Georgianna Borgna
National Technical Institute for the Deaf
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Georgianna Borgna.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education | 2011
Georgianna Borgna; Carol Convertino; Marc Marschark; Carolyn Morrison; Kathleen Rizzolo
Four experiments, each building on the results of the previous ones, explored the effects of several manipulations on learning and the accuracy of metacognitive judgments among deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students. Experiment 1 examined learning and metacognitive accuracy from classroom lectures with or without prior scaffolding in the form of a description of main points and concepts. Experiment 2 compared the benefits of scaffolding when material was read versus when it was presented as a lecture signed for DHH students and spoken for hearing students. Experiment 3 compared scaffolding provided in the form of main points versus vocabulary, and Experiment 4 examined effects of material familiarity and a delay between study and test. Results indicated that although all students had a tendency to overestimate their performance, hearing students learned more and were more accurate in their metacognitive judgments than DHH students. Content familiarity improved the accuracy of metacognitive judgments by both DHH and hearing students, but the delay manipulation was effective only for hearing students. Consistent with other recent findings, DHH students learned as much from reading as they did from signed instruction. Differences between DHH and hearing students may indicate the need for explicit instruction for DHH students in academically relevant skills acquired incidentally by hearing students.
European Journal of Special Needs Education | 2013
Carolyn Morrison; Marc Marschark; Thomastine Sarchet; Carol Convertino; Georgianna Borgna; Richard Dirmyer
This study explored deaf and hearing university students’ metacognitive awareness with regard to comprehension difficulties during reading and classroom instruction. Utilising the Reading Awareness Inventory (Milholic, V. 1994. An inventory to pique students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Reading 38: 84–6), parallel inventories were created to tap metacognitive awareness during comprehension of sign language (deaf students) and spoken language (hearing students). Overall, both deaf and hearing students appeared to have greater metacognitive awareness of ongoing comprehension and repair strategies during reading than during instruction in the classroom, but deaf students scored lower than hearing students in both modalities. Deaf students were no more likely than hearing students to report adopting inappropriate strategies, but both groups indicated they were more likely to do so in classroom contexts than during reading.
Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities | 2017
Marc Marschark; Allan Paivio; Linda J. Spencer; Andreana Durkin; Georgianna Borgna; Carol Convertino; Elizabeth Machmer
In the education of deaf learners, from primary school to postsecondary settings, it frequently is suggested that deaf students are visual learners. That assumption appears to be based on the visual nature of signed languages—used by some but not all deaf individuals—and the fact that with greater hearing losses, deaf students will rely relatively more on vision than audition. However, the questions of whether individuals with hearing loss are more likely to be visual learners than verbal learners or more likely than hearing peers to be visual learners have not been empirically explored. Several recent studies, in fact, have indicated that hearing learners typically perform as well or better than deaf learners on a variety of visual-spatial tasks. The present study used two standardized instruments to examine learning styles among college deaf students who primarily rely on sign language or spoken language and their hearing peers. The visual-verbal dimension was of particular interest. Consistent with recent indirect findings, results indicated that deaf students are no more likely than hearing students to be visual learners and are no stronger in their visual skills and habits than their verbal skills and habits, nor are deaf students’ visual orientations associated with sign language skills. The results clearly have specific implications for the educating of deaf learners.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education | 2017
Marc Marschark; William G. Kronenberger; Mark Rosica; Georgianna Borgna; Carol Convertino; Andreana Durkin; Elizabeth Machmer; Kathryn L. Schmitz
Two experiments examined relations among social maturity, executive function, language, and cochlear implant (CI) use among deaf high school and college students. Experiment 1 revealed no differences between deaf CI users, deaf nonusers, and hearing college students in measures of social maturity. However, deaf students (both CI users and nonusers) reported significantly greater executive function (EF) difficulties in several domains, and EF was related to social maturity. Experiment 2 found that deaf CI users and nonusers in high school did not differ from each other in social maturity or EF, but individuals who relied on sign language reported significantly more immature behaviors than deaf peers who used spoken language. EF difficulties again were associated with social maturity. The present results indicate that EF and social maturity are interrelated, but those relations vary in different deaf subpopulations. As with academic achievement, CI use appears to have little long-term impact on EF or social maturity. Results are discussed in terms of their convergence with findings related to incidental learning and functioning in several domains.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education | 2018
Marc Marschark; Elizabeth Machmer; Linda J. Spencer; Georgianna Borgna; Andreana Durkin; Carol Convertino
Various studies have examined psychosocial functioning and language abilities among deaf children with and without cochlear implants (CIs). Few, however, have explored how relations among those abilities might change with age and setting. Most relevant studies also have failed to consider that psychosocial functioning among both CI users and nonusers might be influenced by having language abilities in both signed and spoken language. The present investigation explored how these variablesmight influence each other, including the possibility that deaf individuals’ psychosocial functioningmight be influenced differentially by perceived and actual signed and spoken language abilities. Changes in acculturation and quality of life were examined over their first year in college, together with changes in perceived and assessed language abilities. Students with and without CIs differed significantly in some aspects of psychosocial functioning and language ability, but not entirely in the directions expected based on studies involving school-aged deaf students. Participants’ cultural affiliations were related asmuch or more to perceived language abilities as to the reality of those abilities as indicated by formal assessments. These results emphasize the need to consider the heterogeneity of deaf learners if they are to receive the support services needed for personal and academic growth. The present study examined psychosocial functioning among deaf college students as it might be affected by their sign language and spoken language abilities and use of cochlear implants (CIs). The study had two specific foci. One focus was how cultural identity and quality of life among deaf students (with and without CIs) might change over a first year of college when immersed in a Deaf community. The second focus was the previously unexplored possibility that deaf students’ perceived and actual language abilities might be related differentially to their cultural identities and quality of life. Previous studies have explored relations of CI use and quality of life among deaf children, language modality (signed vs. spoken language) and cultural identity among deaf adolescents, and language modality and quality of life among deaf adults. However, CI use, quality of life, cultural identity, and language modality have not been considered previously in a single study. Of particular interest here were possible interactions among those factors, as well as the influence of perceived versus actual language abilities, during the first year of college, when deaf and hearing youth go through significant social-emotional transitions. As young people transition from secondary to postsecondary educational settings, they are assumed also to transition from adolescence to young adulthood. Arnett and Taber (1994) described this period as the overlapping shift from adolescence, at ages 11–19 years, to emerging adulthood, 18–25 years. Arnett (2000) emphasized the latter as a period of identity exploration and frequent risk-taking behavior as individuals come to gain self-sufficiency and independence. As difficult as such changes are for some individuals, entering college or some other postsecondary setting can be particularly challenging for students with hearing loss, who will need greater levels of self-advocacy to navigate communication barriers, access issues, and support Linda J. Spencer is now at the Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions. Received June 30, 2017; revisions received August 3, 2017; editorial decision August 5, 2017; accepted August 7, 2017
Deafness & Education International | 2018
Marc Marschark; Dawn Walton; Kathryn Crowe; Georgianna Borgna; William G. Kronenberger
ABSTRACT This study explored possible associations of social maturity, executive function (EF), self-efficacy, and communication variables among deaf university students, both cochlear implant (CI) users and nonusers. Previous studies have demonstrated differences between deaf and hearing children and young adults in EF and EF-related social and cognitive functioning. EF differences also have been demonstrated between hearing children and deaf children who use CIs. Long-term influences of cochlear implantation in the social domain largely have not been explored, but were examined in the present study in terms of social maturity, as it might be related to EF and communication variables. Replicating and extending recent findings, social maturity was found to be related to somewhat different aspects of EF in CI users, deaf nonusers, and hearing students, but unrelated to hearing status, CI use, or deaf students’ use of sign language versus spoken language. Self-efficacy proved a predictor of self-reported socially mature and immature behaviours for all groups. Individuals’ beliefs about their parents’ views of such behaviours was a potent predictor of behaviours for deaf CI users and those deaf students who reported sign language as their best form of communication.
Journal of Communication Disorders | 2018
Linda J. Spencer; Marc Marschark; Elizabeth Machmer; Andreana Durkin; Georgianna Borgna; Carol Convertino
Objectively measured speech reception, speech production and expressive and receptive sign skills were compared with the self-assessment ratings of those skills in 96 college students with hearing loss. Participants with no aidable hearing used cochlear implants (CIs) or nothing. Participants with aidable hearing used either hearing aids (HAs) or nothing. Results revealed that individuals using CIs had speech reception and production skills that were as good as or better than students with more hearing who used HAs. Students using CIs or HAs had better speech reception and production skills than those without sensory aids. There was no difference in measured receptive sign skills across groups, despite differences in age of sign acquisition. Students typically provided accurate self-assessments of their communication skills with two notable exceptions: CI users overestimated their speech skills and nonusers overestimated their receptive sign skills. This study extends our knowledge regarding speech reception, production, sign skills and the ability to self-assess those skills in college students with hearing loss. Students who do not use sensory aids may be at academic risk with regard to receiving input via speech or sign.
European Journal of Special Needs Education | 2018
Dawn Walton; Georgianna Borgna; Marc Marschark; Kathryn Crowe; Jessica W. Trussell
Abstract The unskilled and unaware effect refers to the finding that individuals who are less knowledgeable or less skilled in a domain are relatively less able to evaluate their level of skill or effectively utilise feedback relative to individuals who are more skilled. Studies finding deaf students less accurate than hearing students in estimating their English vocabulary knowledge and in judging how much they are learning from material presented via sign language have attributed those results to the unskilled and unaware effect, citing the lack of language fluencies frequently demonstrated among deaf learners. The present study addressed the issue more directly by comparing both deaf and hearing individuals who were more and less skilled in four domains, three linguistic and one nonlinguistic. Results indicated that even individuals who are unskilled in a nonlinguistic domain can evaluate their performance when they are aware of what skilled performance would look like, and that unskilled and unaware effects can be influenced by individuals’ desires to be skilled.
Deafness & Education International | 2018
Georgianna Borgna; Dawn Walton; Carol Convertino; Marc Marschark; Jessica W. Trussell
ABSTRACT Various studies have examined possible loci of deaf learners’ documented challenges with regard to reading, usually focusing on language-related factors. Deaf students also frequently struggle in mathematics and science, but fewer studies have examined possible reasons for those difficulties. The present study examined numerical and non-numerical (real-world) estimation skills among deaf and hearing college students, together with several cognitive abilities likely to underlie mathematics performance. Drawing on claims in the literature and some limited evidence from research involving deaf children, the study also considered the possibility that the use of sign language and/or the use of cochlear implants and spoken language might facilitate deaf college students’ estimation skills and mathematics achievement more broadly. Results indicated relatively little impact of cochlear implant use or language modality on either estimation skills or overall mathematics ability. Predictors of those abilities differed for deaf and hearing learners. Results suggest the need to guard against overgeneralizations either within the diverse population of deaf learners or between deaf and hearing learners. They further emphasize the need for evidence-based practice in mathematics instruction appropriate for older deaf learners, rather than making assumptions from studies involving younger or narrowly-selected samples.
Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education | 2014
Carol Convertino; Georgianna Borgna; Marc Marschark; Andreana Durkin