Feasibility of a Supplemental Phonological Awareness Intervention via Telepractice for Children with Hearing Loss: A Preliminary Study
The goal of the current study was to examine the feasibility of a telepractice intervention to improve phonological awareness skills in children with hearing loss as compared to a conventional in-person intervention. Twenty children with hearing loss participated in this study. Two groups of ten children each received a supplemental phonological awareness intervention either via telepractice or an in-person service delivery model. Within each of the two groups, five children were enrolled in preschool or kindergarten and five children were enrolled in first or second grade. The two groups of children demonstrated similar phonological awareness, non-verbal IQ, and vocabulary skills during pre-tests. After a 12-week intervention children with hearing loss showed improved phonological awareness skills as measured by a standardized post-test. No significant differences were found between the performance of the telepractice group and in-person group. Nor was a significant interaction found between the two age groups (PreK/K vs. 1st /2nd grade) and the two types of service delivery models (in-person vs. telepractice). The results suggest that a telepractice service delivery model is feasible for young children with hearing loss, and that telepractice may be as effective as in-person intervention in improving phonological awareness skills.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2005). Speech-language pathologists providing clinical services via telepractice: position statement [position statement].
Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/docs/html/PS2005-00116.html
Aram, D., Most, T., & Mayafit, H. (2006). Contributions of mother-child storybook telling and joint writing to literacy development in kindergartners with hearing loss. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 37, 209-223.
Brady, S., Fowler, A., Stone, B., & Winbury, N. (1994). Training phonological awareness: A study with inner-city kindergarten children. Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 26-59.
Brennan, F., & Ireson, J. (1997). Training phonological awareness: A study to evaluate the effects of a program of metalinguistic games in kindergarten. Reading and Writing: An
Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 241-263.
Brownwell, R. (2010). Receptive One-word Picture Vocabulary Test (4th ed.). The Psychological Corporation.
Burgemeister, B., Blum, L.H., & Lorge, I. (1972). Columbia Mental Maturity Scale. The Psychological Corporation.
Cary, L., & Verhaeghe, A. (1994). Promoting phonemic analysis ability among kindergartners: Effects of different training programs. Reading and Writing, 6, 251-278.
Cohn, E.R., & Cason, J. (2012). Telepractice: A wide-angle view for persons with hearing loss. Volta Review, 112, 207-226.
Coleman, J. J., Frymark, T., Franceschini, N.M., & Theodoros, D. G. (2015). Assessment and treatment of cognition and communication skills in adults with acquired brain injury via
telepractice: A systematic review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 24, 295-315.
Colin, S., Magnan, A., Ecalle, J., & Leybaert, J. (2007). Relation between deaf children’s phonological skills in kindergarten and word recognition performance in first grade. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 48, 139-146. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01700.x.
Constantinescu, G., Waite, M., Dornan, D., Rushbrooke, E., Brown, J., McGovern, J., Ryan, M., & Hill, A. (2014). A pilot study of telepractice delivery for teaching listening and spoken
language to children with hearing loss. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 20, 135-140.
Cunningham, A.E. (1990). Explicit versus implicit instruction in phonemic awareness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50, 429-444.
Dillon, C.M., de Jong, K., & Pisoni, D.B. (2012). Phonological awareness, reading skills, and vocabulary knowledge in children who use cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 17, 205-226.
Edwards, M., Stredler-Brown, A., & Houston, K.T. (2010). Expanding use of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology. Volta Review, 112, 227-242.
Ekeland, A. G., Bowes, A., & Flottorp, S. (2010). Effectiveness of telemedicine: A systematic review of reviews. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 79, 736-771.
Engelmann, S., Haddox, P., & Bruner, E. (1983). Teach your child to read in 100 easy lessons. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Entwisle, L.K., Brouwer, K., Hanson, E., & Messersmith, J. (2016). A systematic review of emergent literacy interventions for preschool-age children with cochlear implants. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders, 43, 64-76.
Gabel, T., Grogan-Johnson, S., Alvares, R., Bechstein, L., Taylor, J. (2013). A field study of telepractice for school intervention using the ASHA NOMS K-12 Database. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 44-53.
Geers, A.E., & Hayes, H. (2011). Reading, writing, and phonological processing skills of adolescents with 10 or more years of cochlear implant experience. Ear & Hearing, 32, 49S-59S.
Gillon, G. T. (2004). Phonological awareness: From research to practice. New York: The Guilford Press.
Gillon, G.T. (2008). The Gillon Phonological awareness training programme: An intervention programme for children at risk for reading disorder. Available at http://www.education.canterbury.ac.nz/people/gillon/programme%20booklet%20%202008.pdf
Grogan-Johnson, S., Alvares, R., Rowan, L., & Creaghead, N. (2010). A pilot study comparing the effectiveness of speech language therapy provided by telemedicine with conventional
on-site therapy. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 16, 134-139.
Grogan-Johnson, S., Gabel, R. M., Taylor, J., Rowan, L. E., Alvares, R., & Schenker, J. (2011). A pilot exploration of speech sound disorder intervention delivered by telehealth to
school-age children. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 3, 31-42.
Grogan-Johnson, S., Schmidt, A. M., Schenker, J., Alvares, R., Rowan, L. E., & Taylor, J. (2013). A comparison of speech sound intervention delivered by telepractice and side-
by-side service delivery models. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 34, 210-220.
Hatcher, P.J., Hulme, C., & Ellis, A.W. (1994). Ameliorating early reading failure by integrating the teaching of reading and phonological skills: The phonological linkage hypothesis. Child Development, 65, 41-57.
Houston,K.T., & Bradham, T.S. (2011). Parent engagement in audiologic habilitation: Increasing positive outcomes for children with hearing loss. ASHA Leader, 16(8), 5-6.
Houston, K.T., Munoz, K.F., & Bradham, T. S., (2011). Professional development: Are we meeting the needs of state EHDI programs? Volta Review, 111, 209-223.
Houston, K.T., & Stredler-Brown, A. (2012). Expanding use of telepractice in speech-language pathology and audiology. Volta Review, 112, 227-242.
James, D., Rajput, K., Brinton, J., & Goswami, U. (2008). Phonological awareness, vocabulary, and word reading in children who use cochlear implants: Does age of
implantation explain individual variability in performance outcomes and growth? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13, 117-137.
Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. (2007). Year 2007 position statement: Principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Pediatrics, 120, 898-921.
Kyle, F., & Harris, M. (2011). Longitudinal patterns of emerging literacy in beginning deaf and hearing readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 289-304
Krose. J., Lotz, W., Puffer, C., & Osberger, M.J. (1986). Language and learning skills of hearing impaired children. ASHA Monographs, 23, 66-77.
Ling, D. (1976). Speech and the hearing-impaired child: Theory and practice. Washington, DC: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf.
Ling, D. (1989). Foundations of spoken language for the hearing-impaired child. Washington, DC: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf.
Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Petersen, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in preschool children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263-285.
Mashima, P.A., & Doarn, C. R., (2008). Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Telemedicine and e-Health, 14, 1101-1117.
Miller, P. (1997). The effect of communication mode on the development of phonological awareness in prelingually deaf students. Journal of Speech, Language, and HearingResearch, 40, 1151-1163.
Miller, E.M., Lederberg, A.R., Easterbrooks, S.R. (2013). Phonological awareness: Explicit instruction for young deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18, 206-227.
Moeller, M.P., Tomblin, J.B., Yoshinaga-Itano, C., Connor, C., & Jerger, S. (2007). Current state of knowledge: Language and literacy of children with hearing impairment. Ear & Hearing, 28, 740-753.
Most, T., Aram, D., & Andorn, T. (2006). Early literacy in children with hearing loss: A comparison between two educational systems. Volta Review, 106, 5-28.
Narr, R. F. (2008). Phonological awareness and decoding in deaf/hard-of-hearing students who use Visual Phonics. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 13, 405-416. doi:10.1093/deafed/enm064.
O'Connor, R., Jenkins, J., Leicester, N., & Slocum, T. (1993). Teaching phonological awareness to young children with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 532-546
Reynolds, A. L., Vick, J. L., & Hank, N. J. (2009). Telehealth applications in speech-language pathology: A modified narrative review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 15, 310- 316.
Rosenthal, R. & Rosnow, R. L. (1984). Essentials of behavioral research: methods and data analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Schneider, W., Kuspert, P., Roth, E., & Vise, M. (1997). Short and long term effects of training phonological awareness in kindergarten: Evidence from two German studies. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 311-340.
Smith, A., & Wang, Y. (2010). The impact of visual phonics on the phonological awareness and speech production of a student who is deaf: A case study. American Annals of the Deaf,
Sterne, A., & Goswami, U. (2000). Phonological awareness of syllables, rhymes, and phonemes in deaf children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41, 609-625.
Syverud, S. M., Guardino, C., & Selznick, D. N. (2009). Teaching phonological skills to a deaf first grader: A promising strategy. American Annals of the Deaf, 154, 382-388.
Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills. (2017). Retrieved from http://tea.texas.gov/index2.aspx?id=6148
Torgesen, J. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15,
Torgesen, J., Morgan, S.T., & Davis, C. (1992). Effects of two types of phonological awareness training on word learning in kindergarten children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 364-370.
Trezek, B. J., Wang, Y., Woods, D. G., Gampp, T. L., & Paul, P.V. (2007). Using visual phonics to supplement beginning reading instructions for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 373-384. doi:10.1093/deafed/enm014
Webb, M.L., & Lederberg, A.R. (2014). Measuring phonological awareness in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 131-142.
Werfel, K.L., & Schuele, C.M. (2014). Improving initial sound segmentation skills of preschool children with severe to profound hearing loss: An exploratory investigation. Volta Review, 114, 113-134.
Wiig, E., & Secord, W. (2006). Emerging Literacy & Language Assessment. Greenville, SC: Super Duper Publications
Copyright (c) 2017 Sue Ann S Lee, Brittany Hall, Sherry Sancibrian
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.