Word and World Knowledge Among Deaf Learners With and Without Cochlear Implants

Abstract

Deaf learners frequently demonstrate significantly less vocabulary knowledge than hearing age-mates. Studies involving other domains of knowledge, and perhaps deaf learners' academic performance, indicate similar lags with regard to world knowledge. Such gaps often are attributed to limitations on deaf children's incidental learning by virtue of not having access to the conversations of others. Cochlear implants (CIs) have been described as providing such access, and rapid growth in vocabularies following pediatric cochlear implantation has suggested that, over time, children with implants might close the gap relative to hearing peers. Two experiments evaluated this possibility through the assessment of word and world knowledge among deaf college students with and without CIs and a hearing comparison group. Results across essentially all tasks indicated hearing students to outperform deaf students both with and without CIs with no significant differences between the latter two groups. Separate analyses of a subset of implant users who received their implants at a young age did not reveal any long-term advantages, nor was age of implantation related to enhanced performance on any of the tasks. Results are discussed in terms of incidental learning and the accessibility of word and world knowledge to deaf learners with and without CIs.

Social Maturity and Executive Function Among Deaf Learners

“…Although it is difficult to quantify the effects of overhearing the language of others (or not), findings indicating rapid growth in vocabulary following cochlear implantation among deaf children have suggested that the improved hearing provided by cochlear implants (CIs) might be of significant benefit to incidental learning (Connor, Craig, Raudenbush, Heavner, & Zwolan, 2006;Hayes, Geers, Treiman, & Moog, 2009). Neither CI use nor age of implantation has been found to provide significant long-term benefits to vocabulary or world knowledge (Convertino, Borgna, Marschark, & Durkin, 2014), but the potential for improved hearing and spoken language interactions with diverse others may provide benefits to the development of social maturity. Antia and Kreimeyer (2015) argued that although earlier research frequently described deaf students as socially immature and having more behavior problems than hearing age-mates, such older studies do not reflect the benefits of early interventions and more inclusive educational settings and communication prevalent today.…”

Simultaneous communication supports learning in noise by cochlear implant users

“…Because learning is cumulative, early delays among CI users relative to hearing peers in vocabulary, language, and world knowledge grow during the school years and into young adulthood (Convertino, Borgna, Marschark, & Durkin, 2014; Niparko et al, 2010; Stelmachowicz, Pittman, Hoover, & Lewis, 2004). This often will leave them lagging in the content knowledge needed to support learning in the classroom and from reading, lags that also increase with age.…”

Engagement of dietetic students and students with hearing loss: Experiences and perceptions of both groups

“…Most D/HL display lower vocabulary levels compared with hearing peers owing to their limited access to full, fluent language. [3,10,26,27] Having smaller FGs might be considered in future, as 5 -8 participants per group are advised for the deaf. [20] Fluency in a sign language is a predictor of reading level, as research shows that those most proficient in a sign language were better readers.…”