THE TRAINING OF TEACHERS OF THE DEAF.

The Lancet ◽  
1890 ◽  
Vol 135 (3472) ◽  
pp. 612
Keyword(s):  
1987 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-22
Author(s):  
R.D. Savage ◽  
J.F. Savage ◽  
J. Potter

ABSTRACTThe aim of the present study is to investigate classroom communication by teachers of the deaf. A comparison will be made of the linguistic content of the communication of experienced and inexperienced teachers using total communication methods in a classroom teaching situation. The implications of the teachers' classroom communication methods for children's language development will be discussed.


Author(s):  
Adoyo Peter Oracha

<p><em>Effective communication between teacher and pupil is a requisite factor for educational attainment. For the deaf, ineffective communication is a major problem especially when onset of profound deafness takes places at an early age before language is acquired. At school, the language of classroom communication not only affects the child’s development but also influences ability to learn other curriculum contents. Pointing out reasons for failure by deaf children to compete favorably with their hearing peers, Johnson et al (1989) has indicated that the central problem on deaf education is embedded in the lack of an appropriate language of classroom communication. </em></p><p><em>For a long time education for the deaf was conducted through the oral approach. It was later realized that this oral approach did not avail curriculum content to the deaf learners. In the 1980’s Total Communication arose as one of the solutions. According to Adoyo (2004), Total Communication was misunderstood for Simultaneous Communication, a communication system in which speech and sign are produced at the same time (Lane, Hoffmister &amp; Bahan, 1996).  Although SC has been used in Kenya for all these years, it has not produced the predicated large-scale improvement. </em></p><p><em>In this study, an attempt was made to establish the capacity of SC to enhance understanding and to facilitate information processing. The investigation was carried out through an examination of the extent to which the spoken and signed messages were equivalent in meaning. The research question was: To what extent do teachers of the deaf maintain one-one, sign to-voice ratio during Simultaneous Communication transmission and to what degree is the spoken and signed message equivalent semantically?</em></p>


1987 ◽  
Vol 132 (5b) ◽  
pp. 366-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Tane Akamatsu ◽  
David A. Stewart

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-30
Author(s):  
Jane E. Puhlman ◽  
Carla L. Wood

There is not general consensus on best practice for assessment and intervention of phonological awareness (PA) for children who are D/deaf or hard of hearing (D/dhh). The current study surveyed the PA practices of teachers of the deaf and speech-language pathologists to explore perceptions of PA importance, familiarity, and helpfulness related to assessment and intervention approaches used when working with children who are D/dhh. Survey responses from speech-language pathologists ( n = 80) and teachers of the deaf ( n = 94) indicated that the majority of respondents perceive PA to be important to literacy instruction with children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Notably there was a significantly higher average PA importance rating for literacy instruction with children with typical hearing than the PA importance rating for children who were D/dhh. There was wide variability in reported PA assessment and intervention practices. Participants reported using some assessments that included explicit items or subtests for PA including the following: Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing, and the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. There was not general consensus on a particular instructional method or approach to support literacy development.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Hannah M. Dostal ◽  
Kimberly Wolbers ◽  
Shana Ward ◽  
Rachel Saulsburry

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Crowe ◽  
Sharynne McLeod

The purpose of this research was to investigate factors that influence professionals’ guidance of parents of children with hearing loss regarding spoken language multilingualism and spoken language choice. Sixteen professionals who provide services to children and young people with hearing loss completed an online survey, rating the importance of a range of potential influences on the guidance they provide to parents. These participants were invited to comment on the importance of these influences. Participants included teachers of the deaf, speech-language pathologists, special education teachers, psychologists, auditory-verbal therapists, Auslan interpreters, and curriculum coordinators. All participants had experience working with multilingual families and reported that they would sometimes or always recommend multilingualism for children with hearing loss, with fewer reporting that they would sometimes recommend monolingualism. Professionals placed greater importance on factors relating to family and community considerations (e.g., family language models, communication within the family, community engagement), and less importance on organisational policy and children's characteristics. This research provides an initial insight into the factors that professionals consider when guiding parents around spoken language and spoken language multilingualism decision-making for their children with hearing loss.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document