Brenda Schick

Language and Literacy Development of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children: Successes and Challenges.

Childhood hearing loss presents challenges to language development, especially spoken language. In this article, we review existing literature on deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) childrens patterns and trajectories of language as well as development of theory of mind and literacy. Individual trajectories vary significantly, reflecting access to early identification/intervention, advanced technologies (e.g., cochlear implants), and perceptually accessible language models. DHH children develop sign language in a similar manner as hearing children develop spoken language, provided they are in a language-rich environment. This occurs naturally for DHH children of deaf parents, who constitute 5% of the deaf population. For DHH children of hearing parents, sign language development depends on the age that they are exposed to a perceptually accessible 1st language as well as the richness of input. Most DHH children are born to hearing families who have spoken language as a goal, and such development is now feasible for many children. Some DHH children develop spoken language in bilingual (sign-spoken language) contexts. For the majority of DHH children, spoken language development occurs in either auditory-only contexts or with sign supports. Although developmental trajectories of DHH children with hearing parents have improved with early identification and appropriate interventions, the majority of children are still delayed compared with hearing children. These DHH children show particular weaknesses in the development of grammar. Language deficits and differences have cascading effects in language-related areas of development, such as theory of mind and literacy development.

Advances in the sign language development of deaf children

1. Understanding Sign Language Development of Deaf Children 2. Issues of Linguistic Typology in the Study of Sign Language Development of Deaf Children 3. The Development of Gesture in Hearing and Deaf Children 4. Patterns and Effects of Language Input to Deaf Infants and Toddlers from Deaf and Hearing Mothers 5. Acquiring a Visually-Motivated Language: Evidence from Diverse Learners 6. Lexical Development of Deaf Children Acquiring Signed Languages 7. Deaf Children Are Verb Attenders: Early Sign Vocabulary Development in Dutch Toddlers 8. Learning to Fingerspell Twice: Young Signing Childrens Acquisition of Fingerspelling 9. The Form of Early Signs: Explaining Signing Childrens Articulatory Development 10. Acquisition of Syntax in Signed Languages 11. How Faces Come To Serve Grammar: The Development of NonManual Morphology in American Sign Language 12. Deaf Childrens Acquisition of Modal Terms 13. The Development of Narrative Skills in British Sign Language 14. Natural Signed Language Acquisition within the Social Context of the Classroom

What is learnable in manually coded English sign systems

It has been suggested that manual sign systems designed to represent English are unlearnable because they are not natural languages. In order to examine this premise, the present study examines reading achievement and expressive English skills of 13 profoundly deaf students, aged 7;1 to 14;8, who were educated using only a manually coded English (MCE) sign system. Linguistic structures selected for analysis were designed to reflect unique characteristics of English, as well as those common to English and American Sign Language, and to obtain a broad picture of English skills. Results showed that the deaf students had expressive English skills comparable to a hearing control group for some features of English that reflected syntactic and lexical skills. They showed substantial deficits in inflectional morphological skills that were not predictive of the complexity of their language. The results reveal which aspects of MCE appear to be learnable and which appear problematic for deaf students.

School placement and perceived quality of life in youth who are deaf or hard of hearing.

In the education of students who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH), there is much debate about how placement affects educational outcomes and quality of life. This study examined the relationship between quality of life and educational placement that include and do not include other DHH youth. Participants included 221 DHH youth, ages 11-18 with bilateral hearing loss. Results showed that there were few differences in quality of life related to school placement (with age, gender, depression symptoms, and hearing level as covariates). For both participation and perceived stigma, there was an interaction between school placement and parent hearing status, with no single school placement showing the best results. DHH youth with hearing parents in schools specifically for DHH students scored lower than DHH with deaf parents in some domains (Participation and Perceived Stigma). When the DHH youth were compared with the general population, those in schools that included DHH students scored lower in some aspects of quality of life, particularly Self and Relationships. This study demonstrates that DHH students may not differ much in terms of quality of life across schools placements, but that there may be differences in subsets of DHH youth.

Validation of a quality-of-life measure for deaf or hard of hearing youth.

Objective. Quality-of-life (QOL) measures targeting youth with hearing loss are useful in population needs assessment, educational placement, and program design and evaluation. This study assesses the cross-sectional validity of the Youth Quality of Life Instrument–Deaf and Hard of Hearing Module (YQOL-DHH). Study Design. Instrument development and cross-sectional survey. Setting. Recruitment through schools, professional organizations, clinics, and programs for youth who are deaf or hard of hearing. Subjects and Methods. Thirty-five candidate items were administered to 230 adolescents aged 11 to 18 years: 49% female, 61% white, 11% mild hearing loss, 20% moderate/moderate-severe, 41% severe/profound, and 28% with cochlear implants. Participants completed individual or group-administered questionnaires by paper and pencil (58%), Web-based English (29%), American Sign Language (ASL) or Pidgin Signed English (PSE) (9%) on DVD, or interviewer-supervised ASL or PSE DVD (4%). The Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI-S) was also completed. Factor structure, reliability, construct validity, and respondent burden were assessed. Results. Thirty-two items were retained in the final instrument covering 3 domains: self-acceptance/advocacy (14 items, Cronbach α = 0.84), perceived stigma (8 items, Cronbach α = 0.85), and participation (10 items, Cronbach α = 0.86). QOL was not significantly associated with hearing level. One-week test-retest coefficients were acceptable: self-acceptance/ advocacy (0.70), perceived stigma (0.78), and participation (0.92). As predicted, the total CDI-S score was associated in the appropriate direction (P < .0001) with all YQOL-DHH domains. Time to complete the paper-and-pencil version was 12 minutes. Conclusion. The YQOL-DHH shows good reliability and validity for assessing hearing-specific QOL in adolescents.

Symbol-Infused Joint Attention and Language Use in Mothers With Deaf and Hearing Toddlers

Mother-child interactions in 2-year-old deaf toddlers with deaf parents, deaf toddlers with hearing parents, and hearing toddlers with hearing parents were explored. Fifteen dyads were videotaped in free play and symbol-infused joint attention tasks. Dyads with hearing parents displayed similar responsiveness/directiveness patterns and spent similar amounts of time in symbol-infused joint attention regardless of child hearing status. Deaf toddlers with hearing mothers, however, produced significantly fewer different words and spent less time in sustained interactions than hearing toddlers. Compared with hearing mothers with deaf toddlers, deaf mothers tended to be more responsive to their toddler’s attention focus, an aspect of maternal responsiveness significantly related to the frequency of sustained interaction. Deaf toddlers with deaf mothers spent significantly less time in symbol-infused joint attention, possibly because of deaf toddlers’ need to divide visual attention between looking at objects and attending to their mother’s language.

Environmental Language Factors in Theory of Mind Development: Evidence from Children Who Are Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing or Who Have Specific Language Impairment.

Theory of Mind (ToM) is a foundational skill related to understanding the thoughts, beliefs, and desires of oneself and others. There are child factors that play an important role in the development of ToM (e.g., language and vocabulary) as well as environmental factors (e.g., conversations among family members and socioeconomic status). In this review, we discuss the role of language in ToM and include the nature of social interactions that scaffold ToM development. We review research on deaf and hard-of-hearing children and children with specific language impairment; 2 groups who experience difficulties with language for different reasons, but both encounter deficits in ToM development. Finally, we conclude with examples of how clinicians can easily assess a childs ToM abilities and offer empirical evidence that aspects of ToM can be scaffolded with explicit instruction.

Aspects of Rhythm in ASL

The fluent production of American Sign Language (ASL), like speech involves highly skilled, complex motor activity. Thus, like all skilled motor acts, it is rhythmically structured. This paper presents the results of an experiment designed to determine whether the rhythm of ASL can be associated with rhythmic beats. Three groups of adult observer subjects, ASL-fluent deaf, ASL-fluent normally-hearing children of deaf parents, and sign-naive normally hearing, tapped a small metal stylus in time to the rhythm of five short ASL narratives 30 times repeated; temporal locations of the observers’ taps were compared statistically for differences related to observer group membership and to various properties of the target signs. There was great overall agreement among subjects that repeated signs, signs with primary stress, and phrase-final signs played a major role in the rhythm of these ASL narratives. The ASL-fluent subjects tapped less often to signs with secondary or weak stress than did the ASL-naive subjects, however, confirming that knowledge of ASL is necessary for full appreciation of the rhythm of ASL.

Quality of Life in Youth With Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss

IMPORTANCE Adolescence is a life stage with rapid and major developmental changes, yet little is known about how these changes influence the quality of life of young people who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). OBJECTIVE To determine differences in the 3 domains of a hearing-specific quality-of-life instrument between youth who had severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss based on whether they used no technology, hearing aids, or cochlear implants. DESIGN AND SETTING A multi-institutional prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS A convenience sample of 11- to 18-year-old youths with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss recruited between January 1 and December 31, 2008. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Youth Quality of Life-Research Instrument and Youth Quality of Life Instrument-Deaf and Hard of Hearing (YQoL-DHH) scores. The YQoL-DHH was composed of 3 domains: participation, self-acceptance/advocacy, and stigma-related quality of life. RESULTS A total of 157 individuals participated. Overall mean (SD) age was 14.1 (2.3) years, and the female-male ratio was 82:75. Forty-nine individuals (31.2%) were not using any technology, 45 (28.7%) were using hearing aids, and 63 (40.1%) were using cochlear implants. Mean age of unilateral or first cochlear implant was 62.9 months. Thirty-eight individuals (24.2%) attended schools with DHH programs, 55 (35.0%) attended schools without DHH programs, and 58 (36.9%) attended schools for the deaf. Statistically significant differences were noted in YQoL-DHH participation and perceived stigma scores between the groups when stratified by technology used and school setting. CONCLUSIONS These data suggest that the domains of quality of life as measured by our instrument differ significantly among youth based on technology used and school setting. Youth using no technology or cochlear implants tended to score higher than those using hearing aids in mainstream schools with or without DHH programs and in schools for the deaf. The YQoL-DHH instrument is able to detect differences in quality of life within a group of youth with severe to profound hearing loss.

The Effects of Morphological Complexity on Phonological Simplification in ASL

Researchers have observed that children learning American Sign Language produce incorrect handshapes when they attempt to sign multi-morphemic classifier predicates. Classifiers use distinctive handshapes for morphemes selected to categorize the referent noun. Previous reports suggest that the earliest handshapes children use in forming classifiers reflect stages of their handshape acquisition that are determined by anatomical and cognitive complexity. In this study a conversational game prompted 24 children to produce three types of multi-morphemic classifier predicates. Results indicate that handshape production is influenced both by morphological complexity and by factors more appropriately viewed as syntactic. Handshape errors produced do not support predictions based on anatomical complexity alone.