Literacy with Deaf/HH Students

Reference

Focus

Abstract

Israelite, N.K. & Helfrich, M.A. (1988). Improving text coherence in basal readers: Effects of revisions on the comprehension of hearing-impaired and normal-hearing readers:The Volta Review 90 (6) , 261-273.

Reading Materials

This study examined the effects of revisions that improved text coherence on the comprehension of two stories. The results supported the position those efforts to control readability through manipulation of Syntax, sentence length, and vocabu lary may result in texts that are more difficult to understand due to their lack of coherence. When rewritten stories were revised to increase coherence, no significant differences were shown between deaf and hearing reader's scores.

Kluwin,T.N.& Kelly, A.B. (1992) Implementing a successful writing program in public schools for students who are deaf. Exceptional Children 59 (1) 41-53.

Writing Process

The researchers 2-year project to improve the writing skills of children who are deaf included instruction for teachers in the process approach to teaching writing. The project encompassed ten public school program for students who are deaf and included 325 students in grades 4- 10 and 52 teachers. The project included specific training goals for teachers, a self-report procedure for the teachers, and a data collection and analysis phase to assess short-term effects on student's writing. Teacher self. reports indicated. widespread involvement in the project, and pretest and post test results showed dramatic improvement in students' writing - particularly in grammatical skills.

Lartz,M.N.& Lestina, L.J. (1995). Strategies deaf mothers use when reading to their young deaf or hard of hearing children. American Annals for the Deaf, 140 (4), 358-362.

Reading to Children

This study identified strategies 6 deaf mothers used while reading to their children ages 3 to 5. The sessions were videotaped and transcribed by a native deaf signer. The six categories/strategies that all mothers used include 1) sign placement (signing phrases on the book or with a book); 2) text Paired with sign demonstration (pointing to text elaborating with ASL explanations, then back to text); 3) real world connection between leg and child's experience; 4) attention maintenance (tapping shoulder or lap, elbow nudging, and moving book); 5) facial tone and body posture to demonstrate character changes; 6) non- manual signals as questions (nose-twitch, lowered and raised eyebrows, and mouth movement). The authors contend that these strategies may promote higher reading abilities in deaf children.

LaSasso, C. (1987). Survey of reading instruction for hearing-impaired students in the United States. The Volta Review 89 (2), 85-97.

Reading Materials

A survey of 478 programs for deaf students indicated that basal leaders were the most-used materials with deaf students at all grade levels. Reading Milestones, a basal reader Program developed for deaf and mentally retarded students, was the most widely used program. Teachers reported that they used this program because of the simplified vocabulary and syntax, the figurative expression load, and the heavy phonics emphasis.

Limbrick, E.A., McNaughton, S. & Clay, M.M. (1992). Time engaged reading: A critical factor in reading achievement. American Annals of the Deaf, 137 (4), 309-314.

Reading Instruction

This study looked at the amount of time-spent reading and types of student/teacher interactions during reading instruction with deaf students in New Zealand. While the amount of time set, aside for reading was similar to that for hearing children, time engaged in reading was much lower. The teachers frequently used instructional time to correct students' language. The teachers were not applying meaning-based approaches. The authors suggest that deaf children will become better readers if given more time to read and provided quality meaning-centered instruction.