Abstract: Students who are Deaf/HH have complex service needs, with proficiency in both spoken and signed language often compromised. We review language trajectories this diverse population and provide an overview of auditory-based strategies alongside parallel visual supports. Participants practice identifying skill levels, matching strategies, and effectively modifying language supports across modalities.
Description: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) serving students who are d/Deaf or hard of hearing (Deaf/HH) encounter complexities in navigating sign and spoken language modalities, as well as language proficiency that is often compromised. Training for SLPs inherently focuses on spoken language, although Deaf/HH students, particularly those with intensive language needs, often use sign language as a secondary or primary mode of communication. This session reflects a need that we identified within our interdisciplinary, graduate training programs for Teachers of the Deaf (ToDs) and SLPs. Both cohorts required preparation to address needs of diverse language learners within the construct of our comprehensive communication philosophy.
An examination of effective language supports across auditory and visual modalities reveals clear auditory and visual parallels. Documenting corresponding practices in terms of why they are effective and how they can be delivered may aid in differentiating communication, matching the access and abilities of diverse students. These parallels also provide evidence of similarities in practice across philosophical boundaries as professionals work collaboratively. This session is designed to be a tutorial, providing an overview of established strategies for supporting language from auditory based models, and identifying parallels that can be leveraged for visually-based language users. The result is a framework to match supports to the diverse language needs of this population.
Topic One: The session will begin with a review of the features of the population of students who are Deaf/hh, and the various characteristics and experiences that shape language outcomes. Within this review state data identifying the varied placements of students as well as the language mode used will be provided, with the numbers of students who use sign language as a primary or secondary mode of communication being highlighted. Additionally there is a recognition that only a tiny subgroup of the population of students in the Regional Day School Programs for the Deaf in Texas use formal American Sign Language (ASL), though may use some form of sign communication that could be (and should be) supported effectively by the school-based SLP.
Topic Two: Recognizing that many students who are deaf/hh may not have an established L1, the SLP will need to determine the level of language supports that need to be implemented: Are we working toward making language accessible so that it can acquired? Are we working on building skills for the language learner? Do we have an established foundation so that language can be used as a primary learning tool? Each of these stages will be matched to a different “toolbox” of support strategies, and the trajectory of skills will be reviewed using case studies that vary in language proficiency as well as language modality.
Topic Three: An overview of auditory-based strategies to support language access and development will be provided, aligned with Auditory-Verbal (AV) practices. For each of these auditory-based practices a parallel visual strategy will be described. Example of a parallel practice: Acoustic Highlighting is an AV strategy used to emphasize a specific target word by increasing volume, slowing rate, and providing emphasis while the target remains embedded in a phrase/sentence. Auditorially the SLP may use the strategy to emphasize spoken vocabulary targets, though visually she could also stress signed vocabulary targets, even adding fingerspelling. Acoustic highlighting is also used to make spoken keywords more accessible within lesson, and similarly a clinician could hold the sign, even pointing to sign with opposing hand. Just as the strategy is used acoustically to make instructions more clear by emphasizing critical elements, pausing and holding gaze for emphasis can be incorporated visually.
Topic Four: Concepts of diverse deaf/hh learners, a developmental trajectory of supports, and parallel practices across modalities will be integrated using a group case study. Participants will work in teams to identify skill levels, match strategies, and modify strategies to support auditory and visual language skills in an individualized manner. At the close of the session participants will be invited to identify which strategies seemed to be transferable to visual supports, and what additional elements should be included in this practice-based framework for supporting language needs across a diverse student population.
Presentation Format & Methods: Guided discussion through PowerPoint with facilitated discussion and group participation. Small groups matched with case studies will be used to practice and apply modeled strategies.
Supporting Research: Reference 1: Hall, M.W., & Dills, S. (2020). The limits of “communication mode” as a construct, Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 25 (4), 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enaa009
Supporting Research: Reference 2: Pizzo, L. (2016). d/Deaf and hard of hearing multilingual learners: The development of communication and language. American Annals of the Deaf, 161(1), 17–32. https://doi-org.ezp.twu.edu/10.1353/aad.2016.0017
Supporting Research: Reference 3: Secora, K. & Smith, D. (2021). The benefit of the “and” for consideration of language modality for deaf and hard of hearing children. ASHA SIG 9: Hearing and Hearing Disorders in Childhood, 6(2), 397-401. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_PERSP-20-00267
Supporting Research: Reference 4: Nussbaum, D., Waddy-Smith, B., & Doyle, J. (2012). Students who are deaf and hard of hearing and use sign language: considerations and strategies for developing spoken language and literacy skills. Seminars in Speech and Language, 33(4), 310-21. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1326912
Supporting Research: Reference 5: Blanco-Elorrieta, E., Kastner, I., Emmorey, K. & Pylkkkanen, L. (2018). Shared neural correlates for building phrases in signed and spoken language. Scientific Reports 8, 5492. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23915-0
Learning Objectives:
Describe the practice “differentiating communication” as applied to diverse language users who are deaf/hh.
Plan targeted language supports for diverse grouping of students who are Deaf/HH using a trajectory of providing access, building skills, and accessing content.
Modify support strategies that are auditory and visual, adapting to match individual needs at each level along the developmental trajectory.