scholarly journals Using evaluation criteria and rubrics as learning tools in subtitling for the D/deaf and the hard of hearing

2020 ◽  
pp. 68-88
Author(s):  
Irene De Higes Andino ◽  
Beatriz Cerezo Merchán
Keyword(s):  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Learning Tools

scholarly journals Links between Study Outcomes and Learning Tools: Theoretical Background

Pedagogika ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 124 (4) ◽  
pp. 193-205
Author(s):  
Gintautė Žibėnienė
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Bologna Process ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Theoretical Background ◽  
Learning Tools ◽  
Basic Part ◽  
Study Programme ◽  
European Higher Education ◽  
Study Process ◽  
Structural Parts

The article was prepared on the following conceptual theoretical provisions: Study outcomes is the basic part of a study programme when planning the content of studies, organizing study process, evaluation criteria of students‘ achievements, means and aids (Adam, 2004, 2007, 2008); Study outcome is the main feature of teaching / study programmes; the fundamental element of a teaching / study programme is study outcomes, denoting intended student’s knowledge, abilities and determining substantiation of the remaining elements of the study content (Laužackas, 2008; Pukelis, 2009); Interrelation of quality study process and evaluation of study outcomes with curriculum theory, where study programme is a constantly changing and self-renewing system, with all structural parts directed towards study aims, study outcomes (Kerr, 1967; Laužackas, 2000, 2008; Tyler, 1949; Žibėnienė, 2014); Provisions of European higher education space creation, formulated during Bologna process by ministers of education of participating countries in meetings, documents of European Commission and its authorized institutions (BOLOGNA beyond 2010, Communiqué of the Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education, Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve, 2009; Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area, 2009); study outcomes interface with taxonomy methodology (Kennedy, Ryan & Hyland, 2009; Aligning with Outcomes Assessment, 2012) and study methods and evaluation methods (Žibėnienė, 2014). Lithuania applies a study content designing model directed towards study aims and outcomes, dominating in European countries (R. W. Tyler), when a study programme is designed by setting study aims, study outcomes and foreseeing their further division according to the logical base and subject outcomes. Therefore responsibly formulated study outcomes of a study programme is not only a prerequisite for study quality – their formulation shows a clear direction for all participants of the study process in planning and carrying out evaluation of students’ achievements, directed towards evaluation of study outcomes.

scholarly journals Supplemental Online Learning Tools (SOLTs) to Support Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Introductory Statistics Courses

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Jacqueline McClive ◽  
◽  
Keith Mousley ◽  
Carol E. Marchetti ◽  
David Simkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Introductory Statistics ◽  
Learning Tools ◽  
Sign Language Interpreters ◽  
Instructional Videos ◽  
Mainstream Classrooms ◽  
Language Knowledge ◽  
Student Researchers ◽  
And Mathematics

Research in most Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines uses statistical methods. Thus as students develop into research scientists, introductory statistics serves as a gateway course. If students struggle to incorporate statistics into their knowledge base, they may be effectively kept from careers that rely on statistics. Students who are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) learn differently and thus may lag behind their hearing counterparts in mainstream classrooms. In part, a gap in language knowledge can impede the understanding of statistics topics. What is a variable? What does it mean to have a distribution? With sign language interpreters and other support services, many mainstream instructors believe that DHH students have equal access to learning in their classrooms. Yet variations of instructional skill, interpreter knowledge of the discipline, and the lack of alternative representations of content often result in access that falls short of "equal". This paper describes the work of a team of faculty and student researchers seeking best practices for creating supplemental online learning tools. Starting from a list of prioritized challenging topics in statistics, the team developed a number of strategies and produced a pilot set of instructional videos. Formative feedback led to revised videos, which provided a significant gain in knowledge for DHH students when shown in an experimental setting.

Measuring “Language Access Profiles” in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children With the DHH Language Exposure Assessment Tool

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Hall ◽  
Stephanie De Anda
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Communication Mode ◽  
Developmental Potential ◽  
Language Access ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Language Exposure ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Purpose The purposes of this study were (a) to introduce “language access profiles” as a viable alternative construct to “communication mode” for describing experience with language input during early childhood for deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children; (b) to describe the development of a new tool for measuring DHH children's language access profiles during infancy and toddlerhood; and (c) to evaluate the novelty, reliability, and validity of this tool. Method We adapted an existing retrospective parent report measure of early language experience (the Language Exposure Assessment Tool) to make it suitable for use with DHH populations. We administered the adapted instrument (DHH Language Exposure Assessment Tool [D-LEAT]) to the caregivers of 105 DHH children aged 12 years and younger. To measure convergent validity, we also administered another novel instrument: the Language Access Profile Tool. To measure test–retest reliability, half of the participants were interviewed again after 1 month. We identified groups of children with similar language access profiles by using hierarchical cluster analysis. Results The D-LEAT revealed DHH children's diverse experiences with access to language during infancy and toddlerhood. Cluster analysis groupings were markedly different from those derived from more traditional grouping rules (e.g., communication modes). Test–retest reliability was good, especially for the same-interviewer condition. Content, convergent, and face validity were strong. Conclusions To optimize DHH children's developmental potential, stakeholders who work at the individual and population levels would benefit from replacing communication mode with language access profiles. The D-LEAT is the first tool that aims to measure this novel construct. Despite limitations that future work aims to address, the present results demonstrate that the D-LEAT represents progress over the status quo.

Family Support in Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) Systems

2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-21
Author(s):  
Patti Martin ◽  
Nannette Nicholson ◽  
Charia Hall
Keyword(s):  
Family Support ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
Learning Collaborative ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Improved Outcomes ◽  
Program Components

Family support has evolved from a buzzword of the 1990s to a concept founded in theory, mandated by federal law, valued across disciplines, and espoused by both parents and professionals. This emphasis on family-centered practices for families of young children with disabilities, coupled with federal policy initiatives and technological advances, served as the impetus for the development of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs (Nicholson & Martin, in press). White, Forsman, Eichwald, and Muñoz (2010) provide an excellent review of the evolution of EHDI systems, which include family support as one of their 9 components. The National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management (NCHAM), the Maternal and Child Health Bureau, and the Center for Disease Control Centers cosponsored the first National EHDI Conference. This conference brought stakeholders including parents, practitioners, and researchers from diverse backgrounds together to form a learning collaborative (Forsman, 2002). Attendees represented a variety of state, national, and/or federal agencies and organizations. This forum focused effort on the development of EHDI programs infused with translating research into practices and policy. When NCHAM, recognizing the critical role of family support in the improvement of outcomes for both children and families, created a think tank to investigate the concept of a conference centered on support for families of children who are deaf or hard of hearing in 2005, the “Investing in Family Support” (IFSC) conference was born. This conference was specifically designed to facilitate and enhance EHDI efforts within the family support arena. From this venue, a model of family support was conceptualized and has served as the cornerstone of the IFSC annual conference since 2006. Designed to be a functional framework, the IFSC model delineates where and how families find support. In this article, we will promote and encourage continued efforts towards defining operational measures and program components to ultimately quantify success as it relates to improved outcomes for these children and their families. The authors view this opportunity to revisit the theoretical underpinnings of family support, the emerging research in this area, and the basics of the IFSC Model of Family Support as a call to action. We challenge professionals who work with children identified as deaf or hard of hearing to move family support from conceptualization to practices that are grounded in evidence and ever mindful of the unique and dynamic nature of individual families.

The Colorado Journey Towards Optimal Outcomes for Children With Hearing Loss

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Yoshinaga-Itano
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
Language Outcomes ◽  
Maternal Bonding ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Optimal Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss

Abstract It is possible for children who are deaf or hard of hearing to attain language development comparable to their hearing peers, but these outcomes are not guaranteed. The population of children with hearing loss is a diverse population and although the variable of the age of identification is less variable, there are numerous variables that could potentially and have historically impacted language outcomes of children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Variables such as hearing loss, maternal level of education, and maternal bonding can overcome the benefits of earlier identification and intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document