Achievement, Language, and Technology Use Among College-Bound Deaf Learners

Abstract

Deaf learners are a highly heterogeneous group who demonstrate varied levels of academic achievement and attainment. Most prior research involving this population has focused on factors facilitating academic success in young deaf children, with less attention paid to older learners. Recent studies, however, have suggested that while factors such as early cochlear implantation and early sign language fluency are positively associated with academic achievement in younger deaf children, they no longer predict achievement once children reach high school age. This study, involving data from 980 college-bound high school students with hearing loss, examined relations between academic achievement, communication variables (audiological, language), and use of assistive technologies (e.g., cochlear implants [CIs], FM systems) and other support services (e.g., interpreting, real-time text) in the classroom. Spoken language skills were positively related to achievement in some domains, while better sign language skills were related to poorer achievement in others. Among these college-bound students, use of CIs and academic support services in high school accounted for little variability in their college entrance examination scores.

Numerical and real-world estimation abilities of deaf and hearing college students

“…National (U.S.) data drawn from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2) further indicate that using spoken language, but neither using sign language nor having deaf parents, is a significant predictor of mathematics achievement among deaf secondary school students (Marschark, Shaver, et al, 2015). Similar findings have been obtained in several other large-sample studies by Convertino, Marschark, Sapere, Sarchet, and Zupan (2009), Crowe, Marschark, Dammeyer, and Lehane (2017), Dammeyer and Marschark (2016), and Geers, Tobey, Moog, and Brenner (2008).…”

“…In an analysis of the NLTS2 data from secondary school students in the United States, Marschark, Shaver, et al (2015) found that use of spoken language but not CI use was a significant predictor of mathematics, reading comprehension, social studies, and science among deaf secondary school students. Convertino et al (2009) and Crowe et al (2017) also failed to find CI use to be a predictor of mathematics ability among college-bound, deaf secondary school students as indicated by college entrance examination scores. Crowe et al found students’ self-rated spoken language skills the best predictor of reading and English test scores and a positive predictor of mathematics and science scores.…”

“…With regard to the former issue, recent studies have indicated that deaf college students’ self-ratings of their sign language and spoken language skills usually are correlated with results of objective assessments, even if they sometimes overestimate those skills (Marschark, Machmer, et al, 2018; Spencer et al, 2018). With regard to the latter issue, several studies involving deaf college students have failed to find any advantage in either classroom learning or standardized achievement testing for earlier or native-signing deaf learners over later learners (e.g., Convertino et al, 2009; Crowe et al, 2017; Marschark, Shaver, et al 2015; Marschark, Spencer, et al 2015). Native signers (i.e., those with deaf parents) comprise only about 3–5% of the deaf population (Mitchell & Karchmer, 2004).…”

Relations of social maturity, executive function, and self-efficacy among deaf university students

“…The lack of overall significant differences in social maturity between deaf and hearing university students, between those who primarily used sign language or spoken language, or between CI users and deaf nonusers replicated findings of Marschark et al (2017). The last of these findings also is consistent with the lack of academically-related differences between CI users and deaf nonusers at the university level (e.g., Convertino et al, 2014; Crowe et al, 2017). It remains possible, however, that there may be different foundations of social maturity between deaf CI users and deaf nonusers and between deaf and hearing individuals more broadly.…”

“…A second issue in need of further examination derives from several studies that have reported social-emotional advantages to deaf children after cochlear implantation, at least among those with better spoken language skills (e.g., Bat-Chava & Deignan, 2001; Jambor & Elliot, 2005; Wheeler, Archbold, Gregory & Skipp, 2007). Marschark et al (2017), however, did not find social maturity differences between CI users and deaf nonusers, and other studies have found that by secondary school age, early advantages among CI users relative to deaf nonusers in vocabulary, reading, and other academic domains are attenuated or absent (Convertino, Borgna, Marschark, & Durkin, 2014; Crowe, Marschark, Dammeyer, & Lehane, 2017; Geers, Tobey, Moog, & Brenner, 2008; Marschark, Shaver, Nagle, & Newman, 2015). Long-term influences of cochlear implantation on social behaviour have not been explored, and it may be that early advantages in that domain are later attenuated, just as they are in language and academic domains.…”