Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Vocabulary and Grammar Differences Between Deaf and Hearing Students. |
| Authors: |
Noboru Takahashi1 noborut@cc.osaka-kyoiku.ac.jp, Yukio Isaka1, Toshikazu Yamamoto1, Tomoyasu Nakamura2 |
| Source: |
Journal of Deaf Studies & Deaf Education. Jan2017, Vol. 22 Issue 1, p88-104. 17p. |
| Subject Terms: |
*Comparative studies, *Comparative grammar, *Literacy, *Vocabulary, *Data analysis, Analysis of variance, Deafness, Probability theory, Research funding, Statistics, Multiple regression analysis |
| Geographic Terms: |
Japan |
| Abstract: |
The present study investigated the development of literacy skills of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children in Japan. The three components of literacy, vocabulary, orthographic knowledge, and grammatical knowledge were assessed by using the subtests of the Adaptive Tests for Language Abilities (ATLAN), based on the item response theory developed by the authors). The participants consisted of 207 DHH children (first through twelfth grades) in Study 1, and 425 hearing children (first through sixth grades) in Study 2. The findings show that more than 80% of DHH children's vocabulary variance was explained by the other two componential skills, while the three tasks' difficulty was different. More specifically, their vocabulary and especially, their grammar lagged behind those of hearing children, whereas the difference between the two groups on kanji (one of the three orthographic systems in Japanese taught during the school years) was less. Although considerably delayed, their pattern of responses in grammar was similar to that predicted from normative data. Effective instruction for DHH children's literacy skills was generally discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Journal of Deaf Studies & Deaf Education is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Education Research Complete |