Abstract
Language has always been at the core of our practice in deaf education, but in the current context, it is time to explore new language possibilities for deaf students. Over the past two decades, the combination of widespread implementation of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) and early amplification with hearing technologies, including cochlear implants (CIs), has afforded meaningful access to spoken language during the critical language development period for most deaf children. Early interventionists and educators have taken a new perspective of encouraging spoken language bilingualism in home languages and the majority language. This shift has opened doors to education in spoken language bilingual settings (e.g., French immersion), doors formerly closed to deaf students. This paper presents some preliminary qualitative data, highlighting parent decision-making, from a mixed method case study of deaf Francophone participants (N = 4) enrolled in grades 4-12 at French minority schools in southern Ontario.
Publisher
York University Libraries
Reference51 articles.
1. Allen, C., Nikolopoulos, T. P., Dyar, D., & O’Donoghue, G. M. (2001). Reliability of a rating scale for measuring speech intelligibility after pediatric cochlear implantation. Otology & Neurotology, 22(5), 631–633. https://doi.org/10.1097/00129492-200109000-00012
2. Archbold, S. (2010). Deaf education: Changed by cochlear implantation? Nottingham, UK: The Ear Foundation.
3. Archbold, S. (2015). Being a deaf student: Changes in characteristics and needs. In H. Knoors & M. Marschark (Eds.) Educating deaf learners: Creating a global evidence-base (pp. 23–46). Oxford University Press.
4. Archbold, S., Lutman, M. E., & Nikolopoulos, T. (1998). Categories of auditory performance: Inter-user reliability. British Journal of Audiology, 32(1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.3109/03005364000000045
5. Archbold, S., Lutman, M., & Marshall, D. (1995). Categories of auditory performance. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 104 (suppl 166), 312–314.