students were more prone to take leaves of absence (p = .006), with 7.5% opting for leave in comparison to 3.7% of hearing students. Study abroad modifications or cancellations were not significantly different. A total of 2.7% of hearing students and 2.4% of deaf students experienced modifications or cancellations in study abroad plans (p = .64).

To answer research question 4, logistic regressions were conducted to compare the likelihood of deaf students taking a leave of absence or withdrawing during the COVID-19 pandemic with that of hearing students when demographic characteristics and the risk factor index were accounted for (Tables 5 and 6). For leave of absence, the regression model was statistically significant, t = 2.849, p < .005. Deaf students were nearly twice as likely to take a leave of absence, even when the predictor variables of age, gender, race and ethnicity, and risk factors were held constant (OR = 1.822, 95% CI [1.206, 2.752]). For the likelihood of withdrawing, the regression model was statistically significant, t = 2.930, p < .004. Deaf students were nearly twice as likely to withdraw from their institution, even when the predictor variables of age, gender, race and ethnicity, and risk factors were held constant (OR = 1.780, 95% CI [1.210, 2.619]).

Discussion

This study aimed to explore deaf college students’ experiences with economic, housing, and academic stability during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Though deaf students largely reported receiving similar amounts of helpful communication as their hearing peers and experienced fewer housing or economic disruptions, they were still more likely to leave college. Economic and housing disruptions were not significantly different between the two groups, except for difficulties in finding stable housing, where deaf students faced more challenges.

Academic disruptions, including class cancellations, withdrawal from the institution, and taking a leave of absence, were more prevalent among deaf students. Logistic regressions confirmed that deaf students were nearly twice as likely to take a leave of absence or withdraw from their institution during the pandemic. Together, these findings highlight the vulnerability of deaf college students to leaving college despite institutional support.

General disruptions during the onset of COVID-19

Deaf students experienced a range of disruptions during the onset of COVID-19, including loss of job or income; food insecurity; and difficulty obtaining emergency aid, childcare, or stable housing. For the most part, deaf students’ experiences of these disruptions did not differ significantly from those of their hearing peers, except in a few areas. Deaf students were less likely to receive emergency aid or experience food insecurity and were more likely to experience difficulties finding stable housing. Though the data revealed that fewer deaf college students experienced food insecurity than their hearing peers, other research has demonstrated that deaf people frequently experienced food worry during the pandemic, particularly those without a college degree (Engelman et al., 2021). College may have served as a sort of buffer that prevented food insecurity among deaf college students during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the findings that deaf students experienced more difficulties finding stable housing suggest that more resources are needed in this area. After all, disabled college students are likely to experience housing insecurity (Olfert et al., 2023; Soria et al., 2023).

Coursework and class cancellations

For the most part, deaf students reported receiving similar amounts of helpful communication as their hearing counterparts, except for communication related to coursework. Perspectives about communication related to departmental or campuswide activities such as degree program progress, campus employment, financial aid, and campus housing were similar among deaf and hearing students. However, deaf students reported receiving less helpful communication from their college related to access to coursework. This finding could be explained because communication about coursework typically comes from faculty and instructors, who generally vary widely in how they communicate with students. Deaf students were also more likely to experience class cancellations than their hearing peers (14.2% vs. 9.5%). The reasons for those class cancellations are unknown, but it is possible that faculty who had deaf students in their classes may have been more likely to cancel their classes if accommodations could not be coordinated in time.

Faculty and instructors are not always knowledgeable about best practices for ensuring equitable access for deaf students in their classroom; deaf college students frequently report challenges with faculty not providing the modifications or accommodations they need (Mamboleo et al., 2020; Palmer et al., 2023). Disability service personnel also share that it is often difficult to work with faculty to ensure that accommodations are implemented effectively in their classes (Garberoglio et al., 2022). The lack of knowledge and expertise among faculty related to supporting and accommodating deaf and disabled students was prevalent even before the COVID-19 pandemic; when the pandemic began, faculty had less knowledge and resources to draw from to ensure that deaf students received the support they needed. During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many faculty felt that they were left to fend for themselves with minimal guidance or support from their institutions in a new landscape where instructional activities abruptly shifted online (Ramlo, 2021). In this time of transition, it appears that deaf students were left by the wayside in their coursework.

2-Year vs. 4-year colleges

A greater percentage of deaf students in this dataset were enrolled in certificate or 2-year degree programs than their hearing peers. National data from the American Community Survey also consistently demonstrate that more deaf students enroll in certificate programs or 2-year degree programs than their hearing peers (Bloom et al., 2024). These institutions often serve lower-income populations and students who may be juggling work and home responsibilities, leading to increased vulnerability to economic hardships and housing instability (CCCSE, 2022; Mountjoy, 2022). Technical schools and hands-on training programs, which are common within the 2-year institution sector and frequently attended by deaf students, require face-to-face interaction and practical instruction. Consequently, these programs may have been more susceptible to disruptions and cancellations during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may contribute to the disparities observed in the academic experiences of deaf and hearing students. Indeed, national data indicate that 2-year colleges were hit the hardest during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a higher incidence of student withdrawal and declining enrollment than 4-year colleges (Cameron et al., 2021; Howell et al., 2021; Sutton, 2021).

Chronically on thin ice

Previous studies have consistently shown that deaf students face unique barriers in college compared with their hearing peers, including access barriers (Lang, 2002; Palmer et al., 2020, 2023), limited access to resources and support services (Johnson & Fann, 2016; Keogh et al., 2020; Stapleton, 2015), stress and fatigue (Aldalur et al., 2020; Kheibari, 2022), and social isolation (Bowman & Crowe, 2023; Thompson-Ochoa, 2020). These challenges place deaf students at a disadvantage, exacerbating existing disparities in educational attainment and hindering their academic success (National Council on Disability, 2021). In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, these disparities may be further magnified, as evidenced by the increased likelihood of deaf students leaving their institution compared with their hearing peers. Though deaf students largely reported receiving similar amounts of helpful communication from their institutions as hearing peers and exhibited lower rates of disruption in some areas, they were still more likely to discontinue their studies. This discrepancy suggests that deaf students in higher education may already be on thin ice and that institutional support alone may not be sufficient for addressing their unique challenges when disruption occurs.

Deaf student re-enrollment and retention

The findings from this study indicate that deaf students were almost twice as likely to leave college during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than their hearing counterparts, which is particularly concerning when considering the chronically low college enrollment among deaf people in the United States. Only approximately 5% of deaf people in the United States ages 16–64 are enrolled in college versus approximately 10% of hearing people (Bloom et al., 2024). Considering these low enrollment numbers, colleges are obligated to do everything in their power to retain the few deaf people who do enroll and support them in degree completion.

The dataset used in this study does not track student outcomes after students withdraw from their institution, so we are unable to determine whether students transferred to another institution or re-enrolled at a later time. However, data from the American Community Survey show that college enrollment among deaf people increased slightly from 4.8% in 2019 to 5% in 2022 (Bloom et al., 2024). Colleges across the country have tried various strategies to increase student enrollment during and after the pandemic, such as increasing access to resources and technology for online learning, using test-optional admissions, increasing communication strategies, offering course waivers, and implementing free college programs (e.g., Collom, 2023; Hope, 2021; O’Hara et al., 2022; Ortagus et al., 2024). Whether these strategies have reached deaf students and resulted in increased enrollment and retention among deaf college students remains to be explored.

This study demonstrated that campuswide institutional support may not be enough to retain deaf students, a population at high risk for leaving college. Deaf students are likely to experience isolation, stress, and fatigue during college, which leaves them highly vulnerable to dropping out of college when things become more challenging. More recent research has indicated that effective student retention may involve more complex and nuanced elements, such as fostering a sense of belonging on campus (Walton et al., 2023). During the COVID-19 pandemic, college students’ sense of belonging decreased among racial-ethnic minoritized students but not among White, non-Latinx students (Barringer et al., 2023), and disabled college students were less likely to feel like they belong on campus (Soria et al., 2020), which suggests that belonging may be more challenging for college students who experience oppression because of their race, ethnicity, sexuality, or disability. Efforts to retain or re-enroll deaf students should prioritize a deeper commitment to fostering a sense of belonging, in addition to other campuswide efforts.

To better support deaf students in the event of another pandemic, universities should develop comprehensive, proactive plans to address accessibility and inclusion. Recommendations include ensuring that online learning platforms and instructional materials are fully accessible, expanding mental health and peer support networks, and maintaining consistent communication with deaf students using their preferred communication modes (e.g., Palmer et al., 2024). Universities should also establish protocols for providing emergency remote interpreting and captioning services and ensure that faculty are trained in inclusive virtual teaching practices (e.g., LaChapelle & Nelson, 2024). Strengthening college experiences for deaf students should also include ensuring that faculty and instructors have the tools and resources they need to support deaf students effectively in their classrooms. Classroom experiences are pivotal for student retention; if students fail their classes, it is likely that they will leave their institution.

Addressing the multifaceted challenges faced by deaf students requires a comprehensive approach that considers the diverse needs of this population and implements targeted interventions to promote equitable outcomes in higher education. Efforts to support deaf students must prioritize accessibility, inclusivity, and the provision of resources and support services tailored to their unique needs. By planning for future disruptions, colleges can ensure that deaf students are not impacted by emergencies, creating more resilient and equitable educational opportunities.

Limitations

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings of this study.

First, the data were collected during a specific period of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other time periods or contexts. The unique circumstances of the pandemic, including shifting public health measures and economic conditions, may have influenced the experiences reported by the students. Another limitation of this study is the inability to examine the experiences within the population of deaf students more closely because of the sample size. Unlike some previous studies that combined data from multiple years to increase the sample size and statistical power, this study focused specifically on the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting the methodological approach. Though the study compared hearing and deaf students, it did not have the capacity to delve deeper into the heterogeneity within the deaf student population, such as differences based on known risk factors specific to deaf students and demographic characteristics. Another limitation of this study is the lack of comparable pre-pandemic data about withdrawals, leave of absences, communications from their college, and disruptions related to finances, housing, or academics that could be used as baseline data to better understand what might be recurring experiences among deaf college students.

Conclusion

As many other researchers have noted, the pandemic has amplified longstanding systemic inequities that are deeply embedded in our society (e.g., Wells, 2023). Deaf people have long pushed back against systemic injustice to fight for equitable access to postsecondary education (Axelrod et al., 2017). Their advocacy work has resulted in a steadily increasing number of deaf people enrolling in college and completing postsecondary degrees (Bloom et al., 2024). However, these gains are slowly won on shaky ground, as demonstrated by the greater incidence of deaf college students leaving college during the COVID-19 pandemic despite receiving institutional support. Colleges are obligated to bolster their systems of support to serve as a stronger buffer for potential crises that could negatively affect their most vulnerable students.

Author contributions

Carrie Lou Bloom (Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation) and Jeffrey Palmer (Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration).

Funding

This study was funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs, #H326D210002. However, the contents do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the federal government.

Conflicts of interest: None declared.

References