Etichetă: hearing impairment

Relația dintre abilitarea lingvistică și resursele de reziliență din cadrul sistemului familial la copiii cu implant cohlear

asttlr

Relația dintre abilitarea lingvistică și resursele de reziliență din cadrul sistemului familial la copiii cu implant cohlear

The relation between the linguistic developmental level and the resilience resources within the familial system in children with cochlear implants

Carmela Lavinia IRIMEȘ, Carmen COSTEA-BĂRLUȚIU
Abstract

The training of the ability to develop and use language represents a big challenge in the rehabilitation process of children with cochlear implants. Listening and the practice of hearing represents an important part of the process, while the steps in the process of language acquisition and development need to be carefully planned, in an individualized manner. The role of the parents is central in the speech therapy of young children with cochlear implants. Families experience a high degree of distress and burden, but many of them become stronger and more resilient following the process of rehabilitation of language. The current article discusses several important aspects in the rehabilitation process of young children with cochlear implants and emphasizes the role of the family involvement, as a resource for the child and the speech therapist. A single longitudinal case study is detailed, as a model of the speech therapy in the case of a child with hearing impairment, following cochlear implant. A model of collaborative approach with the family is presented and the intertwining of the child’s progress and family adjustment in the process is discussed.

Keywords: hearing impairment, cochlear implantation, speech therapy, family coping and resilience

"/pdf
DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2022.8.2.04

References
Ahlert, I.A., Greeff, A.P. (2012). Resilience factors associated with adaptation in families with deaf and hard of hearing children. American Annals of the Deaf, 157(4):391-404.
Bodea Hațegan, C. (2016). Logopedia. Terapia tulburărilor de limbaj. Structuri deschise. București: Editura Trei
Peñaranda A, Suárez RM, Niño NM, Aparicio ML, García JM, Barón C. (2011). Parents’ narratives on cochlear implantation: reconstructing the experience of having a child with cochlear implant. Cochlear Implants Int.; 12(3), 147-156.
Batliner, G. (2019). Joaca de-a vorbirea cu copiii hipoacuzici. București: Martin Media Group
Cochlear, (2005). Listen Learn and Talk. Another cochlear innovation, disponibil la Manual Cover (sitecorecontenthub.cloud)
Epstein, N. B., Baldwin, L. M., Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 9, (2), 171-180.
Feher-Prout, T. (1996). Stress and coping in families with deaf children, Journal of deaf studies and deaf education, 1(3), 155-165
Gherguț, A. (2013). Sinteze de psihopedagogie specială. Ghid pentru concursuri și examene de obținere a gradelor didactice. Iași: Editura Polirom
Hall, M. L., Hall, W. C., & Caselli, N. K. (2019). Deaf children need language, not (just) speech. First Language, 39(4), 367–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723719834102
Hart B., Risley T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Hawkins, J. E. (2022). „Human ear”. Encyclopedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/science/ear. Accessed 3 October 2022.
Henry, C.S., Sheffield Morris, A., Harrist, A.W. (2015). Family Resilience: Moving into the Third Wave, Family Relations, 64, 22-43;
Kreindler, A. (1977). Agnozii și apraxii, Ed. Academiei Republicii Socialiste România
Ling, D. (2011). Chit Chat. Ling Sounds, Cochlear Europe Ltd., cochlear.com
McCubbin, H.I., McCubbin, M.A., Patterson, J.M., Cauble, A.E., Wilson, L.R. & Warwick, W. (1983). CHIP-Coping Health Inventory for Parents: An Assessment of Parental Coping Patterns in the Care of the Chronically Ill Child. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45(2), 359-370.
Medel (2018). About Hearing and Telling. Special Report Basic Information on Hearing,, MED-EL Innsbruck
Nikolopoulos, T.P., Lloyd, H., Archbold, S., O’Donoghue, G.M. (2001). Pediatric cochlear implantation: the parents’ perspective, Archives of Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery, 127(4), 363-367
Walsh, F. (2006). Strenghthening Family Resilience. 2nd ed., New York: The Guilford Press
Ștefănescu, C. (2018) Formarea competențelor de comunicare la copiii cu implant cohlear, Workshop, Sibiu, Asociația “Ascultă Viața”
Stinnett, N., & De Frain, J. (1985). Secrets of Strong Families. Boston, MA: Little Brown.
Tipuri de hipoacuzie (medel.com)
Asociația persoanelor cu deficiențe de auz „darul sunetului” – darul sunetului
Auziți acum. Și pentru totdeauna. (cochlear.com)
***human ear | Structure, Function, & Parts | Britannica

Eficientizarea comunicării dintre cadrele didactice și părinți prin intermediul aplicației ClassDojo

asttlr

Eficientizarea comunicării dintre cadrele didactice și părinți prin intermediul aplicației ClassDojo

Increasing communication efficiency among teachers and parents by using ClassDojo

Dorina Anca TALAȘ, Carolina BODEA-HAȚEGAN, Crina Maria IANCU, Renata ORBAN
Abstract

The development of communication abilities at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities has to be approached within a complex and holistic program that takes into consideration the importance of symbolic communication. Widgit Symbols represent an efficient visual and multimodal modality that supports the development of intention in communication, facilitates comprehension, develops language for individuals with disabilities who have difficulties in producing or understanding language. The present case study ilustrates the modality in which a developed and implement program based on Widgit symbols determins progress in the development of communication abilities.

Keywords: communication, hearing impairment, multisensory disabilities, Widgit, symbolic communication.
pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2020.6.1.02
References:
Biemiller, A. (2011).Vocabulary development and implications for reading problems. În:A.McGill-Franzen, R.L. Allington.Handbook of reading disability research. New York: Routledge: 208-218.
Blideanu, E., Şerdean, I. (1981). Orientări noi în metodologia studierii limbii române în ciclul primar. Citit-scris, compunere. Bucureşti: EDP.
Brown, S. (2007). La lecture partagée. Montréal, QC: Chenelière Éducation.
Chiss, J-L. (2008). Littératie et didactique de la culture écrite. Pratiques, nr. 137-138, Metz : 165-178.
Compétences clés. https://ec.europa.eu…Education (vizitată în 15.08.2019).
Donohue, L. (2012). La lecture autonome. Gérer et évaluer la comprehension en lecture. Montréal.QC: Chenelière Éducation.
Glasson, J. (2007). La compréhension en lecture. Bruelles: De Boeck
Glasson, J. (2013). La lecture. Apprentissage et dificultés. Montreal, QC : Gaëtan Monrin éditeur.
Godbout, Turcotte, Giguère (2016). 8 stratégies pour comprendre les textes courants. Guide Pédagogique. Comission scolaire des Patriotes. ADEL.
Goigoux, R., Cèbe, S. (2006). Apprendre à lire à lécole : tout ce qui’l faut savoir pour accompagner lénfant. Paris : Retz.
Grossmann, F. (2011). Didactique du lexique: état des lieux et nouvelles orientations. Pratiques, 149/150 :103-108
Irwin, J. (2007). Teaching reading comprehension processes. Boston, MA: Allyn&Bacon.
Lasnier, F. (2001). Un modèle intégré pour l’apprentissage d’une competence. Pedagogie collégiale, vol. 15, nr. 1, pag. 28-33, la adresa https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/52977894.pdf (vizitată în 13.07.2019).
Ministerul Educaţiei Naţionale (2013). Programa şcolară pentru disciplina Comunicare în limba română, clasa pregătitoare, clasa I şi clasa a II-a, Anexa nr. 2 la ordinul ministrului Educaţiei Naţionale nr. 3418/19.03.2013,
la adresa http://edums.ro/invprimar/Lb%20romana%20P%20I%20II.pdf (vizitată în 22.08.2019).
McEwan-Adkins, E. (2016). 40 interventions en lecture. Montréal, QC: Chenelière Education.
Mândruţ, O., Ardelean, A. (2012). Didactica formării competenţelor – elemente de legitimitate. În Ardelean, A., Măndruţ, O. (coord.) Didactica formării competenţelor. Arad, Universitatea “Vasile Goldiş, Centrul de Didactică şi Educaţie Permanentă, p. 11-24).
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 2000: OECD Publishing and UNESCO Publishing.
Therrien, W.J. (2004). Fluency and comprehension gains as a result of repeated readings: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 25: 252 – 261.
Thompson, L. (2008). La lecture ghidée. Montréal,QC: Chenelière Éducation.

Utilizarea simbolurilor WIDGIT în dezvoltarea comunicării la copiii cu dizabilități de auz și dizabilități senzoriale multiple

asttlr

Utilizarea simbolurilor WIDGIT în dezvoltarea comunicării la copiii cu dizabilități de auz și dizabilități senzoriale multiple

The use of WIDGIT symbols in the development of communication at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities

Ioana-Letiția ȘERBAN, Andrea HATHAZI
Abstract

The development of communication abilities at children with hearing impairment and multisensory disabilities has to be approached within a complex and holistic program that takes into consideration the importance of symbolic communication. Widgit Symbols represent an efficient visual and multimodal modality that supports the development of intention in communication, facilitates comprehension, develops language for individuals with disabilities who have difficulties in producing or understanding language. The present case study ilustrates the modality in which a developed and implement program based on Widgit symbols determins progress in the development of communication abilities.

Keywords:communication, hearing impairment, multisensory disabilities, Widgit, symbolic communication.

"/pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2020.6.1.03

Published on line: 15/03/2020

References:
Abbott, C. (2000). Symbols Now, Widgit, Leamington Spa.
Abbott, C.; Lucey, H. (2005). Symbol communication in special schools in England: the current position and some key issues, British Journal of Special Education, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 196-201.
Anca, M. (2003). Metode și tehnici de evaluare a copiilor cu CES, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.
Chen, D; DeJaco, J; Maley, V. (1997). Lesson from Project CRAFT: Culturally responsive and family focused training; The Individual in a changing society: The proceedings of the National Conference on Deafblindness, June 6-9 (pp. 146-163); Reno, NV: Hilton Perkins Program in cooperation with the Conrad Hilton Foundation.
Chetwynd, J. (2008). Communication with symbols: from the web to the internet and beyond, Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 32-6.
Coca, M. (2019). Despre SymWriter sau „scrierea cu simboluri” în terapia specifică de compensare a auzului și limbajului; în I. Șerban (coord.) – Strategii educaționale specifice în contextul dizabilității de auz, Cluj-Napoca: editura ASCR; pp. 87-111.
Coupe O’Kane, J.; Goldbart, J. (1998). Communication Before Speech, London, david Fulton Publishers.
Detheridge, M. and Detheridge, T. (2002). Literacy Through Symbols: Improving Access for Children and Adults, 2nd ed., David Fulton Publishers, London.
Hathazi, A. (2012). Comunicare și intervenție în deficiența multiplă; în A. Hathazi (coord.) – Comunicare în contextual deficienței multiple; Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană; pp. 1-24.
Light, J. and Drager, L. (2007). ‘‘AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: state of the science and future research directions’’, Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 204-16.
Mavrou, K.; Charalampous, E.; Michaelides, M. (2013). Graphic symbols for all: using symbols in developing the ability of questioning in young children; Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol.7, No.1, pp. 22-33; DOI: 10.1108/17549451311313192
Pampoulou, E. and Detheridge, C. (2007). The role of symbols in the mainstream to access literacy, Journal of Assistive Technologies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 15-21.
Rowland, C.; Schweigert, P. (2003). Cognitive skills and AAC in G.C. Light; D.R. Beukelman; J. Reichle (Eds.) – Communicative competence for individuals who use AAC: From research to effective practice; pp 241-275; Baltimore: Brookes.
Rowland, C; Stremell-Campbell, K. (1987). Share and share alike: conventional gestures to emergent language for learners with sensory impairments; Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6/4, pp. 226-234.
Sheehy, K. and Howe, M. (2001). Teaching non-readers with severe learning difficulties to recognize words: the effective use of symbols in a new technique, Westminster Studies in Education, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 61-71.
Tufar, I. (2015). Sisteme de comunicare alternative și augmentative în A. Roșan, (2015), Psihopedagogie specială. Modele de evaluare și intervenție, Iași: Editura Polirom, pp.457- 474
Widgit Guide to Good Symbol Content (2018) – Best Practice Guide to Symbols, Widgit Software 2002 – 2018, Leamington Spa, UK; Widgit Symbols © Widgit Software 2002-2020; www.widgit.com
Wilkinson, K.M.; Jagaroo, V. (2004). Contributions of principles of visual cognitive science to AAC system display design; Augmentative and Alternative Communication; 20, pp. 123-136.

Alfabetul dactil și influența dactilării asupra abilităților de citire a copiilor cu dizabilități auditive

asttlr

Alfabetul dactil și influența dactilării asupra abilităților de citire a copiilor cu dizabilități auditive

Finger spelling and its influence upon reading skills in the context of hearing disability

Ioana TUFAR
Abstract

This paper assess fingerspelling as a part of Sign Language communication of Deaf persons and the alternative to be a way of increasing reading skills of Deaf children. A short history review is provided together with theories and models that are addressing fingerspelling. It will be underlined that fingerspelling positively correlates with strong reading skills. Strategies and an intervention program for developing fingerspelling skills will be recomended in the last part of this paper.



Keywords: fingerspelling, reading skills, phonological awareness, hearing impairment
pdf
DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2018.4.1.03

Published on line: 15/03/2018

References:

Anca, A. (2006) Psihologia deficienţilor de auz. Cluj Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Baker, S.(2010). The importance of Fingerspelling for Reading. VL2 Gallaudet University.

Bodea-Hațegan, C. (2013). Procesarea fonologică-delimitări teoretice şi aplicaţii practice, Cartea Albă a Psihopedagogiei Speciale, Departamentul de Psihopedagogie Speciala, disponibil online la: (consultat în 15.02.2017)

Bodea-Haţegan, C. (2015). Dizabilitatea auditivă în Adrian Roşan (coord.) Psihopedagogia Specială-Modele de evaluare şi intervenţie. Iaşi: Polirom.

Chard, D. J.; Dickson, S. V. (1999). Phonological Awareness: Instructional Assessment Guidelines, in Intervention in School and Clinic Volume 34, Number 5 pp. 261-270 PRO-Ed, Inc, disponibil online la: http://www.ldonline.org/article/6254/.  (consultat în 15.02.2017)

Enerstvedt, R.Th. (1996) Legacy of the Past (Those who are gone but have not left) Some aspects in the history of blind education, deaf education, deaf-blind education with emphasis on the time before 1900. Dronninglund: Forlaget Nord-Press.

Fărcaș, I. (2012). Aspecte psiholingvistice ale comunicării prin limbajul semnelor gestuale în cazul persoanelor cu surdocecitate.Teză de doctorat. Universitatea Babeș-Bolyai, Cluj Napoca.

Haptonstall-Nykaza, T. & Schick, B. (2007). The transition from fingerspelling to English print: Facilitating English decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 12, 172 – 183.  Master’s thesis.

Lane, H.; Hoffmeister, R.; Bahan, B. (1996). A Journey into the Deaf World. San Diego: DawnSignPress.

Lopatiuc, R. (2016). Ghid methodologic de învăţare a limbajului mimico-gestual în Republica Moldova. Chişinău: Garamont.

MacGlaughlin, H. (2016). “To Fingerspell or not to Fingerspell?” în Proceedings Of EHDI Conference.

Padden CA (2006) Learning to fingerspell twice: young signing children’s acquisition of fingerspelling In: Schick B, Marschark M, Spencer P, editors. Advances in the sign language development of deaf children. New York NY: Oxford University Press; pp. 189–201.

Padden, C., & Ramsey, C. (2000). American Sign Language and reading ability in deaf children. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry(Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 165-189). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Padden, C.A.& Gunsauls,C. D. (2003). How the Alphabet Came to be Used in a Sign Language in Sign Language Studies, vol.4 N1, disponibil online la http://communication.ucsd.edu/_files/SLS2003.pdf  (consultat în 14.02.2017)

Reed, C. M., Delhorne, L. A., Durlach, N. I., Fischer, S. D. (1995). A Study of the Tactual Reception of Sign Language. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, Vol. 38, 477-489.

Schick, B. (2017). Fingerspelling and Phonological Awareness: An Intervention to Improve Phonological Awareness in Fingerspelling as an Alternative Pathway to Literacy . Victoria Deaf Education Institute. University of Colorado Boulder.

Schick, B., Bridenbaugh, B. and Boll, R. (2017). Phonological Awareness in Fingerspelling. National Deaf Education Conference, Indianapolis, IN.

Stock Wager, D. (2012). Fingerspelling in American Sign Language – A Case study of Styles and Reduction, Master thesis. The University of Utah.

Stone, A.; Kartheiser,G.; Hauser,P.;  Petitto,L-A.; Allen T. (2015). Fingerspelling as a Novel Gateway into Reading Fluency in Deaf Bilinguals disponibil online la https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139610 (consultat în 15.02.2017)

Tapio, E. (2012). Fingerspelling English Words in Finish Sign Language Context – A Multimodal view, disponibil online la: https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/bitstream/handle/123456789/41001/URN%3ANBN%3Afi%3Ajyu-201302281279.pdf?sequence=1 (consultat în 15.02.2017)

Wilkox, S. (1992). The Phonethics of Fingerspelling.Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

The impact of acoustic environment on communication in classroom setting

asttlr

Impactul mediului acustic asupra comunicării în sala de clasă

The impact of acoustic environment on communication in classroom setting

Diana TODIȚĂ SYLVANDER
Abstract

Past investigations demonstrated that the acoustical environment is a critical factor in communication,
regardless whether it refers to adults or children, normally developed or with different types of disabilities.
This study examines several acoustical microbarriers, such as: noise, reverberation and speaker-listener distance, and the impact of these variables on the speech perception abilities of both children with hearing loss and children with normal hearing.
From a practical standpoint, we discussed several methods for eliminating some of these communication barriers, such as improving the acoustical environment in the classroom and managing student’s behavior.
The study also presents some of the effects of the acoustical environment on the children’s academic achievement, as well as behavior when speech perception is compromised, ending with suggestions on using smart technology applications for monitoring the noise level hence the student’s behavior in the classroom.

Keywords: Semantic network, hearing impairment, vocabulary
pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2016.2.1.10

Published on line: 15/03/2016

References:

American National Standard Institute (2000). Classroom Acoustics- A Resource for Creating Learning Environments with Desirable Listening Conditions,http://asa.aip.org/classroom/booklet.html-

American Speech and Hearing Language Association (2016). Classroom-Acoustics,http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Classroom-Acoustics/2015.

Arsenault, P.J. (2013). Whole System Acoustical Treatments Improving Indoor Environmental Quality, Green Schools, 3.

Chiriacescu, A. (2003). Comunicare interumană. Comunicarea în afaceri. Negociere, București: Editura ASE.

Crandell, C.C., Smaldino, J.J. (2000). Classroom Acoustics for Children with Normal Hearing and with Hearing Impairment, ASHA, Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 31, 362-370;

Crandell, C.C., Smaldino, J.J. (2000, a). Assistive Technologies for The Hearing Impaired in Sandlin, R. (2000). Textbook of Hearing Aid Amplification: Technical and Clinical Considerations (2nd ed.), San Diego, CA: Singular Press.

Jones, F. (2000).Tools for Teaching, Hong-Kong: Frederic H. Jones & Associates, Inc., 29-38.

Lieu, J.E. (2004). Speech-Language and Educational Consequences of Unilateral Hearing Loss in Children, Archives Otolaryngology Head Neck Surgery, 13, 524-530;

National Education Association (2016). Virtual Classroom Management, http://www.nea.org/tools/virtual-classroom-management.html.

Nelson, P. et al. (2004). Classroom Noise and Children Learning Through a Second Language, ASHA, Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 26, 219-229.

Neveanu, P.P., Zlate, M., Creţu, T. (1990). Psihologie, București: Editura Didactică și Pedagogică, p. 64.

Popescu, E. B., Smigelschi, M., Pana, R. (2003). Ministerul transporturilor, constructiilor și turismului, Direcția generală tehnică în construcții- “Normativ privind protecția la zgomot”, 19-24.

Sabo, L. (2015). Bariere in comunicare, http://documents.tips/documents/bariere-de-comunicare.html.

Shield, B.M., Dockrell, J.E. (2003). The Effects of Noise on Children at School: A Review, J. Building Acoustics 10(2), 97-106.

Wong, H. K., Wong, R. T. (1998). The First Days of School, Mountain View: Harry K. Wong Publications, Inc., 83-89.

World Health Organization (1999). Guidelines for Community Noise, (http://www.who.int/peh/).

http://www.ursa.ro/ro-ro/arhitecti/Documents/Standarde%20si%20Normative/06%20normativ_privind_protectia_la_zgomot.pdf

Speech intelligibility in the context of hearing impairments

asttlr

Aspecte ale inteligibilităţii vorbirii la copiii cu dizabilități auditive

Speech intelligibility in the context of hearing impairments

Liana Angela (ROȘCA) MUŞUŢAN
Abstract

Speech intelligibility of people with hearing disability, who are using a conventional or digital hearing aid or a cochlear implant, is an essential factor that interferes in the communication process with people with normal hearing. Without being understood oral language cannot be an efficient and safe way in the communication process, and in this case, the language cannot exercise its primary function of communication.
The current study aims to highlight the degree of development of speech intelligibility for students with hearing disability who are using digital hearing aids and those with cochlear implants. Recordings were made with students reading lists of words and sentences, witch played to three inexperienced listeners that had to write down (transcription) the words correctly perceived from the students reading. To establish the speech intelligibility, has been applied The Speech Intelligibility Rating Scale (SIR).
The main reason for the selection of this topic is to show that speech intelligibility of children with digital hearing aids and cochlear implant is influenced by many factors that have an impact on oral language development. Among them there are: the type of hearing aid used, the degree of hearing loss, the communication mode used, the beginning of intervention for recovery. Speech intelligibility of students with hearing disability can be improved by applying appropriate strategies and individualized recovery.

Keywords: hearing impairment, speech intelligibility, cochlear implant, hearing aids, speech and language, auditory-verbal therapy
pdf

DOI: 10.26744/rrttlc.2016.2.1.11

Published on line: 15/03/2016

References:

 

Anca, M.(2000). Intervenţii psihopedagogice în antrenarea funcţilor auditiv verbale, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Anca, M.  (2001). Psihologia deficienţilor de auz,  Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj-Napoca.

Anca, M. (2010). Criterii și metode utilizate în evaluarea copiilor cu implant cohlear  în Dinamica educaţiei speciale, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Bernstein, L.E.,Goldstein, M.H., Mahshie, J. J. (1988). Speech training aids for hearing-impaired individuals, Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, Vol . 25,  No .4.

Bodea Hațegan, C. (2015). Dizabilitățile auditive, în Roșan, A. (2015). Psihopedagogia specială. Modele de evaluare și intervenție, Iași: Polirom, p. 124-151.

Bodea Haţegan, C. (2013). Tulburări de voce și vorbire. Evaluare și intervenţie. Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj-Napoca.

Haţegan, C. (2010). Repere psihopedagogice ale terapiei auditiv-verbale în condiţiile implantării cohleare, în Dinamica educaţiei  speciale,  Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

Hodge, M., Whitehill, T. (2010). Intelligibility Impairments,  The Handbook of Language and Speech Disorders,  United Kingdom: Wiley – Blackwell Publishing, disponibil pe: http://books.google.ro/books

Markides, A. (1983),  The Speech of hearing-impaired children, Manchester: Manchester University Press disponibil pe: http://books.google.ro/books

Osberger, M. J. (1992), Speech Intelligibility in the hearing-impaired: research and clinical implication, în Raymond D. K (1992). Intelligibility in Speech Disorder, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing.

Semantic networks visually adapted for children with hearing impairments

asttlr

Reţelele semantice adaptate vizual pentru elevii cu dizabilitate auditivă

Semantic networks visually adapted for children with hearing impairments

Ioana ȘERBAN
Abstract

Semantic networks are used in enhancing verbal and cognitive development for students, before engaging in the study of a certain topic. They can also be used as a way to summarize the content of a lesson, as a technique of making new associations or of representing new meanings. When teaching literacy to hearing impaired students the most difficult aspects are the understanding the meaning of the words, building sentences and enriching the vocabulary.

Keywords: Semantic network, hearing impairment, vocabulary
pdf

DOI:10.26744/rrttlc.2015.1.1.11

Published on line: 15/10/2015

References:

Bloom, P. (2000). How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Clark, E. V. (2006). Color, reference, and expertise in language acquisition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 339–343. disponibil la www.sagepub.com

Courtin, C. (2000). The impact of sign language on the cognitive development of deaf children: The case of theories of mind. Journal of Deaf studies and Deaf Education, 5, 266–276.

Fawzy, E. (2006). Comparing creative thinking abilities and reasoning ability of deaf and hearing children. Roeper Review, 28, 140–147.

Gleitman, L. R., Cassidy, K., Nappa, R., Papafragou, A., & Trueswell, J. C. (2005). Hard words. Language Learning and Development, 1, 23–64.

Lejeune, B., & Demanez, L. (2006). Speech discrimination and intelligibility: Outcome of deaf children fitted with hearing aids or cochlear implants. Belgian ENT, 2, 63–68.

Miclea, M. (1994). Psihologie cognitivă; Cluj-Napoca: Casa de Editură Gloria.

Pamfil, A. (2008). Limba şi literatura română în gimnaziu. Structuri didactice deschise; Piteşti: Editura Paralela 45.

Rottenberg, C. (2001). A deaf child learns to read. American Annals of the Deaf, 146, 270–275.

Schirmer, B. R. & McGough, S. M. (2005). Teaching reading to children who are deaf. Review of Educational Reasearch, 75, 83-117.