St Mary’s College
for Hearing Impaired Students
Evidenced Based Practices
in Deaf Education
Sharon Klieve, Kate Leigh, Vanessa Stewart,
Mini Saundry & Grace Broadbent
EFFECTIVE & EVIDENCE BASED STRATEGIES








Explicit / Direct teaching
Universal Design for Learning strategies
Vocabulary and word-learning strategies
Independent learning strategies & positive psychology
Effective use of feedback
Reciprocal teaching
Sentence combining
Relationships & ‘knowing’ our students
DECISIONS FOR EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
A Special Educator’s Guide to Implementing Evidence Based Practices
Torres, Farley & Cook, 2012
TEACHING Exceptional Children,
Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 85–93.
ACTION BASED RESEARCH PROJECTS
TEACHER
STUDENTS
FOCUS
Grace Broadbent
23 Year 1 & 2 students,
Impacting teacher practice:
Including 2 St Mary’s students Universal Design for Learning
strategies in the mainstream
classroom
Vanessa Stewart
3 Year 10 students
Morphological awareness of
vocabulary in a Shakespearian
text
Mini Saundry
4 Year 12 students
Curriculum focused vocabulary
‘Encountering Conflict’
VCE Expository Essays
Project 1:
Impacting teacher practice - Universal Design
for Learning (UDL) strategies in the
mainstream classroom
Grace Broadbent






Rationale
Evidence from the literature
Student cohort
Pre-test
Intervention
Post-test
Project 1: Rationale

2 x Grade 2 students with a hearing loss
learning in a mainstream composite
classroom of 23 other students, including:
 1 student with cognitive and language delays
 4 students working below the expected level
(AusVELS 0.5 = mid Foundation Year)
 3 students working above the expected level
(AusVELS 2.5 = mid Grade 3)


Concern for students’ social and emotional
needs
Concern for students’ learning within the
mainstream environment
Project 1: Evidence from Literature
Working Collaboratively:
 Regular classroom teachers are willing to make modifications that benefit all
students but will balk at making modifications that take time and effort but
benefit only a few students (Giangreco et al., 1993)
 Teachers of D/HH students must recognise that hearing students also have
difficulty with some of the curricular content being presented in the classroom
and not assume that the D/HH student is the only one having problems. If
teachers of D/HH students are to effectively adapt strategies and materials for
classroom teachers, they must consider the effect of these modifications on
the entire group of students, D/HH and hearing (Antia, Stinson, Gaustad,
2002)
Project 1: Evidence from Literature
Universal Design for Learning (UDL):
 Differentiated instruction is a teaching theory based on the premise that instructional
approaches should vary and be adapted in relation to individual and diverse
students in classrooms (Tomlinson, 2001)
 UDL shifts old assumptions about teaching and learning (CAST, 2003)
 Traditional curricula have the “disability” because they only work for certain learner. They
are filled with barriers that are erected at the point of curriculum design, especially
when printed text is the near-exclusive medium (Hall, Meyer, Rose, 2012)
 UDL suggests that instead of creating a curriculum and then adapting it to meet the
needs of individual children in the program, it is better to start off with an instructional
design which provides learners with a variety of ways to access and process
information and demonstrate what they have learned (Blagojevic, Twomey, Labas,
2002)
Project 1: What is UDL?
CAST (2012), What is UDL?
(http://www.cast.org/research/udl)
Project 1: UDL Principles
Learners have different ways of
acquiring information and
knowledge
Learners have alternative choices
for demonstrating what they know
Learners are allowed to focus their
interests and are offered
appropriate challenges to increase
their motivation in learning
http://setsig.iste.wikispaces.net/Universal+Design+for+Learning
Project 1: Student Cohort
Student
A
B
Hearing Loss
Bilateral severe
sensorineural
Bilateral severeprofound
sensorineural
Assisstive
Listening Devices
(ALD)
Bilateral Cochlear
Implants
Cochlear Implant
and Hearing Aid
PPVT
80
70
Moderately Low Range
Extremely Low Range
98
87
Average Range
Average range
90
62
EVT
CASL
Other students (not D/HH) in mainstream
class
•
Cognitive delay (Pierre Robin Syndrome)
• ADHD
• Language Background Other Than English
• Working 6-12 months above the standard
• Working 6-12 months below the standard
Project 1: Pre-test results
Mainstream Teacher’s perception about his students’:
Project 1: Pre-test results continued...
Narrative writing pre-assessment (30 mins):
Above: Student A’s writing sample
Student
Words produced in 30 mins
A
40
B
72
Cognitive Delay
(Pierre Robin Syndrome)
0
(could not attempt task)
Working 6-12 months above the
standard
69
Working 6-12 months below the
standard
35
LBOTE
50
ADHD
43
Project 1: Pre-test results continued...
Mainstream Teacher’s Unit Plan:
Project 1: Intervention Design
My Unit Plan using UDL principles to guide my planning:
 Taught 10 x 45 min lessons
 Increasing curriculum
flexibility through engaging
technology
 Increasing student
engagement through
physical action
Project 1: Post-test results continued...
Narrative writing post-assessment:
200
PRE-TEST
Words produced in
30 mins
POST-TEST
Words produced
in 30 mins
180
A
40
94
140
B
72
104
120
Cognitive Delay
(Pierre Robin
Syndrome)
0
(could not attempt
task)
40
Working 6-12 months
above the standard
69
96
Working 6-12 months
below the standard
35
LBOTE
50
93
ADHD
43
85
Student
160
100
80
60
40
65
Words
produced in
post-test
20
0
Words
produced in
Pre-Test
Project 1: Post-test results continued...
Project 1: Post-test results continued...
Mainstream Teacher’s perception about his students’:
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Post-UDL
unit
Pre-UDL
unit
Project 1: Post-test results continued...
Mainstream Teacher’s willingness to:
Project 2:
Morphological awareness of vocabulary in a
Shakespearian text
Vanessa Stewart






Rationale
Evidence from the literature
Student cohort
Pre-test
Intervention
Post-test
Project 2: Rationale
 Designed as a literacy activity for
three Year 10 students due to low
level vocabulary impacting on their
ability to access the text
 Increase morphological awareness
 Expand vocabulary knowledge
Project 2: Evidence from Literature
 Many DHH children are unable to fully access language and the rich
environmental diversity to which their hearing peers are exposed (Marschark &
Knoors, 2012)

DHH learners have problems with vocabulary knowledge at all levels, including
grammar, sight word recognition and retention and multiple meaning words,
leading to an impoverished vocabulary (Easterbrooks & Scheetz, 2007)
 Morphological instruction can make a positive contribution to literacy outcomes,
with the effects being stronger for less able readers (Bowers, Kirby & Deacon,
2010)
 “…morphographic instruction can also improve students’ morphographic analysis
skills that may in turn improve their decoding abilities” (Trussell & Easterbrooks,
2015)
Project 2: Student Cohort
Student
A
B
C
Hearing Loss
Bilateral severe
sensorineural
Bilateral severeprofound
sensorineural
Bilateral Moderate
sensorineural
Assistive Listening
Devices (ALD)
HA
CI
HA
PPVT
EVT
CASL
79
97
78
Moderately Low Range
Average Range
Moderately Low Range
90
93
86
Average Range
Average range
Average range
84
85
95
Project 2: Pre-test results
Pre-test - word dissection and definition activity:
E.g. blissful = bliss+ful and meaning
Word list:
blissful
beauteous
handsomely
affection
announcement,
humiliation
disfigure
unknown
begone
irresponsible
Results
Students
Morpheme
dissection
Meaning of
word
Student A
6/10
8/10
Student B
7/10
4/10
Student C
7/10
2/10
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=taming+ofthe+shrew&rlz=1C1NOOH_enAU500AU522&espv=2&biw=1366&bi
h=643&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwji166GqrvNAhUEjZQKHabhCMsQ_AUIBygC&dpr=1
Project 2: Intervention design
SEE-TO-SAY
• See-to-Say Vocabulary palm cards - ‘seeing, saying, defining’ 10 target
words
• Graphing words correctly defined in one minute (The Bridge of Vocabulary,
Montgomery, 2007 )
Project 2: Intervention design continued...
Students produced a visual graphic organizer (poster) of target morphemes,
their meanings and example words
Project 2: Post-test results
See-To-Say Vocabulary strategy - All students increased their vocabulary knowledge of the 10
target words over 4 week period.
Post test results written
Student A
Morpheme
Morpheme meaning
Target word meaning
Pre-test
6/10 (dissection)
-
8/10
Post-test
8/10 (reassemble)
6/10
10/10
Student A and C were able to use a selection of words in their writing.
Student C’s post-intervention interview provided honest and valuable feedback through student voice.
Project 2: Intervention Design
Explicit teaching of morphemes
Morphological problem solving activities
Provide multiple opportunities for students to
dissect and reassemble words and apply their
knowledge of the affixes to learn and
understand new vocabulary
Vocabulary through Morphemes - Susan M. Ebbers
Project 2: Post-Intervention Interview
Project 3:
Curriculum focused vocabulary
‘Encountering Conflict’ - VCE Expository
Essays
Mini Saundry






Rationale
Evidence from the literature
Student cohort
Pre-test
Intervention
Post-test
Project 3: Rationale
 Rationale: Students’ vocabulary was
impacting on their ability to engage in
the curriculum and demonstrate their
understanding.
 Learning Intention:
Increase vocabulary knowledge
around the theme of Encountering
Conflict.
 Success Criteria:
Use new vocabulary accurately in a
written assessment task.
Project 3: Curriculum Linked Vocabulary
 Levels of knowing a word - Dale
Beck, McKeown &
Kucan, 2002
Marzano, 2004
Archer & Hughes, 2016
http://www.literacyworldwide.org/blog/li
teracy-daily/2015/07/07/buildingvocabulary-knowledge-what-does-itmean-to-em-know-em-a-word
Project 3: Student Cohort
Student
A
B
C
D
Hearing Loss
Mild to profound
mid high
frequency
bilateral loss
Bilateral mild to
moderate
hearing loss
Profound
sensori-neural
hearing loss
Bilateral profound
sensorineural
hearing loss
Assistive Listening
Devices (ALD)
Hearing aids
Hearing aids
Cochlear implant
and hearing aid
Bilateral implant
PPVT
Standard Score
110
108
74
71
EVT
Standard Score
124
108
81
80
CASL
Standard Score
113
101
72
78
Project 3: Pre & Post Test format
Word
adversary
hostile
disharmony
discord
I don’t
know
it…..YET
I think I
have
heard it
Can Tell
You
Something
About It
Can
Define
It/Use It
Project 3: Intervention Design
• Syllables / Pronunciation
• Spelling
• Student friendly explanation- understanding
• Illustrations of word in relation to context
• Use word in sentences / text
• Questioning
Project 3: Teaching Vocabulary & Word Learning Strategies
https://www.pearsonclinical.com.au/products/view/251
http://www.ladybugsteacherfiles.com/2011/03/vocab
ulary-graphic-organizer.html
http://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/In-DepthVocabulary-Graphic-Organizer-278021
Project 3: Post-test results
Student
Pre test (out
of a total of
48)
Post test
Written used how
many words
correctly
Used in a test
situation
A
38
48
5/5
Used a number of words in
piece
B
24
44
6/7
Conflict, strife
C
17
44
5/7
Adversaries,disharmony,
contradiction,discord,
contention
D
17
42
5/5
Disharmony, conflict
Project 3: Post-test results continued...
Issues with implementation








Time
Competing priorities
Motivation & engagement
Curriculum links
ToD confidence
Risk taking
Resources
Collaboration within and outside of team
Resources
How will you support EBP for your students?
evidencebasedteaching.org.au
What Works Clearinghouse (WWCH)
Readingrockets.org
Adlit.org
https://www.cis.org.au/app/uploads/2016/07/rr11.pdf?
MUSEC Briefings, Macquarie University
http://routledgetextbooks.com/textbooks/_author/ mitchell9780415623230/
 https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/Pages/pubs_details.aspx?pub
s_id=226







Resources
 Universal Design for Learning:
Hall, T. E., Meyer, M., Rose, D. H. (Eds.). (2012). Universal Design for Learning:Practical Applications.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Free Learning Tools - http://www.cast.org/our-work/learning-tools.html
National Centre on UDL - http://www.udlcenter.org/
 Morphology:
The Bridge of Vocabulary - Judy K. Montgomery
Vocabulary through Morphemes - Susan M. Ebbers
Vocabulogic - http://vocablog-plc.blogspot.com.au/p/morphology.html
 Vocabulary
Six Steps to Better Vocabulary Instruction
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/sept09/vol67/num01/Six-Steps-toBetter-Vocabulary-Instruction.aspx
Explicit Teaching, Anita Archer & Charles Hughes http://explicitinstruction.org
References
Antia, S. D., Stinson, M. S., Gaustad, M. G. (2002). Developing Membership in the Education of Deaf and Hard or
Hearing Students in Inclusive Settings. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 7(3), 214-229.
Blagojevic, B., Twomey, D. & Labas, L. (2002). Universal Design for Learning: From the Start. Orono, ME: University
of Maine.
Bowers, P. N., Kirby, J. R., & Deacon, S. H. (2010). The Effects of Morphological Instruction on Literacy Skills: A
Systematic Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, (2). 144.
CAST (Centre for Applied Special Technology). (2003). Summary of universal design for learning concepts.
Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl.html#.V26yFpN96Rs
Easterbrooks, S. R., & Scheetz, N. A. (2007). Ten Things You Should Know About Reading Vocabulary And Students
With Hearing Loss. Retrieved from http://www.deafed.net/PageText.asp?hdnPageId=97
Giangreco, M. F. R., Dennis, C., Cloninger, C., Edelman, S., & Schattman, R. (1993). “I’ve counted Jon”:
Transformational experiences of teachers educating students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59(1), 359372.
Goss, P., Hunter, J., Romanes, D., Parsonage, H., 2015, Targeted teaching: how better use of data can improve
student learning, Grattan Institute
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next : effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and
high schools. Washington, D.C. : Alliance for Excellent Education.
Hall, T. E., Meyer, M., Rose, D. H. (Eds.). (2012). Universal Design for Learning: Practical Applications. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
References
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning : a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London ; New
York : Routledge, 2009.
MacConville, R., & Rae, T. (2012). Building happiness, resilience and motivation in adolescents : a positive
psychology curriculum for well-being. London : Jessica Kingsley.
Marschark, M., & Knoors, H. (2012). Educating Deaf Children: Language, Cognition, and Learning. Deafness And
Education International, 14(3), 136-160
Montgomery, J. (2007) The Bridge of Vocabulary. Pearson, Incorporated.
Saddler, B., & Asaro-Saddler, K. (2010). Writing Better Sentences: Sentence-Combining Instruction in the
Classroom. Preventing School Failure, 54(3), 159-163.
Tomlinson, C. A., (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. (2nd Ed.) Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Toomey, M. (1998). Expanding and Combining Sentences. London: Circuit Publications.
Torres, C., Farley, C. A., & Cook, B. G. (2014). A Special Educator’s Guide to Successfully Implementing EvidenceBased Practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(2), 85-93.
Trussell, J. W., & Easterbrooks, S. R. (2015). Effects of Morphographic Instruction on the Morphographic Analysis
Skills of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students. Journal Of Deaf Studies And Deaf Education, 20(3), 229-241.
Campuses in Victoria, Australia:
Wantirna South, Ringwood, Dandenong, South Morang & Sunbury
St Mary’s College
for Hearing Impaired Students
CONTACT US:
Kate Leigh – [email protected] / [email protected]
Grace Broadbent – [email protected]
Vanessa Stewart – [email protected]
Sharon Klieve – [email protected]
Mini Saundry – [email protected]