Children with hearing impairment: optimizing the process of inclusion.

Inclusion Rating Scale Hard of Hearing Children Annemiek Voor in µt holt, Beppie van den Bogaerde, Rob de Lange Professorship of Deaf Studies Utrecht University of Applied Sciences INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Introduction Goal of research project Enhance position of hearing impaired (HH) children in Dutch educational environment Through: Development of Inclusion Ratingscale based on J.Richards (2003) ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Research Interviews parents HH children, HH adults and peripatetic teachers (PT) Literature review Visit to Australia Development of questionnaire Survey amongst Peripatetic Services (PS) Analyses of responses Presenting results to PS ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Interviews mothers Importance of awareness ³Yeah uh, with D. the most important thing is that uhm, the directly involved people notice that he really is missing something. Because « it lookes like he always hears everything... But « it¶s very tricky, if you talk with him alone he understands a lot « while in class he really misses a lot of the interaction«.´ ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Interviews mothers Teacher behaviour = Model behaviour ³The teacher can do a lot of little things. Repeat the question of a child for example, uh, that¶s very important. A teacher might also say occasionally, uhm « ³Could you turn to D.?´ And when a teacher just now and then says ³Wait a moment, could you repeat that please?´ or ³I¶ll write it on the blackboard´, it¶s remarkable that children subconsiously copy this behaviour´. In that way the teacher provides a natural model. ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results interviews Facilitators 1. Detractors * 1. 2. 3. 4. Recognition of impact of hearing impairment Stay alert Promote self-reliance Really is part of class School is enthousiastic, pro-active PT is model (in class) for teacher and classmates Individual coaching PT Teamwork Contact with peers by HH pupils and parents ICED 2010 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 5. 6. Trivialisation of hearing impairment Recline and do nothing Lack of independence Is accepted, but is not really part of class School is passive PT: indirect coaching in school 7. 8. 7. 8. Individual Actions No peer contact Annemiek Voor in 't holt Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children * Kreimeyer & Jamieson, 2010 INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results interviews & literature review translated to questionnaire ³Being There is Not Enough: Inclusion is both Deaf and Hearing´ (Komesaroff & McLean, 2006) ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results interviews & literature review translated to questionnaire ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS HH pupil in educational environment SCHOOL MANAGEMENT Teacher classmate HOH PUPIL classmate classmate classmate Peripatetic Teacher ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Introduction of environment scale into questionnaire Assessment evaluates pupil and environment 1. HH pupils¶ progress compared to H classmates (as in CHAPS, Smoski et al., 1998) 2. Willingness to cope with hearing loss by environment - Class - Teacher - School management - Peripatetic teacher ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Coherent items rating scale HH child asks for repetition after noticing that something is not understood H classmates know something about hearing impairment Teacher ‡ creates a quiet listening environment in the classroom ‡ is aware of the need for eye-contact in communication ‡ paraphrases responses of other pupils during instructions and discussions School creates good acoustics in classrooms and other spaces ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results: Pupil scale Mea Sc es 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 H H H T ee Dime si s (n = H H 28; H 19) Language -1,92 0,18 Social Behaviour -0,63 0,18 H H H Class Behaviour -0,8 0,13 ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results: Casus Casus 1 Boy, HH, 11 years old Casus 2 Boy, H, 11 years old Total Language Social B. ICED 2010 Class B. Total Language Annemiek Voor in 't holt Social B. Class B Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Results: Environment scale Teachers: ³Awareness of impact of hearing loss is increased by answering questionnaire´ ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS Conclusions No correlation inclusion score / duration PS Introduction of environmental scale does more justice to principles of inclusion and stimulates engagement of environment Research group too small for firm conclusions Promising results, further studies needed ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt INTRODUCTION INTERVIEWS RATING SCALE CONCLUSIONS ³Do justice to their talent «´ ! Thank you ! annemiek.voorintholt@hu.nl ICED 2010 Inclusion Rating Scale HOH Children Annemiek Voor in 't holt