ADAPTED PHYSICAL ACTIVITY QUARTERLY, 1985, 2, 300-306

Hearing Impaired Students in Physical Education

Sharon Schmidt The Hockaday School, Dallas

Unless vestibular etiology exists, the hearing impaired student exhibits no difference in motor performance than other students in the regular physical education class. Physical educators will need to plan and teach lessons which show an understanding of the con- comitant language delay that will accompany a hearing impairment. Using sign language and a variety of visual aids as well as monitoring the language level of handouts can make the physical education class highly beneficial for the hearing irnpaired student.

The hearing impaired students in physical education have often been considered "normal" because there is nothing that obviously separates these students from the other students. They seem able to follow what the rest of the class is doing and to keep up with most of the games and skills performed in class. The facts are, however, that while re- searchers question some motoric differences of the hearing impaired, the most important problem faced by physical education teachers of the hearing impaired concerns cornrnunica- tion. Hence it is important to filter through the current research and bring to bear what is known about the hearing impaired student in the process of program planning within the regular physical education setting.

Review of Literature

The most logical place to begin studying the hearing impaired student in physical edu- cation is to look at what motoric problems or characteristics may separate this student from other students. There is no extensive research on the motor characteristics of the hearing impaired. Most of what is available supports three general conclusions: There is no difference between the hearing and hearing impaired in motor ability (Boyd, 1%7; Geddes, 1978; Long, 1932; Myklebust, 1954), there is a 1- to 1 112-year delay in the motor development of the hearing impaired (Carlson, 1972; Ewing, 1957; Lubin, 1978; Myklebust, 1964; Vance, 1968), and the hearing impaired are significantly poorer in balance skills than those with no hearing impairments (Boyd, 1967; Brunt & Broadhead, 1982; Ewing, 1957; Lindsey & O'Neal, 1976; Long, 1932; Morsh, 1936; Myklebust, 1946; Vance, 1968). The discrepancies between these major conclusions show the difficulty of obtaining valuable information from the research.

In an effort to assist in comprehending the results from the studies, Table 1 lists the major studies in the three major areas pertaining to motor proficiency. These could be targeted as areas of potential difficulty for the physical education teacher who is teaching motor skills.

Request reprints from Dr. Sharon Schmidt, The Hockaday School, Dallas, TX 75229.

HEARING IMPAIRED STUDENTS

Table 1

Major Areas in the Literature of Motor Proficiency of the Deaf

Balance Motor development Motor ability

Long Morsh Myklebust (1946) Ewing Boyd Lindsey & O'Neal Logan Brunt & Broadhead

S Boyd S Long NS S Logan S Boyd NS S Myklebust (1954) NS Myklebust (1964) S S Ewing S Vance S S Geddes NS S Carlson S S Schmidt NS S

S = Significant difference in favor of hearing. NS = No significant difference.

Balance

Eight researchers studied some aspect of balance or equilibrium, and all concluded that the hearing impaired were significantly inferior in balance skills. The early studies of Long (1932) and Morsh (1936) as well as later researchers (Boyd, 1967; Lindsey & O'Neal, 1976; Logan, 1969) compared groups of hearing impaired to groups with no hearing im- pairments. Myklebust (1946) grouped hearing impaired subjects by etiology of hearing loss, which identified an important aspect of the potential balance problem. The etiological grouping allowed the researcher to separate the hearing impaired who had nonfunctioning semicircular canals. Because the vestibular organ and the cochlea (the end organ for hear- ing) share the same fluid, damage to the cochlea, which causes hearing loss, will also damage the vestibular canals, which causes balance difficulties. The significant difference then between hearing and hearing impaired students in balance is only with the impaired students who have vestibular dysfunction. Hearing impaired students with etiologies other than vestibular do not differ significantly from their hearing peers with respect to balance performance.

Motor Development and Motor Ability

The second potential problem area is that the hearing impaired student will be developmen- tally delayed. Boyd (1967), Ewing (1957), and Carlson (1972) all found an increasingly significant difference between hearing and hearing impaired subjects with increasing age. However, four studies report no significant differences with respect to motor develop- ment and the hearing impaired (Geddes, 1978; Logan, 1969; Myklebust, 1954; Schmidt, 1981). Research leaves us with nothing definitive about motor development.

The third motoric area in the literature is motor ability, which is as confusing as the other areas of the literature. A study of Table 1 shows that two researchers found significant differences in ability while two did not.

302 Schmidt

Questions certainly need to be raised about some of the research published in the motor area as to its applicability for drawing conclusions from which to plan programs for these students. There seems to be little doubt that vestibular etiology is a single con- tributing factor to motor ability or motor performance. Many studies did not control for etiology and consequently must be viewed in light of that fact. With vestibular etiology controlled, there is no significant difference in motor performance between hearing im- paired and other students. In other words, not all hearing impaired students will have poor balance or motor problems accentuated by poor balance.

Lindsey & O'Neal (1976) and Schmidt (1981) raise another concern about the research available. All research, with the exception of Schmidt's, studied subjects from the state schools for the deaf. Schmidt (1981) found an apparent effect of educational place- ment on motor ability scores. The potential effect of state school placement in motor ability was also supported by Project UNIQUE results (Winnick & Short, 1982).

Implications

Perhaps more than any other group of handicapped individuals, the hearing impaired are and should be mainstreamed. Research tends to show that, with the exception of vestibular etiology, the hearing impaired student is motorically no different than the hearing stu- dent. Because a hearing impairment is not associated with motor difficulties, physical educa- tion is one curriculum area in which participation is often within the regular setting. How then should physical educators prepare for the students with hearing dysfunction in class? Should anything be done differently or should any additions to be made in the curriculum or teaching methodologies?

Based on research, the first characteristic that must be identified is the etiology of the hearing impairment. A look at the central files of the school district should provide the information needed to discern the etiology. The school nurse or teacher of the hearing impaired will be able to assist with medical terms that are unfamiliar. If no vestibular etiology exists, it is unlikely there will be particular motor problems because of the hear- ing impairment. Motoric programming can be essentially the same as for any other child of that age group.

If a vestibular etiology is discovered, however, further assessment or evaluation of balance performance may be warranted so that specific functioning in balance tasks is known. Research does not enlighten us as to whether the balance performance of a per- son with vestibular dysfunction can be improved. It seems logical, however, that compen- satory skills can be covered in programming. The student can be taught to use visual input to help identify location and direction in space. The student can be made aware of the proprioceptive system which can help with both the construction of a mental image of body positioning and the maintenance of an image of any change in body positioning.

It is not the motoric programming that will be affected when the hearing impaired student is mainstreamed into regular physical education. Consideration must be taken of any emotional, social, and cognitive needs that may be specific to a hearing impairment. Without a doubt, the single most devastating effect of a hearing impairment on the suc- cess of a hearing impaired student in physical education class is the concomitant language delay and the problems associated with that delay.

HEARING IMPAIRED STUDENTS

Language Delay

The age at onset of the hearing loss, as well as the intensity of the loss, will determine the severity of the effect of the language delay on total development. If the loss of func- tional hearing occurred at birth or before acquiring language (approximately 2 years of age), then the language delay will be more severe. A language delay seems to have the effect of slowing the rate of learning from 3 to 5 years (Telford & Sawrey, 1972). If the child has normal hearing long enough to develop language patterns, this delay is much less severe. It is generally accepted, however, that even a mildly impaired youngster will experience some language delay as well as some of the problems associated with that language delay.

For the physical educator, with little background in language acquisition or usage, an understanding about this effect is vital. Even though physical education is a discipline related to movement, physical educators need to use oral communication to impart knowl- edge. The foremost effect of the language delay, then, can be felt in any curriculum sub- ject, including physical education. It is in dealing with this aspect of hearing impairment that the physical educator may have to use a variety of teaching methods within each physical education class.

This language delay will become apparent in a number of ways in physical edu- cation. No matter how mild the loss, the hearing impaired student will still experience some social isolation because of an inability to participate completely in a conversation (Mindel & Vernon, 1971). Most of the social skills that the hearing students learn just by being exposed to them, the hearing impaired student may have difficulty with or may lack. Physical education is certainly an area known for group games and other activities that involve social skills. With some understanding and specific assistance, there is ex- cellent opportunity to help the hearing impaired improve their social skills. Efforts must be made to include the hearing impaired student in group activities and to encourage the other students to include them. The other students must understand why Johnny did not laugh at the joke or run the correct play: He did not hear what was happening. The students must learn how they can make sure the hearing impaired student does understand. Help- ing make the hearing impaired student feel comfortable and part of the group will be one of the physical education teacher's major tasks.

The second major task will be to deal appropriately with the language delay. Much of our vocabulary and many of the nuances we use routinely in our language are learned by hearing them time and again until their meanings are understood. When that process is blocked because of a reduced ability to hear, vocabulary will be greatly reduced. Remember, the primary problem is one of communication, for the hearing impaired students will probably not be able to understand anyone they cannot see. Even with good eye con- tact, much of the vocabulary and some of the phrases will be above the hearing impaired students' language level. The following example will demonstrate the importance of this: A 7th grader with a moderate hearing impairment will probably be reading at least 2 to 3 years below grade level. The basketball study guide written for the 7th graders is assumed to be at a 7th-grade level (which can be checked by asking the reading teacher to do a language level test on the guide). The hearing impaired student, with an independent reading level of 5th grade, will not be able to take that guide home and study it. The vocabulary, grammar, and sentence structure will be too complicated and will probably prove frustra- ting for that student. A diierent study guide may be needed that has easier vocabulary

304 Schmidt

and sentence structure for the hearing impaired student but still imparts the needed infor- mation. It will probably involve some interdisciplinary work with reading teachers, teachers of the hearing impaired, and others to develop good and useful study guides at appropriate reading levels.

Visual Aids

After determining whether a balance problem exists and preparing for the language delay and associated problems, the third major task of the physical educator is adjusting teaching methodology to accommodate the lack of hearing or the reduced hearing ability of the hearing impaired student in the class. AU but the very mildly impaired youngster can benefit from the use of sign language for communicating. Although oral methods be somewhat successful under certain circumstances, total communication (use of sign language and speaking) provides the best opportunity for language development. Most students who are mainstreamed into the public schools are taught by teachers of the deaf for most of the day but are mainstreamed in a few courses such as physical education, art, and some- times math.

To give the hearing impaired student the opportunity to learn all he or she can in the physical education class, it would be best to have the teacher use sign language simultaneously with the instruction. This kind of presentation can also help other students in the class who could benefit by some visual instruction. The more cognitive information there is for the student to learn, and the more indirect the teaching method, the more im- portant it would be to use signing. Use of a simple 500- to 1,000-word signing vocabulary would have the advantage of fewer missed directions, less confusion, and increased in- dependence of the hearing impaired student in the physical education class.

While signing would be one of the best visual aids, there are many more that can be used by the physical education teacher and other students to help explain concepts, interpret rules and strategies, and develop classroom management techniques. Visual aids are a vital means of reaching a student whose hearing is functionally low. Charts of fields, labels on equipment, maps for directions, demonstrations, pictures, and other visual means should be used to explain what is being taught and how the class is going to function.

The hearing impaired student, again regardless of severity of loss, depends at least partly and possibly totally on speech reading. Some general considerations relative to speech reading are as follows: Always face the student while talking, keep the hearing impaired student's back to the sun, and be close enough that the student can see. This will ensure that the student can see the teacher's face. Even in the best situation, however, only about 40% of one's speech can be read with accuracy. Without signing or other visual aids, it is easy to understand how there can be confusion. Keep lengthy verbalization to a minimum to avoid confusion and possible behavior problems.

Demonstration is one of the easiest methods of teaching, but too much of it can detract from the students' learning creative movement. Movement exploration and other discovery teaching methods can help the hearing impaired student, and other students as well, better utilize space and move freely within space. These teaching methods may also help develop experimentation, creativity, and abstraction, all of which the hearing im- paired student needs.

HEARING IMPAIRED STUDENTS 305

Summary

From the review and summary of the literature relative to the hearing impaired, and motor capabilities and the implications of the literature for programming in physical education, it is clear that the mainstreamed hearing impaired student is unlikely to require any addi- tional or different content area programming than any other student unless vestibular etio- logy is present.

What the physical education teacher who works with the hearing impaired must understand is that a language delay can have a devastating effect on every curriculum area in the school, including physical education. This language delay must be taken into ac- count when preparing and teaching lessons. The teacher must remember to teach words that are specific to a sport or game such as huddle, spike, and jog. Although other students may know the words being used, the hearing impaired student may not. At the same time, the teacher must utilize visual aids whenever possible because the visual system is the hearing impaired student's main receptive system.

Researchers have established that attitude about and knowledge of the handicapped are significantly related (Martinez, 1982). In applying this to the hearing impaired, one must first understand what a hearing impairment is and how it affects educational pro- gramming. Where physical education is concerned, the impairment itself affects very little if any of the programming. What is affected, however, is the potential means of com- municating what you want to teach the students. This knowledge should provide the teacher with a positive outlook about coping with the hearing student in the gym. With planning and care the physical education teacher can make his or her class a successful one for the hearing impaired student as well as everyone else in the class.

References

Boyd, J. (1967). Comparison of motor behavior in deaf and hearing boys. American Annals of the Deaf, 112, 598-605.

Brunt, D., & Broadhead, G.D. (1982). Motor proficiency traits of deaf children. Research Quar- terly for Exercise and Sport, 53 , 236-238.

Carlson, B.R. (1972). Assessment of motor ability of selected deaf children in Kansas. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 34, 303-305.

Ewing, A.W.G. (Ed.) (1957). Educational guidance and the deaf child. London: Manchester Uni- versity Press.

Geddes, D. (1978). Motor development profiles of preschool deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 46, 291-294.

Lindsey, D., & O'Neal, J. (1976). Static and dynamic balance skills of eight-year-old deaf and hearing children. American Annals of the Deaf, 121 , 49-55.

Logan, M.J. (1%9). A comparison of static and dynamic equilibrium among the hearing and hear- ing-impaired at the elementary and college levels. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.

Long, J.A. (1932). Motor abilities of deaf children. New York: Bureau of Publication, Teacher's College, Columbia University.

Lubin, E. (1978). Motor creativity of preschool deaf children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Texas Woman's University, Denton.

306 Schmidt

Martinez, M.P. (1982). A comparative view of mainstrearning. J o u m l of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 53(3), 78.

Mindel, E., & Vernon, M. (1971). They grow in silence: The deaf child and her family. Washington, DC: National Association of the Deaf.

Morsh, J. (1936). Motor perfonnance of the deaf. Comparative Psychological Monograph. 66, 1-51. Myklebust, H.R. (1946). Significance of etiology in motor perfonnance of deaf children with special

reference to meningitis. American Journal of Psychology, 54, 249-258. Myklebust, H.R. (1954). Auditory disorders in children. New York: Gntne & Stratton. Myklebust, H.R. (1964). m e psychology of deafness. New York: Grune & Stratton. Schmidt, S.J. (1981). The relationship between hearing impaired and motor proficiency in selected

school age children. Unpublished dissertation, Oregon State University, Cowallis. Telford, C.W., & Sawrey, J.M. (1972). m e exceptional individual (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall. Vance, P.C. (1968). Motor characteristics of deaf children. Doctoral dissertation, Colorado State

College. DAl, 1969, 1146-A. Winnick, J.P., & Short, F.X. (1982). The physicalfitness of sensory and orthopedically impaired

youth. Project UNIQUE Final Report. Brockport, NY: SUNY, College at Brockport, Physical Education Department.