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

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

Approaches to teaching in mainstream and separate postsecondary classrooms

This study sought to provide a better understanding of postsecondary education for deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students in mainstream and separate settings. The Approaches to Teaching Inventory (Prosser & Trigwell, 1993) was completed by university instructors who normally teach hearing students (with the occasional deaf or hard-of-hearing student) and by instructors who normally teach deaf and hard-of-hearing students at the same institution. Overall, a view of instruction as information transmission was associated with a teacher-focused approach to instruction, whereas viewing instruction as a means of promoting conceptual change was associated with a student-focused approach. Instructors in mainstream classrooms were more oriented toward information transmission than conceptual change, whereas instructors experienced in separate classrooms for DHH students reported seeking to promote conceptual change in students and adopting more student-focused approaches to teaching. These results are consistent with previous findings concerning instructors' approaches to teaching and DHH students' approaches to learning and may help to explain recent findings with regard to student outcomes in separate versus mainstream of secondary classrooms

The approximate number system and domain-general abilities as predictors of math ability in children with normal hearing and hearing loss

Many children with hearing loss (CHL) show a delay in mathematical achievement compared to children with normal hearing (CNH). This study examined whether there are differences in acuity of the approximate number system (ANS) between CHL and CNH, and whether ANS acuity is related to math achievement. Working memory (WM), short‐term memory (STM), and inhibition were considered as mediators of any relationship between ANS acuity and math achievement. Seventy‐five CHL were compared with 75 age‐ and gender‐matched CNH. ANS acuity, mathematical reasoning, WM, and STM of CHL were significantly poorer compared to CNH. Group differences in math ability were no longer significant when ANS acuity, WM, or STM was controlled. For CNH, WM and STM fully mediated the relationship of ANS acuity to math ability; for CHL, WM and STM only partially mediated this relationship. ANS acuity, WM, and STM are significant contributors to hearing status differences in math achievement, and to individual differences within the group of CHL

Do you see what I see? School perspectives of deaf children, hearing children and their parents

Perspectives on academic and social aspects of children's school experiences were obtained from deaf and hearing children and their (deaf or hearing) parents. Possible differences between (1) the views of children and their parents and (2) those of hearing children and their parents compared to deaf children and their parents were of particular interest. Overall, parents gave their children higher school friendship ratings than the children gave themselves, and hearing children and their parents were more positive about children's friendships than were deaf children and their parents. Both children and parents also saw deaf children as less successful in reading than hearing children. However, deaf children having deaf parents, attending a school for the deaf and using sign language at home all were associated with more positive perceptions of social success. Use of cochlear implants was not associated with perceptions of greater academic or social success. These and related findings are discussed in the context of parent and child perspectives on social and academic functioning and particular challenges confronted by deaf children in regular school settings

Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students' Classroom Learning

Contains fulltext : 56859.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)17 p