Perceptual Dynamics of Striving to Make Children with Hearing Impairment Speak in Education

Authors

  • Chingombe Shamiso Iline Great Zimbabwe University, Box 1235 Masvingo, Zimbabwe
  • Magwa Simuforosa Great Zimbabwe University, Box 1235 Masvingo, Zimbabwe

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53555/es.v4i1.195

Keywords:

hearing impaired, perceptual dynamics, restrictive language, sign language, interpretive, significant other

Abstract

The study focused on participants’ views over striving to make children with hearing impairment speak in education. In Zimbabwe the official language of children with hearing impairment is sign language, while hearing individuals use an aural-auditory language. Some measures are being put in place to ensure that the hearing impaired child adopts the hearing culture. As a result, they are coerced to adopt both the hearing and the deaf cultures. A qualitative methodology was used through an interpretive research paradigm. A sample of 10 hearing impaired pupils, 5 teachers and 5 parents was purposively selected. Questionnaires and interviews were used to solicit data from the participants. Data were analysed using thematic data analysis. Mixed perceptions were highlighted by the research participants. Some participants argued that it was a noble idea to encourage the child with hearing impairment to speak. Their argument was that this will allow them to fit well in the larger community which is a hearing one. Other participants felt that coercing children with hearing impairment to talk is against the will of the Creator. The children with hearing impairment felt that this is creating some confusion. They indicated that they are quite comfortable in the Deaf culture. However, some expressed that they are eager to leave their marginal society. The researcher recommended that both cultures co-exist. Children with hearing impairment should be at liberty to use the language that they are comfortable with.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alverson, M. and Karrenman, D. (2011). Qualitative research and theory development: Mystery as method. Sage Publication Ltd: London.

Arends, R.I. (2009). Learning to teach, 8th Edition. McGraw Hill: New York.

Austad, C.S. (2009). Counselling and psychotherapy today: Theory, practice and research. NewYork: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Banda. A. M , Chivore. R. S, Zindi. F, Muchenje. F, Hapanyengwi.O, Nehowe.P and Chikoto.S , 2014).Theory of Education: Diploma in Education (Primary) Open and Distance Learning. Harare: University of Zimbabwe.

Barker, S.B. (2000). School counseling for the Twenty-first century, 3rd Edition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall

Bhatia, T.K. and Ritchie, W.C. (2007). The handbook of bilingualism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Borich, G.D. and Tombari, M.L. (2003). Educational psychology: A contemporary approach. New York: Longman.

Chingombe, S.I. and Chitumba, W. (2013). “A survey of opinions of major stakeholders regarding the feasibility and necessity for the hearing impaired child to speak.” International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), India Online ISSN: pp. 2319-7064.

Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Denscombe, M. (2010). The good research guide for small scale social research projects, 4th Edition. London: McGraw Hill Companies.

Donald, D., Lazarus, S. and Lolwana, P. (2010). Educational psychology in social context: Ecosystemic applications in Southern Africa, 4th Edition. Cape Town: Oxford University.

Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G., Napoli, D.J ,Padden. Cand Rathmann, C. (2014). “Ensuring language acquisition for the deaf: What linguists can do.” Linguistic Society of America Language, 90(2), June 2014, pp. e31-e52.

Humphries, T., Kushalnagar, P., Mathur, G., Napoli, D.J., Padden, C., Rathmann, C., and Smith, S.R. (2012). “Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches.” Harm Reduction Journal, BioMedic Central The Open Access Publisher, Published online 2012 Apr 2. doi: 10.1186/1477-7517-9-16.

KrammerKlaudia, M.A. (2013). “The benefits of sign language for deaf children with and without cochlear implant(s).” European Scientific Journal, December 2013 /SPECIAL/ edition vol.4 ISSN: 1857 -7881 (Print) e -ISSN 1857-7431.

Leigh, I. W. (2009). Identity and deafness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mangal, S.K. (2002). Advanced educational psychology. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India.

Matthew, D. and Sutton, C.D. (2004). Socialresearch: The basics. London: SAGE Publications.

Rule, P. and Vaughn, J. (2011). Your guide to case study research. Johannesburg: Van Schaik Publishers.Santrock. J.W (2011) Educational Psychology 5thEdition.New York, McGraw-Hill.

Snowman, J. and Biehler, R.F. (2000). Psychology applied to teaching. New York: Houghton and Mifflin Company.

Tomaszewski, P. (2001). “Sign language development in young deaf children.” Psychology of Language and Communication, 5(1).Tuckman, B.W. and Monetti, D.M. (2011). Educational psychology. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, USA.

Downloads

Published

2018-02-28

How to Cite

Iline, C. S., & Simuforosa, M. (2018). Perceptual Dynamics of Striving to Make Children with Hearing Impairment Speak in Education. International Journal For Research In Educational Studies, 4(1), 01–10. https://doi.org/10.53555/es.v4i1.195