Search

Purpose The shortage of doctor of philosophy (PhD)–level applicants to fill academic and research positions in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) programs calls for a detailed examination of current CSD PhD educational practices and the generation of creative solutions. The intended purposes of the article are to encourage CSD faculty to examine their own PhD program practices and consider the perspectives of recent CSD PhD graduates in determining the need for possible modifications. Method The article describes the results of a survey of 240 CSD PhD graduates and their perceptions of the challenges and facilitators to completing a PhD degree; the quality of their preparation in research, teaching, and job readiness; and ways to improve PhD education. Results Two primary themes emerged from the data highlighting the need for “matchmaking.” The first time point of needed matchmaking is prior to entry among students, mentors, and expectations as well as between aspects of the program that can lead to students' success and graduation. The second important matchmaking need is between the actual PhD preparation and the realities of the graduates' career expectations, and those placed on graduates by their employers. Conclusions Within both themes, graduate's perspectives and suggestions to help guide future doctoral preparation are highlighted. The graduates' recommendations could be used by CSD PhD program faculty to enhance the quality of their program and the likelihood of student success and completion. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.11991480

Spelling in writing samples was compared between children who are hard of hearing (HH) (n = 142) and their peers with typical hearing (TH) (n = 72) in second and fourth grade. The same analyses were then conducted comparing groups of children who are HH with different levels of aided audibility. Compared to children with TH, children who are HH produced fewer misspelled words (p = .041, d = .42) at second grade but performed similarly in fourth grade (p = .943, d = .02). Compared to peers with TH, children who are HH demonstrated similar distributions of errors in roots but some differences in the distribution of errors for affixes. Different levels of aided audibility among children who are HH were not associated with significant differences in spelling accuracy at both grades. However, second-grade children with poorer aided audibility produced significantly more phonological omissions (p = .005, r = .32) and orthographic consonant errors for monomorphemic words (p = .001, r = .37), as well as more orthographic consonant errors for and affixes (p = .015, r = .28).

Purpose: The shortage of doctor of philosophy (PhD)–level applicants to fill academic and research positions incommunication sciences and disorders (CSD) programscalls for a detailed examination of current CSD PhDeducational practices and the generation of creativesolutions. The intended purposes of the article areto encourage CSD faculty to examine their own PhDprogram practices and consider the perspectives ofrecent CSD PhD graduates in determining the need forpossible modifications.Method: The article describes the results of a survey of240 CSD PhD graduates and their perceptions of thechallenges and facilitators to completing a PhD degree;the quality of their preparation in research, teaching, andjob readiness; and ways to improve PhD education.Results: Two primary themes emerged from the datahighlighting the need for “matchmaking.” The first timepoint of needed matchmaking is prior to entry amongstudents, mentors, and expectations as well as betweenaspects of the program that can lead to students’ successand graduation. The second important matchmaking needis between the actual PhD preparation and the realities ofthe graduates’ career expectations, and those placed ongraduates by their employers.Conclusions: Within both themes, graduate’s perspectivesand suggestions to help guide future doctoral preparationare highlighted. The graduates’ recommendations could beused by CSD PhD program faculty to enhance the qualityof their program and the likelihood of student success andcompletion.Supplemental Material S1. Survey.Crais, E. & Savage, M. H. (2020). Communication sciences and disorders PhD graduates’ perceptions of their PhD program. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_PERSP-19-00107

This study examines the spelling of nine elementary school children with cochlear implants (CIs) who use spoken language, and compares their performance with children who have typical hearing and children who are hard of hearing (HH). Compared to children with typical hearing, children with CIs did not produce a significantly different percentage of misspelled words (p = 0.431, d = 0.38), but their spelling errors comprised significantly lower percentages of homophone substitutions (p = 0.019, r = 0.61) and legal vowel errors (p = 0.011, r = 0.61). Children with CIs and children who are HH did not produce a significantly different percentage of misspelled words (p = 0.521, d = 0.31) or a significantly different distribution of categorical spelling errors. Results suggest that children with CIs utilize similar linguistic strategies as their peers who are HH but different strategies than peers with typical hearing when attempting to spell unfamiliar words.

Purpose To describe factors affecting early intervention (EI) for children who are hard of hearing, we analyzed (a) service setting(s) and the relationship of setting to families' frequency of participation, and (b) provider preparation, caseload composition, and experience in relation to comfort with skills that support spoken language for children who are deaf and hard of hearing (CDHH). Method Participants included 122 EI professionals who completed an online questionnaire annually and 131 parents who participated in annual telephone interviews. Results Most families received EI in the home. Family participation in this setting was significantly higher than in services provided elsewhere. EI professionals were primarily teachers of CDHH or speech-language pathologists. Caseload composition was correlated moderately to strongly with most provider comfort levels. Level of preparation to support spoken language weakly to moderately correlated with provider comfort with 18 specific skills. Conclusions Results suggest family involvement is highest when EI is home-based, which supports the need for EI in the home whenever possible. Access to hands-on experience with this population, reflected in a high percentage of CDHH on providers' current caseloads, contributed to professional comfort. Specialized preparation made a modest contribution to comfort level.

Objectives This study examined the language outcomes of children with mild to severe hearing loss during the preschool years. The longitudinal design was leveraged to test whether language growth trajectories were associated with degree of hearing loss and whether aided hearing influenced language growth in a systematic manner. The study also explored the influence of the timing of hearing aid fitting and extent of use on children's language growth. Finally, the study tested the hypothesis that morphosyntax may be at particular risk due to the demands it places on the processing of fine details in the linguistic input. Design The full cohort of children in this study comprised 290 children who were hard of hearing (CHH) and 112 children with normal hearing who participated in the Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss (OCHL) study between the ages of 2 and 6 years. CHH had a mean better-ear pure-tone average of 47.66 dB HL (SD = 13.35). All children received a comprehensive battery of language measures at annual intervals, including standardized tests, parent-report measures, and spontaneous and elicited language samples. Principal components analysis supported the use of a single composite language score for each of the age levels (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 years). Measures of unaided (better-ear pure-tone average, speech intelligibility index) and aided (residualized speech intelligibility index) hearing were collected, along with parent-report measures of daily hearing aid use time. Mixed modeling procedures were applied to examine the rate of change (227 CHH; 94 children with normal hearing) in language ability over time in relation to (1) degree of hearing loss, (2) aided hearing, (3) age of hearing aid fit and duration of use, and (4) daily hearing aid use. Principal components analysis was also employed to examine factor loadings from spontaneous language samples and to test their correspondence with standardized measures. Multiple regression analysis was used to test for differential effects of hearing loss on morphosyntax and lexical development. Results Children with mild to severe hearing loss, on average, showed depressed language levels compared with peers with normal hearing who were matched on age and socioeconomic status. The degree to which CHH fell behind increased with greater severity of hearing loss. The amount of improved audibility with hearing aids was associated with differential rates of language growth; better audibility was associated with faster rates of language growth in the preschool years. Children fit early with hearing aids had better early language achievement than children fit later. However, children who were fit after 18 months of age improved in their language abilities as a function of the duration of hearing aid use. These results suggest that the language learning system remains open to experience provided by improved access to linguistic input. Performance in the domain of morphosyntax was found to be more delayed in CHH than their semantic abilities. Conclusion The data obtained in this study largely support the predictions, suggesting that mild to severe hearing loss places children at risk for delays in language development. Risks are moderated by the provision of early and consistent access to well-fit hearing aids that provide optimized audibility.

Objectives The primary objective of this article was to describe recruitment, data collection, and methods for a longitudinal, multicenter study involving children with bilateral mild to severe hearing loss. The goals of this research program were to characterize the developmental outcomes of children with mild to severe bilateral hearing loss during infancy and the preschool years. Furthermore, the researchers examined how these outcomes were associated with the child's hearing loss and how home background and clinical interventions mediated and moderated these outcomes. Design The participants in this study were children who are hard of hearing (CHH) and children with normal hearing (CNH) who provided comparison data. CHH were eligible for participation if (1) their chronological age was between 6 months and 7 years of age at the time of recruitment, (2) they had a better-ear pure-tone average of 25 to 75 dB HL, (3) they had not received a cochlear implant, (4) they were from homes where English was the primary language, and (5) they did not demonstrate significant cognitive or motor delays. Across the time span of recruitment, 430 parents of potential children with hearing loss made contact with the research group. This resulted in 317 CHH who qualified for enrollment. In addition, 117 CNH qualified for enrollment. An accelerated longitudinal design was used, in which multiple age cohorts were followed long enough to provide overlap. Specifically, children were recruited and enrolled continuously across an age span of 6.5 years and were followed for at least 3 years. This design allowed for tests of time (period) versus cohort age effects that could arise by changes in services and technology over time, yet still allowed for examination of important developmental relationships. Results The distribution of degree of hearing loss for the CHH showed that the majority of CHH had moderate or moderate-to-severe hearing losses, indicating that the sample undersampled children with mild HL. For mothers of both CHH and CNH, the distribution of maternal education level showed that few mothers lacked at least a high school education and a slight majority had completed a bachelor's degree, suggesting that this sample of research volunteers was more advantaged than the United States population. The test battery consisted of a variety of measures concerning participants' hearing and behavioral development. These data were gathered in sessions during which the child was examined by an audiologist and a speech-language examiner. In addition, questionnaires concerning the child's behavior and development were completed by the parents. Conclusion The Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss study was intended to examine the relationship between variation in hearing ability across children with normal and mild to severe hearing loss and variation in their outcomes across several domains of development. In addition, the research team sought to document important mediators and moderators that act between the hearing loss and the outcomes. Because the study design provided for the examination of outcomes throughout infancy and early childhood, it was necessary to employ a number of different measures of the same construct to accommodate changes in developmental performance across age. This resulted in a large matrix of measures across variable types and developmental levels, as described in this manuscript.

Purpose To characterize preschool and school services for children who are hard of hearing (CHH), we described service setting, amount, and configuration and analyzed the relationship between service receipt and student hearing levels and language scores. Characteristics of professionals providing services were described and then used to predict level of comfort with skills supporting listening and spoken language. The amount of provider communication with children's audiologists was also investigated. Method Participants included parents of CHH (preschool n = 174; school n = 155) and professionals (preschool n = 133; school n = 104) who completed interviews and questionnaires as part of a longitudinal study. Children's hearing, speech, and language data were collected from annual testing and analyzed in relation to service data. Results A majority (81%) of preschool-age CHH received services. Children were more likely to be in a preschool for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (CDHH) or exceptional children than a general education preschool. By elementary school, 70% received services, nearly all in general education settings. Sessions averaged twice a week for a total of approximately 90 min. Children who no longer received services performed significantly better on speech/language measures than those who received services, regardless of service setting. Professionals were primarily speech-language pathologists (SLPs) and teachers of CDHH. SLPs reported significantly less comfort with skills involving auditory development and hearing technologies and less frequent communication with the child's audiologists than teachers of CDHH. Overall communication with audiologists was more frequent in the preschool years. Conclusions As preschool-age CHH transition into school, the majority continue to qualify for services. Congruent with national trends, school-age CHH in the Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss study were most often in general education settings. Without specialized preprofessional or postgraduate training, SLPs and teachers of CDHH did not report comfort with all the skills critical to developing listening and spoken language. This finding supports the need for increased implementation of interprofessional practice among SLPs and teachers of CDHH, as well as audiologists, to best meet the needs unique to this population.

Otitis media with effusion (OME) is described as a collection of fluid in the middle ear, without signs or symptoms of acute ear infection ( Stool, Berg, Berman, & Carney, 1994). The accumulated fluid decreases the ability of both the tympanic membrane (eardrum) and the ossicles in the middle ear to vibrate, resulting in a mild conductive hearing loss. Although 28 decibels (dB) is the average hearing loss associated with OME, the range is quite wide. While some children experience no hearing loss, about 20% have hearing loss of 35 dB or greater ( Gravel, 2003).

PurposeIn this study, the authors examined diagnostic and intervention services for children identified with hearing loss (HL) after the newborn period.MethodThe authors compared ages at service delivery and length of delays between service delivery steps for 57 later-identified children with HL and 193 children who referred for assessment from the newborn hearing screen (NHS). For only later-identified children, regression models were used to investigate relationships among predictor variables and dependent variables related to service delivery.ResultsChildren who referred from the NHS received follow-up services at younger ages than later-identified children. Later-identified children had significantly longer delays from HL confirmation to entry into early intervention, compared to children who referred from the NHS. For later-identified children, degree of HL predicted ages at follow-up clinical services. Children with more severe HL received services at younger ages compared to children with milder HL. Gender predicted the length of the delay from confirmation to entry into early intervention, with girls demonstrating shorter delays.ConclusionsThe current results lend support to the need for ongoing hearing monitoring programs after the neonatal period, particularly when children enter early intervention programs because of language/developmental delays.

Although outcomes for children with cochlear implants have been the focus of investigation in the past 20 years, children with hearing loss in the mild-to severe range have received much less attention from researchers. This brief article discusses the current state of knowledge regarding children with all degrees of hearing loss.

This study was designed to explore parent reactions to the early stages of audiologic assessment and intervention. A total of 213 parents whose children were under the age of 6 years returned a mail survey. Respondents from 45 states participated. Parents were asked to (1) report the approximate age of diagnosis and hearing aid fitting; (2) comment on reasons for any delays encountered from diagnosis to fitting; and (3) respond to questions concerning their reactions to the initial fitting of amplification. The median age of identification was earlier than some previous investigations; however, substantial delays occurred between diagnosis and hearing aid fitting. Reasons for delay included the need for further audiologic evaluation, problems obtaining return appointments, illness of the child, and difficulties obtaining adequate earmolds. Parent reactions to hearing aids, once fitted, included concerns about appearance and questions about maintenance and use, but attitudes regarding hearing aids and their perceived benefits improved over time.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The near universality of otitis media with effusion (OME) in children makes a comparative review of treatment modalities important. This study's objective was to compare the effectiveness of surgical strategies currently used for managing OME. METHODS: We identified 3 recent systematic reviews and searched 4 major electronic databases. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized trials, and cohort studies that compared myringotomy, adenoidectomy, tympanostomy tubes (tubes), and watchful waiting. Using established criteria, pairs of reviewers independently selected, extracted data, rated risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence of relevant studies. We incorporated meta-analyses from the earlier reviews and synthesized additional evidence qualitatively. RESULTS: We identified 41 unique studies through the earlier reviews and our independent searches. In comparison with watchful waiting or myringotomy (or both), tubes decreased time with OME and improved hearing; no specific tube type was superior. Adenoidectomy alone, as an adjunct to myringotomy, or combined with tubes, reduced OME and improved hearing in comparison with either myringotomy or watchful waiting. Tubes and watchful waiting did not differ in language, cognitive, or academic outcomes. Otorrhea and tympanosclerosis were more common in ears with tubes. Adenoidectomy increased the risk of postsurgical hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: Tubes and adenoidectomy reduce time with OME and improve hearing in the short-term. Both treatments have associated harms. Large, well-controlled studies could help resolve the risk-benefit ratio by measuring acute otitis media recurrence, functional outcomes, quality of life, and long-term outcomes. Research is needed to support treatment decisions in subpopulations, particularly in patients with comorbidities.

Purpose The purpose of the study was to (a) compare the speech sound production abilities of 2-year-old children who are hard of hearing (HH) to children with normal hearing (NH), (b) identify sources of risk for individual children who are HH, and (c) determine whether speech sound production skills at age 2 were predictive of speech sound production skills at age 3. Method Seventy children with bilateral, mild-to-severe hearing loss who use hearing aids and 37 age- and socioeconomic status–matched children with NH participated. Children's speech sound production abilities were assessed at 2 and 3 years of age. Results At age 2, the HH group demonstrated vowel production abilities on par with their NH peers but weaker consonant production abilities. Within the HH group, better outcomes were associated with hearing aid fittings by 6 months of age, hearing loss of less than 45 dB HL, stronger vocabulary scores, and being female. Positive relationships existed between children's speech sound production abilities at 2 and 3 years of age. Conclusion Assessment of early speech sound production abilities in combination with demographic, audiologic, and linguistic variables may be useful in identifying HH children who are at risk for delays in speech sound production.

The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue featuring the new Clinical Practice Guideline: Tympanostomy Tubes in Children. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 12 recommendations developed address patient selection, surgical indications for and management of tympanostomy tubes in children. The development group broadly discussed indications for tube placement, perioperative management, care of children with indwelling tubes, and outcomes of tympanostomy tube surgery. Given the lack of current published guidance on surgical indications, the group focused on situations in which tube insertion would be optional, recommended, or not recommended. Additional emphasis was placed on opportunities for quality improvement, particularly regarding shared decision making and care of children with existing tubes.

Insertion of tympanostomy tubes is the most common ambulatory surgery performed on children in the United States. Tympanostomy tubes are most often inserted because of persistent middle ear fluid, frequent ear infections, or ear infections that persist after antibiotic therapy. Despite the frequency of tympanostomy tube insertion, there are currently no clinical practice guidelines in the United States that address specific indications for surgery. This guideline is intended for any clinician involved in managing children, aged 6 months to 12 years, with tympanostomy tubes or being considered for tympanostomy tubes in any care setting, as an intervention for otitis media of any type.The primary purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to provide clinicians with evidence-based recommendations on patient selection and surgical indications for and management of tympanostomy tubes in children. The development group broadly discussed indications for tube placement, perioperative management, care of children with indwelling tubes, and outcomes of tympanostomy tube surgery. Given the lack of current published guidance on surgical indications, the group focused on situations in which tube insertion would be optional, recommended, or not recommended. Additional emphasis was placed on opportunities for quality improvement, particularly regarding shared decision making and care of children with existing tubes. ACTION STATEMENTS: The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians should prescribe topical antibiotic eardrops only, without oral antibiotics, for children with uncomplicated acute tympanostomy tube otorrhea. The panel made recommendations that (1) clinicians should not perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with a single episode of otitis media with effusion (OME) of less than 3 months' duration; (2) clinicians should obtain an age-appropriate hearing test if OME persists for 3 months or longer (chronic OME) or prior to surgery when a child becomes a candidate for tympanostomy tube insertion; (3) clinicians should offer bilateral tympanostomy tube insertion to children with bilateral OME for 3 months or longer (chronic OME) and documented hearing difficulties; (4) clinicians should reevaluate, at 3- to 6-month intervals, children with chronic OME who did not receive tympanostomy tubes until the effusion is no longer present, significant hearing loss is detected, or structural abnormalities of the tympanic membrane or middle ear are suspected; (5) clinicians should not perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with recurrent acute otitis media (AOM) who do not have middle ear effusion in either ear at the time of assessment for tube candidacy; (6) clinicians should offer bilateral tympanostomy tube insertion to children with recurrent AOM who have unilateral or bilateral middle ear effusion at the time of assessment for tube candidacy; (7) clinicians should determine if a child with recurrent AOM or with OME of any duration is at increased risk for speech, language, or learning problems from otitis media because of baseline sensory, physical, cognitive, or behavioral factors; (8) in the perioperative period, clinicians should educate caregivers of children with tympanostomy tubes regarding the expected duration of tube function, recommended follow-up schedule, and detection of complications; (9) clinicians should not encourage routine, prophylactic water precautions (use of earplugs, headbands; avoidance of swimming or water sports) for children with tympanostomy tubes. The development group provided the following options: (1) clinicians may perform tympanostomy tube insertion in children with unilateral or bilateral OME for 3 months or longer (chronic OME) and symptoms that are likely attributable to OME including, but not limited to, vestibular problems, poor school performance, behavioral problems, ear discomfort, or reduced quality of life and (2) clinicians may perform tympanostomy tube insertion in at-risk children with unilateral or bilateral OME that is unlikely to resolve quickly as reflected by a type B (flat) tympanogram or persistence of effusion for 3 months or longer (chronic OME).

A national survey was distributed to families of preschool-age children who are deaf or hard of hearing in order to investigate parent's perceptions of family involvement in early intervention programs, as intended by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (formerly P.L. 99-457). Questions were organized into five categories: (1) the family's experiences with their early intervention program, (2) information provided by their early intervention program, (3) experiences in writing the Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP), (4) demographic information concerning the family, and (5) demographic information concerning the child. Surveys were returned from all geographic regions of the United States, representing parents from a wide variety of backgrounds. Results indicate that although an IFSP had not been developed by almost one-half of the respondents, those who responded reported overall satisfaction with their early intervention program.

This study was designed to seek a nationwide perspective on the status of identification and intervention for infants and young children with hearing loss.Three hundred thirty-one parents, whose children ranged from infancy to 5 yr of age, returned a mail survey that included respondents from 35 states. Parents were asked to report the approximate age of suspicion, diagnosis, hearing aid fitting, and initiation of early intervention services. Demographic information, risk factors, if known, and reasons for delay were also investigated.Results revealed substantial delays between parental suspicion, audiologic-medical diagnosis, fitting of acoustic amplification, and initiation of early intervention services; however, the pattern of delay was different for children with known risk factors than it was for those without known risk factors. The median age of identification and intervention was lower than that reported by some previous investigators, although a considerable range was reported for each category.The median age of identification and intervention, although still higher than optimal, may be improving. Further research is needed to identify the many factors that continue to delay the timely management of hearing loss in young children.

This study examined private sign in two groups of preschoolers with hearing loss: those rated most advanced and least advanced in literacy development. Private sign involves signing to oneself without intent to communicate meaning to others. Teachers and parents/primary caregivers were surveyed to obtain information related to the use of private sign in these two groups. Results indicated that the majority of children with signing skills in both groups exhibited private sign in classroom and home contexts. Teachers noted a statistically significantly higher incidence of private sign behavior in the most advanced group while these children were looking at books, playing alone, and writing or drawing. Results from the parents/caregivers showed that more of the least advanced children used private sign immediately after learning a new linguistic unit, and that the most advanced group used more private sign. These findings show that private sign is used among preschoolers with hearing loss who have signing skills. Directions for future research are suggested.

To examine the status of preprofessional education in early intervention, we conducted a nationwide survey of college and university programs offering degrees in education of the deaf. Curriculum content and practicum experiences with infants and toddlers and their families were examined, as well as general comments and recommendations of program directors. Additional information was sought from programs offering specializations at the preschool level to determine whether they had CED affiliation, and if so, whether they were certified in the areas of parent-infant education or early childhood education. The findings are discussed in the context of Public Law 99-457 and the growing emphasis on family centered early intervention.

Objective In 1993, 11 hospitals in the United States were known to screen more than 90% of newborns for hearing loss. By 2000, approximately 1000 hospitals reported screening at least 90% of their babies. This study was designed to identify trends in the age of identification and intervention for infants and young children with hearing loss in light of expanded implementation of newborn hearing screening. Design Parents of children under 6 yr of age with a confirmed hearing loss were surveyed. The survey instrument was designed to investigate three questions: 1) is the age of identification and intervention earlier for babies whose hearing is screened at birth compared with those whose hearing is not screened; 2) when hearing is screened at birth, do ages of dia-gnosis of hearing loss and intervention meet the guide-lines established in 2000, by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (Reference Note 1), and 3) what are the barriers to timely identification and intervention? Six hundred fifty-seven parents received the mailing. Results Responses of 151 parents of children with hearing loss, born between 1996 and 2000, were analyzed. Parents from 41 states provided information. Approximately half the children reported on were screened for hearing loss at birth. Age of identification and hearing aid fitting varied substantially based on degree of hearing loss and whether the cause of hearing loss was known or unknown; however, diagnosis and intervention occurred at an earlier age for infants screened at birth. Findings indicate that when hearing is screened at birth, infants with more severe degrees of hearing loss and an unknown cause tend to be identified and receive intervention within the 2000 timelines proposed by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Barriers to timely identification and intervention are discussed. Conclusions Before widespread implementation of newborn hearing screening, age of identification and intervention were consistently reported to exceed 2 yr of age. The results reported here indicate a trend toward earlier identification and hearing aid fitting with the implementation of newborn hearing screening. Although limited to literate and English speaking respondents, the study provides supporting evidence that newborn hearing screening lowers the ages of identification and intervention.

Recent developments in technology have resulted in a new assistive device for profoundly deaf children: the cochlear implant. However, many variables must be considered when evaluating children for the device, one of which is parental expectations. Because expectations are sometimes unreasonable high, cochlear implant teams need to be aware of the dynamics involved in expectations and of ways to help parents come to a realistic understanding of the benefits and limitations of implants.

This paper, based on a nationwide survey, examines the attitudes and opinions of professionals regarding parent-professional involvement in the planning and implementation of goals and services for hearing-impaired infants and toddlers and their families. The implications of the findings are discussed as they pertain to PL 99-457, the new federal mandate for services to young children with special needs and their families.

It’s pretty clear that captioning — that is, displaying a transcription of the audio portion of a video presentation as printed words on the screen — is helpful for hearing-impaired viewers. A major concern, however, is that the captions are written in language too difficult for many viewers to understand. This study explored the influence of the language level of captions on the acquisition of pictorial information and two types of verbal information.

This longitudinal study presents the communication techniques utilized by teachers interacting with four hearing impaired preschool children. Analysis of the interactions revealed that teachers relied extensively upon three techniques: label/model, extension and correction. The infrequent use of techniques such as expansion, completion, reinforcement, repetition and simple expatiation, which provide a richer language environment, is discussed. The implications of the use of linguistically restrictive techniques upon the language of young hearing impaired children are also discussed.