Investigating the Writing Achievement of Deaf Learners.

This study investigated writing achievement in a Canadian cohort of school-aged deaf learners (N = 64). In the current context, in which most students are educated in inclusive settings and use hearing technologies, the goal was to establish whether outcomes approach those of hearing-age peers and identify demographic factors (e.g., gender, grade, additional disability, home language, hearing loss, hearing technology, auditory perception) influencing performance. Results indicated that a high percentage of participants performed in the average range or higher on a standardized, norm-referenced assessment, the Test of Written Language-Fourth Edition (TOWL-4, Hammill & Larsen, 2009). Grade, type of hearing loss, higher auditory perception scores, and absence of an additional disability were identified as variables of significance. As auditory access continues to improve, additional investigations of writing achievement in this population will be essential to further inform educational policy and pedagogical practice.

Reading Achievement of Deaf Students: Challenging the Fourth Grade Ceiling.

Historically it has been reported that deaf students do not achieve age-appropriate outcomes in reading, with this performance often being characterized in terms of a fourth grade ceiling. However, given the shifts in the field during the past 20 years (e.g., widespread implementation of newborn hearing screening, advances in hearing technologies), it would be timely to question whether this continues to serve as a meaningful benchmark. To this end, the purpose of this study was to investigate reading outcomes of a Canadian cohort of school-aged deaf learners (N = 70) who all used listening and spoken language as the primary mode of communication. Specifically, the goal was to establish whether their achievement approached that of their hearing age peers and to identify demographic factors influencing performance (i.e., gender, unilateral/bilateral hearing loss, personal amplification, level of auditory functioning, grade placement, additional disabilities, home language). Results indicate that participants obtained standard scores in the average range on both the Basic Reading and Reading Comprehension clusters of the Woodcock Johnson III-Diagnostic Reading Battery (Woodcock et al., 2004), surpassing the fourth grade reading achievement ceiling often reported for this population.

Making Claims in the Light of Evidence: A Rejoinder to Scott, Dostal, and Lane-Outlaw.

Mayer and Trezek offer a rejoinder to an article by Scott, Dostal, and Lane-Outlaw in which Scott et al. challenge the findings and conclusions of a literature review by Mayer and Trezek published in the Winter 2020 American Annals of the Deaf. Both the rejoinder and the article by Scott et al. appear in the Annals' Spring 2021 issue. Mayer and Trezek reiterate the rationale and aims of their review, as well as the process for conducting it, emphasizing the need for empirical evidence to inform policy and practice in deaf education. They also address observations made in terms of (a) factors to be considered when generating or consuming research and (b) the nature of the search procedures that are used. Mayer and Trezek conclude by restating the findings of their review and the implications of these findings for the field moving forward.

English Literacy Outcomes in Sign Bilingual Programs: Current State of the Knowledge.

The authors (a) examine the available peer-reviewed research documenting the literacy achievement of deaf children educated in sign bilingual programs, (b) identify gaps in the empirical literature, and (c) propose directions for future research. This review was limited to studies that reported reading and writing outcomes. On this basis, only 3 studies were identified, representing those published over a period of approximately 20 years (1997-2017) and collectively reporting literacy outcomes for 127 deaf students. Overall, the studies indicate that the majority of participants were not achieving reading comprehension scores in the average range; further, a wide range of variability in achievement was reported across the 3 studies. Factors potentially affecting achievement, such as the presence of additional disabilities, level of American Sign Language proficiency, use of hearing technologies, and parental hearing status, are also discussed.

Literacy Outcomes in Deaf Students with Cochlear Implants: Current State of the Knowledge.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the available peer-reviewed research regarding literacy achievement in deaf children with cochlear implants. A related goal is to identify gaps in the empirical literature and suggest directions for future research. Included in this review are studies that exclusively report reading and writing outcomes for groups of students. A total of 21 studies were identified, representing those published over approximately a 20-year time period (1997-2016) and collectively reporting the literacy outcomes for over 1,000 cochlear implant users. Overall findings of the studies of reading comprehension suggest that the majority of participants achieved scores in the average range, although a wide-range of variability was reported. Only 3 studies of writing were available for review, with 2 reporting lower achievement in this area as compared to reading. Factors impacting outcomes achieved such as age at implantation, presence of additional disabilities, consistency of device use, and communication modality are explored and summarized.

Cued Speech and the Development of Reading in English: Examining the Evidence.

Even though Cued Speech has been a communication option for 50 years, it has not been widely adopted among users of English or in the country where it was created (i.e., the United States). This situation has led scholars and practitioners in the field of deafness to question whether the original intent of creating this system has been realized and if there is an adequate research base to support the use of Cued Speech in developing English reading abilities. The purpose of this review was to examine the available research to determine whether there is evidence available to address the persistent questions about Cued Speech and English. Information from four areas of literature was reviewed and summarized, with converging findings from the available data sources revealing support for the role Cued Speech plays in developing reading abilities in English. Limitations of the current literature base and directions for future research are explored.

Using an Informal Reading Inventory to Differentiate Instruction: Case Studies of Three Deaf Learners.

The present study examined the efficacy of using an informal reading inventory to assess literacy levels in elementary-age deaf students, grades 3-5: the period when the gap between deaf and hearing learners often begins to widen, and the need to identify and remediate specific skill deficits becomes increasingly imperative. Emphasis was placed on exploring how results of a formative assessment can inform instruction across a variety of literacy skills (e.g., word identification, reading accuracy, reading fluency, reading comprehension, writing) and among a broad range of learners. A case study approach is used to present in-depth overviews of the performance profiles of three students; also, instructional implications of the findings are discussed. The results illustrate how an informal reading inventory can be used to design interventions that are differentiated and targeted based on identified needs in both the code- and language-related domains of literacy skill development.

Is reading different for deaf individuals? Reexamining the role of phonology.

Quarter century ago, Hanson (1989) asked, "Is reading different for deaf individuals?" (p. 85). Appealing to evidence available at the time, she argued that skilled deaf readers, like their hearing counterparts, relied on their knowledge of English structure, including phonological information. This perspective on the role phonology plays in the reading process for deaf learners continues to generate much debate in the field, and little consensus exists on whether it is a necessary aspect of learning to read for this population. The present article revisits this question in terms of what is known about phonology and reading in typically developing learners, and in light of two reviews of the research from the field of deafness. The authors conclude that there is stronger empirical evidence for the argument for a relationship between phonology and reading in the population of deaf readers than for the counter-argument.

Implementing instruction in the alphabetic principle within a sign bilingual setting.

The purpose of the present study was to examine the results of implementing remedial instruction in the alphabetic principle with deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students educated in a sign bilingual setting. Data were analyzed in 2 phases, with the first using paired-sample t tests and Pearson correlations and the second phase employing structural equation modeling. Results indicate that study participants (N = 127) from a range of grade placements, with various degrees of hearing loss, and including those with additional disabilities, can acquire an understanding of the alphabetic principle, apply this knowledge to the reading of words, and demonstrate generalization of skills through a pseudo word decoding task. Given the ongoing debates regarding the relevance of phonologically based instruction for DHH learners, the findings of this investigation will also serve to address some of the misconceptions regarding the instructional methods and strategies employed in interventions of this type.

Phonology is necessary, but not sufficient: a rejoinder.

Paul, Wang, Trezek, and Luckner offer a rebuttal to an article by Allen, Clark, del Giudice, Koo, Lieberman, Mayberry, and Miller published in the same issue of the American Annals of the Deaf (Fall 2009) that is critical of an article by Wang, Trezek, Luckner, and Paul that was published in the Fall 2008 Annals. Major themes from the article by Wang and colleagues are reiterated, and the research and theoretical support for the qualitative-similarity hypothesis is emphasized. In addition, specific assertions made in the four sections of the article by Allen and colleagues, which are mostly overgeneralizations and misunderstandings, are addressed. Finally, concluding remarks regarding the importance of phonology are provided.

The role of phonology and phonologically related skills in reading instruction for students who are deaf or hard of hearing.

The article challenges educators to rethink reading instruction practices for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The authors begin with a discussion of the role of phonology in reading, then summarize the evidence of phonological coding among skilled deaf readers and investigate alternative routes for acquiring phonologically related skills such as the use of speechreading, articulatory feedback, Visual Phonics, and Cued Speech. Finally, they present recent intervention studies and proposed procedures to employ phonics-based instruction with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The authors conclude with the assertion that the teaching of phonologically related skills by means of instructional tools such as Visual Phonics and Cued Speech can and should be incorporated into reading instruction for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The authors recommend additional research in this important area.

Using visual phonics to supplement beginning reading instruction for students who are deaf or hard of hearing.

The purpose of the current study is to expand upon the effectiveness of using Visual Phonics in conjunction with Direct Instruction reading programs (B. J. Trezek & K. W. Malmgren, 2005; B. J. Trezek & Y. Wang, 2006) and to explore the results of utilizing Visual Phonics to supplement another phonics-based reading curriculum for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Twenty students with various degrees of hearing loss in kindergarten and first grade as well as 4 teachers participated in the study. Results of the investigation reveal that, given 1 year of instruction from a phonics-based reading curriculum supplemented by Visual Phonics, kindergarten and first-grade students who are deaf or hard of hearing can demonstrate statistically significant improvements in beginning reading skills as measured by standardized assessments.

Implications of utilizing a phonics-based reading curriculum with children who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Extensive literature has reiterated the reading difficulties of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Building and expanding upon the work of B. J. Trezek and K. W. Malmgren, this study demonstrated that given 1 year of instruction from a phonics-based reading curriculum supplemented by Visual Phonics, kindergarten and first-grade students who were deaf or hard of hearing could demonstrate improvements in beginning reading skills as measured by standardized assessments of (a) word reading, (b) pseudoword decoding, and (c) reading comprehension. Furthermore, the acquisition of beginning reading skills did not appear to be related to degree of hearing loss. In this study, students with various degrees of hearing loss benefited equally well from this phonics-based reading curriculum supplemented by Visual Phonics.

The efficacy of utilizing a phonics treatment package with middle school deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

Research indicates that the acquisition of phonemic awareness and phonic skills is highly correlated with later success in learning to read. Numerous studies support the hypothesis that deaf and hard-of-hearing children are able to utilize alternative systems to develop phonological awareness that are not dependent on the ability to hear sounds or accurately pronounce words. A quasi-experimental, pre- and posttest design was employed in this study that evaluated the efficacy of implementing a phonics treatment package with middle-school-aged students. Results indicate that treatment students were able to demonstrate acquisition and generalization of the phonic skills taught. Additionally, acquisition of these skills did not appear to be related to degree of hearing loss.