Suggestions for preparing itinerant teachers: a qualitative analysis

Increasing numbers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing receive educational services in general education classrooms. This placement shift has altered the way teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing work, causing an increase in the number of itinerant teachers. As placement trends for students who are deaf or hard of hearing and teachers' job responsibilities have changed, the field of deaf education has only slightly modified professional standards for licensed teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Most teacher preparation programs continue training preservice teachers to work in self-contained classrooms, leaving itinerant teachers feeling underprepared. Interviews were conducted with 25 experienced itinerant teachers to determine which content and experiences should be included in preparation programs for preservice teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing who plan to become itinerant teachers. Results indicate that changes in course work and practical are necessary to best prepare these teachers.     

Professional concerns of beginning teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students

The professional concerns of beginning teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing were examined. Five first-year teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students served as participants. Two of the participants were itinerant teachers; three taught in self-contained classrooms. Participants were selected from programs serving deaf and hard of hearing students in rural and urban areas of the midwestern and southwestern United States. To interview the study participants, the researcher used an in-depth phenomenological method employing semi-structured questions and guided by a constructivist paradigm. Data were analyzed using qualitative analysis strategies (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Results showed that concerns of beginning teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students are specific to service delivery models and geography. Participants provided specific recommendations for addressing the concerns of beginning teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students.     

Views from the field: program directors' perceptions of teacher education and the education of students who are deaf or hard of hearing

Arandom sample of directors of programs for the deaf in North America were surveyed to get their views about the skills that teacher education programs need to be teaching future teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. The directors were queried about literacy practices, classroom management strategies, and communication strategies used in their programs, and were encouraged to comment freely on the questionnaire items presented to them. Program directors predicted a need for more itinerant and resource teachers. The survey also revealed that programs for the deaf are highly behaviorist (i.e., You do this and you'll get that) in the way they induce students to learn and in how they manage student behavior.     

Itinerant Teachers of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and Their Students in Australia: some state comparisons

To survey the work of itinerant teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing in Australia a mail survey of most of those teachers in four Australian states was conducted. The survey sought information about the professional and personal demographics and work characteristics of the teachers and their roles in working with integrated deaf and hard of hearing students. Teachers also reported on the characteristics and level of inclusion of a “sample student” randomly chosen from their caseloads. Information about the distribution of these students' characteristics and the types of services delivered in each state indicated that there were few differences among the states. It was found that Australian itinerant teachers generally reported that they were satisfied with their work and the placement of deaf and hard of hearing students in regular classes. The teachers generally used a “pull-out/ direct tutorial” mode of working rather than one of “consultation only” with regular teachers and reported that schools and teachers were generally cooperative and understanding of the needs of deaf and hard of hearing students. The students in most cases were well integrated socially and academically in their regular classes.     

Master teachers' responses to twenty literacy and science/mathematics practices in deaf education

Under a grant to improve outcomes for students who are deaf or hard of hearing awarded to the Association of College Educators--Deaf/Hard of Hearing, a team identified content that all teachers of students who are deaf and hard of hearing must understand and be able to teach. Also identified were 20 practices associated with content standards (10 each, literacy and science/mathematics). Thirty-seven master teachers identified by grant agents rated the practices on a Likert-type scale indicating the maximum benefit of each practice and maximum likelihood that they would use the practice, yielding a likelihood-impact analysis. The teachers showed strong agreement on the benefits and likelihood of use of the rated practices. Concerns about implementation of many of the practices related to time constraints and mixed-ability classrooms were themes of the reviews. Actions for teacher preparation programs were recommended.     

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.     

Itinerant teaching: the inside story

The number of students who are deaf or hard of hearing attending local neighborhood schools has increased steadily over the past 20 years (Holden-Pitt & Diaz, 1998). This increase has led to larger numbers of teachers serving these students as itinerant teachers. However, little research has been conducted to examine the efficacy of this model of service delivery (Brelje, 1992; Luckner & Miller, 1994). Qualitative research methods were used to investigate itinerant teachers' perceptions of their responsibilities, job satisfaction, and effectiveness. Individual interviews were conducted with 10 itinerant teachers. Participants reported they preferred working directly with students rather than consulting with general education teachers and families. They noted the primary advantages of working as an itinerant teacher were variety, autonomy, time for reflection, and the diversity of students with whom they worked. Some of the most significant disadvantages they cited were isolation, time and budget constraints, and the distances required to travel from school to school. Essential skills and challenges to being an effective itinerant teacher are identified, recommendations for future itinerant teachers are discussed, and suggestions for future research are presented.     

Issues in the school-to-work transition of hard of hearing adolescents

Career theorists emphasize the importance of the development of career maturity in adolescents if they are to successfully negotiate the school-to-work transition. Transitions of deaf and hard of hearing adolescents may be especially problematic. The authors examine the implications of current labor market trends for young people, in particular those with hearing loss, and review data on employment outcomes for deaf and hard of hearing people. They discuss the environmental and attitudinal barriers that can influence the career outcomes of this population, consider the impact of hearing loss on adolescents' career maturity, and review the studies on this topic in the literature. The article focuses on the experiences of students with significant hearing loss who are educated in regular classes with the support of itinerant teachers, who communicate orally, and who may be defined as hard of hearing. Recommendations for research and practice are provided.     

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 Study of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Placement Decisions by Teacher and Computer

An expert system was developed to make decisions about the educational placement of deaf and hard of hearing students within a limited real‐world domain. Teachers of deaf students and the literature were used to delineate factors that influence the placement of deaf and hard of hearing students. A hypothesis based on these factors was then created to guide the development of an expert system referred to as the HISAT Advisor. The placement decisions of the HISAT Advisor for 10 deaf and hard of hearing students were compared with the placement decisions of 10 teachers of deaf students for the same students. The HISAT Advisor decision matched the majority decision of the teachers in 90% of the cases. Faced with an ever‐increasing number of factors to consider when rendering a placement decision, teachers and administrators should examine the value of a systematic theory and an expert system in this decision‐making process.     

The development of inclusive practices as a result of the process of integrating deaf/hard of hearing students

In recent years there has been a significant debate regarding the ways in which different educational systems throughout the world could develop more inclusive practices in their schools. Based on the notion that the education of children considered as having special needs should be considered as part of a wider process of school development, in this study, we investigated the implications of the integration of deaf and hard of hearing students (D/HH) in relation to the practices used by teachers. Using qualitative data from a secondary school in Cyprus, we formed two assertions which are supported by examples that embraced inclusive practices: (a) the presence of D/HH students obliged teachers to differentiate their teaching and what innovations were used in the class with D/HH pupils were also used afterwards in the classes with all students with success; and (b) the presence of D/HH students in the school led teachers to develop collaborations between themselves, a fact that facilitated the learning not only of the D/HH students, but also of all the children. The integration of D/HH students led teachers to the development of more inclusive practices, which in turn had an impact on all students of the school.     

Team-teaching in an integrated classroom: perceptions of deaf and hearing teachers

This study examined the perceptions of teams of two teachers, one deaf and one hearing, team-teaching students who are deaf and hard-of-hearing (D/HH) in co-enrolled classrooms. Five teachers who had worked in teams and their supervisor were interviewed about their team-teaching experiences and their perception of the effectiveness of this approach. Informants' responses were videotaped, transcribed, and analyzed. From the interview data, four main categories were identified: (1) philosophy of education, (2) perception of roles, (3) benefits of team-teaching, and (4) challenges. Findings revealed that team-teaching in co-enrolled classrooms gave all students access to their own and each other's cultures, languages, and social identities; deaf and hearing people were seen to have equality of status and students who are D/HH were seen to benefit from teachers' high expectations.     

Mainstream teachers about including deaf or hard of hearing students

This study is aimed at teachers’ classroom practices and their beliefs and emotions regarding the inclusion of deaf or hard of hearing (d/hh) students in mainstream secondary schools. Nine teachers in two schools were interviewed about the inclusion of d/hh students. These teachers were found to consider the d/hh students’ needs in their teaching practice. However, they showed less willingness to be considerate when the student showed a negative work attitude. With regard to teachers’ emotions, positive as well as negative emotions were reported, like enjoyment and frustration. Based on our findings, teachers’ pedagogies in inclusive classrooms are discussed.     

Math in motion: origami math for students who are deaf and hard of hearing

This article aims to provide an overview of the use of origami in teaching mathematics to deaf and hard-of-hearing students. The author posits that in both the general and special education settings, origami can be very useful for students who are deaf and hard of hearing as many of them need to see and feel to learn and are likely to be concrete learners. Suggestions about how to conduct an origami math lesson for deaf and hard-of-hearing students are included in this article.     

A national perspective on teachers' efficacy beliefs in deaf education

Teachers' sense of efficacy, or the belief that teachers have of their capacity to make an impact on students' performance, is an unexplored construct in deaf education research. This study included data from 296 respondents to examine the relationship of teacher and school characteristics with teachers' sense of efficacy in 80 different deaf education settings in the US. Deaf education teachers reported high overall efficacy beliefs but significantly lower efficacy beliefs in the area of student engagement than in instructional strategies and classroom management. Teachers' years of experience showed a significant relationship with efficacy beliefs, yet it was the teachers' perceived collective efficacy of their educational setting that ultimately predicted teachers' sense of efficacy. These findings lend credence to the need for further examination of school processes that influence teacher beliefs and attitudes in deaf education settings.     

What really matters in the early literacy development of deaf children

With much earlier identification of hearing loss come expectations that increasing numbers of deaf children will develop literacy abilities comparable to their hearing age peers. To date, despite claims in the literature for parallel development between hearing and deaf learners with respect to early literacy learning, it remains the case that many deaf children do not go on to develop age-appropriate reading and writing abilities. Using written language examples from both deaf and hearing children and drawing on the developmental models of E. Ferreiro (1990) and D. Olson (1994), the discussion focuses on the ways in which deaf children draw apart from hearing children in the third stage of early literacy development, in the critical move from emergent to conventional literacy. Reasons for, and the significance of, this deviation are explored, with an eye to proposing implications for pedagogy and research, as we reconsider what really matters in the early literacy development of deaf children.     

Measuring practical knowledge among prospective and current teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students

Research on teaching and teacher research has a long history. However, in the field of the education of deaf and hard of hearing students, this research is limited. The study addresses one particular area of research on teaching and teacher research: practical knowledge of teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students. Practical knowledge is defined as how educators think about their classroom practice. By means of a survey designed and tested by the researcher, four hierarchical groups (beginning education students, graduating education students, novice teachers, and experienced teachers) in the education of deaf and hard of hearing students were surveyed on their practical knowledge. Practical knowledge codified as images, rules of practice, and practical principles. Results were measured to demonstrate for categories and characteristics of practical knowledge storage among prospective and current teachers of deaf and hard of hearing students. The instrument was designed as an assessment tool to measure aspects of this knowledge, apply it to levels of pedagogical expertise, and expand research in this area.     

Rural gifted students who are deaf or hard of hearing: how electronic technology can help

Electronic technology can be used to overcome many of the barriers and other factors that restrict delivery of services to rural schools; it can also expand the world of rural gifted students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Online college and high school Web sites that offer courses are listed, as well as a Web site for tutoring and one offering help for teachers of rural gifted students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Recommendations are made for ways that legislatures and rural school districts can make Internet resources and assistive technology more widely available in rural educational settings.     

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.     

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.