Showing posts with label asl. Show all posts
Showing posts with label asl. Show all posts

Thursday, December 16, 2010

My CI textbook.

"In a comparative study of parental stress in mothers of preschoolers from three groups (i.e. healthy, hearing impaired, seizure disorders), mothers of children with sensationalist hearing loss reported the highest level of parenting stress on a standardized instrument and the greatest number of depressive symptoms"

"Preliminary data on the impact of cochlear implants on the family indicate a substantial reduction in parental stress and depression in this group, although there is considerable variance in stress ratings likely modified by a range of factors.... Given the data indicating that maternal stress and depression directly impact children's emotional and behavioral development, it is critical that aspects of family function be considered and addressed with objective studies of outcome achieved with cochlear implantations."

Nancy Mellon, MS from Chapter 9 "Parental Response to the Diagnosis of Hearing Loss" (p. 147 & 148) in my Cochlear Implants textbook (Niparko Ed., 2nd Ed., 2009)



She refers to: Quittner A, Glueckauf R, Jackson D. Chronic parenting stress: moderating vs. mediating effects of social support. J Personality Social Psychol 1990;59:1266-1278.

and to: Quitter A, Steck J, Rouiller R. Cochlear implants in children: a study of parental stress and adjustment. Am J Otol, 1991;12(Suppl):95-104.

I just thought this was... interesting.... But it should be noted that this textbook is RIDDEN with biases! And just mean comments about the Deaf world. But I suppose any CI textbook would be. You can borrow it if you want!


Sunday, November 7, 2010

The Value of Baby Sign

ASHA CONVENTION OR BUST!
Come see us- 2220
SA 9:30AM-10:30AM, Seminar 1 HR, Marr/Salon E
About Baby Signing
Brenda Seal, Gallaudet U, Washington, DC; YK
An, James Madison U, Harrisonburg, VA; Michelle
Brown, Gallaudet U, Washington, DC; Alison Gannon,
Gallaudet U, Washington, DC
Abundant anecdotal, but little empirical, evidence
promotes baby signing for a language-literacy
“advantage” in typically developing infants. This
session addresses previous and current research
directions and offers suggestions and cautions for
working with parents on signing choices, approaches,
and probable outcomes. Potential generalization to
clinical populations will be suggested.

As I do more research into the success of Baby Sign, some research hypothesizes why babies who sign have an advantage (see Goodwyn, Acredolo, and Brown, 2000). Fascinating! What it comes down to is scaffolding and reinforcement. What does this all mean? The developing baby brain is learning to interpret the world he is experiencing through interaction. Go read about Vygotsky's ideas. The babies who learn some sign can express just a little about how they are experiencing the world. And with that, parents can focus on their babies' expression, reinforce the vocabulary and elaborate and expand on their "utterances." This also allows for a child-centered approach, building on what the infant is interested in rather than telling them what they should be interested in.

The article highlights that Baby Sign allows babies to have their needs met without crying (WATER), to express how they feel (the doll is SCARY), clarify their needs (using specific signs, e.g. CHEERIOS), be more active participants during book-reading, clarify their initial verbal labels (i.e. if they sign when the begin to talk, the sign can clarify what they are saying if it is unintelligible).

What it comes down to is that parents are offering more opportunity for their babies to contribute (receptively and expressively) in conversation, control their environment, and therefore, allow them to be happier babies... ? In addition, more opportunities exist for parents to respond to their babies' comments. This allows the babies more directed, scaffolded learning opportunities for language development as they hear more language in general - parents are focusing on expanding and elaborating on their child's expression. It comes down to exposure!


Goodwyn, S. W., Acredolo, L. P., & Brown, C. A. ( 2000). Impact of symbolic gesturing on early language development. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 81–103.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

and we're back

Now that I have had a week break, I think I am back in a good mood. I've been sleeping about 9 hours a night and I am enjoying a life without SOAPs or lesson plans or children :-)

AND I've found a gold mine of cool ASL articles in the Sign Language Studies that Gallaudet publishes. Right now I am reading "Language and Literacy Acquisition through Parental Mediation in American Sign Language" (2009), but there are plenty more where that came from. [Email me if you want a copy... don't tell anyone where you got it!]

I was just thinking about how it can be a challenge to keep up with a conversation in a group of Deaf people. I mean, the conversation jumps so fast [::eyes move like you're watching a tennis match::]. It can be quite difficult to catch it all, and therefore difficult to stay in the conversation. I miss signs all the time (on top of the fact that I don't know all the signs), and it doesn't take much for me to get lost. And then today I found "Signs in Which Handshape and Hand Orientation Are Either Not Visible or Are Only Partially Visible: What Is the Consequence for Lexical Recognition?" (2009). Basically they found that handshape has the most salient information for comprehension of the message. Whoa, how awesome?

And I also saw, "Are You Getting the Message?: The Effects of SimCom on the Message Received by Deaf, Hard of Hearing, and Hearing Students" (2010). It basically found that SimCom does not produce equivalent messages to hearing and deaf students (as we knew), and that students do not receive equivalent messages (good to know).

I any event, I want all these articles to be in a book that I can read on the metro. Not me printing out 8.5x11 copies of everything. yuck. I need a kindle??

And in my career-oriented-confusion, true these things excite me and educate me, but they don't encourage me (not yet) to join the forces. While I think these studies are awesome and they are answering some truly curious questions, I really don't think I would want to pilot such a study. I am content on reading them.

Now if someone would just do a study about the hearing students' experiences at Gallaudet, I'd be satisfied. Though they do have published works regarding the Deaf President Now stuff. I'll read that too and let you know if it might be similar...

Sunday, May 2, 2010

CODAfied

Why are CODAs among the most fascinating? Man, I swear... bizarre...

A few beers later, and it's still so captivating. I'll try to convey this to you. It could be a blog post or a master's thesis... I could go on and on... here goes

CODA- child of Deaf adults (KODA = kid... ie, young person specifically...)

Anyway, here goes... and enough with the ellipses, huh?

In general, we need to first address bilingualism. KODAs are hypothetically learning both spoken English and signed American Sign Language (at least in this country). and of course, this depends on their exposure. But they are no ordinary bilingual. KODAs are learning two languages of two MODES of communication. WHAT?! Us hearing folk, when we want to learn ASL, it's a fascinating other language, foreign, yet domestic. Ok, gotta get the handshape, palm orientation, and body placement under my belt, but then, I'm good. The other way around, though, can be quite a challenge. Can you imagine if all your life you only used your hands stuck in mittens, and then you needed the fine motor skills to type a weblog entry fluently? I mean, a lot of people (KODAs or Deaf) will use a manual mode of communication as a primary mode of communication. Trying to learn a spoken language is beyond learning the language itself.

Semantics is only one piece of the puzzle. The English phonology is a whole different MODE than the ASL. For this reason, it may be a challenge to learn to speak English as a KODA. A soon-to-be-graduate in the speech-language pathology program at Gallaudet presented recently a case study about a CODA she worked with in the clinic. And it's true, she confirmed it for me, that children of Deaf adults are fascinating. Hearing kids of hearing parents-- some background for you, put very simply-- learn to speak by practicing different sounds. They babble up a storm, and they listen to themselves. They listen to their parents. Over time, they try to match their productions to their models (e.g., family, teachers, peers?, TV, etc...). Oral motor skills are acquired just as any fine motor skill... through practice... and eventual mastery.

Speech samples revealed that he would produce very inconsistent errors. Sometimes he would say a word this way, sometimes a different way... and rarely the correct way. The presenters example was with the word train. Instead, the KODA said "crane" or "wayne"... [I actually don't remember her examples. I made these up]. Now there are a lot of reasons for inconsistent errors. And the bottom line is that he is still learning how to produce it correctly. He makes his best attempt, and he waits for the ever-so-valuable feedback from the therapist to let him know if that sounded right or not.

Let me take a step back. Before any one learns how to produce speech, it's best to listen to how it's supposed to be produced. The presenter also pointed out some curious errors that may be representative of his ability to discriminate between English speech sounds. And ya know, that is a skill itself. Training your ear to hear the difference between sounds seems passive and natural, but in fact, it should be noted that this comes with work (and exposure!). And for some KODAs, this can also be a challenge. For this kid, he had difficulty understanding the name Colt. He responded "cold?" "No, ColTTTT." "Cold??" he replies, signing the COLD gloss simultaneously. And it's true, that /t/ and /d/ are acoustically similar. And it can be difficult to hear the difference. Just as it can be difficult for a Japanese speaker to discriminate between the English /r/ and /l/ (I've done some research. Ask me for references ;-).

Now moving from speech to language (they are not one and the same)- The KODA she presented on initially would just repeat what he heard. Practicing the model? Once they weaned him off of that, he would consistently produce 1-word utterances. This boy was about 3 years old, so he is expected to produce about 3-word utterances at that time (as other hearing kids typically do). Why, as speech and language therapy continued, was he still at 1-word utterances? One idea is rooted in ASL morphology. In ASL, true there are sign glosses (as they are called) which are kinda comparable to words. You put them together, and built meaning. True. But there is a lot more than that. Often, ASL includes such movements of the hands and body and face that are not exactly a sign themselves. So maybe this child is having trouble with this 1 word:1 morpheme idea? He frequently omitted what may be called "function words" like prepositions (e.g., in) and articles (e.g., the)... And there are no 1:1 corresponding ASL glosses for such English words.

So in the end. KODAs blow my mind. They learn two languages at once- aka simultaneous bilingualism. On the other hand, this really depends on the kid. It could be argued that some are sequential bilinguals (learning one language, then learning the other). Either way, they are fine tuning their oral motor skills and their audition skills. The two languages are different modes, and really, they don't follow the typical simultaneous bilingual patterns other children have who are learning two languages within the same mode (spoken). Intriguing. And don't get me wrong! A LOTTTT of KODAs get English down with no problems! The key is really exposure (and interaction). How can you expect to learn a language when you never encounter it?

I don't know what my real point is, but I want to just point out how complicated and awesome this is. Or sometimes is? sigh..