Explore the vast range of titles available.

Both Gina A. Oliva and Linda Risser Lytle know what it is like to be the only deaf student in a mainstream school. Though they became successful educators, they recognize the need to research the same isolation experienced by other deaf and hard of hearing persons. In this way, they hope to improve education for current and future deaf students. Their efforts have culminated in Turning the Tide: Making Life Better for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Schoolchildren . Turning the Tide presents a qualitative study of deaf and hard of hearing students who attended mainstream schools. The authors conducted three focus groups in different regions in the country, enlisting six to eight participants with diverse backgrounds for each session. They also gathered information from 113 online respondents who answered the same questions used in the focus groups. The respondents discussed many issues, including the difficulties of finding friends and social access, the struggle to establish an identity, the challenges of K-12 interpreting and class placement, and the vast potential of summer and weekend programs for deaf students. Their empowering stories clearly demonstrate that no deaf or hard of hearing student should be educated alone. The authors also elicited comments on other changes that parents, advocates, and other allies could work toward to improve further the educational environment of deaf children.

To correct the paucity of information on deaf or hard of hearing children and their parents' experiences with early intervention services, researchers explored these relationships as part of the National Parent Project. From this investigation, Parents and Their Deaf Children details the experiences of a group of parents and their deaf children from the first identification of the latter's hearing loss through their early years in elementary school. Renowned scholars Kathryn Meadow-Orlans, Donna Mertens, and Marilyn Sass-Lehrer reveal here for the first time the goals and expectations of the parents, the children's achievements and troubles, and the families' satisfaction and disappointment with health and educational systems. Parents and their Deaf Children stems from a nationwide survey of parents with six-to-seven-year-old deaf or hard of hearing children, followed up by interviews with 80 parents. The authors not only discuss the parents' communication choices for their children, but also provide how parents' experiences differ, especially for those whose children are hard of hearing, have additional conditions, or have cochlear implants. Also, one chapter is devoted to families from minority cultures. The final section of this distinctive study offers solid advice for other parents of deaf children and also the professionals who serve them. Kathryn P. Meadow-Orlans is Professor Emerita at Gallaudet University and former Senior Research Scientist at Gallaudet Research Institute, Washington, DC. Donna M. Mertens is Professor in the Department of Educational Foundations and Research at Gallaudet University, Washington, DC. Marilyn A. Sass-Lehrer is Professor in the Department of Education at Gallaudet University, Washington, DC.

The first large-scale, nationwide academic achievement testing program using Stanford Achievement Test (Stanford) for deaf and hard-of-hearing children in the United States started in 1969. Over the past three decades, the Stanford has served as a benchmark in the field of deaf education for assessing student academic achievement. However, the validity and reliability of using the Stanford for this special student population still require extensive scrutiny. Recent shifts in educational policy environment, which require that schools enable all children to achieve proficiency through accountability testing, warrants a close examination of the adequacy and relevance of the current large-scale testing of deaf and hard-of-hearing students. This study has three objectives: (a) it will summarize the historical data over the last three decades to indicate trends in academic achievement for this special population, (b) it will analyze the current federal laws and regulations related to educational testing and special education, thereby identifying gaps between policy and practice in the field, especially identifying the limitations of current testing programs in assessing what deaf and hard-of-hearing students know, and (c) it will offer some insights and suggestions for future testing programs for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.

Purpose: To determine whether 3 aspects of the word learning process--fast mapping, retention, and extension--are problematic for children with cochlear implants (CIs). Method: The authors compared responses of 24 children with CIs, 24 age-matched hearing children, and 23 vocabulary-matched hearing children to a novel object noun training episode. Comprehension and production were measured immediately following training (fast mapping) as well as 1 day later (retention). Extension was measured in terms of the ability of the participants to identify new (untrained) exemplars. Results: Compared with their hearing age-mates, children with CIs performed marginally more poorly on fast mapping as measured by the comprehension probe and more poorly on retention as measured by comprehension and production probes. The age-mates improved over the retention interval, but the children with CIs did not. Most of the children with CIs performed similarly to their age-mates on extension, but 2 children underextended, and 5 children failed to understand the task. Compared with younger vocabulary-matched peers, children with CIs did not differ at fast mapping, retention, or extension. Conclusions: Children with CIs demonstrated deficits in word learning, with retention being especially problematic. Their learning did not differ from that of younger children with similarly sized vocabularies. (Contains 4 tables and 3 figures.)

In this article, we argue that the current linguistic and educational policies affecting school-age US children whose native language is American Sign Language (ASL) should be changed. Concretely, we demonstrate that ASL-English bilinguals should be eligible for classification as English learners (EL). While this identification should remain optional in order to be responsive to individual differences and preferences, we argue that identification can result in increased educational services and access to appropriately targeted instructional support. We offer concrete programmatic and curricular solutions and articulate other consequences affecting various fields, including language policy.

The number of children worldwide with hearing impairment is increasing, and these children face a number of social and educational obstacles.

AMULTIMETHOD STUDY examined the 50 U.S. states’ preparation and licensure practices regarding students with low-incidence sensory disabilities (LISD). The researchers used document review and structured interviews with state education agency representatives. It was found that institutions of higher education (IHEs) in 38 states offer at least one LISD preparation program; 12 states offer no programs at all. Further, program intensity, a measure of state capacity to serve students with LISD, varies from 0 to about 3 programs per million state residents. States also differ by the regime used to qualify teaching candidates, using either licensure or endorsement. Nationally, being an LISD licensure regime is, all else being equal, negatively correlated with number of LISD programs. The findings suggest that many states lack the capacity to supply enough trained professionals to serve students with LISD. Recommendations are framed for states, national organizations, and IHEs.

The authors describe and compare how physical education classes and healthy lifestyle concepts are taught in selected Czech and U.S. schools for the deaf. Professionals who participated in the study included principals and teachers employed by 4 schools for the deaf. Data from schools were collected during the summer and fall semesters, and subsequent interviews were conducted with the principals and physical education teachers. Unique characteristics were exhibited by each of the 4 schools. The settings for extracurricular physical and sports activities varied by school type (residential or nonresidential). Findings indicated that the general trend in physical education has changed from a focus on sports performance to health- promoting activities. There were opportunities for teachers to revise curriculum programs to further promote the health and academic success of students who are deaf or hard of hearing.

THE RESEARCHERS explored the effectiveness of Visual Phonics as a reading instructional tool when used in conjunction with a modified version of the Fountas and Pinnell Kindergarten Phonics Curriculum (Fountas & Pinnell, 2002) with a preschool student who was deaf. The study participant was a 4-year-old deaf child who had a cochlear implant. The goal of the study was to determine whether the student’s phonological awareness and speech production improved over the course of a 6-week intervention. Identical pre- and postintervention tests were administered to measure the extent of any improvement. It was found that Visual Phonics used with a phonics-based curriculum significantly increased phonological awareness and speech production.

AN INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGY was investigated that addressed the needs of deaf and hard of hearing students through a conceptually based sign language vocabulary intervention. A single-subject multiple-baseline design was used to determine the effects of the vocabulary intervention on word recognition, production, and comprehension. Six students took part in the 30-minute intervention over 6–8 weeks, learning 12 new vocabulary words each week by means of the three intervention components: (a) word introduction, (b) word activity (semantic mapping), and (c) practice. Results indicated that the vocabulary intervention successfully improved all students’ recognition, production, and comprehension of the vocabulary words and phrases.