Acoustic Characteristics of the Speech of Young Cochlear Implant Users

[jillio]

Ok I will, thanks

No problem. Let me know how it goes.

 

[vallee]

No problem. Let me know how it goes.

Some testing scores in relations to Achievment scores, I could not view. I am trying to find scores related to NCLB and TCAP scores. I kept getting accommodations for testing. So I will ask my testing coordinator for Tennessee scores. I did find this in the Journals of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education.


It is interesting, but does not answer my question. Since this thread is so long, I'm not sure if it has been posted before. I am looking for evidence that goes against my hypothesis as well. I am looking for state achievement in relation to lower test scores for deaf and HOH students.

Neuropsychological Correlates of Vocabulary, Reading, and Working Memory in Deaf Children With Cochlear Implants
Mary K. Fagan, David B. Pisoni, David L. Horn and Caitlin M. Dillon
Indiana University


Abstract


The performance of deaf children with cochlear implants was assessed using measures standardized on hearing children. To investigate nonverbal cognitive and sensorimotor processes associated with postimplant variability, five selected sensorimotor and visuospatial subtests from A Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (NEPSY) were compared with standardized vocabulary, reading, and digit span measures. Participants were 26 deaf children, ages 6–14 years, who received a cochlear implant between ages 1 and 6 years; duration of implant use ranged from 3 to 11 years. Results indicated significant correlations between standard scores on the Design Copying subtest of the NEPSY and standard scores on vocabulary comprehension, reading, and digit span measures. The results contribute to our understanding of the benefits of cochlear implantation and cognitive processes that may support postimplant language and academic functioning.

 

[deafskeptic]

2 of my current students are perfect proof of that. They have beautiful oral language and can communicate easily orally, however when it comes to academics concepts, it takes them a lot longer than the others who have been exposed to ASL or those from deaf families to pick up on the concepts and apply them. I have to modify my lessons for those two or use my aide to work with them one on one for extra help. If that is not proof, then I dont know what is proof.

One of my roommates that I had at MSSD is also a perfect example of what you speak of, Shel.

 

[vallee]

Academic and Social Benefits of a Co-enrollment Model of Inclusive Education for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children
Kathryn H. Kreimeyer
Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and Blind

Pamela Crooke, Cynthia Drye, Vivian Egbert and Barbara Klein

Miles Exploratory Learning Center


Deaf and hard-of-hearing (d/hh) students are traditionally educated within self-contained programs at residential or special day schools, within self-contained or resource classrooms in public schools, or within regular education classrooms with support provided by an itinerant teacher. The co-enrollment model offers a promising alternative in which these students are educated within a regular education classroom composed of both d/hh and hearing students and team-taught by a teacher of the deaf and a regular education teacher. This article examines the development of one such program and the social and academic performance of the d/hh students within the program. Data on social interaction between d/hh and hearing classmates suggest that specific instructional strategies that promoted students' sign language development, identified d/hh students as "sign language specialists" and grouped d/hh and hearing students during academic activities resulted in increased interaction between these two groups of students. Stanford Achievement Test scores in the areas of reading vocabulary, reading comprehension, mathematical problem solving and procedures indicate that although d/hh students scored below the national normative hearing group, reading comprehension levels exceeded the national normative sample of d/hh students during both years two and three of the program. We discuss the challenges of implementing a co-enrollment program

Th

 

[Kaitin]

It is interesting, but does not answer my question. Since this thread is so long, I'm not sure if it has been posted before. I am looking for evidence that goes against my hypothesis as well. I am looking for state achievement in relation to lower test scores for deaf and HOH students.

Maybe I missed your earlier post, but could you repeat your hypothesis and question, Vallee?

 

[vallee]

Maybe I missed your earlier post, but could you repeat your hypothesis and question, Vallee?

I have not stated it. But I am trying to find evidence that shows increase and decrease achievement scores based on d/HOH students.

Until I see Tennessee's scores and breakdown, my hypothesis might be worthless. Basically I am trying to find out the percentage of Deaf/HOH that qualify for portfolio assessment and out of grade level TCAP testing. Also the percentages of d/hoh students that take TCAP with accommodations and without accommodations.

Without stated my hypothesis, what I do is go against the stated post(even if I agree with the post) and try to find evidence against and for. So when I research I try to dispprove the post, but review all evidence. Then develop an opinion. I try to keep my opinion out of my research and be objective.


Side comment - It is difficult to do and I don't always do it, because prior knowledge and feels cloud judgements. I am trying to be more open minded.

 

[Kaitin]

I have not stated it. But I am trying to find evidence that shows increase and decrease achievement scores based on d/HOH students.

Until I see Tennessee's scores and breakdown, my hypothesis might be worthless. Basically I am trying to find out the percentage of Deaf/HOH that qualify for portfolio assessment and out of grade level TCAP testing. Also the percentages of d/hoh students that take TCAP with accommodations and without accommodations.

I found some information about TCAP and portfolio assessment in Tennessee but not full answers (and maybe you find the same information). But probably these belong in another thread in the "Deaf Education" part of AD.

 

[fredfam1]

I have not seen any evidence of implants being done before 5 months of
age. So from birth to lets say 6 months on average a child who is Deaf
with no residual hearing has NO language input for SIX months. It simply
is not fair to put that baby on hold for six months. If parents want to
focus on oralisum only well fine that is their choice. But why can't they
do sign language from birth day 1 untill the implant. At least then
both R and L hemispheres will be activated in the brain. That way
the child has experienced language for six months instead of being
deprived for 6 months. What harm could it do. I know some of the
Oralisum only group(not parents but the supposed experts)
don't want you to develop the visual inputs
but that just seems stupid. Some input verses no input is a no
brainer to me. How awful for that lonely baby, viewing his world
with no way to communicate. I think the real problem here is parents
think children don't understand what is going on around them untill
they can verbalize or sign and all of the norms for when this should
begin are below average in my opinion. My son could sign milk at
5 1/2 months. He knew the sign and he knew what it got him, BEFORE
he could say MaMa! Before he could say anything. No crying, no whineing
just, signing milk, (with both fists, which I found amusing). We were
communicating with Language! And if he had been Deaf at birth and 1/2
a month later we got him implanted and then activated, all that time
waiting for activation we could have been signing about owies and
doctors and whatever. THEN we could could have added the input
of sound! To everything he already knew! This just seems so much
more of a reasonable approach.

 

[jillio]

I have not seen any evidence of implants being done before 5 months of
age. So from birth to lets say 6 months on average a child who is Deaf
with no residual hearing has NO language input for SIX months. It simply
is not fair to put that baby on hold for six months. If parents want to
focus on oralisum only well fine that is their choice. But why can't they
do sign language from birth day 1 untill the implant. At least then
both R and L hemispheres will be activated in the brain. That way
the child has experienced language for six months instead of being
deprived for 6 months. What harm could it do. I know some of the
Oralisum only group(not parents but the supposed experts)
don't want you to develop the visual inputs
but that just seems stupid. Some input verses no input is a no
brainer to me. How awful for that lonely baby, viewing his world
with no way to communicate. I think the real problem here is parents
think children don't understand what is going on around them untill
they can verbalize or sign and all of the norms for when this should
begin are below average in my opinion. My son could sign milk at
5 1/2 months. He knew the sign and he knew what it got him, BEFORE
he could say MaMa! Before he could say anything. No crying, no whineing
just, signing milk, (with both fists, which I found amusing). We were
communicating with Language! And if he had been Deaf at birth and 1/2
a month later we got him implanted and then activated, all that time
waiting for activation we could have been signing about owies and
doctors and whatever. THEN we could could have added the input
of sound! To everything he already knew! This just seems so much
more of a reasonable approach.

 

[SJCSue]

If there are so many deaf children who, when implanted early, are able to acquire spoken language at the same rates as their hearing peers, how do you account for the consistent discrepancies in both verbal testing and academic achievement rates of deaf children who have been restricted to an oral only environment?

Yes, there is a difference in the way that a deaf child and a hearing child acquire spoken language. That is the whole point. However, there is not a difference inthe way a deaf child acquires language through signs and the way a hearing child acquires language through auditory channels. The cognitive process is the same. The fact that spoken language is not acquired naturally and must be learned through directive action is the best argument there is for including sign in a deaf child's environment.

One can be trilingual in that one is able to understand a language well enough for limited use, but not be fluent in any of the 3 languages. The goal for deaf children is fluency in L1 language, with an L2 language developed to fluency through the skills instilled through natural acquisition of the L1 language. If one is language delayed in the L1 language, then any other language learned will have not just the delays evident in the L1 language, but those delays will be compounded with each additional language. So, while Cloggy's daughter may have limited usage of 2 or more languges, she is still delayed by 2 years. That impacts her ability to use any of the languages to native fluency.