Effects of age at cochlear implantation on vocabulary and grammar: a review of the evidence

Purpose: The increasing prevalence of pediatric cochlear implantation over the past 25 years has left little doubt that resulting improvements in hearing offer significant benefits to language development for many deaf children. Furthermore, given the documented importance of access to language from birth, there has been strong support for providing congenitally deaf children with implants as early as possible. Earliest implantation, in many ways, has become the “gold standard” in pediatric cochlear implantation, on the assumption that it is the key to language development similar to that of hearing children. Empirical evidence to support this assumption, however, appears more equivocal than generally is believed. This article reviews recent research aimed at assessing the impact of age at implantation on vocabulary and grammatical development among young implant users. Method: Articles published between 2003 and 2018 that included age at implantation as a variable of interest and in which it was subjected to statistical analysis were considered. Effect sizes were calculated whenever possible; we conducted a multivariate meta-analysis to compare outcomes in different language domains. Results: Taken together, findings from 49 studies suggest that age at implantation is just one of a host of variables that influence vocabulary and grammatical development, its impact varying with several factors including whether age at implantation is treated as a dichotomous or continuous variable. Results from a meta-analysis showed significant differences across language domains. Conclusion: The pattern of results obtained indicates the importance of considering various child, family, and environmental characteristics in future research aimed at determining how early “early implantation” needs to be and the extent to which age at implantation, duration of implant use, and other factors influence language and languagerelated outcomes. © 2019 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Educational Interpreting: Access and Outcomes

This chapter argues that the assumption that mainstream education—supported by sign language interpreting—can provide deaf students with fair and appropriate public education may be unfounded. It describes research that emphasizes the need to understand better the complex personal and functional interactions of students, instructors, interpreters, and settings if educational interpreting—and interpreted education— is to be optimally beneficial for deaf students

Relations of Social Maturity, Executive Function, and Self-Efficacy Among Deaf University Students

This study explored possible associations of social maturity, executive function (EF), self-efficacy, and communication variables among deaf university students, both cochlear implant (CI) users and nonusers. Previous studies have demonstrated differences between deaf and hearing children and young adults in EF and EF-related social and cognitive functioning. EF differences also have been demonstrated between hearing children and deaf children who use CIs. Long-term influences of cochlear implantation in the social domain largely have not been explored, but were examined in the present study in terms of social maturity, as it might be related to EF and communication variables. Replicating and extending recent findings, social maturity was found to be related to somewhat different aspects of EF in CI users, deaf nonusers, and hearing students, but unrelated to hearing status, CI use, or deaf students' use of sign language versus spoken language. Self-efficacy proved a predictor of self-reported socially mature and immature behaviours for all groups. Individuals' beliefs about their parents' views of such behaviours was a potent predictor of behaviours for deaf CI users and those deaf students who reported sign language as their best form of communication

Classroom Interpreting and Visual Information Processing in Mainstream Education for Deaf Students: Live or Memorex?

This study examined visual information processing and learning in classrooms including both deaf and hearing students. Of particular interest were the effects on deaf students’ learning of live (threedimensional) versus video-recorded (two-dimensional) sign language interpreting and the visual attention strategies of more and less experienced deaf signers exposed to simultaneous, multiple sources of visual information. Results from three experiments consistently indicated no differences in learning between three-dimensional and two-dimensional presentations among hearing or deaf students. Analyses of students’ allocation of visual attention and the influence of various demographic and experimental variables suggested considerable flexibility in deaf students’ receptive communication skills. Nevertheless, the findings also revealed a robust advantage in learning in favor of hearing students

Raising and educating a deaf child : a comprehensive guide to the choices, controversies and decisions faced by parents and educators

xxi, 267 hlm.: 25 c

Ethics and deafness: a matter of perspective?

In 2004, a conference was held in Sydney, Australia, entitled Perspectives on Ethics and Deafness. The questions underlying the conference were intriguing: What are the "ethical issues" that pertain to deafness? To what extent are such issues culturally relative? Are deaf and hearing individuals bound by the same ethical standards with regard to personal and professional relationships involving deaf people? How are ethical decisions concerning deaf children viewed differently depending on the hearing status of their parents? The conference program provided a clear response to the first issue. Predictably, perhaps, there were ethical issues identified in areas such as medical and technological interventions with deaf children, genetic screening and manipulation, respect and support for linguistic diversity, educational placements, interpreting, and so on. As these issues were presented, discussed, and debated over the three days of the conference, the question of ethical standards became of much greater interest. The issue of "perspective" became a clear issue in itself