teaching exceptional children 00

58 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

TEACHINGExceptionalChildren,Vo

l.44

,N

o.4,

pp.58

-67.

Cop

yrig

ht20

12CEC

.

Helping StudentsWho Are Deaf or Hard

of Hearing SucceedJohn L. Luckner � Samuel B. Slike � Harold Johnson

Inclusion

Manny is a 10-year-old boy with a bilat-

eral profound sensorineural hearing

loss that was identified at birth from a

newborn hearing screening. At 12

months of age, he received a cochlear

implant in his left ear. He wears a

behind-the-ear hearing aid in his right

ear at home and uses a myLink FM

system in the classroom. Manny is cur-

rently in fourth grade at Shady Lane

Elementary School and spends most of

his day in the general education class-

room. The other students in his class

are all hearing. Spoken English is his

primary mode of communication.

Manny is athletic and outgoing, and

he makes friends easily. He receives

response to intervention Tier 2 support

for reading in class with a couple of

other classmates for 30 minutes each

day. In addition, he works with Ms.

Iyer, a speech-language pathologist

(SLP), 2 days a week for 30 minutes

each day on speech and auditory train-

ing. Also, he works with Mrs. Castillo,

an itinerant teacher of students who are

deaf or hard of hearing, for 45 minutes

a day, 2 days a week on language,

reading, and self-advocacy. His class-

room teacher, Mrs. Reitz, and Mrs.

Castillo work together using many of

the accommodations described in this

article to assure that all students in the

class, including Manny, have access to

the academic content and social inter-

actions.

This article describes many concrete

and specific actions teachers can take to

promote the learning of their students

who are deaf or hard of hearing,

including the use of a captioned media

web site (www.dcmp.org) for topics to

pump up students’ background knowl-

edge. In addition, the article provides

strategies for enhancing the social skills

of both hearing students and those with

hearing losses as they work together in

inclusive classrooms.

We live in a sound-oriented society.Extensive amounts of information areconveyed both deliberately and inci-dentally through interactions with oth-ers. Through these interactions, chil-dren refine their communication skills,develop language, acquire informationabout the world (i.e., background anddomain knowledge), learn concepts,become literate, develop social skills,and participate in the daily activities oflife (Hart & Risley, 1995, 2003; Luckner& Friend, 2011). A hearing loss of anydegree or type affects the quantity aswell as the quality of interactions withothers, which in turn may adverselyaffect language, academic, social, emo-tional, and career development. Table 1briefly summarizes the different typesof hearing loss, potential effects, andrelevant citations.

Challenges for Educators

The U.S. Department of Education(2009) reported that about 87% of stu-dents who are deaf or hard of hearingspend a portion of the school day ingeneral education classrooms. Thechallenge for both general and specialeducation teachers who have notreceived specialized training to workwith students who are deaf or hard ofhearing is in knowing how to providequantity and quality of services neededto access the academic content andsocial interactions of the general educa-tion setting. As noted by the U.S.Department of Education (1992)

Because deafness is a low inci-dence disability, there is notwidespread understanding of itseducational implications, evenamong special educators. Thislack of knowledge and skills inour education system contributesto the already substantial barrierto deaf students in receivingappropriate educational services.(p. 49274)

As shown in Table 1, a hearing loss ofany type or degree may affect develop-ment and functioning in many ways.This article highlights five specific chal-

lenges that often occur as byproductsof a hearing loss and that interferewith typical ways of learning (seeFigure 1):

1. Language, vocabulary, and literacydelays.

2, Gaps in background and domainknowledge.

3. Inadequate knowledge and use oflearning strategies.

4. Social skills deficits.

5. Reliance on assistive technology.

In this article, we provide examples ofsupplementary instruction and servicesto address each area. In addition, weadvocate for direct as well as consulta-tive services from teachers of studentswho are deaf or hard of hearing.

1. Language, Vocabulary, andLiteracy Delays

Language acquisition is a naturalprocess that occurs without effort formost hearing children (Owens, 2010).Most hearing students begin schoolwith good language skills and strongbackground knowledge (Federal Inter-agency Forum on Child and FamilyStatistics, 2009). Educators use theseessential skills to teach children to readand write, acquire content knowledge,and develop social skills. Quite simply,oral and written language is the mediathrough which educators teach aca-demic content. As well, oral and writ-ten language serves as the primary waythat students demonstrate their knowl-edge of subject matter (Lemke, 1988).As explained by Bransford, Darling-Hammond, and LePage (2005)

Virtually all school learningoccurs through the medium oflanguage. Not only do peopleneed to acquire strong languageskills to communicate with oth-ers, the very use of languageenables people to acquire con-cepts and ideas and to sharpentheir thinking. (p. 34)

The majority of children who are deafor hard of hearing, however, seldom

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN � MAR/APR 2012 59

arrive at school with the same lan-guage skills as their hearing peers(National Association of State Directorsof Special Education, 2006).

The reduction in the quantity andthe quality of interactions with others,negatively affects all aspects of lan-guage acquisition, including the essen-tial area of vocabulary development.Deficits in vocabulary knowledge ofstudents who are deaf or hard ofhearing exist early and grow increas-ingly larger each year. As noted byKame’enui, Carnine, Dixon, Simmons,and Coyne (2002), “The consequencesof vocabulary deficits are extreme.Vocabulary knowledge plays a causalrole in successful reading throughoutan individual’s lifetime and greatlyimpacts performance in many academ-ic subject areas” (p. 46).

Vocabulary development is stronglyrelated to academic achievementbecause content subject instructionincludes a large number of new andtechnical words and concepts (e.g.,Biemiller, 2005). Students who are deafor hard of hearing are delayed in theirlevel of vocabulary knowledge, havesmaller lexicons, acquire new words atslower rates, and have a narrowerrange of contexts that result in wordlearning that is less than their hearingpeers (e.g., Lederberg, 2003; Luckner &Cooke, 2010). Consequently, many stu-

dents who are deaf or hard of hearingmay not have learned the academiclanguage and key vocabulary necessaryfor understanding content information.

As a result, they are likely to have diffi-culty with the vocabulary and conceptdemands of many content-area discus-sions, lessons, and material presentedin textbooks. Moreover, receptivevocabulary knowledge in kindergartenis predictive of reading comprehensionskills in the fourth and seventh grades(Tabors, Snow, & Dickinson, 2001); andreceptive vocabulary in first grade hasa substantial relationship with readingcomprehension in the 11th grade(Cunningham & Stanovich, 1997).

Because literacy developmentdepends on language competence, asevidenced by the high correlationbetween students’ overall languageabilities and their reading achievement(e.g., Metha, Foorman, Branum-Martin,& Taylor, 2005), it is not surprising thatthe majority of students with a hearingloss struggle to become skilled readers(e.g., Karchmer & Mitchell, 2003; Trax-

ler, 2000). As a result, most studentswho are deaf or hard of hearing needsupplementary instruction in language,vocabulary, and literacy.

Teachers can provide neededinstruction by using concrete activities,such as the following:

• Preteaching: Review the material tobe learned, select several keyterms/concepts and systematicallydescribe how the term/concept isused within the context of thelesson.

• Enjoyment: Identify students’ areasof topical interest and then collect adiverse array of reading materialson those topics.

• Engagement: Use topical readingmaterials to conduct brief, informalconversations with students thatfocus on the ideas and informationcontained in the readings.

• Linking: Use students’ statementsabout the reading topic to link theirprior experiences with the readingcontent and encourage students to


Table 1. Types of Hearing Losses, Potential Educational Implications, and Research Citations

Type of Hearing Loss Educational Implications Research Citations

Chronic middle ear infections (i.e.,Otitis Media)

May negatively affect speech andlanguage development

Friel-Patti, 1990; Gravel & Wallace,1992

Hearing loss in one ear (i.e., unilateralhearing loss)

May negatively affect speech andlanguage development, academicprogress, and behavior

Culbertson & Gilbert, 1986; Lieu, 2004

Hard of hearing (i.e., mild or moderatehearing loss)

Person may experience auditory per-ception problems, speech and languagedevelopment delays, academic failure,and self-esteem and social deficiencies

Bess, Dodd-Murphy & Parker, 1998;Davis, Elfenbein, Schum, & Bentler,1986

Severe and profound deafness May negatively affect speech, language,literacy, academics, and employment

Karchmer & Mitchell, 2003; Traxler,2000

To promote vocabulary development, provide enjoyment:

Identify students’ areas of topical interest and then collecta diverse array of reading materials on those topics.

consider if their experiences areconsistent with the information inthe reading materials.

• Modeling: “Think aloud” as youinfer meaning from pictures, keywords, graphics, and text andinclude information regarding howyou check to determine if yourinferences are correct.

• Purpose: Identify how students arecurrently inferring text-based mean-ing within their preferred out-of-school activities (e.g., playing com-puter games, use of captions withtheir favorite TV shows, send-ing/reading text messages, etc.), theproblems they frequently encounter,and then “brainstorm” how thoseproblems can be addressed.

• Direct Instruction: Provide directinstruction concerning sight words,root words, prefixes/suffixes/mor-phemes, phonics, fluency, andnarrative and expository readingstrategies.

Additional instructional strategiesare available on the www.deafed.netweb site. Click on the “InstructionalResources” link. Also, consider exam-ining the texts titled Evidenced-BasedPractice in Educating Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students by Spencer and Mar-schark (2010) and Effective School Inter-ventions: Evidence-Based Strategies forImproving Student Outcomes by Rath-von (2008).

2. Gaps in Background andDomain Knowledge

Background or domain knowledgerefers to the prerequisite facts, skills,and concepts that students mustalready know in order to learn a newstrategy, system, concept, or content(Kame’enui et al., 2002). Many studieshave confirmed the relationshipbetween background knowledge andachievement (e.g., Dochy, Segers, &Buehl, 1999; Tobias, 1994). Back-ground or domain knowledge providesa basis for understanding, learning,and remembering facts and ideasfound in stories, academic content, andtextbooks (Wery & Nietfeld, 2010).People who have knowledge of a topichave better recall and are better able toelaborate on aspects of the topic thanthose who have limited knowledge ofthe topic (e.g., Brown, 2008). Asexplained by Ormrod (2006), “Whatlearners already know provides aknowledge base on which new learn-ing builds” (p. 34).

In general, people who alreadyknow something about a topic, learnnew information about that topic moreeffectively than people who have littlerelevant background. (Similarly, howeasily and accurately people rememberwhat they have previously learneddepends on how they learned it initial-ly, as well as how often they haverecalled and used it in the past (Orm-rod, 2006).

The amount of background ordomain knowledge that students have

can greatly influence whether they canunderstand or read subject matter.Often, students who are deaf or hard ofhearing do not have sufficient generalbackground or domain knowledgebecause they have limited opportuni-ties to access information incidentally(i.e., overhearing conversations, radio,television), have had limited experi-ences, and are not avid readers. As aresult, studies have indicated that stu-dents who are deaf or hard of hearingdemonstrate both qualitative and quan-titative differences in world knowledge(Hauser & Marschark, 2008; Marschark& Wauters, 2008). To offset the cumu-lative effect that often occurs whenstudents develop gaps in the back-ground knowledge due to concepts notbeing adequately learned, studentswho are deaf or hard of hearing mayneed instruction and accommodationsin activating background knowledge,organizing how content is presented tothem, and direct instruction in impor-tant concepts.

Because background knowledge hassuch a significant effect on students’ability to encode and store new infor-mation on a topic, Mayer (2011) sug-gests that assessing learners’ priorknowledge about the topic to be taughtis one of the most important forms ofassessment that educators undertake.Examples of quick assessments thatteachers can conduct before beginninga unit of study include asking studentsto write down everything they knowabout the topic of study for 1 minute,asking students to develop a webabout the topic, or engaging the classin a discussion of the topic using theK-W-L strategy (Ogle, 1986; discussingwhat they Know about the topic, whatthey Want to learn about the topic, andcoming back at the end of the unit toreport what they Learned about thetopic). Following are some additionalsuggestions for building and activatingbackground knowledge before initiatinga lesson or a unit:

• Use graphic organizers to introducethe material and to show how keyconcepts are related (Luckner,Bowen, & Carter, 2001).


Figure 1. Potential Consequences of Hearing Loss

Potential Consequencesof Hearing Loss

1.Language,Vocabulary,LiteracyDelays

2.Gaps in

Backgroundand DomainKnowledge

3.InadequateKnowledgeand Use ofLearningStrategies

4.Social SkillsDeficits

5.Reliance onAssistive

Technology

• Make available conceptually relatedbooks that span a wide range ofreading levels and allow students touse them as they please.

• Start a blog about the topic of studyand have the students extend itthrough group discussion.

• Include virtual experiences such asviewing captioned educationalmedia (e.g., Described and Cap-tioned Media—www.dcmp.org) andconduct group discussions aboutthe topic (Marzano, 2004).

3. Inadequate Knowledge andUse of Learning Strategies

Most students who know how tolearn, have a set of strategies for howthey learn best and evaluate their per-formance, making adjustments asneeded. Research indicates that stu-dents who are deaf or hard of hearingare less aware than their hearing peerswhen they do not comprehend (Schir-mer, 2003), and that they often lack anawareness of learning strategies ordon’t know how to use strategieseffectively (Strassman, 1997). Learningstrategies are “techniques, principles,or rules that enable a student to solveproblems and complete tasks inde-pendently” (Friend & Bursuck, 2009,p. 528). Learning strategies are directlyrelated to individual learning tasks,and people use them when they men-tally or physically manipulate material,or when they apply a specific tech-nique to a learning task (Slater &Horstman, 2002). Examples of learningstrategies that many people use toenhance their understanding are pre-diction, rehearsal (e.g., verbal, repeat-ed reading, selective underlining),self-questioning, elaboration (e.g.,mental imagery, creating analogies),organizing (e.g., outlining, graphicorganizers), and summarizing (Muth& Alvermann, 1999).

The process of purposefully moni-toring our thinking is referred to asmetacognition. Metacognition is char-acterized by (a) matching thinking andproblem-solving strategies to particularlearning situations, (b) clarifying pur-poses for learning, (c) monitoringone’s own comprehension through self-

questioning, and (d) taking correctiveaction if understanding fails. (Echev-arria, Vogt, & Short, 2010). Researchwith students who are both hearingand who are deaf or hard of hearingindicates that when teachers useexplicit metacognitive strategies withstudents, reading comprehension, aswell as content knowledge, is improved(e.g., Duffy, 2002; McLaughlin, 2003;Schirmer & Woolsey, 1997; Snow, Grif-fin, & Burns, 2005). Consequently,many students who are deaf or hard ofhearing require a combination of indi-rect and direct instruction and guidedpractice in the use of learning strate-gies. Examples of strategies and theirsequential use within day-to-dayinstruction are as follows:

• Prior to instruction. Turn Taking,Topic Establishment, Engagement,and Expectations: Prior to convey-ing new information, establishclassroom turn-taking routines thatensure students are aware who hasbeen selected to share; also, pro-vide sufficient time for the class tolook at the selected student, beforehe or she responds. Teachersengage students in informal inter-actions to draw out their experi-ences and questions concerning thefocus of the lesson. These strategiesenable students to participate inclass discussions that activate stu-dents’ prior knowledge, while

increasing their motivation andexpectation to learn (Lang, 2006;National Research Council, 2000;Spencer & Marschark, 2010; Wil-liams, 2009).

• At the onset of instruction. Vocabu-lary Identification, Graphic Organ-izers, and Adjunct Questions:During the initial lesson, teachersand students look through lessonmaterial to identify unknown

words, then use concept maps toidentity word meanings and the pro-gression of key lesson concepts.Teachers also identify specific ques-tions that students should consideras they read course material. Thesestrategies serve to focus students’attention, increase their conceptualcomprehension, and enhance reten-tion (Lang, 2006; Martin, 2006;National Research Council, 2000).

• During instruction. Dialogic Inter-actions, Thinking Aloud, and WaitTime: As the lesson begins, ask stu-dents open-ended questions, withappropriate wait time, to which theyare expected to respond and sharehow they derived their answers.Teachers scaffold students’ use ofincreasingly sophisticated reasoningstrategies by explaining their ownlearning strategies. In this processteachers emphasize such skills ascomparing, identifying patterns, andsequencing, while pointing out thetext-based cues that can be used toinfer meaning. These strategies pro-vide students sufficient time toidentify how they learn, add newlearning strategies, and develop abetter understanding of the targetedlesson content. The strategies alsoprovide teachers with critical infor-mation concerning how studentslearn and the misconceptions theybring to the learning process (Mar-

schark & Hauser, 2008; Marschark &Wauters, 2008; Martin, 2006; Wil-liams, 2009).

• Conclusion of instruction. ProblemSolving, Summarizing, and LinkingLearning With Living: Use perform-ance-based assessments in whichstudents demonstrate their compre-hension of the lesson’s key knowl-edge and skills through collabora-tive, small-group, and problem-


To teach learning strategies, establish classroom turn-takingroutines that ensure students are aware who has been

selected to share; also, provide sufficient time for the class tolook at the selected student, before he or she responds.

solving activities. In these activities,students use their notes to firstidentify, then summarize and uselesson content to understand, andpossibly address topical interestsand problems they encounter out-side of the classroom. These strate-gies increase students’ self-efficacy,conversational competencies, andproblem-solving skills, while simul-taneously increasing their motiva-tion and confidence (Lang, 2006;Spencer & Marschark, 2010;Williams, 2009).

Teachers can also provide supplemen-tary learning strategies to students whoare deaf or hard of hearing in fiveessential areas: gaining information,storing and retrieving information,expressing information, self-advocat-ing, and managing time (Ellis & Lenz,1996). Teachers can use active readingstrategies that have been demonstratedto be effective with students withlearning disabilities and preliminaryresearch suggests may be also appro-priate for students who are deaf orhard of hearing (Luckner & Handley,2008). Some of these strategies include

• RAP (Schumaker & Deshler, 1984),which helps students learn to iden-tify main ideas and details as wellas how to paraphrase:

R—Read a paragraph.

A—Ask yourself, “What were themain ideas and details of thisparagraph?”

P— Put the main idea and details inyour own words.

• RCRC (Richards, 2003), whichencourages students to questionthemselves as they move throughthe text:

R—Read a small part of the materi-al.

C— Cover the material.

R—Retell yourself what you read.

C— Check to see if you rememberedcorrectly.

• PARS (Cheek & Cheek, 1983), whichis a simplified textbook readingstrategy:

P— Preview the material by scan-ning the chapter and surveying

the introduction, headings,graphics, and chapter summaryto identify the main ideas.

A—Ask questions that relate to themain ideas identified while pre-viewing the chapter.

R—Read the chapter to answer thequestions developed.

S— Summarize the main ideas ofthe chapter.

4. Social Skills Deficits

Students who are deaf or hard of hear-ing are often at risk for not developingsocial relationships because they maynot have the language skills or havenot learned how to engage in sociallyappropriate behaviors, such as carryingon conversations, making friends, anddealing with conflict (Hauser & Mar-schark, 2008; Stinson, Whitmore, &Kluwin, 1996). A large and growingbody of research indicates that the pos-session of adequate social skills is nec-essary for maintaining social, psycho-logical, and occupational well-being(Segrin & Givertz, 2003). Simultane-ously, a positive correlation has been

found to exist between social skills andacademic performance (e.g., Malecki &Elliott, 2002). Conversely, research sug-gests that poorly developed social skillsduring early childhood were the singlebest predictor of significant problemsin adulthood (e.g., Strain & Odom,1986) and that people who lack socialskills are often rejected by others andare at risk for developing mental healthproblems during adulthood, such asdepression, social anxiety, and alco-holism (Elksnin & Elksnin, 2006).

Social interaction is challengingbecause it depends on human commu-nication that requires cognitiveprocesses, such as decision making,

social perception and interpretation,and the use of speech or sign language,as well as body language and appropri-ate timing of behaviors to interacteffectively (Liberman, DeRisi, &Mueser, 1989). Most of our social skillsare acquired through informal observa-tional learning, opportunities to prac-tice social skills, and feedback fromsignificant others (Segrin & Givertz,2003).

As a result, students who are deafor hard of hearing may benefit fromdirect instruction and coaching insocial skills and the pragmatics of lan-guage, as well as adult facilitation ofpeer interaction. Antia and Kreimeyer(2003) list a number of social skillsinterventions that enhance social inter-actions between hearing students andstudents who are deaf or hard of hear-ing. Suggestions include teaching stu-dents who are deaf or hard of hearinginteraction skills, teaching hearing stu-dents sign language for use in socialskills activities when communicatingwith their peers who are deaf or hardof hearing, teaching hearing studentsabout hearing loss, and designing

classroom environments that promotecommunication and interaction amongclassmates. Teacher-mediated instruc-tion to develop social skills is also rec-ommended and includes “developinggreeting skills, cooperation, sharingmaterials, assisting others, initiatingand maintaining conversation, compli-menting and praising” (p. 170).

5. Reliance on AssistiveTechnology

Students who are deaf or hard of hear-ing use an array of hearing technologyto access sound. Examples includecochlear implants, programmabledigital hearing aids, bone-anchored


To promote social skills, teach students who are deafor hard of hearing interaction skills, teach hearing

students sign language, teach hearing students about hearingloss, and design classroom environments that promotecommunication and interaction among classmates.

hearing aids (BAHA), contralateralrouting of signal (CROS) hearing aids,tactile communication devices, person-al-worn frequency-modulated (FM)amplification systems, and classroomamplification systems. Accompanyingperipherals include microphones, ear-molds, and chargers. Knowledge of the

use and maintenance of the equipmentis important to the academic success ofthis population of students. In addi-tion, with the interest in and success ofcochlear implants, postimplant therapyis an increasingly important area ofexpertise for teachers working withstudents who are deaf or hard of hear-

ing. To presume that, once implanted,students are able to hear like the typi-cal hearing person is a wrong assump-tion. Like other equipment, cochlearimplants require training for the stu-dents to use and preparation on thepart of the teacher to help students usethem effectively. Consequently, stu-


dents need professionals who cantroubleshoot technology problems andteach them how to use technology andsupport services, as well as how toself-advocate about technology andsupport service issues.

We recommend that the generaleducation teacher work collaborativelywith the teacher of students who aredeaf or hard of hearing to determinethe correct forms of assistive technolo-gy to use. If enough general and spe-cial education professionals need assis-tance, it is suggested that they requestthe teacher of students who are deaf orhard of hearing conduct an inserviceworkshop to define terms and explainhow to use the equipment. The follow-ing are specific actions that teacherscan take to increase the effectivenessof assistive technology:

• Check daily to make sure theassistive technology is workingappropriately.

• Help students learn how to properlytake care of the assistive technology.

• Establish contacts and proceduresfor managing the assistive technol-ogy when it malfunctions.

• Consistently use the assistive tech-nology.

• Face the students when speaking.

• Ensure the classroom is adequatelylit.

• Reduce the background noise in theclassroom.

• Establish and use routine attention-getting strategies (e.g., flick thelights, count down from 10).

• Provide sufficient wait time.

• If an FM system is used, pass themicrophone around to all speakers.

• Use overhead projectors, VCRs,LCDs, and Smart Boards to providevisual supplements to spokenmessages.

• Post a visual schedule identifyingdaily routines and expectations forstudents.

In addition, assistive technology ser-vices may include the use of sign lan-guage interpreters, tutors, and note tak-ers. In this case, it is appropriate to

request that the interpreter or supervi-sor of the tutors and note takers pro-vide professional development trainingof their appropriate use on request.Following are suggestions for maximiz-ing the effectiveness of an interpreter:

• Do not assume that an interpreter isa teacher or tutor, although theymay serve as a tutor if it is part oftheir formal job description.

• Directly address and look at the stu-dent who is deaf or hard of hearing,but not the interpreter when con-veying a message to the studentwho is deaf or hard of hearing.

• Keep in mind that the interpreterwill not answer questions directedto the student who is deaf or hardof hearing.

• Assume that interpreters will inter-pret everything they hear, includingnoises in the class and hallway.

• Provide interpreters with textbooksused in your class so that they canbecome familiar with the materialbeing taught.

• Be aware that it is permissible foran interpreter to ask for clarificationof spoken messages.

Final Thoughts

Technological advances such as new-born hearing screenings, cochlearimplants, and improved hearing aids,as well as federal mandates such as theIndividuals With Disabilities EducationAct (IDEA) of 2004, suggest thatincreasing numbers of students whoare deaf or hard of hearing will receivethe majority of their education in gen-eral education settings. As a result oftheir special needs, researchers (e.g.,Luckner & Muir, 2001; Reed, Antia, &Kreimeyer, 2008) suggest that studentswho are deaf or hard of hearing in gen-eral education settings benefit fromdirect services from a licensed teacherof students who are deaf or hard ofhearing to supplement instruction andto teach additional specialized curricu-lum content (e.g., learning strategies,social skills, self-advocacy). Con-comitantly, students benefit whenteachers of students who are deaf orhard of hearing provide indirect serv-

ice, including consultation with specialeducation and general education teach-ers, so they can make specific adapta-tions and modifications in their instruc-tion and assessment practices that helpstudents with a hearing loss haveaccess to the curriculum as well as tosocial interactions that occur in theclassroom.

As noted by Horowitz et al. (2005),“The core purpose of formal educationis to enable the development of allchildren to take their place in adultsociety with the competencies to bepositively contributing members to thesociety” (p. 125). Placement is not syn-onymous with receiving an appropriateeducation. A variety of teacher factors,such as teaching style, the contentbeing taught, and how the educationalenvironment is managed, as well asstudent factors such as language, cog-nition, motivation, behavior, and socialskills, affect learning.

Although many people with a hear-ing loss have overcome obstacles,achieved happiness, and attained lifesuccess, educators need to understandthat the majority of children who aredeaf or hard of hearing enter schoolwith (1) language, vocabulary, and lit-eracy delays; (2) gaps in backgroundand domain knowledge; (3) inadequateknowledge and use of learning strate-gies; (4) social skills deficits; and (5)reliance on assistive technology. Inaddition to considering these five chal-lenges, educators must keep in mindthat when students with a hearing lossare served in general education class-rooms, access to the information trans-mitted during classroom discourse maybe significantly reduced. This oftenoccurs because of the rapid rate of dis-cussions, continuous turn taking, quickchange of topics, the large number ofspeakers involved in a discussion, thetendency for more than one student totalk simultaneously, and the challengefor educational interpreters to conveyessential classroom communicationaccurately for those students who relyon sign to communicate (Luckner &Friend, 2011; Schick, 2008). Con-sequently, the majority of studentswho are deaf or hard of hearing requireaccommodations and modifications in


the educational environment, as wellas supplementary instruction in orderto benefit from receiving educationalservices in general education settings.Optimally, an educational team pro-vides these services, working collabo-ratively to plan, teach, assess, andevaluate the efficacy of the placementas well as the services that each stu-dent with a hearing loss receives.

ReferencesAntia, S., & Kreimeyer, K. (2003). Peer inter-

action of deaf and hard of hearing chil-dren. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer(Eds.), Deaf studies, language and educa-tion (pp. 164–176). New York, NY:Oxford University Press.

Bess, F. H., Dodd-Murphy, J., & Parker, R.A. (1998). Children with minimal sen-sorineural hearing loss: Prevalence, edu-cational performance, and functionalstatus. Ear & Hearing, 19(5), 339–354.http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00003446-199810000-00001

Biemiller, A. (2005). Vocabulary develop-ment and instruction: A prerequisite forschool learning. In D. Dickinson & S.Neuman (Eds.), Handbook of early litera-cy research, Vol. 2 (pp. 41–51). New York,NY: Guilford Press.

Bransford, J., Darling-Hammond, L., &LePage, P. (2005). Introduction. In L.Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.),Preparing teachers for a changing world:What teachers should learn and be ableto do (pp. 1–39). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Brown, R. (2008). The road not taken: Atransactional strategies approach to com-prehension instruction. The ReadingTeacher, 6(7), 538–547. http://dx.doi.org//10.1598/RT.61.7.3

Cheek, E. H., Jr., & Cheek, M. C. (1983).Reading instruction through contentteaching. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Culbertson, J. L., & Gilbert, L. E. (1986).Children with unilateral sensorineuralhearing loss: Cognitive, academic, andsocial development. Ear and Hearing,7(1), 38–42. http://dx.doi.org//10.1097/00003446-198602000-00007

Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E.(1997). Early reading acquisition and itsrelation to reading experience and ability10 years later. Developmental Psychology,33, 934–945. http://dx.doi.org//10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934

Davis, J. M., Elfenbein, J. L., Schum, R., &Bentler, R. A. (1986). Effects of mild andmoderate hearing impairments on lan-guage, educational, and psychosocialbehavior of children. Journal of Speechand Hearing Disorders, 51, 53–62.

Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Buehl, M. M.(1999). The relationship between assess-

ment practices and outcomes of studies:The case of research on prior knowledge.Review of Educational Research, 69(2),145–186.

Duffy, G. G. (2002). The case for directexplanation of strategies. In C. C. Block &M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehensioninstruction: Research-based practices (pp.28–41). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. J.(2010). Making content comprehensiblefor elementary English learners: The SIOPmodel. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Elksnin, L. K., & Elksnin, N. (2006). Teach-ing social-emotional skills at school andhome. Denver, CO: Love.

Ellis, S., & Lenz, B. K. (1996). Perspectiveson instruction in learning strategies. InD. Deshler, E. Ellis, & B. K. Lenz (Eds.),Teaching adolescents with learning dis-abilities: Strategies and methods (2nded., pp. 9–60). Denver, CO: Love.

Federal Interagency Forum on Child andFamily Statistics. (2009). America’s chil-dren: Key national indicators of well-being, 2009. Washington, DC: U.S.Government Printing Office.

Friel-Patti, S. (1990). Otitis media with effu-sion and the development of language:A review of the evidence. Topics inLanguage Disorders, 11, 11–22. http://dx.doi.org//10.1097/00011363-199011000-00004

Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2009). Includ-ing students with special needs: A practi-cal guide for classroom teachers (5th ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educa-tion.

Gravel, J. S., & Wallace, I. F. (1992). Listen-ing and language at 4 years of age:Effects of early otitis media. Journal ofSpeech Hearing Research, 35, 588–595.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningfuldifferences in the everyday experiences ofyoung American children. Baltimore, MD:Brookes.

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The earlycatastrophe: The 30 million word gap byage 3. American Educator, 27(1), 4–9.

Hauser, P. C., & Marschark, M. (2008).What we know and what we don’t knowabout cognition and deaf learners. In M.Marschark & P. C. Hauser (Eds.). Deafcognition: Foundation and outcomes (pp.439–457). New York, NY: Oxford Univer-sity Press.

Horowitz, F. D., Darling-Hammond, L.,Bransford, J., Comer, J., Rosebrock, K.,Austin, K., & Rust, F. (2005). Educatingteachers for developmentally appropriatepractice. In L. Darling-Hammond & J.Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for achanging world: What teachers shouldlearn and be able to do (pp. 88–125). SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Actof 2004, 20 USC 1400 et seq. (2004).

Kame’enui, E. J., Carnine, D. W., Dixon, R.C., Simmons, D. C., & Coyne, M. D.(2002). Effective teaching strategies thataccommodate diverse learners (2nd ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: PearsonEducation.

Karchmer, M. A., & Mitchell, R. E. (2003).Demographic and achievement character-istics of deaf and hard of hearing stu-dents. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer(Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies,language, and education (pp. 21–37).London, England: Oxford UniversityPress.

Lang, H. (2006). Teaching science. In D. F.Moores & D. S. Martin (Eds.), Deaf learn-ers: Developments in curriculum andinstruction (pp. 57–66). Washington, DC:Gallaudet University Press.

Lederberg, A. R. (2003). Expressing mean-ing: From communicative intent to build-ing a lexicon. In M. Marschark & P.Spencer (Eds.). Oxford handbook of deafstudies, language, and education (pp.247–260). London, England: OxfordUniversity Press.

Lemke, J. (1988). Genres, semantics, andclassroom education. Linguistics andEducation, 1, 81–99. http://dx.doi.org//10.1016/S0898-5898(88)80011-1

Liberman, R. P., DeRisi, W. J., & Mueser, K.T. (1989). Social skills training for psychi-atric patients. New York, NY: PergamonPress.

Lieu, J. E. C. (2004). Speech-language andeducational consequences of unilateralhearing loss in children. Archives ofOtolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 130,524–530. http://dx.doi.org//10.1001/archotol.130.5.524

Luckner, J. L., Bowen, S., & Carter, K.(2001). Visual teaching strategies for stu-dents who are deaf or hard of hearing.TEACHING Exceptional Children, 33(3),38–44.

Luckner, J. L., & Cooke, C. (2010). A sum-mary of the vocabulary research withstudents who are deaf or hard of hearing.American Annals of the Deaf, 155(1),38–67. http://dx.doi.org//10.1353/aad.0.0129

Luckner, J. L., & Friend, M. (2011). Studentswith deafness and hearing loss. In M.Friend (Ed.), Special education: Contem-porary perspectives for school profession-als (3rd ed., pp. 328–365). Boston, MA:Pearson Education.

Luckner, J. L., & Handley, C. M. (2008). Asummary of the reading comprehensionresearch undertaken with students whoare deaf or hard of hearing. AmericanAnnals of the Deaf, 153(1), 6–36.http://dx.doi.org//10.1353/aad.0.0006

Luckner, J. L., & Muir, S. (2001). Successfulstudents who are deaf in general educa-tion settings. American Annals of theDeaf, 146(5), 450–461.


Malecki, C., & Elliott, S. (2002). Children’ssocial behaviors as predictors of academ-ic achievement: A longitudinal analysis.School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 1–23.http://dx.doi.org//10.1521/scpq.17.1.1.19902

Marschark, M., & Hauser, P. C. (2008).Cognitive underpinnings of learning bydeaf and hard-of-hearing students:Differences, diversity, and direction. InM. Marschark & P. C. Hauser (Eds.), Deafcognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp.3–23). New York, NY: Oxford UniversityPress.

Marschark, M., & Wauters, L. (2008).Language comprehension and learningby deaf students. In M. Marschark & P.C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Founda-tion and outcomes (pp. 309–350). NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press.

Martin, D. S. (2006). Cognitive strategyinstruction: A permeating principle. In D.F. Moores & D. S. Martin (Eds.), Deaflearners: Developments in curriculum andinstruction (pp. 201–206). Washington,DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building backgroundknowledge for academic achievement:Research on what works in schools.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervi-sion and Curriculum Development.

Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science oflearning. Boston, MA: Pearson Educa-tion.

McLaughlin, M. (2003). Guided comprehen-sion in the primary grades. Newark, DE:International Reading Association.

Metha, P. D., Foorman, B. R., Branum-Martin, L., & Taylor, W. P. (2005).Literacy as a unidimensional multilevelconstruct: Validation, sources of influ-ence, and implications in a longitudinalstudy in grades 1 to 4. Scientific Studiesof Reading, 9(2), 85–116. http://dx.doi.org//10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_1

Muth, K. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1999).Teaching and learning in the middlegrades (2nd ed.). Needhan Heights, MA:Allyn & Bacon.

National Association of State Directors ofSpecial Education. (2006). Meeting theneeds of students who are deaf or hard ofhearing: Educational services guidelines.Alexandria, VA: Author.

National Research Council. (2000). Howpeople learn: Brain, mind, experience andschool. Washington, DC: NationalAcademy Press.

Ogle, D. (1986). KWL: A teaching modelthat develops active reading of expositorytext. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564–570.http://dx.doi.org//10.1598/RT.39.6.11

Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Essentials of educa-tional psychology. Upper Saddle River,NJ: Pearson Education.

Owens, R. E., Jr. (2010). Language disorders:A functional approach to assessment and

intervention (5th ed.). Boston, MA:Pearson.

Rathvon, N. (2008). Effective school inter-ventions: Evidence-based strategies forimproving student outcomes (2nd ed.).New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Reed, S., Antia, S. D., & Kreimeyer, K. H.(2008). Academic status of deaf andhard-of-hearing students in publicschools: Student, home and service facili-tators and detractors. Journal of DeafStudies and Deaf Education, 13(4),485–502. http://dx.doi.org//10.1093/deafed/enn006

Richards, R. G. (2003). The source for learn-ing and memory strategies. East Moline,IL: LinguiSystems.

Schick, B. (2008). A model of learning with-in an interpreted K–12 educational set-ting. In M. Marschark & P. C. Hauser(Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundation andoutcomes (pp. 351–386). New York, NY:Oxford University Press.

Schirmer, B. R. (2003). Using verbal proto-cols to identify the reading strategies ofstudents who are deaf. Journal of DeafStudies and Deaf Education, 8(2),157–170. http://dx.doi.org//10.1093/deafed/eng009

Schirmer, B. R., & Woolsey, M. L. (1997).Effect of teacher questions on the readingcomprehension of deaf children. Journalof Deaf Studies & Deaf Education, 2(1),47–56.

Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (1984).The learning strategies curriculum: Theparaphrasing strategy. Lawrence, KS:University of Kansas.

Segrin, C., & Givertz, M. (2003). Methods ofsocial skills training and development. InJ. O. Green & B. R. Burleson (Eds.),Handbook of communication and socialinteraction skills (pp. 135–176). Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum.

Slater, W. H., & Horstman, F. R. (2002).Teaching reading and writing to strug-gling middle school and high school stu-dents: The case for reciprocal teaching.Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 163–167.http://dx.doi.org//10.1080/10459880209604416

Snow, C. E., Griffin, P., & Burns, M. S.(Eds.). (2005). Knowledge to support theteaching of reading: Preparing teachersfor a changing world. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Spencer, P. E., & Marschark, M. (2010).Evidenced-based practice in educatingdeaf and hard-of-hearing students. NewYork, NY: Oxford University Press.

Stinson, M. S., Whitmore, K., & Kluwin, T.N. (1996). Self perceptions of social rela-tionships in hearing-impaired adoles-cents. Journal of Educational Psychology,88, 132–143. http://dx.doi.org//10.1037/0022-0663.88.1.132

Strain, P. S., & Odom, S. L. (1986). Peersocial initiations: Effective intervention

for social skill development of exception-al children. Exceptional Children, 52,543–551.

Strassman, B. K. (1997). Metacognition andreading in children who are deaf: Areview of the research. Journal of DeafStudies and Deaf Education, 2, 140–149.

Tabors, P. O., Snow, C. E., & Dickinson, D.K. (2001). Homes and schools together:Supporting language and literacy devel-opment. In D. K. Dickinson & P. O.Tabors (Eds.), Beginning literacy withlanguage: Young children learning athome and school (pp. 203–242). Balti-more, MD: Brookes.

Tobias, S. (1994). Interest, prior knowledgeand learning. Review of EducationalResearch, 64(1), 37–54.

Traxler, C. B. (2000). The Stanford Achieve-ment Test, 9th edition: National normingand performance standards for deaf andhard-of-hearing students. Journal of DeafStudies and Deaf Education, 5(4),337–348. http://dx.doi.org//10.1093/deafed/5.4.337

U.S. Department of Education. (1992,October 30). Deaf students educationservices: Policy guidance. FederalRegister, 57(211), 49274–49276.

U.S. Department of Education, Office ofSpecial Education and RehabilitativeServices, Office of Special EducationPrograms. (2009). 28th annual report toCongress on the implementation of theIndividuals With Disabilities EducationAct, 2006 (vol. 1). Washington, DC:Author.

Wery, J. J., & Nietfeld, J. L. (2010). Support-ing self-regulated learning with excep-tional children. TEACHING ExceptionalChildren, 42(4), 70–78.

Williams, C. B. (2009). No limits: A practi-cal guide for teaching deaf and hard ofhearing students. Hillsboro, OR: ButtePublications.

John L. Luckner (Colorado CEC/DCCD),Professor, School of Special Education,University of Northern Colorado, Greeley.Samuel B. Slike, Director, Special EducationOnline Programs, Saint Joseph’s University,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Harold Johnson(Michigan CEC/DCCD), Professor, Counsel-ing, Educational Psychology, and SpecialEducation Department, Michigan StateUniversity, East Lansing.

Address correspondence concerning this arti-cle to John L. Luckner, School of SpecialEducation, 501 20th St., Campus Box 141,University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO80639-0248 (e-mail: [email protected]).

TEACHING Exceptional Children, Vol. 44,No. 4, pp. 58–67.

Copyright 2012 CEC.


teaching exceptional children 00

Documents