1. TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008 www.PosterPresentations.com Use of Signed Communication Among Parents of Cochlear- Implanted Children with Additional Disabilities INTRODUCTION An estimated 40% of children who are deaf or hard of hearing have additional disabilities (Gallaudet Research Institute, 2011). Increasing numbers of deaf children with additional disabilities have been receiving cochlear implants (CIs) (Edwards, Frost, & Witham, 2006). A greater percentage of deaf children with additional disabilities use signed communication, compared to deaf children without additional disabilities (Venail et al.,2010; Meinzen-Derr et al., 2010. ) There has been little research on parent proficiency in sign language. Earlier studies report the challenges parents face in learning sign language (Hyde & Punch, 2011; Takala, Kuusela, & Takala, 2000). There is virtually no research on the types of communication situations or contexts in which parents use sign language with deaf children who have Cis. RESEARCH QUESTIONS METHODRESULTS References 1.Of parents who use sign language, what are parents’ self- assessment of their own sign language skills? 2.In which daily living situations do parents use sign language? 1.What are parents’ reasons for learning, or not learning sign language? METHOD RESULTS PROCEDURE Participants recruited through online groups for parents of children with CIs. Completed online questionnaires, including background information about child and family. Questionnaire addressed the following: Sign language proficiency level of parent Daily living situations in which sign language was used Why sign language use was or was not chosen SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Over half the parents surveyed (52%) reported using signed communication with their cochlear-implanted children who had additional disabilities. The majority of these parents considered their signing skills to be at a basic level. Many parents use manual signs across a variety of daily living situations as a “back up” communication system for when the child is not using the implant, cannot hear well due to background noise, or is having trouble understanding concepts or directions. The most common reason to learn sign language was to help parents communicate with their child (55%), while the most common reason to not learn sign language was to focus on auditory- oral/verbal skills (37%). However, parents indicated additional reasons for learning, not learning, or discontinuing learning sign language. Professionals working with families of cochlear-implanted children with additional needs should consider the utility of sign language for various daily living situations, but also be aware of the barriers that exist for parents who wish to develop sign language proficiency. Type of DisabilityNumber of children (N=38) Autism7 Developmental Delay9 Motor impairment3 Health Impairment8 Visual Impairment5 Multiple Disabilities6 Child currently using CI FrequencyPercent (N=38) Nearly always3695.7 Sometimes12.6 Never12.6 Child Communication ModeFrequency (N=38) Percent (%) Early communicative behaviors, e.g. crying, facial expressions, etc. 12.6 Above behaviors AND gestures/pointing (no sign language) 12.6 Combination of gestures, signs, and vocalizations 513.2 Combination of gestures, signs, and spoken words 25.3 Both sign language and spoken language 615.8 Spoken language only 1950.0 Sign language only 25.3 Augmentative Communication mostly (PECS, communication board, technology) 25.3 Parent-to-Child Communication ModeFrequency (N=38) Percent (%) Sign language only 12.6 Spoken language only 1839.5 Both signed and spoken language 1642.1 Augmentative communication with signs, spoken language, and/or gestures 37.9 Basic : I know a few signs that help me communicate with my child. Intermediate : I can converse in sign language with my child to ask her about her day, or tell her about an upcoming event. Advanced: I can communicate complex ideas in sign language to another adult. Professional : I am or have been trained and employed as a sign language interpreter. When Signs are UsedFrequency *Percent (%) Child not wearing CI1950 Loud background noise1026 To help child understand directions or concepts 1026 All or almost all communication situations 513 Parent self-rating of Sign Language Proficiency Sign Language Method Used Why Parent Learned Sign Language Frequency *Percent (%) Helped me communicate with child2155 Professional advice38 Wanted child to be involved in Deaf Community 616 Educational program uses sign513 Knew sign prior to child’s birth25 Why Parent Did NOT Learn, or Continue to Learn Sign Language Frequency*Percent (%) Focus on auditory-verbal/oral skills1437 Professional advice718 Did not have the time38 No sign language teachers in area25 Child stopped using sign718 Parent achieved proficiency in sign25 PARTICIPANTS 38 parents (37 mothers, 1 father) from US and Canada All participants English speakers and hearing Children ages 3-18; 20 males, 18 females Image source: thewebsitemanagers.com Deirdre Curle & Anat Zaidman-Zait The University of British Columbia & Tel-Aviv University #7039 * For these questionnaire items, parents were asked to select “all that apply”. Edwards, L.C., Frost, R. & Witham, F. (2006). Developmental delay and outcomes in paediatric cochlear implantation: Implications for candidacy. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 70 (9), pp. 1593-1600. Hyde, M., Punch, R. &Komesaroff, L.( 2010). A comparison of the anticipated benefits and received outcomes of pediatric cochlear implantation: parental perspectives. American Annals of the Deaf, 155 (3), 322-338. Gallaudet Research Institute (April 2011). Regional and National Summary Report of Data from the 2009-10 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth. Washington, DC: GRI, Gallaudet University. Retrieved from http://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2010_National_Summary.pdf http://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2010_National_Summary.pdf Meinzen-Derr J, Wiley S, Grether S, Choo DI. (2010). Language performance in children with cochlear implants and additional disabilities. Laryngoscope, 120 (2), 405-413. Takala M, Kuusela J, Takala EP. (2000). "A good future for deaf children": A five-year sign language intervention project.. American Annals of the Deaf, 145 (4), 366-374. Venail F, et al. (2010). (2010). Educational and employment achievements in prelingually deaf children who receive cochlear implants. Archives of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, 136 (4), 366-372. The authors have no relevant financial or nonfinancial relationships to disclose.