Holding Stories in the Palm of Your Hand: Improving Language & Communication in Students who use American Sign Language. Presenters: Maryellen Rooney Moreau, M.Ed., CCC-SLP; Mandy Longo, M.S., CCC-SLP; Elizabeth Padilla, NBCT, M.A., CCC-SLP. ASHA 2014 Orlando November 21, 2014, 10:30am
Holding Stories in the Palm of Your Hand: Improving Language & Communication in Students who use American Sign Language
1. ASHA 2014 Orlando
November 21, 2014, 10:30am
Holding Stories in the
Palm of Your Hand: Improving
Language & Communication in Students who use American
Sign Language
Presenters:
Maryellen Rooney Moreau, M.Ed., CCC-SLP
Mandy Longo, M.S., CCC-SLP,
Elizabeth Padilla, NBCT, M.A., CCC-SLP
21. PROBLEM
Research into deaf children’s literacy
development since Conrad (1979) does not
point towards a big improvement in
performance (Mayer, 2007).
22. Response to Intervention– 3 Tiered Model
Tier I
Instruction
Core reading instruction using a reading curriculum which includes the 5 key components
of reading instruction
At least a 90 minute reading block which includes a variety of grouping formats
Students are typically grouped heterogeneously for small group instruction
Assessment:
Universal screening assessment 3x/year
Assessments contained within reading curriculum and school-wide outcomes based
assessments
5%
15%
80%
Tier II
Instruction
Tier I core reading instruction and
30 minutes daily of small group skill-based intervention. Identification and monitoring of skill deficit is
based on assessment data. Intervention is provided or supervised by a highly skilled teacher.
Students are grouped homogenously for small group intervention
Intervention is provided in 14 week cycles and students may be provided multiple rounds of intervention.
Assessment:
All assessment provided within Tier I with the addition of bi-monthly progress monitoring
assessments and “digging deeper” assessments to guide intervention
Tier III
Instruction
Tier I core reading instruction and
60 minutes daily of small group (e.g. 1:3) skill-based reading intervention. Intervention is highly systematic and
explicit and allows for multiple opportunities for response. Provided or supervised by a highly skilled teacher and
target skills determined and monitored by assessment data
Intervention is provided in rounds of 9 weeks
Assessment:
Assessment provided with Tier II; however, progress monitoring assessments are administered weekly
Increasing levels of support
Given high quality core instruction 80% of students should reach reading
benchmark standards, 15% will require some additional support and 5% will
require substantial intervention
23.
24. Research Shows…
Comparative studies of deaf children with hearing
parents and deaf children with deaf parents show that
deaf children with deaf parents are superior in
academic achievement, reading and writing, and
social development -Ewoldt, Hoffmeister, & Israelite, 1992
Deaf children with deaf mothers have better reading
skills than those deaf children who have parents who
do not sign.
ASL Fluency facilitates reading
development in English.
25. There is a correlation between ASL competency and reading
skills.
-Ramsey 2000
Discourse skills used in signing are critical to reading
comprehension
-Kuntz 2006
There is a significant correlation between performance on the
SATs (reading comprehension) and ASL linguistic tests.
-Hoffmeister 2000
26. ASL fluency provides the child
with a linguistic foundation that
enables development of literacy
skills in English.
- Strong and Prinz, 1997; Singleton et al., 1998; Hoffmeister,
2000; Chamber- lain and Mayberry, 2000; Padden and Ramsey,
2000
27. Three strongest predictors of reading success:
1.Strong Language Foundation
2.Parental Involvement
3.Feeling Comfortable Communicating
VL2: Reading Research & Deaf
Children (June 2011)
• http://youtu.be/vWeEw-gtBL4?
list=PLCv77TT9h6pI79tULKvIBk2jy
P5kkDpZJ
31. Think on this…
• Reading curriculums are designed for students who are
entering school already fluent in the English language.
• Hearing, English-speaking students receive English
Language Arts instruction (instruction in a language
they are already fluent in) every single day of school
for 13 years.
• Many children who are deaf come to school not fluent
in any language.
• Most students who are deaf have no curriculum and no
instruction in their first language…ever.
33. Metalinguistics
Information Processing Model
By Bailystok and Ryan 1985
Metalinguistic awareness is unnecessary for first language,
it becomes crucial for any individual’s development of a
non-native second language.
Successful language learning is influenced by the
development of analyzed linguistic knowledge (a linguistic
understanding of the devices in one’s language) and
control.
35. Making second-language learners aware of
linguistic forms at their disposal and how
to control these forms makes learners
aware of implicit knowledge and in turn
makes knowledge explicit.
-(Bialystok and Ryan 1985)
36. Listen
Understand Talk
Fluency
in L1
Read
Write
Gain
Metalinguistic
Skills K-5
Begin
Learnin
g L2
Hierarchy of Language Acquisition
for a child who is hearing and
speaks English
37. What happens with our deaf students?
Listen
Understand Talk
Fluency
in L1
Read
Write
Gain
Metalinguistic
Skills K-5
SKIP
AND – don’t forget about the push for inclusion!
38. “Unless the language levels of deaf children are
within 1 or 2 years of those in the regular class in
which they are placed, they are virtually cut off from
the entire verbal input process that is basic to
educational experiences.”
»A. McConkey Robbins (2000)
39. “Students who are behind do not learn faster than students who are
ahead”
“Catch-up growth is driven primarily by proportional increases in
direct instruction time”
“Catch-up growth is so difficult to achieve that it can be the
product only of quality of instruction in great quantity”
» Fielding (2011)
40.
41. “Students who are behind need to make
catch-up growth. Catch-up growth is
annual growth plus some additional part
of a year’s growth.”
–L. Fielding, N. Kerr, P. Rosier
(2007)
42. “Educators often have the poorest
data for the students for whom they
need the most precision”
»L. Fielding (2007)
43. “Adults who consistently do not and
cannot create double annual growth
should not continue to be in charge of
creating it for that critical population of
students who require it”
-L. Fiedling (2009)
44. What have we learned?
• Deaf children who are fluent ASL users are able to use their
Common Underlying Proficiency (CUP) and metalinguistic
skills, to apply that knowledge to learning a second
language, and become literate users of the English
language.
• However, most children who are deaf are not fluent ASL
users. They do not have the L1 or the metalinguistic skills
required to learn L2.
• Deaf children with language delays cannot ever catch up
without intense, direct intervention by qualified
professionals.
45. So what do we do?
We need to think about how we can
ensure that our students have a solid
first language
46. First Language Development
H• FOamWily S?upport
• Bi-Bi Education
• Qualified Teachers
• More training for SLPs
• Specific ASL Instruction
• Qualified Interpreters
• Peer and Adult role models
• Increased language support/therapy
• Ability to evaluate and progress monitor ASL language
development
47. Language Therapy (2x30???)
• Direct instruction is proportional to the
deficiency.
• The greater the deficiency, the more time
they get.
• “Direct instruction to the deficient sub-skill
is fundamentally different than re-teaching
the morning’s lesson” –L. Fielding (2007)
• “Some children may require instruction that
is 4 or 5 times more powerful than the rest
of the students” –Crawford (2007)
48. What’s the Magic Formula?
1 hour of direct instruction
per day
for every year of delay in
language and vocabulary
49. Story Grammar Marker Narrative Analysis
• Prek – adult
• Assesses narrative story-telling skills
• Analyzes student’s production of macrostructure and
microstructure
• Based on the hierarchy of skills identified in the
VCSL and other ASL checklists
57. Narrative Analysis
• Select appropriate Stimulus Story
• Play Story DVD
• Record Student doing a re-tell
• Use forms to rate the language
• Chart Data
• Develop Targeted Interventions
• Annual Assessment & Progress Monitoring
60. 4 Year Business Plan
TraIinmingp Floecmus entation
• Itinerant DHH Staff
• Classroom Teachers
Implementation
– Year 1 & 2
Narrative: Story Structure- Microstructure
» Story Grammar- Macrostructure
– Year 3
» Theory of Mind
» Expository Text
– Year 4
» Common Core
» Expository & Narrative Text
61. Considerations
C•oWllahbaot rias ttihoen eoxfp SeLrtPisse aonf da TSepaecehcher asn odf Lthaen gDueaagfe
Pathologist?
• What is the expertise of the Teachers of the
Deaf?
• Determine roles and responsibilities
62. Results
Impact on Student Performance
• 2 experts working together = increased student
achievement
• Improvement in comprehension using visuals to
represent concepts
• Improvement in language use and understanding of
topics
• Improvement in sentence structure
• Improvement in social pragmatics
Tell a personal narrative here – make sure to have a clear kick off, feeling and plan
Note the omission o.f Discourse…There is not an efficient connection to literacy. If discourse skills are not modeled and taught early in life, the child is often dependent upon others to prod and ask questions to facilitate communication of stories, thoughts and information. It is vital to the success of the CCSS to explicitly teach discourse language in the oral mode.
Oral language is the foundation for the development of other language skills. For most children, from the perspective of language development, oral language provides a literacy learning process which actually begins with speaking: talking about experiences, talking about themselves…The neglect of oral language in the classroom will destroy that foundation and severely hinder the development of other aspects of language.
Zhang, H & Alex, N. (1995). Oral Language Development across the Curriculum, K-12. ERIC Digest.
This Oral-Literate Continuum shows the discourse level of oral language from the Here and Now to the There and Then. Decontextualized language is a continuing focus of development. As students become more competent and confident in their oral language ability, thus having “literate oral language”, they will be able to talk, write and comprehend others’ writing about things, people and happenings that they, themselves, have experienced (a school field trip) or the experiences of others in their absense (a friend’s visit to a museum or the topic of King George/Massachusetts Colonists).
Conversation is the most contextualized. It is often about the here and now and is a dialogue enabling each participant to seek clarification and expand when necessary. Narration is usually one sided, about a topic that is more decontextualized (away from the Here and Now). Westby calls it a Bridge to Expository since the student must realize what the others know about the topic/story, choose vocabulary, formulate sentences and organize the content into a narrative, informational piece (expository) and/or an opinion. All of these are based on increasing decontextualized language and not relying on another to communicate the content. It must be modeled and taught! A Note: Oral language develops over time, following predetermined sequences (we can predict which sounds will be acquired later, for instance; we know from research that “and” comes before “but and so” as cohesive ties (discourse connectors) and we can tell which of the following children has the more advanced language: “boy kick” “boys kicking”. Both have two words BUT one has the early developing bound morphemes (see research). The SLP has the research base to collaborate with teachers, parents, curriculum teams etc…about the development of “literate oral language”…
We all know the data. We know that the average reading level of a DHH highschool graduate is 3rd-4th grade. It has been this way for years and years. Even decades. Why is that? There have been new curriculums, new paradigms, new communication modalities, new strategies…but still no improvement in reading.
If we look at the RtI model, what does it say when 80% or more of the students are not being successful? Yes! That we have to look at the curriculum or the instruction!!!
Whoa is right! We have to completely re-build and re-think the way we are educating deaf children. Adding in a new curriculum, or getting a fresh, young teacher right out of school, or a new strategy….all of these things are just little band-aids that will never solve the real problem. So how do we figure out what the problem is and more importantly, what to do about it? Let’s look at some research and see what some of the facts are…
One key to success that we must not overlook is that for a student to learn a second language they must have metalinguistic skills. Metalinguistic skills are conscious knowledge of the formal aspects of language. This is what we did and what our students do every day in language arts class. They learn that there are different types of words, how to manipulate those words, and how to use those words. For example, they learn that verbs have past, present and future tense. They learn that words go in a certain order and if you put them in the wrong order it could change the meaning or lose the meaning. Our deaf students not only don’t even have a solid first language, let alone any ability to learn the metalinguistic skills required to be able to learn and acquire a second language.
This is the slide that introduces the relationship between the Discourse Level and the Microstructure. The Macrostructure is mentioned here as well but we covered it in Modules 1 and 2. The Data Collection Manual has an excellent summary of Macro and Micro structure on pages 7-18. Use any of these materials as you see fit. The Scaffolding Questions on pages 15-18 would be good to show as these questions relate to the diagram of the Developmental Sequence on page 14.
You may want to point out examples of microstructure from Big Al, used for Macrostructure analysis in Module 2.
The term “story grammar” uses the word “grammar”, meaning “organization”.
English grammar is the organization of the English language whereas “story grammar” is the global organization of a story (narrative). All languages have both types of grammars.
“Independent of Content” means that the “story grammar” structure is the organization of any story. Some stories are more simple in structure than others and thus their “story grammar” contains fewer components. We will learn about the components of “story grammar” in this module.
Microstructure is the glue that holds the sentences together. Microstructure is the “small” while Macrostructure is the “large” structures coming together at the Discourse Level. The final bullets on this slide refer to the Laura Justice Article and to the treatment of Literate Language Features on pages 12 and 13 of the Data Collection Manual.