Early Childhood Education Journal

, Volume 43, Issue 6, pp 485–494 | Cite as

An Alternative Approach to Early Literacy: The Effects of ASL in Educational Media on Literacy Skills Acquisition for Hearing Children

  • Annie M. Moses
  • Debbie B. Golos
  • Colleen M. Bennett
Article

Abstract

Early childhood educators need access to research-based practices and materials to help all children learn to read. Some theorists have suggested that individuals learn to read through “dual coding” (i.e., a verbal code and a nonverbal code) and may benefit from more than one route to literacy (e.g., dual coding theory). Although deaf children can successfully learn to read through American Sign Language (ASL) without sound, few have examined the contributions of sign language as a potential mode, within the verbal code, for hearing children. The purpose of the current investigation was to examine the effects of an educational video that utilizes ASL, in addition to other verbal and nonverbal content, on hearing preschoolers’ early ASL and literacy skills. Participants (N = 77) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: some viewed the video in ASL with sound; some viewed in ASL and without sound; and others did not view the video. Targeted ASL and early literacy skills were assessed before and after viewing. Statistical analyses determined whether scores changed from pretest to posttest, and results showed significant gains for children who viewed a combination of sound and ASL. Although gains were not found on the standardized measure of print and word awareness skills, the results suggest that young hearing children learned the content and skills that were explicitly taught in a video that utilized ASL, fingerspelling and print along with sound. Such results suggest that a visual language, ASL, may serve as an alternative route to literacy development.

Keywords

American Sign Language Dual coding Early literacy Educational media 

References

  1. Allington, R. (2004). Setting the record straight. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 22–25.Google Scholar
  2. Block, C. C., Parris, S. R., & Whiteley, C. S. (2008). CPMs: Helping primary grade students self-initiate comprehension processes through kinesthetic instruction. The Reading Teacher, 61(6), 460–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chamberlain, C., & Mayberry, R. I. (2008). ASL syntactic and narrative comprehension in skilled and less skilled adult readers: Bilingual-bimodal evidence for the linguistic basis of reading. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 368–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Daniels, M. (1994). The effect of sign language on hearing children’s language development. Communication Education, 43(4), 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daniels, M. (2004). Happy hands: The effect of ASL on hearing children’s literacy. Reading, Research, and Instruction, 44(1), 86–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Enns, C. J., Zimmer, K., Boudreault, P., Rabu, S., & Broszeit, C. (2013). American sign language: Receptive skills test. Winnipeg, Canada: Northern Signs Research Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Erting, C., Thumann-Prezioso, C., & Benedict, B. (2000). Bilingualism in a deaf family: Fingerspelling in early childhood. In P. Spencer, C. Erting, & M. Marschark (Eds.), The deaf child in the family and at school (pp. 41–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Fisch, S. M. (2004). Children’s learning from educational television. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123(1), 71–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Golos, D. B., and Moses, A. M. (2011). How teacher mediation during video viewing facilitates literacy behaviors. Sign Language Studies, 12(1), 98–118. Google Scholar
  12. Golos, D. B., & Moses, A. M. (2013a). Developing preschool deaf children’s language and literacy learning from an educational media series. American Annals of the Deaf, 158(4), 411–425. Google Scholar
  13. Golos, D. B., & Moses, A. M. (2013b). The benefits of using educational videos in American Sign Language in early childhood settings. LEARNing Landscapes, 6(2), 125–147.Google Scholar
  14. Hammill, D. (2004). What we know about correlates of reading. Exceptional Children, 70(4), 453–468.Google Scholar
  15. Haptonstall-Nykaza, T. S., & Schick, B. (2007). The transition from fingerspelling to English print: Facilitating English decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12(2), 172–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoffmeister, R. J. (2000). A piece of the puzzle: ASL and reading comprehension in deaf children. In C. Chamberlain, J. Morford, & R. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 143–163). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  17. Invernizzi, M., Sullivan, A., Meier, J., & Swank, L. (2004). Phonological awareness literacy screening: Preschool (PALS-PreK). Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia.Google Scholar
  18. Lehr, R. (1992). Sixteen S-squared over D-squared: A relation for crude sample size estimates. Statistics in Medicine, 11(8), 1099–1102.Google Scholar
  19. Linebarger, D. L., McMenamin, K. & Wainwright, D. K. (2009). Summative evaluation of super why!: Outcomes, dose and appeal. Retrieved from http://pbskids.org/read/files/SuperWHY_Research_View.pdf
  20. Linebarger, D. L., Moses, A. M., Liebeskind, K. G., & McMenamin, K. (2013). Learning vocabulary from television: Does onscreen print have a role? Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 609–621.Google Scholar
  21. Michael Cohen Group. (2012). The effects of WordWorld viewing on pre-school children’s acquisition of pre-literacy and emergent literacy: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. Retrieved from: http://extranet.mcgrc.com/Ready_To_Learn_Files/Final%20Word%20World%20Summative.pdf
  22. National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The nation’s report card: Vocabulary results from the 2009 and 2011 NAEP reading assessments (NCES 2013–452). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Google Scholar
  23. National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early literacy panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.Google Scholar
  24. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Report of the national reading panel. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. NIH Pub. No. 00-4769.Google Scholar
  25. Neuman, S. B. (1995). Literacy in the television age: The myth of the TV effect. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
  26. Neuman, S. B. (2009). The case for multimedia presentations in learning: A theory of synergy. In A. Bus & S. Neuman (Eds.), Multimedia and literacy development: Improving achievement for young learners (pp. 44–56). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Paivio, A. (2006). Dual coding theory and education. Retrieved from www.umich.edu/~rdytolrn/pathwaysconference/presentations/paivio.pdf
  28. Petitto, L. A. (2000). On the biological foundations of human language. In H. Lane & K. Emmorey (Eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology in honor of Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima (pp. 447–471). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Prinz, P., & Strong, M. (1998). ASL proficiency and English literacy within a bilingual deaf education model of instruction. Topics in Language Disorders, 18(4), 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Puente, A., Alvarado, J. M., & Herrera, V. (2006). Fingerspelling and sign language as alternative codes for reading and writing words for Chilean Deaf signers. American Annals of the Deaf, 151(3), 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and text: A dual coding theory of reading and writing. Reading and Writing, 16(3), 259–262.Google Scholar
  32. Tevenal, S., & Villanueva, M. (2009). Are you getting the message?: The effects of SimCom on the message received by deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing students. Sign Language Studies, 9(3), 266–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Uchikoshi, Y. (2009). Effects of television on language and literacy development. In A. Bus & S. Neuman (Eds.), Multimedia and literacy development: Improving achievement for young learners (pp. 182–195). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Wilbur, R., & Peterson, L. (1998). Modality interactions of speech and signing in simultaneous communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41(1), 200–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annie M. Moses
    • 1
  • Debbie B. Golos
    • 2
  • Colleen M. Bennett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Education and School PsychologyJohn Carroll UniversityUniversity HeightsUSA
  2. 2.Department of Communication Disorders and Deaf EducationUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations