Advanced Language and the Deaf Child: DE 576

1. Advanced Language and the Deaf Child: DE 576 Jessica Scott Boston University, Session 4 February 8, 2012

2. Food for thought • “What’s wrong with being deaf? I’m deaf. I’m fine. I function fine. I drive. I have a family. I’ve made a baby. I make people laugh. I travel. What the hell is going on? Like I have to hear - that has nothing to do with it. It’s all about knowledge; it’s about the heart. It’s about abilities, about doing something you want and getting what you want out of life…Knowledge is the most powerful vehicle to success, not hearing, not speaking…” • CJ Jones

3. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash • Housekeeping

4. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash • Housekeeping

5. Discussion: Chrisann!

6. A discussion board interlude… • Those who advocate for the inclusion model, arguing that "placing children with disabilities in the same location with children having no disabilities provides equal access to learning experiences" (Pg 32). I'm confused here...what is equal about sending a student with any disability in to a classroom with other students make it equal access? Nevertheless a deaf or HOH student who is lacking in the majorities language? If anything, this is far from equal and more so discouraging. • The deaf students struggle because the classroom is not conducive to their learning styles, the teachers don't modify their lessons to meet the needs of student, and they miss so much due to hearing customs and the interpreters inability to interpret more than one conversation at once. Add to that they are completely isolated because they are "different" and they have an adult following them around. Then when they don't succeed because honestly who would in that type of situation, they claim the child can't learn or excel "because of their disability, those poor deaf kids". So, how exactly is inclusion helping them?

7. A discussion board interlude… • Deaf peers would support each other during their school life. So, if there are good numbers of Deaf peers in mainstream settings, Deaf students' feeling would be comfortable than being isolated. But it is still hard way for all mainstream settings, I am feeling it is still endless problem. • If all the deaf students in the school were only in this pull-out classroom all day, there were more teachers, and each student was learning at his/her level/zone of proximal development, could this be an alternative to mainstreaming? This picture of the self-contained classroom was pretty appealing, especially after reading about what their regular classrooms are like. Could a mini Deaf school survive inside a public school?

8. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash

9. CI Corner • Reading and spelling abilities of Deaf adolescents with cochlear implants and hearing aids • By Margaret Harris and EmmanouelaTerlektsi • Published in the Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education in 2010 • What did they do? • 3 groups of children – hearing aid group, early implant group and late implant group • Looked at their reading and spelling ability

10. CI Corner: Abstract • A total of 86 deaf children aged between 12 and 16 years were recruited from schools for the deaf, specialist units attached to a school, and mainstream schools. Approximately one-third used hearing aids, one-third had received a cochlear implant before 42 months, and one-third had been implanted later. The 3 subgroups were matched for age and nonverbal IQ , and all had an unaided hearing loss of at least 85 dB. Assessments revealed mean reading ages that were several years below chronological age for all 3 groups. However, participants in the hearing aid group performed best. Reading levels were not predicted by age of diagnosis or degree of hearing loss, but there was a relationship between reading level and presence of phonetic errors in spelling. There were also differences in educational setting, with the great majority of children in the hearing aid group in a school for the deaf and relatively more of the children with cochlear implants being educated in a unit or mainstream setting.

11. CI Corner: Demographics • Who was there? • 30 children with early implantation (before 42 months) • 29 children with later implantation (after 42 months) • 27 children with hearing aids • All between the ages of 12 and 16 • Of the 59 students with CIs: • only 13 were in a mainstream school • 31 preferred sign only or speech and sign for communication

12. CI Corner: Findings • Children with cochlear implants did not read any better than peers who had hearing aids • In fact, children with just hearing aids read significantly better than children with early implants • Meaning that implantation in and of itself does not necessarily lead to improved English reading • They theorize possibly because these children avoid reading, which is challenging for them

13. A final quote: • “Might it be the case that the supportive environment of a school for the deaf provides a better setting for the continuing development of literacy skills?” (p. 32) • Children with hearing aids all scored higher in reading development • All children with hearing aids attended a school for the Deaf • What do you think of these findings? • Do you believe that the higher literacy skills of the hearing aid users is because of their placement in a school for the Deaf?

14. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash

15. Comparing language environments Mainstream Class Self-contained Class Set up as a hearing classroom (seating, activities) Little interaction Few students who knew any signs Challenge for interpreter to provide all information that hearing children hear Set up as a Deaf classroom (visual information and language access) Abundant interaction All community members were signers Rich linguistic interactions and literacy experiences

16. The influence of Vygotsky • Chapter 6 explores the importance of Vygotsky in the classroom • The opportunities to interact • The opportunities to explore language • The opportunities to form relationships • This was clearly different in the mainstream classroom than it was in the self-contained classroom

17. Questions to discuss in groups • Is it even possible for mainstream classrooms to provide the linguistic and visual environment that Deaf children need? • Why or why not? • It is noted that the self-contained classroom attended to the differences not only between ASL and English, but between ASL and English-based signs. Why is this important? How might it impact language development?

18. Looking at student language/literacy interactions, in depth… • One group will look at Robbie (p. 95-98), one at Tom (98-104), and the last at Paul (104-108) • What was your student’s strategies for language learning? • How about literacy learning? • How did adult and peer interaction play a role in his learning? • How did the self-contained classroom support this?

19. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash

20. Break!

21. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash • Housekeeping

22. Thank you for coming, Joan!

23. Agenda • Discussion: Chrisann • CI Corner • Language: In the mainstream versus the self contained • Break! • Guest Speaker: Joan Nash • Housekeeping

24. Housekeeping • Next week we will be exploring further the importance of language in the Deaf Education classroom • Tiffany will be our discussion leader! • We will also be finishing Deaf Children in Public Schools, and beginning Rethinking the Education of Deaf Students

25. Have an excellent week!