English

Language is an essential component of normal development and a means for discovering the world. As we have seen, however, deaf children frequently do not have full access to communication until they have passed the most important ages for language acquisition. Parents and educators of young deaf students thus often struggle to find a balance between fostering effective early communication skills, which research has shown is usually best achieved through sign language, and the provision of English skills needed for literacy and academic success. Despite decades of concerted effort, most deaf children progress at only a fraction of the rate of hearing peers in learning to read. Current data indicate that, on average, 18-year-old deaf students leaving high school have reached only a fourth to sixth grade level in reading skills. Only about 3 percent of those 18 year olds read at the same level as the average 18- year-old hearing reader, and more than 30 percent of deaf students leave school functionally illiterate (Traxler, 2000; Kelly, 1995; Waters & Doehring, 1990). At the same time, there are clearly many deaf adults and children who are excellent readers and excellent writers. How can we account for these differences? What are the implications for educators developing English curricula for deaf students? To answer these questions, we first need to consider what is meant by literacy—that is, what is it we are asking students to acquire? Then, we have to understand how deaf students read, at both descriptive and procedural levels. In this chap ter, we consider only literacy relating to print materials (reading and writing); other possibilities will be considered in chapter 9. But is the question whether deaf students read well enough to fulfill the needs and expectations of their teachers? Is it important to know how well various subgroups of deaf learners read compared to each other? Or, do we want to know how well deaf students read, as a group, compared to hearing students of the same age?

Few American Sign Language (ASL) assessments are readily available for educators to administer and score to document deaf students’ skill levels and direct ASL instruction. Even fewer studies include deaf students with intellectual disabilities or document deaf students’ ASL skills across time. The present study reports deaf school-aged students’ receptive and expressive ASL skills using two readily-available assessments, the American Sign Language Receptive Skills Test (ASL-RST) and an ASL handshape sign generation task. Students attended a residential school for the deaf with a bilingual (i.e. ASL and written English) philosophy in the United States and were assessed across a four-year period. Results for a longitudinal subset of 29 students across three consecutive years are also included. In general, receptive skills strongly and significantly correlated with age, while more variation was found in expressive ASL phonological skills. Longitudinally, most students increased their receptive and expressive skills. Scores did not correspond with years at the school site, which was used as a proxy for years of ASL exposure. Results provide an age-band basis by which educators and researchers can compare deaf children’s sign language skills with their same-aged deaf peers on two readily available ASL assessments. Researchers can replicate this process for children and youth who use other sign languages as well. Implications for sign language instruction and future research are addressed.

EDITORIAL Teacher Morale Recently I was involved in writing up the final report for a study investigating changing perspectives on the meaning and the implementation of the Least Restrictive Environment requirements of Public Law 94-142 in relation to educational placement and provision of services to deaf children. Twenty-eight programs were included in the study, serving children in residential, separate class, resource room, and integrated settings across the United States. As might be expected by educators of the deaf, the results reflected a complicated situation; there was a great deal of variation across and within categories. In one area, however, the findings were consistently negative: the morale of teachers of the deaf appeared to be well below published norms for general education teachers. Regardless of the teaching environment, teacher satisfaction ratings were uniformly low. Whether functioning as itinerant teachers, resource room teachers, teachers in self-contained public school classes, or teachers in residential schools, all showed greater dissatisfaction than regular classroom teachers. Preliminary analysis suggests that this dissatisfaction exists in teachers of the deaf regardless of hearing status, ethnic background, or gender. These results are in sharp contrast to findings in the same study suggesting that the self-concept of American deaf children in various types of educational settings is similar to that of hearing norms, and to encouraging data indicating that parents seem to be adjusting to the presence of deaf children in the family and learning to communicate more effectively than they have in the past. The low morale of teachers of the deaf is especially troubling, as the information was gathered from a well-educated and well-trained sample. The education of deaf children has always placed additional strains on teachers, because most deaf children do not start school with the same English language—or any other language— skills thathearing children bring to the educational process. As a result, much of the curriculum is devoted to closing the English and related communication gap between deaf children and their hearing peers. Teachers of the deaf typically deal with a situation in which their children have normal intellectual potential but academic progress is constrained by limited English and other communication skills. Teachers may see only small incremental growth in standardized test scores from year to year and may— mistakenly in my opinion—hold themselves responsible for what they perceive to be an unsatisfactory rate of progress. Low morale among teachers of the deaf apparently is caused by a number of factors and is more complex than simply dissatisfaction with mastery of English skills by their students. Our results show that the greatest difference between teachers of the deaf and teachers in general is related to feelings about the workload, with teachers of the deaf expressing much greater dissatisfaction. Perhaps teachers of the deaf work harder than teachers in general. This itself is an area in need of study. Another area in which there were great differences lay in the fact that teachers of the deaf felt much greater pressure from community expectations. Possibly, teachers of the deaf believe that the expectations of others for the progress of deaf children are unrealistic, or maybe they believe that the responsibility for fulfilling those expectations falls disproportionately on teachers. Perhaps the situation is not as grim as the results suggest. However, with 213 participants from across the country, there is every reason to believe that the results are valid. In any case, future research is called for to ascertain the validity and generalizability of the findings. If morale is low, this maybe one explanation for the greater turnover among teachers of the deaf that has been documented for more than a decade. If so, it may be necessary to explore the causes of low morale in depth. It is highly likely that preservice training procedures should be modified extensively and that professional in-service training should concentrate much more comprehensively on teacher morale . Last, but certainly not least, we should be paying attention to the environments—physical and otherwise— in which teachers of the deaf function. Donald F. Moores Editor Vol. 136, No. 3 AAD 243 ...

Bullying and childhood obesity are public health concerns in the United States. While obesity has been found to be associated with bullying victimization, it is less clear how it is differentially associated with biological sex and grade level across varying patterns of bullying victimization. Based on the subset of U.S. students in the Health Behavior in School-Aged Children study, patterns of co-occurring bullying victimization and sex and grade level differences in the association between the patterns of bullying victimization and weight status were examined among 9,124 students in Grades 5 to 10. The latent class analysis revealed three patterns of bullying victimization: verbal-relational victimization (Class 1), all-type victimization (Class 2), and noninvolved pattern (Class 3). The results found that females had a higher likelihood of being in Class 1 than males. Moreover, fifth to sixth and seventh to eighth-graders were more likely than ninth to tenth graders to be in both Class 1 and Class 2. Obese males and overweight females were more likely to be in Class 1 and Class 2 than in Class 3. In addition, obesity and overweight status were positively associated with bullying victimization among fifth to sixth and seven to eighth-graders. However, no significant association was found between obesity and overweight status and bullying victimization among ninth to tenth graders. Findings from the study suggest that school-based strategies, especially sex- and age-specific programs, need to take into consideration the bullying involvement of students who are overweight or obese.

Prior research with the Shifting Boundaries (SB) prevention program suggests that it can prevent adolescent relationship abuse and sexual harassment. We assessed the relative impact of a combined set of SB classroom (SBC) and SB building (school-wide; SBS) interventions on adolescent relationship abuse and sexual harassment outcomes when the program is delivered to all three grades in a middle school (full saturation) compared to when only two or one of the three grades receive it. We randomly assigned 23 middle schools (1,764 students) in New York City to varying saturation levels of SB: 6th grade only, 6th and 7th grade, or 6th, 7th, and 8th grade. Providing SB to only one grade level does just as well at preventing peer violence and adolescent relationship abuse as treating multiple grades. However, there was evidence that additional saturation led to sexual harassment reductions. Schools that delivered SB to 6th and 7th graders (compared to just 6th graders) reduced sexual harassment victimization 6 months post-treatment. The results largely support a minimalist approach, in that SB may be effective in preventing peer violence and adolescent relationship abuse outcomes by delivery to one grade level. However, there is a need for more research to continue exploring the potential benefits of a saturated delivery of SB across all grades, building on our finding that 6th and 7th grade implementation of SB was more effective at reducing sexual harassment than 6th grade only implementation.

Mathematics anxiety and mathematical calculation in deaf children: A moderated mediation model of mathematics self-efficacy and intelligence

Feminist Studies 45, no. 2/3. © 2019 by Feminist Studies, Inc. 335 Val Marie Johnson “I’m sorry now we were so very severe”: 1930s Colonizing Care Relations betweenWhite Anglican WomenStaff and Inuvialuit, Inuinnait, and Iñupiat Peopleinan“EskimoResidentialSchool” Colonial actors and Indigenous peoples have a conflicted “shared history” of residential schools in Canada.1 The conflict is reflected in seemingly unbridgeable accounts of what residential schools represent . Critics, including survivors, analyze residential schools (boarding schools in the United States) as brutal institutions with a living history involving the “theft of indigenous peoples’ lives, land and resources,” as laid out by Roland Chrisjohn et al. This history lives through survivors speaking back to these institutions’ ongoing multigenerational impacts and linked forms of colonizing damage.2 Official and staff accounts frame 1. Val Marie Johnson and Isabelle Knockwood, “Our Shared History” (Presentation , Knockwood Honorary Degree Citation for Doctor of Civil Law, Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, NS, October 19, 2013). 2. Ronald D. Chrisjohn, Tanya Wasacase, Lisa Nussey, Andrea Smith, Marc Legault, Pierre Loiselle, and Mathieu Bourgeois, “Genocide and Indian Residential Schooling: The Past Is Present,” in Canada and International Humanitarian Law: Peacekeeping and War Crimes in the Modern Era, ed. Richard D. Wiggers and Anne L. Griffiths (Halifax, NS: Dalhousie University Press: 2002), 263. See also Alice French, My Name Is Masak (Winnipeg , MB: Peguis Publishers Ltd., 1992); Abraham Okpik, We Call It Survival (Iqaluit, NU: Nunavut Artic College, 2005); Pauktuutit Inuit Women’s Association, Sivumuapallianiq: Journey Forward: National Inuit Residential Schools Healing Strategy (Ottawa: Pauktuutit Inuit Women’s Association of Canada, 2007); We Were So Far Away: The Inuit Experience of Residential Schools (Ottawa: Legacy of Hope Foundation, 2010); and Arie Molena, 336 Val Marie Johnson the schools as positive or at least well-meaning institutions, with abuse restricted to isolated individuals in a distant past. Some staff and their supporters emphasize the schools’ provision of care.3 Canadian Senator Lynn Beyak recently reiterated this “kindly and well-intentioned” residential school narrative, claiming to speak for “a silent majority.” Despite a 2008 national apology presenting these schools as “a sad chapter in our history,”4 their reverberations in Indigenous communities, including through state control of Indigenous resources, mean that colonization still operates through the state removal of children from their families and communities, now defined as “child welfare.” Beyak thus defended residential school staff and “foster families.” The federal government has pledged “to build a new relationship” with Indigenous peoples, but strongly resisted a 2016 Canadian Human Rights Commission ruling that upheld a decade-old First Nations complaint—that their children’s overrepresentation “in state care” (including with foster families) replicates residential school dynamics.5 “‘National Memory’ and Its Remainders: Labrador Inuit Counterhistories of Residential Schooling” in Power through Testimony: Reframing Residential Schools in the Age of Reconciliation, eds. Brieg Capitaine and Karine Vanthuyne (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2017), 135– 54. On US schools, see Brenda J. Child, Boarding School Seasons: American Indian Families, 1900–1940 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998). On impacts, see Amy Bombay, Kimberly Matheson, Hymie Anisman, “The Intergenerational Effects of Indian Residential Schools: Implications for the Concept of Historical Trauma,” Transcultural Psychiatry 51, no. 3 (June 2014): 320–38. 3. Bernice Logan, “School Workers Find Their Voice,” interview with Solange De Santis, Anglican Journal (April 2003); Mary Harrington Bryant, 4 Years— And Then Some (Ottawa: Pro Printers, 2007); Thomas A. Lascelles, “Indian Residential Schools,” Canadian Catholic Review 10 (1992): 6–13. Some Indigenous people, including those connected with Shingle Point School, report positive experiences. See also Cheryl Gaver, “Residential Schools in Canada: Why the Message Is Not Getting Across” in Power through Testimony. 4. Lynn Beyak, Senate Debates, Senate of Canada, March 7, 2017; Kristy Kirkup, “Senator Beyak Says ‘Silent Majority’ Supports Her on Residential Schools,” Globe and Mail, April 6, 2017; Stephen Harper, “Statement of Apology to Former Students of Indian Residential Schools,” Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (June 11, 2008). 5. Mia Rabson, “Tribunal Again Tells Feds to Fund Indigenous Child Welfare, Minister Agrees,” CTV News, February 1, 2018, https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics /tribunal-again-tells-feds-to-fund-indigenous-child-welfare-minister-agrees1 .3785170; Cindy Blackstock, “Residential Schools...

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to quantify patients' perceptions of functional ability. The American Medical Association and NIH suggest patient materials be written at or below 6th to 8th grade reading levels, respectively, yet one recent study asserts that few PROMs comply with these recommendations, and suggests that the majority of PROMs are written at too high of a reading level for self-administered patient use. Notably, this study was limited in its use of only one readability algorithm, although there is no commonly accepted, standard readability algorithm for healthcare-related materials. Our study, using multiple readability equations and heeding equal weight to each, hopes to yield a broader, all-encompassing estimate of readability, thereby offering a more accurate assessment of the readability of orthopaedic PROMS. (1) What proportion of orthopaedic-related PROMs and orthopaedic-related portions of the NIH Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) are written at or below the 6th and 8th grade levels? (2) Is there a correlation between the number of questions in the PROM and reading level? (3) Using systematic edits based on guidelines from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, what proportion of PROMs achieved American Medical Association and NIH-recommended reading levels? Eighty-six (86) independent, orthopaedic and general wellness PROMs, drawn from commonly referenced orthopaedic websites and prior studies, were chosen for analysis. Additionally, owing to their increasing use in orthopaedics, four relevant short forms, and 11 adult, physical health question banks from the PROMIS®, were included for analysis. All documents were analyzed for reading grade levels using 19 unique readability algorithms. Descriptive statistics were performed using SPSS Version 22.0. The majority of the independent PROMs (64 of 86; 74%) were written at or below the 6th grade level, with 81 of 86 (94%) written at or below the 8th grade level. All item banks (11 of 11) and short forms (four of four) of the PROMIS® were written below the 6th grade reading level. The median reading grade level of the 86 independent PROMs was 5.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 4.6-6.1). The PROMIS® question banks had a median reading grade level of 4.1 (IQR, 3.5-4.8); the Adult Short Forms had a median reading grade level of 4.2 (IQR, 4.2-4.3) There was no correlation appreciated between the median reading grade level and the number of questions contained in a PROM (r = -0.081; p = 0.460). For PROMs above NIH-recommended levels, following edits, all (five of five) achieved NIH reading level goals and three (three of five) achieved American Medical Association goals. Editing of these PROMs improved readability by 4.3 median grade level (before, 8.9 [IQR, 8.4-9.1], after 4.6 [IQR, 4.6-6.4], difference of medians, 4.3; p = 0.008). Patient literacy has great influence on healthcare outcomes, and readability is an important consideration in all patient-directed written materials. Our study found that more than 70% of PROMs commonly used in orthopaedics, and all orthopaedic-related portions of the PROMIS® are written at or below the most stringent recommendations (≤ 6th grade reading level), and more than 90% of independent PROMs and all PROMIS® materials are written at or below an 8th grade level. Additionally, the use of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines for editing high reading level PROMs yields satisfactory results. Fears of widely incomprehensible PROMs may be unfounded. Future research to identify the most appropriate readability algorithm for use in the healthcare sector, and revalidation of PROMs after readability-improving edits is warranted.

Semantic categorization: A comparison between deaf and hearing children

ON NOVEMBER 15 TO 16, 2002, the Gallaudet Research Institute (GRI) sponsored the national conference Stakes Testing: Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children Being Left Behind? held at the Gallaudet University Kellogg Conference Center. Three hundred people from forty-two states participated, including teachers and counselors of deaf students, school administrators, teacher educators, experts on educational testing, educational researchers, test designers, members of deaf advocacy associations, parents of deaf children, and representatives of various governmental agencies. The conference was a major event featuring introductory remarks by Gallaudet President I. King Jordan and Stephanie Lee, the director of the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs, a keynote address by James Popham, author of The Truth About Testing: An Educator's Call to Action and many books on and evaluation, and presentations by other nationally known experts on and testing-related issues, including Jay Heubert, co-editor of the National Research Council's High Stakes: Testing for Tracking, Promotion, and Graduation, Carolyn Massad, the national consultant for English language arts at Harcourt Educational Measurement, Neal Kingston, the senior vice president and chief operating officer of Measured Progress, Martha Thurlow, director of the National Center on Educational Outcomes, and Shalia Cowan, director of the Texas Education Agency's Division of Services for the Deaf. Also featured were many presentations from the front lines by educators of deaf and hard of hearing students. GRI director and conference co-chair Michael Karchmer said at the opening of the conference that presenters had been selected to represent a broad range of opinion. He predicted that all in attendance would have much to learn and that consensus was unlikely. He advised attendees to keep their minds open as they weighed one perspective against another and to be prepared to change their minds. The scope of the conference presentations was too broad to summarize adequately in a brief article. This essay, therefore, pursues a limited range of important recurring themes of the conference. Testing and Deaf Students' Difficulties with English Midway through a series of panel presentations by educators of deaf students on the first day of the conference, Michael (Mickey) Jones, director of the Evaluation Center at the Illinois School for the Deaf, told a story that evoked many nods of recognition. In 1992, he said, he'd participated in a task force set up in Illinois to make decisions about the appropriateness of the Illinois Goal Assessment Program (IGAP) for use with special education students. His role had been to examine the test, then inform the task force about difficulties deaf and hard of hearing students might have taking it. He had told the task force that deafness can have a severe impact on reading and writing ability and that results on the IGAP-a challenging paper and pencil test-might misrepresent the true capabilities of most deaf students. To illustrate, he had described a bright fifteen-year-old deaf boy whose performance IQ was 133 and whose math computation skills were above grade level. The boy was fluent in American Sign Language (ASL) and could demonstrate a broad range of knowledge in ASL. On standardized tests, however, his reading level had been measured at six grades below the average for his hearing peers. After seeing a sample of this boy's writing, the task force had decided that deaf students in Illinois should be waived from taking the IGAP. But that was 1992, ten years before the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was signed into law. Everyone in Jones's audience got the point: Things are different now. stakes testing is about to become a reality for deaf as well as hearing students in a growing number of states across the country. In the near future failing these tests will have serious consequences in state after state. …

Two experiments examined the problem-solving strategies of deaf and hearing students from seven years to college age in the context of the ‘Twenty Questions’ game. Overall, deaf children were significantly less likely than hearing peers to ‘win’ the game within Twenty Questions, and problem-solving appeared less efficient and less cognitively sophisticated among deaf than hearing students at all ages. Deaf and hearing children who had played the game before were equally likely to use winning strategies. However, inexperienced hearing children typically discovered the ‘correct’ strategy, whereas inexperienced deaf peers did not. Reflectivity–impulsivity, as measured by the Porteus Mazes Test (Experiment 1), was unrelated to problem-solving performance in children and revealed no effects of hearing status. Possible causes and implications of the observed effects are discussed as they relate to early experiences of deaf children and their lack of early, effective access to language.

Children, from birth, acquire literacy within various contexts, including in early childhood educational settings. In the United States, there has been renewed attention from the public, the government and educators to increase the quality of early childhood education. Particular focus has been on settings serving children who are at risk for of later literacy failure. This can include deaf children who typically fall well behind their hearing peers in literacy during the school years and beyond. However, little is known about the frequency and types of literacy experiences offered to deaf children as compared to those offered to hearing children. The current investigation aimed to account for the literacy activities and materials provided to hearing and deaf children through a survey of early childhood educators ( N = 155) who work primarily with one of these populations. Descriptive statistics and Chi-Square Tests of Independence comparisons indicated that, although there is room for improvement in both populations, deaf children in particular may not be receiving access to high quality literacy activities in EC settings. Based on the study’s findings, directions for future research and also the preparation and continued development of all early childhood educators are identified.

Bebko (1984) reported that deaf children tend not to use spontaneously active memory strategies such as rehearsal in tasks requiring recall of ordered, temporal information. The present study investigated whether this tendency is task specific or generalized to other experimental paradigms. A central-incidental paradigm was used with profoundly deaf children and hearing children 6 to 13 years of age. The results for the hearing students replicated previous studies: central recall increased with age, but incidental recall changed little. For the deaf children, the results initially appeared very similar to those of the hearing children. However, on closer examination, the rehearsal strategies of the deaf students seemed less effective in mediating their recall. They apparently compensated for these difficulties by capitalizing on unique spatial features of the task, leading to recall levels comparable to those of the hearing students. Therefore, similar performance may not have been the result of equal strategy use but, rather, of the use of additional strategies by the deaf students. This study reinforced the need to provide additional training for deaf students in the use of memory strategies such as rehearsal when information is to be remembered in a sequential manner.

This paper aims to determine the types of sexual deviant behavior committed by deaf students in special schools in the city of Surakarta. A deaf student is someone who loses the ability to hear either partially or completely due to the malfunction of part or all of the hearing aid so that he has difficulty communicating either with or without using hearing aids. The place used in the study in two special school in the city of Surakarta with a total of 31 resource persons. The data collection technique used an open interview technique. Researchers gave questions to respondents about what sexual deviant behaviors were carried out by deaf children. The data analysis technique used in this study was qualitative data analysis according to Miles and Huberman. Data analysis according to Miles and Huberman consists of three steps. The finding of this research indicate that there are sexual deviant behaviors committed by deaf students, both those committed by deaf students to themselves and those committed to others.

Abstract: This study aims to determine the social interaction of deaf students with regular students, classroom teachers, special supervisors and to know the strategy of fostering deaf students in the development of social interactions. The method used in this study is a qualitative descriptive method. The subjects in this study were one special supervising teacher (GPK), one class teacher, one student guardian and one deaf child in 'aisyiyah bustanul athfal. Data collection techniques using interviews, observation and documentation. This study describes social interactions between deaf students and regular students, namely by using local sign language, having imitation or imitating behavior, associative behavior such as cooperating and having a sense of concern for friends, and dissociative behavior that is sensitive and difficult to control emotions when regular students disturb them. The interaction of deaf students with teachers uses local and national sign languages, the teacher provides a positive stimulus so that the nature of suggestions and feelings of comfort appear when together with the teacher. Strategies for fostering deaf students in the development of social interactions by developing skills using lip language and sign language as well as emotion regulation.