Hearing-impaired students’ reading skills in exceptional and ordinary schools
Background and Aim: Reading skills, a complicated process, should be learnt and solely is not depend on sounds conforming with the written symbols on a page. Readers will be able to understand and perceive the deeper meaning of the text based on their experiences and knowledge obtained through reading. This research aimed to compare hearing-impaired students’ reading literacy in exceptional and ordinary schools in Iran.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was done on 28 hearing-impaired students of the 4th year of primary exceptional and ordinary schools of Shahr-e-Ray and Shahryar cities, Iran, using the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS 2006) booklets. Comparative statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test.
Results: The hearing-impaired students in ordinary schools had significantly (p<0.05) higher scores [mean (SD)] in reading literacy [3.67 (1.74)], comprehension of informational contents [4.21 (2.48)], and comprehension of literary contents [3.14(1.23)] than hearing-impaired students in exceptional schools [1.78 (1.06), 1.92 (1.49), and 1.64 (1.62), respectively].
Conclusion: Hearing-impaired students in ordinary schools meaningfully had higher performance of reading skills in comparison with hearing-impaired students in exceptional schools. It seems that an appropriate cultural bed should be provided in order to conduct these students and accept them in ordinary schools.
2. Patton JR, Kauffman JM, Blackbourn JM, Brown GB. Exceptional children in focus. 5th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company; 1991.
3. Antia SD, Jones PB, Reed S, kreimeyer KH. Academic status and progress of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in general education classrooms. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2009:14(3):293-311.
4. Reed S, Antia SD, Kreimeyer KH. Academic status of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in public schools: student, home, and service facilitators and detractors. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2008:13(4);485-502.
5. Dupoux E, Woiman C, Estrada E. Teachers’ attiudes toward integration of students with disabilities in Haïti and the United States. IJDDE. 2005;52(1):43-58.
6. Hudson F, Graham S, Warner M. Mainstreaming: an examination of the attitudes and needs of regular classroom teachers. Learning Disability Quarterly.1979;2(3):58-62.
7. Campbell JR, Kelly DL, Mullis IVS, Martin MO, Sainsbury M. Framework and specifications for PIRLS assessment 2001. 2nd ed. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College; 2001.
8. Kakojoibari AA, Sarmadi MR, Sharifi A. Comparison of reading literacy in hearing impaired and normal hearing students. Audiol. 2010;9(1):23-30. Persian.
9. Harrell RW. Pure tone evaluation. In: Katz J, Burkard RF, Medwetsky L, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 2002. p. 71-87.
10. Mullis IVS. Martin MO, Kennedy AM, Foy P. PIRLS 2006 international report: IEA's progress in international reading literacy study in primary schools in 40 countries. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College; 2007.
11. Gonzalez EJ. Scaling the PIRLS reading assessment data. In: Martin M, Mulls I, Kennedy A, editors. PIRLS 2001 technical report. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College; 2003.
12. Goldin-Meadow S, Mayberry RI. How do profoundly deaf children learn to read? Learn Disabil Res Pract. 2001;16(4):222-9.
13. Marschark M, West SA. Creative language abilities of deaf children. J Speech Hear Res. 1985;28(1):73-8.
14. Kakojoibari AA, Sarmadi MR, Sharifi A. Comparison of reading literacy in hearing impaired students in three educational degrees. Quarterly Journal of Rehabilitation. 2010;11(3):8-14. Persian.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.