HEARING IMPAIRED STUDENTS : LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND LANGUAGE

LEARNING STRATEGIES

There is clear evidence that increasing numbers of deaf students are now beginning to enter

higher education (http://www.natdisteam.ac.uk). However, it is also evident that many of these

students enter university presenting at below national norms in terms of their literacy. In short,

many pre-lingual deaf students face an incredible language barrier struggling to understand

textual material and complete course assignments. For this reason, many deaf students are

supported individually by language tutors (LTs) whose role includes helping students prepare for

assignments, assisting with planning and organisation of projects, advising students about the

presentation of written work, and modifying the language of course materials, examinations and

assignment briefs where appropriate. This paper describes the results of a qualitative study

designed to investigate the working practices of LTs in one university, in order to provide

recommendations for professional practice and prompt the development of qualifications in this

field. Using a case study research strategy, questionnaires, indepth interviews, videoed

observations, examples of student work and written critical incident diaries were employed to

unpack and explore what makes good language support for deaf students. Several themes

emerged from analysis of the data; these will be outlined for discussion. The findings are offered

as an insight into the skills required for language tutoring, and provide a case for recommending

the development of formal qualifications for LTs supporting deaf students in the higher

education sector.Deaf and hard of hearing children vary widely in how they communicate at school and in the home. A common misconception about deaf children is that providing them with a sign language interpreter is enough to ensure that they have access to learning in the classroom. Another misconception is that if a deaf or hard of hearing child uses a hearing aid, the quality of "listening" will be sufficient for a child to acquire spoken language. (See "Understanding Hearing Ability" for more on this.) There are children who may best access language through American Sign Language (ASL) or children who may benefit more from using other visual supports to assist in their development of spoken English (i.e., cueing, speechreading).The most important thing is to put supports in place as early as possible so children who are deaf or hard of hearing can learn language as early as possible in the most accessible, least frustrating, and natural manner possible.There are many factors to consider when determining the most effective way to facilitate language development for a young deaf or hard of hearing child. Will the use of listening technologies provide the child with enough hearing ability to acquire language and access that

language for learning? Can the child most readily and comfortably develop language through ASL? Is Cued Speech, a system to visually assist a child in clarifying English, beneficial? And why or why not use a combination of everything to assist a deaf child in learning language?Beliefs within the medical and educational communities vary as to the most effective approaches to provide a deaf or hard of hearing child with access to language for learning and communication. Success with one strategy rather than another depends on the confluence of many factors. The most effective strategies and technologies for one child and family may not work for the next child and family. No matter which decisions are made, the timely development of communication and language must be at the heart of the decision. We know through research that cognitive development correlates with development of a strong early language foundation that is wholly and naturally accessible to a child. The most commonly used communication and language strategies are described here, and links to additional online resources are provided:ASL/English Bilingual EducationAuditory ModalitiesTotal CommunicationCued SpeechAs your school plans for a student who is deaf or hard of hearing, it is crucial to be aware of the student's language and communication competency. Some students may be competent in ASL, some may be competent in spoken English, and some still may be in the language development stages of ASL, English, or another language used in the home. It is important to ensure that the student has complete and natural access to language both for continued language and cognitive development and for access to all academic information and social interactions. Keep in mind, also, that language and communication strategies may need to be reviewed and modified depending on how well a child is progressing.The Clerc Center has additional information on language acquisition in deaf children, American Sign Language (ASL), bilingual education (ASL and English), and spoken language development in the Language and Literacysection of Info to Go.Resources: Language and CommunicationBoys Town National Research Hospital: My baby's hearing: Language and learning.http://babyhearing.org/LanguageLearning/index.aspEasterbrooks, S. R., & Baker, S. K. (2002). Language learning in children who are deaf and hard of hearing: Multiple pathways.  Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Mahshie, S. N. (1997). A first language: Whose Choice Is It?  Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center. http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/documents/clerc/SI-AFirstLanguage.pdfRaising Deaf Kids: Communication choices.http://raisingdeafkids.org/communicating/choices/Schwartz, S. (Ed.). (1996). Choices in deafness: A parent's guide to communication options (2nd ed.). Bethesda, MD: Woodbine House.

U.S. Department of Education: Opening doors: Technology and communication options for children with hearing loss.http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/products/opening_doors/index.html

Many hearing impaired students have severe difficulty acquiring literacy and developing reading

comprehension. This difficulty apparently results from a combination of perceptual,

communication, instructional, linguistic, and experiential deficits. Although some hearing

impaired students develop a degree of signed English proficiency, this does not necessarily

translate into reading proficiency. Because of restrictions in auditory communication and the

perceptual limitations of lip reading as a receptive communication mode for English acquisition,

either alone or in combination with listening (Erber, 1972, 1974), reading has been assumed to

have particular importance for English acquisition and use in the education of hearing impaired

students (Grove & Rodda, 1984; Webster, 1986). Research with standardized tests continues to

indicate that most hearing impaired students display poor reading ability relative to

their hearing peers (Conrad, 1979; King & Quigley, 1985; Walker & Rickards, 1993).

Although some evidence exists that the use of signed English by teachers improves hearing

impaired students' reception of simultaneously signed and spoken English (Grove & Rodda,

1984; Hyde & Power, 1992; White & Stevenson, 1975), there seems to be no strong evidence of

teachers' use of signed English resulting in literacy gains by hearing impaired students. Reasons

for the lack of evidence of an association between teachers' signed English use and students'

comprehension of the print form of the language may include insufficient emphasis by teachers

on literacy development in programs using Simultaneous Communication (Ewoldt, 1981; Walker

& Rickards, 1993) and a limitation of signed English systems in which the visual, spatial, and

temporal features of the primary communication (signed English) may not transfer effectively to

the distinctive features of the (secondary) print form (Hyde & Power, 1992).

Although there are some promising approaches to storytelling and early reading experience for

hearing impaired students based on signed procedures observed with deaf parents (Ewoldt, 1985;

Maxwell, 1984), most beginning reading materials presently available are based on printed text

with associated artwork. The use of adapted signed English readers (Lawrence, 1994; Robbins,

1983) seems to present additional means for hearing impaired students to acquire literacy and

forhearing parents and teachers to share stories in English with deaf children. In relation to this

issue, the present study examines whether the use of pictures depicting the formation of signs for

English words parallel to printed text enables hearing impaired students to comprehend more

effectively what they read.

Hearing impaired students' Reading

Although dear students' development of reading proficiency has been examined over many years,

little change in recorded reading-achievement levels has been observed across this period. Any

variations in recorded level appear to result from the different tests used in studies, assumptions

made by researchers about factors such as students' intellectual potential, and changes in the

nature of school placements and programs available to hearing impaired students, rather than

from changes in reading comprehension per se (Power, 1984; Walker & Rikards, 1993).

In early studies, Pintner and Reamer (1920) concluded from tests of intellectual performance that

deaf people were "inferior," and that this state was associated with their poor reading

performance. Furth (1966) found that the reading grade levels of hearing impaired students

increased from a mean of 2.7 between the ages of 10 and 11 years of age to only 3.5 between 15

and 16 years of age. Trybus and Buchanan (1971), Conrad (1979), and Wolk and Allen (1984)

also found that hearing impaired students did not often exceed a fourth-grade reading level on

standardized reading tests. More recently, Wood, Wood, Griffiths, and Howarth (1986) found

that most severely hearing impaired students left school without learning to read proficiently.

Most of these studies present generally uniform pictures of the reading achievements of hearing

impaired students. Walker and Rickards (1993), in an Australian study, and Geers and Moog

(1989), in an American study, found a more mixed picture of student achievement. These

researchers reported that a significant proportion of hearing impaired students was able to

perform at a comparable level with hearing peers, depending upon the relative influence of

factors such as the students' level of hearing loss, the type of school placement, the

communication methods used, the degree of parental support, parents' socioeconomic status,

teacher expectations, student attitude toward learning, and the teaching methods used. Generally,

students in integrated settings, with lesser degrees of hearing loss, from supportive homes, and

using oral communication methods, performed at higher levels and, in some cases, in a manner

comparable to that of their hearing peers.

Reading comprehension has been a particularly significant factor in previous studies of the

reading abilities of hearing impaired students (Ewoldt, 1981; Walker & Rickards, 1993). King

and Quigley (1985), in reviewing studies of hearing impaired students' educational achievement

using instruments such as the Stanford Achievement Test, found a typical profile of performance

on the various subtests. Hearing impaired students usually scored lowest on the vocabulary or

word-meaning subtests, with a pattern of better performance on the other subtests. Performance

levels tended to be lower on any subtest involving meaningful language use, such as Word

Meaning, Paragraph Meaning, and Arithmetic Reasoning, and higher on subtests with

less language involvement, such as Spelling and Arithmetic Computation.

A recent study in the United Kingdom by Banks, Gray, and Fyfe (1990) found that many of the

hearing impaired students studied appeared to "bark at print" in a manner similar to that

of hearing students who read poorly. These researchers believed that the hearing impaired

students lost the general meaning of the passage being read because they were caught up in their

attempts at word recognition and syntax processing.

Collectively, studies of the reading abilities of hearing impaired students confirm that many of

these students continue to have difficulty surpassing a fourthgrade level of reading proficiency.

This seems to be due to a combination of communication, instructional, linguistic, and

experiential deficits which result in relatively few hearing impaired students being able to derive

sufficient meaning from text beyond the word level or to comprehend complex text.

Information Processing by Deaf and Hearing Readers

Another factor thought to be associated with the low reading-comprehension scores of hearing

impaired students is the manner in which these students process information. Many researchers

have suggested that some hearing impaired students use processing strategies that are different

from those used by hearing readers because hearing impaired students have little auditory and

phonological experience, or lack such experience altogether (Ewoldt, 1981; King & Quigley,

1985; Webster, 1986). For example, Ewoldt suggested that deaf readers, when asked to sign

printed material, may use manual/visual encoding and thus circumvent the comprehension

difficulties they experience because of their limited knowledge of English phonology and

associated word-identification strategies.

More recently, Ewoldt (1996) concluded that it was not necessary for the acquisition and use of

written language to be mediated through speech, and, in fact, that deaf children had been shown

not to engage in such mediation. She suggests a more "holistic" approach, in which the deaf

child's knowledge of sign language can be used as the initial basis for realizing intentions for

reading and writing. However, Tomlinson Keasey and Kelly (1978) concluded that because

many hearing impaired students often have to rely on a visual code, they may continue to

experience difficulty with the auditory sequential foundations of reading. Kelly (1995) has also

speculated that reliance by some deaf readers on a less enduring iconic/spatial mediation strategy

means that there is greater potential for the words of a sentence to decay before meaning can be

constructed.

The findings of studies of information processing suggest that, although some hearing impaired

students may learn to use phonological encoding, many others will rely solely on the visual

features of a text when reading. Students' knowledge of signs therefore seems to represent an

important potential basis for mediation in the reading process.

Hearing impaired students' Early Reading Experiences

In addition to differences in the processing of information, hearing impaired students also show

differences from hearing students in relation to early reading experiences. The early reading

experiences of hearing students are frequently based on picture-book activities shared with

caregivers and teachers. Being "read to" is a different experience for many deaf children, who are

often required to look at the book and attend to the parent's spoken or signed communication at

the same time.

In this context, Maxwell (1984) reports an interesting case study of a deaf child of deaf parents

and her development of literacy skills. Signed English texts were included in the books to which

this child had access. Maxwell describes the manner in which the child began to recognize a few

of the signs until eventually she could read the whole story from the sign drawings alone. She

then began to identify the words below the sign drawings and eventually used both sources to

read the story. The study by Maxwell suggested that the use of signed English pictures in

association with printed text may facilitate literacy development by hearing impaired students.

Signed English materials such as popular fairy tales and beginning readers were initially

produced by Bornstein (1973). These books consisted of illustrations, printed text, and graphic

representations of signs based on signed English forms.

Evidence of an association between print and graphic sign representations has also been

observed in studies by Robbins (1983) and Stoefen-Fisher and Lee (1989). These researchers

found that the use of graphic representations of signs helped hearing impaired students to

identify the print form of unfamiliar written words that were part of their signed vocabulary. It

was noted that students performed poorly with the print-only (no sign included) lists but better

with the signed-word lists (sign included with the word) when performing the word identification

tasks under study. Robbins's study complements StoefenFisher and Lee's finding that students'

comprehension of printed material was facilitated by the graphic representation of signs in

association with printed text.

The present study therefore examines whether the use of signed English pictures in association

with printed text enhances hearing impaired students' reading comprehension. We also

considered two subsidiary questions: (a) Will the use of the signed English pictures result in

fewer decoding errors by deaf readers? (b) Does the level of students' reading ability influence

the effectiveness of their use of signed English texts?

Method

Subjects

Sixteen students (9 boys and 7 girls) was involved in the study. The students attended two

metropolitan special education units attached to regular elementary schools in the same city. Six

criteria were used to identify subjects for the study:

1. age between 8 and 13 years

2. severe or profound hearing loss, that is, unaided hearing loss of 75 dBHL or more, averaged

over 250, 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 4,000 Hz in the better ear

3. no other severe or uncorrected disability present, that is, severe learning difficulty, uncorrected

visual impairment, gross motor coordination dysfunction, or severe behavioral disturbance

4. IQ scores at the average level or better, based on administration of the Wechsler Intelligence

Scale for Children-Revised for the Deaf (Ray, 1979)

5. demonstrated competency in the reception of signed English, with scores no worse than 60%

for the signed English section of the Evaluation of Receptive Communication Abilities

of Hearing-Impaired Students (Hyde, 1990)

6. reading age between 5 and 9 years, as ascertained with the Southgate Reading Test and the

Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children

The students were divided into two groups-A and B-based on their assessed reading age and in

conjunction with the judgments of their teachers and the school psychologist. Students were

allocated to Group A (Better Readers) if they showed a reading age between 7 years 3 months

and 9 years. Group B students (Poorer Readers) had a reading age between 6 years and 7 years 2

months.

According to school files, 15 of the 16 students came from a home environment using English as

the primarylanguage. One student was exposed to Australian Sign Language (Auslan) as her

first language by her deaf parents and deaf sister. All students in the study had been exposed to

signed English at school for a period of 4 to 9 years and had been at their current school for 3

years or more. The students received their instruction in the special education unit with limited

interaction with the regular elementary school, usually in sports and arts activities.

Materials

Books

Four reading books were selected for use in the study. Two books were used for Group A and

two for Group B. One book for each group presented printed text only; the other book presented

Australasian Signed English pictures in association with the text. Extra copies of the books were

used for the researcher's introductory storytelling session, with the printed text and signed

English pictures deleted for this use.

The two books used for each group were considered equivalent according to several criteria: the

size and layout of the book, the size of the print font used, the number of sentences on each page,

common authorship, illustrations by the same illustrator, illustrations relating effectively to the

sentences on each page, approximately the same total number of words in the text, approximately

the same number of sentences in the text, equivalence for age and interest level, and the

determination by the teachers that the books were equivalent and within the reading proficiency

of each group of students.

In subsequent linguistic analysis of the texts, the differences between the books selected by

teachers for Group A and Group B were minimal. For example, the number of sentences and

words in each book, and mean sentence length, were not significantly different. Some minor but

not significant differences were noted between the Group A and Group B books in the number of

syllables per sentence and the grammatical complexity of the sentence material. Teachers

seemed to make their judgments regarding the suitability of the books for these groups based on

font size, page and text layout, and perceived level of student interest.

The signed English versions of the books were prepared by placing adhesive strips of the signs

and associated text on each page. The labels were generated by computer software designed for

this purpose at the Queensland Department of Education, Low-Incidence Support Centre

(Lawrence, 1994).

Comprehension Questions

A list of six comprehension questions was devised for each book. The question lists were created

in accordance with Rosenshine's (1980) criteria for examining reading comprehension. These

criteria reflect the consensus established from a review of approaches to gauging reading

comprehension. They involve the development and use of questions that require readers to

recognize story sequence, recognize words in context, identify a main idea, decode detail, draw

inferences, recognize cause and effect, and compare and contrast story elements. (For a detailed

review, see Rosenshine, 1980, pp. 536-540).

Procedure

All students received a Signed English Text and an Unmodified Text. Presentation order was

randomized to minimize possible serial effects across groups and settings.

Students received an introductory reading lesson before reading each book, during which the

researcher used a version of the book with both the printed and the signed text deleted. The

researcher told the story in the original words using Simultaneous Communication. Following

the introductory lesson, the students were videotaped individually reading the story, signing in

signed English. For the first comprehension measure, the students were required to answer the

six comprehension questions; their answers were recorded on videotape. The second

comprehension measure, which entailed the retelling of the story by the students, was also

videotaped. This retelling procedure has been shown to result in effective measurement of text

comprehension (Fuchs, Fuchs & Maxwell, 1988).

All the data were gathered over a 2week period, with each group completing reading of a book,

comprehension questions, and story retelling on the same day its members had their introductory

reading lesson. Transcriptions were made from the videotapes of the students reading each story,

retelling the story, and answering the comprehension questions.

For the comprehension questions, each answer was scored in terms of how effectively it matched

the information required by the question; the percentage correct for the six questions for each

book was determined for each student.

To develop a scoring procedure for the story retelling, four experienced primary-school teachers

were asked to indicate the number of "essential details" in each of the stories. There was 98%

agreement among the "details" identified by the four teachers. The number of details identified in

scoring of the students' retelling was compared with the composite list of details identified by the

four teachers and recorded as the percentage correctly identified.

To determine the accuracy of the students, reading, the transcripts were examined for omissions,

substitutions, additions, and fingerspelled items. Students' omissions and substitutions of words

were compared with the total number of words in the text, and percentages were calculated. The

number of words that could be signed (based on the Australasian Signed English lexicon) in the

unmodified texts was noted and compared with the number actually signed by the students. In

this context, the frequency of use of fingerspelling was also noted.

The data in the study were analyzed using an analysis of variance with a Bonferoni correction to

maintain the Type 1 error rate below 0.05. The .01 level of probability for statistical significance

was used in the study as a means of making conservative inferences from the data.

Results

Students performed more effectively with the Signed English Text on the two measures of

comprehension used in the study: the comprehension questions and the scored story-retelling

procedure. Examination of several other linguistic variables also revealed significant differences

between the reading groups and their scores for the two reading conditions.

Percentage Correct for Comprehension Questions

Table 1 presents the percentage-correct scores for both groups on the comprehension questions.

There was a significant difference between the comprehension question scores for the two

groups across both books (F = 100.82; p < .01), with Group A (Better Readers) scoring

significantly higher than Group B (Poorer Readers) across both books. There was also a

significant difference between the comprehension scores of both groups for the "book" variable

(Signed English Text/ Unmodified Text) (F = 12.72; p < .01), with comprehension better for

both groups with the Signed English Text. There was no significant interaction between the

"book" variable and the "group" variable (F = 4.26; p = .06).

Scores on Story-Retelling Tasks

Table 2 presents the percentage-correct scores for story details recalled by the two groups. There

was a significant difference between the percentage of story details recalled by students for the

books used (F = 37.0; p < .01), with both groups recalling a greater percentage of story detail

from reading the Signed English Texts. There was also a significant difference between the two

reading-level groups across the two books (F = 9.39; p < .01), with the group with the lower

reading level (Group B) recalling fewer details of its books than the group with the higher

reading level (Group A). There was no significant interaction between the "book" and "group"

variables (F = 0.20; p = .66).

Story Event Sequencing

All subjects in Group A maintained correct sequencing of story events and details for both

books. This was determined by comparing the scripts of students' recalled stories with the event

sequences in the original texts. Four of the six students in Group B failed to maintain correct

sequencing with the Unmodified Text condition, but all students managed this effectively with

the Signed English Text condition.

Number of Words Used in Retelling

Group A used a mean of 140 words in the retelling of the Unmodified Text, with an increase to

159 words with the Signed English Text. With the Signed English Text, Group B produced a

mean of 90 words, in comparison with 56 words with the Unmodified Text condition. These

increases did not reach statistical significance.

Semantic Miscues

The number of semantic miscues during story retelling was determined using Goodman's (1970)

miscue procedure. Six students in Group A and four students in Group B were found to have

miscued some semantic aspects of the Unmodified Texts. With the Signed English Texts, all

students were able to retell the stories without semantic miscues.

Accuracy with Each Reading Condition

Students' reading accuracy was determined by examining transcripts of their reading of each

book. These data are presented at Table 3. The mean accuracy score was 90.6% for the

Unmodified Texts and 96.5% for the Signed English Texts. Fifteen students improved their

reading accuracy scores with the Signed English Text condition. This produced a significant

difference between the accuracy scores of students for word identification with the two books,

with use of the Unmodified Text resulting in lower accuracy scores than use of the Signed

English Text (F = 19.25; p < .01). There was no significant interaction between the "book" and

"group" variables (F = 0.09; p = .77) for this comparison. There was no significant difference for

accuracy between the two groups across the two books (F = 4.58; p = .05).

Number of Substitutions

There was a significant difference between the number of word/sign substitutions made by each

group, with both groups making fewer word substitutions with the Signed English Text (F =

17.79; p < .01). Again, there was no significant interaction between the "book" and "group"

variables (F = .44; p = .52).

Number of Omissions

Generally, if students did not know the sign for a particular word, they fingerspelled the letters of

the word. Omissions were limited mainly to words such as the, is, and to. The number of

omissions was significantly reduced under the Signed English Text condition (F = 17.69; p

< .01), and there was no significant interaction between the groups for the "group" and "book"

variables (F = 2.53; p = .134). Comparisons between the two groups across the books did not

reveal a significant difference (F = .36; p = .56) for the number of omissions students made while

reading.

Percentage of Signs Used in Word Identification

Students were observed to attend actively to the information from the signed English pictures

before forming signs for words. Overall, they seemed to use more signs while reading with the

Signed English Text than with the Unmodified Text. However, the use of the Signed English

Text had a greater effect on the use of signs by Group B than it did on Group A's usage, with

Group B improving by 21.2% while Group A improved by only 3.5%. This was due to a ceiling

effect for Group A with the Signed English Text. For this reason, no inferential statistical

comparison between the groups was possible for this variable. The data for Group B are

presented at Table 4.

Percentage of Fingerspelling Used in Word Identification

Students' use of fingerspelling did not mean that they did not identify a word, but suggests that

this outcome was less likely than for words for which they knew a sign. There was a basal effect

for Group A, as its members signed all signable words with both reading conditions. However,

the Signed English Text had an effect on the use of fingerspelling by Group B. Comparison of

the two groups across books revealed a significant difference (F = 14.76; p < .01), with Group B

using a higher proportion of fingerspelling. There was a significant interaction between the

"book" an "group" variables. From the mean scores, it is evident that this interaction effect was

produced mainly by greater use of fingerspelling by Group B with the Unmodified Text.

As discussed, these results are compromised by the basal effect for the Group A subjects. The

data do, however, present a useful picture of the reduced use of fingerspelling by both groups

with the Signed English Texts.

Students' Preferences

With one exception, the students expressed a preference for the Signed English Texts. They also

reported a higher level of enjoyment and motivation with this format, as the following remarks

indicate:

"I like sign pictures [Signed English Text] because I understand lot. Don't like `spooky book'

[Unmodified Text], because if no sign picture don't understand ... sign picture for deaf."

"Sign book good. Don't know word book [Unmodified Text]." "Like `apple book' [Signed

English Text], better sign, don't like `sea book' [Unmodified Text], no understand."

"I like sign book. Understand words more easy."

Summary

The results of a two-way analysis of variance indicated that students with the Signed English

Text condition performed at a higher level on both comprehension measures than they did with

the Unmodified Text condition. This overall effect was demonstrated even though Group A

(Better Readers) performed at a significantly higher level on the comprehension measures than

Group B (Poorer Readers). The different comprehension results for the two groups provide

support for the original allocation of subjects to Group A or B based on reading age and teacher

judgment.

Discussion

The main finding of this study was that the use of signed English pictures in association with

printed text facilitated both initial reading of text by the hearing impaired students in the study

and their performance on subsequent comprehension measures. Under this condition (Signed

English Text), the students recalled more story details in correct sequence and with fewer

semantic miscues than they did under the Unmodified Text condition.

The second feature examined in the study was the influence of the level of the students, reading

ability on comprehension under the two text conditions. These results showed that the Better

Readers were more effective overall than the Poorer Readers with both text conditions. In

general, however, it seems that the lower-level reading group derived more benefit from the

Signed English Text format than the higher-level group. This result was due to some extent to

the teachers' selection of an Unmodified Text reading book for the Better Readers that was

relatively easy for them to read. This group still showed improvement with the signed English

condition, but because of the influence of a ceiling effect the enhancement was not as marked as

for the Poorer Readers.

The finding in the study of significant differences between the two reading conditions supports

earlier findings by Robbins (1983), Maxwell (1984), and Stoefen-Fisher and Lee (1989) that the

presence of signed English pictures facilitates hearing impaired students' word identification and

comprehension. It seems that the use of the signed English pictures, by supporting more efficient

word identification, increases the potential for text comprehension (Banks, Gray, & Fyfe, 1990).

From an information-processing perspective, the enhanced performance of both reading groups

under the Signed English Text condition suggests that using signed English pictures in

association with printed text enhances short-term memory coding, word identification, and recall.

These results provide support for the conclusions of Bellugi and Klima (1975), Conlin and

Paivio (1975), Odom, Blanton, and McIntyre (1970), Parasnis (1983), and Siple, Caccamise, and

Brewer (1982) regarding hearing impaired students' use of signed information in a manner

similar to hearing students' use of spoken language when reading.

Although Mayer and Wells (1996) have questioned the association between hearing impaired

students' acquisition of a signlanguage (having no agreed-upon print form) as a

first language and subsequent transfer of this linguistic competence to English literacy

development (as was suggested by Ewoldt, 1996), the findings of the present study are relevant

in the context of the educational use of signed English. These findings suggest that an association

may be formed between signed English use by students (and teachers) and the development of

reading proficiency. Further research is needed, however, to establish the specific features of any

information-processing link between signed English pictures and short-term memory coding in

reading. Based on these data, it would seem that the presence of the signed English pictures

initially helped the students decode the text more accurately and completely. They showed less

hesitation when approaching an unfamiliar printed word and, in general, their reading of the

facilitated text seemed to go more smoothly. Under the Signed English Text condition, both

reading-level groups made fewer word substitutions or omissions and used more signs when they

were reading. While the students' decoding skills could not be described as automatic under this

condition, the students were able, through more effective word identification, to recall more story

details with less loss of specific information.

Generally, students fingerspelled a word for which they did not know the sign. The lower-level

reading group relied on this mode of encoding with a substantial number of words in the

Unmodified Text. The significant reduction in fingerspelling when both groups were using the

signed English picture readers (a complete absence of fingerspelling for the Better Readers)

suggests that a greater potential for word identification may exist with the Signed English Text

condition.

Finally, in relation to the research questions posed in the present study, the students' better

performance on the comprehension and word identification aspects were supported by their

stated preferences for the signed English Texts. This suggests that greater use of such texts could

lead to improved attitudes toward reading among such students.

Practical Implications of the Findings

Four practical implications stem from the findings of the study. First, the use of signed English

pictures seems to increase word identification and comprehension among hearing impaired

students, particularly those in the process of acquiringliteracy. Greater use of the association

between signed English and written English seems to be an appropriate educational focus.

Second, students with lower reading ages appear to derive greatest benefit from Signed English

Texts. This could suggest the use of such materials in beginning readers and in shared-book

reading procedures between deaf children and teachers. Signed English readers could also be

valuable for hearing parents, as they may enable these parents to become more involved in

reading stories with their deaf children. As suggested by Andrews and Taylor (1987), the

presence of signs in the books could support the development of children's (and parents') interest

and confidence in reading.

Third, the presence of signed English pictures seems to increase the chance that an unfamiliar

printed word will be identified correctly. The use of signed English pictures in vocabulary-

building activities could be an adjunct to their use in other initial reading experiences.

Fourth, students indicated a greater preference for the Signed English Texts. Use of such texts

could increase hearing impaired students' motivation to read if such materials were made more

regularly available.

Although further research is needed to confirm and extend the findings of the present study,

evidence exists that Signed English Texts assist hearing impaired students in learning to read.

Teachers and parents could be made aware of the importance and potential of the use of such

texts; a sufficient number should be prepared and made available.

Future Research

Further research is needed to determine whether the use of signed English pictures to facilitate

reading comprehension would be suitable for a larger number of students. In particular, the use

of Signed English Texts may not be suitable for mature readers, for several reasons. These

include the number of words in upper primary and secondary texts that would require

fingerspelling and the time-consuming and impractical requirement to produce a large number of

Signed English Texts across a range of curriculum areas. The present study focused on beginning

readers, with relatively simple text-andpicture books being used.

Another feature of the study that could be examined in further research is the use of

fingerspelling. The texts used in the present study were chosen because of the potential for every

word in the books to be signed. It may be appropriate to examine texts in which a significant

proportion of the words require fingerspelling. Pictured fingerspelled material may not produce

the same increase in comprehension produced by pictures of signs. Further research could

examine the use of signed English reading materials over a longer period, particularly examining

outcomes in terms of student learning of content as well as reading comprehension per se.

In conclusion, the use of signed English pictures in association with written text enhanced

reading comprehension among the hearing impaired students in this study. Study findings

suggest that a connection between signed and written English can be useful in developing

literacy in young hearing impaired students.

References

References

References

Andrews, J., & Taylor, N. (1987). From sign to print: A case study of picture book reading

between mother and child. Sign Language Studies, 56, 261-274

Banks, J., Gray, C., & Fyfe, R. (1990). The reading abilities of severely deaf children: A

developmental study using the Edinburgh Reading Test. Journal of the British Association of

Teachers of the Deaf,14, 25-34. Bellugi, U., & Klima, E. (1975). Two faces of sign: Iconic and

abstract. TheReading Teacher, 32, 297-301.

Bornstein, H. (1973). A description of some current sign systems designed to represent English.

American Annals of the Deaf 118, 454-463. Conlin, D., & Paivio, A. (1975) The associative

learning of the deaf: The effects of word imagery and signability. Memory, and Cognition, 3,

335-340.

Conrad, R. (1979). 7he deaf`school child. London: Harper & Row.

References

Erber, N.P. (1972). Auditory, visual and audiovisual recognition of consonants by children with

normal and impaired hearing. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 15. 413-422. Erber, N.P.

(1974). Visual perception of speech by deaf children: Recent developments and continuing

needs. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 39, 178-185. Ewoldt, C. (1981). Factors which

enable deaf readers to get meaning from print. Occasional paper, York University, Toronto,

Canada. Ewoldt, C. (1985). A descriptive study of the developing literacy of young hearing-

impairedchildren. Volta Review, 87, 109-126. Ewoldt, C. (1996). Deaf bilingualism: A holistic

perspective. Australian Journal of Education of the Deaf 2(1), 5-9.

Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Maxwell, L. (1988). The validity of informal reading comprehension

measures. Remedial and Special Education, 9(2), 20-28.

Furth, H.G. (1966). A comparison of reading test norms of deaf and hearing children. American

Annals of the Deaf, 111, 461-462. Geers, A., & Moog, J. (1989). Factors predictive of the

development of literacy in profoundly hearing impaired adolescents. Volta Review, 91, 69-86.

Goodman, K. (1970). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer & R. Ruddel

(Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 259-272). Newark, DE: International

Reading Association. Grove. C., & Rodda, M. (1984). Receptive communication skills

of hearing-impaired students: A comparison of four methods of communication. American

Annals of the Deaf, 129, 378-385.

Hyde, M. (1990). Evaluation of Receptive Communication Abilities of Hearing-

Impaired Students. Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University, Centre for Deafness Studies and

Research.

References

Hyde, M., & Power, D. (1992). The receptive communication abilities of hearing impaired

students under oral, manual, and combined methods. American Annals of the Deaf 137, 389-398.

Kelly, L.P. (1995). Processing bottom-up and topdown information bv skilled and average deaf

readers and implications for Whole Language instruction. Exceptional Children, 61, 318-334

King, C.IM., & Quigley, S.P. (1985). Reading and deafness. San Diego, CA: College Hill Press.

Lawrence, G. (1994, January). Signed English Reader Project. Paper presented at the Australian

and New Zealand Conference for Educators of the Deaf, Sydney, Australia. Maxwell, .M.

(1984). A deaf child's natural development of literacy. Sign LanguageStudies, 44, 191-224.

Mayer, C., & Wells, G. (1996) Can the linguistic interdependence theory support a

bilingualbicultural model of literacy education for hearing impaired students? Journal of Deaf

Studies and Deaf Education, 1, 93-107.

Odom. P.B., Blanton, R.L., & McIntyre, F. (1970). Coding medium and word recall by deaf

and hearing subjects. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 13, 54-58.

Parasnis, 1. (1983). The effects of parental deafness and early exposure to manual

communication on the cognitive skills, English language skill and field-independence of young

deaf adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 26, 588-594.

Pintner, R., & Reamer, J. (1920). A mental and educational survey of schools for the deaf.

American Annals of the Deaf, 65, 451-472. Power, DJ. (Ed.). (1984). Developing literacy in

References

bearing-impaired children: Report of the Third ,National Workshop on Language Curriculum

Development forHearing-Impaired Pupils. Brisbane, Australia: Mount Gravatt CAE, Centre for

Human Development Studies. Ray, S. (1979). An adaption of the Wechsler Intellgence Scale

(Performance) for ChildrenRevised. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee.

Robbins, N. (1983). The effects of signed text on the reading comprehension of hearing

impaired children. American Annals of the Deaf, 128, 40-44.

Rosenshine, B.V. (1980). Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce, &

W. Brewer (Eds.), Skill hierarchies in reading comprehension (pp. 535-554). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Siple, P., Caccamise, F., & Brewer, L. (1982). Signs as pictures

and signs as words: The ef

References

fect of language knowledge on memory for new vocabulary. Journal of Experimental

Psychology, 8, 612-625.

Stoefen-Fisher, J., & Lee, M. (1989). The effectiveness of the graphic representation of signs in

developing word identification skills for hearing-impaired beginning readers.Journal of Special

Education, 23, 151-167. Tomlinson-Keasey, C.. & Kelly, R. (1978). The deaf child's symbolic

world. American Annals of the Deaf,123, 452-459. Trybus, R., & Buchanan, C. (1971). Studies

in achievement testing, hearing impaired students. American Annals of the Deaf, 131, 243-247.

Walker, L., & Rickards, F. (1993). Reading comprehension levels of profoundly prelingually

hearing impaired students in Victoria. Australian Teacher of the Deaf, 33, 32-47.

References

Webster, A. (1986). Deafness, development and literacy. London: Methuen.

White, A., & Stevenson, V. (1975). The effects of total communication, oral communication and

reading on the learning of factual information in a residential school for deaf children. American

Annals of the Deaf, 120, 48-57.

Wolk, S., & Allen, T. (1984). A five-year followup study of reading comprehension achievement

in a national sample ofhearing-impaired students in special education programs. Journal of

Special Education, 18, 161-176.

Wood, D., Wood, Il., Griffiths, A., & Howarth, I. (1986). Teaching and talking with deaf

children. Chichester, England: John Wiley Hr Sons.

AuthorAffiliation

Wilson is a Ph.D. candidate at the Centre for Deafness Studies and Research in the Faculty of

Education, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. Hyde is an associate professor of special

education and deputy director of the Centre for Deafness Studies and Research, Griffith

University.