Using Family-Centered Practices to Increase Language Access for Multilingual Deaf or Hard of Hearing Children

Children who are deaf or hard of hearing may experience language deprivation in the early years that impacts long-term communication and educational outcomes. Fortunately, family engagement in the early childhood years has been shown to increase outcomes for young learners, and the standards for early childhood family engagement align with best practices for teaching children who are deaf or hard of hearing from multilingual families. Best practices for early childhood education, deaf or hard of hearing education, and multilingual education all place the family at the forefront with a strong belief that family is the first and best teacher for their child. The purpose of the chapter is to present the alignment of family centered practices across early childhood, deaf or hard of hearing, and multilingual education literature and present family centered collaboration strategies to increase early childhood language access for young multilingual children who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Family ASL: An Early Start to Equitable Education for Deaf Children

Deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children experience systematic barriers to equitable education due to intentional or unintentional ableist views that can lead to a general lack of awareness about the value of natural sign languages and insufficient resources supporting sign language development. Furthermore, an imbalance of information in favor of spoken languages often stems from a phonocentric perspective that views signing as an inferior form of communication that also hinders the development of spoken language. On the contrary, research demonstrates that early adoption of a natural sign language confers critical protection from the risks of language deprivation without endangering spoken language development. In this position paper, we draw attention to deep societal biases about language in the information presented to parents of DHH children, against early exposure to a natural sign language. We outline actions that parents and professionals can adopt to maximize DHH children’s chances for on-time language development.

Argument omissions by deaf students in three languages and three modalities

While it is common for deaf children to be bilingual in a spoken and signed language, studies often attribute any delays in language acquisition to language deprivation, rather than as a result of cross-linguistic interaction. This study compares the production of simple sentences in three languages (Palestinian Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic, and Israeli Sign Language [ISL]) and three language modalities (spoken, written, and signed) by deaf and hearing students in an Arabic-speaking community. Thirty-eight school-age Palestinian Arabic–speaking students participated in a sentence elicitation task in which they retold the events portrayed in video clips. Hearing students ( n = 19) produced the sentences in spoken Palestinian Arabic and in written Modern Standard Arabic. Deaf students ( n = 19) produced the sentences in these two language varieties and additionally in ISL. Omissions of arguments and verbs were compared across the two groups and three languages. Results showed that deaf students omitted more arguments and verbs compared with their hearing peers who scored at close to ceiling. Deaf students produced more omissions for direct objects and more omissions in ISL. The findings can be interpreted in two possible ways: atypical effects resulting from inconsistent language input and cross-linguistic transfer known to arise in multilingual children.

Acquisition of Sign Languages

Natural sign languages of deaf communities are acquired on the same time scale as that of spoken languages if children have access to fluent signers providing input from birth. Infants are sensitive to linguistic information provided visually, and early milestones show many parallels. The modality may affect various areas of language acquisition; such effects include the form of signs (sign phonology), the potential advantage presented by visual iconicity, and the use of spatial locations to represent referents, locations, and movement events. Unfortunately, the vast majority of deaf children do not receive accessible linguistic input in infancy, and these children experience language deprivation. Negative effects on language are observed when first-language acquisition is delayed. For those who eventually begin to learn a sign language, earlier input is associated with better language and academic outcomes. Further research is especially needed with a broader diversity of participants. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Linguistics, Volume 7 is January 14, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.