Writing instruction designed for deaf learners

By Andrea Ochoa, Johns Hopkins University

A recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) by Wolbers and colleagues evaluated the effect of Strategic and Interactive Writing Instruction (SIWI) on writing outcomes for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. SIWI, developed specifically for deaf learners, explicitly teaches the writing process, provides interactive and co-constructed writing opportunities, and helps learners develop metalinguistic and linguistic skills.

The RCT included students in grades 3 through 5 randomly assigned to the treatment (n=43) or business as usual control condition (n=36). Participants were students from different educational environments across the country, including self-contained or pullout classes in public schools or schools for the deaf. Teachers in the treatment condition administered the writing intervention 2 hours per week for nine weeks. The study found that the treatment students outperformed the control students on writing to recount (ES=+3.32) and writing information (ES=+1.12). Additionally, treatment students were assessed nine weeks after the intervention period had concluded and demonstrated they maintained the gains in writing to recount (ES=+3.12) and writing information (ES=+0.62). Findings from the study suggest SIWI may be an appropriate instructional model to improve short- and long-term writing outcomes of children who are deaf or hard of hearing.

A sight word intervention improves deaf students’ literacy

By Kaya Feng, Johns Hopkins University

According to the multistore memory model, humans’ working memory is limited. This means that when a person holds less information in working memory, more cognitive processing space is available for other tasks. When deaf students read print-based words, which is considered a second language, automatic recognition of common sight words allows them to spend more cognitive energy on comprehension instead of on decoding each word. Various interventions have been used to facilitate deaf students’ recognition of sight words, and a recent paper by Jodi Falk and colleagues examined the effectiveness of one of them, a component of the Bedrock Literacy Curriculum, a guide on teaching foundational English skills to deaf students.

The experiment involved 30 deaf students in grades 1-7 in a private urban school where the Bedrock Literacy sight word intervention was embedded in an overall balanced literacy instructional approach during the 2016-17 school year. Sight words in the experiment were incorporated throughout daily reading and writing activities. Weekly and monthly formative assessments and summative assessments at the end of the school year measured the number of sight words students could identify and the rate at which they identified them. The results demonstrated that after the intervention, there was significant growth, especially among younger students, in the number of sight words participants could identify and their fluency in reading familiar words, regardless of their home language or gender. While confidence in the results would be bolstered by a study with a control group, this research still provides meaningful instruction for practitioners working with deaf students.

explicit + vocabulary intervention increases vocabulary learning of DHH children

By Kaya Feng, Johns Hopkins University

Vocabulary, a predictor of literacy outcomes, is of great significance for all students. Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students oftentimes lag behind their typically hearing (TH) peers in terms of acquiring vocabulary words appropriate for their age or grade level, which is a concern for many teachers of DHH students. Thus, many teachers adopt various interventions to facilitate DHH students’ vocabulary development. A recent study examined the effect of an intervention called “explicit +”, which demonstrates promising results.

The study examined three types of vocabulary instruction: in-context, explicit, and explicit plus in-context (explicit +). During in-context instruction, teachers expose students to new words while reading books and in conversation. During explicit instruction, teachers provide more information about the new vocabulary and do activities that require the students to use the new words. Explicit + instruction is a combination of these two instructions. The researchers used a multiple baseline design including nine students to test whether explicit + instruction, compared to mere in-context instruction, increased the numbers of words DHH students could learn or assisted them in mastering words’ meanings and appropriate usage. The results showed that the explicit + instruction led to better outcomes of vocabulary learning regarding breadth (numbers of words) and depth (level of comprehension). This conclusion may be informative for teachers when choosing interventions for their DHH students.