Search

This study investigated writing achievement in a Canadian cohort of school-aged deaf learners (N = 64). In the current context, in which most students are educated in inclusive settings and use hearing technologies, the goal was to establish whether outcomes approach those of hearing-age peers and identify demographic factors (e.g., gender, grade, additional disability, home language, hearing loss, hearing technology, auditory perception) influencing performance. Results indicated that a high percentage of participants performed in the average range or higher on a standardized, norm-referenced assessment, the Test of Written Language-Fourth Edition (TOWL-4, Hammill & Larsen, 2009). Grade, type of hearing loss, higher auditory perception scores, and absence of an additional disability were identified as variables of significance. As auditory access continues to improve, additional investigations of writing achievement in this population will be essential to further inform educational policy and pedagogical practice.

For much of the history of deaf education, spoken language bilingualism was not considered a viable goal. It was believed that given the challenges of meaningful auditory access, age-appropriate development in even one language would be daunting. However, implementation of universal newborn hearing screening during the early 2000s, along with early fitting of hearing technologies, including cochlear implants, has afforded significantly improved access to spoken language during the critical early years of language acquisition for most deaf children. In this context, it is timely to reconsider the possibilities of spoken language bilingualism in the education of deaf students. The present article therefore focuses on examining the available literature with a view to summarizing current understandings and reflecting on how these understandings can inform future research and practice and the multiple ways in which bilingualism can be operationalized in the education of deaf students.

Historically it has been reported that deaf students do not achieve age-appropriate outcomes in reading, with this performance often being characterized in terms of a fourth grade ceiling. However, given the shifts in the field during the past 20 years (e.g., widespread implementation of newborn hearing screening, advances in hearing technologies), it would be timely to question whether this continues to serve as a meaningful benchmark. To this end, the purpose of this study was to investigate reading outcomes of a Canadian cohort of school-aged deaf learners (N = 70) who all used listening and spoken language as the primary mode of communication. Specifically, the goal was to establish whether their achievement approached that of their hearing age peers and to identify demographic factors influencing performance (i.e., gender, unilateral/bilateral hearing loss, personal amplification, level of auditory functioning, grade placement, additional disabilities, home language). Results indicate that participants obtained standard scores in the average range on both the Basic Reading and Reading Comprehension clusters of the Woodcock Johnson III-Diagnostic Reading Battery (Woodcock et al., 2004), surpassing the fourth grade reading achievement ceiling often reported for this population., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The authors (a) examine the available peer-reviewed research documenting the literacy achievement of deaf children educated in sign bilingual programs, (b) identify gaps in the empirical literature, and (c) propose directions for future research. This review was limited to studies that reported reading and writing outcomes. On this basis, only 3 studies were identified, representing those published over a period of approximately 20 years (1997-2017) and collectively reporting literacy outcomes for 127 deaf students. Overall, the studies indicate that the majority of participants were not achieving reading comprehension scores in the average range; further, a wide range of variability in achievement was reported across the 3 studies. Factors potentially affecting achievement, such as the presence of additional disabilities, level of American Sign Language proficiency, use of hearing technologies, and parental hearing status, are also discussed.

The link between Theory of Mind (ToM) and literacy is increasingly being recognized in the literature. However, the focus to date has concentrated on the connections between reading and ToM, with an emphasis on the ways in which ToM is implicated in making inferences from text and suggestions that engaging in reading fiction can support the development of ToM. The exploratory study presented in this paper is unique in its approach as it widens the focus to consider the relationship between ToM and writing. Using a developmental framework based on the work of Westby and Robinson (Westby, C. & Robinson L. (2014). A developmental perspective for promoting theory of mind. Topics in Language Disorders 34 (4), 362-382 doi: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000035), the written narratives of 43 deaf children (aged 7.2 years to 11.11 years) were examined for evidence of ToM. Evidence of ToM was found in the writing of 86% of the participants (n = 37) with children demonstrating abilities across the spectrum of development. Implications for both research and pedagogical practice are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the available peer-reviewed research regarding literacy achievement in deaf children with cochlear implants. A related goal is to identify gaps in the empirical literature and suggest directions for future research. Included in this review are studies that exclusively report reading and writing outcomes for groups of students. A total of 21 studies were identified, representing those published over approximately a 20-year time period (1997-2016) and collectively reporting the literacy outcomes for over 1,000 cochlear implant users. Overall findings of the studies of reading comprehension suggest that the majority of participants achieved scores in the average range, although a wide-range of variability was reported. Only 3 studies of writing were available for review, with 2 reporting lower achievement in this area as compared to reading. Factors impacting outcomes achieved such as age at implantation, presence of additional disabilities, consistency of device use, and communication modality are explored and summarized., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

While there have been attempts to develop written systems for signed languages, none have been widely used or adopted. In his article in an American Annals of the Deaf special issue that also includes the present article, Grushkin makes a case not only for why, but how efforts should be renewed to develop a written signed language, suggesting that increased written-English competence will be a consequence of increased competence in written and signed American Sign Language, with literacy-related skills transferring across languages. The present author responds in terms of what is known about linguistic interdependence in spoken-language contexts and in light of the evidence base from hearing bilinguals. She argues that, given the field's current context, no compelling rationale exists for pursuing this route to literacy for deaf learners, and that other routes are more workable from pragmatic, theoretical, and evidence-based perspectives.

The present study examined the efficacy of using an informal reading inventory to assess literacy levels in elementary-age deaf students, grades 3-5: the period when the gap between deaf and hearing learners often begins to widen, and the need to identify and remediate specific skill deficits becomes increasingly imperative. Emphasis was placed on exploring how results of a formative assessment can inform instruction across a variety of literacy skills (e.g., word identification, reading accuracy, reading fluency, reading comprehension, writing) and among a broad range of learners. A case study approach is used to present in-depth overviews of the performance profiles of three students; also, instructional implications of the findings are discussed. The results illustrate how an informal reading inventory can be used to design interventions that are differentiated and targeted based on identified needs in both the code- and language-related domains of literacy skill development.

Quarter century ago, Hanson (1989) asked, "Is reading different for deaf individuals?" (p. 85). Appealing to evidence available at the time, she argued that skilled deaf readers, like their hearing counterparts, relied on their knowledge of English structure, including phonological information. This perspective on the role phonology plays in the reading process for deaf learners continues to generate much debate in the field, and little consensus exists on whether it is a necessary aspect of learning to read for this population. The present article revisits this question in terms of what is known about phonology and reading in typically developing learners, and in light of two reviews of the research from the field of deafness. The authors conclude that there is stronger empirical evidence for the argument for a relationship between phonology and reading in the population of deaf readers than for the counter-argument.

For over 30 years, teachers have used miscue analysis as a tool to assess and evaluate the reading abilities of hearing students in elementary and middle schools and to design effective literacy programs. More recently, teachers of deaf and hard-of-hearing students have also reported its usefulness for diagnosing word- and phrase-level reading difficulties and for planning instruction. To our knowledge, miscue analysis has not been used with older, college-age deaf students who might also be having difficulty decoding and understanding text at the word level. The goal of this study was to determine whether such an analysis would be helpful in identifying the source of college students' reading comprehension difficulties. After analyzing the miscues of 10 college-age readers and the results of other comprehension-related tasks, we concluded that comprehension of basic grade school-level passages depended on the ability to recognize and comprehend key words and phrases in these texts. We also concluded that these diagnostic procedures provided useful information about the reading abilities and strategies of each reader that had implications for designing more effective interventions.

This case study is an examination of the language development of a single pair of fraternal twins--one with a profound, sensorineural hearing loss who received simultaneous bilateral cochlear implants at 1 year of age and the other with normal hearing. The purpose of the study was to compare the twins' language development over time from 6 months to almost 3 years of age. Findings suggest that early simultaneous bilateral implantation supports the development of age-appropriate language, thus increasing the potential for overall progress commensurate with hearing age peers.

Reading achievement among deaf students typically lags significantly behind hearing peers, a situation that has changed little despite decades of research. This lack of progress and recent findings indicating that deaf students face many of the same challenges in comprehending sign language as they do in comprehending text suggest that difficulties frequently observed in their learning from text may involve more than just reading. Two experiments examined college students' learning of material from science texts. Passages were presented to deaf (signing) students in print or American Sign Language and to hearing students in print or auditorially. Several measures of learning indicated that the deaf students learned as much or more from print as they did from sign language, but less than hearing students in both cases. These and other results suggest that challenges to deaf students' reading comprehension may be more complex than is generally assumed.

With much earlier identification of hearing loss come expectations that increasing numbers of deaf children will develop literacy abilities comparable to their hearing age peers. To date, despite claims in the literature for parallel development between hearing and deaf learners with respect to early literacy learning, it remains the case that many deaf children do not go on to develop age-appropriate reading and writing abilities. Using written language examples from both deaf and hearing children and drawing on the developmental models of E. Ferreiro (1990) and D. Olson (1994), the discussion focuses on the ways in which deaf children draw apart from hearing children in the third stage of early literacy development, in the critical move from emergent to conventional literacy. Reasons for, and the significance of, this deviation are explored, with an eye to proposing implications for pedagogy and research, as we reconsider what really matters in the early literacy development of deaf children.

Over the years, persistently low achievement levels have led scholars to question whether reading skill development is different for deaf readers. Research findings suggest that in order for deaf students to become proficient readers, they must master the same fundamental abilities that are well established for hearing learners, regardless of the degree of hearing loss or communication modality used (e.g., spoken or signed). The simple view of reading (SVR), which hypothesizes the critical role both language abilities and phonological skills play in development of reading comprehension, provides a model for understanding the reading process for a wide range of students and has the potential to shed light on the challenges deaf students have historically experienced in achieving age-appropriate outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to review the components of the SVR and use this conceptual model as the basis for exploring and discussing both historical and current research evidence in reading and deafness, with a particular focus on phonological skills. Recommendations for future research and practice based on the existing body of literature will also be provided.

Although reading and writing play equally important roles in the literacy development of deaf individuals, far more attention has been paid to reading than to writing in both research and practice. This is concerning as outcomes in writing have remained poor despite changes in communication philosophies (e.g., spoken and/or signed) and pedagogical approaches. Although there are indications of a positive shift as the context for deaf education has been transformed with advances in hearing technologies, challenges are ongoing. In order to better understand why deaf learners struggle to achieve age-appropriate outcomes in written language, the goal of this paper will be to take stock of the available research evidence in writing and deafness, and interpret it in light of both the Simple View of Writing (SVW), in which ideation or text generation is linked to oral language, and current models of the composing process. Based on this overview and analysis, implications and directions for future research and practice will be discussed.

Mayer and Trezek offer a rejoinder to an article by Scott, Dostal, and Lane-Outlaw in which Scott et al. challenge the findings and conclusions of a literature review by Mayer and Trezek published in the Winter 2020 "American Annals of the Deaf." Both the rejoinder and the article by Scott et al. appear in the "Annals'" Spring 2021 issue. Mayer and Trezek reiterate the rationale and aims of their review, as well as the process for conducting it, emphasizing the need for empirical evidence to inform policy and practice in deaf education. They also address observations made in terms of (a) factors to be considered when generating or consuming research and (b) the nature of the search procedures that are used. Mayer and Trezek conclude by restating the findings of their review and the implications of these findings for the field moving forward. [For the article by Scott, Dostal, and Lane-Outlaw, "A Call for a Diversity of Perspectives in Deaf Education Research: A Response to Mayer and Trezek (2020)," see EJ1296492. For the literature review by Mayer and Trezek, "English Literacy Outcomes in Sign Bilingual Programs: Current State of the Knowledge," see EJ1269623.]

While there is an emerging body of research investigating the associations between Theory of Mind and reading in both hearing and deaf children, little attention has been given to the connections between ToM and writing, and the potential for developing ToM through the process of writing. In a descriptive study, the authors focused on investigating the use of writing in role as a means not only of looking for evidence of ToM understandings in text, but of considering the utility of writing in role as a possible strategy for the development of ToM. The written samples of 43 deaf children (aged 7;2 years-11;11 years) were examined, and evidence of ToM was found in the writing of 81% (n = 35), with children demonstrating abilities across the spectrum of development. Implications for both research and pedagogical practice are discussed.

This article describes a pilot project that examined the use of a two-way text messenger for deaf and hard of hearing teens and their parents. The study took place at two large inner-city public high schools and in grade 8 of their feeder school. The vast majority of the students in the study had severe to profound congenital hearing loss and were being educated in congregated settings by teachers who were specially trained to teach this population. Before using the equipment, each participant took part in a pre-use survey designed to elicit thoughts on how the participants thought the two-way text messengers might be used prior to actually having any experience with them. With the text messaging system in place, the students believed that they would be able to go out at night without their parents and to manage in case they got lost. The parents and staff reported that they were able to have direct communication with the students and with those among the parents and staff who were deaf or hard of hearing. This eliminated some safety concerns about fire alarms and emergency procedures and contributed to the ease of coordination of everyone's activities. The majority of the students and their parents expressed satisfaction with access to the technology.

Thirty-three young people with cochlear implants, aged between 9 and 16 years, were assessed for use of their implant system, cognitive abilities, vocabulary, reading, and writing skills. The group came from throughout England and included 26 born deaf, six deafened by meningitis, one with auditory neuropathy, and five with additional needs. Nineteen had bilateral implants with a mean age at first implantation of three years six months. The majority were educated in mainstream, with 85 per cent using oral communication in school. The group was cognitively able, all scoring within or above the normal range. In terms of receptive and expressive vocabulary, 75 per cent and 67 per cent scored within the average range respectively. Using the Single Word Reading Test, 55 per cent were within the average range, and 21 per cent above. As measured by the York Assessment of Reading Comprehension, 72 per cent were commensurate with hearing peers, and 9 per cent above on reading rate, and 75 per cent within the average range, and 13 per cent above on comprehension. Free writing samples indicated that 25 per cent were performing at the expected level for their age, 19 per cent above, and 56 per cent below. Influences on outcomes were age at implantation, bilateral implantation, and age at testing. Overall this group demonstrated good use of their technology, and much stronger outcomes in vocabulary and reading than evidenced in the deaf population prior to implantation. Writing outcomes were not as strong as in reading, but were not showing the use of non-standard English as in the past, and were showing writing strategies such as invented spelling, common in hearing children.

The authors conducted an integrative review of the research literature on the writing development, writing instruction, and writing assessment of young deaf children ages 3 to 8 years (or preschool through third grade) published between 1990 and 2012. A total of 17 studies were identified that met inclusion criteria. The analysis examined research problems, theoretical frames, research methodologies, and major findings across the body of work. Findings of the review indicated that much of the research has focused on spelling, and when studies examined writing development, the analyses were limited to the word level. Assessment of writing has been largely ignored. Results also indicated that two primary conceptual frameworks have dominated the field across the 22-year span, with divergent implications for pedagogy and practice. The researchers call for longitudinal studies that examine deaf children's use of English grammar and syntax within connected discourse.

This paper reviews the impact that cochlear implantation has had on the practice of deaf education in terms of educational placement, communication choices, and educational attainments. Although there is variation in outcome, more children with implants are going to mainstream schools, and using spoken language as their primary means of communication, and the evidence to date suggests that cochlear implantation early in life has led to improved levels of spoken language and educational attainments. However, there is also evidence that providing an appropriate educational environment for these learners remains a challenge--from parents making choices in the early years to students managing the complexity of the secondary and post-secondary setting. Managing the technology effectively in the classroom remains an issue in many schools, and ongoing training of teachers and other educational workers needs to include its management. While the positive benefits of cochlear implantation are clear, we must also be mindful of the attendant challenges in providing flexibility of choice in meeting the needs of this increasingly diverse population.

The widespread implementation of newborn hearing screening and advances in amplification technologies (including cochlear implants) have fundamentally changed the educational landscape for deaf learners. These changes are discussed in terms of their impact on sign bilingual education programs with a focus on the relationships between language and the development of literacy and the changing role of signed language in this process. (Contains 3 notes.)

Deaf learners whose first language is American Sign Language face particular challenges and constraints in developing literacy in English as a second language. These constraints are interrogated and discussed in terms of their relationship to issues of language proficiency in both L1 and L2, and to models of second language literacy education. Suggestions are proposed as to ways in which these constraints might be addressed in designing future bilingual programs for deaf learners.

Deaf and hard-of-hearing students are often delayed in developing their independent living skills because of parental restrictions on activities outside the home due to worries about their child's inability to communicate, their whereabouts, and their general safety. Recent accounts of the use of two-way text messagers suggests that, like electronic mail, distance communication problems that have long plagued deaf people may be ameliorated--by the use of such technology (M. R. Power & D. Power, 2004; S. S. Rhone & Cox News Service, 2002). This project was designed as an initial foray into investigating the use of two-way text messaging technology as a way of increasing the independence of deaf adolescents and reducing their parents' anxiety about their safety and responsibility. All the deaf and hard-of-hearing students in the deaf and hard-of-hearing programs at two urban high schools (ages 13?19), the staff of the deaf departments at these two schools, and the parents/guardians of the students participated in this study. Preuse surveys, postuse surveys, and monthly statistics on the number of times each pager was used enabled us to chart how often the participants used the technology. The data were used to identify concerns that parents have about student independence and safety, the extent to which deaf students engage in independent activities, and expectations surrounding how two-way text messaging use might increase independence and literacy skills. The data collected on this project to date confirm that two-way text messaging technology is indeed useful for deaf adolescents and helps alleviate some of the concerns that have kept them from developing independence as quickly or readily as their hearing peers. The potential policy implications for this research are discussed. (Contains 3 notes.)

Examines the literature on teachers' use of signing in the classroom for clues about future directions in research that aim to improve the academic performance of deaf students. Suggests that it is not by concentrating solely on the question of whether American Sign Language or some form of English-based signing should dominate in the classrooms. (Author/VWL)

Data are presented from the first-year of a 4-year research project that aims to design a model for describing exemplary communicative practice using signed classroom discourse in the teaching of students who are deaf. Episodes are presented to illustrate how 10 teachers engage in dialogic knowledge building and exemplary communicative practice. (Contains references.) (Author/CR)

A study involving three children who are deaf (grades 7-8) investigated the ways in which American Sign Language (ASL) and English-based sign allow for comprehension of text content. Retelling, proposition, and feature analysis scores indicate students understood the fable texts whether they were presented in ASL or English-based sign. (Contains references.) (CR)

Investigates, in a longitudinal study, the spelling development of young deaf children in the context of an integrated process writing classroom. Identifies/categorizes the spelling strategies employed by deaf writers as print-based, speech-based, and sign-based. Provides insights into the nature of cognitive processes in the deaf child. (PA)

This article criticizes application of linguistic interdependence theory to the bilingual/bicultural model of English literacy for deaf students, suggesting that deaf learners do not match theory assumptions. It draws on the work of Vygotsky and Halliday to develop a conceptualization of literacy processes and argues that becoming literate involves mastering "social speech,""inner speech," and written text. (Author/DB)