In the past two decades, â€˜non-oralâ€™ or â€˜pro-signingâ€™ approaches to the education of deaf children have increasingly described themselves as bilingual and bicultural (â€˜BiBiâ€™) programs. There has been a shift away from Total Communication programs and/or programs that use Manually Coded English (MCE) systems such as Seeing Essential English, Signing Exact English, and Signed English, as developed and used in North America; Sign Supported English in Britain, and Australasian Signed English in Australia and New Zealand (Jeanes, Reynolds, & Coleman, 1989). Some of these programs have been replaced or succeeded by sign bilingual programs (as bilingual/bicultural pro-grams will be referred to in this paper) as educators have increasingly better
understood native sign languages (or NSLs after Fischer, 1995) and their role
in the linguistic development and education of deaf children. Educators have
also increasingly recognized the structural limitations of English conveyed in a
sign-based manual mode and the inherent deficiencies of Simultaneous Com-
munication (the favored environment for MCEs), notably the conflict between
signing and speaking at the same time while trying to maintain a natural rate of
delivery (Baker, 1978; Drasgow & Paul, 1995).
At an early age, antonyms are part of a childâ€™s
lexicon. Antonyms represent a strong case of the principle of lexical contrast
(Clark, 1987), which proposes that any new word that is acquired must contrast
in meaning with other words. The acquisition of antonyms requires knowledge of
relationships among words and thus has been fruitfully used as an indicator of
both breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge (Paul & Oâ€™Rourke, 1988).
Thus, the study of antonyms is a useful tool to learn about aspects of
vocabulary knowledge beyond vocabulary size. Vocabulary knowledge in general
positively relates to reading comprehension (e.g., Baumann, Edwards, Boland,
Olejnik, & Kameâ€˜enui, 2003; Davis,1942; Ouellette, 2006). In recent years
it has been shown that vocabulary knowledge in the first language (L1) also
supports reading comprehension in the second language (L2) for spoken languages
(e.g., de Villiers & Masek, 2013; Lindsey, Manis, & Bailey, 2003;
Miller et al., 2006; Proctor, August,
Researchers have long highlighted
the need to apply evidence-based approaches to writing instruction for students
who are deaf and hard of hearing (d/hh). Yet, the majority of the research base
for effective writing instruction and intervention is based on studies of
hearing children, with or without disability labels. Therefore, existing
interventions often fail to account for the unique language and literacy needs
of d/hh students. In this article we describe an approach that enhances the
power of Interactive Writing (IW) instruction, an evidence-based approach for
typically developing students, that is specifically designed to engage and
support d/hh learners. We begin by providing a brief historical overview of IW
instruction as it is often used in contemporary general education classrooms.
Then, we describe evidence of the unique language and literacy development of
d/hh students from a series of recent studies related to Strategic and
Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) with d/hh students. Finally, we present
the language zone in the form of a flowchart, which illustrates the teacher
decision making process when responding to d/hh studentsâ€™ various language
needs in the context of IW. We conclude by illustrating examples of the
language zone in use and discussing the implications of this approach for d/hh
The purpose of this article is to
review research dealing with the use of ASL in teaching English and literacy. I
review some of the literature (and direct readers to additional sources) that
indicates that early learning of ASL need not create concerns for future
development of English structure, speech, or other cognitive skills. I also
suggest ways in which ASL can contribute directly to developing more of the
high-level skills needed for fluent reading and writing. The global benefit of
learning ASL as a first language is that it creates a standard bilingual
situation in which teachers and learners can take advantage of one language to
assist in acquiring the other and in the transfer of general knowledge. As part
of this discussion, I compare English and ASL as natural languages for
similarities and differences.
This paper is part of a broad study that looked at the impact of hearing loss on literacy skills development. The paper explores the role of the home and the school in the development of literacy skills among learners with hearing impairments. The study employed mixed methods where both qualitative and quantitative techniques were used. However, the case study design largely underpinned the study. The representative sample was composed of five educators (two teachers and three administrators) and 10 parents who were conveniently selected. Questionnaires, interviews and observation were the data gathering tools used. The results showed that educators felt that the curriculum did not support both English and Zimbabwean Sign Language equally as needed for literacy development in the teaching of students with hearing impairment. From the observations and interviews carried out, it was established that there was no equal time allocation on the timetable to both languages. There was no formal teaching of Zimbabwean Sign Language as a subject like English. There were no materials that could be used in the teaching of Zimbabwean Sign Language. The study recommended that language development should be the primary consideration when teaching students who are pre-lingually deaf (either born deaf or became deaf before acquiring language). To counteract the apparent language deficit in hearing families with children who are deaf it was recommended that a variety of strategies to provide meaningful language experiences be employed. Teachers were encouraged to share these suggestions with families, as well as remember them in their own teaching.
This study explored preservice teacher attitudes towards teaching a deaf student who uses Australian Sign Language (Auslan) compared to a student who is new to Australia and speaks Polish. The participants were 200 preservice teachers in their third or fourth year of university education. A questionnaire was created to measure attitudes, and participants were also asked to list teaching strategies they would use with the two students. A factor analysis yielded two subscales: Teacher Expectations and Teacher Confidence. Results showed that teachers had higher expectations of the Auslan student than the Polish student, and were more confident about teaching the Auslan student. Differences between the two conditions were also found for suggested teaching strategies. The findings have implications for teacher education programs.
The study explores the communication challenges faced by teacher trainees in teaching deaf learners and the opportunities that they present. A critical disabilities study approach within the qualitative paradigm was employed to collect interview data from 14 trainee teachers (6 were men and 8 women) and 5 of their specialist mentors (all of them were women) at 3 special schools in Zimbabwe. The trainees were aged 28â€“45. Data were analyzed using theme identification methods. Results showed that all the mentors and trainees without deaf assistants tended to teach using spoken language and even though they had no prior experience with them, they were suspicious of the use of deaf assistants, whom they saw as synonymous with sign language. Scepticism about using sign language was based on the idea that it was inadequate, would interfere with spoken language development, and would not enable learners to be included in a nondeaf world. It was also established that most of the mentors and trainees with deaf assistants used spoken language to teach, although this tended to be in combination with signs. Based on these challenges, opportunities to develop the education of deaf learners are discussed and recommendations made.
Researchers in education have documented that teachersâ€™ sense of efficacy has strong impacts on various aspects of teaching and learning. Yet, in the field of TESOL, inquiry into teachersâ€™ sense of efficacy is extremely scarce. The present study, by adopting the notion of teachersâ€™ sense of efficacy as the theoretical framework, has explored Iranian English Institute teachersâ€™ confidence in teaching English. The study has also examined teachersâ€™ attitudes toward the English language and teachersâ€™ English language proficiency, respectively. An exploratory survey methods design was employed in the present study and data were collected in the quantitative format, by which 68 English institute teachers working in Mazandaran responded to the survey. The results indicated that teachersâ€™ current level of English proficiency and EIL (English as an International Language) attitude toward the English language were the significant predictors for teachersâ€™ English teaching-specific efficacy beliefs or confidence. Also, efficacy for oral English language use was found as an additional dimension of teacher efficacy in teaching English, indicating that in a foreign language context, oral target language use would be a significant dimension to be considered in examining teachersâ€™ self-efficacy in teaching the target language.
This study was conducted to investigate the benefits of sign language for deaf students. The study was descriptive in nature and teachers of deaf were the sample of the study selected by using simple random sampling technique. A total number of 40 teachers of deaf from four schools were the participants of the study. For the purpose of collecting specific information, a structured questionnaire was developed on the basis of 5-Point Likert Scale. Collected data was tabulated and analyzed by using descriptive and inferential statistics. The study revealed that sign language is beneficial instrument for the deaf students in classroom learning.
Students who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) face challenges in
learning to read. Much has been written about the relative importance
of the different factors associated with success in reading, but these factors are disputed within the literature on DHH readers. The Center on
Literacy and Deafness, funded by the Institute of Education Sciences, is
engaged in a nationwide project to identify child-by-instruction interactions related to instructional factors that are malleable within the classroom context. In the present article, the authors describe the project,
present the conceptual model on which it is based, explain the
processes and procedures used to choose assessment tools, and discuss
their theoretical view of how reading and instruction might differ based
on an individual studentâ€™s language and level of functional hearing.
Already well documented for hearing children, schoolingâ€™s effects on early literacy skills for young students who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) were examined for the first time in the present study. Piecewise growth curve modeling was used to describe 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old studentsâ€™ growth in phonological awareness, letter-word identification, and vocabulary during 2 years of schooling and the intervening summer (N = 56). Amplification mode was cochlear implants for 45% of the sample and hearing aids for 54%. Classroom communication mode was spoken language only (for 61%) or sign language (39%). Across all skills, significant growth occurred during the 2 years of schooling but not during the summer. These findings underscore early educationâ€™s importance in promoting DHH childrenâ€™s critical early skills. Universal preschool intervention, including during summer, may be important in ensuring that DHH children have an adequate foundation when schooling begins.
In 1998 the document â€˜Sign bilingualism â€“ a Modelâ€™ was published It was developed by Miranda Pickersgill and Susan Gregory, and many schools, services, universities and individuals contributed to and endorsed this original publication. It has been used largely as a policy reference document for sign bilingual education since that time. The model of sign bilingual education as presented in the 1998 document has evolved over the last 10 years as practice has developed and the educational context has changed. There have been a number of significant and diverse changes in deaf education including developments in sign language teaching and research, and a steady increase in the number of profoundly deaf children with cochlear implants. These changes have prompted a revision of the original document.
According to Locke (Locke, Hay et al. 2000), â€œto
experience a true freedom in society is to have language that is to be the
great instrument and common tie of societyâ€. It is well documented that the
language skills of a child strongly affect the achievement of literacy
(Hoffmeister, 2000; Mayer & Akamatsu, 2003; Nover & Andrews, 1998; Prinz
& Strong, 1997). Sadly, the average reading level for todayâ€™s deaf and
hard-of- hearing (d/hh) students at the time of their high school graduation
remains at the fourth-grade level (Livingston, 1997; Singleton, et al, 2004;
Wilbur, 1977, 2000). It is equally unfortunate that several reforms in Deaf1 education
have produced only minor changes in the English reading and writing skills of
d/hh students (Hoffmeister, 2000; Lane, 1992; Lane, et al, 1996; Singleton, et
al, 2004). Given this, one has to ask how deaf children with limited reading
and writing skills can participate as full-fledged citizens of society,contributing
to our diverse community.
The purpose of this literature review is to present the arguments in support of conceptualizing deaf children as â€˜English Learnersâ€™, to explore the educational implications of such conceptualizations, and to suggest directions for future inquiry. Three ways of interpreting the label â€˜English Learnerâ€™ in relationship to deaf children are explored: (1) as applied to deaf children whose native language is American Sign Language; (2) as applied to deaf children whose parents speak a language other than English; and (3) as applied to deaf children who have limited access to the spoken English used by their parents. Recent research from the fields of linguistics and neuroscience on the effects of language deprivation is presented and conceptualized within a framework that we refer to as the psycholinguistic turn in deaf education. The implications for developing the literacy skills of signing deaf children are explored, particularly around the theoretical construct of a â€˜bridge between sign language proficiency and print-based literacy. Finally, promising directions for future inquiry are presented.
Deaf education aims to address
the educational, linguistic, cultural, and social needs of students who are
deaf or hard-of-hearing by providing a continuum of services based on their
individual needs. In the United States, deaf education dates back to the 1800s
when both oral and manual methods of instruction were imported from Europe.
There are three main communication methods used in the education of deaf and
hard-of-hearing students: (1) the oral approach, also known as the listening
and spoken language method, emphasizes the use of hearing amplification technology
(hearing aids and cochlear implants) in order to develop spoken language
skills; (2) the Total Communication approach advocates for the use of multiple
means of communication, including signing that follows English word order,
speaking, lip reading, listening via amplification technology, and finger
spelling, to address the studentsâ€™ needs; (3) the bilingual-bicultural
approach, also known as the American Sign Language (ASL)/English bilingual approach,
and sign bilingualism outside of the United States, adheres to the principles
of additive bilingualism and aims to develop proficiency in a signed and a
spoken language. Controversy over which approach is most appropriate to educate
deaf and hard and hearing children persists to this day. Schools where students
who are deaf or hard-of-hearing are educated vary depending on the level of
integration they have with hearing students.
The deaf community within The United States is a unique community with deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals
who share a common language and social network which include Deaf clubs, sports
and theatre. The Deaf community supports Deaf children and their families. It
is a place where Deaf people have a sense of belonging in the same way that people
from different ethnic backgrounds share experience when they gather (Padden,
1988). Padden (1988) further noted that the Deaf community is growing in
adversity; it is not a single society with one purpose which one can sign up for;.
It is a diverse meeting of individuals who come together for many purposes but
who share some basic experience, communication and commitment. The
communication will be in sign language. The commitment will be to support other
deaf people and to have a place to meet. According to (Jamie Berke) 2008, the
Deaf community is protected by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) which provides free and appropriate early intervention services from
birth to 3 years of age and covers school years (age 3-21 years). If a student
is eligible under IDEA or has a 504 plan, the school must ensure the hearing
aids are functioning properly, the student has access to assistive technology
(such as an FM system), and that those using assistive technology - including
teachers - are trained properly in the care and use of that technology.
All children have the right to education that meets their needs and aims to enable them full integration in their society. Education should guarantee all children an equal chance to actively participate in society regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or disability (Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989). Yet sophisticated mechanisms within educational structures marginalize children from poor backgrounds, ethnic origins, race, gender and disability to the same social status they were born into (Freire, 1970; Shor & Freire, 1987; Giroux, 1997). This article highlights the characteristics of oppressive education, education that intends to give equal opportunities to all but in practice short cut children from marginalized groups. Oppression of different marginalized groups, whether political groups, working-class groups, racial, national, ethnical gendered groups or ones with a disability, manifest similar characteristics. Cases become more complicated when certain children belong to multiple circles of oppressed groups: such is the case of a Deaf Bedouin girl, for example. This article illustrates some of these oppression mechanisms through the case of Deafii education in Israel. It will point out the way Deafness is constructed via education. Critical pedagogy concepts have been applied to analyze the manifestation of these mechanisms in Deaf formal and informal educational systems; while relying on theories of Disability Studies, as well.
In this chapter, the authors explore the practice of inclusion as it relates to the education of deaf and hard of hearing (d/hh) students. Using the current situation in Jamaica as a microcosm, it is argued that for this specific population of students, it may be necessary to reframe and redefine the notion of inclusion more broadly. For example, the authors argue that as a result of the specific cultural, linguistic, and academic needs of d/hh students, a more traditional approach to inclusion may in fact result in isolation and less access to content and skills. Inclusion that considers how deaf education classrooms may include accessible language, the Deaf community, families of d/hh children, and Deaf role models may be more appropriate for this population.
Little is known about the
educational experiences of deaf children in Mexico. Schools for the deaf exist,
but no research has examined instructional practices for children in these
contexts. In this study, we adopt a sociocultural framework for language
acquisition to document and understand how teachers at a bilingual (Mexican
Sign Language and Spanish) school for the deaf in central Mexico support the
learning of their students. Our findings indicate that teachers at this school prioritized
deafness and how to leverage the visual modality to support student growth.
They used a number of instructional practices familiar to English-speaking
audiences, such as scaffolding, explicit instruction, and individualization,
perhaps as a result of the close ties between the school and US-based collaborators.
Finally, both teachers and students felt that collaboration, between the
administration and teachers, among teachers, and among students, was essential.
Findings indicate a need to explore these complex issues and expand burgeoning
collaborations between bilingual and deaf education researchers.
It is unknown if the developmental path of antonym knowledge in deaf children increases continuously with age and correlates with reading comprehension, as it does in hearing children. Using a receptive multiple-choice American Sign Language (ASL) antonym test, antonym knowledge depended more strongly on age for deaf children with deaf parents (DCDP) than for deaf children with hearing parents (DCHP). This indicates more developmentally typical acquisition for DCDP, consistent with early natural language exposure. Multiple regressions demonstrated that ASL antonym knowledge eliminated the advantage of deaf parents for reading. This establishes the strong language effect of ASL.
The literacy skills of deaf children generally lag behind those of their hearing peers. The mechanisms of reading in deaf individuals are
only just beginning to be unraveled but it seems that native language skills
play an important role. In this study, 12 deaf pupils (six in grades 1â€“2 and six
in grades 4â€“6) at a Swedish state primary school for deaf and hard of hearing
trained on the connection between Swedish Sign
Language and written Swedish using a pilot sign language version of the
literacy training software program Omega-is. Literacy skills improved
substantially across the 20 days of the study. These literacy gains may have
rested upon the specific soft-ware-based intervention, upon regular classroom
activities, or upon a combination of these factors. Omega-is-d, and similar
software utilizing sign
This article outlines a working model that is grounded in visual learning; it is a model for facilitating deaf childrenâ€™s acquisition of literacy. In our view, literacy is more than merely reading. It also encompasses the acquisition of knowledge and the development of cognitive skills that one needs for thinking, comprehending, and communicating. The perspective espoused by the proponents of â€œmultiliteraciesâ€ is utilized to fashion a model that explains how deaf childrenâ€™s literacy development may be supported through ASl and various visual modes of learning. The model incorporates components of ASL acquisition, visual engagement, emergent literacy, social mediation of English print, literacy and Deaf culture, and a variety of media. Our goal is to broaden the current dialogue on the literacy development of deaf children by offering a model that is based on a fairly holistic concept of literacy, insights from a wide array of research findings and theoretical constructs, and recognition of the need to capitalize on deaf studentsâ€™ natural tendency to learn via the visual mode.
This article builds on Carol Padden and Tom Humphriesâ€™ assertion that culturally identified deaf people inhabit a
different center of knowledge than the non-deaf. Over generations of inhabiting a different center, deaf people have
developed and transmitted embodied knowledge. The core of this knowledge is the role of sign language in developing
language, cognition, and social structures. Modern fields of science search for truth by deconstructing false narratives.
That is, anything worth being scientific is worth testing. While this approach may be effective for science, it devalues community knowledge since core tenets have no value until
they are tested. To illustrate this, we critique a literary work, The Deaf Mute Howls, by deaf writer Albert Ballin in 1930. His work is particularly compelling because he suggests a radical approach to disability justice. Many of his claims were later verified by science, which presents questions about future research praxis centering deaf epistemology.
A new test, the ASL Receptive SkiUs Test (ALS-RST), adapted from the BSL Receptive Skills Test (BSL-RST), was administered to i6o deaf children, ages 3â€”5, as part of the Early Education Longitudinal Study conducted by the Science of Learning Center on Visual Language and Visual Learning. An analysis of the test's psychometric properties was conducted. The results support the use of the ASL-RST for measuring ASL grammatical knowledge for developing signers at this young age level. The overall reliability of the test across aU age groups was .96. An ANOVA revealed significant differences among sample age groups, as well as significant differences among groups of children differentiated by whether their fanuHes reported regularly using sign in the home. An analysis of items grouped by the grammatical feature that determined the structure of the ASL-RST showed systematic gains by age and systematic differentiation by the degree of grammatical complexity represented by the items. These grammatical differences in score performance are discussed from a developmental perspective in light of the current research literature on ASL acquisition.
Numerous studies have shown that spelling presents unique challenges for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (d/hh), and most do not develop age-appropriate spelling skills. Spelling errors from 29 middle school d/hh students were analyzed from writing samples that were gathered at the beginning, middle, and end of a year-long writing instructional approach.
A linguistic analysis of spelling errors was used to assess each childâ€™s understanding of the phonological, morphological, orthographic, semantic, and visual imagery rules that apply to written words. Our results provide a descriptive analysis of the types of spelling errors made by middle school d/hh students. Results indicate that spelling should be directly targeted during writing lessons. The results provide important information on the acquisition of spelling skills with this unique population and the use of narrative samples to assess spelling.
This paper addresses the relation
between sign language and literacy development in bilingually educated deaf
children. These children are acquiring LSQ (Quebec Sign Language) as a first language
and written French as a second language. In the spirit of the
"Interdependence Theory" of Cummins (1991), we try to determine
whether there is a relation between the mastery of L1 and of L2 despite the
modality difference between these languages. In order to examine the relation
between the use of space in LSQ and reading comprehension in French, two tests
were developed. The use of space in LSQ was measured by an imitation task.
Given that in LSQ, as in other sign languages, the use of space is involved in
all forms of co-indexation (pronominal reference, verb agreement, etc.) and is
the means by which the language establishes relations between different lexical
elements, mastery of the use of space was hypothesized as an appropriate
indicator of global competence in LSQ. Two aspects of the use of space were
looked at, namely, locus assignment and reference. To evaluate reading
comprehension, a multi-level reading test was designed to verify specifically
the ability to locate and infer information in a text. Statistical analyses
(Spearman correlations) show that mastery of LSQ is related to reading comprehension.
More specifically, the mastery of locus assignment and reference in LSQ seems consistently
related to the ability to make inferences when reading French. However, the
mastery of locus assignment in LSQ does not consistently correlate with the
ability to locate information in a written text and the mastery of reference in
LSQ does not appear to correlate with this ability either.
This monograph supplement to
"The Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology" contains
eight papers on issues and strategies for communication assessment of
hearing-impaired children, not only in the area of interpersonal communication,
but in classroom and print discourse as well. Titles and authors of the papers
are as follows: "Communication Competence and Assessment" (Richard
Kretschmer and Laura Kretschmer); "Assessing Communication of
Hearing-Impaired Children: Influences from Pragmatics" (Judith Felson
Duchan)7, "Assessing English Syntax in Hearing-Impaired
Children: Eliciting Production in
Pragmatically-Motivated Situations" (Peter de Villiers); "Combining
Formal and Informal Strategies for Language Assessment of HearingImpaired Children!'
(Mary Moeller); "A Sociolinguistic Assessment Scheme for the Total
Communication Student" (Harold Johnson); "Perspectives on the
Assessment of Reading" (Joan Laughton); "Assessing the Writing
Abilities of Hearing-Impaired Children" (David Conway); and
"Assessment for Three Aspects of School Communication" (Sandra
Tattershall et al.) (JDD)
Dialogic reading is an instructional strategy that has shown promise for supporting the reading development of children
both with and without disabilities. Specifically, there may be positive effects of vocabulary knowledge, morphological
knowledge, participation during reading, and emergent literacy skills. However, the knowledge base on the efficacy of
dialogic reading with informational text is extremely limited. In addition, there are much available data on the use of dialogic
reading with deaf students. The current study describes a multiple baseline single-case design study of a dialogic reading
approach used with a deaf student enrolled in upper elementary school. Findings show promise for the dialogic reading
approach for use with this genre and this population, though further research is necessary.
Language transfer theory
elucidates how first language (L1) knowledge and grammatical features are
applied in second language (L2) writing. Deaf and hard of hearing (d/hh)
students who use or are developing American Sign Language (ASL) as their L1 may
demonstrate the use of ASL linguistic features in their writing of English. In
this study, we investigated the extent to which 29 d/hh students in Grades 68
(mean age13.2) with diverse ASL exposure incorporated ASL features in their
English writing. We also investigated the impact of one year of Strategic and
Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) to increase studentsâ€™ metalinguistic
knowledge and linguistic competence, and subsequently reduce ASL features in
writing. Results indicate that ASL transfer is found in the writings of
students with varied L1 experiences, and that SIWI can lead to significant
reductions of ASL features in writing. The findings suggest that bilingual
literacy programs where there is an emphasis on implicit language competence
and metalinguistic knowledge can support d/hh students in the development of
Reading requires two related, but
separable, capabilities: (1) familiarity with a language, and (2) understanding
the mapping between that language and the printed word (Chamberlain &
Mayberry, 2000; Hoover & Gough, 1990). Children who are profoundly deaf are
disadvantaged on both counts. Not surprisingly, then, reading is difficult for
profoundly deaf children. But some deaf children do manage to read fluently. How?
Are they simply the smartest of the crop, or do they have some strategy, or
circumstance, that facilitates linking the written code with language? A prior one
might guess that knowing American Sign Language (ASL) would interfere with
learning to read English simply because ASL does not map in any systematic way onto
English. However, recent research has suggested that individuals with good
signing skills are not worse, and may even be better, readers than individuals
with poor signing skills (Chamberlain & Mayberry, 2000). Thus, knowing a
language (even if it is not the language captured in print) appears to
facilitate learning to read. Nonetheless, skill in signing does not guarantee
skill in readingâ€”reading must be taught. The next frontier for reading research
in deaf education is to understand how deaf readers map their knowledge of sign
language onto print, and how instruction can best be used to turn into readers.
This report describes a rapid
appraisal sociolinguistic survey done in the Jamaican deaf community in Spring
2009. After six weeks of background research, three researchers collected data
in six different Jamaican cities during three weeks in Spring 2009. Survey
methods used to report the information given in this report include library
research, sociolinguistic questionnaires, and participant observation. Results show
that the Jamaican deaf community is functioning in a complex, multilingual
situation. Because deaf schools were found to be the primary site of sign
language acquisition in the Jamaican deaf community, the Jamaican deaf school
systemâ€™s movement toward bilingual and bicultural education, the increased use of
Jamaican Sign Language (JSL) in the classroom, and the development of JSL
resources, points to high vitality of JSL in Jamaica. Although Deaf Jamaicans
take pride in JSL as their national language, American Sign Language (ASL) and
Signed English are also used as lingua francas throughout the island. Jamaican
Country Sign Language, which is used by a decreasing number of deaf Jamaicans
in the St. Elizabeth Parish, is nearing extinction and will soon disappear from
memory, unless steps are taken to document it. Although social access and deaf
rights are increasing in Jamaica, deaf Jamaicans are eager to work toward
community and language development, especially in the areas of interpreter
training, education, and employment.
thesis aims to explore how the rapid development of different communication
technology that has taken place over the last few years offers new
possibilities for deaf people to use American Sign Language through the use of
videophones and webcams. I started by
delving into the inventions of many communication tools that have excluded and
included deaf people from society. I
proceeded to talk about the 1988 and 2006 protests at Gallaudet University and
the diverse technology used to distribute information during each protest by
deaf people and the media. Afterwards I
revealed the amazing impact videophones have on deaf people whose native or
second language is American Sign Language.
Deaf people no longer have to rely on English to contact one another in
distant places. Next I mentioned the
conflict parents of deaf babies face with the many choices of audio and visual
technology. Lastly I focused on present and future research on electronic
learning used for the education of deaf children.
The development of valid and reliable assessment tools to measure the acquisition
of natural signed languages is of practical as well as theoretical significance. This chapter
describes a selection of tests that are currently available or under development to assess
several signed languages (American Sign Language, British Sign Language, German
Sign Language, and Swiss German Sign Language) at the phonological, lexical,
grammatical, and discourse levels. In addition to test descriptions we discuss issues
pertaining to test development procedures, test formats, normative sample composition,
and the use of web-based technology. The importance of assessment in guiding
instruction in deaf education is emphasized throughout.
opportunities to flourish as others might, children with disabilities have the
lead fulfilling lives and to contribute to the
social, cultural and economic vitality of their
â€“ as the personal essays in this volume attest. Yet surviving and thriving can
be especially difficult for children with disabilities. They are at greater
risk of being poor than peers without disabilities. Even where children share
the same disadvantages â€“ of poverty or membership in a minority group, say â€“
children with disabilities confront additional challenges as a result of their impairments
and the many barriers that society throws in their way. Children living in
poverty are among the least likely to enjoy the benefits of education and
health care, for example, but children who live in poverty and have a
disability are even less likely to attend their local school or clinic.
AbstractOver the last two decades, scientists have come up with mathematical models for predicting the life of languages. These predictions have invariably indicated that the human species is moving rapidly close to extinction of a large part of its linguistic heritage. These predictions do not agree on the exact magnitude of the impending disaster; but they all agree on the fact that close to three quarters or over of all existing natural human languages are half in grave. There are, on the other hand, advocates of linguistic globalization. They would prefer the spread of one or only a few languages all over the world so that communication across national boundaries becomes the easiest ever. Obviously, the nations and communities that have learnt to live within only a single language, whose economic well-being is not dependent on knowing languages other than their own, whose knowledge systems are well-secure within their own languages, will not experience the stress of language loss, at least not immediately, though the loss of the worldâ€™s total language heritage, which will weaken the global stock of human intellect and civilizations, will have numerous indirect enfeebling effects for them too. Since it is language mainly, of all things, that makes us human and distinguishes us from other species and animate Nature, and since the human consciousness can but function given the ability for linguistic expression, it becomes necessary to recognize language as the most crucial aspect of the cultural capital. It has taken us continuous work of about half a million years to accumulate this valuable capital. In our time we have come close to the point of losing most of it. Some of the predictions maintain that out of approximately 6000 existing languages, not more than 300 will survive in the 22nd century. In absence of thorough surveys of languages, it is difficult to decide as to how many languages there really are in existence; and it is even more difficult to predict how many of these, and precisely which ones, will survive. History of every language has strange and some time completely unpredictable turns. The recent upward trend of some of the tribal languages in India such as Bhilli can be an example. It defies all established Sociolinguistic assumptions.
Over the last two decades, scientists have come up with mathematical models for predicting the life of languages. These predictions have invariably indicated that the human species is moving rapidly close to extinction of a large part of its linguistic heritage. These predictions do not agree on the exact magnitude of the impending disaster; but they all agree on the fact that close to three quarters or over of all existing natural human languages are half in grave. There are, on the other hand, advocates of linguistic globalization. They would prefer the spread of one or only a few languages all over the world so that communication across national boundaries becomes the easiest ever. Obviously, the nations and communities that have learnt to live within only a single language, whose economic well-being is not dependent on knowing languages other than their own, whose knowledge systems are well-secure within their own languages, will not experience the stress of language loss, at least not immediately, though the loss of the worldâ€™s total language heritage, which will weaken the global stock of human intellect and civilizations, will have numerous indirect enfeebling effects for them too. Since it is language mainly, of all things, that makes us human and distinguishes us from other species and animate Nature, and since the human consciousness can but function given the ability for linguistic expression, it becomes necessary to recognize language as the most crucial aspect of the cultural capital. It has taken us continuous work of about half a million years to accumulate this valuable capital. In our time we have come close to the point of losing most of it. Some of the predictions maintain that out of approximately 6000 existing languages, not more than 300 will survive in the 22nd century. In absence of thorough surveys of languages, it is difficult to decide as to how many languages there really are in existence; and it is even more difficult to predict how many of these, and precisely which ones, will survive. History of every language has strange and some time
completely unpredictable turns. The recent upward trend of some of the tribal languages in India such as Bhilli can be an example. It defies all established Sociolinguistic assumptions.
Hearing-impaired (HI) students
same as hearing students, they must understand passages, stories, and
sentences from various school subjects. All students should be able to make a
distinction of the important facts and ideas from words they are reading and
recognize words that are unimportant. At times this remains difficult for
hearing impaired students for the reason that, they are reading words or
sentences they cannot comprehend. Reading is a dual progress whereby one part
is the aptitude 2 to decode print and know what one is reading, and another
part is reading comprehension and without it, one is not truly reading. Among
students, these skills are highly related but there are some populations of
children who struggle with the skills necessary to either decode or comprehend
(Oakhill, Cain & Bryant, 2013). In other words, when most children learn to
read, they either develop the skills to both decode and comprehend or they do
not. Yet there are students who are capable decoders but still perform poorly
on measures of reading comprehension because they are not making the necessary
connections between words as they form sentences, paragraphs and entire texts.
The inability to understand the meanings of words cause problems for
comprehension. Effectively teaching students to read and write well in English
is an important responsibility in todayâ€™s primary schools.
Despite the linguistic research that has already been initiated in India, sign language and deaf education in the northeastern part of India has largely remained unknown. This chapter provides a glimpse into the situation of deaf education and sign language in this area. Despite the innumerable number of studies on sign language and the deaf community, sign language is still perceived as a universal language invented by the hearing, a tool to overcome the communication barriers of the deaf. Several studies have discussed the challenges faced by deaf communities around the world, and they are no different from the deaf communities in the northeast region. This chapter examines the language barriers in education within the context of north east India and how they impact the lives of the d/Deaf individuals in the larger society. ......The idea of â€œinclusive education for allâ€ is actually a paradox because, despite the noble motives of the policymakers, the gap between academic research and education persists; the majority of the deaf (especially the Deaf) are still being discriminated against and the negative attitude towards sign language continues. Within the context of one of the most diverse regions of India, a multilingual education model that can accommodate sign language as an equal with other spoken languages can truly minimize the barriers of education for the Deaf. Language is a phenomenon that needs to be understood beyond what we know in terms of sound, and such a view of language acquisition process can curtail the hegemony of speech over sign language. Hence, this chapter emphasizes that it is only within the arena of education itself that change can have a widespread impact, perhaps in the form of an improved version of â€œinclusive education.â€
In this article, we adapt a concept designed to structure language testing more effectively, the Assessment Use Argument (AUA), as a framework for the development and/or use of sign language assessments for deaf children who are taught in a sign bilingual education setting. By drawing on data from a recent investigation of deaf childrenâ€™s nonsense sign repetition skills in British Sign Language, we demonstrate the steps of implementing the AUA in practical test design, development and use. This approach provides us with a framework which clearly states the competing values and which stakeholders hold these values. As such, it offers a useful foundation for test-designers, as well as for practitioners in sign bilingual education, for the interpretation of test scores and the consequences of their use.
This book falls on the heels of its cousin Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High. Those who have read this previous offering or heard about it or bought the action figures are sure to wonder: â€œWhatâ€™s the difference between a crucial conversation and a crucial confrontation?â€ Weâ€™re glad you asked. Both are high stakes. Both are likely to be emotional. Thatâ€™s why theyâ€™re both crucial. Hereâ€™s the difference. The hallmark of a crucial conversation is disagreement. Two or more people have different opinions, donâ€™t know how to work through their differences, digress into silence or violence, and kill the free flow of ideas. Disagreements, poorly handled, lead to poor decisions, strained relationships, and eventually to disastrous results. Crucial confrontations, on the other hand, are about disappointments. Theyâ€™re made up of failed promises, missed expectations, and all other bad behavior. Confrontations comprise the very foundation of accountability. They all start with the question: â€œWhy didnâ€™t you do what you were supposed to do?â€ And they only end when a solution is reached and both parties are motivated and able to comply. Confrontations are the prickly, complicated, and often frightening performance discussions that keep you up at night.
Now, hereâ€™s how the two books relate. This book draws on the principles found in Crucial Conversationsâ€” with an occasional and brief review of those pivotal concepts. With that said, almost all of the material youâ€™ll find here is new and stand-alone. Pick up this book, read it, put the ideas into action, and youâ€™ll never walk away from another conflict again.
This study focused on whether
developmental communication disorders exist in American Sign Language (ASL) and
how they might be characterized. ASL studies is an emerging field; educators
and clinicians have minimal access to descriptions of communication disorders
of the signed modality. Additionally, there are limited resources for assessing
ASL acquisition. This article is designed to raise clinicians â€˜awareness about
developmental communication disorders in ASL and categorize types of
atypicality that have been witnessed.
Against the problem of low
school-to-work transition of the Deaf, the TOR sets out the study objectives
I. To provide an evidence base
for appropriate and effective interventions in policy and practice to support
the full enjoyment of the Deaf of the opportunity to earn a living
ii. To improve the quality of
life of Deaf citizens in Jamaica, and their school-to work-transition in particular.
A mixed methods approach was taken, which involved:
a) A review of existing
b) Collection of secondary data
from the Jamaican Ministry of Education (MOE),
including the 2014 National
c) Interviews with key informants
d) Two focus group sessions
e) Three case studies
f) A survey of 160
non-agriculture sector employers in the Kingston
Metropolitan Area, Mandeville and
The study design changed over the
course of the research as intended approaches were modified in response to
fieldwork experiences. Hence, a face-to-face survey of employers was included
after attempts at an online survey were unsuccessful.
is essential that research and analysis conducted by and for government is of
the highest possible standards to ensure that the government of the day can
make well-informed decisions, leading to better outcomes for society. Analysts
across government demonstrate their commitment to providing high-quality
research through adherence to professional codes of practice. This GSR
publication protocol complements these. Members of all analytical professions
are expected to adhere this protocol when collaborating on the production of
social research, as they do to the principles under their professional codes.
Compliance with this protocol will help ensure that evidence produced by
government is released into the public domain in a manner that promotes public
confidence and scientific rigour. The protocol applies to government
departments and devolved administrations covering England, Wales and the UK
that conduct or commission social research. Non-departmental public bodies and
agencies are not obliged to follow the protocol, although as it is a statement
of good practice for the publication of social research and analysis, compliance
Nonstandard grammatical forms are
often present in the writing of deaf students that are rarely if ever, seen in
the writing of hearing students. With the implementation of Strategic and
Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) in previous studies, students have
demonstrated significant gains in high-level writing skills (e.g., text
structure) but have also made gains with English grammar skills. This 1-year
study expands on prior research by longitudinally examining the written
language growth (i.e., writing length, sentence complexity, sentence awareness,
and function words) of 29 deaf middle-school students. A repeated-measures
analysis of variance with a between-subjects variable for literacy achievement
level was used to examine gains over time and the interventionâ€™s efficacy when
used with students of various literacy levels. Students, whether high or low
achieving, demonstrated statistically significant gains with writing length,
sentence complexity, and sentence awareness. Subordinate clauses were found to
be an area of difficulty and follow up strategies are suggested. An analysis of
function word data, specifically prepositions and articles, revealed different
patterns of written language growth by language group (e.g., American Sign
Language users, oral students, users of English-based sign). With respect to
writing English text that is grammatically accurate and complex, deaf writers
are known to demonstrate substantial variability in their writing and, subsequently,
have different instructional needs than hearing writers. Nonstandard
grammatical forms tend to appear in their writing that are rarely, if ever,
produced by hearing students, even in the writing of hearing students with very
limited school experience (Fabbretti,Volterra, & Pontecorvo, 1998). This
certainly points to the language differences that exist between hearing children
Literacy is essential for success
and an enhanced quality of life in our society. It is estimated that 2 -3 % of
Canadians are Deaf and the majority of them have inadequate literacy skills
(Schein, 1996). This prevents most Deaf people from attaining post-secondary
education (Carver, 1991), limits their opportunities for employment (Carbin,
1996) and results in a loss of human potential. What disables Deaf people is
not that they cannot hear, but that they cannot read and write. This framework
suggests that one way of addressing the literacy crisis in the Deaf community
is to refine and adapt language arts curricula for Deaf students incorporating
visual language processing, meaning-based strategies, and bilingual teaching
principles. The question of how best to promote literacy in deaf children has
long frustrated teachers. From the beginnings of English literacy instruction,
which primarily emphasized the use of amplification (hearing aids) to develop
speaking and listening skills, to the development of simultaneous communication
(speaking and signing at the same time) in the 1970â€™s, the overall reading
level of deaf high school graduates did not increase beyond the level of grade
four (Fruchter, Wilbur, & Fraser, 1984; Holt, 1993; Moores, 1987; Quigley,
Montanelli, & Wilbur, 1976). However, one group of Deaf children, those
with Deaf parents, scored consistently higher on tests of English reading
skills than their deaf peers with hearing parents (Allen, 1986; Trybus &
Jensema, 1978). These children had the advantage of learning their first
language through consistent and accessible exposure to proficient language
models. Even though that language, American Sign Language (ASL), was different
from English, it facilitated their ability to learn written English as a second
language (Hoffmeister & Wilbur, 1980). These observations suggested to
educators that Deaf education should be considered a form of bilingual
education. In this system children learn a natural signed language as their
first language and a spoken/written language, such as English, is introduced as
a second language (Strong, 1988).
This article explores the available research literature on language development and language interventions among deaf and hard of hearing (d/hh) children. This literature is divided into two broad categories: Research on natural languages (specifically American Sign Language and spoken English) and research on communication systems (specifically iterations of signed English and cued speech). These bodies of literature are summarized, with special attention paid to intervention research and research exploring the impacts of language skills on literacy development. Findings indicate that there is generally a stronger research base on natural languages as compared to communication systems, though more studies in both categories are necessary. Additionally, there are very few intervention studies and even fewer that aim to intervene upon language with the explicit goal of impacting literacy; therefore, there is little known about whether and how interventions that aim to support language development may have direct or indirect impacts on literacy within this population. Further research on this topic, as well as replication studies and research with larger sample sizes, is strongly recommended.
Hearing loss (HL) can be defined medically, educationally and culturally. When defined medically, HL is categorized at levels from slight to profound. When defined educationally, HL is described in relation to the childâ€™s ability to learn language via audition and to perform academically. For example the Individuals with Disabilities Education ACT (IDEA) uses hearing impairment as the category labels and defines it as a loss that serves enough to adversely affect a childâ€™s educational performance. When defined culturally, hearing loss is described in terms of a shared cultural identity among individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing (Schiermer, 2000).
Factors influencing native and nonnative signersâ€™ syntactic judgment ability in American Sign Language (ASL) were explored for 421 deaf students aged 7;6â€“18;5. Predictors for syntactic knowledge were chronological age, age of entering a school for the deaf, gender, and additional learning disabilities. Mixed-effects linear modeling analysis revealed the main effects of each predictor and an interaction between signing status and learning disability. The native signers showed typical syntactic development that varied by chronological age, gender, additional learning disabilities, and age of entering a deaf school. In contrast, the syntactic development of nonnative signers was more variable. It was less tightly related to chronological age and more strongly influenced by the age at which they had entered the school where assessment occurred, which was highly related to length of exposure to a sign language.
Fingerspelling is a system of
manually representing the graphemes of a spoken language used by members of
Deaf communities worldwide. Yet, at least within the North American educational
system, fingerspelling appears to be largely discounted in favor of sign usage,
despite its high potential for linkage to the orthographical system of English
and literacy development. The author describes fingerspelling in connection
with how it is used within the American Deaf community, and also describes the development
of fingerspelling skills in deaf (and hearing) children. He also describes how
deaf adults use fingerspelling to promote literacy development in young deaf
children. Strategies for increasing the use of fingerspelling by teachers and
parents of the Deaf are outlined.
Access to health care without
barriers is a clearly defined right of people with disabilities as stated by
the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. The present study
reviews literature from 2000 to 2015 on access to health care for deaf people
and reveals significant challenges in communication with health providers and
gaps in global health knowledge for deaf people including those with even
higher risk of marginalization. Examples of approaches to improve access to
health care, such as providing powerful and visually accessible communication
through the use of sign language, the implementation of important communication
technologies, and cultural awareness trainings for health professionals are
discussed. Programs that raise health knowledge in Deaf communities and models
of primary health care centers for deaf people are also presented. Published
documents can empower deaf people to realize their right to enjoy the highest attainable
standard of health.
Background: The implication of
health literacy is the ability of individuals to find, understand, and use
their required health information from reliable sources. It is an indicator of
the individualsâ€™ participation in their own medical decision-making. Deaf
individuals have limited health literacy and poor health status due to low
literacy. Hence, this review was conducted to understand barriers and
facilitators influencing health literacy among deaf community.
Methods: We searched the ISI Web
of Sciences, Scopus, and Medline from 1987 to 2016. Seventy-three papers were analysed
Results: We found three primary
themes, including inadequate health literacy, barriers, and facilitators to
accessing health information and health care services among deaf individuals.
Facilitators were composed of four sub-theme including legal activities
protecting the right of deaf patients to accessing health services, training
health professionals about effective communication with deaf patients,
providing sign language interpreter services, and developing deaf tailored
educational health programs and materials.
Conclusion: Closing the deaf
cultural gap and their limited access to health information are achievable
through the removal of the communication barriers, allowing deaf individuals
with more access to health learning opportunities, and informing the hearing
community about the communicative skills of deaf individuals.
Deaf patients are too often
overlooked in our society despite requiring in-depth attention to their
specific communication needs. If they are not able to communicate with
healthcare professionals, they may be unable to access and receive appropriate
care. Yet, medical providers who fail to address patientsâ€™ linguistic
difficulties breach their ethical and professional duties, and face potential
malpractice lawsuits. This article aims to highlight the unequal access of
medical care by deaf patients and the impact of language barriers. It also
provides an overview of medical providersâ€™ ethical and legal duties to assist
people with hearing disabilities and discusses the benefits of using
professional interpreting services and offers recommendations to address the
ethical and legal issues faced by medical professionals.
An estimated 10% of the worldâ€™s
population â€“ 650 million people â€“ live with a disability. Persons with
disabilities have the same sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs as other
people. Yet they often face barriers to information and services. The ignorance
and attitudes of society and individuals, including health-care providers,
raise most of these barriers â€“ not the disabilities themselves. In fact,
existing services usually can be adapted easily to accommodate persons with
disabilities. Increasing awareness is the first and biggest step. Beyond that,
much can be accomplished through resourcefulness and involving persons with
disabilities in programme design and monitoring. Now is the time for action
concerning SRH of persons with disabilities. On 3 May 2008, the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities came into force. This is the first
legally binding international treaty on disability. It mentions SRH
specifically. Both UNFPA Executive Director Thoraya A. Obaid and WHO
Director-General Margaret Chan have welcomed the Convention and have emphasized
the importance of addressing the needs of persons with disabilities.
Background: There has been little
research on the experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) with deaf/hearing
impaired (HI) clients. Anecdotal evidence suggests that HCWs experience
challenges, but little is reported on how they manage these challenges.
Interactions with and care of deaf/Deaf and HI patients by clinicians has
yielded several questions around communication and assessment strategies, as
well as comparative quality of health care for deaf/Deaf and HI clients. This research
was intended to further the understanding and knowledge of these aspects of
health care of deaf/Deaf and HI clients.
Methods: The study design is a
qualitative, descriptive case study. Data were collected using semi-structured
interviews with individual HCWs and focus-group discussions with groups of participants.
Participants were invited staff members at Retreat Community Health Centre
(RCHC) in Cape Town. Convenience sampling was used to select participants, and
interviews were conducted until saturation was reached. Data were studied and
analysed using the phenomenological method.
Results: HCWs reported that they
serve very few Deaf or HI clients. However, themes of language barriers,
resilience, preconceptions, improvisation and innovation, interpreters and
recommendations emerged. Difficulties in communication were acknowledged, but
HCWs insisted that these barriers are not insurmountable.
Discussion and conclusion: A few
preconceptions and gaps in knowledge and awareness were revealed. HCWs also
tended to rely on escorts and other interpreters. The dominant recommendations
are that HCWs should receive training in sign language (SL) and/or that SL
interpreters be available at facilities. Despite using words and phrases such
as â€˜frustratingâ€™ and â€˜more effortâ€™, participantsâ€™ concluding remarks reiterate
that their experiences are positive, suggesting a notable resilience.