I picked this topic because I can connect personally and have an understanding of the struggles grow up communicating orally. As I was technically not born deaf, I’m curious to understand how hearing parents raising a deaf child interact. They are automatically faced with a great challenge: communication. Ninety percent of deaf children are born to hearing parents. What steps can the hearing parents take to ensure a successful communication outcome for their child. If the parent chooses to use oral as their child’s main source of communication what kind of intervention programs are available to parents.
This topic will benefit me because my goal is to become a counselor. I am taking an internship at a deaf school, but they only focus on hearing and speaking. I want to be able to service the deaf community and maybe a hearing parent who is struggling with their deaf child.
I will be able to provide information, tips, and tricks about different option they can do to handle their deaf child. The purpose of the first study is to identify effective facilitative language techniques in child two years of age and older with cochlear implants. The design of this study had to meet three requirements; children must be under the age of 5 years, severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss, and parents committed to educating the child in spoken English (Cruz, Quittner, Marker, and DesJardin, 2013). Reynell Developmental Language scales (RDLs) measures consists of verbal comprehension and expressive language scales.
Videotaped interaction through free play was also used to assess a variety of developmental processes and the quality of parent-child interaction.
Another task the parent assisted with was showing the child a series of five different art picture mounted on the wall at different heights. The parents talked about the picture for a period of five minutes and determine which picture the child likes the best and least. The task asses “parental sensitivity and communicative competence in children with atypical language development” (Cruz, Quittner, Marker, and DesJardin, 2013). The results of the study showed that there was more of an impact during the picture gallery task then the free play. During the picture gallery task parent-child interaction showed to have better facilitation of oral communication through the use of more words, different types of words, and longer mean lengths of utterances (MLU). Similar positive results were found for parental use of dialogic reading, which is based on higher level FLTs and produced higher vocabulary development in deaf children (Cruz, Quittner, Marker, and DesJardin, 2013).
The study examined whether the quantity and quality of parental input affect the outcome of oral language. The use of a “coaching model” such as the facilitative language techniques (FLT) is one way parents are able to support their children’s communication skills. An early intervention plan that is family focused could increase communication competence in a young deaf child who receives cochlear implants. The purpose of the second study is to determine and compare the rates of progress made through the speech frequency spectrum by pre-school aged children with all types of hearing impairment and deafness with the use of hearing technology; cochlear implants and hearing aids. The design of the experiment is was to examine the outcome in children who spent more than two years on an Auditory Verbal (AV) program.
The children were split into categories either by deafness alone, deafness with additional need (experienced another medical condition), then arranged according to whether the child achieved their age appropriate language (AAL). Children took standardized spoken language assessments on joining the AV program and then in intervals of six months for the duration of their program. The rates of language (RDL) were used to assess and compare their language development throughout their program. The children and their primary caregiver attended regularly. One hour sessions at an Auditory Verbal (AV) center located in the UK. This center focuses on the use of spoken language and what the outcomes are for the children. The families followed a listen and spoken language habilitation approach with their child. (Hitchins and Hogan, 2018). “AV intervention is different from ‘oral’ approaches which place audition within an array of sensory information, including visual (speech reading) and gestural clues to access the meaning of the spoken language” (Hitchins and Hogan, 2018).
The results of the study, out of the 129 children who participated in the study 79% achieved their age appropriate spoken language scores. One in two of the children with additional needs reached age appropriate language by the end of their individualized program (Hitchins and Hogan, 2018). 40% of Children with additional needs continued with their AV program at a significantly older age to correct for prematurity. Through this study, we learned that children who stayed in the AV program for more than two years showed their listening and speech communication improved. The early invention is very important for a parent who wants to promote spoken language as their primary mode of communication.
Families who utility these opportunities for early intervention have shown to have an advantage of understanding spoken language quicker. In conclusion, as a parent only you can make the decision on whether to immerse your child in the hearing oral world, but allow them the opportunity when they have grown up a bit to experience the other side of their culture. Understanding that there journey to learning and understand spoken English is a difficult one. Even if the child has a cochlear implant or hearing aid, do not assume that they are fully understanding everything that is happening around them. The benefit of teaching your child speech is that they are able to communicate with others hear people, but may suffer to understand how socially interact with other deaf people.