Conclusion: Perspectives on Language, Literacy, and Deafness

Abstract

As indicated in this Special Issue, there has been much debate on the development of English language and literacy in d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) students. Questions remain on the nature of the first language and the relation of this language to the development of English literacy. There is also considerable controversy on the role of English phonology. Adding to the complexity is the increase of d/Dhh children for whom English is not the home language and the ongoing challenge of addressing the needs of those with disabilities or additional disabilities. After describing English literacy and the need for documenting desirable research characteristics, the authors of this conclusion article utilize a construct named the Qualitative Similarity Hypothesis (QSH) as the guiding framework for addressing issues such as the role of phonology and the nature of the through-the-air form of the language of print. The QSH asserts that d/Dhh students need to master the same set of fundamentals as typical English literacy learners. These fundamentals include code-related, language-related, and comprehension-related skills. One major assertion is that proficiency in the through-the-air form of English is essential for achieving proficiency in conventional English literacy skills. It is argued that the importance of English language proficiency has been emphasized in literacy models that delineate the strong connections among language, reading, and writing, even for second language learners of English or English learners. Another major assertion is that proficiency in English phonology is necessary (albeit not sufficient) for the development of emerging decoding skills. The use of English phonology facilitates the early and advanced literacy comprehension skills. The article concludes with recommendations for additional research, including the understanding of the visual representation of the structure of English, the development of comprehensive English language assessments, and the exploration of literacy-related skills such as decoding and comprehension. Finally, the validity of the QSH also needs to be further investigated.sections of a country. It should be acknowledged, however, that, in some countries, the relationship between the through-the-air and written forms is complex, due, in part, to the number of dialectical variations of speech or the encroachment of the influences of other languages on the mainstream society's language form [4,5]; also, see the review in [6], for Arabic as an example).Confining our emphasis to English, one of the major challenges for d/Dhh children and adolescents is to develop proficiency in literacy (reading and writing) skills in this majority language of society [7][8][9][10][11][12]. Since the beginning of the 20th century, it has been well documented that many students with severe to profound hearing loss and some with a moderate loss-in the better unaided ear-graduate from high school (after 12-15 years of compulsory education) reading at about a 4 th grade level. Albeit this lev...

Meta-analytic findings on reading in children with cochlear implants

“…This result aligns with those studies reporting that children with CIs scored significantly lower than their hearing peers, but still scored within the normal range on reading tests (i.e., out of normal range is defined as more than 1.5 SD or more below the norm) Spencer et al, 2003). (Paul & Alqraini, 2019). Notably, some children with CIs performed on reading tests at an age-appropriate level, which is consistent with a recent review paper on literacy outcomes that suggested there has been an incredible improvement with many students with CIs achieving reading outcomes at the age-appropriate range (Mayer & Trezek, 2018).…”

“…While the construct of reading skills did not significantly change the magnitude of the group differences between children with CIs and their hearing peers, our results also indicated children with CIs struggled more in PA, vocabulary, and reading comprehension and less in decoding and fluency. Our findings align with the QSH (Paul & Alqraini, 2019) and suggest that similar to their hearing peers, children with CIs require the same foundational skills to learn to read. The average performance among children with CIs in reading skills in the current meta-analysis is encouraging and confirms a positive shift in reading outcomes for profoundly deaf children as a consequence of cochlear implantation despite the poor scores in all constructs.…”

“…The average performance among children with CIs in reading skills in the current meta-analysis is encouraging and confirms a positive shift in reading outcomes for profoundly deaf children as a consequence of cochlear implantation despite the poor scores in all constructs. Although there is variability among constructs of reading skills, overall reading outcomes exceed the historically reported 4th-grade ceiling (Paul & Alqraini, 2019). Notably, some children with CIs performed on reading tests at an age-appropriate level, consistent with a recent review paper on literacy outcomes that suggested an incredible improvement with many students with CIs achieving reading outcomes at the age-appropriate range (Mayer & Trezek, 2018).…”

“…The developmental sequence of learning to read for children with TH holds for children who are DHH, based on the report from National Center for Special Education Research (Connor et al, 2014) and the Qualitative Similarity Hypothesis (QSH) (Paul & Alqraini, 2019). For instance, the Simple View of Reading (SVR), as an influential model for children with TH, supports that reading comprehension is not a serial process with decoding preceding linguistic comprehension but rather interactive (“product”) processes that involve both decoding and linguistic comprehension (Gough & Tunmer, 1986).…”