Recall of Different Segments of an Interpreted Lecture by Deaf Students

Stinson, Michael; Meath-Lang, Bonnie; MacLeod, Janet

doi:10.1353/aad.2012.1081

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is noteworthy that scores across the three delivery modes were relatively low, ranging from 30% to 45%. Although no hearing comparison group was included, the comprehension scores observed here are consistent with previous results concerning deaf students' classroom learning with interpreting and real-time text (e.g., Jacobs, 1977;Livingston et al, 1994;Marschark, Sapere, et al, 2004;Murphy & Fleischer, 1979;Stinson et al, 1981).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The operator produces text as it is spoken by the teacher using a stenographic machine (CART), automatic speech recognition (C-Print), or a standard keyboard (Preminger & Levitt, 1997;Stinson et al, 1999;Viable Technologies Inc., 2002). Stinson, Meath-Lang, and MacLeod (1981) were perhaps the first to examine the utility of print relative to sign language interpreting in the classroom. They found that deaf college students recalled more information when the material was presented in print rather than interpreted, although performance was quite low, ranging from 12% to 56% in various conditions.…”

Section: Text-based Alternatives To Interpretingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students' Classroom Learning

Marschark¹,

Leigh

Sapere

et al. 2006

Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments examined the utility of real-time text in supporting deaf students' learning from lectures in postsecondary (Experiments 1 and 2) and secondary classrooms (Experiments 3 and 4). Experiment 1 compared the effects on learning of sign language interpreting, real-time text (C-Print), and both. Real-time text alone led to significantly higher performance by deaf students than the other two conditions, but performance by deaf students in all conditions was significantly below that of hearing peers who saw lectures without any support services. Experiment 2 compared interpreting and two forms of real-time text, C-Print and Communication Access Real-Time Translation, at immediate testing and after a 1-week delay (with study notes). No significant differences among support services were obtained at either testing. Experiment 3 also failed to reveal significant effects at immediate or delayed testing in a comparison of real-time text, direct (signed) instruction, and both. Experiment 4 found no significant differences between interpreting and interpreting plus real-time text on the learning of either new words or the content of television programs. Alternative accounts of the observed pattern of results are considered, but it is concluded that neither sign language interpreting nor real-time text have any inherent, generalized advantage over the other in supporting deaf students in secondary or postsecondary settings. Providing deaf students with both services simultaneously does not appear to provide any generalized benefit, at least for the kinds of materials utilized here.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Text-based Alternatives To Interpretingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students' Classroom Learning

Marschark¹,

Leigh

Sapere

et al. 2006

Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Five studies have compared support provided by various types of text information to support provided by interpreting. Three studies that compared deaf/hh students' retention of interpreted and printed information included either a hard-copy text or captions that were prepared ahead of time (Gates, 1971;Norwood, 1976;Stinson, Meath-Lang, & MacLeod, 1982). These studies found greater retention of the printed information.…”

Section: Comparisons Of Types Of Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students' Memory of Lectures with Speech-to-Text and Interpreting/Note Taking Services

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In one investigation with 48 deaf and hard-of-hearing (hh) high school students and a second investigation with 48 deaf/hh college students, all viewed one lecture with an interpreter and one with the C-Print ® speech-to-text support service. High school students retained more lecture information when they viewed speech-to-text support, compared to interpreter support, and when they studied note taker notes or a hard copy of the text after viewing the lecture, compared to no opportunity to study. For college students, however, there was no difference between retention with these two kinds of support or with study of notes, compared to no study. For the college investigation, there was a three-way interaction due to markedly better performance on a multiple-choice than on a sentence-completion test when students viewed an interpreter and did not study notes. This result may have reflected difficulty in comprehending unfamiliar terms. Reading proficiency was also related to retention.

show abstract

“…Though In India at present most deaf (approximate 60-78%) do not have access to Computers, Laptops, Tabs, etc, there is very limited Deaf channels, Deaf programs, and Deaf oriented entertainment [19]. Deaf experience lack of access to technology due to hearing impairment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Combined Effect of Captioning and Sign Language in Understanding Television Content in Deaf

Sharma¹,

Rao²

2018

Commun Disord Deaf Stud Hearing Aids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the benefits of combined use of captions and sign language interpretation in understanding television content. Methods: 30 prelingually deaf adults (25-45 y) participated in the study. Stimulus consisted of three video-clips taken from Television (TV) program "Shaktimaan" with already incorporated sign language video. Captions were incorporated in two of the video clips. The experiment was conducted in three phases. In pre-experimental phase participants were required to answer informational questions. In the Experimental phase participants were shown three video-clips in three different viewing conditions i.e. with sign language (WSL), with captions only (WC) and with both sign language and captions combined (WSL:WC). They were required to answer 10 comprehension questions after each video. In post experimental phase they were required to answer feedback questions based on the videos shown. Results: The results showed significant improvement in scores in condition with combined presence of captions and sign language (WSL:WC),than the other two conditions. Conclusion: Was concluded that providing captions and sign language together would immensely help in making television accessible to larger number of deaf adults than providing any of it alone. It was further concluded that the combined use of these devices may also be helpful in improving televised content depending on the individual's efficiency in use of Sign language or captions, though this needs to be researched further.

show abstract

Recall of Different Segments of an Interpreted Lecture by Deaf Students

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students' Classroom Learning

Benefits of Sign Language Interpreting and Text Alternatives for Deaf Students' Classroom Learning

Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students' Memory of Lectures with Speech-to-Text and Interpreting/Note Taking Services

The Combined Effect of Captioning and Sign Language in Understanding Television Content in Deaf

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About