December 11, 2007 

There were several course objectives that were intended for my class to meet this semester as we completed our assignments. They are: 

• …foster in my students a love of learning.
• …cultivate a culture of inquiry as a means of knowing and sensemaking.
• …socialize students into the culture of both the theoretical and the practical aspects of the discipline.
• …inspire students to consider different ways of being, knowing, and doing.
• …promote learning partnerships and learning communities.
• …facilitate improvement in the ability to communicate effectively, in the discourse of the discipline, in both oral and written formats

 These objectives were met over the course of the class rather than at one specific point in time. Therefore, I will discuss the things that I have learned about and the things that I have learned to do throughout the semester by quoting excerpts from my weekly participation memos.

Week 2:

This week I learned a little about the history of the internet and world wide web.  I also learned etiquette for using blogs, email and discussion groups. There was a lot of basic review on using the internet and being careful about what you say online and how you say it, whether it be in an email, discussion group or blog. There was also a bit of a continuation from last week regarding the classroom and incorporating the Read/Write web as a way of learning.

This week I learned how to set up categories on my weblog to keep my posts organized. After I set them up I also learned how to assign a category to each new post.  I learned how to browse discussion groups and how to sign up for one.  I now know how to maintain an account and unsubscribe if need be.  I also learned of many online hoaxes this week.  Now I know how to determine if something is actually a hoax and, if so, how to report it.  I learned that there is a preferred “language” when writing emails and that I need to make subject lines specific, the body of the email to the point, and use the appropriate acronyms and formatting.  I realized this week that I need to keep my sarcasm to the minimum online, or at least make sure that those I’m conversing with understand my humor.

Week 3:

This week I learned about developing a research question.  I learned that it needs to be a topic or issue that is not too broad or too narrow and it also has to be something that can be researched. I was given a list of questions that would help me determine if my research question was appropriate. I also learned a lot about using wikis; how they developed, grew, caught on both in the social and corporate world, and how they can be used in classrooms. I learned about collaborative editing and how it is different from a wiki. I now know that collaborative editing can be password protected or open to the public and that each editor is assigned a color that highlights their changes in order to keep track of who edits what.   

I learned a “shortcut” to adding categories to my weblog, rather than going through step by step on the assignment form. I was also able to add my own page to the class wiki and, although it was a bit confusing at first, I figured out how to edit my personal wiki. As I received emails throughout the week from others who had edited their wiki I thought it would be harder than the articles claim, because of how the changes were coded in the email. But, I was pleasantly surprised when I edited my own page for the first time and saw how easy it really was.

Week 4: 

This week I learned how to use different tools, search engines and key words to find things on the internet. I learned that I can search not only web pages but also discussion groups and weblogs. Although we briefly discussed Wikipedia in last week’s assignments, I learned a lot more about how it can be beneficial in understanding a new topic  and how the discussion tabs can help in viewing the development of the article.  I also learned a lot about RSS feeds.  I now know how they work, using an aggregator to retrieve all updates to subscribed sites. I learned how all these different tools can be utilized in the classroom.

When I read about searching the internet, I learned how to use different resources to search weblogs, websites and discussion groups.  I learned to change the spelling and keywords when using a search engine to manipulate the search and get the results I’m looking for.  I also learned how to use RSS.  I can now download an aggregator, subscribe to different sites by adding the link to the aggregator, check updated sites and organize the information. 

Week 5:

This week I’ve read and learned about virtual worlds, virtual meetings, and social bookmarking.  I learned that virtual worlds are computer generated applications that allow users to control customized characters in customized scenarios.  They’re used by several universities and colleges as a training tool and are thought to be beneficial with students in public schools as well.

I also learned about social meetings, which are conducted in real-time and use several components including a white board application, audio and video.  These meetings can connect students and professionals around the world.

Social bookmarking was another topic we covered this week. In “7 Things You Should Know About Social Bookmarking,” I learned how it can be used to keep track of and organize websites that can be viewed publicly and accessed anywhere online. In chapter 6 of his book, Richardson went into more detail about social bookmarking and recommended some services that offer useful functions, such as saving a snap shop of the website when it’s bookmarked.

This week I learned how to subscribe to an RSS reader. I also learned how to add the link to my RSS reader to my weblog, with some assistance from Mrs. McComas.  Also, with the detailed description of social bookmarking in Richardson’s book, I feel confident that I could subscribe to and use a social bookmarking service.

Week 7:

This week I learned that there are many websites that are not legitimate, regardless of their appearance. During our evaluation of websites assignments, I realized that the websites that appear valid often are not. I also noticed that the websites that don’t necessarily look professional often contain very reliable, accurate information.

I learned about the relationships between reading, writing, and research and how they relate to literacy. Although I had never thought about the interdependence of the topics, I realized after reading the article that they all go hand in hand to help build the knowledge of a subject.

Our class was able to experience a virtual meeting this week, which is something I’ve read about but never participated in.  Now I know how to sign up for and participate in discussions online, which is more than just a chat room. The features available in a virtual meeting improve the experience and make it more comprehensive than a chat. Things like emoting and receiving a transcript of the meeting are a couple of those features.

Also, I registered with delicious, a social bookmarking service.  Social bookmarking is, again, something I’ve read about but have never been able to experience.  I now have my own username and have bookmarked a site, using a tag that allows the entire class to access it.

It has been interesting being able to use the applications that we have talked about in class thus far.

Week 8:
The assignment that required us to double check our citation of sources really helped me learn more about the APA citation style. I was required to read more on the types of citations and understand how to cite certain publications. I found that my redundant error was related to the date of the publication, so I now know that the citation should include the year and month of the publication if it’s a journal and the year, month and day if its a weekly or daily publication. Also, after reading the Eshet-Alkali & Amichai-Hamburger article again, I realized how much everything we’ve been discussing in the class is connected. I was also surprised to learn that I’m now familiar with the lingo associated with information literacy.

This class has provided me with many challenges involving new technology and applications that I’m not familiar with. Since the beginning of the semester we’ve been required to use weblogs, RSS feeds, social bookmarking, and virtual meetings. I had never used any of those tools until this class. I realized as I was reflecting on this week’s assignments that I am finally becoming “fluent” in using these applications.  I haven’t learned any new tasks this week, but I’m surprised and excited that I am becoming more comfortable using the ones that we’ve been discussing thus far in the semester. This week, as I posted my weblogs, filed them in the appropriate categories, bookmarked a website and included a tag for the class, I remembered how nervous I was the first time I used those tools. Now, after much practice, I’m comfortable using them on a daily basis.

Week 9:

This week I learned a lot more about one component of digital literacy called photo-visual literacy. One author stated that it requires users to use “vision to think.” I learned that it uses graphic symbols and icons instead of written words to give directions and labels. I was surprised to find the amount of information that I did on the topic. In reading articles I discovered that it has been researched and found that photo-visual literacy is an important skill for students to learn in order to be competent employees and citizens. There are programs currently allowing students to tutor senior citizens on computer use so that the older population can acquire digital literacy while students better learn the skills associated with digital literacy.

I also learned a lot about the development of a research question, which I thought I already had a good grasp on. I realized, though, that I needed to simplify my question and break down my foundational questions even more.  The process taught me a lot about the organizational aspect of research, which determines the quality of the end product.   

There were no new tools that we learned to use this week. However, I’m still learning how to refine my searches on databases and search engines. Having such a unique topic makes it difficult to find something that applies, so I’ve been able to change the combination of words I use to search and double check my terminology. Like I said last week, I’m becoming more comfortable using the applications that were new to me at the beginning of the semester. I’m continuing to make weblog posts, bookmark websites, and feel confident about my work.

Week 10:

This week I read about one component of digital literacy called reproduction literacy.  I learned that it is the skill of altering media, like a photo or video, to change the meaning of it.  It requires users to use their vision to think, as described by one author. I realized that I see the results of this type of literacy multiple times a day, and have also used those skills myself on some occasions. I think Photo Shop is a great tool to enhance the skills of reproduction literacy. That program is the source of most demonstrations of reproduction literacy that I have seen.

I also read about challenges that children with a hearing loss and those with cochlear implants face in the school systems. The author titled one challenge “Acoustic Challenges,” which talked about the seating of children in the classroom, the size of a classroom, acoustics in a classroom, and the number of students in that classroom.  I learned that any child with a hearing loss should be seated close to the teacher so that they can hear him/her and not be distracted by other noises around them. Also, a classroom that doesn’t allow enough reverberation of sound, or doesn’t allow the sound to carry, can make it difficult for the receiver of an implant to pick up a signal for that child to hear. FM systems are frequently used to ensure that a child with an implant hears everything going on in the classroom; what the teacher is saying and what the other students are saying. Although these systems are often used, they’re not always used properly, which defeats the purpose of having them in the classroom.

I didn’t learn any new procedures this week. However, I’m continually using the ones I learned in the first several weeks of this class, like weblogs, posting to wikis, using social bookmarking, RSS, and virtual meetings. I’m very comfortable using all these tools now. 

Week 11:

In my research this week, I learned so much about hearing impaired children and habilitation methods. I learned that over 80% of children with severe-profound hearing loss perform below or significantly below average on a specific standardized test, normed on hearing children. I read from multiple resources that severe-profound hearing impaired children not only have deficits in language and communication but, as a result of that deficit, tend to have problems with cognition and social-emotional development.

I read a lot about newborn hearing screenings and how their early identification brings intervention to the child, which results in a better prognosis affecting their childhood and adult lives. I also read that the early identification of the newborn hearing screenings has allowed for earlier age of implantation for cochlear implants, which, if used with the auditory-oral approach, can allow a child to be age appropriate and mainstreamed by kindergarten.

Although I’m still doing a lot of research for my project, I feel I’ve got a great start to my draft and some interesting resources.

I was able to practice a lot of my researching skills this week.  I used Academic Search Premier to find an article that was cited in another article which, although it would appear to be easy, was difficult.  Instead of being able to type in the title or author, I had to manipulate the search to yield the results I was looking for.  I think I’m starting to get the hang of it, finally.

Week 12:

I  learned a lot this week as I researched my topic. I found that there are many deficits that a child with a severe-profound hearing loss are faced with. These included areas I never thought about, like social-emotional, cognitive, and general educational deficits. The things I’ve learned through my research is more detailed in my I-Search paper, so I won’t spend too much time talking about them here.

I also learned about reading skills in connection with hearing loss by reading Linsey’s paper. Apparently there are 5 skills necessary in order to read, all of which are directly or indirectly related to hearing. Also, hearing impaired children usually plateau in the middle of their reading development, which puts them behind their peers in reading.

I read Traci’s paper, too, which discussed literacy skills in children who live in impoverished environments. These children usually do not receive much stimulation in their developmental years, which put them behind the literacy level of their peers. However, there are several things that teachers can do to help these children, which include dialogic reading and giving the child more one-on-one attention.

This week I practiced giving peer reviews using the model Mrs. McComas set out for us. I’ve given peer reviews before, but I don’t know how helpful they’ve actually been. I think the procedure we were instructed to use gave the author good feedback in a lot of areas and made us say what we liked and what needed to be changed without offending anyone. 

Week 13:

There was no new information in this class this week. The learning that I did involved figuring out how to do the writing assignments.

This week, I learned how to write a preface, acknowledgement section and an about the author section to add to my project.  I had never been instructed on exactly how to do these assignments (instruction being something that I really enjoy.) Because of that, I had to figure out what these types of writings usually include and the purpose of each of them. By reading these writings by other authors, I learned more about what they include and how they should be written. Although there’s no textbook way these writings have to be done, I felt better knowing I was at least on the right track with mine.

We had a bit of a crash course in using Movie Maker in class a couple weeks ago. After playing around with it more I’m feeling more comfortable and confident in using it. 

This collective evidence implies that I have met the course objectives throughout the weeks of semester.

November 23, 2007

Aims and Objectives:

My goals regarding this class over the past couple of weeks have been to complete my I-Search paper and the assignments due this week in a timely manner. I wanted to finish all of the assignments before Thanksgiving so I could enjoy the holiday and have time to work on projects due in other classes. I also wanted to begin work on the Movie Maker aspect of my project this week. Getting a nice start on that part of the project would be beneficial, especially as the semester winds down.

Declarative Knowledge:

There was no new information in this class this week. The learning that I did involved figuring out how to do the writing assignments.

Procedural Knowledge:

This week, I learned how to write a preface, acknowledgement section and an about the author section to add to my project.  I had never been instructed on exactly how to do these assignments (instruction being something that I really enjoy.) Because of that, I had to figure out what these types of writings usually include and the purpose of each of them. By reading these writings by other authors, I learned more about what they include and how they should be written. Although there’s no textbook way these writings have to be done, I felt better knowing I was at least on the right track with mine.

We had a bit of a crash course in using Movie Maker in class a couple weeks ago. After playing around with it more I’m feeling more comfortable and confident in using it.   

Conditional Knowledge:

The knowledge I gained using Movie Maker is something that will be very beneficial as a student, with this project and to improve other projects I may have in the future. It will also be something I can use in my personal time and making videos for fun.  As far as the other assignments this week, I don’t feel I will be using them as much. I think that they have been helpful in general, giving me the experience. The assignments this week are essential in completing the project for this class to pull everything together and polish it off. I may have an opportunity to use them again as a professional or grad student in presentations or writings.

I can’t help but think back to the beginning of the semester when we started defining literacy. We read and talked about how we can improve as students and citizens by gaining skills discussed in the new, broader definition of literacy. With the combination of written work and computer work I’ve done this week, I feel confident that I’m a very literacy student and citizen.

November 21, 2007

I didn’t realize how challenging this project would be and how much I would appreciate other’s contributions. I want to thank Mrs. McComas for spending time with me in her office, helping me take what I wanted to say and figure out how to say it.

I’m also thankful for my classmates, Caroline and Traci, who reviewed my paper and gave me constructive feedback to enhance it. Some of my other classmates, Marissa, Deidra and Linsey, were also very supportive and helpful when I wasn’t confident in my work.

Everyone involved in The L, staff and students, helped me realize how great of a profession this is and gave me a chance to watch as the children learned to listen and communicate; thanks for everything you’re doing.

I would like to thank Ryan Poole, my Flickr friend, who was very helpful in the making of this video. He was not hesitant to allow me to use his photos and so graciously provided me with an audio clip, telling the story of his son and his cochlear implant. This project wouldn’t be the same without your input.

I also want to thank my dad, who spent a lot of time helping me with last minute editing details and computer glitches when my brain could no longer function.

Thanks everyone!

November 21, 2007

This I-Search paper is the product of a long thought process and much research that changed courses several times before it came to be. When I was first posed with what topic I wanted to research, I immediately thought of aural habilitation. I didn’t have much knowledge on the subject when we were defining our research for this class, but I was in a aural habilitation class where we were just beginning to talk about cochlear implants and habilitation methods. I have always had an interest in cochlear implants but wasn’t aware of how they worked and all that was necessary for them to function. Still, I loved the idea of helping people hear and, in turn, allowing them to communicate better. 

I wanted to connect the topic of sensory devices to literacy, but coming up with an essential question to answer through my research was very difficult and required many revisions. I considered looking at literacy skills when using one hearing aid versus binaural hearing aids, which was suggested by my aural habilitation instructor. Although it was interesting, I wasn’t enjoying the research.

During this time I was periodically observing the Luke Lee Listening, Language, and Learning Lab, referred to as “The L,” on campus. The L is a preschool for children who use sensory devices, such as hearing aids and/or cochlear implants. The L uses the auditory-oral method when working with these children in therapy and in their daily routine.  I was amazed to see how well some of the children in the preschool were functioning with their devices, and how age appropriate some of them were. Thus began my desire to research more on how literacy and cochlear implants were connected.

 I met with Mrs. McComas, my instructor for this class, for a conference to discuss how my project was coming and solidify my research question. Through some re-wording of my essential question and discourse about what I wanted to accomplish through this project, we narrowed down what I would be researching. We also came up with some foundational questions I would need to address in order to answer my main question which is “What do we know about developing literacy skills in children with severe-profound hearing loss?”

This project was interesting to research and I feel I learned a lot about a topic that I love.

November 20, 2007 

Joy Pyles is a lifelong resident of West Virginia where she attends Marshall University. She is currently enrolled in her senior year where she’s majoring in Communication Disorders and an avid Marshall football fan. Joy has a particular interest in aural habilitation with a emphasis on hearing impaired children, which began after a visit to a school for the deaf on a mission trip to Jamaica. She plans on attending graduate school to complete her master’s degree in Communication Disorders and become a licensed Speech-Language Pathologist. Joy also hopes to make frequent trips to the school for the deaf in Jamaica throughout her career.

November 20, 2007 

Balkany, T., Hodges, A., Eshraghi, A., Butts, S., Bricker, K., Lingvai, J., et al. (2002, June). Cochlear Implants in Children—A Review. Acta Oto-Laryngologica, 122(4), 356-362. Retrieved November 16, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Central Intelligence Agency. (n.d.) The World Factbook. Retrieved November 15, 2007 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/notesanddefs.html

Chute, P., & Nevins, M. (2003, January). Educational Challenges for Children with Cochlear Implants. Topics in Language Disorders, 23(1), 57. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ666196) Retrieved November 5, 2007, from ERIC database.

Daley, E. (2003, March). Expanding the Concept of Literacy. EDUCAUSEreview, 33-40.

Davis, J. M., Shepard, N.T, Stelmachowicz, P.G., Gorga, M.P. (1981). Characteristics of Hearing-Impaired Children in the Public Schools: Part II – Psychoeducational Data. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 131-137.  

Gregory, J., & Others, A. (1985, January). A National Survey of Mainstreamed Hearing Impaired High School Sophomores. Journal of Rehabilitation, 51(1), 55. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ316337) Retrieved November 15, 2007, from ERIC database.

Martindale, M. (2007). Children With Significant Hearing Loss: Learning to Listen, Talk, and Read–Evidence-Based Best Practices. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(2), 73-76. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Mildner, V., Šindija, B., & Zrinski, K. (2006, April). Speech perception of children with cochlear implants and children with traditional hearing aids. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 20(2/3), 219-229. Retrieved November 5, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Most, T., Aram, D., & Andorn, T. (2006). Early Literacy in Children with Hearing Loss: A Comparison Between Two Educational Systems. Volta Review, 106(1), 5-28.  Retrieved November 5, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Shumate, N., Creek, L., Crittenden, E. (2001). English/Language Arts Curriculum Standards. Retrieved November 15, 2007 from http://www.state.tn.us/education/ci/cistandards2001/la/cilaglossary.htm

The Standards Site. (2007). Department for Children, Schools, and Families. Glossary. Retrieved November 15, 2007 from http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/secondary/keystage3/respub/mflframework/appendices/glossary_of_terms/j_to_o/

What is Literacy? (n.d.) Mid South Reads. Retrieved November 4, 2007 from http://www.midsouthreads.org/WhatisLiteracy.html.

Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. (2007). Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. PEDIATRICS, 120(4), 898-921. Retrieved November 4, 2007 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/4/898.

November 16, 2007

Introducing/ Questioning

    I have developed a solid understanding of what literacy is through my work on this project and discussion with classmates. When I began this project, my thought was that literacy is the ability to read, write, understand the information being exchanged, then to apply it and make connections with prior knowledge.

    My knowledge on the relationship between literacy and children with a severe-profound hearing loss was slim to none before I began this project. I did not know how literacy would be affected in a child with a severe-profound hearing loss beyond my own generalized assumptions. I supposed that reading and language would be impaired, but I had no inclination as to what extent that impairment would be. I knew that cochlear implants would help, but I hadn’t seen statistics to indicate what degree a child would benefit from them. Before I began searching through articles and journals, I knew that cochlear implants could be extremely beneficial for some children, but that the prognosis varied depending on the individual characteristics of the child.  I had already learned that using the auditory-oral approach in speech therapy following the implantation of the device has yielded great results for some children, allowing them to become age-appropriate by the time they entered kindergarten. I also knew that the child’s age at the time of implantation is an important factor, with research showing that the earlier the implantation the better the outcome for the child.  

    I have recently developed a particular interest in aural habilitation and cochlear implants. When I was given the opportunity to choose my research topic, I immediately wanted to include something related to aural habilitation, but wasn’t sure how to approach it.  After much revision and guidance during a conference with my instructor, I was happy with the decision to research literacy and its connection to children with a severe-profound hearing loss. The essential question I chose is, what do we know about developing literacy skills in children with severe-profound hearing loss? I developed some foundational questions to guide my research and help me answer that question. Those questions are: 

-What is literacy?

-What aspects of literacy are most affected by a severe-profound hearing loss? Is there a difference relating to academic achievement?

-Do cochlear implants have an effect on the areas of literacy that are affected by a severe-profound hearing loss?

-What type of intervention and habilitation method is best when working with children with cochlear implants in order for them to perform at age appropriate levels in the classroom?

 Searching

    In order for me to understand if literacy is affected in a child with a hearing loss, it was important to first have a good understanding of what literacy is. While most people define literacy as the ability to read, I found Daley’s (2003) definition of literacy to include the ability to read and write and also to comprehend that which is being read and written.  One organization called Mid South Reads defines literacy as “using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential.” When searching for different definitions of literacy, I was overwhelmed with the various results. The Standard Site of the United Kingdom’s Government (2007) defined it as communication skills while the Shumate et al (2001) included the ability to listen, speak, read and write. It was interesting that even the CIA’s list of definitions stated that there’s no standard definition of literacy and, after searching for a definitive answer, I have to agree with that statement. It’s obvious to me that literacy is much more than just reading and writing. Many aspects of a person’s life are affected if their literacy skills are impaired.

    The next thing I wanted to discover was what aspects of literacy are affected in a child with a severe-profound sensorineural hearing loss. I found a statement by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (2007) that said hearing impaired children are at risk for becoming delayed in their “communication, cognition, reading, and social-emotional development.” The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing also states that these delays, early in life, will lead to difficulties finding employment and functioning as an adult. Although there were not many recent studies available, I did find an older study by Gregory & Others (1985) that compared hearing impaired high school students to their hearing peers. The results of this study indicated that the hearing impaired students performed below the hearing students in areas of reading, writing, vocabulary, civics, science, and mathematics. I thought it was interesting that this study also found hearing impaired students to be less motivated in the classroom setting.

    An article by Martindale (2007) discusses the performance of hearing impaired children in relation to language development. She reports that oral language proficiency, print-related knowledge, and nonverbal abilities are skills that children with a hearing loss are not acquiring. Because these skills aren’t being developed in hearing impaired children, they fall behind their peers and spend their years in the school systems trying to catch up. The results of the English Language Arts section of the State Testing And Reporting Program in 2003 and 2004 were given in Martindale’s article and show that over 80% of deaf students fall below or far below the basic performance level.  

    I found that there weren’t many resources discussing the overall academic achievement of hearing impaired students. The results of a study by Davis et al were general, stating that children with a severe-profound hearing loss presented with a progressive “educational deficit.” I also read that academic achievement continually decreased as students continued to go through school. Although general, the resources discussed here show that many components of a child’s literacy are negatively affected by the presence of a severe-profound hearing loss.

     Since it’s apparent that a severe-profound hearing loss does affect a child’s literacy, the next topic I want to discuss is whether or not cochlear implants can be beneficial to these children and improve their literacy skills. A study by Most et al (2006) showed that children who used hearing aids and cochlear implants performed the same on tasks in a kindergarten classroom. Therefore, a sensory device does make a difference in the child’s performance. When taking a closer look at the degree of loss with these children, those with implants had a profound loss and were performing on the same level as those with a severe loss who were using hearing aids. I found this interesting because it shows that implants are able to give children with a profound loss the gain they need to function appropriately if it cannot be attained using hearing aids. Findings from the same study showed better results from children using cochlear implants who received their implant at an earlier age than the others. These facts suggest that early intervention does change the prognosis for a hearing impaired child.

    Another study that I read by Mildner et al (2006) compared the performance of children with hearing aids to children with cochlear implants on tasks including nonsense syllables, vowels, and the correctness of place, manner, and voicing.  The results showed that children with cochlear implants responded correctly 66.56% of the time and incorrectly 17.15%. Conversely, children using hearing aids were correct on 46.47% of the tasks and incorrect 39.56%. These results were surprising to me; I wasn’t expecting to see such a considerable difference in the performance of the two types of devices. The children using implants also had significantly fewer incorrect responses than those with hearing aids. The researchers examined the children that were most accurate in the group of implanted children and compared significant findings. I was expecting for these children have been implanted at an early age and consistent speech therapy before and after implantation. It was extremely interesting to me, then, that the age of implantation varied in these individuals, ranging from two years, ten months to nine years, four months. What was consistent in all of these children was early intervention; they had all been enrolled in therapy by the time they were about three years old.  

    Although implants are definitely making a difference for some children, I realize that it’s still difficult to function with a cochlear implant. I found, in an article by Chute & Nevins (2003), that there are many challenges children with cochlear implants face in the classroom. These include being able to hear the teacher well, easily attending to the speaker’s voice with a field of background noise, and the inevitable self-esteem issues that any child who is “different” may feel. Even though children with a severe-profound hearing loss can utilize cochlear implants and function appropriately, there are still many obstacles they will have to face.

    When discussing habilitation methods, I think it’s important to remember what Chute & Nevins (2003) explain: even though a cochlear implant makes it possible for a child to hear, they “don’t provide normal hearing.”  Entertaining this thought along with the results of the study by Mildner et al (2006), we can see how imperative therapy is both before and after implantation of a cochlear device. Although there is no argument that the post-implantation years are critical in regards to therapy, I’ve learned that there is no single habilitation method that is agreed upon as the most effective for children with cochlear implants.  However, I found there is one method that is becoming more popular, shown in the study by Balkany et al (2002). The results of this study found that the best environment for implanted children to be in was a “strongly auditory, orally based and family-centered therapy situation.” I’ve heard a lot about this method, which is referred to as the auditory-oral approach, but was disappointed that there was not more research available on it.  

Concluding/ Answering

    To answer the question, “What do we know about the developing literacy skills of children with a severe-profound hearing loss,” we have to look at all the information presented here. With the definition of literacy that I have found through many resources, it’s apparent that a hearing impairment can affect all aspects of literacy.  Not only are reading and writing affected, but cognition, listening, and speaking are also impaired. It’s not accurate to say that cochlear implants improve literacy in all cases, but is has been evidenced in multiple cases that it can. The ability to function using an implant varies per client, their resources, and habilitation method. Even after implantation, there are many challenges that children face, both in the classroom and in common communication situations.

    With research supporting the statement that cochlear implants improve literacy skills in children, I was disappointed that there were no publications stating what habilitation methods have been found to be beneficial in children who have received a cochlear implant. My research has shown me that we know what we can do to improve literacy skills in children with severe-profound hearing loss: utilize hearing aids and cochlear implants. We have also seen that implants can be more beneficial in children with a profound hearing loss. Currently, the problem seems to be that no therapeutic method has been accepted that can consistently render the best possible results for the client. The utilization of a device is just the beginning of the habiliation process for a hearing impaired child. I feel that more energy needs to be directed towards standardizing our therapeutic approach involving children with cochlear implants.

    It was interesting that there’s not more research available on children with cochlear implants, especially concerning academic achievement and habilitation methods. This is probably due to the fact that a lot of research is still going on to study how the children that have been implanted in the past years are now performing. I’m anxious to see what new findings will be revealed and what therapy methods will result from this research being made available.  

November 11, 2007

Aims and Objectives:

My goals regarding this course this week were to complete the assignments, provide helpful peer reviews for my classmates, and improve my own I-Search paper after getting feedback from classmates. I planned on getting all of the assignments done in a timely manner so that they wouldn’t be late and also so my classmates could use the feedback I gave in the peer review to work in their I-Search papers.

Declarative Knowledge:

I learned a lot this week as I researched my topic. I found that there are many deficits that a child with a severe-profound hearing loss are faced with. These included areas I never thought about, like social-emotional, cognitive, and general educational deficits. The things I’ve learned through my research is more detailed in my I-Search paper, so I won’t spend too much time talking about them here.

I also learned about reading skills in connection with hearing loss by reading Linsey’s paper. Apparently there are 5 skills necessary in order to read, all of which are directly or indirectly related to hearing. Also, hearing impaired children usually plateau in the middle of their reading development, which puts them behind their peers in reading.

I read Traci’s paper, too, which discussed literacy skills in children who live in impoverished environments. These children usually do not receive much stimulation in their developmental years, which put them behind the literacy level of their peers. However, there are several things that teachers can do to help these children, which include dialogic reading and giving the child more one-on-one attention.

Procedural Knowledge:

This week I practiced giving peer reviews using the model Mrs. McComas set out for us. I’ve given peer reviews before, but I don’t know how helpful they’ve actually been. I think the procedure we were instructed to use gave the author good feedback in a lot of areas and made us say what we liked and what needed to be changed without offending anyone.

Conditional Knowledge:

All of the things I’ve learned about this week are related to the field of speech pathology. All of the topics have been interesting and I think I will benefit from them as a student and in the future as an SLP. They’ve all been interesting, particularly Linsey’s paper on cochlear implants, because I also have a interest in that area.

Reading my classmate’s papers this week has helped me as well. I’ve been able to see how they’ve structured their research and things like that, which I can get ideas and benefit from as well.

November 8, 2007

Socio-emotional literacy, as Eshet-Alkali and Amichai-Hamburger describe, is the most complex component of digital literacy.  These particular digital literacy skills allow users to discern the people and places they may find themselves amongst on the web. These skills refer to the social aspect of the internet; interacting with people through websites, email, and  chat rooms, and avoiding hoaxes or potential danger through those interactions. Socio-emotional skills also include using appropriate netiquette when communicating and interacting online.

My first thought in reaction to the idea of socio-emotional literacy skills was, “Why do these exist? How can this be tied to literacy?” But after I read more about what these skills are, I realized how important they are for internet users. When I first began using AIM and email around 6th or 7th grade, my parents carefully monitored what I was doing online and who I was talking with. A random guy messaged me one day and it just so happened he lived in the same area of WV that I did. We chatted online, but I didn’t give him any personal information other than my first name. When my parents asked who he was I filled them in and thought it was so interesting that he lived in the same area. Of course, I was just naive. They made sure I didn’t chat with him anymore and explained to me why it could be so dangerous. That laid the foundation for my socio-emotional literacy skills, and I didn’t even know it! On a lighter note, the song “So Much Cooler Online” comes to mind, where Brad Paisley sings about people living vicariously through profiles they create on myspace. It’s a funny song, but in this context it makes me think of people that do that to draw certain people to them. I can only think of the hundreds of young myspace users who may end up in the wrong place with the wrong person online because they don’t know how to discern good from bad through the internet.

I think socio-emotional literacy skills are very important in the school systems. Lack of these skills in students (mostly due to inexperience or ignorance) is actually a reason why the internet isn’t used as much in the classroom. There are so many places a student could end up with just a few inaccurate clicks of the mouse, and potential danger if not careful.  This may be controversial in the elementary schools right now, with parents concerned about their children having internet access and knowing what all they can be exposed to on the web. I believe the importance of socio-emotional literacy skills cannot be emphasized enough, though. These skills can keep students from becoming susceptible to online dangers. If students are not taught now then they will have to learn on their own, which means they may have to come face to face with some of the negative things that can happen online. But, if they begin learning now, they can learn how to use the internet appropriately and build on those skills as they go through life.

References:

Aphek, E. (2006). Digital, Highly Connected Children: Implications for education. Creativity at Work. Retrieved on October 18, 2007 from http://www.creativityatwork.com/articlesContent/aphek/digital-literacy.html. 

Eshet-Alkali, Y., Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2004). Experiments in Digital Literacy. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(4), 421-429.

Paisley, B. (2007.) Online. Retrieved November 8, 2007 from http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/paisley-brad/online-22297.html

November 5, 2007

I-Search Rough Draft

Introducing/ Questioning

    I have developed a solid understanding of what literacy is through work on this project and discussion with classmates. When I began this project, my thought was that literacy is the ability to read, write, understand the information being exchanged in order to apply it and make connections with prior knowledge.

    My knowledge on the relationship between literacy and children with a severe-profound hearing loss was slim to none before I began this project. I did not know if and how literacy would be affected in a child with a severe-profound hearing loss beyond my own assumptions. I did know that cochlear implants would help, but I hadn’t seen statistics to show to what degree the client would benefit. Before I began searching through articles and journals, I knew that cochlear implants could be extremely beneficial for clients, but that the prognosis varied depending on the individual characteristics of the client.  I had learned that using the auditory-oral approach in speech therapy following the implantation of the device has yielded great results for some clients, allowing them to become age-appropriate by kindergarten. The client’s age at the time of implantation is also an important factor, with research showing that the earlier the implantation the better the outcome for the client.  

    Before I began this research project I had a particular interest in aural habilitation and cochlear implants. When I was given the opportunity to choose my research topic, I immediately wanted to include something related to aural habilitation, but didn’t know how to approach it.  After much revision and guidance during a conference with my instructor, I was happy with the decision to research whether or not literacy and its connection with children with a severe-profound hearing loss. The essential question I chose is, what do we know about developing literacy skills in children with severe-profound hearing loss? I developed some foundational questions to guide my research and help me answer that question. Those questions are: 

-What is literacy?

-What aspects of literacy are most affected by a severe-profound hearing loss?

-Do cochlear implants have an effect on the areas of literacy that are affected by a severe-profound hearing loss? Is there a difference concerning academic achievement?

-What type of intervention and rehabilitation method is best when working with children with cochlear implants in order for them to perform at age appropriate levels in the classroom?

 Searching

    In order to understand if literacy is affected in a child with a hearing loss, it’s important to have a good understanding of what literacy is. While most people define literacy as the ability to read, Daley states that literacy is the ability to read and write and also to comprehend that which is being read and written.  One organization called Mid South Reads defines literacy as “using printed and written information to function in society, to achieve one’s goals, and to develop one’s knowledge and potential.”

    The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) states that hearing impaired children are at risk for becoming delayed in their “communication, cognition, reading, and social-emotional development.” The JCIH also states that these delays early in life will lead to difficulties finding employment and functioning as an adult. Martindale talks about oral language proficiency, print-related knowledge, and nonverbal abilities as skills that children with a hearing loss are not acquiring. Because these skills aren’t being developed in hearing impaired children, they fall behind their peers and spend their years in the school systems trying to catch up. Results of the English Language Arts section of the State Testing And Reporting Program in 2003 and 2004 show over 80% of deaf students falling below or far below the basic performance level.

     A study by Most, Aram, and Andorn showed that children who used hearing aids and cochlear implants performed the same on tasks in a kindergarten classroom. Therefore, a sensory device does make a difference in the child’s performance. However, when looking at the degree of loss, the children with implants had a profound loss and were performing on the same level as those with a severe loss who were using hearing aids. The study also showed better results with children who were implanted at an earlier age, suggesting that early intervention does change the outcome for a hearing impaired child. The results of a study by Davis, Shepard, Stelmachowicz, Gorga, indicated that children with a severe-profound hearing loss presented with a progressive “educational deficit.” It was also reported that academic achievement continually decreased as students continued to go through school. Another study by Mildner,Šindija, and Zrinski compared the performance of children with hearing aids versus children with cochlear implants on tasks including nonsense syllables, vowels, and the correctness of place, manner, and voicing.  The results showed that children with cochlear implants responded correctly 66.56% of the time and incorrectly 16.29%. Children using hearing aids were correct on 46.47% of the tasks and incorrect 13.97%.

    Chute and Nevins explain that, even though a cochlear implant makes it possible for children to hear, they “don’t provide normal hearing.” It’s imperative to implement the best possible habilitation method.  There is a lot of controversy about what method is most effective, primarily between manual approach and the auditory/aural approach. 

Concluding/ Answering

    With the definition of literacy that I have found through many resources, it’s apparent that a hearing impairment can affect all aspects of literacy.  Not only are reading and writing affected, but the cognition and connection making that it requires as well. It’s not accurate to say that cochlear implants does improve literacy in all cases. Performance with an implant varies per client, their resources, and habilitation method. Even after implantation, there are many challenges that children face in the classroom including acoustics, attention, and interacting socially.

    It was interesting that there’s not more information available concerning academic achievement of children with cochlear implants.  This is probably due to the fact that a lot of research is still going on to study how the children that have been implanted are now performing.

Resources:

Chute, P., & Nevins, M. (2003, January 1). Educational Challenges for Children with Cochlear Implants. Topics in Language Disorders, 23(1), 57. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ666196) Retrieved November 5, 2007, from ERIC database.

Daley, E. (2003, March). Expanding the Concept of Literacy. EDUCAUSEreview, 33-40.

Davis, J. M., Shepard, N.T, Stelmachowicz, P.G., Gorga, M.P. (1981). Characteristics of Hearing-Impaired Children in the Public Schools: Part II – Psychoeducational Data. Journal of Soeech, Language, and Hearing Research, 131-137.  

Martindale, M. (2007, Winter). Children With Significant Hearing Loss: Learning to Listen, Talk, and Read–Evidence-Based Best Practices. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 28(2), 73-76. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Mildner, V., Šindija, B., & Zrinski, K. (2006, April). Speech perception of children with cochlear implants and children with traditional hearing aids. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 20(2/3), 219-229. Retrieved November 5, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

Most, T., Aram, D., & Andorn, T. (2006, Spring). Early Literacy in Children with Hearing Loss: A Comparison Between Two Educational Systems. Volta Review, 106(1), 5-28.  Retrieved November 5, 2007, from Academic Search Premier database.

What is Literacy? (n.d.) Mid South Reads. Retrieved November 4, 2007 from http://www.midsouthreads.org/WhatisLiteracy.html.

Year 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. (2007). PEDIATRICS, 120(4), 898-921. Retrieved November 4, 2007 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/4/898.