Experiences of Portuguese Deaf Students in Higher Education

ABSTRACT

In the current absence of a legal framework for Deaf people in Higher Education in Portugal, students face linguistic, cultural, and institutional barriers. This exploratory study analyses experiences of Portuguese Deaf students, highlighting challenges such as a shortage of qualified Portuguese Sign Language interpreters, cultural insensitivity among faculty towards Deaf linguistic diversity, and devaluation of Portuguese Sign Language and Deaf Culture within academic environments. Testimonies from current and former Higher Education students reveal pathways of resistance, adaptive strategies, and advocacy for the right to higher education for all.

Keywords
Deaf Community; Higher Education; Human Rights; Sign Language; Accessibility

RESUMO

No atual vazio de enquadramento legal no Ensino Superior para pessoas Surdas em Portugal, os estudantes enfrentam barreiras linguísticas, culturais e institucionais. Este estudo exploratório analisa experiências de estudantes Surdos portugueses, destacando desafios como escassez de intérpretes de Língua Gestual Portuguesa devidamente preparados, insensibilidade cultural por parte do corpo docente, face à diversidade linguística Surda, e desvalorização da Língua Gestual Portuguesa e Cultura Surda no ambiente acadêmico. Os testemunhos de estudantes e ex-estudantes do Ensino Superior revelam percursos de resistência, estratégias adaptativas e reivindicações pelo direito ao Ensino Superior verdadeiramente para todos.

Palavras-chave
Comunidade Surda; Ensino Superior; Direitos Humanos; Língua Gestual; Acessibilidade

Introduction

Despite legislative advances in inclusion and accessibility in Portugal, the presence of Deaf¹ students in higher education institutions (HEIs) remains marked by multiple challenges. This article aims to analyse the lived experiences of these students, focusing on communication barriers, the role of Portuguese Sign Language (LGP), and teaching practices that contribute (or not) to equity in HEIs. We will explore the obstacles that persist in the academic careers of Deaf students, how access to LGP is guaranteed (or not) in HEIs, and how students themselves find strategies to cope with a context that is often hostile to their linguistic and cultural needs. Based on individual experiences, we seek to understand what daily life is like for Deaf people at a university or polytechnic in Portugal², assessing the difficulties that persist, the most valued forms of support, and how the presence (or absence) of LGP in teaching practices is understood.

Context

For many Deaf people in Portugal, belonging to the Deaf Community implies a distinct linguistic and cultural identity, centered on the use of Portuguese Sign Language (LGP) as their first or main language, both for expression and communication, and for structuring thought (Vygotsky, 2007; Padden; Humphries, 1988; 2005). In this sense, issues of accessibility have long ceased to be viewed as merely technical or welfare-related and have become linguistic, social, and political issues (Skliar, 1998; Ladd, 2003). In Portugal, LGP was recognized in the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic in 1997, which represented an important legal advance (Portugal, 1997). Nevertheless, the presence of LGP in academia remains fragile and scarce. Despite the limited availability of qualified interpreters, the problem is not limited to this argument, as there is also a lack of employment contracts for these interpreters that include preparation work, and the need for adapted teaching materials, insufficient training and awareness of teachers in HEIs about Deaf pedagogy, and a lack of knowledge about sign languages and Deaf Culture. All these factors contribute to an academic experience often marked by exclusion or unilateral adaptation on the part of Deaf students (Jesus et al., 2022).³ Thus, Deaf students in Portugal are left to develop strategies of resistance and ways of negotiating their place within the university or polytechnic, which reveals not only structural inequalities such as audism⁴ (Humphries, 1975), but also manifestations of the search for autonomy and resilience.

The impact of the Salamanca Declaration, since 1994, has been remarkable for the impetus it has given to bilingual education for Deaf children and young people, especially in the various member states of the European Union, including Portugal. Following the repeal of Decree-Law 3/2008 (and its respective amendment in Law 21/2008) in Portugal (2008a; 2008b), Decree-Law 54/2018 (Portugal, 2018) is in force, establishing the legal framework for reference schools for bilingual education for Deaf children and young people, from primary to secondary education, which is part of compulsory education, ending in the 12th grade or at the age of 18. Although there is a specific legal framework in place to guarantee access for Deaf people up to upper secondary education (12th grade), Portuguese legislation remains silent regarding access to higher education (HE). Furthermore, without going into the debate on whether Deaf people consider themselves or should be classified as persons with disabilities, Portuguese law does not specifically have a law against audism. Therefore, we can affirm that Deaf people are, from a legal standpoint, covered by the law against discrimination of persons with disabilities, that is, according to point 1 of Article 6 of Law No. 38/2004, of August 18, the Basic Law for Persons with Disabilities: “No person may be discriminated against, directly or indirectly, by action or omission, on the basis on disability” (Portugal, 2004, p. 5232). And, in point 2 of the aforementioned article: “Persons with disabilities shall benefit from positive action measures aimed at ensuring the exercise of their rights and duties by correcting a factual situation of inequality that persists in social life” (Portugal, 2004, p. 5232). The invisibility of Deaf people in HE persists and extends to the absence of effective institutional practices that promote their full participation. This reality highlights gaps in the knowledge of the entities responsible for regulating the system, such as the Directorate-General for Higher Education (DGES). Furthermore, it is important to question the extent to which the inclusion of Deaf students and people with disabilities is, in fact, an evaluation criterion in institutions and courses by the Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher Education (A3ES). To date, there are no known coordinated measures among HEIs, the A3ES, and DGES that ensure conditions of equity in access to and attendance at HE by Deaf students.

It is in this context that this exploratory study arises, to investigate affirmative action policies in HE in relation to the Deaf population in Portugal. This article explores the national legal framework, the available and growing body of documentation and bibliography, and the data collected through the participation of several Deaf people who have studied and are studying in ES. The relevance of this article is evident, first, due to the scarcity of in-depth studies in this area. Although some research developed by faculty and researchers, master's theses, and articles are beginning to emerge, these initiatives remain, for the most part, disconnected from structured institutional approaches. Secondly, it should also be remembered that Deaf people's access to HE is a human rights issue and raises a discussion about which spaces are permitted or not, and accessible or not to Deaf people. This discussion has implications at the macro level, since preventing or hindering access to HE has a socioeconomic impact on a specific group of people - in this case, the Deaf cultural and linguistic minority - and, of course, has direct repercussions at the scientific and academic level (Jesus et al., 2022).

Despite advances in primary and secondary education, and despite the obstacles that still exist, this does not prevent us from highlighting that the challenges faced by Deaf people in HE in Portugal are evident, given the lack of a legal framework and the absence of Portuguese Sign Language on university and polytechnic campuses. We therefore propose to identify the gaps in public policies, the difficulties faced in everyday academic life, and the students' own perceptions of the educational system through their experiences and testimonies. In the conclusions of this article, we address possible improvements and the future path for affirmative policies to support the Deaf community in HE. Without intending to offer definitive answers, we believe it is necessary to open space for critical reflection and discussion about the challenges that Deaf people face in a context that aims to be increasingly diverse and accessible. Thus, our analysis will not be limited to identifying flaws but aims above all to highlight strategies of resistance and adaptation present in the testimonies of Deaf participants. The conceptual proposal in Bauman and Murray (2014) states that Deaf people are at the origin of sign languages and Deaf Culture, and these are part of human wealth, the rhetoric behind the concept of Deaf Gain⁵. It is now the responsibility of HEIs in Portugal to grow by making the most of this richness.

Higher Education in Portugal – Affirmative Action Policies

The lack of specific official statistical data from entities such as the National Statistics Institute (INE), Pordata, and DGES made it impossible to provide a comprehensive quantitative characterization. We know, therefore, according to the DGES database, that 448,235 students enrolled in Portuguese higher education in 2024 (Portugal, 2025b). Unfortunately, we do not know the exact number of Deaf students, as there is no published data on the number of Deaf people enrolled in higher education over time or even currently enrolled. Nor do we know if any Deaf students for whom LGP is their first language, or if they use assistive technologies, and, if so, which ones. We also do not know, through official data published annually in institutional reports, how many LGP interpreters are employed to provide accessibility for Deaf students in HEIs and under what working conditions they perform their duties. Another aspect that we consider relevant, yet for which data remain unavailable, concerns information on Deaf academics, both historically and at present, working within HEIs, as well as the ways in which accessibility is organised within their institutions. Data relating to Deaf lecturers and LGP interpreters may appear to lie outside the primary focus of this research, which centres on Deaf students. Nevertheless, these realities should not be underestimated. Considering that accessibility is built within the community, in the academic context, the presence of Deaf lecturers and LGP interpreter teams contributes significantly to this end (Komesaroff, 2005). A HEI that integrates these elements is immediately more accessible and potentially more attractive to Deaf students when choosing and applying for courses.

Although there are some measures taken by the Portuguese government that may be a resource for Deaf people, these are not comprehensive and fall short of what is necessary and what is already being done in other countries. As part of the Inclusion for Knowledge initiative⁶, the Portuguese government created the IncluiIES Desk to promote the inclusion of people with disabilities in HE and awards “scholarships for students with disabilities⁷” under the regulations for the Award of Scholarships for Higher Education Students with disabilities⁸ equal to or greater than 60%. These scholarships correspond to the amount of tuition fees actually paid and are awarded under the State Budget Law for 2020, up to the maximum tuition grant provided by the Foundation for Science and Technology for obtaining a doctorate in Portugal, currently set at €2,750. In the North, Center, and Alentejo regions, these scholarships are co-financed by the European Social Fund under the Thematic Program on Demography, Qualifications, and Inclusion - PESSOAS 2030 (Portugal 2017; 2020).

In turn, DGES offers specific, limited places designated as Priority Quota for Candidates with Disabilities. Therefore, Deaf students wishing to apply for these places must hold a Multi-purpose Medical Certificate of Disability confirming a disability of 60% or higher. Applicants who do not possess this certificate may undergo assessment by the Expert Committee, upon submission of a technical-pedagogical report, as provided for under Decree-Law 54/2018, together with their educational and medical documentation. The DGES 2025 Application Guide for Public Higher Education establishes that, in the admissions process for candidates with disabilities, a contingent of places is reserved equivalent to the greater of: 4% of the places offered in the first phase (or, at minimum, two places) and 2% of the places offered in the second phase (or, at minimum, one place). The same guide also outlines the groups of prerequisites to be fulfilled. Of particular note is Group A: Interpersonal Communication, in which applicants for courses requiring Group A must submit, at the time of enrolment and registration in Higher Education, a document certifying “the absence of any psychological, sensory, or motor disability that severely interferes with functional and interpersonal communication capacity to the extent that it prevents one’s own or others’ learning” (Portugal, 2025a)⁹.

The Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, together with Law No. 38/2004, cited above, establishes the principle of non-discrimination. Furthermore, Article 74(h) of the Constitution, within the framework of education, states: “To protect and value Portuguese Sign Language as a cultural expression and as an instrument for access to education and equality of opportunities” (Portugal, 1997). Considering that education itself is an instrument for accessing equality of opportunities in society, employment, and quality of life, the accessibility of Deaf people to HE is regarded as a matter of human rights.

There is also a Working Group for the Support of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education (GTAEDES), which conducted a survey in 2014 encompassing 292 national HEIs. Of these 292 institutions, 114 are private HEIs, including 61 polytechnics and 53 universities, and 172 are public HEIs, comprising 94 polytechnics, 78 universities, and 6 military higher education institutions. The survey obtained 238 institutional responses and revealed that 1,318 individuals with special educational needs were enrolled in HE during 2013/2014. The study identified 160 students with hearing loss¹⁰, among whom 20 indicated that they benefited from accessibility support provided by Portuguese Sign Language interpreters (Pires et al., 2014). GTAEDES also presents data on fluctuations in the number of d/Deaf individuals it was able to identify:

Table 1
d/Deaf people identified GTAEDES

Academic Year	Referenced d/Deaf People
2006/2007	98
2011/2012	216
2012/2013	195
2013/2014	160

• Source: Data from Pires et al. (2014).

It is possible to observe from the data that there has been a considerable increase, along with some fluctuations, which may be related to factors such as educational policies, HE entrance examinations, and the availability of courses that anticipate the participation of Deaf individuals. As Santos (2019) notes, several authors across different countries have recorded an increase in Deaf students entering HE (Bisol et al., 2010; Daroque, 2011; Frumos; Roșu, 2019; Hyde et al., 2016; Svartholm, 2014). Although we cannot state this with absolute certainty, given the anonymity of the data presented in the table and collected by Pires et al. (2014), we can infer from the fluctuations that there was a high number in 2011/2012, followed by a gradual decline in 2012/2013, yet still elevated compared with the most recent year for which data were collected, 2013/2014. During this period, as members of the Portuguese Deaf Community, we attribute to the cohort of students enrolled in the bachelor’s degree in Portuguese Sign Language (PRO_LGP) at the Institute of Health Sciences of the Portuguese Catholic University.

The PRO_LGP programme followed a blended learning model, integrating both face-to-face and distance learning components, and had 46 students between 2010 and 2013. From its inception, the degree was designed to be bilingual, in LGP and Portuguese. Teaching materials were developed in LGP, including 26 manuals, and assessments could be undertaken in either language (Lagarto; Mineiro; Pereira, 2013; Pereira; Gil; Silva, 2013). Furthermore, LGP interpretation for Deaf and one Deafblind student was provided for classes. Interpreting teams had access to the teaching materials in advance for preparation. Additionally, tutoring sessions could be conducted in LGP, with interpreter-lecturers fluent in LGP, to which both Deaf and hearing professionals were hired with the appropriate profile to fulfil these roles (Pereira; Gil; Silva, 2013).

Returning to the topic, it is recognised that the inclusion of Deaf students in HE presents numerous challenges, and research conducted in Brazil reveals a significant progress compared to the Portuguese context. Although, as noted by Amorim, Castro, and Gimenez (2020), Portugal benefits from political momentum and European funds, it still remains at a lower level of development concerning the inclusion of Deaf students in HE institutions. It is therefore fair to state that the state of the art is more established in the Brazilian HE context. Brazilian studies highlight linguistic challenges, with Deaf Brazilian students facing significant obstacles in the transition between Brazilian Sign Language (LIBRAS) and written Portuguese (Bisol et al., 2010; Mesquita, 2018; Viana, 2020; Costa et al., 2022). They emphasise that the presence of LIBRAS interpreters in classrooms, alongside active collaboration from faculty staff, are fundamental elements for promoting effective inclusion (Jesus et al., 2022). Although there has been an increase in enrolments of Deaf students in Brazilian HE, studies indicate a gap between inclusive policies and their practical implementation (Oliveira, Fuzeto & Manoel, 2020; Santana, 2016). As in Portugal, most lecturers lack specific training in Deaf education, contributing to significant difficulties for students (Santana, 2016), an investment that should be enacted. Bilingual education currently being developed in compulsory schooling has been identified as a promising route to improve access and ensure full inclusion in HE (Mesquita, 2018). To achieve this, research points to the importance of rethinking pedagogical approaches, integrating LGP in HE in Portugal, similar to developments already underway in Brazil and other countries. Such political and educational progress would represent a decisive step towards genuine inclusion of Deaf students in the university environment, with positive consequences for the labour market and social implications (Mesquita, 2018; Jesus et al., 2022; Santana, 2016).

It is widely known, even informally, that some Deaf individuals occasionally have access to limited hours of LGP interpretation. Some students, with an insufficient number of hours, must choose which curricular units they prefer or do not prefer to have interpreted. In this system, LGP interpreters are remunerated directly by active hours worked under a freelance service provision model, without employment contracts and without compensation for preparation time. At times, LGP interpreters are sought and paid by families or the Deaf students themselves, while some are remunerated because the students have received scholarships from their institutions that allocate specific funds for this purpose. There are still rare exceptions within the national HE framework: LGP interpreters employed under contracts with HE institutions, notably at the Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra, working predominantly at the School of Education of Coimbra, and at the Inclusion Support Centre of the University of Porto. At the Polytechnic Institute of Porto, the situation remains less than ideal for sustainable employment, with LGP interpreters being hired through internal professional internships via the Office for Academic and Professional Integration. As Santos (2019, p. 180) points out, this is an area in need of improvement, as better contracts could ensure “continuous work, based on interpreters’ experience and practice, and would enable the implementation of more ambitious projects, including the development of multimedia pedagogical materials.”

In general, Portuguese Deaf students rarely see their right to equal opportunities and education effectively recognised. Requests for accessibility, when granted, depend on recruitments managed by institutional administrations. Students are therefore entirely dependent on internal institutional decisions, as there are no legal frameworks guaranteeing Deaf students access to LGP interpretation or to other pedagogical accommodations. Furthermore, the LGP interpreters who may be contracted are unlikely to have access to stable employment contracts that would ensure adequate preparation for interpretation, consequently limiting the quality of their professional performance (Rodrigues; Gil; Conde e Sousa, 2022). The presence of Deaf students in higher education has gradually increased over recent years, accompanied by a still incipient development of academic research on inclusive practices in this context. This reflects processes that remain under consolidation within the national academic landscape (Amorim, Castro, & Gimenez, 2020; Jesus et al., 2022; Jorge & Ferreira, 2007; Lagarto, Mineiro, & Pereira, 2013; Pereira et al., 2013; Pires et al., 2014; Santos, 2019; Silva, 2024).

As we finalise this article, in July 2025, the Polytechnic Institute of Porto published a text and a video on its Facebook social media page promoting the availability of LGP interpreters for Deaf people enrolled in its programmes¹¹. We interpret this publication as a sign of the times, in which higher education institutions are also expected to publicise their accessibility provisions for Deaf people. With extensive experience in this field, the previously mentioned Bachelor’s degree in Portuguese Sign Language and the Master’s degree in the Teaching of Portuguese Sign Language at the School of Education of the Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra include LGP accessibility, as well as Deaf and hearing faculty who are fluent in LGP and hold appropriate qualifications and experience in Deaf Pedagogy¹² (Ladd, 2022; Skyer, 2023). Given the scientific field of the programmes offered in Coimbra, an approach grounded in Deaf Pedagogy is unavoidable, not only as a methodology for teaching students within these programmes, but also as a tool of resistance against audism, insofar as these programmes train professionals who will become key actors in the education of Deaf children and young people. Despite some higher education institutions attempting to accommodate Deaf students, policies, and particularly legislation in Portugal, still fail to recognise the specificity and positive affirmation of Deaf identity, the status of Deaf people as members of a cultural and linguistic minority, and even what remains marginalised by such frameworks, thus remaining, as Komesaroff (2005) has argued, a “hearing university”.

Methodology

This exploratory study aimed to analyse the experiences of Portuguese Deaf people in HE, seeking to identify the main challenges and strategies adopted by this population. This article does not intend to provide an exhaustive mapping of this reality, but rather to contribute to reflection through the analysis of relevant literature and the data collected. In Portugal, there has been an observable increase in the number of Deaf people seeking access to HE, particularly after the age of 18, when bilingual education comes to an end. This trend has exposed the insufficient preparedness of HEI to adequately accommodate this population. Nevertheless, it is with optimism that a gradual increase in critical and scientific production on this topic is acknowledged, reflecting a collective desire to promote accessibility within Portuguese HE.

Sample Composition and Ethical Considerations

The criteria for defining the sample were shaped by the researchers’ experience and involvement within the Deaf Community: one researcher is a native sign language user with experience and involvement in the Deaf Community since the age of four, and the other researcher is a hearing sign language user with experience and involvement in the Deaf Community since the age of seventeen. Accordingly, a non-probabilistic sampling of typical cases was adopted (Carmo & Ferreira, 1998), comprising nine¹³ participants, including former and current Portuguese Deaf students who have attended or are attending national HE across different degree programmes and institutions. Based on the researchers’ experience and knowledge as members of the Deaf Community, participants were intentionally selected for typicality, with diversity rather than homogeneity being the guiding principle of the sample. The previously established criteria were: “Deaf people of different genders”; “fluent users of Portuguese Sign Language”; “students from different Portuguese higher education institutions”; “from different degree programmes and academic pathways”; and “from different geographical and socio-economic backgrounds”, to enable the collection of diverse testimonies. Although it was not a selection criterion, it was verified a posteriori that none of the participants were cochlear implant users. All participants were informed about the objectives of the research and the use of the data collected. Informed consent forms were completed and signed in accordance with ethical research principles. Participants were also informed that their participation was voluntary, anonymous, and that they could withdraw at any time without any consequences.

The data collection instrument is described in detail in the following section; however, within the scope of ethical considerations, it should be clarified that the questionnaire was written in Portuguese but could also be accessed in LGP through explanations provided by the Deaf researcher, who remained accessible and available for additional clarification. Participants’ answers could be provided either in written Portuguese or in LGP, through video recordings. Anonymity was therefore ensured at two distinct levels, and participants were informed about both options. Given the visual nature of sign languages and the difficulty of maintaining anonymity when recording an intelligible video in LGP, participants who preferred could provide their responses exclusively in written form, making it impossible to attribute authorship to any response (Singleton, 2014). When participants did provide an LGP video, it was subsequently transcribed into Portuguese and, if so requested, the video was destroyed, thus ensuring privacy and the confidential handling of data.

Data collection and Analysis

This study adopted a qualitative approach, employing mixed methods of data collection, including a mixed online questionnaire with closed-ended multiple-choice and Likert-scale questions, as well as open-ended questions with the option of responding in LGP via video or in written Portuguese. Initial contact with participants was established via WhatsApp, a written and video communication platform that offers data encryption, and the online questionnaire was administered using the Microsoft Forms platform. The videos in LGP were transcribed by the researchers and, should participants so request, were destroyed following transcription and data processing, thereby ensuring participants’ agency over their data.

In addition to primary data collection, a documentary analysis and a review of the existing literature on the topic were conducted, alongside an examination of the legal framework and institutional data relating to Deaf people’s access to higher education in Portugal.

Presentation and Discussion of Results

The university and polytechnic context constitutes, in itself, a new environment with increased demands for all those who enter it for the first time. However, for Deaf people, this is compounded by the fact that HEIs are structured according to norms and practices of the hearing world, in which oral and auditory communication prevails as the primary means of interaction. According to Komesaroff (2005), the “hearing university” becomes an environment that automatically excludes Deaf people.

The majority of peers and faculty staff are unfamiliar with Deaf Culture and with how to interact with Deaf people, thereby contributing to their invisibility. Analysing the Portuguese context, Jorge and Ferreira (2007, p. 342) emphasised that students’ trajectories are “fraught with difficulties, barriers and discrimination, with a persistent lack of foundations for a fully inclusive education that addresses their specificity and individuality.”

Figure 1
Graph of responses regarding challenges in HE in Portugal

Analysing Figure 1, it can be observed that participants report their communication difficulties with peers on Likert scale as follows: 44,4% responded “sometimes” and 11,1% “frequently”, totalling 55,5%. This contrasts with those who indicated “rarely” (33,3%) and “never” (11,1%). Regarding interactions in group ativities, the majority do not feel excluded, selecting “rarely” (33,3%) and “never” (11,1%). However, when it comes to communication with lecturers, the situation worsens: 44.4% responded “sometimes”, 33.3% “frequently”, and 11.1% “always”, demonstrating that communication with lecturers is considerably more challenging than communication with peers.

In this context, and concerning audism within Higher Education Institutions HEIs), the testimony of one participant is particularly noteworthy. The participant reported that “full professors in higher education openly stated that LGP was not a real language”. At the time such behaviour occurred, it was already possible to refute this claim on scientific grounds, however, the participant considers that, nowadays, it can be argured that LGP has gained greater social acceptability.

With regard to accessibility, responses clearly indicated that 66,7% of participants experienced a lack of LGP interpreters during their HE journey. However, in order to interpret this figure appropriately, it is important to recall that the sample was intentionally selected and includes four participants who had the opportunity to attend courses at institutions equipped with LGP interpreting teams, as well as one participant who voluntarily reported having dispensed with this type of support. Accordingly, we consider that the 33.3% who did not report such a need should not be interpreted as having experienced no lack in this domain, nor as suggesting that this provision should not be taken into account. In some cases, this need had already been met through the availability of LGP interpreting services within the respective institutions, as can be observed in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Graph of responses regarding resources and support for Deaf people in HE in Portugal

Here, one participant added: “The response would be ‘All: No’. The institution did not provide me with an interpreter, assistive technologies, adapted materials, psychopedagogical support, or extra time in assessments. I found my own solutions.”

Some participants recall that, during their undergraduate studies, they did not have access to LGP interpreters and that this period was particularly challenging, marked by physical and emotional exhaustion and the use of numerous strategies in an attempt to keep up with classes. Several participants reported spending entire days copying everything they could, from what lecturers wrote on the board to their peers’ notes. Nevertheless, a range of strategies adopted by Deaf students emerges, involving the use of technology and support from peers, which function as solutions enabling them to progress through HE, even if not on an equitable basis. This additional stress should not form part of what ought to be the HE student experience:

I’m profoundly Deaf and studied at a university for 3 years. I was the only deaf student in my class. My colleagues were all hearing. I did not have access to a Portuguese Sign Language interpreter, nor did I receive support such as adapted materials or assistive technologies. The university supported me by informing lecturers of my situation. I also explained that I am deaf and shared my experiences and the barriers I face, so that they could better understand me and provide appropriate support. Most lecturers showed concern and attempted to help, although some paid little attention. I understand that not everyone knows how to communicate with me — this happens, but it is important that they learn, as communication is essential. Approximately 65% of lecturers spoke clearly, and their speech could be accurately converted into text with the help of a microphone and Microsoft Word. I purchased my own microphone, connected it via Bluetooth to my mobile phone, and used Word to convert speech into text — this was how I managed to follow the lectures.

We consider that the accessibility of Deaf students is not exclusively resolved through the recruitment of sign language interpreters (SLIs), and there are alternative and augmentative technologies that Deaf people can use, which enhance autonomy and offer complementary possibilities. Among those identified by our participants are: software that amplifies sound directly to hearing aids, the Read Aloud function in Microsoft Word for delivering oral presentations of work:

I would write the summary in Microsoft Word and use the 'Read Aloud' function for the teacher to hear. Sometimes I would click 'pause' to explain with more examples and then resume 'Read Aloud'. There was never a problem with this. I always asked permission beforehand, and the professors respected my way of presenting.

In addition to these resources, there is also stenocaptioning, or automatic captioning, which can be carried out with the presence of a technician (with a lower margin of error) or using automatic speech recognition software (with a higher margin of error) that provides automatic captioning, enabling Deaf students not only to capture via text what is said in the lecture but also to create notes in the same document, thus making it possible to overcome the obstacle of divided attention. However, one of the participants also explained that some lecturers did not authorise the use of these resources. The participant recounts that he requested to record the audio in the lecture for it to be transcribed, with auto-generated captions (despite the flaws we know exist, it is useful), and to learn from reading the transcription, but the lecturer did not authorise it: "The secretary and the coordinator spoke with him for some time until he accepted, but afterwards he continued to be distrustful. He spoke poorly, which caused the text to contain many errors. It was complicated, but I learnt to deal with it on my own." He adds: "I never had adapted materials, but I never asked for them either. I like to have the same challenges as hearing people." Here, it is worth noting that hearing people do not face these challenges, nor do they encounter the same obstacles as Deaf people. Moreover, these obstacles are not only related to accessibility to lectures and information in HE but are also present in the constant barriers throughout their previous educational trajectory, compounded by the difficulty in accessing information and communication in society.

The use of these technologies is of utmost importance and should not be dispensed with, especially when support is provided, such as accessibility through a LGP interpreter. As one of the participants notes: "Despite the importance of having sign language interpreters, this support, on its own, is not sufficient. A Deaf student cannot look at the interpreter and, at the same time, take notes or record information in a notebook, which leads to significant losses of content" — this concept is called "divided attention" (Fernández-Viader; Pertusa Venteo, 2004) and is a key concept in Deaf Pedagogy, given the need to alternate one's gaze between various visual sources (the lecturer, the interpreter, the materials, the board, peers), without the possibility of simultaneously retaining all stimuli.

In another aspect, there is the additional issue of the prior preparation of SLIs. Regarding this, one of the participants states:

It would be essential for interpreters to be previously prepared in conjunction with the lecturers responsible for the modules, knowing the topics, technical vocabulary, and structure of the lectures. Furthermore, it is fundamental that there exists an accurate translation of the content taught, accompanied by well-structured theoretical-practical notes, with clear explanations.

In this regard, there are positive experiences and examples of good practice in HE, and participants who are more satisfied with interpretation stand out when there are prepared SLIs and courses are designed for Deaf people:

It was then that, for the first time, I had lectures with an LGP interpreter. This simple fact completely transformed my academic experience: I was able to follow the lectures, participate in discussions, exchange ideas with peers ... deaf and hearing ... and feel included. The class was mixed, and the lecturers showed themselves to be committed to building a truly accessible environment. It was the beginning of something new, of a journey where I felt, finally, seen and respected.

This participant also notes that "These responses are so important: because they represent not only facts and experiences, but also the profound impact that inclusion (or the lack thereof) has on the life of a deaf person in higher education". We must therefore conclude that the presence of a prepared LGP interpreter, in coordination with the teaching staff, makes a difference. However, when there is no openness from lecturers or HEIs for the SLIs to undertake their preparation, and this is regarded as dispensable, not included in working hours nor as an integral part of their duties and contract, the accessibility and effectiveness of their function is compromised and, consequently, there is a distortion of the objective that leads us to hire a SLI. As one participant stated: "[...] with the LGP interpreter I was assigned, I understood so little (because most of the time, the interpreter herself did not know what was being discussed)". It is evident that, as in any professional field, there are instances of less adequate practices or professionals who do not fully comply with the ethical and deontological duties of their role, but it is also understood that the precarious nature of contracts (on a service provision basis, paid by the hour) in which some SLIs find themselves in HE represents an obstacle to the performance of simultaneous interpretations. Regarding this, one participant adds:

I really think that for certain topics, especially in the sciences, we are unlikely to have LGP interpreters who can do a good job there... the problem with the LGP interpreter is that it requires interpretation from the language being spoken, and often there are no signs for the technical jargon, nor do the LGP interpreters know how to fingerspell it.

Thus, ideally SLIs should be contracted in such a way as to include preparation time in coordination with lecturers and those responsible for the subjects and course coordinators, as well as complementing through technological pathways. As solutions, one participant suggests: "I think it is important: to have LGP interpreters; training for lecturers about deafness; support groups for deaf students; technology available for those who cannot afford to buy it".

Regarding whether or not they were prepared for what HE would be like, Deaf people considered that they were no more or less prepared than any young person:

I was not prepared, but it was not because I was deaf. Simply, at least at that time, those who left year 12 in a very supportive teaching environment (where everything was spoon-fed) collided with a first year of extreme autonomy and 'every man for himself'. I went from having books already purchased and available before lectures began, to a scenario where I only knew which books were required during the first lecture, and then had difficulties finding some of them, if they were sold out.

In conclusion, it is difficult to express it better than by taking the testimony of one of the participants: "This was my experience. Each deaf person is different, and each has their own path. HE must provide fair opportunities for all".

In the newspaper Diferencial, a newspaper produced by students, Rui Pinheiro writes about his experience and shares that lip-reading was a resource, but whose effectiveness suffered from various obstacles such as beards, moustaches, and foreign accents (Pinheiro, 1998). Furthermore, lip-reading became very exhausting mental guesswork (Pinheiro, 2002). Pinheiro summarises his experience in HE in two articles in the aforementioned newspaper and notes that he became self-taught by force of circumstances. At the time of enrolment, he was accompanied by his grandfather, and later, in the first lectures, he mentioned that he had a friend in another class on the same course, but that the journey was not easy at all. Various obstacles arose, such as bibliography in English, misunderstandings with lecturers who considered requests for clarification of what was written on the board via email to be "terrorist acts", or missing information about assignment submissions; nevertheless, he managed to continue with strong family support, whilst contesting the existence of an underlying spirit that in HE everything must be hard and involve suffering.

Thus, Rui Pinheiro states: "Forced by habit not to depend on existing support, I almost give the impression that I do not need it". (Pinheiro, 2002, p.16). This level of functionality, already pointed out by other participants through their testimonies, reveals a context of adaptation and resilience which, whilst inspiring to many, on second glance evidence great pressure for the Deaf student to conform to the standards of the "hearing university"¹⁴ Komesaroff (2005). This process of adaptation implies, above all, the internalisation of norms that marginalise their needs and, moreover, their rights. This level of self-sufficiency is imposed by the "hearing university" Komesaroff (2005), which does not adapt and excludes the Deaf person. We thus verify that HE fosters internalised audism¹⁵ and cultivates the fear of stigmatisation, which results from the inferiorised view of the Deaf student, who frequently does not wish to be singled out for requiring distinct support or additional resources, thus constituting an adaptation to exclusion.

Conclusion

The experiences of Portuguese Deaf students in HE reveals a complex reality, in which the legal recognition of LGP and the principles of inclusion do not always translate into effective practices. Despite advances in terms of the visibility of LGP and Deaf Culture, structural, communicational, and attitudinal barriers persist, which compromise the right to education on equal terms. The scarcity of qualified LGP interpreters, the lack of specific training for teaching staff, and the devaluation of the linguistic and cultural dimension of the Deaf Community create situations of exclusion (subtle or otherwise), often invisible in academic daily life. Accessibility continues to be conceived within an assistentialist logic, which expects the individual to adapt to the norm, rather than promoting a structural transformation of the education system. Consequently, many HEIs continue to regard the Deaf person as someone whose disability must be compensated for, rather than as possessing a linguistic and cultural difference to be respected. The testimonies of Deaf students and former students demonstrate strategies of resistance and negotiation, challenging the status quo and claiming their rights.

In short, for Portuguese HE to become truly accessible to the Deaf public, a paradigm shift is necessary: recognising LGP as a language of instruction, guaranteeing continuous training for lecturers in Deaf Pedagogy, ensuring the presence of qualified LGP interpreters with contracts that include preparation and proper working conditions, permitting the use of and guaranteeing access to alternative technologies for accessibility and, above all, cooperating attentively with the Deaf Community. This challenge is pedagogical, but above all political and ethical, as it concerns transforming linguistic and cultural diversity into an opportunity for constructing a more plural, democratic and humane higher education.

Despite the study's limitations, namely the small number of participants and the absence of an exhaustive mapping, we believe that this work offers significant contributions to the field. The article aims to contribute to expanding the debate on accessibility in HE, especially in light of linguistic diversity. We consider that HE is an appropriate space for challenging hegemonic teaching models by promoting in-depth discussion and critical interpretation of the results obtained, comparing them with the theoretical framework. It is hoped, therefore, that this article and other works in the field may have concrete implications for public policies, teaching practice, and support services, promoting greater accessibility in HE. LGP is a recognised constitutional right of access to education for the Deaf Community in Portugal. The Constitution of the Portuguese Republic thus imposes a responsibility, not only moral, but institutional and legislative, on HEIs to ensure equality of opportunities in access to, continuation in, and completion of HE.

The valorisation and promotion of LGP in Portuguese HEIs therefore proves urgent and imperative for the construction of inclusive HE. This social challenge requires concerted action by institutions and stakeholders in HE. Although significant gaps persist in terms of public policies, these transformations depend on political will to operationalise measures such as the creation of optional curriculum units in LGP; provision of LGP interpreters; accessibility of academic content; and adaptations to spaces and methodologies, promoting not only access, but also the participation and success of Deaf students. It is fundamental to invest also in the training of academic and support staff regarding LGP and Deaf Culture. Only in this way will it be possible to ensure that adaptations are not limited to good intentions but translate into concrete actions: adaptation of pedagogical practices, communication, and organisation of academic spaces to linguistic and cultural diversity. This commitment to accessibility for all must move from discourse to practice, ensuring that no Deaf student abandons or is prevented from attending their course due to a lack of guaranteed conditions.

In this regard, this article also alerts to the urgent need for a dynamic approach that promotes LGP in academic contexts, trains aware professionals, and contributes to a more equitable society. Quoting Rui Pinheiro (2002, p. 18):

The difficulties experienced by Deaf students are sometimes frustrating, but things need not be this way. The Deaf community does not, fundamentally, demand anything special. It merely asks for the same education system that exists for hearing people, but adapted to their sign language, with qualified teachers. And that there be respect for differences.

It is important to recognise that the construction of inclusive higher education requires not only reflection, but the inclusion of Deaf people's testimonies, consultation of existing literature, and critical analysis of practices already implemented in different geographical contexts. For example, in Brazil, Law No. 12.711/2012, recently updated (Law 14.723/2023), guarantees places in HE for socially minoritised groups: Black people, Indigenous people, quilombolas, and people with disabilities. This is a measure that reflects an institutional commitment to combating profound social and historical inequalities. Portuguese HE certainly welcomes Deaf students, Black students, Roma students, people with disabilities, trans people, migrants, refugees, amongst many others with full right to access, continuation, and active participation in academic life. However, whilst this article focuses on the urgency of reversing the historical exclusion of Deaf students and denouncing the barriers that persist, we cannot ignore the need to initiate, within Portuguese HEIs, serious debates aimed at affirmative policies that address issues such as racism, misogyny, transphobia, xenophobia (Kilomba, 2019), and audism in all its aspects.

The collective commitment to transforming HEIs in Portugal can only happen in collaboration with civil society. Articulation with associations representing the Deaf Community and with Deaf people themselves in HE, both lecturers and students, is considered vital, so that no Deaf student experiences exclusion or abandonment in the context of higher education, and so that inclusion ceases to be an aspiration and becomes a practice with real social implications.

Notes

Notes

¹

The spelling difference between ‘deaf’ (written with a lowercase initial letter) and ‘Deaf’ (with an uppercase initial letter) is a convention established in the field of Deaf Studies since the 1970s (Woodward, 1972). This conceptual distinction aims to delineate two distinct perspectives: the lowercase term refers to the medical-clinical paradigm of deafness, understood exclusively as hearing impairment; in contrast, the capitalized spelling indicates identification with the Deaf Community, fluency in sign language, and active participation in Deaf Culture, recognizing it as a specific social and cultural identity. Although this practice remains a subject of debate due to the division and categorization it creates (Kusters; De Meulder, O'Brien, 2017), several researchers defend its relevance, as this distinction does not aim to standardize the heterogeneity present in the Deaf Community, but rather to highlight the ethnic, cultural and identity characteristics that define it as a distinct social group, similar to what is agreed upon with other minorities (Ladd, 2003; Gil, 2020).

²

In the wake of the amendment to the Legal Regime of Higher Education Institutions (RJIES), introduced by Law No. 32/2026 of 20 July and effective from 1 August 2026, polytechnic institutes with institutional accreditation without conditions from A3ES may now adopt the designation “polytechnic university,” with their statutes automatically considered amended.

³

It is also worth questioning the extent to which HEIs ensure accessibility and whether they are accessible environments for Deaf teachers. However, this issue is a specific research topic that requires autonomous treatment, as it constitutes a line of research that is distinct from the objectives of this article.

⁴

Audism is a term coined by Tom Humphries (1975), derived from the Latin word “audire” combined with the suffix “-ism”, by analogy with the term “racism”. The concept refers to a notion of superiority based on hearing or on behaviours associated with the ability to hear, leading to discrimination against d/Deaf people.

⁵

Deaf Gain is a concept that focuses on the contributions of Deaf people to society at large, emphasising the benefits and added value inherent in Deaf people, sign languages, and Deaf Culture. In contrast to the notion of hearing loss, Deaf Gain foregrounds both individual and collective benefits, highlighting the linguistic, cognitive, and cultural contributions of Deaf people (Bauman & Murray, 2009, 2014).

⁶

Translation by the authors, in the original: Inclusão para o Conhecimento.

⁷

Note from the authors regarding the translation: In the original text, the term incapacidade is used. We have translated this as disabilities, as it is widely accepted term in English. However, incapacidade the term used in the original, carries connotations closer to handicap or incapacity in Portuguese, which differ in nuance from disability in English.

⁸

Multi-purpose Medical Certificate of Disability (on the translation, please see note 6).

⁹

In addition, some courses require specific documentation and prerequisites. For instance, the Speech Therapy course requires the submission of a statement from a speech therapist certifying the “absence of language and/or speech disorders” and proficiency in written and spoken Portuguese (Portugal, 2025a). Similarly, the Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy course requires a medical certificate confirming that the applicant does not possess metallic devices or ferromagnetic implants that could compromise attendance or completion of the course. Access to the Audiology course is contingent upon a statement from an audiologist certifying the “absence of auditory disorders (B.I.A.P. criteria)” that could interfere with learning or practical performance in the course (Portugal, 2025a). Sports courses traditionally have physical test prerequisites, among other requirements, and thus there are courses in which Deaf people are, a priori, less encouraged to apply, or at least perceive that they will face more obstacles compared with hearing students.

¹⁰

Term used by GTAEDES.

¹¹

Available at https://www.facebook.com/politecnicodoporto/videos/%C3%A9s-uma-pessoa-surda-comunicas-em-l%C3%ADngua-gestual-portuguesa-lgp-terminaste-o-12%C2%BA-/1385326429387456/?rdid=WSwQoPAXSGlj2Jbq. Accessed on 22 July. 2025.

¹²

Deaf Pedagogy places Deaf Culture at the centre of the learning process in the promotion of equity, deconstructing hierarchies of power/knowledge within the classroom and encouraging the active participation of Deaf people as students and as educators, as citizens, and as members of the higher education community. It also fosters the development of alternative models of teaching that challenge systemic oppression and audism within schools and society (Ladd, 2022; Skyer, 2023).

¹³

Ten individuals were approached; however, one participant, despite initially agreeing to take part, was unable to complete the questionnaire due to a lack of availability.

¹⁴

This expression, originally from Komesaroff (2005), is used by the authors of the article, but it is not intended to generalise "being hearing" in a homogeneous way. On the contrary, it serves to emphasise that the university is configured as an audist environment. It is within this reality of exclusion that Deaf people must learn and progress academically, facing linguistic and cultural barriers, in addition to the increased emotional regulation required to deal with marginalisation in a space to which they have a right, but which does not consider them.

¹⁵

According to Gertz (2008), dysconscious audism is a form of audism in which Deaf people internalise and uncritically accept the dominant norms and privileges of hearing society, leading to a distorted consciousness of their own Deaf identity and a weakening of Deaf pride and cultural perspective.

Availability of research data

The dataset supporting the results of this study is published in the article itself.

References

• AMORIM, Thalita Cristina Prudencio; CASTRO, Fernanda Oliveira; GIMENEZ, Roberto. Os surdos no ensino superior: uma visão intercultural – Brasil e Portugal. Cadernos de Pesquisa, v. 27, n. 4, p. 231-254, 29 dez. 2020. Disponível em: https://www.periodicoseletronicos.ufma.br/index.php/cadernosdepesquisa/article/view/12655 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://www.periodicoseletronicos.ufma.br/index.php/cadernosdepesquisa/article/view/12655
• BAUMAN, H.-Dirksen L.; MURRAY, Joseph J. Reframing: From Hearing Loss to Deaf Gain. Deaf Studies Digital Journal, no. 1 fall 2009.
• BAUMAN, H.-Dirksen L.; MURRAY, Joseph J. Deaf Gain: Raising the stakes for Human Diversity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2014.
• BISOL, Cláudia Alquati et al. Estudantes surdos no ensino superior: reflexões sobre a inclusão. Cadernos de Pesquisa, São Paulo, v. 40, n. 139, p. 147-172, 2010. Disponível em: https://publicacoes.fcc.org.br/cp/article/view/190 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://publicacoes.fcc.org.br/cp/article/view/190
• CARMO, Hermano; FERREIRA, Manuela Malheiro. Metodologia da investigação: Guia para auto-aprendizagem. 2. ed. Lisboa: Universidade Aberta, 1998.
• COSTA, Kélli Cristina de Jesus Ferreira et al. A surdez e causas: educação inclusiva no âmbito da educação superior, o direito e as legislações educacionais. Conjecturas, v. 22, n. 15, 2022. DOI: 10.53660/CONJ-1936-2Q06B.
  » https://doi.org/10.53660/CONJ-1936-2Q06B
• DAROQUE, Samantha Camargo. Alunos surdos no Ensino Superior: uma discussão necessária. 2011. Dissertação (Mestrado) – Universidade Metodista de Piracicaba, Piracicaba, 2011.
• FERNÁNDEZ VIADER, Maria P.; PERTUSA VENTEO, Esther (Coord.). El valor de la mirada: sordera y educación. 2. ed. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona, 2004.
• FRUMOS, Luciana; ROȘU, Claudia. Deaf students accessing higher education programs – Romanian and European experiences. Journal of Innovation in Psychology, Education and Didactics, v. 23, n. 2, p. 199-214, 2019. Disponível em: https://jiped.ub.ro/archives/2771 Acesso em: 15 jul. 2025.
  » https://jiped.ub.ro/archives/2771
• GIL, Cristina. Deaftopia: Utopian Representations and Community Dreams by the Deaf. 2020. Tese (Doutoramento) – Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, 2020.
• GERTZ, Eugenie Nicole. Dysconscious audism: a theoretical proposition. In: BAUMAN, H-Dirksen L. (Org.). Open your eyes: Deaf Studies talking. Minneapolis; London: University of Minnesota Press, 2008. P. 219-234.
• HUMPHRIES, Tom. The making of a word: audism. 1975. Unpublished article.
• HYDE, Mervyn et al. Critical factors toward the inclusion of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in higher education. In: MARSCHARK, Marc; LAMPROPOULOU, Venetta; SKORDILIS, Emmanouil (Ed.). Diversity in Deaf Education New York: Oxford University Press, 2016. P. 441-471.
• JESUS, Francislene Cerqueira de et al. Os estudantes surdos no ensino superior em Portugal - uma reflexão sobre a sua inclusão. Educação e Filosofia, Uberlândia, v. 36, n. 76, p. 269-310, jan./abr. 2022. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.14393/REVEDFIL.v36n76a2022-60469 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.14393/REVEDFIL.v36n76a2022-60469
• JORGE, Andreia; FERREIRA, Joaquim Armando. Transição de alunos surdos para o ensino superior. Revista Portuguesa de Pedagogia, Coimbra, v. 41, n. 3, p. 335-357, 2007.
• KILOMBA, Grada. Memórias da plantação – Episódios de racismo cotidiano. Rio de Janeiro: Cobogó, 2019.
• KOMESAROFF, Linda. Category politics: deaf students’ inclusion in the ‘hearing university’. International Journal of Inclusive Education, v. 9, n. 4, p. 389-403, 2005. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110500138301 Acesso em: 15 jul. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110500138301
• KUSTERS, Annelies; DE MEULDER, Maartje; O’BRIEN, Dai (Ed.). Innovations in Deaf Studies: the role of Deaf scholars. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2017.
• LADD, Paddy. Understanding Deaf Culture: in search of Deafhood. Clevedon; Buffalo: Multilingual Matters, 2003.
• LADD, Paddy. Seeing Through New Eyes, Deaf Cultures and Deaf Pedagogies: the unrecognized curriculum. San Diego: DawnSign Press, 2022.
• LAGARTO, José; MINEIRO, Ana; PEREIRA, Joana. b-Learning in a distance learning graduate program for deaf students. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, v. 26, n. 1, p. 83-88, 2013. Disponível em: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1026821 Acesso em: 11 jun. 2025.
  » https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1026821
• MESQUITA, Leila Santos de. Políticas públicas de inclusão: o acesso da pessoa surda ao ensino superior. Educação & Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 43, n. 1, p. 255-273, jan./mar. 2018. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2175-623663861 Acesso em: 11 jun. 2025.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2175-623663861
• OLIVEIRA, Everton Luiz de; FUZETO, Adriana Paula; MANOEL, Paulo Afonso F. The inclusion of deaf students in higher education: didactic-pedagogical strategies applied to the teaching and learning process. Psychology and Behavioral Science International Journal, v. 15, n. 1, 2020.
• PADDEN, Carol; HUMPHRIES, Tom. Deaf in America: voices from a culture. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1988.
• PADDEN, Carol; HUMPHRIES, Tom. Inside Deaf Culture Cambridge; London: Harvard University Press, 2005.
• PEREIRA, J.; GIL, C. I. C.; SILVA, A. Práticas de Tradução e Interpretação de Língua Gestual Portuguesa: o Contexto Académico na Pro_LGP. In: COELHO, O.; KLEIN, M. (org.). Cartografias da Surdez: Comunidades, Línguas, Práticas e Pedagogias. Porto: Livpsic, 2013. P. 67–77.
• PINHEIRO, Rui. O Instituto do Silêncio. Diferencial - jornal dos estudantes do IST, Lisboa, p. 27, jan. 1998.
• PINHEIRO, Rui. Falar sem dizer nada. Diferencial - jornal dos estudantes do IST, Lisboa, p. 16-18, mar. 2002.
• PIRES, Lília et al. Inquérito nacional sobre os apoios concedidos aos estudantes com necessidades educativas especiais no ensino superior. In: SEMINÁRIO INCLUSÃO NO ENSINO SUPERIOR – 10 ANOS DO GRUPO DE TRABALHO PARA O APOIO A ESTUDANTES COM DEFICIÊNCIA NO ENSINO SUPERIOR, 2014, Lisboa. Anais [...] Lisboa, 2014.
• PORTUGAL. Assembleia da República Portuguesa. Quarta revisão constitucional. Lei Constitucional n.º 1/97, de 20 de setembro. Diário da República, Lisboa, 1ª Série-A, n. 218, p. 5130-5196, 20 set. 1997. Disponível em: https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/1997/09/218a00/51305196.pdf Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://files.diariodarepublica.pt/1s/1997/09/218a00/51305196.pdf
• PORTUGAL. Lei n.º 38/2004, de 18 de agosto. Diário da República, Lisboa, Série I-A, n. 194, p. 5232-5236, 18 ago. 2004.
• PORTUGAL. Decreto-Lei nº 3/2008, de 7 de janeiro de 2008. Diário da República, Lisboa, n. 4/2008, Série I, p. 154-164, 7 jan. 2008a. Disponível em: https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/decreto-lei/3-2008-386871 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/decreto-lei/3-2008-386871
• PORTUGAL. Lei n.º 21/2008, de 12 de maio de 2008. Altera o Decreto-Lei nº 3/2008, de 7 de janeiro de 2008. Diário da República, Lisboa, n. 91/2008, Série I, p. 2519-2521, 12 maio 2008b. Disponível em: https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/lei/21-2008-249230 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/lei/21-2008-249230
• PORTUGAL. Despacho n.º 8584/2017, de 29 de setembro. Aprova o Regulamento de Atribuição de Bolsas de Estudo para Frequência do Ensino Superior de Estudantes com incapacidade igual ou superior a 60%. Diário da República, Lisboa, 2.ª série, 29 set. 2017.
• PORTUGAL. Decreto-Lei nº 54/2018, de 6 de julho de 2018. Diário da República, Lisboa, n. 129/2018, Série I, p. 2918-2928, 6 jul. 2018. Disponível em: https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/decreto-lei/54-2018-115652961 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/decreto-lei/54-2018-115652961
• PORTUGAL. Lei n.º 2/2020, de 31 de março. Aprova o Orçamento do Estado para 2020. Diário da República, Lisboa, Série I, 31 mar. 2020.
• PORTUGAL. Direção-Geral do Ensino Superior. Guia da Candidatura ao Ensino Superior Público 2025 Lisboa: DGES, 2025a. (Coleção Guias do Ensino Superior). ISBN 978-972-741-181-8.
• PORTUGAL. Direção-Geral de Estatísticas da Educação e Ciência. Estatísticas da Educação 2023/2024 – Estatísticas Oficiais Lisboa: DGEEC, 2025b. Disponível em: https://www.dgeec.medu.pt/api/ficheiros/685e9f1d8ccf2462af5c5676 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://www.dgeec.medu.pt/api/ficheiros/685e9f1d8ccf2462af5c5676
• RODRIGUES, Andreia; GIL, Cristina; CONDE E SOUSA, Joana. Intérprete de Língua Gestual de conferência - Entre o atual e o ideal - Estudo de caso em Portugal. In: CORREIA, Isabel Sofia Calvário; CUSTÓDIO, Pedro Balaus; CAMPOS, Ronaldo Manassés Rodrigues (Ed.). Línguas de Sinais Além-Mar: propostas de investigação e desafios. São Paulo: E-Manuscrito, 2022. P. 59-73.
• SANTANA, Ana Paula. A inclusão do surdo no ensino superior no Brasil. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, v. 16, n. S1, p. 85-88, ago. 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12128
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12128
• SANTOS, Miguel Augusto. Estudantes surdos no ensino superior – descrição dos apoios implementados na Escola Superior de Educação do Instituto Politécnico do Porto. In: CORREIA, Isabel Sofia Calvário; CUSTÓDIO, Pedro Balaus; CAMPOS, Ronaldo Manassés Rodrigues (Ed.). Línguas de sinais: cultura, educação e identidade. Lisboa: Ex-Libris, 2019. P. 165-182.
• SILVA, Ana Beatriz Oliveira. Estudantes surdos no ensino superior: perceções sobre a experiência académica e social. 2024. Dissertação (Mestrado) – Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Porto, 2024. Disponível em: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.22/26879 Acesso em: 13 jul. 2025.
  » http://hdl.handle.net/10400.22/26879
• SINGLETON, Jenny L.; JONES, Gabrielle; HANUMANTHA, Shilpa. Toward ethical research practice with deaf participants. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, v. 9, n. 3, p. 59-66, jul. 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264614540589 Acesso em: 17 jul. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264614540589
• SKLIAR, Carlos. A surdez: um olhar sobre as diferenças. Porto Alegre: Editora Mediação, 1998.
• SKYER, Michael Edmond. A decisive role for Deaf epistemologies: analyzing power/knowledge in Critical Deaf Pedagogy. Diffractions, n. 7, p. 32-81, 2023. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.34632/diffractions.2023.12296 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.34632/diffractions.2023.12296
• SVARTHOLM, Kristina. 35 years of bilingual Deaf education – and then?. Educar Em Revista, Curitiba, v. 30, número especial 2, p. 33-50, 2014. Disponível em: https://revistas.ufpr.br/educar/article/view/37227 Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
  » https://revistas.ufpr.br/educar/article/view/37227
• VIANA, Marcos Vinícius Guimarães; GOMES, Márcia Regina. Desafios do aluno surdo no ensino superior. Revista Espaço, Rio de Janeiro, n. 53, p. 197-214, jan./jun. 2020.
• VYGOTSKY, Lev. Pensamento e linguagem [1934]. Lisboa: Climepsi Editores, 2007.
• WOODWARD, James C. Implications for sociolinguistic research among the Deaf. Sign Language Studies, v. 1, n. 1, p. 1–7, 1972. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1972.0004.
  » https://doi.org/10.1353/sls.1972.0004

Correspondence

E-mail: [e-mail]

Correspondence

E-mail: [e-mail]

Editor in charge:

Iara Tatiana Bonin

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  30 Oct 2026
• Date of issue
  2026

History

• Received
  29 Sept 2025
• Accepted
  18 Feb 2026