jillio
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 60,232
- Reaction score
- 19
Below is what just a very small amount of the research shows. I only used a few of the articles available for the sake of space.
Many students who have a hearing loss and are educated in mainstream settings report feelings of loneliness and a lack of close friendships (Stinson & Whitmire, 1992). Most of these students are surrounded only by hearing individuals and generally have no deaf or hard-of-hearing peers (Stinson & Lang, 1994). This lack of contact with deaf peers may evoke feelings of being alone, different, or stigmatized (Evan, 1989) and may lead to negative self perceptions (Leigh, 1999).
In addition to feelings of isolation, children who are deaf and mainstreamed face the task of orally communicating
with hearing people most of the time. Oral communication poses the greatest difficulty in establishing
and maintaining social relationships for children who have a hearing loss (Antia & Stinson, 1999; Aplin, 1987; Markides, 1989; Stinson & Whitmire, 1991). Although many children have the potential to hear and to speak orally with proper amplification and intensive speech therapy, not all have the capability to speak clearly or hear and understand other people’s speech. One of the common criticisms of cochlear implants is that spoken language skills of implant users remain inadequate for full functioning within a hearing community (Crouch, 1997; Lane, 1997).
Even the parents who were pleased with the implant’s results, and reported that their children’s peer relationships improved after the implant, nonetheless reported lasting difficulties.
Bat-Chava, Y. & Deignan, E. (2001). Peer relationships of children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 6. 186-189.
Deaf pupils, like hearing pupils, attract positive and negative reactions, and these are most likely related to personal characteristics that are independent of their hearing status. However, hearing pupils prefer a hearing peer as a friend. The likelihood of deaf pupils being chosen as a guest to play at home with was proportionally smaller than that of a hearing pupil. The same was observed for mutual positive nominations: deaf pupils were less likely to have a friend in the same class than hearing pupils. The hearing pupils who had deaf friends indicated pro-social reasons for the friendship, rather than the typical enjoyment and intimacy reasons offered by pupils at this age.
But there was a significant difference between the hearing and deaf children’s friendship pattern: whereas the majority of the hearing children’s friendships was long-term, the most common pattern of friendship for the deaf children was sporadic.
Nunes, T., Pretzlik, U., Olsson, J. (2004 ). Deaf children’s social relationships in mainstream schools. Journal of Deaf Education International. 3. 123-136.
Differences between the deaf and hearing children occur in social competence and the stability of prosocial
behavior and probability of impact.
Wauters, L. & Knoors, H. (2007). Social integration of deaf children in inclusive settings. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education.
Identification with the Deaf proved to be positively related to self-esteem. This finding is in line with other studies that showed that those members of the deaf population who identify strongly with their group have higher self-esteem. Identification with similar others who can provide social and emotional support has a positive impact on self-esteem even if the individuals are members of a devalued minority group.
Those who are able to get along well in both theDeaf and the hearing worlds tend to have higher self-esteem. These deaf individuals can take pride in their achievement in the dominant society but can also rely on the support they can get from the community of similar others. This is an important finding since it suggests that the endeavor to integrate deaf people into the majority society is a positive effort, but only if these individuals can keep their ties to theDeaf world for emotional and social support.
However, one category of mode of communication at home reached significance in the bivariate case:
using oral communication at home as opposed to sign language was associated with lower self-esteem. The
literature emphasizes the importance of effective communication between parents and children so that the
offspring can develop adequate social skills and a positive self-regard. Deaf children need a visual communication
tool since processing information through the auditory channels is at best limited. Communicating through sign
language may be necessary for the positive self-evaluation of those who become deaf pre-lingually, since this is often the most natural way for them to express their feelings, desires and beliefs.
Jambor,E . & Elliot,M . ( 2005). Self esteem and coping strategies among deaf students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 10(1). 63-81.
Barriers to optimal socialization for deaf and hard-of-hearing children are well documented. Deaf children are more likely than their hearing peers to experience social deficits (Liben, 1978; Stika, 1989).
Although communication through spoken language often enables deaf individuals to access mainstream
education, these individuals still encounter their share of socialization difficulties. Stinson and Foster (2000)
proposed that socialization of deaf and hard-of-hearing students requires access to both formal and informal
communications with peers and teachers, peer relationships, and participation in extracurricular activities.
found that students who had been mainstreamed through high school experienced isolation and discrimination
from hearing peers and alienation from deaf peers in college.
This study involved deaf adults who were raised using spoken language as an avenue toward better
integration into mainstream culture. These individuals’ recollections reinforce much of what has been suggested
in the literature about mainstreaming, namely, that communication difficulties pose significant obstacles
to the development of satisfying social relationships with hearing peers and that deafness cuts some individuals off from hearing peers because of gaps in social and cultural information and stigmatization.
Bain, L., Scott, S. & Steinberg, A.G. (2004 ). Socialization and coping strategies of adults raised using spoken language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 9(1).
Many students who have a hearing loss and are educated in mainstream settings report feelings of loneliness and a lack of close friendships (Stinson & Whitmire, 1992). Most of these students are surrounded only by hearing individuals and generally have no deaf or hard-of-hearing peers (Stinson & Lang, 1994). This lack of contact with deaf peers may evoke feelings of being alone, different, or stigmatized (Evan, 1989) and may lead to negative self perceptions (Leigh, 1999).
In addition to feelings of isolation, children who are deaf and mainstreamed face the task of orally communicating
with hearing people most of the time. Oral communication poses the greatest difficulty in establishing
and maintaining social relationships for children who have a hearing loss (Antia & Stinson, 1999; Aplin, 1987; Markides, 1989; Stinson & Whitmire, 1991). Although many children have the potential to hear and to speak orally with proper amplification and intensive speech therapy, not all have the capability to speak clearly or hear and understand other people’s speech. One of the common criticisms of cochlear implants is that spoken language skills of implant users remain inadequate for full functioning within a hearing community (Crouch, 1997; Lane, 1997).
Even the parents who were pleased with the implant’s results, and reported that their children’s peer relationships improved after the implant, nonetheless reported lasting difficulties.
Bat-Chava, Y. & Deignan, E. (2001). Peer relationships of children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 6. 186-189.
Deaf pupils, like hearing pupils, attract positive and negative reactions, and these are most likely related to personal characteristics that are independent of their hearing status. However, hearing pupils prefer a hearing peer as a friend. The likelihood of deaf pupils being chosen as a guest to play at home with was proportionally smaller than that of a hearing pupil. The same was observed for mutual positive nominations: deaf pupils were less likely to have a friend in the same class than hearing pupils. The hearing pupils who had deaf friends indicated pro-social reasons for the friendship, rather than the typical enjoyment and intimacy reasons offered by pupils at this age.
But there was a significant difference between the hearing and deaf children’s friendship pattern: whereas the majority of the hearing children’s friendships was long-term, the most common pattern of friendship for the deaf children was sporadic.
Nunes, T., Pretzlik, U., Olsson, J. (2004 ). Deaf children’s social relationships in mainstream schools. Journal of Deaf Education International. 3. 123-136.
Differences between the deaf and hearing children occur in social competence and the stability of prosocial
behavior and probability of impact.
Wauters, L. & Knoors, H. (2007). Social integration of deaf children in inclusive settings. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education.
Identification with the Deaf proved to be positively related to self-esteem. This finding is in line with other studies that showed that those members of the deaf population who identify strongly with their group have higher self-esteem. Identification with similar others who can provide social and emotional support has a positive impact on self-esteem even if the individuals are members of a devalued minority group.
Those who are able to get along well in both theDeaf and the hearing worlds tend to have higher self-esteem. These deaf individuals can take pride in their achievement in the dominant society but can also rely on the support they can get from the community of similar others. This is an important finding since it suggests that the endeavor to integrate deaf people into the majority society is a positive effort, but only if these individuals can keep their ties to theDeaf world for emotional and social support.
However, one category of mode of communication at home reached significance in the bivariate case:
using oral communication at home as opposed to sign language was associated with lower self-esteem. The
literature emphasizes the importance of effective communication between parents and children so that the
offspring can develop adequate social skills and a positive self-regard. Deaf children need a visual communication
tool since processing information through the auditory channels is at best limited. Communicating through sign
language may be necessary for the positive self-evaluation of those who become deaf pre-lingually, since this is often the most natural way for them to express their feelings, desires and beliefs.
Jambor,E . & Elliot,M . ( 2005). Self esteem and coping strategies among deaf students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 10(1). 63-81.
Barriers to optimal socialization for deaf and hard-of-hearing children are well documented. Deaf children are more likely than their hearing peers to experience social deficits (Liben, 1978; Stika, 1989).
Although communication through spoken language often enables deaf individuals to access mainstream
education, these individuals still encounter their share of socialization difficulties. Stinson and Foster (2000)
proposed that socialization of deaf and hard-of-hearing students requires access to both formal and informal
communications with peers and teachers, peer relationships, and participation in extracurricular activities.
found that students who had been mainstreamed through high school experienced isolation and discrimination
from hearing peers and alienation from deaf peers in college.
This study involved deaf adults who were raised using spoken language as an avenue toward better
integration into mainstream culture. These individuals’ recollections reinforce much of what has been suggested
in the literature about mainstreaming, namely, that communication difficulties pose significant obstacles
to the development of satisfying social relationships with hearing peers and that deafness cuts some individuals off from hearing peers because of gaps in social and cultural information and stigmatization.
Bain, L., Scott, S. & Steinberg, A.G. (2004 ). Socialization and coping strategies of adults raised using spoken language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 9(1).
DB. I just get so tired of people trying to convince themselves and others that these problems don't exist.:roll: