National survey of accommodations and alternate assessments for students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the United States

This paper reports the results of the National Survey of Accommodations and Alternate Assessments for Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing in the United States (National Survey). This study focused on the use of accommodations and alternate assessments in statewide assessments used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. A total of 258 participants responded to the survey, including 32 representing schools for the deaf, 168 from districtwide/school programs, and 58 from mainstreamed settings. These schools and programs served a total of nearly 12,000 students who are deaf or hard of hearing nationwide. The most prevalent accommodations used in 2003-2004 statewide standardized assessments in mathematics and reading were extended time, an interpreter for directions, and a separate room for test administration. Read aloud and signed question-response accommodations were often prevalent, used more often for mathematics than in reading assessments. Participants from mainstreamed settings reported a more frequent use of accommodations than those in schools for the deaf or districtwide/school programs. In contrast, schools for the deaf were most likely to have students participate in alternate assessments. The top three alternate assessment formats used across all settings were out-of-level testing, work samples, and portfolios. Using the National Survey results as a starting point, future research will need to investigate the validity of accommodations used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. In the context of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 accountability policies, the accommodations and alternate assessment formats used with students who are deaf or hard of hearing may result in restrictions in how scores are integrated into state accountability frameworks.     

Your case will now be heard: sign language interpreters as problematic accommodations in legal interactions

This paper uses data from open-ended, videotaped interviews with 12 deaf people to examine their experiences negotiating access during interactions with legal authorities. In every case, these deaf persons preferred an accommodation that involved the use of an American Sign Language interpreter, and in every case, these accommodations were problematic. Three major themes emerged from the informants' narratives: difficulty obtaining the desired accommodation, dealing with a problematic accommodation, and enduring a partial accommodation. These findings suggest that accommodations involving sign language interpreters are not neutral and transparent and that they often have tangible effects on the experiences of and outcomes for deaf persons in the context of dealing with legal matters. Deaf people have very little control over the accommodation they receive and yet are held fully responsible for ensuring its efficacy. These results are discussed in relation to policies and procedures for ensuring that deaf persons have full access in their interactions with American legal institutions.     

Identification, assessment, and intervention strategies for deaf and hard of hearing students with learning disabilities

The purpose of the study was to ascertain methods of identification used by teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing who were working with students with learning disabilities, the training these teachers had received, and the accommodations and modifications they had implemented for their students. A 10-item survey was designed to solicit opinions and implementation procedures. Surveys went to teachers in a four-state region of the Midwest; 91 responded. Teachers indicated the use of various criteria to identify deaf and hard of hearing students with learning disabilities, and indicted that they incorporated a variety of accommodations to meet these students' needs. The survey showed that 50% of respondents did not feel adequately prepared to teach deaf and hard of hearing students with learning disabilities. Teachers expressed a desire for more training in identification, assessment, and intervention.     

Assessing resilience in students who are deaf or blind: Supplementing standardized achievement testing

Although testing accommodations for standardized assessments are available for students with disabilities, interpretation remains challenging. The authors explored resilience to see if it could contribute to the interpretation of academic success for students who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision. High school students (30 deaf, 11 blind) responded to the Resiliency Scales and a school-specific resilience survey. Student ratings were within 1 SD of those who were not deaf or blind; resilience was positively correlated with academic success (grade point average). Resilience information may contribute to the interpretation of academic success in students who are deaf or blind and may provide insight into potential interventions. This is the first time students who are deaf or blind have been assessed on a published measure of resilience. Results defy stereotypes and affirm that individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing or blind or have low vision have more in common with the hearing and seeing world than is often recognized.     

Demographics, psychiatric diagnoses, and other characteristics of North American Deaf and hard-of-hearing inpatients

This study examined demographic and clinical data from a specialty deaf inpatient unit so as to better understand characteristics of severely and chronically mentally ill deaf people. The study compares deaf and hearing psychiatric inpatients on demographic variables, psychiatric discharge diagnoses, a language assessment measure, a cognitive ability measure, and a measure of psychosocial functioning and risk of harm to self and others. Overall, findings indicate a broader range of diagnoses than in past studies with posttraumatic stress disorder being the most common diagnosis. Compared with hearing patients in the same hospital, deaf patients were less likely to be diagnosed with a psychotic or substance abuse disorder and more likely to be diagnosed with a mood, anxiety, personality, or developmental disorder. Psychosocial functioning of the deaf patients was generally similar to hearing psychiatric patients. Deaf patients presented significantly higher risks than hearing patients in areas of self-harm and risk of sexual offending. Cognitive scores show that both the deaf and hearing inpatient population is skewed toward persons who are lower functioning. An additional surprising finding was that 75% of deaf individuals fell into the nonfluent range of communication in American Sign Language.     

Deaf Children’s Understanding of Other People’s Thought Processes

This study focuses on the ability of deaf children to predict the behaviours of other people, based on an understanding of their beliefs. An unexpected transfer task and a deceptive box task were used with a group of 55 severely/profoundly deaf children. Results reiterate the findings of other studies that many deaf children are grossly delayed in this important area of social functioning compared to their hearing counterparts. Deaf children of deaf parents/carers fared better than deaf children with hearing parents/carers. Implications for early intervention and education programmes are discussed.     

Career and workplace experiences of Australian university graduates who are deaf or hard of hearing

This article reports on the experiences of a group of deaf and hard-of-hearing alumni of Griffith University in south-east Queensland, Australia. Participants completed a survey answering questions about their communication patterns and preferences, working lives, career barriers or difficulties anticipated and encountered, and workplace accommodations used or sought. Results revealed a range of career barriers and workplace difficulties encountered by these participants, as well as solutions found and strategies used by them. Differences in employment sector, job-search activities, difficult workplace situations, and use of accommodations were noted between 2 groups: those who communicated primarily in Australian Sign Language and considered themselves to have a Deaf or bicultural identity and those who communicated primarily in spoken English and considered themselves to have a hearing identity. Implications for university services supporting deaf and hard-of-hearing students are outlined, and suggestions for further research are made.     

Accommodations use for statewide standardized assessments: prevalence and recommendations for students who are deaf or hard of hearing

The Second Annual National Survey on Assessments and Accommodations for Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing investigated the types of testing accommodations used on 2004-2005 statewide standardized assessments as well as recommendations for best practices. A total of 444 participants who served over 9,000 students as teachers, administrators, or other educational professionals responded to the survey. The most widely used accommodations were small-group testing, interpreting test directions, and extended time. With the exception of interpreting or reading test items aloud, accommodations were largely used for both reading and math assessments. Participants perceived all listed accommodations as both valid and easy to use. Participants recommended that student academic level, communication mode, and additional disabilities be taken into account when choosing accommodations for students who are deaf or hard of hearing.     

Policy and practice in deaf education: views and experiences of teachers,and of young people who are deaf in Northern Ireland and Sweden

Due to the fact that the outcomes of education for most school leavers who are deaf in Northern Ireland are weak literacy skills and below average reading ages, a study was undertaken to investigate this situation. The views and experiences of teachers of children who are deaf, and of young people who are deaf in Northern Ireland, where oral and total communication forms of instruction are employed in their education were compared with those of Sweden where a sign bilingual is used in education, in the context of current policy and practice. The aim of the study was to find out if there are elements of Swedish policy and practice that could help resolve the situation for Northern Irish learners who are deaf. A qualitative approach was adopted via interviews with teachers of deaf and young people who were deaf in both countries. Findings are reported in relation to policy and practice in education, attitudes to deafness, status of sign language and other factors.     

Accommodations for Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing in Large-Scale, Standardized Assessments: Surveying the Landscape and Charting a New Direction

Students who are deaf or hard of hearing (SDHH) often use test accommodations when they participate in large-scale, standardized assessments. The purpose of this article is to present findings from the Third Annual Survey of Assessment and Accommodations for Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing. The "big five" accommodations were reported by at least two-thirds of the 389 participants: extended time, small group/individual administration, test directions interpreted, test items read aloud, and test items interpreted. In a regression analysis, language used in instruction showed the most significant effects on accommodations use. The article considers these findings in light of a more proactive role for the National Survey in providing evidence for the effectiveness of accommodations with SDHH.     

Deaf and hearing partnerships: ethical and communication considerations

With few exceptions, a hearing perspective controls the direction of deaf education nationally and internationally. People who are hearing have a powerful influence over decisions that affect legislation, policies, professional organizations, research agendas, and curricular decisions related to deaf education. Although this situation is changing in some arenas, people who are deaf often have relatively less influence than their hearing counterparts in shaping the educational agenda. The authors, one deaf and one hearing, relate their views on the challenge of changing this imbalance of power and discuss their personal experiences as friends and professional collaborators as they offer strategies for creating and nurturing partnerships between people who are deaf and people who are hearing.     

Deaf and hearing individuals' beliefs about the capabilities of deaf people

The study explored the beliefs of 100 residents of Greece about the capabilities of deaf people living in that country. Participants included deaf adults who communicated in Greek Sign Language (GSL), deaf adults who communicated orally, hearing adults who attended GSL courses, and hearing adults who did not attend such courses. Beliefs were explored through the ODP (Opinions About Deaf People) scale (Berkay, Gardner, & Smith, 1995) and an open-ended interview. All participant groups viewed deaf people's capabilities positively, but Deaf users of GSL expressed the most positive beliefs. The findings suggest that less positive beliefs reflect diverse ideological views toward GSL and Deaf culture or an awareness of the obstacles preventing deaf people from developing their potential. The Deaf community's role in empowering deaf people and the role of GSL courses in promoting awareness regarding deaf people are also discussed.     

The views,verdict and recommendations for school and home sex and relationships education by young deaf and hearing people

The purpose of this survey study was to explore the views of young deaf and hearing people (16–25 years old) on school and home sex and relationships education (SRE). The study addressed a critical knowledge gap in the research literature on deaf youth's perception of SRE. The small-scale study explored young deaf people's experiences of SRE and the challenges they had faced when learning about sexuality and relationships. Recommendations on how to improve school SRE lessons were also obtained. Data were collected from 81 young people (n = 27 deaf, n = 54 hearing). Overall, deaf participants indicated greater levels of satisfaction with school SRE than hearing respondents. More deaf young people than young hearing people felt that the school had provided them with enough opportunities to learn about sexuality and relationships. The deaf group showed a preference for school SRE lessons to start at a later age than the hearing group. Mothers and friends were the two sources most frequently consulted in both groups. Teachers and school nurses were a third source frequently used by the deaf group. The views of deaf and hearing youth on their own SRE are important for the development, implementation and delivery of the school SRE curriculum. The study's findings can provide educators with valuable insight on the needs of a minority group who are particularly vulnerable to sexual exploitation and sexual misinformation due to their sensory loss and associated factors.     

Measuring the attitudes of human service professionals toward deafness

The Attitudes to Deafness Scale is a 22-item measure of attitudes toward people who are deaf designed for use with human service professionals. Attitude statements were generated from personal accounts by deaf people in the literature and from a focus group in which deaf people discussed their experience of hearing people's attitudes toward them. A 60-item scale was administered to a group of 121 clinical and forensic psychologists during their training. Item analysis was conducted to select items that effectively distinguished participants with a positive attitude from those with a negative attitude toward deaf people. The scale may be used in any context where a professional group comes into contact with people who are deaf.     

The Changing Role of Teachers of Students Who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: Consultation as an Increasing Part of the Job

ABSTRACT

The majority of deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) students are educated at least part of the day in general education classrooms taught by teachers who may not have any experience working with this population. DHH students make up a unique, heterogeneous group with a wide range of communication modalities, technology utilization, early intervention experiences, and educational placements. In addition to providing direct service to support these students, teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing (ToDHH) collaborate and consult with classroom teachers and school staff on classroom accommodations and modifications. However, recent research shows that ToDHH often feel unprepared to engage in the consultative aspect of their role. Since the Education for All Handicapped Children Act was passed 43 years ago, the field of deaf education has increasingly called for research on consultation models to apply to their unique population and to teach in their teacher preparation programs. This article identifies the characteristics of DHH learners and synthesizes current research on consultation in the field of deaf education. Three consultation models are examined to determine their level of fit within the field of deaf education. The author ends with a call for future research that can best be met through an interdisciplinary research approach between the field of deaf education and the fields of educational and psychological consultation.     

The Role of Extended Time and Item Content on a High‐Stakes Mathematics Test

The premise of a great deal of current research guiding policy development has been that accommodations are the catalyst for student performance differences. Rather than accepting this premise, two studies were conducted to investigate the influence of extended time and content knowledge on the performance of ninth‐grade students who took a statewide mathematics test with and without accommodations. Each study involved 1,250 accommodated students (extended time only) with learning disabilities and 1,250 nonaccommodated students demonstrating no disabilities. In Study One, a standard differential item functioning (DIF) analysis illustrated that the usual approach to studying the effects of accommodations contributes little to our understanding of the reason for performance differences across students. Next, a mixture item response theory DIF model was used to explore the most likely cause(s) for performance differences across the population. The results from both studies suggest that students for whom items were functioning differently were not accurately characterized by their accommodation status but rather by their content knowledge. That is, knowing students' accommodation status (i.e., accommodated or nonaccommodated) contributed little to understanding why accommodated and nonaccommodated students differed in their test performance. Rather, the data would suggest that a more likely explanation is that mathematics competency differentiated the groups of student learners regardless of their accommodation and/or reading levels.     

A cross‐cultural study: deaf students in a public mainstream school setting

The 1000 primary school students in this study included a minority population of nine deaf children. The underlying foundation of this mainstream environment allowed for accommodations, but only to the extent that the non‐deaf majority was not overtly impacted. Explicit messages of equality and implicit notions of normal were often in conflict. Deaf students learned that acceptance was granted to those who complied with the mores of the majority. The author draws on current pedagogical theory and study findings to offer four principles that will help insure a more inclusive educational experience for deaf and non‐deaf students as they are educated together: (1) care must be taken to understand the lived experience of all students; (2) consideration must be given to scheduling issues; (3) sign language interpreters must be provided for all curricular activities; and (4) all students should be acculturated in the dynamics and issues pertaining to a cross‐cultural learning experience.     

The University Experiences of Students with Learning Disabilities

To explore the university experiences of students with learning disabilities (LD), 63,802 responses to the 2014 Student Experience in the Research University Survey were analyzed. Compared to other students, those with self‐reported LD (5.96 percent) had difficulty with assignments and had more obstacles caused by nonacademic responsibilities and imposed by their skill levels. Students with self‐reported LD sensed more bias toward people with disabilities on campus, and they were less satisfied with their overall experience. Interactions between disability status and age suggested even more challenges for older students who self‐reported LD. Approximately one‐third of students who self‐reported LD received accommodations. The rate of accommodations was higher among individuals who were wealthy, who lived alone, and who were out‐of‐state students. Compared to students who self‐reported LD but reported no accommodations, those with accommodations had more contact with faculty and less difficulty with assignments.