View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Resonating beyond Sound: A Multi-Sensory Approach to General Music for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Resonating beyond Sound: A Multi-Sensory Approach to General Music for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students
Language: English
Authors: Cody Lee Puckett (ORCID 0009-0004-5769-8355)
Source: Journal of General Music Education. 2026 39(3):38-46.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 9
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Descriptors: Music Education, Deafness, Hard of Hearing, Students with Disabilities, Teaching Methods, Multisensory Learning, Music Teachers, Attitudes toward Disabilities, Social Bias, Barriers, Equal Education, Tactual Perception, Visual Stimuli, Kinesthetic Perception
DOI: 10.1177/27527646261417335
ISSN: 2752-7646
Abstract: Traditionally, music education has been defined by an auditory-centric paradigm, prioritizing pitch discrimination and aural skills in ways that often exclude students who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). This article argues for a pedagogical shift toward a multisensory framework that validates vibration, visual tracking, and kinesthetic engagement as legitimate modes of musical understanding. By examining the concept of Deaf Gain and applying Universal Design for Learning principles, this article offers practical strategies for general music educators to transform their classrooms into spaces where sound is felt and seen, not just heard.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1499788
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGb7qErSN2Pe4jn28zD9UIZAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDMHceV51LOuI5914YgIBEICBm-TX20xPAtTuNn8aaZxX7AYy8aq7rZ9FCMedaiIagDrh2HK_nku677IU6Jpu3zKCbjLUy8Ss3KnsV_qyM2DnfkJtOyQreo1-cifFiC7lSKq03VzaaA5n4Lu3i0pWNafCe0Iahd8ucLzmerz71TTmax2bld0xSqsrA5CHKdtjC5Xv6qEByY68pua9RoRauoh7KyOHaBq-F32ZeS5B
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0192008831;[mts2]01apr.26;2026Mar05.05:47;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0192008831-1">Resonating Beyond Sound: A Multi-Sensory Approach to General Music for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students </title> <p>Traditionally, music education has been defined by an auditory-centric paradigm, prioritizing pitch discrimination and aural skills in ways that often exclude students who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). This article argues for a pedagogical shift toward a multisensory framework that validates vibration, visual tracking, and kinesthetic engagement as legitimate modes of musical understanding. By examining the concept of Deaf Gain and applying Universal Design for Learning principles, this article offers practical strategies for general music educators to transform their classrooms into spaces where sound is felt and seen, not just heard.</p> <p>Keywords: deaf education; music pedagogy; universal design for learning (UDL); multimodal learning; deaf gain</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The presence of a student with hearing loss in the general music classroom often triggers a crisis of confidence for educators ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref1">6</reflink>]). The question of how to teach music to someone who cannot hear remains a common refrain among practitioners. Yet, this query reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of both the nature of music and the capabilities of the deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) community. Music is not merely an auditory phenomenon; it is a physical event—a manipulation of time, vibration, and emotional expression that can be perceived through multiple sensory channels ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref2">1</reflink>]). For DHH students, exclusion from music education is often less about their physiological hearing levels and more about the rigidity of the curriculum.</p> <p>Traditionally, music education has been hear-ocentric, prioritizing auditory perception as the sole medium for musical experiences. This paradigm is insufficient and exclusionary for students who are DHH. The exclusion is rooted in a hero-normative or audist perspective that defines music strictly as an auditory experience, overlooking the fact that music is an organized vibration. As mainstreaming becomes the norm, music educators must pivot from an accommodation model, which retrofits a lesson for a DHH student, to a universal design model. In a setting that is rich in deaf culture and American Sign Language (ASL), music education must be reframed as a multisensory, academic, and expressive art form.</p> <p>This article synthesizes research on deaf education, music therapy, and pedagogy to propose a model grounded in three pillars: tactile transmission, visual representation, and kinesthetic embodiment. This approach leverages the tactile, visual, and kinesthetic domains to foster musical understanding and serve as a medium for cultural expression.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-3">The Historical Context of Audism in Music Education</hd> <p>To fully grasp the necessity of a deaf-centric music pedagogy, one must first deconstruct the historical barriers that have kept deaf bodies out of musical spaces. The exclusion of deaf students from music education is not merely an oversight; it is a systemic byproduct of audism—a discriminatory perspective that values hearing over listening ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref3">12</reflink>]).</p> <p>For much of the 19th and 20th centuries, the dominant educational paradigm for the deaf was the medical model ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref4">11</reflink>]). This framework viewed deafness as a pathology—a physical deficit to be cured rather than a cultural identity to be celebrated ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref5">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref6">15</reflink>]). Through the lens of [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref7">8</reflink>] disciplinary power, the traditional music classroom functions as a site of normalization, where the 'deviant' Deaf body is constantly measured against, and corrected to match, the hearing norm. This view reached its apex during the era of oralism, championed by educators such as Alexander Graham Bell. Under the strictures of oralism, the use of sign language was frequently banned in schools, and the pedagogical focus shifted entirely to speech training and lip-reading. In this environment, music was weaponized; it was not taught as an aesthetic art form or a vehicle for creative expression, but rather as a clinical tool for speech therapy. The music classroom became a space for training residual hearing, reinforcing the narrative that music belongs exclusively to the hearing world. This approach had a devastating effect on Deaf students' musicality; by prioritizing speech and denying sign use, educators severed the link between the deaf body's natural rhythm and the rhythmic structures of music. Consequently, generations of deaf students were alienated from a universal human experience, told that music was not for them.</p> <p>The paradigm began to shift with the resurgence of Manualism—education based on Sign Language—and the recognition of ASL as a distinct language. This cultural awakening redefined deafness not as a disability, but as a linguistic minority status. It opened the door for deaf music to emerge—not as a therapeutic intervention to fix a broken ear, but as a cultural right. In this modern context, music education is no longer an attempt to replicate a hearing experience or to fix a deficit, but a specialized discipline that provides access to vibration and emotional expression through nonauditory pathways.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-4">Deconstructing the Master Narrative: From Beethoven to Claiming Space</hd> <p>While the legacy of oralism actively suppressed deaf culture, the field of music education has simultaneously upheld a specific master narrative that complicates the identity of the deaf musician: the story of Ludwig van Beethoven. Within the curricular canon, the deaf musician is almost exclusively exemplified through the life of Beethoven, presented as a tortured musical genius who triumphed over his disability. While this narrative appears empowering on the surface, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref8">4</reflink>] argues that it functions as a medicalized archetype, framing the deaf musician's goal as overcoming a pathology to produce a masterpiece that meets hearing standards.</p> <p>This Beethoven narrative imposes a normalizing agenda. It implicitly asks: How can we help them experience music the same way we do? Rather than asking what unique musical perspectives they possess. This view is reinforced by traditional aesthetic philosophies, such as those of Bennett Reimer, who famously identified hearing as the sole enabler of musical intelligence and described deafness as a faulty sensory apparatus. Such discourse pathologizes the deaf body, positioning it as a mechanical failure that precludes proper musical experience unless it can simulate hearing norms.</p> <p>To counter this, Churchill proposes a framework for claiming musical space. This concept moves beyond the deficit model by validating the diverse ways deaf adults insert themselves into public musical spheres—not by replicating hearing music, but by enacting their own forms of musicking. Drawing on Christopher Small's definition, musicking shifts the focus from the musical object (the sound) to the social relationships and bodily engagements that give the act meaning. When a deaf musician claims a space—whether through sign-language hip-hop ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref9">13</reflink>]) or vibrotactile sound art—they are actively resisting the medical discourse. They are not trying to fix their deafness to be like Beethoven; they are using their unique embodiment to generate new forms of musical knowledge that challenge the boundaries of what the hearing world considers music.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-5">Crafting a Narrative Strategy: Stories as Resistance</hd> <p>Expanding on the necessity of claiming space, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref10">3</reflink>] posits that the very act of storytelling is a crucial pedagogical tool for liberation. Narrative inquiry serves not merely as a methodology for research but also as a mechanism of resistance against the dominant medical model. By breaking silences, deaf musicians provide alternative narratives that challenge the disabling discourses typically inscribed upon them.</p> <p>Foucault's concept of disciplinary power (1977) suggests that the stories told about us shape our identities; - narrative is a two-way affair—we construct stories, and stories construct us. When the only available tale is one of deficit or overcoming (the Beethoven trope), the DHH student's musical identity is constrained. However, crafting a counter-narrative allows DHH individuals to define music on their own terms, rooted in their own sensory experiences.</p> <p>For the educator, this means creating space for student narratives. It requires moving away from the assumption that we know what music is for the DHH student and, instead, asks us to reflect on what motivates members of the DHH community to engage in music making. Whether it is the story of a deaf rapper finding rhythm in sign language or a hard-of-hearing instrumentalist feeling the floor for feedback, these individual stories disrupt the monolithic view of deafness. This narrative strategy is essential for re-storying the deaf musician not as a broken version of a hearing musician, but as a distinct cultural artist contributing valid new forms of knowledge to the field.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-6">Theoretical Framework: Deaf Gain and Universal Design</hd> <p>To dismantle the auditory-centric model, this paper draws on two theoretical pillars: the concept of Deaf Gain and the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework. The traditional deficit model focuses on hearing loss; however, scholars [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref11">2</reflink>] proposed the concept of Deaf Gain, flipping the narrative to explore the unique cognitive and sensory perspectives that Deaf individuals bring to the world. In a musical context, Deaf Gain suggests that DHH students possess a heightened sensitivity to vibrotactile feedback and visual rhythm that hearing students often overlook. When a teacher emphasizes vibration to support a DHH student, the hearing students also benefit. They begin to understand sound as physical energy, leading to better tone production and rhythmic grounding. Thus, the DHH student becomes a catalyst for a deeper, more embodied musical understanding for the entire ensemble.</p> <p>The transition to a multimodal pedagogy is best articulated through the UDL framework, which posits that education should be designed for the margins, not the average, thereby benefiting all learners ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref12">16</reflink>]). A UDL-compliant music curriculum provides multiple means of representation via tactile and visual inputs, alongside various means of action and expression through kinesthetic and signed outputs. By treating vibration and waveform visualization as equal to auditory sound, the educator creates a learning environment where a deaf student can demonstrate musical mastery without ever hearing a note. This aligns with the cultural model of deafness, which views the deaf experience as a unique sensory variation that offers rich contributions to the arts.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-7">Differentiating for Audiological Diversity</hd> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /></colgroup><tbody><tr><td><bold>Classroom Vignette: The Timbre Puzzle</bold>In a busy 5th-grade general music room, the class is exploring the difference between a trumpet and a cello. While hearing peers identify the sounds instantly, Leo, who has bilateral cochlear implants, looks puzzled. To him, the electrical signals from both instruments produce a similarly "muddy" or metallic texture. Sensing Leo's frustration, the teacher pulls up a real-time spectrogram on the SmartBoard. As the trumpet plays, Leo watches the jagged, vertical harmonic spikes appear on the screen; when the cello takes over, he sees the smooth, thick horizontal waves. By pairing the distorted auditory signal with this clear visual map, Leo's brain finally clicks, allowing him to distinguish the instruments not just by sound, but by sight.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>While Deaf Gain provides a philosophical foundation, practical application requires acknowledging that the DHH population is not monolithic. A multimodal approach must be refined based on students' specific technological and sensory profiles. Students with cochlear implants (CIs) access sound through electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. While this allows for speech perception, CIs are notoriously poor at conveying pitch and timbre, often resulting in a muddy or metallic sound quality ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref13">9</reflink>]). Differentiation strategies for this group should focus on timbre discrimination using visual aids. Since the CI may not clearly distinguish a violin from a flute, pairing the sound with a spectrogram or an image of the instrument helps the brain map the electrical signal to the correct source.</p> <p>In contrast, students with hearing aids often amplify acoustic sounds but do not necessarily achieve clarity or correct frequency loss ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref14">19</reflink>]). These students may hear the music's volume but struggle with frequency-specific content. Educators should use frequency mapping to identify the student's specific frequency loss on their audiogram and ensure that essential musical cues are doubled in a range they can access. For example, if a student has high-frequency loss, the teacher might double a melody line on a lower-pitched instrument or emphasize the tactile bass line.</p> <p>Finally, for profoundly deaf or unaided students, the experience of music is entirely tactile and visual. The curriculum for these learners must emphasize rhythm and structure over melody, using visual metronomes and solid-matter conduction to keep them locked in with the ensemble's tempo.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-8">The Neuroscience of Cross-Modal Perception</hd> <p>The argument for a multimodal music curriculum is not just cultural; it is biological. The scientific justification for abandoning a hear-ocentric model lies in the concept of cross-modal neuroplasticity ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref15">18</reflink>]). Traditional neurological models assumed that the auditory cortex in a profoundly deaf individual would atrophy due to a lack of stimulation. It was believed that, without sound, this area of the brain remained dormant. However, modern neuroimaging technologies have dismantled this view, revealing the brain to be far more adaptive and plastic than previously understood.</p> <p>Recent research by [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref16">14</reflink>] indicates that the auditory cortex does not atrophy in the absence of auditory input; instead, it is recruited by the brain to process information from other senses, specifically vision and touch. This functional reorganization leads to supranormal abilities—heightened visual and tactile sensitivity developed to compensate for hearing loss. This neurological evidence is the cornerstone of the feel-first pedagogical principle. When a deaf student interacts with a musical instrument, the tactile vibrations—whether from a wooden floor, a drum, or a speaker—can activate the auditory cortex. This suggests that the brain is processing these vibrations as sound, or at least as a sonic analog. Therefore, when a student feels the beat through a specialized floor, their brain engages in a complex act of musical perception that parallels hearing. This confirms that the deaf experience of music is not a lesser version of the hearing experience, but a translation processed through a reorganized neural network.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-9">Pedagogical Pillar 1: The Tactile Domain</hd> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /></colgroup><tbody><tr><td><bold>Classroom Vignette: The Rhythm of the Floor</bold>Maya, a fourth-grade student who is profoundly deaf, sits cross-legged on the wooden floor of the music room, her palms flat against the grain. While her classmates listen to a recording of a jazz ensemble, Maya is listening through her skin. As the double bass begins a walking bassline, she closes her eyes, feeling the slow, heavy pulses vibrate through the floorboards. When the drummer enters with a sharp snare hit, she feels a crisp, quick tack against her hands. Maya grabs her Vibration Log and circles the word <italic>bumpy</italic> for the bass and <italic>sharp</italic> for the snare. For Maya, the floor isn't just a surface; it is a high-fidelity speaker that translates sound waves into a physical map she can navigate with precision.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The foundation of deaf music education is vibration, and the curriculum must be built on a feel-first principle. Sound is, at its core, vibration traveling through a medium. While air conduction is the primary medium for hearing students, bone and solid-matter conduction are vital for DHH students. Educators should prioritize wooden floors or resonance boards over carpeted areas. Allowing DHH students to sit or lie on a wooden floor during listening activities helps them feel the lower frequencies of instruments such as the double bass and tympani. Students feel vibrations when they place their hands on speakers, pianos, or guitars. Balloons are a classic, low-cost tool; when held against the chest or fingertips, they effectively transmit sound vibrations and amplify acoustic energy. This allows students to distinguish between rhythmic pulses and dynamic changes, transforming an abstract auditory concept into a concrete tactile experience.</p> <p>While low-tech solutions like balloons provide foundational access, the future of deaf music education lies in advanced haptic technology. Recent innovations enable sensory substitution, in which detailed musical information is translated into patterns of skin vibration ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref17">17</reflink>]). For students using cochlear implants, pairing electrical auditory stimulation with precise tactile stimulation significantly improves melody recognition and pitch discrimination ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref18">7</reflink>]). Devices like the haptic chair use full-body vibrotactile feedback to allow deaf users to differentiate between instruments solely by their vibrational texture or timbre. Integrating these technologies moves the experience from a general wash of vibration to a precise, high-fidelity musical interaction.</p> <p>Consider a lesson on timbre as a practical application. In a traditional classroom, the teacher might play recordings of a flute and a tuba and ask students to identify them by auditory cues. In an inclusive classroom, the teacher places a large speaker on the floor face down. Students take turns placing their hands on the speaker to feel the sharp, fast vibration of the flute and the slow, rumbling vibration of the tuba. The DHH student identifies the difference immediately through touch. To demonstrate how the feel-first principle can be operationalized in a general music setting, the following lesson plan utilizes tactile feedback to teach timbre discrimination in accordance with the National Core Arts Standards. To transition from sensory experience to academic data, educators can utilize a Student Vibration Log. This tool allows students to document tactile sensations—such as bumpy low frequencies or sharp high frequencies—translating physical vibrations into a concrete vocabulary for timbre and dynamics. By recording these observations, DHH students demonstrate rigorous musical analysis, proving that tactile perception is a legitimate and measurable form of musical intelligence.</p> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /></colgroup><tbody><tr><td><bold>Lesson Plan 1: The Tactile Domain (Pillar 1)</bold><bold>Title:</bold> Good Vibrations: The Science of Timbre<bold>Focus:</bold> Sound as Physical Vibration/Timbre Discrimination<bold>Grade Level:</bold> 4–8<bold>National Music Standard:</bold> • <bold>Responding (MU: Re7.2.5a):</bold> Identify how musical elements (such as timbre, dynamics, or tempo) and context inform the response to music.<bold>Learning Objectives:</bold> 1. Students will define sound as physical energy (vibration). 2. Students will distinguish between different instrument timbres (e.g., Flute vs. Tuba) using tactile feedback (touch) rather than just auditory hearing.</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Materials:</bold> • Balloons (one per student). • High-quality speaker placed on the floor (wood floor preferred). • Audio recordings of instruments with distinct timbres (e.g., Piccolo, Double Bass, Distorted Guitar). • Vibration Log worksheet.<bold>Procedure:</bold> 1. <bold>The Feel-First Hook (10 mins):</bold> ○ Distribute inflated balloons. Instruct students to hold the balloon lightly between their fingertips or against their chest. ○ Play a bass-heavy track. Ask students to describe what the balloon is doing. ○ Teacher Note: Explain that the balloon acts as a second eardrum, catching sound waves that our ears might miss. This validates the DHH experience of <italic>feeling</italic> sound. 2. <bold>Tactile Timbre Tour (15 mins):</bold> ○ Have students take turns placing their hands directly on the speaker cabinet. ○ Play a low-frequency sound (Tuba). Ask: Does the vibration feel fast or slow? Smooth or bumpy? (Answer: Slow, wide rumble). ○ Play a high-frequency sound (Flute/Piccolo). Ask: How did the vibration change? (Answer: Fast, buzzing, sharp). ○ UDL Connection: This allows DHH students to identify instruments by their vibrational textures. 3. <bold>The Blind Identification Challenge (15 mins):</bold> ○ Students close their eyes (or turn away). ○ The teacher plays a mysterious sound on an instrument. ○ Students use balloon or floor vibration to identify if it was a Low/Rumble instrument or a High/Buzz instrument.<bold>Assessment:</bold> • Students complete the Vibration Log, matching descriptive tactile words (tickle, shake, punch) to the correct instrument family.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left" colspan="5"><bold>Student Vibration Log: Listening with My Body</bold>Name: ___________________________________ Date: ____________________<bold>Instructions:</bold> Place your hands on the speaker or hold your balloon. For each instrument played, describe what you feel (not what you hear) and guess the instrument's size or family.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Instrument</td><td>Tactile Sensation <italic>(Texture)</italic></td><td>Vibration Speed</td><td>Intensity <italic>(Dynamics)</italic></td><td>Prediction</td></tr><tr><td>Ex: Tuba</td><td>Bumpy, heavy rumble</td><td>Slow</td><td>Strong/Large</td><td>Low Brass</td></tr><tr><td>Track 1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Track 2</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Track 3</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><italic>Part 2: Reflections</italic><bold>The Balloon Test:</bold> When the music got louder (Forte), how did the balloon feel against your chest? ____________________________________________________________________________<bold>Timbre Detective:</bold> Describe the difference between the feel of a high-frequency instrument (like a flute) and a low-frequency instrument (like a double bass).High Frequency: ______________________________________________________________________________Low Frequency: ______________________________________________________________________________<bold>Deaf Gain Observation:</bold> Did feeling the vibration through the floor or balloon help you stay "with the beat" better than just listening? Why?___________________________________________________________________________________________________</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0192008831-10">Pedagogical Pillar 2: The Visual Domain</hd> <p>Because ASL is the primary language, the deaf school is an inherently visual-learning environment, and music must be presented in a visually coherent way. While pitch is the most abstract concept for many DHH learners, it can be represented visually through color-coded notation, such as Boomwhackers, or through body-level pedagogies, such as Kodály hand signs. Rhythm is made concrete through visual aids, in which standard rhythmic notation serves as a visual representation of the duration felt in the tactile domain. Additionally, the structure of a song can be mapped using different-colored shapes or lights, allowing students to visually track their place in the music.</p> <p>For DHH students, the conductor is a lifeline, yet standard conducting patterns can be abstract. Educators can initially implement iconic notation, using visual representations of duration—such as long bars for sustained notes—rather than relying solely on standard notation. Integrating a visual metronome provides the necessary temporal structure. Using a flashing light or a bouncing ball projected on a SmartBoard provides a rigid visual beat that does not rely on auditory processing. Furthermore, technology such as visualizer apps can display real-time graphs of pitch and dynamics, allowing students to see the waveform of the sound they produce. The practical application of these visual tools is detailed in the lesson plan below, which employs visual metronomes and waveform technology to develop rhythmic precision and dynamic understanding.</p> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /></colgroup><tbody><tr><td><bold>Lesson Plan 2: The Visual Domain (Pillar 2)</bold><bold>Title:</bold> Seeing the Beat: Visualizing Rhythm and Dynamics<bold>Focus:</bold> Visual Tracking/Rhythmic Precision<bold>Grade Level:</bold> 4–8<bold>National Music Standard:</bold> • <bold>Performing (MU: Pr4.2.5a)</bold>: Demonstrate understanding of the structure and the elements of music (such as rhythm, pitch, and form) in music selected for performance.<bold>Learning Objectives:</bold> 1. Students will perform rhythmic patterns using a visual metronome rather than an auditory click. 2. Students will analyze dynamics by viewing real-time waveform visualizations.<bold>Materials:</bold> • SmartBoard/Projector. • Percussion instruments (drums, rhythm sticks, or Boomwhackers). • <bold>Visualizer App</bold> (e.g., Chrome Music Lab: Spectrogram, or any DAW equalizer). • <bold>Visual Metronome</bold> (flashing light app or bouncing ball video).<bold>Procedure:</bold> 1. <bold>The Silent Beat (10 mins):</bold> ○ Turn off all sound. Project a Visual Metronome (a flashing dot or bouncing ball) on the board. ○ Ask students to clap a steady beat by watching the pulse. ○ Change the tempo visually (speed up the flash). Students must adjust without auditory cues. ○ Teacher Note: This builds visual tracking skills essential for DHH musicians watching a conductor. 2. <bold>Iconic Notation Composition (15 mins):</bold> ○ Instead of standard notes, use Iconic Notation. Draw long horizontal bars for sustained sounds and short dots for staccato sounds. ○ Divide the class into two groups. Group A plays the Bars (long rolls/sustains); Group B plays the Dots (hits). ○ DHH students can lead this section by pointing to the visual shapes, acting as conductors. 3. <bold>Waveform Science (15 mins):</bold> ○ Open the Spectrogram/Visualizer app on the screen. ○ Have a student play a drum softly, then loudly. ○ Ask the class to describe the visual difference in the wave (e.g., the loud sound made the wave taller/spikier). ○ UDL Connection: This makes the abstract concept of dynamics (volume) concrete and visible.<bold>Assessment:</bold> • <bold>Performance Check:</bold> Students perform a 4-measure rhythm in unison, relying solely on the visual metronome (teacher mutes the click track). Success is measured by the ensemble's ability to stay together without sound.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0192008831-11">Pedagogical Pillar 3: The Kinesthetic and Linguistic Domain</hd> <p>The third pillar connects tactile and visual elements through movement and language. Students do not just learn the beat; they become the beat. Pedagogy is heavily influenced by Orff-Schulwerk, which integrates speech, movement, and instrument playing ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref19">20</reflink>]). Students may stomp, clap, or use body percussion to internalize rhythmic patterns. Peer mirroring is another effective strategy, where pairing a DHH student with a rhythmically intense peer allows the student to borrow the peer's internal subdivision by watching the peer's body movements.</p> <p>The flagship ensemble of many deaf schools is the ASL Choir, or Signing Glee Club ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref20">10</reflink>]). Students analyze the original hearing song for its emotional intent, tempo, and dynamics. They then work as an ensemble to choreograph an ASL translation that conveys the song's musicality, not just its words. This is a high-level action of artistic translation, analysis, and group performance. ASL is a prosodic language that possesses rhythm, flow, and dynamics, expressed through sign size and intensity, and it teaches the choir to sign the lyrics. At the same time, singing allows the DHH student to convey the meaning and emotion of the song with the same validity as the vocalists. This practice improves the facial expression and engagement of hearing students as well, aligning with UDL principles. Finally, music is used to support literacy. Teachers use rhythmic chants to practice English syllables, breaking words down by their rhythmic feel. This connection of rhythm to phonology is a critical bridge to reading, strengthening neural pathways for language acquisition. To integrate these embodied and linguistic elements, the following lesson plan outlines a strategy for teaching dynamics and emotion through movement and ASL prosody, aligning with the UDL principle of action and expression.</p> <p></p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /></colgroup><tbody><tr><td><bold>Lesson Plan 3: The Kinesthetic and Linguistic Domain (Pillar 3)</bold><bold>Title:</bold> Embodying Music: Dynamics and Emotion<bold>Focus:</bold> Movement/ASL Prosody/Expression<bold>Grade Level:</bold> 4–8<bold>National Music Standard:</bold> • <bold>Performing (MU: Pr4.3.5a)</bold>: Demonstrate and explain how intent is conveyed through interpretive decisions and expressive qualities (such as dynamics, tempo, and timbre).<bold>Learning Objectives:</bold> 1. Students will demonstrate musical dynamics (loud/soft) through body size and movement. 2. Students will translate the emotion of a musical phrase into facial expression (Non-Manual Markers).<bold>Materials:</bold> • Recorded music with apparent dynamic shifts (e.g., In the Hall of the Mountain King). • Open floor space.<bold>Procedure:</bold> 1. <bold>The Human Volume Knob (10 mins):</bold> ○ Explain that in ASL and deaf culture, loudness is often shown by size. ○ Play a piece of music. Instruct students to move around the room. ○ When the music is piano (Soft): Students must crouch low, take small steps, and keep movements contained. ○ When the music is forte (Loud): Students must stretch wide, take large leaps, and use expansive arm movements. ○ Teacher Note: This helps students become the beat and internalize dynamics kinesthetically. 2. <bold>Peer Mirroring (15 mins):</bold> ○ Pair students up (Partner A and Partner B). ○ Partner A is the leader (representing the music). Partner B is the mirror. ○ Partner A moves to the music's rhythm. Partner B must copy them exactly in real-time. ○ UDL Connection: This replicates the peer mirroring strategy used to help DHH students borrow internal subdivision from hearing peers. 3. <bold>ASL Non-Manual Marker Challenge (15 mins):</bold> ○ Explain that DHH musicians use their facial expressions to convey the music's intensity. ○ Play an Angry/Intense clip. Ask students to make a face that matches the sound (furrowed brows, tight mouth). ○ Play a Peaceful/Sweet clip. Ask for a matching face (relaxed brows, slight smile). ○ Have the class lip-sync the song's emotion without using words, focusing only on facial prosody.<bold>Assessment:</bold> • <bold>Interpretive Performance:</bold> Small groups choose a 30-second music clip and create a silent movement map that mirrors the piece's dynamics and emotion, using only their bodies and faces. The class guesses if the music was loud/soft or happy/angry based on the movement.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0192008831-12">Redefining Musical Success: Assessment Strategies for the DHH Learner</hd> <p>Implementing a multisensory pedagogy requires a corresponding shift in assessment strategies. Traditional music assessment often relies heavily on pitch accuracy and auditory recognition—metrics that are inherently biased against DHH students. To align with UDL principles, educators must develop deaf-centric rubrics that evaluate musicality through tactile, visual, and kinesthetic modalities rather than auditory ones.</p> <p>Rhythm is the most accessible musical element for DHH students, and assessment in this domain should focus on temporal precision and internalization. Educators can evaluate visual tracking by observing the student's ability to follow a visual metronome or conductor without latency. Tactile reproduction can be measured by the student's accuracy in reproducing a rhythm felt through a vibration board or speaker. Furthermore, kinesthetic subdivision can be assessed by the student's ability to maintain a steady beat through body percussion or movement, demonstrating an internalized sense of time. When assessing expressive musicality in ASL, the focus shifts to prosodic alignment. Evaluation criteria should include dynamic flow, examining if the size and intensity of the sign match the musical dynamics. Rhythmic phrasing is another critical metric, ensuring that the start and end points of the signs align with the musical phrases.</p> <p>Finally, emotional embodiment assesses whether the student uses nonmanual markers to convey the harmonic tension or resolution of the piece. By formalizing these criteria, educators move away from a participation-only model toward a rigorous academic model in which students are held to high, albeit adapted, standards.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-13">Collaborative Partnerships: The Role of the Educational Interpreter</hd> <p>While the music educator is the content expert, the educational interpreter (EI) is the communication bridge. However, interpreting music is distinct from interpreting speech, presenting unique challenges that require explicit collaboration. Without preparation, an interpreter may default to signing the lyrics of a song in real-time, effectively stripping the music of its rhythm and emotional context. To prevent this, the music educator and EI must function as a pedagogical team focusing on preparation, approach, and positioning.</p> <p>Interpreters need access to the music beforehand to translate not just the words, but the rhythm of the lyrics. A gloss should be prepared that matches the musical meter, ensuring that the visual language aligns with the auditory beat. In the general classroom, the interpreter should be encouraged to convey the musical prosody before the lyrics, utilizing a music-first approach. In instrumental sections, the interpreter might use specific handshapes to represent the rising and falling of a melody or the staccato texture of a rhythm, serving as a visualizer of the sound. Additionally, sightlines are critical. The interpreter must be positioned within the same visual field as the conductor or the primary visual aid. If the student has to look away from the conductor to see the interpreter, they lose the temporal connection to the ensemble.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-14">Challenges and Implications</hd> <p>This pedagogical model presents unique challenges. The most significant is teacher preparation. The ideal educator must be a quad-specialist: musically competent, fluent in ASL, trained in deaf education, and skilled in differentiating for a broad spectrum of hearing loss. Such professionals are scarce. Additionally, there are challenges related to limited resources. Many school districts, operating from a hearing framework, may see music for the deaf as a low-priority frill, leading to inadequate funding for instruments, technology, and trained staff.</p> <p>Despite these challenges, the implications of a robust music program are profound. On a social-emotional level, it provides a unique avenue for emotional expression and release. Ensemble performance fosters teamwork, confidence, and a sense of belonging. When DHH students see their unique sensory experiences validated in the curriculum, they transition from being visitors in the music room to active contributors.</p> <hd id="AN0192008831-15">Conclusion</hd> <p>To teach music to DHH students is to return to the roots of music itself: vibration, movement, and expression. Music education in a deaf school is a vibrant and essential discipline that succeeds when it abandons the goal of replicating a hearing-centric experience. By translating auditory information into tactile, visual, and kinesthetic experiences, music educators provide DHH students with access to rhythm, structure, and expression. By embracing a multisensory pedagogy, general music educators do not lower their standards; they expand their toolkit. When educators teach students to listen with their hands, their eyes, and their bodies, they democratize the music classroom. Ultimately, the goal of an inclusive music classroom is not merely participation but belonging. It teaches all students that music is not just something you hear, it is something you do, see, and feel. As educators, we have the responsibility to ensure that the definition of a musician is broad enough to encompass every student who wishes to express themselves, regardless of how they perceive the sound.</p> <ref id="AN0192008831-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref2" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Adamek M. S., Darrow A. A. (2019). Music in special education (4th ed.). American Music Therapy Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref11" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bauman H. D. L., Murray J. J. (2014). Deaf gain: Raising the stakes for human diversity. University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref10" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Churchill W. N. (2015). Deaf and hard-of-hearing musicians: Crafting a narrative strategy. Research Studies in Music Education, 37(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X15589777</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref8" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Churchill W. N. (2016). Claiming musical spaces: Stories of deaf and hard-of-hearing musicians (Publication No. 10149021) [Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Darrow A. A. (1993). The role of music in Deaf culture: Implications for music educators. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41(2), 93–110.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref1" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Darrow A. A. (2010). Music education for the deaf and hard of hearing: A review of the literature. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 29(1), 1–8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref18" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Fletcher M. D. (2021). Can haptic stimulation enhance music perception in hearing-impaired listeners? Frontiers in Neuroscience, 15, Article 642542. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.642542</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref7" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Foucault M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (Sheridan A., Trans.). Pantheon Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref13" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gfeller K. (2016). Music and cochlear implants. In Stach T. H., Stach B. A. (Eds.), Handbook of audiology (3rd ed., pp. 533–550). Plural Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall S. (2017). Signing music: The case of the ASL choir. Gallaudet University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hands & Voices. (n.d.). Deaf culture & community: Medical vs. cultural models. https://handsandvoices.org/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Humphries T. (2004). The "audism" in music education. Music Educators Journal, 90(5), 48–51.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lieff J.(Director) (2011). Deaf jam [Film]. New Day Films.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lomber S. G., Meredith M. A., Kral A. (2010). Cross-modal plasticity in specific auditory cortices underlies visual compensation in the deaf. Nature Neuroscience, 13(11), 1421–1427. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2653</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maler A. (2013). Nineteenth-century perspectives on deafness and music. Music & Medicine, 5(3), 133–140.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meyer A., Rose D. H., Gordon D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nanayakkara S. C., Wyse L., Ong S. H., Taylor E. A. (2013). Enhancing musical experience for the hearing-impaired using visual and haptic displays. Human-Computer Interaction, 28(2), 115–160.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patel A. D. (2010). Music, language, and the brain. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schraer-Joiner L. (2014). Music for children with hearing loss: A resource for parents and teachers. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wamsted J. (2021). The Orff-Schulwerk approach in deaf education: A rhythmic foundation for language. American Annals of the Deaf, 166(1), 74–92.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0192008831-17"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Cody Lee Puckett</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5769-8355</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Cody Lee Puckett</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> <p></p> <p>Cody Lee Puckett is a professional educator, disabilities advocate, and PhD student in Music Education at the University of South Florida, with a specialized focus on Communication Disorders. His academic background includes a Master's in Special Education from Florida Gulf Coast University and a Bachelor's in Music and Deaf Education from Flagler College, providing a unique foundation for bridging the gap between music and accessibility. A recognized leader in the field, Cody serves as a Florida ambassador for the CEC Division of Visual and Performing Arts and is a member of the FMEA Diverse Learners Committee. His work, featured in the People of PCPS podcast and supported by various grants, centers on creating innovative, adaptive music environments. Cody is a 2023–2025 FMEA Emerging Leader dedicated to empowering K-12 students through accessible, multi-sensory music education.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref20"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1499788
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Resonating beyond Sound: A Multi-Sensory Approach to General Music for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cody+Lee+Puckett%22">Cody Lee Puckett</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5769-8355">0009-0004-5769-8355</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+General+Music+Education%22"><i>Journal of General Music Education</i></searchLink>. 2026 39(3):38-46.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 9
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Music+Education%22">Music Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deafness%22">Deafness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hard+of+Hearing%22">Hard of Hearing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multisensory+Learning%22">Multisensory Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Music+Teachers%22">Music Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attitudes+toward+Disabilities%22">Attitudes toward Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Bias%22">Social Bias</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Equal+Education%22">Equal Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Tactual+Perception%22">Tactual Perception</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Visual+Stimuli%22">Visual Stimuli</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Kinesthetic+Perception%22">Kinesthetic Perception</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/27527646261417335
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 2752-7646
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Traditionally, music education has been defined by an auditory-centric paradigm, prioritizing pitch discrimination and aural skills in ways that often exclude students who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH). This article argues for a pedagogical shift toward a multisensory framework that validates vibration, visual tracking, and kinesthetic engagement as legitimate modes of musical understanding. By examining the concept of Deaf Gain and applying Universal Design for Learning principles, this article offers practical strategies for general music educators to transform their classrooms into spaces where sound is felt and seen, not just heard.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1499788
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1499788
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/27527646261417335
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 38
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Music Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Deafness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hard of Hearing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multisensory Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Music Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attitudes toward Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Bias
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Equal Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Tactual Perception
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Visual Stimuli
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Kinesthetic Perception
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Resonating beyond Sound: A Multi-Sensory Approach to General Music for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cody Lee Puckett
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2752-7646
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 39
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of General Music Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1