Deaf Education - One size does not fit all

[jillio]

English is one of the most unique languages and so different from pretty every other language out there. It's incredibly difficult to learn, it's a wonder we, deaf people even managed to understand it in the first place! Of course, I don't find it difficult to read and write English because I grew up with it. But I do understand why so many people find it difficult.

French, Spanish, Italian and such languages share similar syntaxes and rules.

Indeed! English is difficult for hearing students, let alone someone who can't hear it.

 

[Banjo]

Indeed! English is difficult for hearing students, let alone someone who can't hear it.

Yes and it may explain why the deaf folks are better spellers.

I often see people misspelling words like "lose" and "weird." I am always seeing the word, "Loose" when it's obviously "Lose."

 

[jillio]

Yes and it may explain why the deaf folks are better spellers.

I often see people misspelling words like "lose" and "weird." I am always seeing the word, "Loose" when it's obviously "Lose."

I think it goes a long way toward explaining. Deaf folks go by the way the word looks, and hearing people try to spell using phonics. English is phonetically inconsistent. That is one of my reservations about systems like CS that rely on phonetic representation, but that's a whole other topic, LOL!

 

[Miss-Delectable]

I did exceptionally well, I was one of the top students in the school.

Except that one year I beat you in Canadian History and I'm not Canadian. LOL!

 

[Miss-Delectable]

Unfortunately, I can't say that the education they provide at the school is something to be proud of. The problem is, a lot of students enrolled at that school are often students who did not do well at the schools they previously attended.

Not only to mention that students don't take Academic English courses. Instead, they take English as a Second Language courses without telling them what the difference is.

I should know, I used to attend that school.

Yep, I can attest to that. I was under misconception that deaf schools in North America was more advanced in academic standard compared to my school in Australia.

Boy, I was wrong! Victorian College for the Deaf, in fact, exceeded their standard and I had challenges. Whereas I had very little or no challenges at ECD.

 

[Banjo]

Except that one year I beat you in Canadian History and I'm not Canadian. LOL!

That's pretty sad when an Australian beat us at our own game. :-/

One thing I did notice about exchange students is that they often perform far better than most students at Ernest C. Drury which is quite amazing considering the fact that neither ASL nor English are often their native languages.

You were the only one that I know of who came from an English-speaking country that I remember in my years at the school. We had one from Sweden, several from Germany and such. Though they told me they learned English in schools over there too. I found that interesting.

 

[Banjo]

Yep, I can attest to that. I was under misconception that deaf schools in North America was more advanced in academic standard compared to my school in Australia.

Boy, I was wrong! Victorian College for the Deaf, in fact, exceeded their standard and I had challenges. Whereas I had very little or no challenges at ECD.

Yes, though I do consider myself lucky that I am quite knowledgeable and well-educated. A large part of that is because of my parents.

 

[Miss-Delectable]

That's pretty sad when an Australian beat us at our own game. :-/

One thing I did notice about exchange students is that they often perform far better than most students at Ernest C. Drury which is quite amazing considering the fact that neither ASL nor English are often their native languages.

You were the only one that I know of who came from an English-speaking country that I remember in my years at the school. We had one from Sweden, several from Germany and such. Though they told me they learned English in schools over there too. I found that interesting.

Ahem. What about that New Zealand boy Daniel? He came from English speaking country, too.

I'm sure the standard & quality at ECD has improved since they were made to meet the hearing standard. Right?

 

[Banjo]

Ahem. What about that New Zealand boy Daniel? He came from English speaking country, too.

I'm sure the standard & quality at ECD has improved since they were made to meet the hearing standard. Right?

Yes, I remember Daniel. I think he's a member here too.

Anyway, I can't say if they have improved because I haven't been there in years to see the progress.

Though you can check their daily announcements...

62NEWS WEATHER SPORTS ENTERTAINM

 

[jillio]

That's pretty sad when an Australian beat us at our own game. :-/

One thing I did notice about exchange students is that they often perform far better than most students at Ernest C. Drury which is quite amazing considering the fact that neither ASL nor English are often their native languages.

You were the only one that I know of who came from an English-speaking country that I remember in my years at the school. We had one from Sweden, several from Germany and such. Though they told me they learned English in schools over there too. I found that interesting.

Many of the non-English speaking countries offer ESL at the grammar school level. My son's school, as well, had several students from non-English speaking countries who learned ESL, and therefore were able to pick up on ASL quite easisly. The sysntax of ASL matched their native languages quite closely, and ESL had taught them English word equivilents for concepts, so they were able to connect the two readily. Just another support for the advantages of bilingualism in any form!

 

[jillio]

Yes, though I do consider myself lucky that I am quite knowledgeable and well-educated. A large part of that is because of my parents.

You were very fortunate to have parents that sought to meet your needs from your perspective.

 

[rockdrummer]

First off let me say I am in no way an expert on how to educate a child or on brain research. One thing I do belive is, that educational approaches should be somewhat influenced by our knowledge and understanding of our brain, and how it devolpes and functions. I also believe that would apply to hearing and deaf students and would be interested in knowing if anyone disagrees with that, and why. Is brain development and function any different between a deaf and hearing child?

Here is some information you may wish to consider. I would also be interested if anyone knows that any of these suggestions are implemented in current approaches to educating deaf children.

Source: Brain-based learning, ideas, and materials

Most of the research from neurology, psychology and education is suggesting that teachers (at all grade levels) implement more student-centered, differentiated instructional models.


Based on current brain-imaging information, Layered Curriculum® is an exciting and effective student-centered teaching method. The 3 layer model encourages complex thinking and holds students highly accountable for their
learning

Source: Dr. Kathie Nunley's Layered Curriculum Web Site for Educators

Working with styles


By Dr. Kathie F. Nunley

A common concern among teachers is: Are we doing a disservice to students by allowing them to work exclusively in their learning style? If the student is allowed to complete all assignments in their own style, it probably is denying them some growth.

Obviously the real world doesn't always accommodate learning styles. Job sites often require a great deal of flexibility in performance and problem solving. Students need to challenge themselves and increase their comfort in a variety of learning styles. Teachers want to offer a variety of learning styles in class assignments, but the real trick is knowing when to match and when to mis-match learning styles.

Matching a student's style of learning is particularly important in the beginning of the year, especially when working with students who have experienced little success in school, students who are struggling with concepts or students who have developed years of learned helplessness. Matching the learning style of the student to the assignment is a marvelous way to get students engaged and allow them to experience success.

However, once a student sees that he or she can have a successful learning experience, the teacher should try to encourage the student to work in a wide range of learning styles, even those out of the student's comfort zone. This is known as mis-matching learning styles. The easiest way to do this is through a wide variety of assignment choice offerings, as in Layered Curriculum™.

Students can pick their way through the menu of assignments picking and choosing their way to a grade. There should be several choices in each type of learning style, but not enough
to allow the student to complete the unit using only their preferred style. This engages the student right off, by allowing them to work and experience success, but at the same time,
forces them to branch out in other directions as they complete the unit.

 

[jillio]

RD, I couldn't agree with you more that brain fuction should be of primary concern in developing curriculum for any child. That is a core concept in developmentally appropriate curricullum.

There is not so much a "difference" in the "brain function" between deaf and hearing children, but a difference in the ways in which information is processed cognitively.

I am a firm believer in addressing education in the early years to support and enhance a child's learning style, hearing or deaf. Once a child has learned to take in, process, and synthesize information from the style that best meets their need, they can, and will, use those skills and apply them to various other ways of taking in and processing information. A child's learning preference is usually evident very early on. Most children benefit from a kinesthetic environment, no matter their hearing status. Some will change that preference as they mature, some will not. Many will use it in combination with other preferences. Learning styles are not static because they are simply preferences for the way in which it is most natural to achieve understanding.

There are any number of ways to capitalize on a learning preference. In the upper grades, for instance, material can be presented both orally and in a handout. A student who learns orally will learn what they need to know from listening to and processing a lecture. A student who is a visual or a kinesthetic learner will benefit more from taking notes as they listen to a lecture, or, in the case of a deaf student from having a visual representation through sign and notes to review following the lecture. For instance, at the college level, a student who has an oral learning preference will get more content from a lecture if they listen to the lecture first, and then read the corresponding chapter in the test following the oral presentation. A visual learner will get more from the lecture if they read the chapter prior to listening to lecture. A very strong kinesthetic learner will benefit from taking notes as they read and listen to lecture both.

It would work the same in the work world. It is not an all or nothing proposition, but a matter of creating an environment that allows the child to use and develop their learning preference so that it can be used to support other forms of learning.

 

[rockdrummer]

RD, I couldn't agree with you more that brain fuction should be of primary concern in developing curriculum for any child. That is a core concept in developmentally appropriate curricullum.

There is not so much a "difference" in the "brain function" between deaf and hearing children, but a difference in the ways in which information is processed cognitively.

I am a firm believer in addressing education in the early years to support and enhance a child's learning style, hearing or deaf. Once a child has learned to take in, process, and synthesize information from the style that best meets their need, they can, and will, use those skills and apply them to various other ways of taking in and processing information. A child's learning preference is usually evident very early on. Most children benefit from a kinesthetic environment, no matter their hearing status. Some will change that preference as they mature, some will not. Many will use it in combination with other preferences. Learning styles are not static because they are simply preferences for the way in which it is most natural to achieve understanding.

There are any number of ways to capitalize on a learning preference. In the upper grades, for instance, material can be presented both orally and in a handout. A student who learns orally will learn what they need to know from listening to and processing a lecture. A student who is a visual or a kinesthetic learner will benefit more from taking notes as they listen to a lecture, or, in the case of a deaf student from having a visual representation through sign and notes to review following the lecture. For instance, at the college level, a student who has an oral learning preference will get more content from a lecture if they listen to the lecture first, and then read the corresponding chapter in the test following the oral presentation. A visual learner will get more from the lecture if they read the chapter prior to listening to lecture. A very strong kinesthetic learner will benefit from taking notes as they read and listen to lecture both.

It would work the same in the work world. It is not an all or nothing proposition, but a matter of creating an environment that allows the child to use and develop their learning preference so that it can be used to support other forms of learning.

From what I gather, it's the utilization of a variety of learning styles that is benificial. They also suggest that matching the learning style of the student is important and also that intentionally mis-matching learning styles has benefits. Are there any deaf ed programs out there that implement more student-centered, differentiated instructional models?

 

[jillio]

From what I gather, it's the utilization of a variety of learning styles that is benificial. They also suggest that matching the learning style of the student is important and also that intentionally mis-matching learning styles has benefits. Are there any deaf ed programs out there that implement more student-centered, differentiated instructional models?

Bi-Bi (I'm sure everyone gets tired of hearing this, but it's true) is indeed a student centered approach. Through the use of ASL, the visual and kinesthetic learning preferences of the majority of deaf students is addressed; the use of English addresses the oral preference of those students. The integration of both languages encourages leasrning from different perspectives.

Intentionally mis-matching can provide benefits, but only subsequent to a student becoming skilled in receiving and processing information through their preferred learning style. It encourages the development of skills that would perhaps go underused without that encouragement.

Of course, the degree of student centered vs teacher centered has a lot to do with the preferred method of the teacher. Some teachers are, by preference and personality, more autoritative in their classrooms, leading to a more teacher centered approach, even with the use of a student centered methodology. But those teachers usually don't choose early childhood education, either, so their students have already been given the opportunity to integrate their preferred learning style with other skills.

 

[loml]

From what I gather, it's the utilization of a variety of learning styles that is benificial. They also suggest that matching the learning style of the student is important and also that intentionally mis-matching learning styles has benefits.

rockdrummer - One of the reason that I support Cued Speech is the fact that it is muti-model and muti-sensory. We are all a combination of learning types/styles. Deaf/hoh and hearing children benefit from intergation of the Cued Speech system into their learning.

 

[jillio]

rockdrummer - One of the reason that I support Cued Speech is the fact that it is muti-model and muti-sensory. We are all a combination of learning types/styles. Deaf/hoh and hearing children benefit from intergation of the Cued Speech system into their learning.

Since when is CS used for hearing children? And the phonetic approach does not address all learning preferences no matter what mode it is presented in. To assume that it does is to indicate a rather shallow understanding of the topic of learning styles.

 

[loml]

jillio - Perhaps if you were an informed Cued Speech user you wouldn't ask such questions. You like to portray yourself as an individual versed in Cued Speech, this is indeed shallow. Feel free to continue making statements that truly reflect what you don't know.

 

[jillio]

jillio - Perhaps if you were an informed Cued Speech user you wouldn't ask such questions. You like to portray yourself as an individual versed in Cued Speech, this is indeed shallow. Feel free to continue making statements that truly reflect what you don't know.

Kind of like talking about a 1950's radio program when you really meant to refer to a piece of literature with a title that in no way resembled the title of the radio program? I find reference to an invasion by aliens when one meant to refer to political treatise a protrayal in what really doesn't know.

Perhaps if you really were informed about Cued Speech you would be able to answer such questions rather than attempting to avoid them.

 

[rockdrummer]

More re-enforcement that each child is different and the teaching styles should be adjusted.

Source: With the recent legislation of No Child Left Behind, even more pressure has been placed on educators to find a magic formula t

A Search for the Magic Formula

Donna J. Thomas


With the recent No Child Left Behind legislation, even more pressure has been placed on educators to find a magic formula that will ensure the success of all students. As a result, there seems to have been a resurgence of research revolving around teaching methodologies. It seems as if each study suggests that one methodology is a little more effective than another. It has also increased the debate between teacher-centered instruction and student-centered instruction. What the research does agree on is that children learn differently and, somehow, educators must find a way to address these differences.





Brain-Based Teaching

Eric Jensen explains that, while brain-based teaching is not a universal remedy, it does provide crucial guidance for developing and implementing instruction. Brain-based teaching is more action research than it is a learning theory--it was created from the insights gained through research regarding how the brain learns. A major concept from brain-based teaching is that "quality education promotes the exploration of alternative thinking, multiple answers, and creative insights" (Jensen, 1998). Brain-based teaching encourages educators to use enrichment activities, create stress-free and threat-free environments, develop intrinsic motivation and to increase the quality of information by teaching for meaning.


While the components of brain-based teaching seem very clear in meaning, it is important to clarify the concepts of enrichment and teaching for meaning. In many classrooms, enrichment is offered only to the gifted and talented students. Brain-based teaching promotes enrichment for all learners. The two vital elements of enrichment are that the learning is challenging and that there must be some interactive feedback. Educators can challenge their students by promoting problem solving, critical thinking, relevant projects, giving students choices, and using complex activities. Feedback, the second part of enrichment, is more effective when it is immediate and specific. It is essential to note that feedback does not necessarily have to come from the teacher. Feedback from peers or even from the student himself can often cause the student to be more of a reflective thinker.



According to brain-based teaching, activities and techniques for both implicit and explicit memory pathways need to be incorporated in order to make learning meaningful. Brain research has proven that the way the brain retrieves the information depends on which memory pathway was used to introduce the information. Therefore, brain-based lessons include a variety of activities that provide the learner with multiple opportunities in which to create significance.





Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered Instruction

Currently, student-centered instruction appears to be winning the debate over teacher-centered instruction. Teacher-centered approaches to learning usually mean that the teacher is the provider of information and the director of the learning process. In this type of instruction the learner is usually a passive participant. Forms of teacher-centered instruction include lecture, demonstration, lecture-discussions, and direct instruction. The critics of teacher-centered instruction claim that this type of teaching does not address the needs of students in our ever-changing, information rich, global society. Proponents of teacher-directed instruction argue that when delivered correctly, teacher-centered instruction can be an effective teaching strategy.


On the other side of the debate is student-centered instruction. This approach to teaching is grounded in constructivism. In student-centered instruction, the teacher serves more as a facilitator, or as a guide, than as a provider of knowledge. Learners construct their own meaning in student-centered learning classrooms. Examples of this type of learning include discussion, discovery or inquiry learning, cooperative learning, learning centers, role-play and problem-based learning. Student-centered learning acknowledges student interests and learning styles, encourages critical thinking and allows students to increase their interpersonal skills.





Differentiated Instruction

In a differentiated classroom, instruction is based on the students' readiness level, student interest and learning profiles. Teachers modify content by providing texts of varying reading levels, providing a wide range of materials including audio-tapes and videotapes, encouraging students to work with partners, using graphic organizers and using surveys to determine student interest. Process is modified by using tiered activities, providing resource materials at varying levels, by forming like-readiness and mixed-readiness interest groups and by allowing multiple options for how students process their learning. Teachers also differentiate products by holding teacher-led mini-workshops, developing rubrics based on both grade level and individual needs and by encouraging students to demonstrate their learning in related topics of special interest.


Teachers have students respond to surveys to assess their interests, learning preferences, and "intelligences." Teachers use these profiles to determine the readiness level of each student, in order to assign appropriate learning activities.





Layered Curriculum

The Layered Curriculum model for instruction is an eclectic mixture of all the models above. This model takes into account that there is a need for diversity in teaching strategies. The three essential keys to Layered Curriculum are choice, complex thinking and accountability.


Dr. Kathie Nunley, developer of Layered Curriculum, has integrated approaches for inclusion, diversity, learning styles, multiple intelligences and mind styles all into one practical method of instruction. Layered Curriculum units are made up of three layers with each layer building on the knowledge gained from the previous layer. The amount of work in each layer does not increase, it just requires more complex thinking.


Students begin in the "C" Layer, where the basic knowledge and skills are learned. While in this layer, students demonstrate a basic understanding of the objectives being taught. Students are offered choices from a wide range of activities geared around the learning styles and ability of the students. "C" Layer activities might include lecture, posters, dioramas, flash cards, textbook readings, song writing, listening to audio tapes and watching a video.


The "B" Layer requires more critical thinking of the students. In this layer, students apply, manipulate, demonstrate, problem solve and work with the information learned in the "C" Layer. The "B" Layer offers students the chance to tie in the new information into their prior knowledge. Projects, role play, and experiments are all examples of activities that would be in a "B" Layer.


The final "A" Layer requires students to make a critical analysis about an issue. Dr. Nunley explains,

"Critical thinking requires the most complex kind of thought because it uses the entire brain--the cortex and the subcortex." Students respond to questions that encourage them to take the research and integrate it with their opinions, values and morals.



A vital part of the Layered Curriculum format is that of oral defense. As students are working on their chosen activities, the teacher works as a facilitator of instruction. Interactive feedback occurs as the teacher and students or a group of students discuss and explain their responses to different assignments. This allows the teacher to encourage the students to reflect on their responses and to think about what they are saying. Grading these units is simplified by the fact that students are given rubrics and are told how many points each activity will earn them. Students are given in of their learning and the stress is lessened by the fact that students know exactly what is expected of them.





Conclusion

Research has made it clear that that there is not any one "best" way to deliver instruction. Some objectives are better met when student-centered approaches are used while others may need a more teacher-centered approach. The fact that educators need to be able to "read and flex" with the differing needs of their students is irrefutable. Today, more than ever, with all of the high stakes testing and accountability measures, teachers need to possess a large repertoire of instructional approaches. Layered Curriculum may be the closest thing yet to that magic formula that educators are so frantically searching for. After all, it allows teachers to "give every child a special education" (Nunley, 2004).





References:

Gregory, G., & Chapman, C. (2002). Differentiated Instructional Strategies: One Size Doesn't Fit All. Thousand Oaks, Ca.: Corwin Press, Inc.



Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.


Nunley, K. (2003). A Student's Brain: The Parent/Teacher Manual. Kearney, NE.: Morris Publishing.


Nunley, K. (2004). Layered Curriculum. Kearney, NE.: Morris Publishing.


Planning for Instruction. Retrieved August 25, 2004. from <http://edtech.tennessee.edu/~bobannon/instructional_methods.html>


Sprenger, M. (2002). Becoming a "Wiz" at Brain-Based Teaching. Thousand Oaks, Ca.: Corwin Press, Inc.


Sprenger, M. (2003). Differentiation Through Learning Styles and Memory. Thousand Oaks, Ca.: Corwin Press, Inc.



Sprenger, M. (1999). Learning and Memory: The Brain in Action. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.


Tomlinson, C. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.