Predicting the Academic Achievement of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students From Individual, Household, Communication, and Educational Factors

Abstract

Research suggests that the academic achievement of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students is the result of a complex interplay of many factors. These factors include characteristics of the students (e.g., hearing thresholds, language fluencies, mode of communication, and communication functioning), characteristics of their family environments (e.g., parent education level, socioeconomic status), and experiences inside and outside school (e.g., school placement, having been retained at grade level). This paper examines the relative importance of such characteristics to U.S. DHH secondary students’ academic achievement as indicated by the Woodcock-Johnson III subtests in passage comprehension, mathematics calculation, science, and social studies. Data were obtained for approximately 500 DHH secondary students who had attended regular secondary schools or state-sponsored special schools designed for DHH students. Across all subject areas, having attended regular secondary schools and having better spoken language were associated with higher test scores. Significant negative predictors of achievement varied by type of subtest but included having an additional diagnosis of a learning disability, having a mild hearing loss, and being African American or Hispanic. The findings have important implications for policy and practice in educating DHH students as well for interpreting previous research.

Social Maturity and Executive Function Among Deaf Learners

“…These findings might appear surprising, given the literature indicating significant benefits of cochlear implantation for young deaf children. Nevertheless, they are convergent with a variety of recent findings indicating that the early advantages in reading of CI users relative to nonusers-like those of deaf children having deaf parents compared to having hearing parents-are diminished or disappear by high school age Geers, Tobey, Moog, & Brenner, 2008;Marschark, Shaver, Nagle, & Newman, 2015;see Marschark & Leigh, 2016, for a review). Both situations could be the result of the increasing complexity of materials and differing goals of reading at the high school level (Archbold, 2015), premature cessation of interventions for deaf children who show age-appropriate language and reading skills in elementary school (Nittrouer & Caldwell-Tarr, 2016), or because those skills are increasingly mediated by other factors, such as quality of communication (H. Knoors, personal communication, May 19, 2016).…”

“…Recent research (see Archbold, 2015;Harris, 2016, for reviews) has demonstrated significant benefits of cochlear implantation to young deaf children's speech and language, school achievement, and social-emotional functioning (the last usually according to parent reports). Benefits to achievement, however, largely have been found to disappear by high school and college age (Geers & Hayes, 2011;Geers et al, 2008;Harris & Terlektsi, 2010;Marschark, Shaver et al, 2015), at which time there also appears to be little if any difference between deaf individuals with and without CIs across a variety of cognitive domains (Figueras et al, 2008;Marschark, Spencer et al, 2015;Marschark, Paivio et al, 2016). As noted earlier, this finding has been suggested to reflect greater difficulty and differing goals of reading at the high school level (Archbold, 2015), the need for longer term interventions following cochlear implantation (Nittrouer & Caldwell-Tarr, 2016) or the involvement of alternative cognitive and environmental factors.…”

Prevalence of Hearing Loss Among a Representative Sample of Canadian Children and Adolescents, 3 to 19 Years of Age

“…In addition, there is evidence that a greater signal to noise ratio is required for children with unilateral or mild HL compared to normal-hearing peers to understand speech (Bess et al 1986; Bovo et al 1988; Lieu 2004), placing them at a disadvantage in classrooms when trying to hear a teacher's voice above background noise (Crandell 1993). These children also tend to have difficulties with pragmatic and social skills, all of which may significantly affect learning and educational achievement (Moeller et al 2007; Cone et al 2010; Wolters et al 2011; Marschark et al 2015). …”

Simultaneous communication supports learning in noise by cochlear implant users

“…However, there also is emerging, convergent evidence that, on average, the early academic benefits seen in primary school are reduced or absent in secondary and postsecondary settings (Geers, Tobey, Moog, & Brenner, 2008; Harris & Terlektsi, 2011; Marschark, Shaver, Nagle, & Newman, 2015; see also Fitzpatrick et al, 2012). This situation may result, at least in part, from the greater complexity of materials and differing goals in secondary school (Archbold, 2015), premature cessation of interventions for CI users who show age-appropriate language and reading skills in primary school (Nittrouer & Caldwell-Tarr, 2016), lesser overlap between the language used at home and school in later grades (Chung, 2016), or because school-related skills increasingly are mediated by factors other than language level per se (H. Knoors, personal communication, May 19, 2016).…”