Reading Fluency in Young Elementary School Age Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-111
Author(s):  
Susan R Easterbrooks ◽  
Amy R Lederberg
Keyword(s):  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Reading Fluency ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Deaf Education ◽  
Deaf Studies ◽  
Elementary School Age ◽  
School Year ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Reading Progress ◽  
Hearing Children

Abstract The Center on Literacy and Deafness examined the language and reading progress of 336 young deaf and hard-of-hearing children in kindergarten, first and second grades on a series of tests of language, reading, and spoken and fingerspelled phonological awareness in the fall and spring of the school year. Children were divided into groups based on their auditory access and classroom communication: a spoken-only group (n = 101), a sign-only group (n = 131), and a bimodal group (n = 104). Previous work reports the overall data (Antia, S., Lederberg, A., Schick, B., Branum-Martin, L., Connor, C. M., & Webb, M. (2020a). Language and reading progress of young DHH children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, (3), 25; Lederberg, A. R., Branum-Martin, L., Webb, M. L., Schick, B., Antia, S., Easterbrooks, S. R., & Connor, C. M. (2019). Modality and interrelations among language, reading, spoken phonological awareness, and fingerspelling. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 24(4), 408–423). This report presents an in-depth look at the reading fluency of the participants measured along multiple dimensions. In general, 43% of the participants were unable to read fluently and an additional 23% were unable to read fluently at grade level. Rate and accuracy, rate of growth, miscue analysis, and self-corrections differed by communication modality. Most notably, children demonstrated limited strategies for self-correction during reading fluency tasks.

scholarly journals Language and Reading Progress of Young Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 334-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirin D Antia ◽  
Amy R Lederberg ◽  
Susan Easterbrooks ◽  
Brenda Schick ◽  
Lee Branum-Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Word Reading ◽  
Reading Scores ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Classroom Communication ◽  
Only Children ◽  
School Year ◽  
Reading Progress ◽  
English Syntax ◽  
Hearing Children

Abstract We examined the language and reading progress of 336 young DHH children in kindergarten, first and second grades. Trained assessors tested children’s language, reading, and spoken and fingerspelled phonological awareness in the fall and spring of the school year. Children were divided into groups based on their auditory access and classroom communication: a spoken-only group (n = 101), a sign-only group (n = 131), and a bimodal group (n = 104). Overall, children showed delays in language and reading compared to norms established for hearing children. For language, vocabulary standard scores were higher than for English syntax. Although delayed in language, children made expected gains based on hearing norms from kindergarten to second grade. Reading scores declined from kindergarten to second grade. Spoken-only and bimodal children had similar word reading and reading comprehension abilities and higher scores than sign-only children. Spoken-only children had better spoken phonological awareness and nonword reading skills than the other two groups. The sign-only and bimodal groups made similar and significant gains in ASL syntax and fingerspelling phonological awareness.

Measuring Phonological Awareness in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children

2014 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mi-young L. Webb ◽  
Amy R. Lederberg
Keyword(s):  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Early Literacy ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Standardized Tests ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
School Year ◽  
Hearing Children

PurposeThis study evaluated psychometric properties of 2 phonological awareness (PA) tests normed for hearing children when used with deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children with functional hearing. It also provides an in-depth description of these children's PA.MethodOne hundred and eight DHH children (mean age = 63.3 months) with cochlear implants or hearing aids were assessed in the fall and spring of the school year. Sixty-three percent communicated only with spoken language; 37% communicated with both sign and speech. Examiners administered PA subtests from the Phonological Awareness Test—2 and the Test of Preschool Early Literacy, along with assessments of speech perception and early literacy.ResultsItem analyses indicated that both tests showed good psychometric properties (e.g., high item discriminations and internal consistencies). DHH children scored higher on subtests and items that measured words, rhymes, and syllables than those that assessed phonemes. Although subtest difficulty influenced the factor structure in the fall, spring PA was best characterized as a single factor. PA correlated concurrently and predictively with early literacy.ConclusionsThis study suggests that these 2 standardized tests are valid for use with DHH children with functional hearing. Although delayed, these children's PA was structurally similar to that of hearing children.

Library services and early literacy approaches in public libraries for deaf and hard of hearing children

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bobbie Bushman
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Phonological Awareness ◽  
Early Literacy ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Reading Skills ◽  
Public Libraries ◽  
Library Services ◽  
Grounded Theory Research ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
Theory Research

[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT AUTHOR'S REQUEST.] Children's librarians are challenged to provide inclusive programming in today's public libraries. There is a current trend in public libraries to provide special needs programming for children. This dissertation focuses on library programming for deaf and hard of hearing (D/HoH) children who visit U.S. public libraries. The American Library Association (ALA) states that hearing children need to know six pre-reading skills to be ready to read; however, some of these pre-reading skills focus on singing or rhyming which is difficult for D/HoH children. Grounded theory is "a systematic, inductive, and comparative approach for conducting inquire for the purpose of constructing theory" (Bryant and Charmaz 2007). This grounded theory research studies the programs, services, and story times that are implemented and modified for D/HoH children in U.S. public libraries. This study began with sending out a recruitment script and questionnaire found in Appendix A and B, respectively, which reached nearly 500 medium to large sized U.S. public libraries. Fifteen participants volunteered to be interviewed, and eleven were interviewed. Interviews were analyzed using open and axial coding, which is typical in grounded theory. Preliminary data and a review of literature on literacy acquisition for D/HoH children suggested that D/HoH children do not progress in four of the pre-reading skills outlined in the ALA's early literacy program, Every Child Ready to Read (ECRR), in the same way that hearing children do. Phonological awareness is largely not utilized by D/HoH children in learning to read. D/HoH children are also likely to build vocabulary, develop print motivation, and approach narrative skills differently than hearing children. This grounded theory research developed the model of successful library services and modifications to D/HoH children to explain which services, early literacy instruction, staff training and programs public libraries provide to children who are D/HoH. This research project also inquires about what kinds of modifications are made to serve D/HoH children, and what the impetus was for providing library services to deaf children. The first stage of the model highlights staff attitude as being warm and welcoming, taking initiative, and not seeing D/HoH as a disability. The second stage described the impetus for providing services as encountering a D/HoH patron in the library, knowing a disabled person in a librarian's personal life, or by encountering a nearby agency that serves D/HoH. In the third stage, librarians made accommodations by being inclusive in programming, providing ASL programming, or facilitating visual phonics instruction in place of phonological awareness instruction. In the fourth and final stage, this model reported outcomes such as educating both hearing and D/HoH individuals and building a sense of community.

scholarly journals Relations Between Teacher Talk Characteristics and Child Language in Spoken-Language Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Classrooms

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (12) ◽  
pp. 2977-2995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly K. Duncan ◽  
Amy R. Lederberg
Keyword(s):  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Wait Time ◽  
Teacher Talk ◽  
Second Grade ◽  
Linear Modeling ◽  
Spoken English ◽  
School Year ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
Explicit Vocabulary

PurposeThe aim of this study was to examine relations between teachers' conversational techniques and language gains made by their deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Specifically, we considered teachers' reformulations of child utterances, language elicitations, explicit vocabulary and syntax instruction, and wait time.MethodThis was an observational, longitudinal study that examined the characteristics of teacher talk in 25 kindergarten through second-grade classrooms of 68 deaf and hard-of-hearing children who used spoken English. Standardized assessments provided measures of child vocabulary and morphosyntax in the fall and spring of a school year. Characteristics of teacher talk were coded from classroom video recordings during the winter of that year.ResultsHierarchical linear modeling indicated that reformulating child statements and explicitly teaching vocabulary were significant predictors of child vocabulary gains across a school year. Explicitly teaching vocabulary also significantly predicted gains in morphosyntax abilities. There were wide individual differences in the teachers' use of these conversational techniques.ConclusionReformulation and explicit vocabulary instruction may be areas where training can help teachers improve, and improvements in the teachers' talk may benefit their students.

The Development and Evaluation of Literacy Interventions for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children

2020 ◽  
pp. 401-416
Author(s):  
Hannah M. Dostal ◽  
Amy R. Lederberg
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Intervention Studies ◽  
Deaf Education ◽  
Intervention Research ◽  
Literacy Intervention ◽  
Literacy Interventions ◽  
Reliable Evidence ◽  
Hearing Children

Literacy intervention research tests our best ideas about instruction and forges a pathway forward toward deeper and more nuanced understandings of how children think, communicate, and learn. This chapter describes the components of the development of literacy interventions, explaining how to construct and evaluate each component in sequence to generate robust, reliable evidence for practice. In doing so, the chapter discusses some of the specific contexts of, and challenges for, literacy intervention research in deaf education. In order to illustrate important considerations for designing and interpreting literacy intervention studies in this context, two case studies of interventions developed or applied with deaf and hard-of-hearing children are included.

Using an Expert System to Study the Classroom Placement Decision for Students Who are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing

1993 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Vinsonhaler ◽  
David Stewart ◽  
Leighton Price ◽  
Brenda Hall
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Expert System ◽  
Expert Systems ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Deaf Education ◽  
Educational Plan ◽  
Placement Decisions ◽  
Classroom Placement ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Hearing Children

This study applies expert systems technology to the problem of deciding whether to place deaf & hard-of-hearing children in mainstream or self-contained classrooms. This application includes: (a) developing a theoretical model of how experts make placement decisions, (b) creating a computer-based expert system to capture this model and to aid teachers and other members of the individualized educational plan committee (IEPC) in the making these decisions, and (c) conducting an empirical study comparing the placement decisions of the human experts with those of the expert system. The study provides a review of the theoretical model, describes the expert system in some detail and briefly summarizes those aspects of the study related to evaluation of the expert system. In the study, ten teachers made placement decisions for ten representative student-cases. A simulation experiment was run by presenting the same ten cases to the expert system. The decisions of the expert system were found to agree with those of a majority of teachers in 90% of the cases. This and other results indicate the value of expert systems in deaf education.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document