How Do Profoundly Deaf Children Learn to Read?

Reading requires two related, but separable, capabilities: (1) familiarity with a language, and (2) understanding the mapping between that language and the printed word (Chamberlain & Mayberry, 2000; Hoover & Gough, 1990). Children who are profoundly deaf are disadvantaged on both counts. Not surprisingly, then, reading is difficult for profoundly deaf children. But some deaf children do manage to read fluently. How? Are they simply the smartest of the crop, or do they have some strategy, or circumstance, that facilitates linking the written code with language? A priori one might guess that knowing American Sign Language (ASL) would interfere with learning to read English simply because ASL does not map in any systematic way onto English. However, recent research has suggested that individuals with good signing skills are not worse, and may even be better, readers than individuals with poor signing skills (Chamberlain & Mayberry, 2000). Thus, knowing a language (even if it is not the language captured in print) appears to facilitate learning to read. Nonetheless, skill in signing does not guarantee skill in reading—reading must be taught. The next frontier for reading research in deaf education is to understand how deaf readers map their knowledge of sign language onto print, and how instruction can best be used to turn signers into readers.     

How “open” is open learning?

Many of the models and paradigms that underlie open learning are based on inappropriate mechanistic, closed-system models-to name two, Instructional Systems Design (ISD) and behaviorism. This paper explores the roots of the open learning systems approach to education and examines the relationship between the goals of this approach and the models and methodologies that have followed its implementation. These models are then analyzed within the context of the theory of open and closed systems and a number of incongruities noted. An open systems orientation toward the development of learning systems is suggested and recommendations are made for its implementation.     

Activity and Behavioral Development in Stunted and Nonstunted Children and Response to Nutritional Supplementation

It is frequently assumed that undernutrition in young children leads to poor development through reduced activity. 3 groups of 26 1-year-old stunted children were studied: nutritional supplementation, supplementation with psychosocial stimulation, and controls. 26 nonstunted comparison children were also studied. Activity levels were measured by extensive observations in the homes, and development using 4 subscales of the Griffith's Mental Development Scales. Initially, stunted children were less active than nonstunted ones ( p < .01), but after 6 months they caught up regardless of treatment. The mental ages of the stunted children were lower than those of the nonstunted children initially, and improved with either treatment. Initially, activity levels made a significant contribution to the variance in the locomotor subscale only, but not 6 months later. Activity did not predict change in development over 6 or 12 months, nor did change in activity over 6 months predict change in development over 12 months.