Teenagers and Young Adults Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: a Snapshot of Acculturation in High School and Post-Secondary Life.

OBJECTIVES: The current study investigates acculturation in a group of teenagers and young adults who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) and who were raised in an age of early identification, early intervention, advanced audiologic technology, and inclusive education. DESIGN: The Deaf Acculturation Scale ( Maxwell-McCaw & Zea 2011 ) was administered via online survey to 106 teenagers and young adults (mean ages = 16.87 and 24.65 years, respectively). All participants were alumni of an early childhood program for children who are DHH in the United States learning listening and spoken language skills. RESULTS: The majority of the participants scored as hearing acculturated (79%), with 1% scoring as deaf acculturated, and 20% as bicultural. Teenagers and adults did not differ significantly on acculturation. Participants who identified as hearing acculturated were less likely to use sign language with their friends, at work, or with their families than those who identified as bicultural. CONCLUSIONS: These results are in contrast to acculturation patterns reported in other populations of young DHH adults, indicating the need to continue investigating the diversity in cultural values, beliefs, and practices of people who are DHH.

Early educational placement and later language outcomes for children with cochlear implants.

HYPOTHESIS: This investigation examined the hypothesis that the type of preschool intervention provided to children who receive a cochlear implant affects their language scores at school entry. BACKGROUND: Recent research has documented faster language acquisition when children attend specialized preschool programs beginning at age 3 years. We hypothesized that if similar intervention were initiated before age 3 years, the rate of language acquisition might increase even more. METHODS: Thirty-nine listening and spoken language (LSL) programs located in 20 different states across the United States contributed language test scores for 141 five- and six-year-olds who had used a cochlear implant for at least 1 year. A retrospective analysis compared outcomes at 5 to 6 years based on interventions received each year before age 5 years: 1) individual parent-infant intervention; 2) LSL class with only deaf children, or 3) LSL class with 1 or more hearing children. RESULTS: The specific type of intervention at ages 1 and 2 years provided a lasting positive impact on language, at least until kindergarten. The probability that a child would reach normal language levels by kindergarten increased significantly if, at age 1 year, intervention included a combination of cochlear implant use and parent-infant intervention and, at age 2 years, a LSL class with other deaf children was added. CONCLUSION: These results favor providing a cochlear implant by age 1 year and supplementing early parent-infant intervention with an intensive toddler class designed specifically for developing spoken language in children with hearing loss by age 2 years.

Receptive vocabulary development in deaf children with cochlear implants: achievement in an intensive auditory-oral educational setting.

OBJECTIVES: Deaf children with cochlear implants are at a disadvantage in learning vocabulary when compared with hearing peers. Past research has reported that children with implants have lower receptive vocabulary scores and less growth over time than hearing children. Research findings are mixed as to the effects of age at implantation on vocabulary skills and development. One goal of the current study is to determine how children with cochlear implants educated in an auditory-oral environment compared with their hearing peers on a receptive vocabulary measure in overall achievement and growth rates. This study will also investigate the effects of age at implant on vocabulary abilities and growth rates. We expect that the children with implants will have smaller vocabularies than their hearing peers but will achieve similar rates of growth as their implant experience increases. We also expect that children who receive their implants at young ages will have better overall vocabulary and higher growth rates than older-at-implant children. DESIGN: Repeated assessments using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test were given to 65 deaf children with cochlear implants who used oral communication, who were implanted under the age of 5 yr, and who attended an intensive auditory-oral education program. Multilevel modeling was used to describe overall abilities and rates of receptive vocabulary growth over time. RESULTS: On average, the deaf children with cochlear implants had lower vocabulary scores than their hearing peers. However, the deaf children demonstrated substantial vocabulary growth, making more than 1 yr's worth of progress in a year. This finding contrasts with those of previous studies of children with implants, which found lower growth rates. A negative quadratic trend indicated that growth decelerated with time. Age at implantation significantly affected linear and quadratic growth. Younger-at-implant children had steeper growth rates but more tapering off with time than children implanted later in life. CONCLUSIONS: Growth curves indicate that children who are implanted by the age of 2 yr can achieve receptive vocabulary skills within the average range for hearing children.

Changing expectations for children with cochlear implants.

Seventeen students with cochlear implants who were between 5 and 11 years of age and attended the Moog Center for Deaf Education school program were tested just before exiting the program. The Moog program is an intensive oral program that provides very focused instruction in spoken language and reading. Children leave the program when they are ready for a mainstream setting or when they are 11 years of age, whichever comes first. All of the children demonstrated open-set speech perception ranging from 36% to 100%. On a test of speech intelligibility, all students scored 90% or better. On language and reading tests, compared with the performance of normal-hearing children their age, more than 65% scored within the average range for language and more than 70% scored within the average range for reading. These data demonstrate what is possible for deaf children who benefit from a combination of a cochlear implant and a highly focused oral education program.