Utilizing Literacy Kits During Home Based Intervention to Foster Development of Familiar Language

Children who are deaf or hard of hearing tend to be delayed in the development of spoken language. The ability to communicate effectively is an important skill children need to succeed throughout their educational experiences. Many of the language concepts children learn are acquired through incidental exposure, such as overhearing. Children with hearing loss often miss language concepts learned through incidental exposure due to poor listening conditions. Early intervention has been shown to be effective in helping children who are deaf or hard of hearing acquire spoken language, especially when there is parental involvement in early intervention. Likewise, early literacy skills are linked to language development. Utilizing literature as a means of expanding and building upon current language development practices may provide additional opportunities for parent-child interaction that will aid children in their future educational environments

The impact of cochlear implants on deaf children's literacy

This chapter reviews recent studies looking at the impact of cochlear implants on the development of reading and writing of deaf children. Although there is good evidence that cochlear implants have significantly improved the spoken language of many children with severe to profound hearing loss, their impact on literacy—something that deaf children have traditionally found challenging—has proved to be considerably less consistent. In particular, benefits that are evident in the early years of education are often reduced as children progress through school. The aim of the chapter is to identify factors that affect the impact of cochlear implants at different stages of learning to read and write by considering both the skills that underpin early and later literacy for deaf children and factors affecting the efficacy of cochlear implants. The chapter concludes with a consideration of how the literacy development of deaf children with cochlear implants can best be supported through the use of interventions that enable the development of robust phonological coding

Home-based literacy experiences of severely to profoundly deaf pre-schoolers and their hearing parents

The low literacy levels achieved by deaf children are of ongoing concern to educators and researchers alike. The present research considered emergent literacy as one aspect to consider in the acquisition of literacy skills in deaf children. The aim of this research was to describe the home-based literacy experiences of severely to profoundly deaf pre-schoolers as provided by their hearing parents. Parents of twenty-nine pre-school deaf children from schools for the deaf were selected to complete a questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed based on the four identified literacy contexts: the physical and functional context, the language context, the affective context and the educational context. The results obtained indicate that the deaf children in this survey are exposed to literacy-rich home environments where they are able to observe literate adult role models. Limitations in the quantity and quality of text-based interaction between the deaf pre-schoolers, their hearing parents and older siblings were identified. The results also indicated that the parents who participated in this research regarded the development of language and communication as more important than the early acquisition of literacy skills. The parents assigned the greatest responsibility in teaching literacy skills to teachers. This study highlights the sensitive nature of early literacy and language learning in young deaf children. Suggestions for further research are presented.Dissertation (M(Augmentative and Alternative Communication))--University of Pretoria, 2005.Centre for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (CAAC)unrestricte

Support For Parents Of Deaf Children: Common Questions And Informed, Evidence-Based Answers

To assist medical and hearing-science professionals in supporting parents of deaf children, we have identified common questions that parents may have and provide evidence-based answers. In doing so, a compassionate and positive narrative about deafness and deaf children is offered, one that relies on recent research evidence regarding the critical nature of early exposure to a fully accessible visual language, which in the United States is American Sign Language (ASL). This evidence includes the role of sign language in language acquisition, cognitive development, and literacy. In order for parents to provide a nurturing and anxiety-free environment for early childhood development, signing at home is important even if their child also has the additional nurturing and care of a signing community. It is not just the early years of a child\u27s life that matter for language acquisition; it\u27s the early months, the early weeks, even the early days. Deaf children cannot wait for accessible language input. The whole family must learn simultaneously as the deaf child learns. Even moderate fluency on the part of the family benefits the child enormously. And learning the sign language together can be one of the strongest bonding experiences that the family and deaf child have

Shared Reading Activities: A Recommendation For Deaf Children

There should be a focus on fun in shared reading activities with preschoolers in order to prepare them for later literacy, particularly those at risk of a poor foundation in a first language (L1), including deaf children (here “deaf” covers hard of hearing, as well). We look at how shared reading activities (SRAs) develop pre-literacy skills and describe bilingual-bimodal ebooks aimed purely at producing enjoyment, so families will engage in SRAs frequently

Language and Reading Progress of Young Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children.

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

Phonological awareness, vocabulary, and word reading in children who use cochlear implants: does age of implantation explain individual variability in performance outcomes and growth?

The phonological awareness (PA), vocabulary, and word reading abilities of 19 children with cochlear implants (CI) were assessed. Nine children had an implant early (between 2 and 3.6 years) and 10 had an implant later (between 5 and 7 years). Participants were tested twice over a 12-month period on syllable, rhyme, and phoneme awareness (see James et al., 2005). Performance of Cl users was compared against younger hearing children matched for reading level. Two standardized assessments of vocabulary and single word reading were administered. As a group, the children fitted early had better performance outcomes on PA, vocabulary, and reading compared to hearing benchmark groups. The early group had significant growth on rhyme awareness, whereas the late group showed no significant gains in PA over time. There was wide individual variation in performance and growth in the Cl users. Two participants with the best overall development were both fitted with an implant late in childhoo

Discourses Of Prejudice In The professions: The Case Of Sign Languages

There is no evidence that learning a natural human language is cognitively harmful to children. To the contrary, multilingualism has been argued to be beneficial to all. Nevertheless, many professionals advise the parents of deaf children that their children should not learn a sign language during their early years, despite strong evidence across many research disciplines that sign languages are natural human languages. Their recommendations are based on a combination of misperceptions about (1) the difficulty of learning a sign language, (2) the effects of bilingualism, and particularly bimodalism, (3) the bona fide status of languages that lack a written form, (4) the effects of a sign language on acquiring literacy, (5) the ability of technologies to address the needs of deaf children and (6) the effects that use of a sign language will have on family cohesion. We expose these misperceptions as based in prejudice and urge institutions involved in educating professionals concerned with the healthcare, raising and educating of deaf children to include appropriate information about first language acquisition and the importance of a sign language for deaf children. We further urge such professionals to advise the parents of deaf children properly, which means to strongly advise the introduction of a sign language as soon as hearing loss is detected

The contribution of verbal working memory to deaf children's oral and written production

open3noopenArfé, Barbara; Rossi, Cristina; Sicoli, SilviaArfe', Barbara; Rossi, Cristina; Sicoli, Silvi