Student perceptions and instructional effectiveness of deaf and hearing teachers

The study examined the views of deaf and hard of hearing secondary-level students when asked about their preferences for deaf vs. hearing teachers. It also compared elementary- and secondary-level students' achievement scores based on the hearing status of their teachers. Deaf and hard of hearing secondary-level students showed greater preference for deaf teachers, with deaf students showing greater preference for deaf teachers than hard of hearing students did. No significant differences were found in the achievement levels of students based on differences in teacher hearing status. The study supports the limited research done in the past.     

A comparison of the vocal patterns of deaf and hearing mother-infant dyads during face-to-face interactions

This study was part of a longitudinal investigation of the impact of deafness on the cognitive, social, and communicative development of infants. The current study reports analyses of the vocalizations of deaf and hearing infants and their Deaf or hearing mothers during normal face-to-face interactions when the infants were 9 months old. Results indicate essentially no differences in the amount of positive or negative vocalizations emitted by infants in any of the four groups observed. However, there is a heightened use of vocal games by hearing mothers interacting with deaf infants, indicating that these mothers are incorporating several additional sensory modalities into their vocal expressions. This is interpreted as one way in which parents make their vocal communication more salient and accessible to an infant with a hearing loss. Deaf mothers are also highly active and engaged with their infants, but have been found to rely more extensively on vigorous tactile contact rather than auditory input during these same interactions.     

Self-concept in hearing and prelingual, profoundly deaf students. A comparison of teachers' perceptions.

A self-concept measure was administered to a group of 68 deaf students aged 8-19 years and a comparison group of 68 hearing students. Teachers for both of the groups completed observer reports of self-concept. Although tentative, the findings indicate that hearing teachers' perceptions of students' self-concepts are in closer agreement for hearing students than they are for deaf students. At the same time, the results show that deaf students do not appear markedly different from hearing students in their own reports of self-concept.     

Comparing motor development of deaf children of deaf parents and deaf children of hearing parents

Deaf children of Deaf parents perform better academically (Ritter-Brinton & Stewart, 1992), linguistically (Courtin, 2000; M. Harris, 2001; Vaccari & Marschark, 1997), and socially (Hadadian & Rose, 1991; M. Harris, 2001) than Deaf children of hearing parents. Twenty-nine Deaf children in residential schools were assessed to determine if a significant difference also exists in motor development between Deaf children with Deaf parents and Deaf children with hearing parents. In the locomotor area, 78.6% of Deaf children of Deaf parents and 73.3% of Deaf children of hearing parents reached or surpassed average performance levels. In regard to object control, 92.9% of Deaf children of Deaf parents and 93.3% of Deaf children of hearing parents reached or surpassed average performance levels. The study results show no significant difference between the motor development of Deaf children of Deaf parents and Deaf children of hearing parents.     

Comparing practical knowledge storage of deaf and hearing teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing

Especially in the education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing, teachers' practical knowledge storage is almost never measured. The Survey of Practical Knowledge was used to compare the practical knowledge storage of deaf and hearing teachers of these students. Surveyed were 48 deaf and 115 hearing individuals at the preservice and in-service experience levels. Practical knowledge storage was defined as images, rules of practice, and practical principles. Results indicate that deaf teachers tend to view students as equals but are more likely to emphasize control over classroom behavior than hearing teachers. Hearing teachers tend to stress efforts to engage students in subject matter by providing variety and relating it to life experiences. Given the trend toward high-stakes testing of teachers, further research is encouraged on role differences between deaf and hearing teachers working with students who are deaf or hard of hearing.     

Learning to look in the right place: a comparison of attentional behavior in deaf children with deaf and hearing mothers

Eleven 18-month-old children with profound prelingual hearing loss were video-recorded in a free-play session with their mothers. Five of the mothers were profoundly deaf and fluent users of British Sign Language (BSL) or Auslan. The other six were hearing and had enrolled in a signing program. Ten-minute segments from each session were analyzed to determine the number of switches in attention shown by each child. Switches in attention were subdivided into three categories: spontaneous (where the child spontaneously looked to the mother); responsive (where the child responded to some maternal action such as moving an object); and elicited (where the mother made a direct attempt to gain the child's attention. Failed attempts to gain attention were also noted. A comparison of deaf and hearing mothers revealed no difference in the proportion of spontaneous or responsive switches in attention shown by their children. Responsive switches were by far the most frequent category for both groups, but these most commonly focused on objects and did not provide an opportunity for maternal signing. Successful perception of signing typically followed from spontaneous or elicited attentional switches. Deaf mothers were generally more insistent on their children turning to look at them, and they were more successful in eliciting attentional switches although they also had more failed attempts. These overall differences between the two groups were overshadowed by large individual differences within the groups. Within the sample there were both deaf and hearing mothers who achieved successful signed communication with their children.     

When the same is different. A comparison of the information processing strategies of deaf and hearing people.

In this study, the information processing strategies of Gallaudet University students who are profoundly and prelingually deaf were evaluated. The subjects demonstrated the highest levels of recognition to the left and right of the fixation point, often referred to as a reading strategy when found in hearing people. Additionally, they demonstrated higher levels of recognition at positions in the top right quadrant of the display, a pattern not found in hearing people. A main effect was found: subjects whose primary and secondary school backgrounds were oral and manual combined had significantly higher levels of recognition overall than did subjects from oral-only educational backgrounds. Differences in background did not interact with strategy use in this study. These findings lead to the conclusion that the information processing strategies of deaf people need to be evaluated closely before general conclusions can be made. Alternative means for evaluating these types of findings are suggested.     

Spelling without phonology: A study of deaf and hearing children

To what extent does phonology play a role in spelling English words? The written responses of deaf students and groups of hearing children to five tasks were subjected to quantitative and qualitative analyses. The first three tasks were used to see if deaf students utilized phonology when they generated their own words and to compare their spelling performance with that of hearing subjects. The fourth and fifth tasks were designed to compare the spelling performance of deaf and hearing subjects when they were required to reproduce visually presented common words. Results showed that deaf students, who were chronologically much older, were not better spellers than hearing children from the fifth grade. Analysis of data revealed little evidence that the deaf students involved in the present study utilize phonology in spelling. Nor did word-specific visual memory for entire words appears to play a role in spelling by deaf students. Rote visual memory for letter patterns and sequences of letters within words, however, appears to play a role in the spelling by deaf students. It is concluded that sensitivity to the stochastic-dependent probabilities of letter sequences may aid spelling up to certain point but phonology is essential for spelling words whose structure is morphophonemically complex.

     

Strategy usage among deaf and hearing readers

High school youths who were prelingually and profoundly deaf, hearing elementary-school-age youths, and hearing reading-disabled high school youths read expository texts and filled in deleted words and phrases. After making word replacements, they explained their decisions in sign or verbally. As expected, the hearing youths had an easier time filling in the deleted portions and explaining what strategies they were using. While the deaf youths reported using similar strategies as the hearing youths, the frequency of each type of strategy differed. Deaf readers more often relied on rereading and background knowledge, while the hearing readers made greater use of context clues. The results suggest that instruction for deaf readers should include more effective comprehension strategies.     

A comparison of teacher and principal perception of an outstanding science teacher

The purpose of this study was to determine the level of agreement or disagreement between principals and teachers when using established criteria to measure the effectiveness of a science teacher. To obtain this information, 28 principals and 81 science teachers were randomly selected to complete an instrument for their perceptions of an outstanding science teacher. The respondents involved in this study were employed in the English-speaking high schools in the Province of Québec, Canada. The questionaire was constructed from a model based on the theoretical framework of previous research in science education and instructional theories. The data collected from the two populations were tested using the arithmetic mean, Pearson chi-square and cross tabulation using the Lambda & Gamma tests to determine the strength or form of the association between the two variables (position and perception). Results indicated that the high school principals and science teachers agree on the relative importance for most of the evaluative criteria. From such results it was possible to construct a profile of the attributes of an outstanding science teacher, and also, to make recommendations to school board officials, school principals, science teachers, and researchers in the field of education.     

A comparison of teacher and principal perception of an outstanding biology teacher

The purpose of this study was to ascertain the level of agreement or disagreement between principals and teachers when using established criteria to measure the effectiveness of a biology teacher. To obtain information regarding their perceptions of an outstanding biology teacher, twenty-two principals and forty-one biology teachers were chosen randomly from English-speaking high schools within a 50 km radius of metropolitan Montreal, Quebec, Canada. The measuring instrument was a modified version of Dieter's questionnaire that evolved from his doctoral study of the National Association of Biology Teachers-Outstanding Biology Teacher Award Program. The data collected from the two populations were tested using one-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) or by applying normal approximation. Results indicated that both the principals and teachers agree on the relative importance of most criteria, particularly those related to the teacher's classroom behavior and academic background in biology. From such results, it was possible to construct one stereotype of the outstanding biology teacher. A number of recommendations were made from the results of the study, which were directed to the (a) teachers and their professional organization, (b) principals and the school boards, (c) teacher training institutions, and (d) researchers in teacher evaluation.