Eighteen school children with unilateral hearing loss were compared to their peers through administration of the Screening Instrument for Targeting Educational Risk (SIFTER) to their teachers.  Results indicate that children with unilateral hearing loss are given SIFTER scores significantly lower than their peers in all five SIFTER areas of academics, attention, communication, participation, and behavior. Such results support previous findings regarding teachers\u27 attitudes toward students with unilateral hearing loss and indicate a need for in-service education for the classroom teacher and special attention to the educational risks of such children

Dancer, Jess

Radford, Nola T. Burl

Waters, Sandra

English

University of Tennessee, Knoxville: Trace

University of Tennessee, KnoxvilleTrace: Tennessee Research and CreativeExchangeAudiology and Speech Pathology Publications andOther Works Audiology and Speech Pathology7-1995Effects of Unilateral Hearing Loss on TeacherResponses to the SIFTERJess DancerNola T. Burl RadfordUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center, nradford@uthsc.eduSandra WatersFollow this and additional works at: http://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_audipubsThis Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Audiology and Speech Pathology at Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. Ithas been accepted for inclusion in Audiology and Speech Pathology Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of Trace: TennesseeResearch and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact trace@utk.edu.Recommended CitationDancer, Jess, Nola T. Burl, and Sandra Waters. "Effects of unilateral hearing loss on teacher responses to the SIFTER." AmericanAnnals of the Deaf (1995): 291-294.Volume   140,   No.3Effects of Unilateral Hearing Loss onTeacher Responses to the SIFTERJess DancerNola T. Burland Sandra WatersDancer is aprofessor and Burlis an assistantprofessor in thedepartment ofSpeech Pathologyat the University ofArkansas at LittleRock. Waters is anaudiologist at theEar & Nose-Throatclinic in LittleRock, Arkansas.ighteen school children with unilateral hearingloss were compared to their peers through ad-ministration of the Screening Instrument for Tar-geting Educational Risk (SIFTER) to their teach-ers. Results indicate that children with unilateralhearing loss are given SIFTER scores significantlylower than their peers in all five SIFTER areas ofacademics, attention, communication, participa-tion, and behavior. Such results support previousfindings regarding teachers' attitudes toward stu-dents with unilateral hearing loss and indicate aneed for in-service education for the classroomteacher and special attention to the educationalrisks of such children.Among every 100 school age students inthe United States, 16 to 19 have unilateralhearing losses with potential educationalsignificance (Berg, 1986; Lundeen, 1991)Â·Unilateral hearing loss effects on classroomperformance are significant, with language,academic, and behavioral difficulties re-ported (Clark & Richards, 1966; Boyd,1974; Klee & Davis-Dansky, 1986;Brookhouser, Worthington, & Kelly, 1991).Up to 50% of students with unilateral losseither repeat a grade or receive specialservices (Bess, 1986). In addition, teachers'ratings of such students tend to be nega-tive (Bess and Tharpe, 1986; Culbertsonand Gilbert, 1986). Because the teacher'sperception of student performance is animportant factor to any student's ultimatesuccess or failure, Anderson (1989) devel-oped the Screening Instrument for Target-ing Educational Risk, or SIFTER.The purpose of the SIFTER is to providea valid and standard method by which chil-dren with hearing problems can be educa-tionally screened for potential difficultieswith the use of three questions in each offive major areas: academics, attention,communication, class participation, andschool behavior. The SIFTER'S overall pro-file chart designates either pass, marginal,or fail within each content area. Accordingto SIFTER guidelines, students placed inthe marginal area are at risk for failing andshould be monitored while student's fail-ing in a content area should be consideredfor further assessment by the appropriateprofessionals.The present study investigated the ef-fects of unilateral hearing loss on schoolage children as shown by their teachers'responses to the SIFTER. Questionnairedata were gathered to answer the follow-ing questions:Volume 140, No. 3 American Annals of the DeafSIFTERTable 1Profile ofUnilateralHearing LossSubjectsTable 2Means, Standard Deviations, and T-values of the 15 SIFTER Questionsfor Subject and Control (S-C)1.  Are there significant differ-ences in teachers' scores on the15 questions of the SIFTER whenchildren with unilateral hearingloss are compared to an averagepeer in their same classroom?2.  Are there significant differ-ences in teachers' scores withinthe five content areas of theSIFTER when children with uni-lateral hearing loss are comparedto each teacher's average class-room child?3. Are students with unilateralhearing loss more at risk educa-tionally than an average class-room child based on theiroverall SIFTER profiles?MethodSubjectsBy reviewing audiological charts atArkansas Children's Hospital inLittle Rock, Arkansas, for childrenwith unilateral hearing losses asdocumented by an audiologist hold-ing the Certificate of Clinical Com-petence in Audiology (CCC-A), 33potential subjects, ranging in agefrom 5 to 17 years were identified.The sample included twelve malesand six females. Out of the eighteensubjects, nine are right ear affectedand nine are left ear affected. Table1 summarizes information regardingthe severity of hearing loss and sub-jects' use of Assistive Listening De-vices (ALD).SIFTER questionnaire were sentto the subjects' teachers at publicschools in the state of Arkansas. Allteachers participating in the studywere the subjects' full-time regularteachers in grades 1 through 6, orstudents' regular homeroom teach-ers for students in grades 7 through12. All teachers held a minimum ofa bachelor's degree with currentArkansas teaching certificates. Eachteacher was asked to complete twoSIFTER questionnaires, one con-cerning the child with unilateralhearing loss and one concerning anaverage child with normal hearingwithin the same classroom. Averagewas defined as students performingin the middle range of gradeachievement in comparison to theirpeers, across all subjects.Scoring and Statistical AnalysisThe Sifter1 questionnaire consists offifteen questions subdivided intofive content areas: academics, atten-tion, communication, class partici-pation, and school behavior. Thefive content areas are comprised ofthree related questions answeredthrough a ranking scale, from one toVolume 140, No. 3 American Annals of the Deaffive. For each question, respondentsare asked to circle the number that bestrepresents their perception of thestudent's behavior. Scoring the SIFTERinvolves summing the responses of thethree questions in each content area.Responses are then placed on a chartto develop a profile of the subject.For this study, average ratings of thestudents with unilateral hearing loss onthe SIFTER's fifteen questions werecompared with the average ratings foraverage peers. In addition, the averagescores within each of the five contentareas were compared for students withunilateral hearing loss versus the aver-age students. Finally, the overall ratingsof pass, marginal, or fail for each groupwere determined and compared byusing a chart provided with theSIFTER. Data were statistically ana-lyzed using either a t-test for indepen-dent means with equal population vari-ances or a t-test for independent meanswith unequal population variances,depending upon the results of initial F-tests. All results were considered sig-nificant at the .05 level of confidence.ResultsTable 2 shows means, standard devia-tions, and t-values of the 15 questionsof the SIFTER. Note that in all cases the"average" students had mean scoresabove the median of 3; in contrast, stu-dents with unilateral hearing loss hadmean scores below 3 on more thanhalf the questions, 9 of 15. Further, stu-dents with unilateral hearing lossscored significantly lower than controlson 13 of the 15 questions of theSIFTER. The only two questions notsignificantly different related to theteacher's ratings of students workingup to their potential (question #2) andstudents not being easily frustrated(question #14).Table 3 shows means, standard de-viations, and t-values within the fivecontent areas of the SIFTER, with 9being the median score. In all areas,the mean scores of children with uni-lateral hearing losses were significantlylower than the mean scores of the av-Table 3Means, Standard Deviations, and T-values for Subject and Control (S-C)SIFTER Scores Within the Five Content Areaserage controls. On the SIFTER's profilechart, subjects with unilateral hearingloss fell into the marginal category inthe three areas of academics, attention,and communication; they receivedpassing but significantly lower scoresthan the controls in the areas of classparticipation and school behavior.Control subjects passed in all five ar-eas.Chi-Square AnalysisTo determine if differences among sub-jects in the experimental group wereassociated with gender, affected ear,degree of loss, or variation in assistivelistening devices (treatment types), aseries of chi squares were conducted.No significant differences were foundfor males versus females [Ï‡2 (4,N= 18)= 4.41, p > .051; right ear versus left ear[Ï‡2 (4,7V = 18) = 6.68, p > .05]; moder-ate versus severe-profound hearingloss [Ï‡2 (4,N= 17) = 0.47, p > .05]; ortreatment type [8,7V = 18) = 5.24, p >.05].DiscussionData from the present study show thatclassroom teachers consistently ratestudents with unilateral hearing losslower in academics, attention, commu-nication, class participation, and be-havior than their average classroompeers. The results are consisted withprevious findings (Bess & Tharpe,1986; Culbertson & Gilbert, 1986) andmay be related primarily to the teach-ers' low expectations for students withunilateral hearing loss. Despite thelower performance ratings for studentswith unilateral hearing loss, teachersperceive them as performing as well asother students in regard to their ex-pected potential (question #2, underacademics). This rating indicates thatteachers perceive the academic poten-tial of their hearing-impaired studentsas lower than that of other students. Itis ironic that teachers also rate the stu-dents with hearing loss as no moreeasily frustrated than controls (ques-tion #14), under school behavior); theteachers' lowered expectations couldlead, in fact, to the withholding of chal-lenges that promote not only the pos-sibility of frustration but also that oflearning and growth. In turn, studentswho perceive that teachers expect lessmay adjust to the notion that they arenot capable of more, and thus, accepttheir "lot" in the classroom to performat a lower level than their peers withnormal hearing and be less anxiousabout this lack of performance.It is imperative that teachers receivein-service education on the effects ofhearing loss in general and unilateralhearing loss in particular on thestudent's classroom performance. Al-Volume 140, No. 3 American Annals of the DeafSIFTERthough much can be done to increaseany child's classroom performance ifneeded (Flexer, Wray, & Ireland, 1989;Kenworthy, Klee, & Tharpe, 1990),teachers' attitudes must also be ad-dressed, specifically relating to the nor-mal learning potential of children withunilateral loss. Ultimately, educationalaudiologists working in concert withthe classroom teacher can help eradi-cate the negative attitudes toward stu-dents with hearing loss that hindertheir success in the classroom.The current study focused only onteachers' perceptions of children withunilateral hearing loss and is limited bythe lack of random selection for boththe experimental and control groups aswell as small sample sizes. Additionalfollow-up studies are planned to ex-ample more closely teachers' ratings ofstudents in relationship to degree ofunilateral hearing loss, grade point av-erage, student IQ scores and parentalinvolvement. These limitations, how-ever, do not negate the finding that forthis sample of students with unilateralmoderate to severe-profound hearingloss teachers generally rated them asbelow-average students. Moreover,gender affected ear, degree of hearingloss, and treatment type are indepen-dent of the scores received in academ-ics, attention, communication, partici-pation and behavior.Endnote1 The SIFTER is a well-established andstatistically sound instrument. Thereader is referred to Anderson (1989)for additional information. In the cur-rent study there was a 55% question-naire return rate, resulting in the finalsample of 18. Due to time constraintsin the school's term, a second mailingwas not attempted.ReferencesAnderson, K. (1989). SIFTER: Screening Instru-ment for Targeting Educational Risk. Inter-state Printers and Publishers, Inc. Danville: IL.Berg, F. (1986). Characteristics of the targetpopulation in F. Berg, J. Blair, S. Vielweg &A. Wilson-Viotman (Eds.), Education Audiol-ogy for the hard of hearing child (pp. 1-2).New York: Grune and Stratton.Bess, F. (1986). The unilaterally hearing impairedchild: A final comment. Ear and Hearing, 7,52-54.Bess, F., & Tharpe, A. (1986). An introduction tounilateral sensorineural hearing loss in chil-dren. Ear and Hearing, 7, 3-13.Boyd, S. (1974). Hearing loss: Its educationallymeasurable effects on achievement. Depart-ment of Education, Southern Illinois Univer-sity, Springfield, IL.Brookhouser, P., Worthington, D., & Kelly, W.(1991). Unilateral hearing loss in children.laryngoscope, 191, 1264-1272.Clark, A. & Richards, C. (1966). Auditory dis-crimination among preschool children. Ex-ceptional Child, 33, 259-262.Culbertson, J., & Gilbert, L. (1986). Children withunilateral sensorineural hearing/loss: Cogni-tive, academic, and social development. Earand Hearing, 7, 38-42.Flexer, C, Wray, D., & Ireland, J. (1989). Prefer-ential seating is not enough: Issues in class-room management of hearing-impaired stu-dents, language, Speech, and Hearing Ser-vices in the Schools, 20, 11-21.Kenworthy, O., Klee. T., & Tharpe, A. (1990).Speech recognition ability of children withunilateral sensorineural hearing loss as afunction of amplification, speech stimuli andlistening conditions. Ear and Hearing, 11,264-270.Klee, T., & Davis-Dansky, E. (1986). A compari-son of unilaterally hearing-impaired childrenand normal hearing children on a battery ofstandardized language tests. Ear and Hear-ing, 7, 27-37.Lundeen, C. (1991). Prevalence of hearing im-pairment among children. Language, Speech,and Hearing Services in Schools, 22, 269-271.Volume 140, No. 3 American Annals of the Deaf

Effects of Unilateral Hearing Loss on Teacher Responses to the SIFTER

https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&amp;context=utk_audipubs

Effects of Unilateral Hearing Loss on Teacher Responses to the SIFTER

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Tennessee, Knoxville: Trace