The ultimate purpose of reading is to understand what you're reading. However, attaining grade-appropriate reading comprehension levels provides a unique difficulty for deaf and hard-of-hearing (d/hh) students. Accordingly, it assess reading comprehension strategies use of each of the grades 5-12 and determines the overall reading comprehension strategies use of all the participant deaf students of MekaneEyesus School for the Deaf. For the investigation, a descriptive research design was chosen to describe the different reading comprehension strategies use of deaf students. Twenty one grade 5-12 deaf students were selected randomly to be included in this pilot study. The data were collected through Cognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (CARSI) adapted based on the objectives of the study and its related literature. The results of the survey were evaluated with descriptive statistics in SPSS Version 21 (mean, std. deviation, frequency and percentage). The results revealed that medium level global reading strategies subscale use mean (M= 3.26, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 10 (47.6%) reporting medium level use of Global Strategies use. On the other hand, problem-solving strategies use subscale mean was (M = 3.67, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 15 (71.4%), reported high level use of Problem solving strategies and Support strategies usesubscale mean was (M = 3.6, SD = .81), with more than half of the sample, 13 (61.9%), reported high level use of Support strategies use. However, the Overall strategies use mean was (M = 3.47, SD = .61), with the majority of the sample 11 (52.4%), reported medium level use of Overall strategies. Based on the main findings synthesized abovethe problem solving reading strategies appeared to be used more frequently than the other strategy types in this study. Apart from that, it appeared that support reading strategies were the next most commonly employed strategy and global reading strategies, on the other hand, are shown to be the least used reading strategies by pupils. Moreover, Overall strategies use revealed medium level use.
| Published in | International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research (Volume 8, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14 |
| Page(s) | 19-25 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Reading Comprehension, Reading Strategies, Deaf/Hard of Hearing, Students
| [1] | Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process and practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. |
| [2] | National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. |
| [3] | Shiv, K. (2006). Education of students with special needs. New Delhi: National Council of Educational Research and Training. |
| [4] | Torgeson, J. K. (2002). The Prevention of Reading Difficulties. Journal of School Psychology, 40 (1), 7-26. |
| [5] | Allen, T. E. (1986). Patterns of academic achievement among hearing impaired students: 1974 and 1983. In A. N. Schildroth & M. A. Karchmer (Eds.), Deaf children in America (pp. 161-206). San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press. |
| [6] | Pinter, R., & Patterson, D. (1916). A measurement of the language ability of deaf children. Psychological Review, 23, 413-436. |
| [7] | Pinter R., & Patterson, D. (1917). The ability of deaf and hearing children to follow printed directions. American Annals of the Deaf, 62, 448-472. |
| [8] | Geers, A., Tobey, E., Moog, J., & Brenner, C. (2008). Long-term outcomes of cochlear implantation in the preschool years: from elementary grades to high school. International Journal of Audiology, 47, 21-30. |
| [9] | Marschark, M., & Wauters, L. (2008). Language comprehension and learning by deaf students. In M. Marschark & P. C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp. 309-350). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. |
| [10] | Rydberg, E., Coniavitis Gellerstedt, L., & Danermark, B. (2009). Toward an equal level of educational attainment between deaf and hearing people in Sweden? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enp001. |
| [11] | Montreal, S. T., & Hernandez, R. S. (2005). Reading levels of Spanish deaf students. American Annals of the Deaf, 150, 379-387. |
| [12] | Wauters, L. N., van Bon, W. H. J., & Telling, A. E. J. M. (2006). The reading comprehension of Dutch deaf children. Reading and Writing, 19, 49-76. |
| [13] | Nisbet, J. and Watt, J. (1984) Case study. In J. Bell, T. Bush, A. Fox, J. Goodey and S. Goulding (eds) Conducting Small-scale Investigations in Educational Management. London: Harper &. Row, 79–92. |
| [14] | Adelman, C., Kemmis, S. and Jenkins, D. (1980) Rethinking case study: notes from the Second Cambridge Conference. In H. Simons (ed.) Towards a Science of the Singular. Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia, 45–61. |
| [15] | Geertz, C. (1973) Thick description: towards an interpretive theory of culture. In. C. Geertz (ed.) The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books. |
| [16] | Creswell, J. W. 2003. Reearch Design: Quallitative, Quantitative, & Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. |
| [17] | Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison (2000) Research methods in education/Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion, and Keith Morrison.—5th ed. |
| [18] | Seliger and Shohamy (1989) Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p 172. |
| [19] | Seliger and Shohamy (1990) Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| [20] | Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 249-259. |
| [21] | Oxford, R. 1990. Language Learning Strategies.: What every teacher shouldknow. New York. New Bury. |
| [22] | Walker, L., Munro, J., & Rickards, F. W. (1998). Literal and inferential reading comprehension of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Volta Review, 100, 87-103. |
| [23] | Schirmer, B. R., & Williams, C. (2003). Approaches to teaching reading. In M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (pp. 110-122). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. |
| [24] | Schirmer, B. R., Bailey, J., & Schirmer Lockman, A. (2004). What verbal protocols reveal about the reading strategies of deaf students: A replication study. American Annals of the Deaf, 14, 95-16. |
APA Style
Bereket Hailemariam Ersamo. (2022). Assessing Reading Strategies Use of Deaf Students of Mekane Eyesus School for the Deaf. International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research, 8(1), 19-25. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14
ACS Style
Bereket Hailemariam Ersamo. Assessing Reading Strategies Use of Deaf Students of Mekane Eyesus School for the Deaf. Int. J. Vocat. Educ. Train. Res. 2022, 8(1), 19-25. doi: 10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14,
author = {Bereket Hailemariam Ersamo},
title = {Assessing Reading Strategies Use of Deaf Students of Mekane Eyesus School for the Deaf},
journal = {International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research},
volume = {8},
number = {1},
pages = {19-25},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijvetr.20220801.14},
abstract = {The ultimate purpose of reading is to understand what you're reading. However, attaining grade-appropriate reading comprehension levels provides a unique difficulty for deaf and hard-of-hearing (d/hh) students. Accordingly, it assess reading comprehension strategies use of each of the grades 5-12 and determines the overall reading comprehension strategies use of all the participant deaf students of MekaneEyesus School for the Deaf. For the investigation, a descriptive research design was chosen to describe the different reading comprehension strategies use of deaf students. Twenty one grade 5-12 deaf students were selected randomly to be included in this pilot study. The data were collected through Cognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (CARSI) adapted based on the objectives of the study and its related literature. The results of the survey were evaluated with descriptive statistics in SPSS Version 21 (mean, std. deviation, frequency and percentage). The results revealed that medium level global reading strategies subscale use mean (M= 3.26, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 10 (47.6%) reporting medium level use of Global Strategies use. On the other hand, problem-solving strategies use subscale mean was (M = 3.67, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 15 (71.4%), reported high level use of Problem solving strategies and Support strategies usesubscale mean was (M = 3.6, SD = .81), with more than half of the sample, 13 (61.9%), reported high level use of Support strategies use. However, the Overall strategies use mean was (M = 3.47, SD = .61), with the majority of the sample 11 (52.4%), reported medium level use of Overall strategies. Based on the main findings synthesized abovethe problem solving reading strategies appeared to be used more frequently than the other strategy types in this study. Apart from that, it appeared that support reading strategies were the next most commonly employed strategy and global reading strategies, on the other hand, are shown to be the least used reading strategies by pupils. Moreover, Overall strategies use revealed medium level use.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Assessing Reading Strategies Use of Deaf Students of Mekane Eyesus School for the Deaf AU - Bereket Hailemariam Ersamo Y1 - 2022/05/24 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14 DO - 10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14 T2 - International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research JF - International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research JO - International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research SP - 19 EP - 25 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2469-8199 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijvetr.20220801.14 AB - The ultimate purpose of reading is to understand what you're reading. However, attaining grade-appropriate reading comprehension levels provides a unique difficulty for deaf and hard-of-hearing (d/hh) students. Accordingly, it assess reading comprehension strategies use of each of the grades 5-12 and determines the overall reading comprehension strategies use of all the participant deaf students of MekaneEyesus School for the Deaf. For the investigation, a descriptive research design was chosen to describe the different reading comprehension strategies use of deaf students. Twenty one grade 5-12 deaf students were selected randomly to be included in this pilot study. The data were collected through Cognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (CARSI) adapted based on the objectives of the study and its related literature. The results of the survey were evaluated with descriptive statistics in SPSS Version 21 (mean, std. deviation, frequency and percentage). The results revealed that medium level global reading strategies subscale use mean (M= 3.26, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 10 (47.6%) reporting medium level use of Global Strategies use. On the other hand, problem-solving strategies use subscale mean was (M = 3.67, SD = .69) with the majority of the sample 15 (71.4%), reported high level use of Problem solving strategies and Support strategies usesubscale mean was (M = 3.6, SD = .81), with more than half of the sample, 13 (61.9%), reported high level use of Support strategies use. However, the Overall strategies use mean was (M = 3.47, SD = .61), with the majority of the sample 11 (52.4%), reported medium level use of Overall strategies. Based on the main findings synthesized abovethe problem solving reading strategies appeared to be used more frequently than the other strategy types in this study. Apart from that, it appeared that support reading strategies were the next most commonly employed strategy and global reading strategies, on the other hand, are shown to be the least used reading strategies by pupils. Moreover, Overall strategies use revealed medium level use. VL - 8 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: