Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An evaluation of natural and formal language programmes with deaf children Bunch, Gary Owen 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A2 B85_3.pdf [ 6.51MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054431.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054431-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054431-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054431-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054431-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054431-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054431-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054431-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054431.ris

Full Text

AN EVALUATION OF NATURAL AND FORMAL LANGUAGE PROGRAMMES WITH DEAF CHILDREN  by  Gary Owen Bunch B.A., Queen's U n i v e r s i t y , 1968 M.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Doctor of Education i n t h e department of Special Education  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e required standard  v  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1975  In  presenting  this  an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e the I  Library  further  for  agree  in  at  University  the  make  that  it  partial  freely  permission for  this  representatives. thesis  for  It  gain  written permission.  Depa r t m e n t  Date  r  of  of  Columbia,  British for  extensive by  the  Columbia  shall  not  the  requirements  reference copying of  Head o f  is understood that  financial  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a  fulfilment  available  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d  by h i s of  shall  thesis  I  agree  and this  be a l l o w e d  that  study. thesis  my D e p a r t m e n t  copying or  for  or  publication  w i t h o u t my  ii Chairman:  P r o f e s s o r Bryan R. C l a r k e ABSTRACT  T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n was designed  t o e v a l u a t e t h e success  of t h e  n a t u r a l and f o r m a l language t e a c h i n g programmes f o r deaf c h i l d r e n i n t e a c h i n g t h e usage of s e l e c t e d g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s . E v a l u a t i o n s of the success o f each programme r e l a t i v e t o t h e language a b i l i t i e s of young n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n and o f each programme r e l a t i v e t o t h e o t h e r were performed. F o r t y - n i n e s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d from a r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l u s i n g t h e n a t u r a l method of t e a c h i n g language and t w e n t y - s i x s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d from a r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l employing f o r m a l methods. The s u b j e c t s from each s c h o o l were d i v i d e d i n t o  three  age r a n g e s ; n i n e y e a r s t o t e n y e a r s , e l e v e n months; t w e l v e y e a r s t o t h i r t e e n y e a r s , Eleven months; f i f t e e n y e a r s t o s i x t e e n y e a r s ,  eleven  months. S u b j e c t s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a i n c l u d e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f i n t e l l i g e n c e l e v e l s , h e a r i n g l o s s , absence of major a d d i t i o n a l h a n d i c a p p i n g s c h o o l - a g e c a r e e r h i s t o r y and age of onset o f d e a f n e s s .  conditions,  Extensive  q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s was performed on t h e v a r i a b l e s o f method, age and sex. Test i n s t r u m e n t s were Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence and Berko's Test o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l  Rules.  E x a m i n a t i o n of programme g o a l s r e v e a l e d t h a t n e i t h e r s c h o o l had d e l i n e a t e d g o a l s i n t h e a r e a o f language programme i n a manner c o n d u c i v e t o the e v a l u a t i o n of any s p e c i f i c language p r i n c i p l e . Intended s i t u a t i o n a l , i n p u t , p r o c e s s  and outcome f a c t o r s were n o t  congruent w i t h t h e i r observed c o u n t e r p a r t s . Observed outcomes d i d n o t approximate i n t e n d e d outcomes as i m p l i e d i n t h e language programme g o a l s . Goals and t a r g e t t i n g e v a l u a t i o n were recommended f o r b o t h schools. Q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s demonstrated t h a t n e i t h e r language t e a c h i n g programme enabled  deaf c h i l d r e n i n t h e age ranges examined  to d e a l w i t h t h e s e l e c t e d language p r i n c i p l e s w i t h a n y t h i n g  approaching  the a b i l i t y d i s p l a y e d by n u r s e r y s c h o o l and k i n d e r g a r t e n age n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . C h i l d r e n taught under one programme d i d not f a r e any b e t t e r than c h i l d r e n taught under t h e o t h e r . Some e v i d e n c e t h a t females d e a l w i t h language p r i n c i p l e s on a h i g h e r l e v e l t h a n males was found. Language a b i l i t y appeared t o be a g e - r e l a t e d w i t h o l d e r  iii c h i l d r e n a c h i e v i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r s c o r e s than younger. Q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t a l i m i t e d number of deaf c h i l d r e n demonstrated c o n s i d e r a b l e competence i n d e a l i n g w i t h the language p r i n c i p l e s examined. The m a j o r i t y o f the s e v e n t y - f i v e s u b j e c t s demonstrated almost t o t a l i n a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h any g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e . As a group t h e deaf s u b j e c t s of t h i s s t u d y performed as though t h e y were memorizing g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s ra'ther than i n t e r n a l i z i n g them. L i t t l e s u p p o r t was found f o r t h e o r i e s s u g g e s t i n g t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n p a r a l l e l n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n language development  though a t a somewhat s l o w e r pace o r t h a t deaf and h e a r i n g  c h i l d r e n approach language t a s k s w i t h common r u l e s of performance.  iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. II.  III.  IV.  V.  PAGE INTRODUCTION  1  PROBLEM  5  1.  Statement o f t h e Problem  5  2.  Review o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e  6  METHOD  1 9  1.  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  19  2.  Sampling and S u b j e c t s  20  3.  Instruments  21  4.  Scoring  26  5.  Examiner  26  6.  Evaluative Considerations  27  7.  Design  2 8  8.  E x p e r i m e n t a l Hypotheses  29  EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION  . . . .  3 1  1.  Programme E v a l u a t i o n i n S c h o o l s f o r t h e Deaf  31  2.  P o l i c y G o a l s and Programme O b j e c t i v e s  35  3.  Observed S i t u a t i o n a l F a c t o r s  37  4.  Observed Input F a c t o r s  39  5.  Observed P r o c e s s F a c t o r s  43  RESULTS  5 0  1.  Data A n a l y s i s  50  2.  Results of Q u a n t i t a t i v e A n a l y s i s  51  3.  Results of Q u a l i t a t i v e Analysis  74  V  VI.  DISCUSSION 1.  VII.  94  Interpretation of Results  94  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. 1.  113  Summary  113  2. Results  114  3. Conclusions  117  4. Implications  120  5. Suggested Future Research  . . . . . .  6. Limitations.  122 123  REFERENCES  124  APPENDICES  128  A Assessing Communication  S k i l l s - Yoder Model. . .  B Menyuk's Test of Grammatical Competence Items and Error Source C Menyuk's Test of Grammatical Competence Administration Instructions  128  130 131 '  D Menyuk's Test of Grammatical Competence Scaled Scoring System ...  133  E Menyuk's Test of Grammatical Competence Category D e f i n i t i o n s and Examples  134  F Berko's Test of Morphological Rules Sample Item  137  G Berko's Test of Morphological Rules Items and Error Source  138  t  •  •  *  H Berko's Test of Morphological Rules Administration Instructions  140  I Berko's Test of Morphological Rules Scaled Scoring System  ...  141  J Subject Scores f o r Menyuk Items-Tables 33 to 38  148  K Subject Scores for Berko Items-Tables 39to 44  ]54  vi LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1.  PAGE S u b j e c t D i s t r i b u t i o n by Language Method, Age and Sex  22  Sentences Not C o r r e c t e d i n Non-Spontaneous Mode by At L e a s t 25% o f S u b j e c t s i n Each Group  53  Summary Anova T a b l e o f N a t u r a l and Formal Language Method Deaf Subject. Groups f o r Non-Spontaneous C o r r e c t i o n o f Items on Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence  54  Summary o f Menyuk Non-Spontaneous Mode Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  55  Summary Anova T a b l e o f Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Groups f o r P e r f e c t C o r r e c t i o n o f E r r o r Source i n Menyuk T e s t o f G r a m m a t i c a l Competence Items  57  Summary o f Menyuk P e r f e c t C o r r e c t i o n o f E r r o r Source Non-Spontaneous Mode Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s . . . .  58  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Responses by H e a r i n g and Deaf S u b j e c t s t o Items on Berko's T e s t o f Morphological Rules  59  8.  Summary o f Berko H e a r i n g v s Deaf C o n t r a s t s  60  9.  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o B e r k o ' s T e s t o f Morphological Rules  62  Summary o f Berko T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  63  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and F o r m a l Method Group Responses t o Berko P l u r a l Form Items . . .  64  Summary o f Berko P l u r a l Form T o t a l S c o r e Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  65  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o Berko Tense Form Items. . . .  66  Summary o f Berko Tense Form T o t a l S c o r e Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  67  2. 3.  4. 5.  6. 7.  10. 11. 12.  13.  14.  vii  15.  16. 17. 18.  19.  20.  21.  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form Items  "70  Summary o f Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  71  Summary o f Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Method X Sex C o n t r a s t s  72  Summary o f Berko Pos s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Method X Age C o n t r a s t s  73  C a t e g o r i z e d Responses f o r A l l S u b j e c t s t o t h e R e p e t i t i o n Without C o r r e c t i o n Phase o f Menyuk's T e s t o f G r a m m a t i c a l Competence  75  C a t e g o r i z e d Response f o r A l l S u b j e c t s t o t h e R e p e t i t i o n W i t h C o r r e c t i o n Phase o f Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence Summary o f P e r f e c t E r r o r Source C o r r e c t i o n s Independent o f A d d i t i o n a l E r r o r s o r M o d i f i c a t i o n s of Meaning on Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence f o r a l l N and F Deaf S u b j e c t s  76  78  22.  T o t a l C o r r e c t i o n o f Menyuk Items by Each N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group  g^  23.  O b t a i n e d Responses t o Berko Item One from N a t u r a l Method Age Groups  g^  24.  O b t a i n e d Responses t o Berko Item One from Formal Method Age Groups  g^  25.  E r r o r Response C a t e g o r i e s S t a t e d i n P e r c e n t a g e s f o r A l l Berko T e s t Items  26.  Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal  ft  gg  Method Groups Berko E r r o r C a t e g o r y Responses 27.  Summary o f Berko E r r o r Age C o n t r a s t s  89  28.  Summary o f Berko E r r o r C a t e g o r y C o n t r a s t s  90  29.  Summary o f Berko E r r o r Age X C a t e g o r y Responses  92  30.  Sentences S p o n t a n e o u s l y C o r r e c t e d by 25% o r More of S u b j e c t s i n Menyuk's K i n d e r g a r t e n and ONS Groups and Each Deaf Group  viii  31.  Sentences C o r r e c t e d i n Non-Spontaneous Mode by 75% o r More o f S u b j e c t s i n Menyuk's K i n d e r g a r t e n and ONS Groups  102  P e r c e n t a g e ,of S u b j e c t s Responding C o r r e c t l y t o S t i m u l u s Items from Berko's T e s t o f Morphological Rules  106  33.  N^ S c o r e s f o r Menyuk Items.  148  34.  F^ Scores f o r Menyuk Items.  149  35.  N£ S c o r e s f o r Menyuk Items. .  150  36.  F2 Scores f o r Menyuk Items  151  37.  N^ S c o r e s f o r Menyuk Items  152  38.  F  3  Scores f o r Menyuk Items  153  39.  N  1  Scores f o r Berko Items  154  40.  F^ Scores f o r Berko Items  155  41.  ^  Scores f o r Berko Items  156  42.  F2 Scores f o r Berko Items  157  43.  N^ Scores f o r Berko Items  158  44.  F„ Scores f o r Berko Items  159  32.  ix LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE  PAGE  1.  An E v a l u a t i o n Framework:  SIPO Model  2.  C a u s a l E v a l u a t i o n : SIPO Model  33 .  34  1  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION  There e x i s t s i n e v e r y c o u n t r y a f a i r l y l a r g e group o f deaf p e o p l e w i t h whom t h e m a j o r i t y o f i n h a b i t a n t s a r e u n a b l e t o c o n v e r s e u s i n g t h e medium o f speech.  I t would appear a r e l a t i v e l y s i m p l e  m a t t e r t o overcome t h i s d i f f i c u l t y by t e a c h i n g t h e deaf p e r s o n t o r e a d and w r i t e and, t h u s , b u i l d a p r i n t e d symbol system w h i c h , w h i l e perhaps awkward t o use a t t i m e s , would p r o v i d e a common and e f f e c t i v e avenue f o r communication.  U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e deaf p e r s o n ' s p r i m a r y  h a n d i c a p i s n o t t h e l o s s o f h e a r i n g b u t t h e l o s s o f normal a c q u i s i t i o n of  language s k i l l s and a r e s u l t a n t p l e t h o r i c d i f f i c u l t y i n e x p r e s s i n g  o r r e c e i v i n g t h o u g h t s t h r o u g h speech o r w r i t i n g . The i n a b i l i t y o f t h e average deaf p e r s o n t o a c h i e v e a normal range o f v o c a b u l a r y and comprehension i n language has been w e l l documented ( W r i g h t s t o n e , Aronow and M o s k o w i t z , 1962; Lenneberg, 1967; G e n t i l e , 1969; Q u i g l e y , 1969).  The r e s u l t i s a l a c k o f c l a r i t y i n t h e  c o n c e p t s he w i s h e s t o r e c e i v e o r e x p r e s s .  Seemingly, i t m a t t e r s l i t t l e  how e x t e n s i v e t h e v o c a b u l a r y o f a deaf c h i l d i s .  When he b e g i n s t o  s t r i n g words t o g e t h e r , he e x p e r i e n c e s d i f f i c u l t i e s i n c r e a t i n g language w h i c h a h e a r i n g p e r s o n would r e c o g n i z e as c o n v e n t i o n a l . Lenneberg (1967) c r i t i c i z e s e x i s t i n g methods o f t e a c h i n g as p r e s e n t i n g a "meta-language, a language about t h e language w h i c h t h e y do n o t y e t have. ( p . 322)".  He q u e s t i o n s whether t h e s e meta-language m e t h o d o l o g i e s  c o u p l e d w i t h t h e l a r g e - s c a l e d e f i c i e n c y i n model examples o c c a s i o n e d  2 by a u d i t o r y impairment, w i l l ever r e s u l t i n normal language a b i l i t y i n the  deaf p o p u l a t i o n .  Garber (1967) c r i t i c i z e s t e a c h i n g methods f o r  the  deaf as n o t e x p o s i n g t h e deaf c h i l d t o t h e e x t e n s i v e language  e x p e r i e n c e s e n j o y e d by n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n .  Lowenbraun  (1969)  c r i t i c i z e s language t e a c h i n g methods f o r deaf c h i l d r e n as d e v i a t i n g from t h e language a c q u i s i t i o n p a t t e r n o f o t h e r c h i l d r e n . and S t r e n g (1964) have c r i t i c i z e d  Doctor  (1950)  t r a d i t i o n a l methodologies f o r a strong  tendency towards over-whelming t e a c h e r i n v o l v e m e n t and m i n i m a l c h i l d involvement. R e s e a r c h e r s i n t h e f i e l d o f e d u c a t i o n o f t h e deaf c h i l d a r e w e l l aware o f t h e f a c t t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n a r e " s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n a l l a s p e c t s o f language development  inferior  and f a c i l i t y . . . ( M o o r e s , 1970,  p. 1 0 ) " when compared t o t h e i r h e a r i n g p e e r s .  Over t h e p a s t two  hundred y e a r s t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l s concerned w i t h t h e e d u c a t i o n o f t h e deaf c h i l d have l a b o u r e d t o d i s c o v e r methods o f t e a c h i n g  language  w h i c h would e n a b l e t h e deaf c h i l d t o u t i l i z e language w i t h ease and fluency.  One main t h r u s t i n t h i s endeavour has been toward t h e  development of  o f what has been termed f o r m a l , o r g r a m m a t i c a l , methods  t e a c h i n g language.  These methods have been open t o c r i t i c i s m s i n c e  exposure t o a f o r m a l i z e d method o f l e a r n i n g language p l a c e s t h e deaf c h i l d i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f l e a r n i n g t o communicate i n a d i f f e r e n t manner t h a n h i s h e a r i n g c o u n t e r p a r t . the  O'Connor ( G r o h t , 1958) summarizes  c r i t i c i s m s o f t h e s e a t t e m p t s when he s t a t e s t h a t "a deaf c h i l d so  exposed cannot p o s s i b l y e q u a l o r approach t h e language f l u e n c y o f h i s h e a r i n g p e e r s (p. v i i ) " . W h i l e some were d e l i n e a t i n g f o r m a l methods o f t e a c h i n g  3 language t o the deaf c h i l d , o t h e r s were d e v e l o p i n g what i s known as the;  " n a t u r a l method".  O'Connor s t a t e s t h a t Groht has  demonstrated  t h a t t h e s k i l l f u l use of the n a t u r a l method w i l l e n a b l e deaf c h i l d r e n to (p.  " a c q u i r e f l u e n t use o f E n g l i s h comparable t o t h a t of the h e a r i n g . . . vii)."  Groht (1958) a f f i r m s her p e r s o n a l b e l i e f i n the n a t u r a l  method when she s t a t e s t h a t t h r o u g h the use o f t h i s method  "The  deaf c h i l d can a c q u i r e a n a t u r a l and d e s i r a b l e use o f language as can a h e a r i n g p e r s o n (p. 1 8 3 ) . "  A more r e c e n t statement o f t h e  n a t u r a l method may be found i n Van Uden's d i s c u s s i o n of t h e m a t e r n a l r e f l e x i v e method (1970). A v a r i e t y of language i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have been u n d e r t a k e n i n the  p a s t but f o r the most p a r t have been of a r a t h e r g e n e r a l n a t u r e .  They have n o t examined to  s p e c i f i c language p r i n c i p l e s and r e l a t e d them  the l i n g u i s t i c development  o f deaf c h i l d r e n .  T h i s tendency toward  g e n e r a l i t y has been c r i t i c i z e d by Cooper and R o s e n s t e i n (1966) and Q u i g l e y (1969). the  The two former r e s e a r c h e r s emphasized t h a t  though  g e n e r a l f a c t of a s i g n i f i c a n t language r e t a r d a t i o n among deaf  i n d i v i d u a l s was known, most s t u d i e s "of the language o f deaf c h i l d r e n are  o f l i m i t e d u s e f u l n e s s because the d a t a have not been r e l a t e d i n  any m e a n i n g f u l way t o what deaf c h i l d r e n know about language (p. 6 6 ) . " . Q u i g l e y ' s c r i t i c i s m s were even more sweeping. w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n f o r t h e F e b r u a r y 1969  His review of research  Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h  s t a t e d "The e x t e n s i v e l i t e r a t u r e on the e d u c a t i o n o f deaf c h i l d r e n contained very l i t t l e objective research.  The few s t u d i e s t h a t were  p u b l i s h e d were s c a t t e r e d among a number o f e d u c a t i o n a l a r e a s , and t h e r e were no a t t e m p t s t o examine any i m p o r t a n t a r e a s . . . i n s y s t e m a t i c manner."  a  The s i x y e a r s s i n c e 1969 have seen l i t t l e  change  the scene d e s c r i b e d by these t h r e e r e v i e w e r s .  5  CHAPTER I I PROBLEM 1.  Statement o f t h e Problem  S t u d i e s by H e i d e r and H e i d e r (1941), T e m p l i n (1950), M y k l e b u s t (1960), M a c G i n i t i e (1964), Brannon (1968), N u n n a l l y and B l a n t o n (1966), Garber (1967), S c h m i t t (1970) and o t h e r s l e d t o Moore's (1970) statement r e g a r d i n g t h e g e n e r a l d e f i c i e n c y o f deaf c h i l d r e n i n t h e a r e a o f language.  A l l document t h e wide  difference  between t h e manner i n w h i c h deaf c h i l d r e n and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n language.  treat  However, t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e s e s t u d i e s d i d n o t c o n c e r n  themselves w i t h s p e c i f i c p r i n c i p l e s n o r d i d they attempt t o e v a l u a t e the  e f f i c i e n c y o f s p e c i f i c methods i n t e a c h i n g s p e c i f i c  principles.  language  Thus, t e a c h e r s o f deaf c h i l d r e n have been l e f t i n t h e  p o s i t i o n o f b e i n g aware o f t h e g e n e r a l i z e d language d i f f i c u l t y o f t h e i r charges b u t b e i n g unaware o f s p e c i f i c d i f f i c u l t i e s n o t a m e l i o r a t e d by t h e method i n u s e . As r e c e n t l y as 1969 Lowenbraun found t h a t " t h e sequence i n w h i c h e x p r e s s i v e language d e v e l o p s does n o t even approximate t h e sequence o f f o r m a l language i n p u t u t i l i z e d  i n the school...(p. 103)"  i n w h i c h she c a r r i e d o u t h e r s t u d y i n t o t h e s y n t a c t i c competence o f deaf c h i l d r e n .  She a l s o s t a t e d t h a t she c o n s i d e r e d i t premature a t  t h a t t i m e " t o d i s c u s s t h e p r o b a b l e i n f l u e n c e o f t e a c h i n g method on the  development  o f language i n deaf c h i l d r e n . . . ( p . 1 0 3 ) " .  W h i l e i t may be premature, due t o a p a u c i t y o f a p p r o p r i a t e assessment  i n s t r u m e n t s , t o e v a l u a t e t h e s u c c e s s o f e n t i r e methods, i t  6 would be most u s e f u l t o t e a c h e r s o f t h e deaf i f t h e deaf c h i l d ' s l e a r n i n g o f s p e c i f i c p r i n c i p l e s were e v a l u a t e d and i f t h i s e v a l u a t i o n were t i e d t o p a r t i c u l a r language t e a c h i n g programmes.  Such e v a l u a t i o n s  would go a l o n g way toward a n s w e r i n g c r i t i c i s m s r e g a r d i n g t h e nonmeaningf u l n e s s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . I n the r e c e n t p a s t i n v e s t i g a t o r s i n t o t h e language o f n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n have d e v e l o p e d a v a r i e t y o f t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s t o a s s e s s language development.  Though they were d e v e l o p e d f o r use w i t h the  h e a r i n g c h i l d , i t i s p o s s i b l e t o use a number o f t h e s e i n s t r u m e n t s i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g the p r o c e s s o f language development and t h e s t a t e o f language knowledge i n the deaf c h i l d . Concomitant w i t h t h e development o f i n s t r u m e n t s s u i t a b l e f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e e x p r e s s i v e language performance o f deaf c h i l d r e n , the f i e l d of e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n has y i e l d e d a number o f models t o a s s i s t t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r i n a s s e s s i n g t h e s u c c e s s of v a r i o u s e d u c a t i o n a l programme approaches.  A c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e new  linguistic  e v a l u a t i o n i n s t r u m e n t s and e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s p r o v i d e s a v e h i c l e f o r t h e assessment o f language development o f t h e deaf c h i l d i n s p e c i f i c a r e a s and t o r e l a t e t h a t development t o t h e s u c c e s s o f t e a c h i n g programmes i n t h o s e a r e a s .  2.  Review o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e  Language T e a c h i n g Programmes f o r the Deaf  Child  Two main v a r i e t i e s o f language t e a c h i n g programmes have been developed f o r deaf c h i l d r e n .  These two, t h e f o r m a l and t h e n a t u r a l  approaches o r major a s p e c t s of them, a r e u t i l i z e d i n the g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f s c h o o l s f o r t h e deaf i n N o r t h A m e r i c a .  7  Formal Programmes Three f o r m a l programmes s u r v i v e i n t e a c h i n g language t o deaf children.  Of t h e s e t h r e e two, t h e Wing Symbols (Wing, 1887) and t h e  F i v e - S l a t e System ( B a r r y , 1899), a r e used i n f r e q u e n t l y and m o s t l y o n l y i n p a r t w h i l e t h e t h i r d , t h e Key ( F i t z g e r a l d , 1929) i s t h e p r i m a r y language t e a c h i n g programme i n many s c h o o l s . The Wing Symbol system c o n s i s t s o f l e t t e r s , numbers and o t h e r symbols p l a c e d o v e r w r i t t e n language t o e x p l a i n t h e form and f u n c t i o n of t h e p a r t s o f a normal s e n t e n c e . s e r i e s o f e i g h t symbols: verb; V  The main a s p e c t o f t h e system i s a  S = subject; V = verb; V  '_> = i n t r a n s i t i v e v e r b ;  = transitive  V = passive verb; 0 = object;  AC = A d j e c t i v e complement; N = noun o r pronoun complement. The  B a r r y F i v e - S l a t e System c o n s i s t e d o r i g i n a l l y o f f i v e  d i v i s i o n s f o r a normal s e n t e n c e .  These d i v i s i o n s ( s u b j e c t , v e r b ,  o b j e c t o f t h e v e r b , p r e p o s i t i o n , o b j e c t i v e o f t h e p r e p o s i t i o n ) were used a s f i x e d g u i d e s under w h i c h a p p r o p r i a t e p a r t s o f a sentence were t o be w r i t t e n . separate  I n group work t h e s e d i v i s i o n s were each on l a r g e  s l a t e s w h i l e f o r i n d i v i d u a l work each c h i l d had a s m a l l e r  slate appropriately divided. added f o r t i m e The S l a t e System.  E v e n t u a l l y a s i x t h d i v i s i o n o r s l a t e was  expressions. F i t z g e r a l d Key i s r e m i n i s c e n t  i n part of the Barry F i v e -  I t too i s a f i x e d sentence guide c o n s i s t i n g of v a r i o u s  columns.  The columns a r e headed by i n t e r r o g a t i v e words d e s i g n e d t o  represent  p a r t s o f a sentence and t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h o s e s e n t e n c e  parts.  A s i m p l i e d form o f t h e Key found i n many c l a s s r o o m s i s :  8  What:  Who: What:  Whom:  =__==_  (Subject)  How o f t e n : How much: For:  Where:  (Object)(Place)  (Verb)  (Modifiers o f the verb)  When: (Time)  C h i l d r e n b e g i n w i t h s i m p l e sentences u s i n g o n l y a few p a r t s o f  the  g u i d e and work toward more complex s t r u c t u r e s . N a t u r a l Programmes The n a t u r a l programme approach i s b e s t d e s c r i b e d by Groht (1958) though i t o r s i m i l a r f o r e b e a r s have been i n use f o r o v e r one years.  hundred  T h i s approach a t t e m p t s t o develop language a b i l i t i e s on  the  b a s i s of the needs of the c h i l d and eschews any p r e d e t e r m i n e d system. Word d r i l l s , t e x t b o o k  e x e r c i s e s or d r i l l s  patterns are considered  on language p r i n c i p l e s  i n a p p r o p r i a t e s i n c e they do not grow d i r e c t l y  from s i t u a t i o n s of i n t r i n s i c meaning t o the c h i l d . for  and  W h i l e many i d e a s  language s t i m u l a t i o n a r e g i v e n and many p o s s i b l e language  teaching techniques  a r e d i s c u s s e d , no type o f g u i d e i s s u g g e s t e d .  p r a c t i c e , many s c h o o l s have designed  In  language c u r r i c u l a w h i c h suggest  p r e d e t e r m i n e d systems f o r t e a c h i n g v a r i o u s p r i n c i p l e s as w e l l as l e s s o n p a t t e r n s and t e a c h i n g  techniques.  A more r e c e n t statement o f a programme t h a t f i t s under the g e n e r a l n a t u r a l h e a d i n g comes from H o l l a n d maternal  (Van Uden, 1970).  The  r e f l e x i v e method i s based on the language w h i c h a mother  would use w i t h her n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d as he p a s s e s t h r o u g h v a r i o u s s t a g e s of s o p h i s t i c a t i o n .  As w i t h o t h e r n a t u r a l methods,  c l a i m s o f c o n s i d e r a b l e s u c c e s s w i t h the m a t e r n a l made, but e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e o f t h i s s u c c e s s  r e f l e x i v e method a r e  i s lacking.  9  T r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l Grammar Recent y e a r s have w i t n e s s e d the advent of v a r i o u s t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar systems f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . the  R e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e s e i s  A p p l e Tree programme ( C a n i g l i a e t a l , 1972). I t i s the i n t e n t a s e q u e n t i a l and basic structures deaf o r t o t h o s e language, (p. i )  The a u t h o r s s t a t e :  of t h i s language program t o p r e s e n t s p i r a l i n g method o f t e a c h i n g the o f t h e E n g l i s h language t o the who do not have E n g l i s h as t h e i r p r i m a r y  W h i l e such programmes make use of the t e r m i n o l o g y o f t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar, they move toward a c q u i s i t i o n o f sentence p a t t e r n s i n a f o r m a l manner r e m i n i s c e n t of t h e F i t z g e r a l d Key.  I n form and p r e s e n t  use t h e m a j o r i t y o f t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar systems a r e much more a k i n t o f o r m a l systems o f t e a c h i n g language than t o n a t u r a l . One system w h i c h a v o i d s much of t h e f o r m a l i t y o f many t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar systems i s McCarr's Lessons i n Syntax (1973). T h i s system g i v e s much more freedom t o t h e c h i l d i n b u i l d i n g up h i s language r e p e r t o i r e and may be u t i l i z e d a t many l e v e l s . to  I t appears  combine many o f t h e s t r e n g t h s o f t h e m a t e r n a l r e f l e x i v e method  and the s t r u c t u r e of t h e f o r m a l systems. S t u d i e s o f the Language A b i l i t y o f Deaf C h i l d r e n Cooper and R o s e n s t e i n (1966) r e v i e w e d s t u d i e s a n a l y s i n g samples o f t h e w r i t t e n language o f deaf i n d i v i d u a l s .  They  summarized  the  c o n c e r n s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s as " p r o d u c t i v i t y , c o m p l e x i t y , f l e x i b i l i t y ,  the  d i s t r i b u t i o n of p a r t s of speech, and c o r r e c t n e s s (p. 6 2 ) . " .  They  n o t e d t h a t t h e v a r i o u s i n v e s t i g a t i o n s p r e v i o u s l y u n d e r t a k e n have not r e s u l t e d i n "a d e s c r i p t i o n o f language as a system (p. 6 2 ) . " .  Thus,  t h e s e s t u d i e s have r e v e a l e d t h a t the w r i t t e n language of deaf c h i l d r e n i s i n f e r i o r t o t h a t o f t h e i r c h r o n o l o g i c a l h e a r i n g p e e r s and somewhat  more l i k e t h a t of younger h e a r i n g shed l i g h t on how  children.  They have n o t , however,  t h i s s i t u a t i o n came t o e x i s t nor how  i t might  be  remedied. H e i d e r and H e i d e r (1941) a n a l y z e d by deaf e l e v e n year o l d s .  the c o m p o s i t i o n s w r i t t e n  t o s e v e n t e e n y e a r o l d s and h e a r i n g  eight to  fourteen  T h e i r study r e s u l t e d i n a d e t a i l e d enumeration of  q u a n t i t a t i v e and  qualitative differences.  I n essence the deaf sample  demonstrated a s i m p l e r w r i t i n g s t y l e w i t h s h o r t e r s e n t e n c e s , fewer compound and  complex s e n t e n c e s , l e s s p r e c i s i o n of meaning, g r e a t e r  use  of f i x e d forms, a p r e f e r e n c e  f o r d i s c u s s i o n of a c t u a l happenings r a t h e r  t h a n p o s s i b l e happenings and  a g r e a t e r tendency t o e x p l a i n why  occurred.  The H e i d e r s '  a n a l y s i s of the p r o d u c t i o n s  of o l d e r  younger deaf c h i l d r e n agreed w i t h Goda's (1959) w h i c h l e d him  events and to s t a t e  t h a t t h e q u a l i t a t i v e a s p e c t s of language appear t o be r e l a t e d t o The  age.  o l d e r deaf c h i l d uses a r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e r number o f words i n h i s  s p e a k i n g and w r i t i n g and w i l l g e n e r a l l y e x p r e s s h i m s e l f w i t h  relatively  l o n g e r and more complex s e n t e n c e s . Taken as a group t h e s e and o t h e r s i m i l a r s t u d i e s have documented t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n add,  o m i t , s u b s t i t u t e f o r or i n c o r r e c t l y  o r d e r words a t a r a t e g r e a t e r than t h a t of t h e i r h e a r i n g p e e r s . analyses  of t h e s e e a s i l y q u a n t i f i a b l e a s p e c t s of language have  The served  t o d e s c r i b e the w r i t t e n language of the deaf c h i l d i n comparison w i t h t h a t of the h e a r i n g evaluate  child.  These s t u d i e s have not attempted t o  the s u c c e s s of any p a r t i c u l a r language programme and  not d e l v e d  i n t o whether o r not any  language p r i n c i p l e d i s c u s s e d a c t u a l l y  had been taught t o the c h i l d r e n i n v o l v e d . have been p o s s i b l e a t the t i m e due  have  Such e v a l u a t i o n s may"not  t o l a c k of a p p r o p r i a t e  instruments  11 though i t cannot be d e n i e d t h a t t h e i r u s e f u l n e s s would have been enhanced i f t h e s u c c e s s of t h e programmes employed were s u b j e c t e d t o scrutiny.  E v a l u a t i o n may  be e s p e c i a l l y p e r t i n e n t s i n c e many t e a c h e r s  used o n l y one b a s i c programme approach c o n s i d e r i n g i t t o o f f e r  the  o n l y r e a l o p p o r t u n i t y of s u c c e s s i n language t e a c h i n g . S t u d i e s o f L i n g u i s t i c Development o f Deaf C h i l d r e n I n r e c e n t y e a r s a few r e s e a r c h e r s have attempted beyond t h e a f o r e m e n t i o n e d  t y p e of s t u d y and determine  to go  the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  o f language problems and development i n t h e deaf p o p u l a t i o n .  These  s t u d i e s a r e o f two d e f i n i t e t y p e s . The f i r s t type tended  t o u t i l i z e sentence  s i n g l e word c l o z e t y p e t a s k s i n an attempt  completion  or  t o d e f i n e a s p e c t s o f the  deaf s t u d e n t ' s a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h s t r u c t u r a l and l e x i c a l meanings (Hart and R o s e n s t e i n , 1966), t o p r e d i c t a p p r o p r i a t e m i s s i n g words from c o n t e x t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n (Odom, B l a n t o n and N u n n a l l y , 1967) word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t s developed  o r t o employ  f o r t h e h e a r i n g t o compare p a t t e r n s  of word a s s o c i a t i o n i n t h e deaf and h e a r i n g c h i l d  ( K o p k i n , Odom,  B l a n t o n and N u n n a l l y , 1967; N u n n a l l y and B l a n t o n , 1966). The d e m o n s t r a t i o n  of g r e a t e r r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y w i t h  s t r u c t u r a l v e r s u s l e x i c a l meanings (Hart and R o s e n s t e i n , 1966), t h e s u g g e s t i o n t h a t the r u l e s used by t h e deaf i n d i v i d u a l i n c o n s t r u c t i n g a sentence a r e d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e used by h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n  "especially  w i t h r e g a r d t o f u n c t i o n words (Odom, B l a n t o n and N u n n a l l y , 1967)", and the s u g g e s t i o n t h a t words as a group a r e l e s s m e a n i n g f u l c h i l d r e n than f o r h e a r i n g ( N u n n a l l y and B l a n t o n , 1966) groundwork f o r more d e t a i l e d s t u d i e s .  f o r deaf  have l a i d  the  These f u t u r e s t u d i e s , t o be more  e f f e c t i v e , s h o u l d e v a l u a t e t h e s u c c e s s of e x i s t i n g language t e a c h i n g  12 programmes and suggest new  t e c h n i q u e s and/or programmes t o improve the  language l e a r n i n g o f the deaf  child.  The second t y p e o f l i n g u i s t i c s t u d y w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n i s t h a t d e s i g n e d on a g e n e r a t i v e grammar model. numerous but they have been o f great: i n t e r e s t . to  These have not been Those who  have v e n t u r e d  c a r r y out i n v e s t i g a t i o n s based on g e n e r a t i v e grammar models have  been f a c e d w i t h a v e r y fundamental q u e s t i o n w h i c h has not posed d i f f i c u l t y f o r those w o r k i n g w i t h h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . w i t h h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n have been conducted  Most i n v e s t i g a t i o n s  o r a l l y f o r t h e v e r y good  r e a s o n t h a t o r a l p r o d u c t i o n s g i v e the most a c c u r a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e performance l e v e l o f t h e speaker.  The m a j o r i t y o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n s  w i t h t h e deaf have been n o n - o r a l due t o the speech problems endemic among the deaf.  intelligibility  I n most cases paper and p e n c i l  style  t e s t s have been d e v i s e d o r adapted from t h o s e o r a l t e s t s used w i t h hearing children. I t i s r e a l i z e d t h a t n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n may  s c o r e some-  what d i f f e r e n t l y i f t h e o r a l t e s t s were r e p l a c e d by w r i t t e n t e s t s . However, i t i s not p o s s i b l e t o a d m i n i s t e r w r i t t e n t e s t s t o n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n due t o the ages a t w h i c h such c h i l d r e n a r e t e s t e d f o r these s t u d i e s .  W h i l e deaf c h i l d r e n o f age e i g h t y e a r s o r o l d e r  possess  t h e r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g s k i l l s and d e v e l o p i n g language l e v e l s d e s i r e d , n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g p r e - s c h o o l o r k i n d e r g a r t e n age c h i l d r e n do possess t h e r e q u i s i t e r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g s k i l l s .  not  Deaf c h i l d r e n cannot  be t e s t e d a t younger ages due t o t h e i r l a c k of s u f f i c i e n t language and s u f f i c i e n t speech and w r i t i n g  skills.  Cooper (1965) compared the development of s e l e c t e d m o r p h o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n s i n terms of r e c e p t i v e and e x p r e s s i v e c o n t r o l i n deaf  and  13 h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n through a p p l i c a t i o n of a Berko-type t e s t .  The  average performance of t h e deaf s u b j e c t s was below t h a t of t h e i r chronological peers.  The s c o r e s f o r n i n e t e e n y e a r o l d deaf c h i l d r e n  were below the average s c o r e f o r h e a r i n g t e n y e a r o l d s . t h a t t h e r e i s an apparent p a r a l l e l i n the development  Cooper  found  of m o r p h o l o g i c a l  p a t t e r n s by deaf and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . Garber (1967) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e " . . . m o r p h o l o g i c a l a b i l i t i e s of  deaf c h i l d r e n i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c o r r e c t i n f l e c t i o n s under t h r e e  d i v e r g e n t t e s t c o n d i t i o n s , namely r e a d i n g , s p e e c h r e a d i n g , and speechr e a d i n g w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n a l c l u e of t a c t i o n . "  H i s f o r t y - f i v e deaf  s u b j e c t s were d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e groups by c h r o n o l o g i c a l age; group b e i n g 6.7  t o 9.6 y e a r s o l d , group "B" 9.7  11.7 t o 13.6 y e a r s o l d .  "A"  t o 11.6 y e a r s o l d and group  "C"  Three groups of h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n w i t h a t o t a l  age range o f 5.6 t o 8.8 y e a r s were used f o r comparison p u r p o s e s . deaf and h e a r i n g groups were examined l e x i c o n and nonsense words.  The  i n t h e i r a b i l i t i e s to i n f l e c t  Garber's t e s t i n g i n s t r u m e n t s were Berko's  t e s t and N e w f i e l d ' s l e x i c o n word l i s t w h i c h p a r a l l e l s Berko's t e s t b o t h m o r p h o l o g i c a l l y and p h o n o l o g i c a l l y . Garber's r e s u l t s demonstrated a h i e r a r c h i a l l y s i m i l a r r a n k i n g for  performance on the l e x i c a l and nonsense l i s t w i t h r e a d i n g over  s p e e c h r e a d i n g and t a c t i o n and s p e e c h r e a d i n g r e s p e c t i v e l y .  D e s p i t e the  d i f f e r e n c e i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages of h i s groups, no s i g n i f i c a n t  difference  between deaf groups i n a b i l i t y t o i n f l e c t v e r b s and p o s s e s s i v e s was found though one was n o t e d f o r the i n f l e c t i o n of l e x i c o n nouns.  There  was a s i m i l a r tendency f o r the deaf and h e a r i n g groups t o improve i n performance w i t h i n c r e a s e i n age but t h e i n c r e a s e f o r t h e deaf groups did  not even approximate t h a t f o r t h e h e a r i n g groups.  In a d d i t i o n ,  14 Garber n o t e d a d i f f e r e n c e i n p r o g r e s s i o n of the a c q u i s i t i o n o f a l l o m o r p h s i n the deaf and h e a r i n g groups and a tendency f o r t h e deaf groups t o o v e r - g e n e r a l i z e i n t h e a d d i t i o n o f / - s / f o r p l u r a l nouns and o f /-ed/ for  the past tense of verbs.  The f i n d i n g o f a d i f f e r e n c e i n p r o g r e s s i o n s  for  the a c q u i s i t i o n of a l l o m o r p h s s u g g e s t s t h a t the p a r a l l e l f o r deaf  and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of m o r p h o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n s noted by Cooper may be o n l y g e n e r a l a t b e s t . These two s t u d i e s may be c r i t i c i s e d on a common and major ground.  Both r e s e a r c h e r s l i m i t e d the p o s s i b l e response i t e m s of t h e  deaf s u b j e c t s by p r o v i d i n g them w i t h a s e t of i t e m s from w h i c h t o s e l e c t t h e i r responses.  F o r example, Cooper p r o v i d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g  form f o r an i r r e g u l a r i n f l e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n : Mary has a t i f e . J a c k has a t i f e . They have two  (tife,  tifes, tives,  tive).  Garber p r o v i d e d such forms a s : T h i s i s a wug. Now t h e r e i s a n o t h e r one. Now t h e r e a r e two of them. There a r e two  ._. (wug, wugs, wugses)  Such forms f a i l t o a l l o w f o r the e x p l o r a t i o n o f whether t h e deaf c h i l d would suggest r e s p o n s e s beyond t h o s e g i v e n .  I t i s quite possible that,  i f g i v e n a f r e e c h o i c e , t h e deaf s u b j e c t s would respond w i t h m o r p h o l o g i c a l forms not g i v e n i n t h e p o s s i b l e response i t e m s . the  I f such were the c a s e ,  f i g u r e s f o r c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e s quoted by t h e r e s e a r c h e r s would be  spuriously, high.  I n a d d i t i o n , t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n of the a c q u i s i t i o n of  m o r p h o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n s by deaf c h i l d r e n i s based, a t l e a s t i n p a r t , on . the  r e s e a r c h e r s ' p r e c o n c e i v e d i d e a s o f what c o n s t i t u t e p o s s i b l e  response forms and not on t h e c h i l d r e n ' s a c t u a l r e p e r t o i r e o f r e s p o n s e s .  15 R e s e a r c h w i t h h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n p r o v i d e s f o r an open-endedness o f response not p r e s e n t i n t h e two s t u d i e s mentioned  above.  Cooper a l s o p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an u n s u c c e s s f u l attempt w i t h Kaye (1967) t o develop a paper and p e n c i l t a s k t o c a s t l i g h t on deaf c h i l d r e n ' s l i n g u i s t i c competence.  Their t e s t consisted of f i v e sub-tests  d e s i g n e d t o probe f o r i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g knowledge o f l i n g u i s t i c rules.  They c o n c l u d e d t h a t deaf and h e a r i n g i n d i v i d u a l s share some  b a s i c r u l e s f o r t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f responses b u t , t h a t t h e deaf  differ  from t h e h e a r i n g i n t h a t t h e y have "...a grammar w h i c h i s d i f f e r e n t i n terms o f a few s u p e r f i c i a l r u l e s . . . o r t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s e x h i b i t e d i n p r o d u c t i o n can be a t t r i b u t e d t o d i f f e r e n c e s i n r u l e s o f performance." I f t h e l a t t e r i s t h e c a s e , much r e s e a r c h w i l l have t o be u n d e r t a k e n to  f e r r e t out t h e s e r u l e s and t o develop t e c h n i q u e s t o i n c u l c a t e  r u l e s more l i k e t h o s e o f t h e h e a r i n g p o p u l a t i o n . S c h m i t t (1970) d e s i g n e d a study f o c u s e d on t h e " . . . s y n t a c t i c a b i l i t y needed t o p r o c e s s sentence t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s and v e r b t e n s e s , by e x p l o r i n g b o t h comprehension  and p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s e s , and by i s o l a t i n g  and m a n i p u l a t i n g s y n t a c t i c v a r i a b l e s i n c o n t r o l l e d e x p e r i m e n t a l situations."  He found t h a t t h e deaf c h i l d r e n i n h i s sample g e n e r a t e d  s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e s based on r u l e s w h i c h , a t l e a s t i n a few c a s e s , a r e i n c o r r e c t ( t h e P a s s i v e - A c t i v e R u l e , t h e ^ - N ^ R u l e , and t h e No N e g a t i v e Rule).  These i n c o r r e c t r u l e s appear t o o p e r a t e b o t h e x p r e s s i v e l y and  r e c e p t i v e l y and may be m a n i f e s t i n g themselves i n s u b t l e manners i n r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g .  I f f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h supports these f i n d i n g s ,  e d u c a t o r s o f t h e deaf w i l l be f a c e d w i t h t h e need t o l e a d f u t u r e deaf c h i l d r e n t o an a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e c o r r e c t r u l e s .  T h i s , of course,  means t h e development o f t e a c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s c a p a b l e o f p r o d u c i n g  16 the d e s i r e d r e s u l t s . L i n g u i s t i c T e s t s Used W i t h Deaf C h i l d r e n : D u r i n g t h e 1960's a f a i r l y l a r g e number of s t u d i e s were undert a k e n i n a t t e m p t s t o d e s c r i b e the c h i l d ' s a c q u i s i t i o n o f language.  The  i n v e s t i g a t o r s concerned themselves w i t h a n a l y s e s o f the p r o d u c t i o n s o f c h i l d r e n from the e a r l i e s t s t a g e s of. t h e onset o f speech to the age o f s c h o o l e n t r a n c e and s l i g h t l y beyond. model f o r a s s e s s i n g communication  Yoder (1972) has developed  b e h a v i o u r (Appendix A ) .  a  A n a l y s i s of  t h e model i n d i c a t e s t h a t an i n v e s t i g a t o r c o u l d a s s e s s a s p e c t s o f the deaf c h i l d ' s knowledge o f two d i v i s i o n s , morphology and s y n t a x , of language s t r u c t u r e t h r o u g h w r i t t e n p r o d u c t i o n s .  Yoder a l s o has  suggested s e l e c t e d t e s t s w i t h w h i c h t o e v a l u a t e m o r p h o l o g i c a l and s y n t a c t i c a l a s p e c t s o f language.  Among t h e s e a r e two which have been  adapted as p e n c i l and paper t e s t s f o r deaf c h i l d r e n .  These two  Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s and Menyuk's T e s t of Competence i n Normal-Speaking  tests,  Grammatical  C h i l d r e n , a r e doubly p e r t i n e n t s i n c e  t h e m a j o r i t y o f items t e s t p r i n c i p l e s taught t o deaf c h i l d r e n w i t h i n t h e f i r s t t h r e e y e a r s of s c h o o l e x p e r i e n c e under a l l language t e a c h i n g programmes. I n one o f a s e r i e s o f l i n k e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n s Menyuk (1969) p r e s e n t e d t w e n t y - f i v e a g r a m m a t i c a l sentences t o a young p r e s c h o o l group (34 t o 39 months o l d ) , t o an o l d e r p r e s c h o o l group (52 t o 57 months o l d ) , and a k i n d e r g a r t e n group (70 t o 75 months o l d ) . The c h i l d r e n were i n s t r u c t e d t o r e p e a t each sentence as g i v e n o r a l l y by t h e t e s t a d m i n i s t r a t o r and t h e n , a f t e r a l l t h e sentences had been t r e a t e d , the c h i l d r e n were t o l d t h e sentences had been i n c o r r e c t . r e p e a t e d and the c h i l d r e n asked "How  The sentences were  s h o u l d I say t h a t ? " i n o r d e r t o  17  e l i c i t a b i l i t i e s t o c o r r e c t a g r a m m a t i c a l sentences on command. ing  In apply-  t h i s t e c h n i q u e Menyuk was a t t e m p t i n g t o t e s t t h e h y p o t h e s i s  " . . . t h a t r e p e t i t i o n i s dependent on t h e r u l e s i n t h e l i s t e n e r ' s grammar r a t h e r than b e i n g mere i m i t a t i o n , o n l y l i m i t e d by memory span." general  In  the f i n d i n g of the s e r i e s of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n d i c a t e d that the  most common d e v i a t i o n s from complete r e p e t i t i o n were n o t o m i s s i o n o r s u b s t i t u t i o n s but "...modifications  of transformational  spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n s o f non-grammatical f o r m s . " supported the hypothesis being t e s t e d .  s t r u c t u r e s and  Such a f i n d i n g  In addition differences i n  spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e l e v e l o f g r a m m a t i c a l competence o f t h e v a r i o u s groups was b e i n g r e f l e c t e d (Appendix B ) . Berko (1958) d e s i g n e d a s t u d y t o t e s t f o r c h i l d r e n ' s a p p l i c a t i o n of m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s .  She c r e a t e d nonsense words t o t e s t t h e c h i l d ' s  system o f r u l e s f o r t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e p l u r a l , s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l possessives,  the t h i r d person s i n g u l a r of the verb, the progressive  t e n s e , t h e p a s t t e n s e and t h e c o m p a r a t i v e and s u p e r l a t i v e o f t h e adjective.  Cartoon-style  p i c t u r e of imaginary beings or people  p e r f o r m i n g i m a g i n a r y a c t s were c r e a t e d and a t e x t p r i n t e d w i t h t h e p i c t u r e s . The t e x t c o n t a i n e d  a b l a n k f o r t h e d e s i r e d form o f t h e  nonsense word b e i n g used (Appendix G ) . A n a l y s i s was performed on t h e r e s u l t s f o r f i f t y - s i x c h i l d r e n between t h e ages o f f o u r t o seven y e a r s i n c l u s i v e . the f i r s t grade a c h i e v e d h i g h e r did  c h i l d r e n at the preschool  Those c h i l d r e n i n  p e r c e n t a g e s c o r e s on a l l i t e m s t h a n  level.  This general  difference indicated  a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d a b i l i t y t o g e n e r a t e c o r r e c t morphophonemic s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e s w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age. However, t h e groups were n o t  18 qualitatively different  i n t h e i r responses.  Both appeared  employing " t h e same s i m p l i f i e d , m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s . " Berko a t t r i b u t e d  t o be  In general  r e l a t i v e success or d i f f i c u l t y to the frequency w i t h  w h i c h t h e v a r i o u s i n f l e c t i o n s appear i n t h e models p r e s e n t e d t o t h e c h i l d and t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f r u l e s  governing t h e i r use.  The h i g h e r  l e v e l s o f success were met w i t h forms t h a t were t h e most r e g u l a r . p i c t u r e f o r a l l groups was one o f " c o n s i s t e n c y , r e g u l a r i t y  The  and s i m p l i c i t y . "  19  CHAPTER I I I METHOD  1.  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms  Deaf - a mean h e a r i n g l o s s o f no l e s s than 80 dB I.S.O. i n t h e b e t t e r ear f o r t h e f r e q u e n c i e s 500, 1000 and 2000 Hz. w i t h onset o f impairment a t o r p r i o r t o b i r t h . I.S.O. - I n t e r n a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n f o r S t a n d a r d i z a t i o n r e f e r e n c e zero l e v e l f o r pure-tone  audiometers.  Formal Language System - a language t e a c h i n g system f o c u s s e d on t h e l e a r n i n g o f s e q u e n t i a l s t r u c t u r a l r u l e s o f language. N a t u r a l Language System - a language t e a c h i n g system f o c u s s e d on t h e l e a r n i n g o f language i n a manner p a r a l l e l t o t h a t o f t h e h e a r i n g child. Language P r i n c i p l e - an a c c e p t e d  r u l e f o r the c o r r e c t production of a  p a r t o f language. e.g.  t h e r u l e f o r t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e morpheme I-si  to create  the p l u r a l form o f a noun. Programme E v a l u a t i o n - " t h e p r o c e s s o f d e l i n e a t i n g , o b t a i n i n g and providing useful information f o r judging decision alternatives ( S t u f f l e b e a m , 1971, p.- 267)". E r r o r Source - a) t h e word o r words i n Menyuk's Test o f Grammatical Competence items t h e a l t e r a t i o n , d e l e t i o n , i n s e r t i o n o r rearrangement o f w h i c h r e n d e r s t h e i t e m c o r r e c t . b) t h e s t i m u l u s word i n Berko's Test o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l Rules  items.  Programme G o a l - an o b s e r v a b l e and p r e d i c t a b l e change i n the b e h a v i o u r o f a s u b j e c t as t h e r e s u l t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a programme of i n s t r u c t i o n . Exogenously deaf - h a v i n g been deafened by some cause o t h e r than h e r e d i t y . Endogenously  deaf - h a v i n g been deafened by h e r e d i t a r y c a u s e s .  2.  Sampling and S u b j e c t s  Three s t u d y groups were s e l e c t e d from each o f a r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l f o r t h e deaf employing the n a t u r a l method of t e a c h i n g language (N^, N^, N^)  and a r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l f o r the deaf employing more  f o r m a l i z e d methods o f t e a c h i n g language  ( F ^ , F^, F ^ ) .  f o r m a l method i n use was t h e F i t z g e r a l d Key  The most common  ( F i t z g e r a l d , 1929)  though  some t e a c h i n g s t a f f have r e l i e d h e a v i l y on t h e f o r m a l g r a m m a t i c a l c u r r i c u l a d e s i g n e d f o r use w i t h n o n - h e a r i n g - i m p a i r e d c h i l d r e n . r e c e n t y e a r s a number of t e a c h i n g s t a f f have adopted t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar systems  In  formalized  ( C a n i g l i a e t a l , 1972; McCarr,  1973).  B a s i c s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a f o r each s u b j e c t were: 1. h a v i n g an average h e a r i n g l o s s o f 80 dB. I.S.O. o r g r e a t e r i n t h e b e t t e r ear a c r o s s 500, 1000 and 2000 Hz. 2. h a v i n g a t e s t e d I.Q.  l e v e l o f between 85 and 115  as  determined by e x a m i n a t i o n o f s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e c o r d s . 3. h a v i n g no a d d i t i o n a l major h a n d i c a p p i n g c o n d i t i o n s as determined by a n a l y s i s o f s c h o o l m e d i c a l and  psycho-  l o g i c a l r e c o r d s and d i s c u s s i o n o f each s u b j e c t ' s i n - c l a s s f u n c t i o n i n g w i t h the s c h o o l p s y c h o l o g i s t and s u p e r v i s o r y staff. 4. h a v i n g spent h i s / h e r e n t i r e s c h o o l - a g e c a r e e r i n e i t h e r  of t h e s c h o o l s s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s  study.  5. h a v i n g onset o f deafness d u r i n g t h e p r e - o r p e r i n a t a l . , stage. To e v a l u a t e the e f f e c t o f the e d u c a t i o n a l methodologies  over  time s u b j e c t s were s e l e c t e d i n t h r e e age spans of e q u a l l e n g t h .  The  f i r s t age span (A^, 9 y e a r s , 0 months t o 10 y e a r s , 11 months) was chosen t o ensure t h a t a l l s u b j e c t s had been exposed t o i n s t r u c t i o n f o r a minimum of t h r e e y e a r s .  The  two r e m a i n i n g age spans (A^, 12 y e a r s ,  0 months t o 13 y e a r s , 11 months; A^,  15 y e a r s , 0 months t o 16 y e a r s ,  11 months) were chosen t o a l l o w p e r i o d s of c o n t i n u e d  instruction  between e v a l u a t i o n ages and f o r e v a l u a t i o n p r i o r t o the common s c h o o l l e a v i n g age of 17 t o 19. Due  t o the l i m i t e d number o f p o s s i b l e s u b j e c t s i n the n a t u r a l  and f o r m a l method s c h o o l s ( r e s p e c t i v e s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n s of l e s s  than  400 and 225), a l l s u b j e c t s m e e t i n g t h e c r i t e r i a were i n c l u d e d (Table 1 ) .  3.  Instruments  As noted p r e v i o u s l y i n s t r u m e n t s p o s s e s s i n g the s o p h i s t i c a t i o n and s e n s i t i v i t y t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e language knowledge of deaf a r e few.  The  children  i n s t r u m e n t s i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n were s e l e c t e d on  b a s i s o f t h e i r known u t i l i t y as t e s t s of language a b i l i t i e s and a p p l i c a b i l i t y as paper and p e n c i l t e s t s f o r deaf c h i l d r e n i n t h e groups as c i t e d .  Both a r e among the i n s t r u m e n t s suggested  (1972, Appendix A) f o r the assessment of m o r p h o l o g i c a l and a s p e c t s o f language s t r u c t u r e .  the their age  by Yoder syntactical  Both have been used s u c c e s s f u l l y as  paper and p e n c i l t e s t s w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n (Garber, 1967,  Bunch, 1971).  Table 1 S u b j e c t D i s t r i b u t i o n by Language Method, Age Group and Sex  Formal Method  N a t u r a l Method  A  A  l  A  2  M  F  M  F  M  7  10  7  12  7  A  3  F  6  M  l  A  3  A  F  M  F  6  2  4  3  M  5  F  2  6  Each t e s t suggested by Yoder was  c o n s i d e r e d by the i n v e s t i g a t o r . A l l ,  w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n s of t h e two s e l e c t e d and t h e "Grammatical Compreh e n s i o n T e s t " by B e l l u g i - K l i m a were r e j e c t e d as b e i n g too a u d i t o r i a l l y based and/or p o s s e s s i n g o t h e r d e s i g n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e n d e r i n g them i n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r deaf s u b j e c t s .  S i n c e i t proved  i m p o s s i b l e to o b t a i n  a copy o f t h e "Grammatical Comprehension T e s t " through normal s o u r c e s , B e l l u g i was  c o n t a c t e d and a r e q u e s t f o r a copy o f t h e t e s t made.  She  w r o t e t o i n f o r m t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r t h a t w h i l e some thought had been devoted  t o such an i n s t r u m e n t , i t had not been c o m p l e t e l y  developed.  Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s The f i r s t i n s t r u m e n t s e l e c t e d (Appendix  G) was  developed  by  Berko (1958) t o a s s e s s the n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d ' s knowledge o f morphological rules.  R e s e a r c h w i t h t h e deaf c h i l d has i n d i c a t e d t h a t  one of h i s p r i m a r y language problems c e n t e r s on t h e i n c o r r e c t use of p l u r a l forms, tense markers and p o s s e s s i v e forms.  S i n c e the  a s s i m i l a t i o n o f such m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s seems to be a p a r t i c u l a r problem f o r the deaf c h i l d and s i n c e c o r r e c t a s s i m i l a t i o n i s n e c e s s a r y t o f a c i l i t a t e communication, a t e s t of m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s s h o u l d r e v e a l t o what e x t e n t t h e s e r u l e s have been i n t e r n a l i z e d . Berko u t i l i z e d twenty-seven p i c t u r e s o f c a r t o o n - l i k e c h a r a c t e r s She p o i n t e d to a p i c t u r e and read the t e x t t o her s u b j e c t . s u b j e c t responded o r a l l y and t h e response was  recorded.  The  Researchers  w o r k i n g w i t h t h e deaf c h i l d m o d i f i e d Berko's a d m i n i s t r a t i o n procedure by p r e s e n t i n g t h e p i c t u r e and the t e x t v i s u a l l y .  The deaf s u b j e c t s  i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s responded by i n d i c a t i n g one of a number o f p o s s i b l e c h o i c e words.  For reasons p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d , t h e deaf s u b j e c t s i n  the p r e s e n t s t u d y responded response  by r e c o r d i n g a word o f t h e i r c h o i c e on t h e  sheet. The m a j o r i t y o f Berko's t e s t items were s e l e c t e d by  Garber  (1967) as a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t e s t i n g deaf r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l s u b j e c t s between t h e ages o f 6.7  and 13.6 y e a r s .  T h i s s t u d y made use o f t h e  Garber s e l e c t i o n and i n c l u d e d t h e t e s t i n g of p o s s e s s i v e forms s i n c e b o t h t h e f o r m a l and n a t u r a l method s c h o o l s p r e s e n t e d t h e s e t o t h e i r s t u d e n t s by t h e age of n i n e .  The s p e c i f i c g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s a s s e s s e d  are: 1- nouns  p l u r a l Is/  2- v e r b s  present p r o g r e s s i v e tense  and / e s / forms  p a s t t e n s e i n /ed/ i r r e g u l a r past tense •  t h i r d person s i n g u l a r present t e n s e i n I si and /es/  3- p o s s e s s i v e  s i n g u l a r / ' s / form p l u r a l Is'/  Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical  and / e s ' / forms  Competence  Menyuk c r e a t e d a t e s t of g r a m m a t i c a l competence by  selecting  items from a g r a m m a t i c a l u t t e r a n c e s of p r e s c h o o l and k i n d e r g a r t e n h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n (Appendix B ) .  These sentences were g i v e n o r a l l y  t o a sample o f c h i l d r e n r a n g i n g i n age from two y e a r s , t e n months t o s i x y e a r s , t h r e e months.  I n the f i r s t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n the c h i l d r e n  were asked t o r e p e a t t h e s e n t e n c e s .  I n a second a d m i n i s t r a t i o n the  c h i l d r e n were i n f o r m e d t h a t each sentence c o n t a i n e d an e r r o r . were r e q u e s t e d t o c o r r e c t t h a t s e n t e n c e .  Menyuk t h e o r i z e d t h a t  They  " . . . r e p e t i t i o n i s dependent on t h e r u l e s i n t h e l i s t e n e r ' s grammar r a t h e r than b e i n g mere i m i t a t i o n , l i m i t e d by memory span p. 113-114)." of o n l y  She found support f o r t h i s h y p o t h e s i s  (1969,  i na correlation  .03 between sentence l e n g t h and n o n - r e p e t i t i o n i n t h e i r  c o r r e c t grammatical order.  T h i s f i n d i n g was i n t e r p r e t e d as i n d i c a t i n g  t h a t s t r u c t u r e , r a t h e r than memory span, was t h e l i n c h - p i n o f repetition.  I n a d d i t i o n , the f i n d i n g that m o d i f i c a t i o n of  transforma-  t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s and spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n o f g r a m m a t i c a l forms were more common than o m i s s i o n s o r s u b s t i t u t i o n s l e n t f u r t h e r s u p p o r t to her hypothesis.  I f one can agree t h a t t h e s e f i n d i n g s do, i n d e e d ,  argue f o r t h e p o s s e s s i o n  o f l i n g u i s t i c competence by young  hearing  c h i l d r e n , s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s f o r deaf c h i l d r e n s h o u l d argue f o r a s i m i l a r degree o f competence.  C o n v e r s e l y , o p p o s i n g f i n d i n g s would  argue f o r a l e s s e r command o f language w i t h dependency on memorized language p a t t e r n s . The  s t r u c t u r e s i n v e s t i g a t e d by t h i s i n s t r u m e n t were v a r i e d  (Appendix B ) .  Each sentence c o n t a i n s o b v i o u s e r r o r s o u r c e s w h i c h , i f  c o r r e c t e d , r e n d e r t h e sentence a c c e p t a b l e . sentence c o n t a i n s o n l y one e r r o r s o u r c e .  I n most cases each Menyuk's sentence number  twenty-two "You c a n ' t p u t no more water i n i t . " was d e l e t e d s i n c e t h e double n e g a t i v e  had n o t been f o r m a l l y p r e s e n t e d t o t h e youngest group  of s u b j e c t s i n one s c h o o l . A v i s u a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n system r e p l a c e d Menyuk's o r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n system i n t h i s s t u d y . may be found i n Appendix C.  Detailed administration instructions  4.  Scoring  A l l responses were s c o r e d as c o r r e c t (1) for  or incorrect  (0)  s t a t i s t i c a l comparison w i t h t h e n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g s u b j e c t s i n t h e  Berko and Menyuk s t u d i e s . In a d d i t i o n , d e t a i l e d a n a l y s e s employing  scaled scoring  systems were d e v i s e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l comparison o f t h e deaf s u b j e c t s taught under n a t u r a l and f o r m a l language methods. for  These systems, one  each i n s t r u m e n t , were d e s i g n e d t o f o c u s on t h e e r r o r s o u r c e i n  each i t e m and t o g i v e c r e d i t f o r v a r y i n g degrees o f apparent  insight  i n t o t h e language concepts b e i n g i n v e s t i g a t e d . C o n s u l t a t i o n s were h e l d w i t h knowledgeable e d u c a t o r s o f deaf c h i l d r e n w i t h t r a i n i n g i n language t o determine o f response  a h i e r a r c h i a l s c o r i n g system based on q u a l i t y  t o i t e m s f o r each i n s t r u m e n t  (Appendices  D and I ) .  A l l i t e m s were s c o r e d by t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r and then r e s c o r e d i n c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e major r e s e a r c h a d v i s o r . s c o r i n g o f a l l items was reached.  A l l responses  Agreement on t h e f o r a random  s e l e c t i o n o f twenty p e r - c e n t o f t h e s u b j e c t s were s u b m i t t e d t o a p a n e l o f diploma i n e d u c a t i o n o f t h e deaf s t u d e n t t e a c h e r s and s c o r e d . N i n e t y - f i v e p e r - c e n t o f s c o r e s by t h i s p a n e l agreed w i t h s c o r i n g by the i n v e s t i g a t o r .  Scores w h i c h d i d n o t agree c o u l d be t r a c e d t o  ambiguity i n s c o r i n g d i r e c t i o n s .  Changes were made t o p e r t i n e n t  d i r e c t i o n s and agreement reached on one hundred p e r - c e n t o f a l l i t e m s .  5.  Examiner  The i n v e s t i g a t o r a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e i n s t r u m e n t s t o a l l s u b j e c t s The i n v e s t i g a t o r i s a t r a i n e d and e x p e r i e n c e d t e a c h e r o f t h e deaf and  27 test administrator.  He i s competent i n the v a r i o u s communication  modes employed w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n i n . t h e s c h o o l s s e l e c t e d .  6.  Evaluative Considerations  E v a l u a t i o n of an e d u c a t i o n a l programme i s o f t e n hampered by i n a d e q u a t e l y d e f i n e d programme g o a l s and g o a l - r e l a t e d a s s u m p t i o n s . E v a l u a t i o n may  a l s o be hampered by a t t e m p t s t o i n v e s t i g a t e too l a r g e  and complex a programme w i t h i n a d e q u a t e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n and resources.  The  other  f i r s t o f these major d i f f i c u l t i e s i s o f t e n i n e s c a p a b l e  i f one w i s h e s to e v a l u a t e a s p e c i f i c programme i n o p e r a t i o n p r i o r t o the i n i t i a t i o n of e v a l u a t i o n .  The  second may  be a m e l i o r a t e d  c h o o s i n g a s p e c t s o f the o v e r a l l programme w h i c h may  by  be i n v e s t i g a t e d  t h o r o u g h l y w i t h the r e s o u r c e s a t hand. The n a t u r a l language s c h o o l i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s i n the m i d s t o f d e s i g n i n g a "programme book" w h i c h w i l l " s t a t e the programme goals of a l l school a c t i v i t i e s  thus p r o v i d i n g the framework f o r a l l  o p e r a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s . . . ( W o l l a s t o n , 1974,  p. 3 ) . "  The  s t a f f of  t h i s s c h o o l were d i r e c t e d by M i n i s t r y o f E d u c a t i o n o f f i c i a l s t o read Mager's P r e p a r i n g I n s t r u c t i o n a l O b j e c t i v e s (1962) t o a s s i s t i n the t a s k o f c r e a t i n g a "programme book" and were r e f e r r e d t o the work of R a l p h W.  T y l e r as a g u i d e .  No t r a i n i n g i n the s t a t i n g of i n s t r u c t i o n a l  o b j e c t i v e s o r the b a s i c T y l e r i a n p r i n c i p l e s o f c u r r i c u l u m and i n s t r u c t i o n were p r o v i d e d .  Language c u r r i c u l a were p r e p a r e d  f o r a l l age  levels. D i s c u s s i o n s w i t h a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and t e a c h i n g  personnel  i n d i c a t e d t h a t the f o r m a l method s c h o o l has no s e t programme o b j e c t i v e s or c u r r i c u l a .  C e r t a i n of the f o r m a l methods b e i n g used  28  (e.g. F i t z g e r l a d Key) ( B u e l l , 1954;  l a y down s e q u e n t i a l s t e p s o f language development  Pugh, 1955).  G i v e n the i n c o m p l e t e l y o r i n a d e q u a t e l y s t a t e d language programme g o a l s i n the s c h o o l s and the d i f f i c u l t y of a t t e m p t i n g  to  e v a l u a t e a l l a s p e c t s o f on-going language programmes w i t h the t o o l s a t hand, the i n v e s t i g a t o r chose to e v a l u a t e o n l y those a s p e c t s language surveyed by the t e s t s s e l e c t e d and o n l y those t e s t  of  items  w h i c h s c h o o l o f f i c i a l s and documents i n d i c a t e d were s p e c i f i c a l l y taught t o s t u d e n t s of t h e ages s e l e c t e d w i t h the u l t i m a t e g o a l of mastery.  These items a r e given.Mn Appendices B and  7.  F.  Design  S u b j e c t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d the t e s t s i n groups o f seven t o ten.  Menyuk's Test o f G r a m m a t i c a l Competence was  administered  (45 m i n u t e s ) and Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s i n separate s i t t i n g s .  S c h e d u l i n g was  arranged  (30 m i n u t e s ) second  so t h a t s u b j e c t s d i d  not have o p p o r t u n i t y t o d i s c u s s t e s t items w i t h one  another.  A n a l y s i s of r e s u l t s comparing h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n and c h i l d r e n was  e f f e c t e d by one way  first  a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e .  deaf  Scores f o r  t h e s e a n a l y s e s were coded c o r r e c t (1) o r i n c o r r e c t ( 0 ) . A n a l y s i s of r e s u l t s comparing deaf s u b j e c t s was 2 X 3 X 2  (method X age X sex) a n a l y s e s o f v a r i a n c e .  systems f o r the two  e f f e c t e d by  Scaled scoring  i n s t r u m e n t s were employed.  B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s were employed t o t r a c e sources v a r i a t i o n found f o r main and i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s . suggested  of  A l l c o n t r a s t s were  a p r i o r i by the h y p o t h e s e s . An a l p h a l e v e l of .05 was  selected for a l l analyses.  29 8.  E x p e r i m e n t a l Hypotheses  Hypothesis 1 A d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between t h e h e a r i n g t h r e e t o seven and o n e - h a l f y e a r o l d s i n Menyuk's s t u d y and each o f t h e deaf groups i n t h i s s t u d y i n r e s p o n s e t o Menyuk t e s t items w i t h t h e deaf groups o b t a i n i n g lower scores. Hypothesis 2 A d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between t h e h e a r i n g f o u r t o seven y e a r o l d s i n Berko's s t u d y and each of t h e deaf groups i n t h i s s t u d y i n response t o Berko test, i t e m s w i t h t h e deaf groups o b t a i n i n g lower scores. Hypothesis 3 No d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between t h e deaf groups t a u g h t language under d i f f e r e n t language programmes i n r e s p o n s e t o Menyuk t e s t i t e m s . Hypothesis 4 No d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between t h e deaf groups t a u g h t language under d i f f e r e n t language programmes i n r e s p o n s e t o Berko t e s t i t e m s . Hypothesis 5 No d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between male and female deaf s u b j e c t s taught under d i f f e r e n t language programmes i n r e s p o n s e t o Menyuk t e s t items. Hypothesis 6 No d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between male and female deaf s u b j e c t s taught under d i f f e r e n t language programmes i n r e s p o n s e t o Berko test items. Hypothesis 7 A d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between deaf s u b j e c t s o f d i f f e r e n t ages  30 i n response t o Menyuk t e s t items w i t h younger s u b j e c t s o b t a i n i n g lower scores. Hypothesis 8 A d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s between deaf s u b j e c t s of d i f f e r e n t i n response t o Berko t e s t i t e m s w i t h younger s u b j e c t s o b t a i n i n g lower scores.  ages  31  CHAPTER IV EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION  1.  Programme E v a l u a t i o n i n S c h o o l s f o r t h e Deaf  A r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e d t h a t no s c h o o l f o r t h e deaf has r e p o r t e d e n t e r i n g i n t o a f o r m a l programme e v a l u a t i o n and d e l i n e a t e d t h e s u c c e s s o f i t s language i n s t r u c t i o n programme i n a c h i e v i n g defined or understood goals.  As n o t e d e a r l i e r  various  s c h o o l s have c o o p e r a t e d i n r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s d e s i g n e d t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e language a b i l i t y o f deaf i n d i v i d u a l s .  These  s t u d i e s have been d e s c r i p t i v e r a t h e r than e v a l u a t i v e i n n a t u r e . Various  s c h o o l s have performed " i n f o r m a l e v a l u a t i o n s " b u t t h e  dependence o f such e v a l u a t i o n s on " c a s u a l o b s e r v a t i o n , i m p l i c i t  goals,  i n t u i t i v e norms and s u b j e c t i v e judgement ( S t a k e , 1967, p. 5 2 3 ) . " has not r e s u l t e d i n a knowledge r e g a r d i n g t h e s p e c i f i c s u c c e s s o f a t e a c h i n g programme c o n s i d e r e d  i n t h e a b s o l u t e o r r e l a t i v e sense.  Yet  i t appears t h a t d e c i s i o n s on c u r r i c u l u m change, g o a l m o d i f i c a t i o n and i n t e r v e n t i o n s t r a t e g y , i f t h e y a r e t o be e f f e c t i v e , must be based on h a r d d a t a .  To o b t a i n t h i s "hard d a t a " f o r m a l e v a l u a t i o n s embodying  appropriate experimental  designs  are c a l l e d f o r .  An argument q u e s t i o n i n g t h e u t i l i t y o f e x p e r i m e n t a l  design i n  programme e v a l u a t i o n has been c o n t i n u i n g f o r a number o f y e a r s . present  t h e d i s c u s s i o n seems t o be s w i n g i n g  experimental  design.  against experimental  Glass  At  i n f a v o u r o f t h e use o f  (1970) summarized t h e arguments f o r and  d e s i g n and c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e arguments f o r f a r  o u t w e i g h t t h e arguments a g a i n s t .  Stufflebeam  (1971) probed t h e use  32 of experimental  design  i n r e l a t i o n t o the CIPP e v a l u a t i o n model  (Context e v a l u a t i o n , I n p u t e v a l u a t i o n , P r o c e s s e v a l u a t i o n , P r o d u c t e v a l u a t i o n ) and e v a l u a t i o n and  concluded that i t possessed high relevance c o u l d be u s e f u l i n the a r e a of i n p u t  f o r product  evaluation.  I t would appear t h a t programme e v a l u a t i o n embodying experimental  d e s i g n would be p o s s i b l e i n the a r e a of t e a c h i n g  t o deaf c h i l d r e n i f an a p p r o p r i a t e model were employed. c a r e f u l l y designed e v a l u a t i o n s t u d i e s could provide  language  Further,  teachers  and  a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w i t h a d a t a base from w h i c h t o examine p r e s e n t language programmes and  g o a l s r e l a t e d t o those programmes w i t h a v i e w toward  p o s i t i v e change. Conry and U n g e r l e i d e r  (1974) c r e a t e d an e v a l u a t i o n model  ( F i g u r e 1) based on the e a r l i e r work of Stake (1967) and (1969).  T h e i r SIPO model c o n s i d e r s  f a c t o r s , p r o c e s s (P) f a c t o r s and  Stufflebeam  s i t u a t i o n a l ( S ) f a c t o r s , input  outcome (0) f a c t o r s f o r each of  e v a l u a t i o n , r a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n , t a r g e t t i n g e v a l u a t i o n , and  (I) goals  causative  evaluation. The  d i s c u s s i o n of c a u s a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n i n d i c a t e s t h a t  model would be a p p r o p r i a t e  their  t o the e v a l u a t i o n of the s u c c e s s of language  t e a c h i n g programmes i n s c h o o l s  f o r the deaf.  The  following discussion  w i l l be based on the SIPO model, the s t a t e d or i m p l i e d programme g o a l s f o r the methods b e i n g e v a l u a t e d  and  the c a u s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p  between the observed s i t u a t i o n , o b s e r v e d i n p u t s , observed p r o c e s s e s ( F i g u r e 2) i n the s c h o o l s the f o l l o w i n g  chapter.  studied.  Observed outcomes a r e d i s c u s s e d  in  Figure 1  Policy  Goals  and Programme O b j e c t i v e s  Observed Situation  Intended Situation  Observed Inputs  Intended Inputs  Observed Processes  Intended Processes  Observed Outcomes  Intended Outcomes  An E v a l u a t i o n Framework:  SIPO Model  Intended and Observed S i t u a t i o n , I n p u t s P r o c e s s e s and Outcomes as d e r i v e d from P o l i c y G o a l s and Programme O b j e c t i v e s (Conry and U n g e r l e i d e r , 1974)  Figure 2  Policy  Goals  and Programme O b j e c t i v e s  Observed Situation  Observed Inputs  Observed Processes  Observed Outcomes  Causal E v a l u a t i o n :  SIPO Model  A n a l y s i s of Cause-Effect R e l a t i o n s h i p s between Outcomes and S i t u a t i o n s , I n p u t s and P r o c e s s e s (Conry and U n g e r l e i d e r , 1974)  35  2.  P o l i c y Goals and Programme O b j e c t i v e s  P o l i c y g o a l s and programme o b j e c t i v e s as they r e l a t e t o t h e t e a c h i n g o f language a r e n o t w e l l d e f i n e d i n e i t h e r t h e n a t u r a l method o r t h e f o r m a l method s c h o o l .  W h i l e t e a c h e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s  i n b o t h s c h o o l s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f language s k i l l s i s a major programme, s p e c i f i c p o l i c y o b j e c t i v e s and programme g o a l s a r e lacking. As n o t e d p r e v i o u s l y t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l r e c e n t l y i n i t i a t e d a d e l i b e r a t e attempt  t o f o r m u l a t e programme g o a l s .  The  programme book ( W o l l a s t o n , 1974) c r e a t e d by s t a f f members c o n s i d e r s p o l i c y g o a l s b u t does n o t s t a t e programme g o a l s as d e f i n e d i n t h i s s t u d y though t h e g o a l s s t a t e d a r e c o n s i d e r e d programme g o a l s by o f f i c i a l s of the school.  No s p e c i f i c statement  i s made f o r language  s i n c e i t i s subsumed under t h e g o a l and s u b - g o a l s f o r t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l programme. I n s t r u c t i o n : t o develop optimum and harmonious growth i n communicative, i n t e l l e c t u a l , s o c i a l ,  emotional,  a e s t h e t i c and m o r a l a s p e c t s o f a l l p u p i l s e n r o l l e d , a) Academic: t o develop i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p a c i t y t o t h e f u l l e s t e x t e n t p a r t i c u l a r l y i n academic s u b j e c t a r e a s , t o enable the p u p i l to continue h i s education a t the post-secondary  l e v e l s h o u l d he so d e s i r e (p. 1 2 ) .  I t i s n o t e d t h a t language i s c o n s i d e r e d a s u b - s e c t i o n o r programme a c t i v i t y under i n s t r u c t i o n (p. 15) and t h a t "a statement  of objectives  f o r i n s t r u c t i o n a l programmes and c o u r s e s of s t u d y i n a l l s u b j e c t areas (p. 1 5 ) . . . " e x i s t i n t h e s c h o o l .  I n f a c t , these statements o f  o b j e c t i v e s were i n t r a n s i t i o n a t t h e time o f t h i s s t u d y and tended n o t t o d e l i n e a t e s p e c i f i c g o a l s f o r t h e t e a c h i n g o f s p e c i f i c language principles.  No s p e c i f i c language g o a l s were a v a i l a b l e o t h e r  than  those i m p l i e d i n t h e c u r r i c u l a f o r v a r i o u s d i v i s i o n s o f the s c h o o l . These c u r r i c u l a i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e s a s s e s s e d by t h e i n s t r u m e n t s i n t h i s s t u d y a r e p r e s e n t e d by age n i n e b u t do n o t suggest goals a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the l e a r n i n g of these p r i n c i p l e s (Ontario School f o r t h e Deaf, M i l t o n , J u n i o r S c h o o l C u r r i c u l a , 1966). The  f o r m a l method s c h o o l does n o t have s t a t e d p o l i c y  goals  o r programme o b j e c t i v e s n o r does i t have s e t language c u r r i c u l a beyond those suggested  by t h e language t e a c h i n g methods i n use.  Teachers  a r e r e l a t i v e l y f r e e t o s e l e c t and implement any o f a v a r i e t y o f methods. The g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f t e a c h e r s have s e l e c t e d programmes c e n t e r e d on f o r m a l s t r u c t u r e s and t e a c h a c c o r d i n g t o t h e suggested that structure.  development o f  A common element o f t h e methods i n use i s t h a t a l l  p r e s e n t t h e language p r i n c i p l e s under i n v e s t i g a t i o n w i t h i n t h e f i r s t few y e a r s o f i n s t r u c t i o n . The i n v e s t i g a t o r d i s c u s s e d t e a c h e r  goals i n presenting  i n d i v i d u a l language p r i n c i p l e s w i t h t e a c h i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t a f f of both s c h o o l s .  I n a l l cases t h e common g o a l was t o enable t h e deaf  c h i l d t o employ t h e p r i n c i p l e c o r r e c t l y i n spontaneous language situations.  I n no case were programme g o a l s s t a t e d i n a form w h i c h  made them s u s c e p t i b l e t o programme e v a l u a t i o n .  The i n v e s t i g a t o r was  l e f t i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f i m p u t i n g t h a t s i n c e v a r i o u s language p r i n c i p l e s were t a u g h t , s t u d e n t s were e x p e c t e d t o l e a r n t o employ them spontaneously  and c o r r e c t l y .  3. Observed S i t u a t i o n a l F a c t o r s The n a t u r a l method s c h o o l s e r v e s a p o p u l a t i o n of j u s t 2,000,000 i n an a r e a a p p r o x i m a t e l y  over  70 by 120 m i l e s . The s c h o o l i s i n  a community o f JO,000 w i t h m e t r o p o l i t a n c e n t r e s o f 2,500,000 and 500,000 w i t h i n t h i r t y m i l e s . Over h a l f o f t h e s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n of 400 a t t e n d on a d a i l y b a s i s w h i l e t h e b a l a n c e l i v e i n a r e s i d e n c e f o u r n i g h t s a week. P u p i l s come from b o t h urban and r u r a l  settings.  I n s t r u c t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e f i v e and o n e - h a l f hours p e r day 185 t o 190 days p e r y e a r . A d m i t t a n c e r o u t i n e l y f a l l s i n t h e f i f t h y e a r . A v a r i e t y o f p r e - s c h o o l s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o c h i l d r e n below age f i v e . S e r v i c e i s a v a i l a b l e on a d a i l y b a s i s i n l a r g e r c e n t r e s w h i l e l i m i t e d t o once a week o r s l i g h t l y l e s s f r e q u e n t l y i n r u r a l  areas.  Funding f o r t h e s c h o o l comes from t h e p r o v i n c i a l m i n i s t r y o f e d u c a t i o n and a l l s t a f f a r e employed by t h a t m i n i s t r y . C l a s s e s v a r y i n s i z e from two o r t h r e e t o seven o r e i g h t . The s m a l l e r c l a s s e s a r e m a i n t a i n e d who comprise a p p r o x i m a t e l y  f o r m u l t i p l y handicapped s t u d e n t s ,  o n e - t h i r d of t h e s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n  (Bunch, 1973). A l l classrooms  a r e b r i g h t , s p a c i o u s and w e l l - e q u i p p e d .  The language t e a c h i n g method i s based on t h e n a t u r a l method described  earlier.  The f o r m a l method s c h o o l s e r v e s a p o p u l a t i o n o f  approximately  2,300,000 i n t h e p r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia. The s c h o o l i s s i t u a t e d i n a r e s i d e n t i a l sect-ion o f a m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s o f over  1,000,000.  As w i t h t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l a p p r o x i m a t e l y h a l f o f t h e s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n o f 225 l i v e at home. Of t h e b a l a n c e , a p p r o x i m a t e l y  half  a r e u n a b l e t o v i s i t t h e i r homes more than a few times each term due t o  38 the g r e a t d i s t a n c e s i n v o l v e d . P u p i l s come from b o t h r u r a l and u r b a n s e t t i n g s . I n s t r u c t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e f i v e and o n e - h a l f hours p e r day f o r between 190 and 195 days p e r y e a r . A d m i t t a n c e i s i n t h e f i f t h o r s i x t h y e a r . P r i o r t o age a j x p r e - s c h o o l s e r v i c e i s a v a i l a b l e t o many o f t h e c h i l d r e n b u t by no means a l l . A v a i l a b i l i t y o f p E e - s c h o o l  services i s  l i m i t e d b y t h e i s o l a t i o n o f many communities and t h e l a c k , u n t i l  recent  d a t e , o f any p r o v i n c i a l l y o r g a n i z e d s e r v i c e . Funding comes from t h e p r o v i n c i a l department of e d u c a t i o n w h i c h department employs a l l t e a c h e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n t h e s c h o o l . C l a s s s i z e v a r i e s from t h r e e o r f o u r t o seven o r e i g h t . M u l t i p l y handicapped s t u d e n t s comprise a p p r o x i m a t e l y  fifty  of t h e s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n (Watson, 1973). A l l classrooms  per-cent  are b r i g h t ,  s p a c i o u s and w e l l - e q u i p p e d . . V a r i o u s f o r m a l methods s e r v e as t h e b a s i s f o r t h e language programme. A few t e a c h e r s make u s e o f a m o d i f i e d n a t u r a l method. S u b j e c t s f o u t h i s s t u d y were n o t s e l e c t e d from c l a s s r o o m s  using a  m o d i f i e d n a t u r a l method approach. Though t h e p o p u l a t i o n s s e r v e d by t h e two s c h o o l s a r e s i m i l a r , the a c t u a l s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n s d i f f e r c o n s i d e r a b l y ( n a t u r a l method s c s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n = 400; f o r m a l method s c h o o l p o p u l a t i o n = 225). The l a r g e r p o p u l a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l may be a s c r i b e d t o a number o f f a c t o r s . D i a g n o s t i c s e r v i c e s i n t h e much s m a l l e r a r e a s e r v e d by t h i s s c h o o l a r e r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e when compared t o t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of s e r v i c e s i n the r u r a l  areas o f B r i t i s h Columbia. The  n a t u r a l method s c h o o l a c c e p t s c h i l d r e n a p p r o x i m a t e l y one y e a r younger t h a n dees t h e f o r m a l method s c h o o l and a l s o r e t a i n s s t u d e n t s t o l a t e r  ages.  A number o f s t u d e n t s from t h e g e o g r a p h i c a l a r e a of a  neighbouring  s c h o o l a t t e n d t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l t o a v a i l themselves of v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g not a v a i l a b l e i n t h e i r s c h o o l .  F i n a l l y a number of f a m i l i e s  have moved i n t o t h e d a i l y bus t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a r e a o f t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l so t h a t t h e i r c h i l d r e n might be day s t u d e n t s .  Such move-  ment i s r e l a t i v e l y easy i n t h e h i g h l y i n d u s t r i a l i z e d g e o g r a p h i c a l l y r e s t r i c t e d a r e a o f t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l compared t o t h e huge r e g i o n s e r v e d by t h e f o r m a l method s c h o o l .  There appears t o be no  reason t o h y p o t h e s i z e a h i g h e r r a t e of d e a f n e s s i n t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l catchment a r e a .  4.  Observed Input  Factors  A l l s u b j e c t s i n t h i s study meet t h e s e l e c t i o n o u t l i n e d under s a m p l i n g and s u b j e c t s i n c h a p t e r t h r e e .  criteria The m a j o r i t y  of t e a c h e r s i n b o t h s c h o o l s a r e t r a i n e d t o t e a c h deaf c h i l d r e n though the f o r m a l method s c h o o l has r e c e n t l y added a number of u n t r a i n e d i n d i v i d u a l s to i t s teaching  staff.  The major i n p u t d i f f e r e n c e i s t h a t of communication method. The n a t u r a l method s c h o o l has t r a d i t i o n a l l y used t h e o r a l method o f communication i n i n s t r u c t i o n though i t added f i n g e r s p e l l i n g t o i t s communication r e p e r t o i r e i n t h e f a l l o f 1973.  The f o r m a l method  s c h o o l has employed t h e t o t a l communication method f o r a number o f y e a r s i n a l l departments.  P r i o r t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e t o t a l  method, t h e j u n i o r department (ages 5 t o 11) employed t h e o r a l method. B o t h methods f e a t u r e a heavy r e l i a n c e on w r i t t e n forms of language i n teaching  situations. A v a r i e t y o f s t u d i e s on t h e v a r i a b l e of communication method  40 have been completed and a r e d i v i d e d on w h i c h communication method i s most b e n e f i c i a l f o r e d u c a t i o n a l purposes ( B i r c h and S t u c k l e s s , Montgomery, 1966; Q u i g l e y , 1969; K a t e s , 1972).  1966;  In general these  s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e t h a t s l i g h t advantages accompany t h e use o f manual forms o f communication when i t i s i n i t i a t e d a t t h e p r e s c h o o l l e v e l . Owrid (1971) and Rhodda (1973) have d i s c u s s e d t h e d e s i g n f a u l t s o f most communication method s t u d i e s .  One d e s i g n f a u l t o f t h e s e s t u d i e s  has been t h e f a i l u r e t o c o n t r o l t h e v a r i a b l e of e t i o l o g y . o c c u r s i n more s t u d i e s t h a n any o t h e r .  This fault  T y p i c a l l y t h e non-manual groups  were composed o f e x o g e n o u s l y deaf c h i l d r e n .  Vernon  (1966) s t u d i e d t h e  e f f e c t s o f e t i o l o g y o f d e a f n e s s and c o n c l u d e d t h a t endogenously  deaf  c h i l d r e n d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from o t h e r groups o f deaf c h i l d r e n . Other d e s i g n f a u l t s r e l a t e t o s u b j e c t s e l e c t i o n , p r o c e d u r e s and o f an i n s u f f i c i e n t number o f s t u d y g r o u p s .  creation  These f a u l t s have c r e a t e d  a s i t u a t i o n i n w h i c h knowledgeable e d u c a t o r s and r e s e a r c h e r s admit t h a t no d e f i n i t e s t a t e m e n t on communication method may be made.  This  l a c k o f a p r o v e n " b e s t " method i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e use o f v a r y i n g methods o f communication i n N o r t h A m e r i c a n s c h o o l s f o r . t h e d e a f . I f communication method does have an e f f e c t , one would e x p e c t t h e f o r m a l method s c h o o l s u b j e c t s t o be more advanced t h a n t h e n a t u r a l s c h o o l subjects.  The p a u c i t y o f r e s e a r c h i n t h i s a r e a and t h e i n c o n c l u s i v e n e s s  o f what has been done does not s u p p o r t any d e f i n i t e s t a t e m e n t o f an advantage f o r e i t h e r method used i n s c h o o l s i n t h i s s t u d y . E d u c a t o r s o f the deaf have a c c e p t e d t h e v i e w t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n o f i n s t r u c t i o n by w e l l - t r a i n e d t e a c h e r s from a p p r o x i m a t e l y age f i v e i s s u f f i c i e n t to achieve educational o b j e c t i v e s .  Similarly  each  s c h o o l i n t h i s s t u d y s e l e c t e d t h e language t e a c h i n g methods i n use as  41 those methods w h i c h would b e s t e n a b l e t h e deaf c h i l d t o l e a r n t h e E n g l i s h language.  The methods employed were designed  f o r use w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n .  specifically  Proponents o f each method b e l i e v e t h a t  the method they employ o f f e r s t h e b e s t o p p o r t u n i t y o f language a c q u i s i t i o n f o r t h e deaf i n d i v i d u a l . E v e r y s u b j e c t r e c e i v e d language i n s t r u c t i o n on a d a i l y b a s i s . Long range and s h o r t range t e a c h e r p l a n n i n g c a l l e d f o r p e r i o d i c r e v i e w of language p r i n c i p l e s taught b u t n o t mastered.  Language p r i n c i p l e s  p r e v i o u s l y p r e s e n t e d were used r o u t i n e l y under a l l modes o f communication and s u b j e c t s were expected t o be f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e i r u s e . A c t u a l t e a c h i n g l e s s o n s were v e r y s i m i l a r under b o t h methods though t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r the d e c i s i o n to teach p a r t i c u l a r lessons a t p a r t i c u l a r times d i f f e r under n a t u r a l and f o r m a l methods a c c o r d i n g t o method philosophy. S t u d e n t s i n b o t h s c h o o l s were h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e f o r mastery o f a l l language p r i n c i p l e s t a u g h t .  Language e r r o r s were c o r r e c t e d i n a l l  s u b j e c t a r e a s whether o r n o t language was t h e f o c a l p o i n t o f any lesson.  T e a c h e r s , e s p e c i a l l y t e a c h e r s o f younger c h i l d r e n , attempted  t o communicate w i t h c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r c l a s s e s u s i n g o n l y t h e language p r i n c i p l e s t o w h i c h they had been exposed.  Reading m a t e r i a l was  s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s o f s i m p l i c i t y o f language s t r u c t u r e s and restricted  vocabulary. B o t h s c h o o l s make e x t e n s i v e and i n t e n s i v e use o f group and  i n d i v i d u a l a u d i t o r y a i d s t o a s s i s t younger c h i l d r e n i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g instruction.  The n a t u r a l method s c h o o l c o n t i n u e s t h e p r o v i s i o n o f  group a i d s w i t h o l d e r s t u d e n t s .  B a s i c t o t h e use o f group and i n d i v i d u a l  a i d s i s t h e b e l i e f t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n b e n e f i t e d u c a t i o n a l l y from  42 maximum u t i l i z a t i o n o f r e s i d u a l h e a r i n g .  Trained a u d i o l o g i s t s are  employed i n b o t h s c h o o l s t o a s s i s t and a d v i s e t e a c h e r s i n the p r o v i s i o n o f the b e s t use o f a u d i t o r y a i d s f o r c h i l d r e n o f a l l degrees o f hearing  handicap. Both s c h o o l s p r o v i d e f i l m p r o j e c t o r s , overhead p r o j e c t o r s ,  s l i d e p r o j e c t o r s and c l o s e d c i r c u i t t e l e v i s i o n f a c i l i t i e s f o r the use of teaching s t a f f .  These v a r i o u s t y p e s o f v i s u a l hardware a r e employed t o  p r o j e c t p i c t u r e s , f i l m s and l i v e a c t i v i t i e s i n c l o s e a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h language t o a s s i s t deaf c h i l d r e n i n m a s t e r i n g taught.  the language p r i n c i p l e s  Both s c h o o l s employ t e a c h i n g s t a f f w i t h s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g i n  v i s u a l m a t e r i a l s and p r o v i d e i n - s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g t o a l l t e a c h i n g Language m a t e r i a l s a r e l a r g e l y t e a c h e r c o n s t r u c t e d designed  t o meet s p e c i f i c language needs.  the younger age l e v e l s .  Few  language schemes p r e p a r e d  staff.  and  This i s e s p e c i a l l y true at  deaf c h i l d r e n a r e a b l e t o work from  f o r n o r m a l l y - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n s i n c e these  schemes assume p r i o r language competency and p r o g r e s s from p r i n c i p l e ' ; to for  p r i n c i p l e w i t h an economy of d r i l l and r e v i e w not c o n s i d e r e d the deaf c h i l d .  suitable  A l i m i t e d number o f t e x t s have been w r i t t e n and  were i n r o u t i n e use i n s c h o o l s a c c o r d i n g t o language t e a c h i n g method. B a s i c a l l y t e a c h e r s i n t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l taught from language c o u r s e s of study p r e p a r e d  f o r t h a t s c h o o l w h i l e t e a c h e r s i n the  formal  method s c h o o l used the t e x t f o r t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r c h o i c e o f method as a teaching  guide. It  i s apparent t h a t i n p u t f a c t o r s a r e s i m i l a r f o r b o t h  s c h o o l s w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f communication method, the e f f e c t of w h i c h has not been a s c e r t a i n e d .  On the b a s i s o f t h i s d i s c u s s i o n l i t t l e  j u s t i f i c a t i o n can be found f o r h y p o t h e s i z i n g a d i f f e r e n c e between  43 language methods.  5.  Observed P r o c e s s F a c t o r s  Time and space do n o t a l l o w a complete d e s c r i p t i o n o f a l l p r o c e s s f a c t o r s r e l a t e d t o t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n and l e a r n i n g o f t h e language p r i n c i p l e s e v a l u a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y .  I t i spossible,  however,  to d e s c r i b e s p e c i f i c type lessons u t i l i z e d t o present grammatical principles.  The f o l l o w i n g l e s s o n examples were s e l e c t e d from  o b s e r v a t i o n o f on-going c l a s s r o o m p r o c e s s e s , a-preposition " o f f " N a t u r a l Method S c h o o l Preparation:  A number o f p i e c e s o f paper were p l a c e d i n v a r i o u s p o s i t i o n s around t h e room p r i o r t o t h e l e s s o n , e.g. a paper on a t a b l e a paper on a desk a paper on a c h a i r The c h i l d r e n were s e a t e d on c h a i r s i n a s e m i - c i r c l e f a c i n g t h e t e a c h e r who s a t by t h e b l a c k b o a r d .  A l l  c h i l d r e n wore h e a d s e t s f o r t h e group h e a r i n g a i d system. P r e s e n t a t i o n : a-The t e a c h e r gave a command u s i n g speech and f i n g e r spelling.  She a l s o w r o t e t h e command on t h e b o a r d ,  e.g. Blow t h e paper o f f t h e t a b l e , R o b e r t . b-The p u p i l blew t h e paper o f f t h e t a b l e . c-The t e a c h e r asked t h e p u p i l t o w r i t e what he had done on t h e b o a r d b e s i d e t h e command.  With assistance the  p u p i l wrote: I blew t h e paper o f f t h e t a b l e .  44 d-The t e a c h e r had a l l p u p i l s say and f i n g e r s p e l l t h e sentence. e-The t e a c h e r asked the p u p i l s f o r the meaning o f " o f f " . A number o f p u p i l s pantomimed the paper f a l l i n g o f f the table.  The t e a c h e r agreed t h a t " o f f " i n d i c a t e d  the  movement of t h e paper from t a b l e t o f l o o r . f-The o t h e r p i e c e s o f paper were blown from t h e i r p o s i t i o n s . Each time s t e p s a) t h r o u g h d) were r e p e a t e d . Summary:  The t e a c h e r had the c l a s s r e a d and f i n g e r s p e l l a l l t h e sentences. all  She emphasized t h a t the word " o f f " was  used i n  cases.  Formal Method S c h o o l Preparation:  The c h i l d r e n were s e a t e d f a c i n g t h e t e a c h e r . headsets  Presentation:  A l l wore  f o r t h e c l a s s r o o m group h e a r i n g a i d system.  a-The t e a c h e r , u s i n g t o t a l communication, t o l d the c h i l d r e n t o s t a n d on t h e i r c h a i r s .  A l l d i d so.  b-The t e a c h e r t o l d a l l t h e c h i l d r e n t o "Jump o f f your chairs.".  A l l d i d so.  c-The t e a c h e r asked the c h i l d r e n i f they knew the word f o r the s i g n " o f f " .  No p u p i l knew t h e word.  d-The t e a c h e r s a i d and f i n g e r s p e l l e d " o f f " .  She  then  w r o t e the word on the b o a r d . e-The t e a c h e r asked one p u p i l t o s t a n d on h i s c h a i r . She then asked him t o jump o f f i t and asked him what he .had done. f-With assistance o f f the c h a i r .  the p u p i l s i g n e d t h a t he had jumped  h-The t e a c h e r now gave t h e p u p i l s t h e commands on your c h a i r s . " and "Jump o f f your  "Stand  chairs.".  i-The t e a c h e r now gave t h e p u p i l s t h e command t o w r i t e what they had done i n t h e i r workbooks. were checked and a s s i s t a n c e  A l l responses  g i v e n as n e c e s s a r y ,  j - S t e p s h) and i ) were r e p e a t e d w i t h d i f f e r e n t commands, e.g. Push your book o f f t h e desk. Push t h e t o y c a r o f f t h e desk. b-past  tense  N a t u r a l Method S c h o o l : P r e p a r a t i o n : The t e a c h e r had p r e p a r e d  flashcards  f o r the lesson.  A s l o t c h a r t was ready a t t h e f r o n t :of t h e c l a s s r o o m . The c h i l d r e n were s e a t e d on c h a i r s i n a s e m i - c i r c l e f a c i n g the teacher.  A l l c h i l d r e n wore h e a d s e t s  f o r the  c l a s s r o o m group h e a r i n g a i d . Presentation:  a-The t e a c h e r showed a f l a s h c a r d b e a r i n g t h e p r i n t e d word "push".  A l l c h i l d r e n read t h e c a r d .  The t e a c h e r  then  asked one p u p i l t o "push" h i s desk. b-The p u p i l pushed h i s desk.  The t e a c h e r p o i n t e d t o t h e  f l a s h c a r d as t h e desk was b e i n g pushed.  When t h e p u p i l  s t o p p e d , she q u i c k l y stopped p o i n t i n g t o t h e word on the f l a s h c a r d . c-The t e a c h e r t o l d t h e c l a s s t h a t t h e p u p i l had stopped pushing the t a b l e . "push". The  Now they c o u l d n o t use t h e word  The boy had f i n i s h e d w i t h p u s h i n g t h e t a b l e .  teacher put the f l a s h c a r d i n the s l o t c h a r t .  46  d-The t e a c h e r asked the c l a s s i f they knew how the word t o show t h a t the boy was p u p i l was  t o change  f i n i s h e d pushing.  a b l e t o p r o v i d e the c o r r e c t  No  response.  e-The t e a c h e r t o l d t h e p u p i l s t h a t two l e t t e r s /ed/ were added t o t h e word t o show t h a t i t was showed a new  finished.  She  f l a s h c a r d b e a r i n g t h e word "pushed".  f - A l l p u p i l s s a i d and f i n g e r s p e l l e d t h e new word.  The  t e a c h e r p l a c e d i t i n the s l o t c h a r t b e s i d e the word "push". g-Steps a) through f ) were r e p e a t e d f o r the words " p l a y , walk, p u l l , c o l o u r . "  The p u p i l s p l a c e d a l l c a r d s i n t h e  slotchart. Summary:  The t e a c h e r t o l d the p u p i l s t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n t forms of the word had d i f f e r e n t names.  She i n t r o d u c e d t h e words " p r e s e n t "  and " p a s t " and l a b e l l e d the word columns a p p r o p r i a t e l y . t o l d t h e p u p i l s t h a t they had t o remember t h a t the /ed/ had t o be added when an a c t i o n was  She  letters  finished.  Formal Method S c h o o l : Preparation:  The  t e a c h e r had s e l e c t e d a number o f p i c t u r e s  a c t i o n s i n t h e p r e s e n t and p a s t t e n s e s . seated f a c i n g the teacher.  demonstrating  A l l c h i l d r e n were  A l l p u p i l s were w e a r i n g  group  hearing aids. Presentation:  a-The t e a c h e r showed the p u p i l s a p i c t u r e of a boy p u l l i n g a wagon.  She s a i d "The  boy i s p u l l i n g t h e  wagon." and w r o t e the sentence on t h e board under the F i t z g e r a l d Key h e a d i n g s "Who  verb  What."  b-The t e a c h e r kept the p i c t u r e i n s i g h t and  emphasized  47  t h a t the c h i l d r e n can see the boy p u l l i n g the wagon. c-The t e a c h e r p l a c e d t h e f i r s t p i c t u r e f a c e down and showed a second p i c t u r e w i t h t h e wagon s t i l l and t h e boy w a l k i n g away. The t e a c h e r s a i d t h a t t h e boy was not p u l l i n g the wagon. He had f i n i s h e d p u l l i n g i t . d-The t e a c h e r asked "What d i d t h e boy  do?".  e-The t e a c h e r a s s i s t e d the p u p i l s i n r e s p o n d i n g t o the question.  One p u p i l wrote "The boy p u l l e d the wagon."  on t h e board b e s i d e the: i n i t i a l s e n t e n c e . f-The t e a c h e r p o i n t e d out t h a t the two s e n t e n c e s were almost i d e n t i c a l .  Only the v e r b had changed because  t h e boy had f i n i s h e d p u l l i n g t h e wagon. g-Steps a) through f ) were r e p e a t e d f o r d i f f e r e n t ' of p i c t u r e s . Summary:  series  No i r r e g u l a r v e r b s were a t t e m p t e d .  The t e a c h e r r e v i e w e d t h e s e r i e s of sentences e m p h a s i z i n g  that  the v e r b changed i n form when an a c t i o n had been completed. I t w i l l be noted t h a t l e s s o n s i n b o t h s c h o o l s a r e q u i t e similar.  T h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i s found w i t h r e g a r d t o a l l p r i n c i p l e s .  I t i s t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r t e a c h i n g any l e s s o n and t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r r e v i e w work and d r i l l t h a t d i f f e r s from method t o method.  As noted  earlier  the n a t u r a l method depends on t h e t e a c h e r ' s a n a l y s i s of the changing needs of h e r p u p i l s and l e s s o n s and r e v i e w a r e -to be p r a c t i c a l m e a n i n g f u l a t t h e time o f p r e s e n t a t i o n .  and  A curriculum i s considered  o n l y a g u i d e and not a s e t of s t e p s to be f o l l o w e d i n o r d e r t o ensure t h a t a l l language p r i n c i p l e s a r e t a u g h t i n a r a t i o n a l ; , sequence.  Drill  48  i s c o n s i d e r e d u n d e s i r a b l e and n o n p r o d u c t i v e but i t . was d r i l l was  observed  that  a r o u t i n e p a r t o f t h e programme i n the. n a t u r a l method s c h o o l .  The f o r m a l methods s t a t e d e f i n i t e sequences i n w h i c h language i s t o be taught.  Language i s p e r c e i v e d as a complex b u i l d i n g which one must  b u i l d b l o c k on b l o c k cementing  t h e whole s t r u c t u r e w i t h d r i l l  review.  e l e c t t o t e a c h a few p r i n c i p l e s out o f  W h i l e the t e a c h e r may  and  sequence t o respond t o immediate needs, t h e m a j o r i t y of p r i n c i p l e s a r e taught i n the laid-down  sequence.  The arguments f o r the i n t e n d e d form o f p r o c e s s f a c t o r s a r e the same f o r b o t h methods and a r e congruent w i t h i n t e n d e d i n p u t s . P r i n c i p l e s a r e t o be p r e s e n t e d i n a l o g i c a l manner e x t e n d i n g i n t o the r e a l m of t h e unknown from t h a t o f the known.  Language p r o c e s s e s  are  p r e p a r e d and p r e s e n t e d by t r a i n e d t e a c h e r s o f the deaf employing  the  b e s t hardware and s o f t w a r e a v a i l a b l e .  A t t e n t i o n i s g i v e n t o the  p r o v i s i o n o f an a p p r o p r i a t e a u d i t o r y environment.  Communication i s  r o u t i n e l y i n the form p r e s c r i b e d f o r the s c h o o l as a u n i t .  The  heavy dependency o f deaf c h i l d r e n on v i s u a l i n p u t d e c i d e s t h e r e l i a n c e on p i c t u r e s , f l a s h c a r d s and w r i t e n work. To t h i s p o i n t i n t e n d e d s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , i n p u t f a c t o r s p r o c e s s f a c t o r s meld t o p r e s e n t a w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d whole.  The  one  d i s r u p t i n g ' f a c t o r i s the vagueness o r absence of p o l i c y g o a l s and programme o b j e c t i v e s .  W h i l e t h e t h r e e f a c t o r s mentioned above a r e  w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d , i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o judge whether o r not they s e r v e t o meet t h e g e n e r a l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s s t a t e d .  As  will  noted  t h e i r congruency w i t h t h e i r observed p a r a l l e l s does not appear t o be perfect.  The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n of " r e s u l t s " o r "outcome f a c t o r s "  w i l l i n d i c a t e the a c t u a l e f f i c a c y of t h e programmes r e l a t i v e to the  and  language a n i l i t y o f t h e n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d and r e l a t i v e t o each other.  From o b s e r v a t i o n and a n a l y s i s of s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , i n p u t  f a c t o r s and p r o c e s s  f a c t o r s i t i s n o t apparent t h a t t h e two methods  would be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y  efficacious.  CHAPTER V RESULTS  1.  Data  Both q u a n t i t a t i v e t h i s study.  and  Analysis  q u a l i t a t i v e r e s u l t s are of i n t e r e s t i n  S p e c i f i c models, as d i s c u s s e d below, were employed to  f a c i l i t a t e the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of r e s u l t s . Quantitative  Results  Two analysis.  s c o r i n g models were used t o p r e p a r e s u b j e c t r e s p o n s e s f o r  The  f i r s t was  B o t h Menyuk and  a simple correct  (1) o r i n c o r r e c t  (0)  system.  Berko employed t h i s type o f dichotomous s c a l e i n t h e i r  investigations. The systems, one  second s c o r i n g model was  a scaled  system.  f o r r e s p o n s e s to Menyuk t e s t items and  to Berko i t e m s , were d e v i s e d t o f e r r e t out between the s u b j e c t s taught under the two e a r l i e r s t u d y (Bunch, 1971)  indicated  one  Two  scaled  f o r responses  s i m i l a r i t i e s and  differences  language programmes.  An  t h a t deaf s u b j e c t s responded to  items on b o t h t e s t s w i t h d e c i d e d v a r i e t y .  A simple  correct-incorrect  s c a l e would not p e r m i t i n v e s t i g a t i o n of "degrees of c o r r e c t n e s s " i n responses not w h o l l y c o r r e c t between the e f f e c t s of the The  and  two  might c o n c e a l i m p o r t a n t  language programmes.  hypotheses suggest c e r t a i n c o n t r a s t s  e f f e c t s and/or i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s are n o t e d . was  selected  effects.  The  i f s i g n i f i c a n t main B o n f e r r o n i t_ t e s t  as an a p p r o p r i a t e s t a t i s t i c to i n v e s t i g a t e  T h i s t e s t of m u l t i p l e  differences  significant  comparison of means a l l o w s f o r a  51  p r i o r i and a p o s t e r i o r i , o r t h o g o n a l and n o n - o r t h o g o n a l c o n t r a s t s , as w e l l as y i e l d i n g c o n s e r v a t i v e r e s u l t s ( K i r k , 1968). Qualitative Results A q u i t e g e n e r a l model was employed f o r t h e q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of r e s u l t s .  A l l r e s p o n s e s t o b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s were a n a l y z e d and  c a t e g o r i z e d on t h e b a s i s o f t y p e .  T h i s approach p e r m i t t e d d e t a i l e d  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f t y p e s o f e r r o r s as w e l l as degree o f c o r r e c t n e s s o f responses d e m o n s t r a t i n g examined.  some u n d e r s t a n d i n g  I t was c o n s i d e r e d  of the p r i n c i p l e s  being  i m p e r a t i v e t o d i s c o v e r t h e types o f e r r o r s  made under c o n t r a s t i n g language programmes t o e v a l u a t e programme e f f e c t s fully.  2.  Results of Quantitative Analysis  Menyuk's Test o f Grammatical Competence Menyuk's t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d Appendix D.  t o a l l s u b j e c t s as d e t a i l e d i n  A n a l y s e s were performed o n l y f o r t h e non-spontaneous mode  s i n c e i t i s t h i s mode w h i c h y i e l d s t h e most i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e deaf s u b j e c t s ' knowledge o f t h e language p r i n c i p l e s b e i n g i n v e s t i g a t e d . I n t h e spontaneous mode many s u b j e c t s w i l l n o t demonstrate t h e i r t r u e competence i n t r e a t i n g v a r i o u s p r i n c i p l e s due t o t h e i n s t r u c t i o n o n l y to r e p e a t t h e s t i m u l u s . Menyuk's o l d e r n u r s e r y group ( n = 43, age 4 y e a r s , 4 months to  5 y e a r s , 3 months) i s t h e s p e c i f i c group t o w h i c h t h e deaf s u b j e c t  groups were compared. Menyuk p r e s e n t e d  h e r d a t a f o r t h e non-spontaneous mode i n t h e  form o f s t i m u l i s e n t e n c e s n o t c o r r e c t e d by a t l e a s t  twenty-five  52  p e r - c e n t of her s u b j e c t s .  The c a t e g o r y " c o r r e c t e d " i n c l u d e s m o d i f i c a t i o n s  and t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s as d e f i n e d i n Appendix E.  A s i m i l a r a n a l y s i s of -  r e s p o n s e s by deaf s u b j e c t s r e v e a l e d t h a t no Menyuk sentence was responded t o c o r r e c t l y by t w e n t y - f i v e per c e n t of any deaf group (Table 2 ) .  The d i f f e r e n c e between the h e a r i n g group and each of the  deaf groups i s so o b v i o u s as not t o n e c e s s i t a t e s t a t i s t i c a l  analysis.  T h i s f i n d i n g i n d i c a t e s t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n between ages 9 y e a r s and 16 y e a r s d i d not c o r r e c t a g r a m m a t i c a l s e n t e n c e s i n the nonspontaneous mode w i t h the f a c i l i t y o f younger h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . H y p o t h e s i s one s t a t i n g a d i f f e r e n c e between Menyuk's h e a r i n g group and each of t h e deaf groups i n t h i s s t u d y i s s u p p o r t e d . F u r t h e r a n a l y s e s were performed on responses t o Menyuk i t e m s t o i n v e s t i g a t e whether deaf s u b j e c t s d i f f e r e d on the v a r i a b l e s o f method, age and s e x . The f i n d i n g of no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between methods ( T a b l e 3) s u p p o r t s h y p o t h e s i s t h r e e w h i c h suggested no d i f f e r e n c e would be f o u n d . sex.  S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r b o t h age and  T h i s r e s u l t was h y p o t h e s i z e d f o r age but not f o r sex.  d i f f e r e n c e was i n v e s t i g a t e d u s i n g B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s and  The  age  significant  d i f f e r e n c e s were found between the youngest (A^) age group and the o l d e s t (A^) age group and t h e m i d d l e (A^) and o l d e s t age  groups  (Table 4 ) . The means f o r males significantly.  (9.9394) and females (24.3570)  differed  T h i s f i n d i n g i n d i c a t e s that hypothesis f i v e , which  suggested no d i f f e r e n c e would be f o u n d , may be r e j e c t e d . The above a n a l y s i s was performed on r e s u l t s from t h e s c a l e d  53  Table 2 Sentences Not C o r r e c t e d i n Non-Spontaneous Mode by A t L e a s t 25% o f S u b j e c t s i n Each Group  Groups Sentences Menyuk  1 2 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  X  x  X X  X X  X  l  N  N  2  N  3  F  F  2  X X X X  X  X  X X X  X X X  X X X X X X  X  X X X X X X  X X X X X X  X X X X X X  X X X X X X X X X X X X  X X X X X X  X X X X X X  X X X  X X X  X X X  X  X  X X X X  X X X X  X X X X  X X X X X  X X X X X  X X X X X  X X  l  X X  X X X X X X X X X X  F. 3  X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X  X X X  X X X X  X X X X  X X X X  Table 3 Summary Anova T a b l e o f N a t u r a l and Formal Language Method Deaf S u b j e c t Groups f o r Non-Spontaneous C o r r e c t i o n o f Items on Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence  Source  df  Mean Square  F  Method  1  1178.75719  2.37034  Age  2  4525.45577  9.10016*  Sex  1  2750.63022  5.53119*  Method X Age  2  545.40999  1.09676  Method X Sex  1  4.01829  .00808  Age X Sex  2  1180.68311  2.37421  Method X Age X Sex  2  570.21416  1.14663  63  497.29419  Error  * p r o b a b i l i t y <.05  Table 4  Summary o f Menyuk Non-Spontaneous Mode Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  V V  2  ^3  =  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r ^  = A^ - T~  2  1.910 > V  1  > -28.075  = A^ - A^  -13.429 > T  2  > -45.736 *  ^2 " ^3  "  *  5 9 3  " 3 " f  _ 3 2  -  C e l l Means A^ =  4.8461  A^ = 17.9286 A^ = 34.4285  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l , where A^ = 9 y e a r s , 0 months t o 10 y e a r s , 11 months = 12 y e a r s , 0 months t o 13 y e a r s , 11 months A  Q  = 15 y e a r s , 0 months t o 16 y e a r s , 11 months  4 0 7  *  s c o r i n g system (Appendix D) f o r Menyuk i t e m s .  T h i s system  allows  c r e d i t f o r a wide range o f r e s p o n s e s i n c l u d i n g p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n o f e r r o r source i n a p e r f e c t l y repeated sentence, p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r source i n a sentence c o n t a i n i n g and  a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s and m o d i f i c a t i o n s  imperfect c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r source.  A f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s was  performed on t h e b a s i s of p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n o f e r r o r s o u r c e whether or n o t a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s appeared i n t h e response ( T a b l e 5 ) . Once a g a i n no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between methods w h i l e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r s e x and age. Bonferroni  t^ t e s t s f o r age i n d i c a t e d t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -  ences e x i s t e d between A^ and A^ and A^ and A ^ ( T a b l e 6 ) . The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between means f o r males (2.4545) and females (4.8809) i n d i c a t e s a s e x d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e a b i l i t y t o respond t o Menyuk i t e m s . various  These  f i n d i n g s a r e s i m i l a r t o those f o r t h e o v e r a l l Menyuk a n a l y s i s .  Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s Berko's t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d t o a l l deaf s u b j e c t s as d e t a i l e d i n Appendix H.  A n a l y s i s of variance  (Table 7) i n d i c a t e s a  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between means f o r groups. were employed t o t r a c e t h e s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n .  B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s As i n d i c a t e d  ( T a b l e 8) a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between t h e h e a r i n g group and  each o f t h e deaf groups w i t h t h e h e a r i n g group o b t a i n i n g t h e  h i g h e r s c o r e i n each c a s e .  T h i s f i n d i n g i n d i c a t e s t h a t h y p o t h e s i s two  s t a t i n g t h a t such a d i f f e r e n c e would be found i s s u p p o r t e d . F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s w i t h t h e deaf s u b j e c t s out t o t e s t hypotheses f o u r , s i x and e i g h t .  a l o n e were c a r r i e d  The f i r s t o f t h e s e  a n a l y s e s suggested no d i f f e r e n c e would be found between methods.  57  Table 5 Summary Anova T a b l e o f Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal .and Method Groups For P e r f e c t C o r r e c t i o n o f E r r o r Source i n Menyuk T e s t of Grammatical Competence Items  Mean Square  F  Source  df  Method  1  45.65703  1.94103  Age  2  213.84224  9.09112*  Sex  1  96.19249  4.08945*  Method X Age  2  24.80982  1.05474  Method X Sex  1  .01391  .00059  Age X Sex  2  46.79467  1.98939  Method X Age X Sex  2  24.95053  1.06073  63  23.52211  Error  * p r o b a b i l i t y <• .05  58  Table 6 Summary o f Menyuk P e r f e c t C o r r e c t i o n o f E r r o r Source Non-Spontaneous Mode Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contract  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r  J ¥  = A  ^  2  V  =  i  A  = A  - A  .623 Z. V >  2  1  ~ 3  -2.742 > V  A  2  - A  - .161 i f  C e l l Means A  *equivalent  = 1.0769  A  2  = 3.7143  A  3  = 7.3333  t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  -5.898  > -9.771 * 3  > -7.077 *  59  Table 7 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Responses by H e a r i n g and Deaf S u b j e c t s t o Items on Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s  Source  df  Mean Square  Groups  6  12522.69  Items Groups X Items  *probability  < .05  26  469.0114  156  176.2721  F  71.04*  Table 8 Summary o f Berko H e a r i n g v s Deaf C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  *1  =  \  = =  -N  52.456 > ^  2  \ \"  1  ?  Interval for f .  55.284 *  74.345  «b  = =b  h  95% C o n f i d e n c e  2  ^ 33.062 A  52.567 > ^  > 33.507 *  73.345 >  > 54.284 A  4  53.123 > f > 34.062 A 5 "  " 2 ?  47.234 >  " 3 ?  V> 28.173 A 6  C e l l Means  \ H  2  w  3  = 64 .81481  ?  0 .00000  ?  = 21 .88889  1 2  = 1.00000 =21.22222 =27.11111  = 21 .77778  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l where K  = Berko s u b j e c t s  S u b j e c t t o t a l s c o r e s w i t h m a r k i n g of r e s p o n s e s on the b a s i s o f t h e Berko t e s t s c a l e d s c o r i n g system (Appendix I ) were u t i l i z e d . s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between groups was found ( T a b l e 9 ) .  No A similar  f i n d i n g of a l a c k of s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r sex s u p p o r t e d h y p o t h e s i s s i x w h i c h i n d i c a t e d no d i f f e r e n c e f o r sex would be found. Bonferroni  t t e s t s were employed  t o t r a c e the s o u r c e of  v a r i a t i o n f o r t h e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e found between age (Table 10). and A^.  groups  S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found between A^ and A^ and  A^  These f i n d i n g s s u p p o r t h y p o t h e s i s e i g h t w h i c h i n d i c a t e d a  d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of o l d e r s u b j e c t s would be found. Berko's t e s t i n v e s t i g a t e s the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t y t o respond i n the a r e a s o f p l u r a l f o r m s , t e n s e forms and p o s s e s s i v e forms.  Analyses  were performed f o r each of t h e s e a r e a s t o d i s c o v e r whether o r not language method, sex o r age s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t t h e a b i l i t y t o respond c o r r e c t l y i n these s p e c i f i c areas. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r method o r sex f o r items demanding p l u r a l forms ( T a b l e 1 1 ) . The s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e f o r age was i n v e s t i g a t e d ( T a b l e 12) and as w i t h t h e p r e c e d i n g a n a l y s i s t h e s o u r c e of v a r i a t i o n was between groups A^ and A^ and A^ and  found  A^.  The a n a l y s i s f o r p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e s p o n d i n g t o i t e m s r e q u i r i n g knowledge  of t e n s e forms a g a i n i n d i c a t e d no d i f f e r e n c e f o r  method o r sex but a d i f f e r e n c e f o r age ( T a b l e 1 3 ) .  The d i f f e r e n c e f o r  age was t r a c e d t o s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between age groups A^ and A^ and age groups A^ and A^ ( T a b l e 1 4 ) . The f i n a l a n a l y s i s i n v e s t i g a t e d p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e s p o n d i n g t o nonsense words r e q u i r i n g p o s s e s s i v e s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l  62  Table 9 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o Berko T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s  Mean Square  F  Source  df  Method  1 "•  Age  2  7376.44811  Sex  1  403.37268  .59892  Method X Age  2  67.60386  .10038  Method X Sex  1  2081.92815  3.09118  Age X Sex  2  295.47744  .43872  Method X Age X Sex  2  382.32698  .56767  63  673.50513  Error  *probability  < .05  503.18461  .74711 10.95233*  T a b l e 10 Summary of Berko T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  95% C o n f i d e n c e  Interval for ¥  ¥  -46.894 *  = A  - A  2  -11.968 >  - A  3  -15.194 > ¥  2  > -52.788 *  - A  3  13.941 > ^  3  > -23.060  *  2  = A  ^  3  = A  2  C e l l Means A  =  1.9615  A  2  = 31.3928  A  3  = 35.9523  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  64  T a b l e 11 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o Berko P l u r a l Form Items  df  Method  1  65.41736  Age  2  1664.94091  Sex  1  20.06586  .16898  Method X Age  2  20.01485  .16855  Method X Sex  1  382.61729  3.22211  Age X Sex  2  54.03508  .45504  Method X Age X Sex  2  79.17787  .66678  63  118.74739  Error  *probability  < .05  Mean Square  F  Source  .55090 14.02086*  T a b l e 12 Summary o f Berko P l u r a l Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r ¥  y  -6.604 > ¥  1  = A  1  - A 2  ¥  2  = A  L  - A  3  -7.893 > ^  V  3  = A  2  - A  3  5.923 > *  C e l l Means  A  =  1.3462  A  2  = 15.2857  A  3  = 17.1428  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  1  > -21.275 * > -23.701 *  3  > " 9.638  66  T a b l e 13 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Responses t o Berko Tense Form Items  F  Source  df  Mean Square  Method  1  27.75417  Age  2  1286.47689  Sex  1  240.91398  1,53333  Method X Age  2  19.80577  .12606  Method X Sex  1  228.46209  1.45407  Age X Sex  2  66.24610  .42163  Method X Age X Sex  2  62.27228  .39634  63  157.11861  Error  *probability  < .05  .17664 8.18793*  T a b l e 14 Summary o f Berko Tense Form T o t a l S c o r e Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r *F  y  -4.811 > V > 1  1  = A  *  = A  ¥  = A  1  2  - A 2 - A  3  -4.537 > ^  - A  3  8.549 > ^  C e l l Means  A  =  .2308  A  2  = 13.4643  A  3  = 13.8571  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  "21.656 * > -22.716 * > - 9.334  68  forms.  Once a g a i n no d i f f e r e n c e was  found f o r method o r sex  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r main e f f e c t s f o r age i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s f o r method X age  and method X sex  while and  ( T a b l e 15).  B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s were used t o t r a c e t h e s o u r c e of v a r i a t i o n i n a l l cases.  groups  I t was  found t h a t the s o u r c e of v a r i a t i o n l a y between  and A^  (Table 16).  Here, as i n a l l cases where s i g n i f i c a n t  d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r age, the o l d e r age The  age  the d i f f e r e n c e was  i n the d i r e c t i o n of  group. s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e f o r method X sex l a y between  n a t u r a l method males and n a t u r a l method females (Table 1 7 ) .  No  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found w i t h i n o r a c r o s s methods by  other sex.  I n the case of t h e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e f o r method X the v a r i a t i o n was  t r a c e d t o the d i f f e r e n c e between the N^ group  the F^ group w i t h the l a t t e r group p o s s e s s i n g  the h i g h e r  was  eight.  examined i n i s o l a t i o n ( p l u r a l s , t e n s e s , p o s s e s s i v e s ) ,  I n a d d i t i o n i t was  the  consistent  an almost as c o n s i s t e n t d i f f e r e n c e between the A^ and A^  groups.  18).  No m a t t e r w h i c h p r i n c i p l e  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found between the A^ and A^ age and  and  s c o r e (Table  These l a t t e r t h r e e a n a l y s e s c a s t a d d i t i o n a l l i g h t on f i n d i n g s f o r hypotheses f o u r , s i x and  age,  found t h a t t h e r e was  groups age  no main e f f e c t sex  method d i f f e r e n c e i n a b i l i t y t o respond t o the i s o l a t e d p r i n c i p l e s .  or  L e a f 69 o m i t t e d i n page numbering.  70  T a b l e 15 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and F o r m a l Method Group Responses t o Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form Items  Mean Square  F  Source  df  Method  1  44.27967  2.07452  Age  2  184.73326  8.65482*  Sex  1  4.59830  Method X Age  2  99.67977  4.67003*  Method X Sex  1  165.75116  7.76550*  Age X Sex  2  6.88303  .32247  Method X Age X Sex  2  33.81396  1.58420  63  21.34456  Error  „  *probability  < .05  .21543  T a b l e 16 Summary o f Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Age C o n t r a s t s i  Estimated Contrast  95% C o n f i d e n c e  .854 > ¥ 1.138 > ¥  Interval for  > -5.370 2  > -7.807 *  1.076 > T. > -5.494  C e l l Means .3846 2.6428 4.8517  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  72  T a b l e 17 Summary o f Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Method X Sex C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  =  M  1 1 " 1 2 S  = 1 1 M  \  S  M  S  -M S 2  M  2 1 " 1 2  =  M  2 1 " 2 2 S  M  Interval for¥  -  >  -17.216  >  - 7.082  >  - 4.319  >  - 4.624  2  =  S  95% C o n f i d e n c e  S  M  S  .301  >  1.225  >  2.802  >  4.767  >  *1  \ ¥  3  \  C e l l Means MS 1  M S 2  1  = 0.0000  M S  = 3.0000  M~~s"~ = 2.9286  1  2  = 3.7586  2  2  T a b l e 18 Summary o f Berko P o s s e s s i v e Form T o t a l Score Deaf S u b j e c t s Method X Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated  Contrast.  = M  1 1 " 2 2  = M  1 1  A  M  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r ¥.  " 2 3 M  A  4.873 >  >  -  5.501  - 2.617 >  >  -  13.428  >  -  8.240  >  -  7.708  > -  10.120  A  A  1.971 >  = 2 1 " 1 2 M  M  A  A  3.212 >  *4 = 2 1 " 1 3 M  A  M  -M A  *5 = 1 2 M  \  2  A  = M A 2  A  2  .527  3  M  A  \  >  3.434 >  " 1 3  *3  \  >  C e l l Means MA M A X  MA  = 2  .3529  M ^  =  .4444  = 3.5789  M ^  =  .6667  = 2.6923  M ^  = 8.3750  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  -  7.486  74 3.  Results of Q u a l i t a t i v e Analysis  Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence In of  Sentences C h i l d r e n Use Menyuk s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s t r u c t u r e  a p a r t i c u l a r sentence and n o t i t s l e n g t h determined whether o r n o t  young c h i l d r e n c o u l d r e p e a t h e r a g r a m m a t i c a l sentences as g i v e n ( r e p e t i t i o n ) , w i t h a c o r r e c t change i n s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e or  s p o n t a n e o u s l y c o r r e c t them ( c o r r e c t i o n ) .  or  response w h i l e i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s was.  for  (modification),  Memory was n o t t h e v e h i c l e Support  t h i s p o s i t i o n was found i n t h e f a c t t h a t d e v i a t i o n s from complete  r e p e t i t i o n s were m o d i f i c a t i o n s and spontaneous  corrections.  If  o m i s s i o n o f p a r t s o f s e n t e n c e s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s o f o t h e r words o r morphemes had been t h e most f r e q u e n t d e v i a t i o n s , t h e i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f r u l e s p o s i t i o n would have been weakened w i t h a concomitant s t r e n g t h e n i n g of  a memory p o s i t i o n . W i t h t h i s t h e o r e t i c a l framework f o r t h e manner i n w h i c h  children to  approach  Menyuk's t e s t i n mind, a n a l y s e s o f s u b j e c t r e s p o n s e s  t h e r e q u i r e m e n t f i r s t t o r e p e a t a g r a m m a t i c a l s e n t e n c e s and then t o  c o r r e c t them were made ( T a b l e s 19 and 2 0 ) .  Menyuk's c o r r e c t i o n s and  m o d i f i c a t i o n s were subsumed under C o r r e c t i o n .  Responses c r e d i t e d  under  Attempted C o r r e c t i o n i n d i c a t e that: an apparent attempt was made t o change t h e element c a u s i n g t h e i n i t i a l problem ( t h e e r r o r s o u r c e ) , b u t t h a t a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s were made somewhere i n t h e r e s p o n s e . I t w i l l be n o t e d t h a t o f t h e 1800 r e p e t i t i o n phase responses the  s e v e n t y - f i v e deaf s u b j e c t s were a b l e t o c o r r e c t t h e agrammatical  s e n t e n c e s s p o n t a n e o u s l y i n o n l y 102 c a s e s .  D e v i a t i o n s i n t h e form o f  o m i s s i o n s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s were found more f r e q u e n t l y than  75 T a b l e 19 C a t e g o r i z e d Responses for A H S u b j e c t s t o t h e R e p e t i t i o n Without C o r r e c t i o n Phase o f Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence  s  C  R  NR  1 3 2 4 3 6 4 17 5 4 6 1 7 3 8 9 • 6 10 7 11 2 12 .1 13 14 15 16 2 17 3 18 14 19 7 20 15 21 22 23 2 24 5 102  28 19 5 20 28 35 26 48 26 23 63 39 50 34 56 69 24 42 23 18 44 31 65 45 861  23 12 17 7 4 5 8 7 7 12 2 8 7 10 3 1  Where:  S c R NR AC 0 SUB WO A  5 10 6 1 4 1 160  = Sentence = Correction = Repetition = = = = =  Non-Response Attempted C o r r e c t i o n Omission Substitution Word Order Addition  AC  4 4 5 1 1 4 11 6 2 1 2 4 10 1 9 2 67  0 10 25 30 22 28 22 29 11 14 20 5 22 12 29 4 2 41 8 29 21 20 32 1 13 450  SUB 6 11 13 3 9 10 7 5 7 6 3 3 5 2 10 1 3 1 10 2 2 11 1 10 141  WO  A  3  2  1  5  1  2 4 1  2 1 8  1  11  76 T a b l e 20 C a t e g o r i z e d Responses f o r A l l S u b j e c t s t o t h e R e p e t i t i o n W i t h C o r r e c t i o n Phase o f Menyuk's Test o f Grammatical Competence  s  C  R  NR  AC  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  8 8 9 18 5 4 1 5 11 17 9 4 10 13 6 9 5 20 14 18 2 3 13 14  31 27 7 23 30 37 27 46 22 22 60 34 52 34 51 53 25 41 23 15 46 32 51 38  10 9 10 10 4 6 6 7 6 7 1 5 5 10 4 2 2 2 3 4 4 1 1  1 15 20 3 32 3 12 6 5 . 23 4 9 21 6 10 3 12 16 12 9 2 3 16 7 3 14 2 6 2 1 31 4 1 7 22 3 13 19 5 13 2 27 4 5 12 2  226  827  119  Where:  s c R NR AC 0 SUB WO A  Sentence Correction Repetition Non-Response Attempted C o r r e c t i o n Omission Substitution = Word Order = Addition  = = = = = =  99  0  349  SUB  l  6 6 13 5 8 11 9 3 2 8 3 11 1 1 4 6 5 1 7 5 5 8  WO  3 1 1  A  1 1 1  3  1 5 1 6 2  1 2 1  1 2 1 3 1 1  1 1  9 137  14  29  77 m o d i f i c a t i o n s and c o r r e c t i o n s ( t = 7.43; p  < .05; d f  = 23).  I n the  non-spontaneous mode a g r e a t e r number o f o m i s s i o n s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s were made as w e l l ( t = 3.95; p  < .05; df  = 23).  The i m p l i c a t i o n s  of t h e s e f i n d i n g s i n v i e w o f Menyuk's arguments w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l i n a l a t e r chapter. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t a l l age groups under t h e two methods have members who a r e unable t o respond  correctly to either a l l  of o r t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f Menyuk items w h i l e age groups A^ and  have  members who respond w i t h a f a i r degree o f c o r r e c t n e s s t o t h e m a j o r i t y o f items (Table 21).  Though e a r l i e r a n a l y s e s i n d i c a t e  significant  d i f f e r e n c e s f o r ages, t h e r e i s n o t a g r a d u a l l y i n c r e a s i n g a b i l i t y o f a l l group members t o respond  to the s t i m u l i .  i n t h e f a c t t h a t , w h i l e most Menyuk sentences  This finding i s reflected are corrected, the  c o r r e c t i o n s may be a t t r i b u t e d t o o n l y a v e r y few s u b j e c t s ( T a b l e 2 2 ) . I n v i e w o f t h e f a c t t h a t a l l members o f any s i n g l e s c h o o l group have met t h e same b a s i c s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a and have e x p e r i e n c e d exposure t o s i m i l a r t e a c h i n g methods o v e r t h e y e a r s , t h i s f i n d i n g i s o f c o n s i d e r a b l e interest. In a d d i t i o n to d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n d i v i d u a l subject r e a c t i o n to t h e spread o f Menyuk i t e m s , t h e r e was i n t e r e s t i n g r e a c t i o n - t o s p e c i f i c items.  Both o f t h e s e t e n d e n c i e s a r e r e f l e c t e d i n t a b l e s 33 t o 38  i n c l u s i v e (Appendix J ) . C o n s i d e r a t i o n was g i v e n t o a n a l y z i n g responses  t o items i n a  s y s t e m a t i c a l l y s t a t i s t i c a l manner t o i n v e s t i g a t e p o s s i b l e main and interaction effects.  The u n f o r t u n a t e b a l a n c e o f s u b j e c t s ( T a b l e 1)  m i t i g a t e d a g a i n s t such a p r o c e d u r e .  Any attempt  to achieve  propor-  t i o n a l i t y o f s u b j e c t s would r e s u l t i n t h e d e l e t i o n o f t o o g r e a t a  T a b l e 21 Summary o f P e r f e c t E r r o r Source C o r r e c t i o n s Independent o f A d d i t i o n a l E r r o r s o r M o d i f i c a t i o n s o f Meaning on a l l N and F Deaf S u b j e c t s  N a t u r a l Method Group  N  -  N  - F Z  Subject  F  1  F 2 3 4 5 6 7 . 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  ,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  Sex  Total Correct Responses 2 1  M F F F F M M M F , F F F F M M M F F M F M M F M F M M F F F F M F F F  1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 .  1 1 20 1 4 1  F o r m a l Method Subject  Sex  Total Correct Responses  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  M F M M F F M M M  3  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  F M M M F F F M F  2 5 5  1 1 2 9 1 4 1  continued  4  2  3 16 5 21  79  T a b l e 21  (continued)  Formal Method  N a t u r a l Method Group  N  J  - F  Subject  3  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  Sex  Total Correct Responses  M F M F F M F F M M F M M  5 1 3 20 1 2 16 11 1 16 12 1 1  Subj e c t  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  Sex  F M F F F F F M  Total Correct Responses  6 10 12 19 19 3 5  80  T a b l e 22 T o t a l C o r r e c t i o n of Menyuk Items by Each N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group  Groups Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  $  2  N  N  2  1 1 4 2 1  3  ¥  F  ±  1 1  F  2  2 2 1 3  1  3 2  1 2  2  2 1 5 2  1 2 2 2  3 5 2  1 1  6  1 2 1 1 1 4 2 6 2 1  1 2 2  4 4 3 1  3 1 1 5 3  1  2 4 3 1  3 3  4 1  3  4 4 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 4 1 2 2 3 2  4 4  3  number of s u b j e c t s and render  s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s meaningless.  f o l l o w i n g q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s was Only one responses.  individual in  The  made i n p l a c e of q u a n t i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s . o r F^ gave two p e r f e c t l y c o r r e c t  These two groups were c h a r a c t e r i z e d by almost t o t a l  i n a b i l i t y t o respond w i t h any i n d i c a t i o n o f g r a s p i n g the g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s under i n v e s t i g a t i o n . i n d i v i d u a l s who  and F^, however, c o n t a i n e d  2  e x h i b i t e d considerable a b i l i t y to deal w i t h  p r i n c i p l e s as p r e s e n t e d 6 and 9 ) .  Groups N  by Menyuk ( N  A s i m i l a r p a t t e r n was  2  s u b j e c t s 4 and 14; F  found f o r  i n c r e a s e d competence (N^  s u b j e c t s , 4, 7, 8, and 11; F^ s u b j e c t s 2, 4, 5, and 6 ) .  i n a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h any  7. My daddy has new  Conversely  demonstrated t o t a l or almost t o t a l  principle.  C e r t a i n items p r e s e n t e d t h e s e were items 6.  subjects,  and F^ s u b j e c t s w i t h a  g r e a t e r number i n each group d e m o n s t r a t i n g  a l l groups i n c l u d e d members who  2  the  almost u n i v e r s a l d i f f i c u l t y . . Among  He l i k e s t o l o o k a t  (noun p h r a s e o m i t t e d ) ,  o f f i c e downtown, ( a r t i c l e o m i t t e d ) ,  8. He  growed  b i g g e r and b i g g e r , (verb f o r m ) , 12. What name you're w r i t i n g ? (word order), rain.  15. Don't put t h e h a t . ( p a r t i c l e ) ,  ("There" i n s e r t i o n ) and  (verb i n a p p r o p r i a t e ) . rate.  22. He t o o k h i s k n i f e from f a l l i n g ,  Other items were c o r r e c t e d a t an above average  Among t h e s e were items 4.  ( p r e p o s i t i o n redundancy), 10. The  l i t t l e boy  The b a r b e r  t h r e e t r e e s , (verb-number agreement),  20. The  cut o f f h i s h a i r o f f .  9. He l i k e t e d t h a t funny game, (verb  i s washing h i s s e l f .  I have, (word o r d e r ) ,  21. I t i s n ' t any more  ( r e f l e x i v e form), 14. Two  form),  13. There's  b r o t h e r s and one  18. Where a r e the p e o p l e s ?  (noun f o r m ) ,  t e a c h e r w r i t e s t h a t numbers, ( d e t e r m i n e r :  noun f o r m ) ;  sister  82  23. T h i s d r e s s g r e e n , (verb o m i t t e d ) and (noun phrase redundancy).  C e r t a i n e r r o r s o u r c e s seemed t o be noted by  an above average number of s u b j e c t s who make c o r r e c t i o n s . pushed him.  24. She took i t away t h e h a t .  a t t e m p t e d , but were u n a b l e , t o  These i n c l u d e d i t e m 3.  They get mad  and then they  ( v e r b - t e n s e agreement) and items 9. and 12.  w i l l be t h e s u b j e c t o f l a t e r  These r e s u l t s  discussion.  I t i s of f u r t h e r i n t e r e s t t o n o t e t h a t o f the s e v e n t y - f i v e deaf s u b j e c t s o n l y n i n e responded c o r r e c t l y t o h a l f o r more of the Menyuk i t e m s .  A l l n i n e were female.  Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s T h i s t e s t has been used t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e development o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s i n b o t h h e a r i n g and deaf c h i l d r e n .  I n g e n e r a l , the  f i n d i n g s w i t h h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n d i c a t e e a r l y a c q u i s i t i o n o f most r e g u l a r a f f i x e s and i n c r e a s i n g c o n t r o l o v e r i r r e g u l a r a f f i x e s w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age.  The v a r i o u s - f i n d i n g s f o r deaf c h i l d r e n (Cooper,  1965;  G a r b e r , 1967) may be q u e s t i o n e d on the b a s i s of l i m i t e d f o r c e d c h o i c e f o r responses.  S u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y , who. were f r e e t o g i v e any  response they d e s i r e d , p r o v i d e d a much g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f responses than were a v a i l a b l e t o the deaf s u b j e c t s i n Garber's and Cooper's i n v e s t i g a t i o n s ( T a b l e s 23 and 2 4 ) . S u b j e c t s under b o t h methods i n t h i s s t u d y responded s t i m u l u s items w i t h c l o s e t o i n d i v i d u a l v a r i e t y .  Perfect  were i n f r e q u e n t r e l a t i v e t o i m p e r f e c t r e s p o n s e s .  Qualitative  t o Berko  responses  a t i o n o f r e s p o n s e s , however, s u g g e s t s t h a t c e r t a i n responses  examindemonstrate  a f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h t h e g r a m m a t i c a l c o n c e p t s b e i n g s t u d i e d w h i c h i s not apparent i n a p e r f e c t - i m p e r f e c t a n a l y s i s .  The s c o r i n g s c a l e s  T a b l e 23 O b t a i n e d Responses t o Rerko Item One From N a t u r a l Method Age Groups  Group T o t a l s Correct Response  Response  wugs  wugs  N^  -  a wugs wug  N^  N^  6  4  1 7  a wug  2 1  wuggest  1  wurg  1  wup  1  chickens  2  birds  3  ducks word  1 1  1  wax  1  wig  1  love  1  chicken  1  bug bird  1  2 5  1  legs  1  tiwn  1  No r e s p o n s e  2  84  T a b l e 24 O b t a i n e d Responses t o Berko Item One From Formal Method Groups  Group Responses Correct Response  Response  wugs  wugs  F  l  F  2  4  wug  1  1  birds  1  2  ducks  1  bugs  1  wings  1  F  3  3  1  legs  2  bird  1  brid  2 1  Fly 1 + 2 = 3  1  No r e s p o n s e  3  85  (Appendix i ) developed f o r t h i s t e s t r e p r e s e n t an attempt t o c r e d i t p a r t i a l l y c o r r e c t responses.  A n a l y s i s on t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e s c a l e s  has been d i s c u s s e d . As w i t h Menyuk's t e s t t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t r e a c t i o n t o Berko i t e m s and i n t e r e s t i n g g e n e r a l i z e d r e a c t i o n s to s p e c i f i c items.  These r e a c t i o n s a r e summarized i n t a b l e s 39 t o 44  i n c l u s i v e (Appendix K ) .  Once a g a i n s y s t e m a t i c s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s of  responses t o items was i n a p p r o p r i a t e due t o t h e u n f o r t u n a t e imbalance o f s u b j e c t s (Table 1 ) . I n g e n e r a l t h e youngest unable t o respond c o r r e c t l y . most items ( ^ responded  s u b j e c t s under b o t h methods were  A few N  s u b j e c t s were a b l e t o c o r r e c t  s u b j e c t s 4, 14 and 1 8 ) . A number o f H  and  c o r r e c t l y t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y h a l f o f t h e items ( N  8 and 9;  s u b j e c t s 2, 3, 6 and 9 ) . Both t h e  2  subjects s u b j e c t s 7,  and F^ groups i n c l u d e d  members who were u n a b l e t o respond c o r r e c t l y t o t h e m a j o r i t y o f items (N^ s u b j e c t s 4 and 5; F^ s u b j e c t s 2 and 4) w h i l e t h e i n c l u d e d members who responded  group a l s o  c o r r e c t l y to approximately h a l f of the  items (N^ s u b j e c t s 1, 3, 7 and 8 ) .  I n c o n t r a s t t o these s u b j e c t s who  r e a c t w i t h a f a i r degree o f c o r r e c t n e s s , a r e a l a r g e number i n each group who demonstrate  few s k i l l s i n r e a c t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o t h e i t e m s .  C e r t a i n items appeared j e c t s , than o t h e r s . I-si  t o p r e s e n t l e s s e r d i f f i c u l t y t o the sub-  Among t h e s e were some b u t not a l l p l u r a l items i n  and p a s t t e n s e items i n /-ed/ ( s p e c i f i c a l l y items 1. wugs;  9. l u n s ; 5. r i c k e d ) . and " r a n g " .  A l s o i n c l u d e d were t h e r e a l word items " g l a s s e s "  Other i t e m s p r e s e n t e d e x t r a d i f f i c u l t y .  Among t h e s e were  the p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e t e n s e i t e m " z i b b i n g " and t h e two t h i r d  person  s i n g u l a r items " n a z z e s " and " l o o d g e s " and the p o s s e s s i v e items as a group.  The p o s s e s s i v e p l u r a l i t e m s were e s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t .  Certain  o t h e r items i n d i c a t e d t h e tendency o f many s u b j e c t s to respond w i t h a word d e s c r i b i n g the s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e r a t h e r than w i t h t h e s t i m u l u s word ( 1 . wugs;  7, t o r s ;  2. g u t c h e s ;  4. k a z h e s ;  10. n i z z e s ) .  E x a m i n a t i o n o f e r r o r s from a l l groups i n d i c a t e d t h a t c e r t a i n c a t e g o r i e s o f e r r o r response c o u l d be d e f i n e d .  T a b l e 25 p r e s e n t s  e r r o r r a t e s by c a t e g o r y as p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l group e r r o r s .  T a b l e 26  i n d i c a t e s t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between ages, between c a t e g o r i e s and i n t h e case o f t h e age X c a t e g o r y i n t e r a c t i o n . As might be expected from e a r l i e r Berko a n a l y s e s t h e s o u r c e of v a r i a t i o n between ages was  traced to a s i g n i f i c a n t  difference  between t h e A^ and A^ age groups ( T a b l e 2 7 ) . A number o f s o u r c e s of v a r i a t i o n were found when the s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r c a t e g o r y was  i n v e s t i g a t e d (Table 28).  S u b j e c t s chose t o respond by r e p e a t i n g t h e s t i m u l u s word o r d e s c r i b i n g t h e p i c t u r e a t an e q u a l l e v e l . the s t i m u l u s t e x t .  T h i r d c h o i c e was  T h i s response was  r e p e t i t i o n o f p a r t of  chosen s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than  r e p e t i t i o n o f t h e s t i m u l u s word but not s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s t h a n d e s c r i p t i o n of the p i c t u r e .  I n t o t a l responses t h e n e x t c h o i c e was  t o respond a t a l l though t h i s c h o i c e was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y  different  than response by r e p e t i t i o n of p a r t o f t h e s t i m u l u s t e x t .  Over-  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of r u l e s and m i s c e l l a n e o u s response were chosen a t an e q u a l l e v e l and s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than any o t h e r response e x c e p t i n t h e case o f t h e c o n t r a s t between r e p e t i t i o n o f p a r t o f t h e s t i m u l u s t e x t and  over-generalization.  not  87  T a b l e 25 E r r o r Response C a t e g o r i e s S t a t e d i n P e r c e n t a g e s For A l l Berko T e s t Items  Groups Category  N  L  N  2  N  3  F  l  F  2  F  3  15.25  18.16  44.99  7.44  26.97  43.23  OverGeneralization of R u l e s  1.09  10.15  9.23  2.07  7.87  11.61  R e p e t i t i o n of P a r t of S t i m u l u s Text  23.97  20.83  11.92  22.73  8.99  3.87  Repetition of S t i m u l u s Word  39.65  28.04  11.15  38.43  26.41  15.49  No Response  12.85  20.29  13.46  20.25  21.35  23.23  7.19  2.67  9.23  9.09  8.43  2.58  Description of P i c t u r e  Miscellaneous  N^ - t o t a l e r r o r s  459 i n 459 r e s p o n s e s  N^ - t o t a l e r r o r s  375 i n 513 r e s p o n s e s  N^ - t o t a l e r r o r s  260 i n 351 r e s p o n s e s  F^ - t o t a l  errors  242 i n 243 r e s p o n s e s  F^ - t o t a l e r r o r s  178 i n 243 r e s p o n s e s  F„ - t o t a l  155 i n 216 r e s p o n s e s  errors  88  T a b l e 26 Summary Anova T a b l e f o r Deaf N a t u r a l and Formal Method Group Berko E r r o r Category Responses  Mean Square  F  Source  df  Method  :1  .11111  Age  2  6.86111  6.67568*  Category  5  25.51111  24.82161*  Method X Age  2  .19444  .18919  Method X C a t e g o r y  5  1.04444  1.01622  Age X Category  10  11.49444  Error  10  1.02778  *probability  <.05  .10811  11.18378*  T a b l e 27 Summary o f Berko E r r o r Age C o n t r a s t s  Estimated Contrast  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r ^  ¥^ = A^ -  2.355 > ^  ^ -.022  ^ =A^-A^  2.605 > ^  >  ^  1.338 > Y  2  3  = A^ - A^  C e l l Means A ^ = 4.0833 A^ = 2.9167 AT = 2.6667  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  3  .228 *  > -.938  T a b l e 28 Summary o f Berko E r r o r Category  Estimated Contrast  =  -  =  -  h  =  - c  \  =  *1 A,  !  7  Y  -  =  -  =  -  10 11 12 13 14 15  95% C o n f i d e n c e I n t e r v a l f o r ^  s 4  \ -s = \\=  =  -  =  -  = =  ^4  -  ^4  s  6.407  >  4.241  >  1.574  >  4.074  >  6.574  >  .074  >  1.926 *  V  - .241  *2*  -2.907  f > 3  f  - .407  4^  2.093 *  \>-  -4.407  -2.593  >  -7.074 *  - .093  >  -4.574 *  2.407  >  ^6  - .426  ^4  Contrasts  Y >> -2.074 9  -10  -  -4.907 *  > -2.407 2.074 >y - 11 " ^6  > 4.574 >y " 12 "  .093 *  >y > - 13 "  .259 A  4.741  S  7.241  ^6  4.741  °6  ^ 1 4 >~ ^15  C e l l Means C, = 5.1667 1  C. = 5.8333 4  C  = 1.0000  C  = 3.1667  C, = o  C  2  3 0  5  = 3.3333  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l .  .8333  &  2.759 * .259 *  A number o f s i g n i f i c a n t s o u r c e s o f v a r i a t i o n were found f o r the  s i g n i f i c a n t age X c a t e g o r y i n t e r a c t i o n ( T a b l e 2 9 ) .  responded by d e s c r i b i n g the s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e a t a r a t e h i g h e r t h a n A^ o r A^. the  Age group  A^  significantly  No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n r a t e of response i n  cases of o v e r - g e n e r a l i z a t i o n o r m i s c e l l a n e o u s e r r o r s was  found.  The A^ group chose t o r e p e a t p a r t of the s t i m u l u s t e x t a t a r a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than t h a t of the A^ o r A^ groups.  No  significant  d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r the A^ - A^ o r A^ - A^ c o n t r a s t s . case of r e p e t i t i o n of t h e s t i m u l u s word t h e A^ age group  differed  s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e A^ age group as d i d t h e A^ age group. s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was  I n the  found i n the r a t e a t w h i c h age  No  groups  e l e c t e d not t o respond. Berko's t e s t c o n t a i n s t h r e e r e a l words w h i c h the s u b j e c t s would n o r m a l l y e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e c l a s s r o o m ( g l a s s e s , m e l t e d , r a n g ) .  It  i s of i n t e r e s t t o n o t e t h a t some s u b j e c t s b r o k e c o n s i s t e n t p a t t e r n s of e r r o r o r non-response  t o c o r r e c t b o t h " g l a s s e s " and " r a n g " .  It is  d i f f i c u l t t o comment on " m e l t e d " s i n c e i t was t h e o n l y exemplar o f i t s p a r t i c u l a r type.  However, " g l a s s e s " and " r a n g " had o t h e r  exemplars and i n b o t h cases were responded t o c o r r e c t l y more so than were t h e i r coexemplars 8.5; of  ( g l a s s e s = 25, average f o r f o u r o t h e r exemplars =  rang = 13, average f o r two o t h e r exemplars = 0 ) .  This finding i s  c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t when one examines the i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of r u l e s  p o s i t i o n and the m e m o r i z a t i o n of r u l e s p o s i t i o n .  These w i l l be d i s c u s s e d  r e l a t i v e t o t h i s f i n d i n g i n a subsequent c h a p t e r . Once a g a i n i t i s o f i n t e r e s t t o n o t e t h a t of :the e l e v e n s u b j e c t s who  c o r r e c t e d t h i r t e e n . o r more Berko i t e m s , e i g h t were f e m a l e s .  T a b l e 29 Summary o f Berko E r r o r Age X Category  Estimated Contrast  ¥  1  =  C  1 1 " °1 2  ¥  2  =  C  1 1 " 1 3  ¥  3  =  C  1 2 " °1 3  A  95% C o n f i d e n c e  A  A  C  2  A  ,  1  -  9  5  " "  ¥  3 0 7  - *3 " "  ¥  2.469 > ¥  = C ^  - C A 2  3  ¥, = C„A„ - C_A„ 6 2 2 2 3  3.969 > V  V  7.469 > ¥  = C A  - C A  3  3  2  ¥  = CA  ¥  = C A  10  = C.A. - C.A„ 4 1 4 2  3  3  - C A  ±  3  2  - C A 3  *  12 1 0  1 3  *  ,  4  6  *  9  5  > - 5.469  b ?  g  g  > - 3.969 > -  .469  >  1.031 *  > - 2.469  11  1.031 *  >  3.531 *  6.469 >¥ > - 1.469 1^  =  3.969 > ¥  - C A : 5  e  =  9  = C.A- - C.A. 4 2 4 3 2  = C A- - C A 5 1 5 3  14 15  11.469 >¥  6  4 6 9  8.969 >T' > 10  H?,, = C.A. - C.A. 11 4 1 4 3 ¥  9  > - 5.469 .  5.469 > V  3  8  ,  4  8.969 > Y  3  4  9  2.469 > ¥  5  Interval for ¥  - 2 " " '  5 3 1  " '  A  6  V. = C„A, - C_A„ 4 2 1 2 2  g  ¥  9  " "  A  Contrasts  C  A  C  A  > - 3.969  5.969 >¥.. > - 1.969 14  0  °5 2 " 5 3  1 3  5  ,  9  6  9  " 15 ~ " W  1  ,  9  6  9  16  = C,A, - C>A„ 6 1 6 I  4.969 >*.,>- 2.969  17  = C,A. - C A 6 1 6 3  4.969  C  *18 = 6 2 " 6 3 C  A  C  A  ID  0  3  ,  9  6  9  1/  > - 2.969  **18 * '  3  ,  9  6  9  * e q u i v a l e n t t o s i g n i f i c a n c e a t .05 l e v e l . continued  93  T a b l e 29 ( c o n t i n u e d )  C e l l Means  C  1 1 A  ¥ 2 " ¥ 3 "  ¥ 2 "  3.0000  A  A  10.0000 5.0000  8.5000  2.5000  0.0000  4.0000  1.5000  ^2"  4.0000  1.5000  ¥ 3  2.0000  2.5000 3 2  4 1  4.0000  6.0000  C  C  1,0000  Vi" V2"  1.5000 .5000 .5000  94  CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION  1.  I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of R e s u l t s  Quantitative Results Hypothesis  1 No deaf group under e i t h e r method was  a b l e to c o r r e c t Menyuk's  items w i t h t h e f a c i l i t y o f 4 y e a r , 4 month t o 5 y e a r , 3 month o l d "•y  normally hearing c h i l d r e n .  The d i f f e r e n c e s i n f u n c t i o n i n g were so  d e f i n e d as t o beg s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s .  I t i s r e a d i l y apparent  that  the h y p o t h e s i s of a d i f f e r e n c e i n the d i r e c t i o n o f young h e a r i n g children i s sustained. Hypothesis  2 A main e f f e c t f o r groups was  found f o r the a n a l y s i s between  the h e a r i n g group and the deaf groups f o r Berko items as I n v e s t i g a t i o n employing  hypothesized.  B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s t r a c e d t h e s o u r c e o f  v a r i a t i o n t o s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the h e a r i n g f o u r t o seven year o l d group and each of t h e deaf groups w i t h t h e h e a r i n g group obtaining higher scores.  Deaf c h i l d r e n between ages n i n e y e a r s  s i x t e e n y e a r s a r e u n a b l e t o respond of much younger h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n .  to Berko items w i t h t h e  and  ability  T h i s r e s u l t agrees w i t h t h e e a r l i e r  f i n d i n g s of Cooper (1965) and Garber (1967).  The d i f f e r e n c e s found i n  t h i s s t u d y were much more pronounced than i n e i t h e r o f t h e s e s t u d i e s . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e i n degree may response  be c r e d i t e d t o the open-endedness of  i n t h i s s t u d y r e l a t i v e t o t h e r e s t r i c t e d response  a v a i l a b l e t o s u b j e c t s i n t h e Cooper and Garber s t u d i e s .  choices  95 Hypothesis 3 An a n a l y s i s o f responses t o Menyuk items was performed f o r deaf groups a l o n e on t h e b a s i s of method, age and s e x . made use o f t h e s c a l e d s c o r i n g system for'Menyuk i t e m s . no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t was found f o r method. e f f e c t i n v o l v i n g method was found. equally e f f e c t i v e i n enabling  This  analysis  As h y p o t h e s i z e d  I n a d d i t i o n no i n t e r a c t i o n  The n a t u r a l and f o r m a l methods were  deaf s u b j e c t s  t o respond t o Menyuk i t e m s .  A f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s on t h e b a s i s o f p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n o f e r r o r s o u r c e i g n o r i n g o t h e r e r r o r s i n responses a l s o i n d i c a t e d no main o r i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s f o r method. Hypothesis 4 A n a l y s i s o f Berko items was performed f o r t o t a l s c o r e s f o r a l l items and f o r p l u r a l i t e m s , t e n s e items and p o s s e s s i v e  items.  s c o r i n g system d e s i g n e d f o r Berko items was employed.  As h y p o t h e s i z e d  no main e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e f o r method was found i n any a n a l y s i s . n a t u r a l and f o r m a l enabling  The s c a l e d  The  language t e a c h i n g methods a r e e q u a l l y e f f e c t i v e i n  deaf s u b j e c t s  t o respond t o Berko i t e m s .  S i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n s f o r method X age and method X sex were found f o r t h e a n a l y s i s o f p o s s e s s i v e  form r e s p o n s e s .  s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s were found f o r o t h e r  No  analyses.  I n t h e case o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n t method X age i n t e r a c t i o n t h e s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n was t r a c e d t o a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e N^ group and  the  group.  The youngest n a t u r a l method s u b j e c t s had a  s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower mean t h a n d i d t h e o l d e s t f o r m a l method (.3529 and 8.3750 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .  subjects  On t h e b a s i s o f t r e a t m e n t i t was  expected t h a t younger groups would have l o w e r means than o l d e r groups.  96 Such a d i s t i n c t l y l o p s i d e d s i t u a t i o n i n t h e absence o f s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t s f o r method i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e f o r m a l method has a d i f f e r e n t e f f e c t f o r older subjects  than does t h e n a t u r a l method f o r  younger. The s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n f o r t h e method X sex i n t e r a c t i o n was found t o be between n a t u r a l method males and n a t u r a l method f e m a l e s . T h i s i s a s t r o n g i n d i c a t i o n t h a t , i n t h e case o f p o s s e s s i v e  forms,  the n a t u r a l method has a d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t f o r males and f e m a l e s . D e f i n i t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s f i n d i n g i s n o t p o s s i b l e due t o t h e l a c k of i n d i c a t i o n s o f s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r o t h e r language p r i n c i p l e s tested. Hypothesis 5 S i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r sex were found i n b o t h Menyuk i t e m a n a l y s e s . subjects  No d i f f e r e n c e was h y p o t h e s i z e d .  Female deaf  i n t h e age ranges t e s t e d performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than  d i d male deaf s u b j e c t s . normally hearing  subjects  Though d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female i n language a r t s have been noted i n t h e  l i t e r a t u r e , no mention has been made o f s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female deaf s u b j e c t s  i n t h e a r e a o f w r i t t e n language.  The  f i n d i n g o f a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h i s case must be i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h c a u t i o n due t o t h e l a c k o f s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s e l s e w h e r e .  Language  s t u d i e s w i t h deaf s u b j e c t s have n o t n o r m a l l y i n v e s t i g a t e d sex d i f f e r e n c e s . Further  s t u d i e s i n c l u d i n g t h i s f a c t o r need t o be u n d e r t a k e n b e f o r e one  might c o n f i d e n t l y h y p o t h e s i z e the e x i s t e n c e  or non-existence of  d i f f e r e n t i a l language l e a r n i n g a b i l i t i e s among male and female deaf subjects.  The f i n d i n g s h e r e , however, suggest t h a t a d i f f e r e n c e may  e x i s t and i n d i c a t e a need f o r f u r t h e r c l a r i f i c a t i o n  of t h i s point.  Hypothesis 6 As h y p o t h e s i z e d no s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e f o r s e x was. found f o r any Berko a n a l y s i s .  The s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t  f o r p o s s e s s i v e forms has been d i s c u s s e d . T h i s f i n d i n g i s c o n t r a r y t o t h e f i n d i n g f o r Menyuk i t e m s and s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d t o r e n d e r any i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Menyuk f i n d i n g s extremely t e n t a t i v e . Hypothesis 7 B o t h a n a l y s e s f o r Menyuk items found a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r age as h y p o t h e s i z e d .  B o n f e r r o n i _t t e s t s f o r c o n t r a s t s  t r a c e d t h e s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n t o d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e A^ and A^ and and A^ age groups f o r b o t h a n a l y s e s .  This f i n d i n g of increasing  a b i l i t y t o c o r r e c t g r a m m a t i c a l e r r o r s i n sentences s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r a t e o f i n c r e a s e i n a b i l i t y i s slow a t t h e younger ages b u t p i c k s up i n t h e teen-age y e a r s .  T h i s f i n d i n g agrees w i t h Garber's f i n d i n g o f  a slow r a t e o f i n c r e a s e i n t h e a b i l i t y o f deaf c h i l d r e n t o i n f l e c t nonsense words and Lowenbraun's (1969) f i n d i n g o f an i n c r e a s e w i t h age to produce g r a m m a t i c a l l y a c c e p t a b l e p r o d u c t i o n s .  A d d i t i o n a l support i s  found i n S c h m i t t ' s (1970) s t u d y o f Deaf C h i l d r e n ' s Comprehension and P r o d u c t i o n o f Sentence T r a n s f o r m a t i o n s .  H i s f i n d i n g s w i t h deaf e i g h t  to seventeen y e a r o l d c h i l d r e n b e a r out h i s . h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e d e v e l o p ment o f s y n t a c t i c competence would be a g e - r e l a t e d . The f i n d i n g s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y and t h o s e mentioned  above a r e c o n t r a r y t o f i n d i n g s  i n d i c a t i n g a p l a t e a u e f f e c t i n language, a b i l i t y from a p p r o x i m a t e l y age ten  t o s i x t e e n (Pugh, 1946; W r i g h t s t o n e e t a l , 1962; G e n t i l e ,  1969).  98  The performance of s u b j e c t s on Menyuk i t e m s i n t h i s s t u d y s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s an increment i n language a b i l i t y under b o t h methods o v e r t i m e .  T h i s i n c r e a s e does not p r o v i d e t h e deaf s u b j e c t  w i t h the degree of language competence enjoyed by the much younger hearing  child.  Hypothesis 8 As suggested i n t h e h y p o t h e s i s s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r age were found f o r a l l Berko a n a l y s e s . s i g n i f i c a n t s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n was groups.  I n each case a  found between t h e A^ and A^  age  I n each case except p o s s e s s i v e forms a s i g n i f i c a n t s o u r c e  o f v a r i a t i o n was found between the A^ and A^ age  groups.  These f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e a r e l a t i v e l y q u i c k growth i n the a b i l i t y o f deaf c h i l d r e n under b o t h methods t o respond c o r r e c t l y t o Berko i t e m s o r to g i v e e v i d e n c e o f some u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the p r i n c i p l e s being tested.  A s i m i l a r l y n o t i c e a b l e growth does n o t o c c u r i n t h e  teen-age y e a r s .  T h i s i s t h e r e v e r s e o f t h e f i n d i n g s f o r Menyuk i t e m s .  The d i f f e r i n g age ranges i n v a r i o u s s t u d i e s make comparison  difficult  but i n g e n e r a l t h i s f i n d i n g d i s a g r e e s w i t h the s t e a d y i n c r e a s e w i t h age of Lowenbraun and S c h m i t t but agrees w i t h t h e p l a t e a u e f f e c t found by Pugh, W r i g h t s t o n e e t a l and G e n t i l e and w i t h Garber's f i n d i n g o f i n c r e a s e t o age  13.6.  Deaf c h i l d r e n may principles i n differing  r e a c t d i f f e r e n t i a l l y to s p e c i f i c g r a m m a t i c a l  grammatical s e t t i n g s .  The Berko t e s t i t e m s  examined o n l y s u f f i x e s and t h e s u b j e c t s were w e l l aware o f t h e s p e c i f i c error source.  G i v e n t h i s s e t t i n g deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h e two o l d e r  groups met s i m i l a r s u c c e s s w h i l e younger c h i l d r e n demonstrated  a  s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s e r grasp o f the p r i n c i p l e s i n v o l v e d .  The Menyuk t e s t  items examined a wide v a r i e t y of g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s and the were not aware o f s p e c i f i c e r r o r s o u r c e s .  Given t h i s s e t t i n g  subjects  the  youngest s u b j e c t s demonstrated l i t t l e s u c c e s s w h i l e the o l d e r groups demonstrated s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r l e v e l s o f s u c c e s s .  I n t u r n the  o l d e s t group demonstrated i n c r e a s i n g a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h the when compared t o the second o l d e s t group.  items  These f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t  the p i c t u r e s o f a g e - r e l a t e d a b i l i t y o r p l a t e a u e f f e c t p a i n t e d by r e s e a r c h e r s may  not be as dichotomous as they appear.  the g r a m m a t i c a l t a s k p r e s e n t e d ,  deaf s u b j e c t s may  other  Depending on  react d i f f e r e n t i a l l y  a t d i f f e r e n t ages. Qualitative Results Menyuk's Test of Grammatical Competence Menyuk has p r e s e n t e d  the v i e w t h a t a b i l i t y to  a g r a m m a t i c a l s e n t e n c e s o r t o c o r r e c t them s p o n t a n e o u s l y  repeat i n d i c a t e s that  young h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n have i n t e r n a l i z e d c e r t a i n g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s and a r e a b l e t o put them i n t o p l a y a t the performance l e v e l . arguments t h a t t h e s e young c h i l d r e n were r e s p o n d i n g  Her  on the b a s i s of  i n t e r n a l i z e d r u l e s and not on the b a s i s of memory a r e s t r o n g . Menyuk r e p o r t s on the r e p e t i t i o n phase of her s t u d y i n terms of s t r u c t u r e s spontaneously cent of her s u b j e c t s .  c o r r e c t e d by a t l e a s t t w e n t y - f i v e  per  Comparison of the r e s u l t s f o r Menyuk's  Kindergarten  (5 y e a r s , 4 months t o 6 y e a r s , 3 months) and O l d e r N u r s e r y  School  4 y e a r s , 4 months t o 5 y e a r s , 3 months) groups w i t h each  (ONS,  deaf group i n d i c a t e s t h a t no deaf group s p o n t a n e o u s l y  corrected  sentences w i t h the f a c i l i t y o f younger h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n (Table  30).  Only the o l d e s t group o f deaf s u b j e c t s under b o t h methods c o r r e c t e d  100  Table  30  Sentences Spontaneously C o r r e c t e d by 25% o r More o f S u b j e c t s i n Menyuk's K i n d e r g a r t e n and ONS Groups and Each Deaf Group  Sentence  Groups Kindergarten  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  X  x x x X  ONS  X X X X X X  X X X  X  X  X X  X  X  N  N  N  F  F  2  F  101 more t h a n one  i t e m a t t h e t w e n t y - f i v e per c e n t l e v e l .  n a t u r a l method group c o r r e c t e d one  youngest  i t e m a t the same l e v e l .  Menyuk found t h a t her ONS  s u b j e c t s tended t o make spontaneous  c o r r e c t i o n s more f r e q u e n t l y t h a n h e r K i n d e r g a r t e n postulated  The  subjects.  She  t h a t the o l d e r c h i l d r e n were more t a s k - o r i e n t e d thar. the  younger and  repeated agrammatical sentences without being d i s t r a c t e d  by t h e i r oddness.  Younger c h i l d r e n , not h a v i n g i n t e r n a l i z e d r u l e s t o  the same e x t e n t , i g n o r e the s e n t e n c e e r r o r s and sentence.  Using t h i s reasoning  one  respond w i t h a c o r r e c t  c o u l d argue t h a t t h e o l d e r deaf  c h i l d r e n do not s p o n t a n e o u s l y c o r r e c t s i n c e t h e y a r e l e s s c o n f u s e d the a g r a m m a t i c a l s t i m u l u s and, b e i n g more t a s k - o r i e n t e d , r e p e a t sentence e x a c t l y .  The  f a c t t h a t s e v e n t y - f i v e per c e n t of  by  the  kindergarten  c h i l d r e n c o r r e c t e d more s e n t e n c e s t h a n d i d s e v e n t y - f i v e p e r c e n t of ONS  the  c h i l d r e n i n the non-spontaneous mode s u p p o r t e d Menyuk's p o s i t i o n  (Table 31).  The  p i c t u r e obtained  q u i t e d i f f e r e n t . No f i v e p e r c e n t o f any  s e n t e n c e was  f o r deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y responded t o c o r r e c t l y by  was  seventy-  deaf group.  I n the non-spontaneous mode deaf s u b j e c t s were a b l e produce more c o r r e c t i o n s (226 corrections consistently.  t o 102)  to  but were g e n e r a l l y u n a b l e t o make  I n the c a s e of s e n t e n c e s e v e n , fewer  c h i l d r e n were a b l e t o g i v e non-spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n s t h a n spontaneous (Table 19 and  20).  I f Menyuk's arguments a r e v a l i d , i t a p p e a r s t h a t  the deaf s u b j e c t s i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y have not i n t e r n a l i z e d b a s i c g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s t o the same e x t e n t as k i n d e r g a r t e n younger h e a r i n g  children.  age o r even  Responses seem t o be made on the b a s i s  of  e x t e r n a l i z e d , or consciously a p p l i e d , r u l e s o r , at l e a s t , d i f f e r e n t and h i g h l y i n d i v i d u a l i z e d r u l e s .  T a b l e 31 Sentences C o r r e c t e d i n Non-Spontaneous Mode by 75 P e r - c e n t o r More o f S u b j e c t s i n Menyuk's K i n d e r g a r t e n and ONS Groups  Sentence  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  Kindergarten  X X  ONS  X X  X X X  X  X X  X  X X X X X  X X X X X  X X X  X  X X X X  X  X X  X  X X X X  103 I f the deaf s u b j e c t s have i n t e r n a l i z e d r u l e s s i m i l a r t o those of young h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n , t h e y s h o u l d s p o n t a n e o u s l y c o r r e c t o r m o d i f y and not omit o r s u b s t i t u t e when f a c e d w i t h Menyuk i t e m s . o m i s s i o n s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s a r e e x a c t l y what a r e g i v e n .  However, As noted  e a r l i e r t h e t o t a l number o f o m i s s i o n s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s under b o t h modes was  s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r t h a n the t o t a l number of c o r r e c t i o n s /  modifications.  I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e were numerous  nonresponses,  attempted c o r r e c t i o n s , a d d i t i o n s and word o r d e r e r r o r s documented ( T a b l e s 19 and 2 0 ) . I t appeared  t h a t the deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h i s study d i d t h o s e  t h i n g s which Menyuk suggested a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f i n d i v i d u a l s do not p o s s e s s an i n t e r n a l i z e d grammar.  who  C e r t a i n l y the n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g  f o u r t o s i x y e a r o l d s coped w i t h the t a s k s more c o m p e t e n t l y than d i d the n i n e t o s i x t e e n y e a r o l d deaf s u b j e c t s . d i f f i c u l t y may  P a r t o f the deaf  subjects'  be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e v i s u a l p r e s e n t a t i o n of m a t e r i a l s  though one would be hard put t o f i n d a more e f f e c t i v e a l t e r n a t e t o the auditory.  P a r t of the d i f f i c u l t y may  be a t t r i b u t e d t o forms  t h e deaf c h i l d would n o t n o r m a l l y produce but w h i c h a r e o f t e n by young h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n (e.g. l i k e t e d ) .  which produced  Few such forms appeared i n  the items and, when t h e y d i d appear, were among t h e b e t t e r h a n d l e d items f o r deaf s u b j e c t s .  I n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , deaf n i n e t o s i x t e e n y e a r o l d  s u b j e c t s d i d not demonstrate to s i x year o l d s .  the l i n g u i s t i c competence of h e a r i n g f o u r  They were not a b l e t o meet the g o a l of d e m o n s t r a t i n g  the a b i l i t y t o h a n d l e the language p r i n c i p l e s t a u g h t . d i s c e r n i b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n performance which was  There was  method-related.  no  104 Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s Berko " s e t o u t t o d i s c o v e r what i s l e a r n e d by c h i l d r e n exposed t o E n g l i s h morphology  (1958, p. 1 3 ) . "  She t h e o r i z e d t h a t one  c o u l d d i s c o v e r whether a n o r m a l l y h e a r i n g c h i l d had i n t e r n a l i z e d a m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e by r e q u i r i n g h i m t o i n f l e c t nonsense words.  I f the  c h i l d g e n e r a l i z e d t h e c o r r e c t m o r p h o l o g i c a l form from E n g l i s h t o t h e nonsense word, i t c o u l d be c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r u l e was i n t e r n a l i z e d . Berko found t h a t by age seven c h i l d r e n p o s s e s s e d a good grasp o f t h e r u l e s f o r t h e most common m o r p h o l o g i c a l i n f l e c t i o n s and a f a i r grasp o f t h e r u l e s f o r t h e l e s s common i n f l e c t i o n s . t o new words w i t h u n i q u e , i n d i v i d u a l r e s p o n s e s .  Children d i d not react There was d e f i n i t e  e v i d e n c e o f a common, s h a r e d grammar. Garber and Cooper t r a n s p o s e d Berko's t h e o r y t o t h e s t u d y o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l a b i l i t i e s i n deaf c h i l d r e n .  Garber a p p l i e d t h e Berko  t e s t and an analogous r e a l word t e s t t o deaf c h i l d r e n .  His basic  f i n d i n g was t h a t h i s deaf s u b j e c t s (CA range 6.7 t o 13.6) l a g g e d i n the a c q u i s i t i o n o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s when compared t o h e a r i n g s u b j e c t s (CA ranged 5.6 t o 8.6).  He c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h i s l a g was due  i n p a r t t o t h e i r h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d s c h o o l environment, t h e i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f p a r e n t s i n p r o v i d i n g e x p e r i e n c e s and t h e inadequacy o f t e a c h i n g methods. Cooper used a B e r k o - t y p e t a s k i n an attempt t o c r e a t e a t e s t o f deaf c h i l d r e n ' s l i n g u i s t i c competence.  He t e s t e d r e c e p t i v e and  p r o d u c t i v e c o n t r o l o f i n f l e c t i o n a l and d e r i v a t i o n a l s u f f i x e s i n a forty-eight item t e s t .  H i s s u b j e c t s were deaf seven t o n i n e t e e n y e a r  o l d s and h e a r i n g second, f o u r t h and s i x t h g r a d e r s .  The deaf s u b j e c t s  105 o b t a i n e d much l o w e r s c o r e s than d i d t h e h e a r i n g s u b j e c t s b u t p a r a l l e l e d them i n t h e development  of morphological patterns.  From t h i s s t u d y  and a l a t e r one w i t h Kaye (1967) Cooper c o n c l u d e d t h a t deaf c h i l d r e n and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n s h a r e " u n i v e r s a l " g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s .  The deaf  s u b j e c t ' s grammar was d i f f e r e n t i n terms o f a few s u p e r f i c i a l  rules  o r , i f t h e grammars were a c t u a l l y s i m i l a r , appeared d i f f e r e n t on t h e performance l e v e l due t o d i f f e r e n t r u l e s f o r p e r f o r m a n c e . The r e s u l t s o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y agree w i t h G a r b e r ' s c o n c l u s i o n s e s p e c i a l l y w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e inadequacy o f t e a c h i n g methods. When compared t o Berko's young h e a r i n g s u b j e c t s deaf c h i l d r e n do l a g i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s ( T a b l e 3 2 ) . The phonemic l a g a p p a r e n t i n G a r b e r ' s s u b j e c t s was much more s e r i o u s t h a n G a r b e r however.  realized  The same comment h o l d s f o r Cooper's c o n c l u s i o n s though i t i s  d i f f i c u l t t o comment on h i s t o t a l a n a l y s i s o f l i n g u i s t i c  abilities  s i n c e he c o n d u c t e d more t h a n one s t u d y i n t h e a r e a and i n v e s t i g a t e d more t h a n m o r p h o l o g i c a l t y p e t e s t s o n l y .  I t does appear s a f e t o s u g g e s t  t h a t i n v e s t i g a t o r s cannot assume, as d i d Cooper, t h a t deaf and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n s h a r e " u n i v e r s a l " r u l e s w i t h t h e deaf d e v i a t i n g  superfically  only. B o t h Cooper and Garber committed t h e same major m e t h o d o l o g i c a l e r r o r , a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l e r r o r n o t found i n B e r k o ' s o r i g i n a l s t u d y . Berko a l l o w e d h e r s u b j e c t s t o g i v e any r e s p o n s e t h e y w i s h e d .  Cooper  and Garber l i m i t e d t h e i r s u b j e c t s t o t h r e e o r f o u r p o s s i b l e r e s p o n s e s respectively.  These r e s p o n s e s were d e t e r m i n e d by t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r s  and r e f l e c t t h e i r b e l i e f s r e g a r d i n g t h e p o s s i b l e range o f r e s p o n s e from deaf s u b j e c t s .  Thus, b o t h r e s e a r c h e r s documented deaf s t u d e n t s '  r e s p o n s e s t o what t h e r e s e a r c h e r s f e l t were r e s p o n s e s i n t h e s u b j e c t s '  106  T a b l e 32 P e r c e n t a g e o f S u b j e c t s R e s p o n d i n g C o r r e c t l y t o S t i m u l u s Items From.Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s  Item  Berko (4 - 7 y e a r s )  wugs tors luns eras heafs/heaves gutches kazhes nizzes tasses glasses spowed ricked motted bodded melted glinged/glang binged/bang ringed/rang zibbing loodges nazzes wug's bik's nizz's wugs biks' nizzes' 1  **not  recorded.  91 85 86 79 82 36 31 28 36 91 52 73 33 31 73 77 78 17 90 56 48 84 87 49 88 93 76  Garber ( 6 - 1 3 . 6 years)  87 76 73 71 22 27 73 82 73 76 82 80 84 44 38 57 65 44 73' 40 29 56 62 73  ** ** A*  Present (9 - 16.11 y e a r s )  24 15 24 20 20 9 11 9 17 33 21 24 17 21 24 20 16 32 27 9 8 24 11 9 5 3 5  107  r e p e r t o i r e s and n o t t h e s u b j e c t s ' a c t u a l range o f p o s s i b l e r e s p o n s e s . Such a l i m i t a t i o n was n o t s u g g e s t e d i n t h e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s posed by the two i n v e s t i g a t o r s .  The p r e s e n t s t u d y a l l o w e d t h e deaf c h i l d r e n t o  respond as t h e y w i s h e d .  The average number o f responses was 12 and 13  w i t h ranges o f 8 t o 16 and 8 t o 18 f o r t h e n a t u r a l and f o r m a l method groups r e s p e c t i v e l y . Both Berko and Garber p r e s e n t e d t h e i r f i n d i n g s i n t h e form o f percentage of c h i l d r e n c o r r e c t l y responding to items.  T a b l e 32  summarizes t h e s e f i n d i n g s and t h e r e s p o n s e s f o r t h i s s t u d y .  It is  o b v i o u s t h a t s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y demonstrated f a r l e s s a b i l i t y t o add c o r r e c t s u f f i x e s than d i d t h o s e i n t h e Berko o r Garber s t u d i e s . Age groups respond i n c e r t a i n manners t o Berko  stimuli.  - These response p a t t e r n s , d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r , may equate t o r u l e s i n t h e grammars o f some o f t h e deaf s u b j e c t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h i s s t u d y . P o s s i b l e r u l e s appear  below.  1. Repeat t h e s t i m u l u s word when you do n o t know what t o do. 2. Do n o t respond when you do n o t know what t o do. 3. D e s c r i b e o r e x p l a i n t h e s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e when i n doubt about how t o respond t o t h e s t i m u l u s word and p i c t u r e . 4. Repeat p a r t o f t h e s t i m u l u s t e x t when you do n o t know what t o do. 5. Use some s u f f i x you know when u n c e r t a i n as t o what s u f f i x t o u s e . (No g e n e r a l r u l e c o u l d be s t a t e d f o r t h e u s e o f s p e c i f i c i n a p p r o p r i a t e s u f f i x e s ( o v e r - g e n e r a l i z a t i o n ) when f a c e d w i t h t h e demand t o respond t o Berko i t e m s .  The  s u b j e c t s i n t h i s study over-generalized the s u f f i x e s / s / , / e s / , /ed/, / i n g / , / i e s / , / ' s / and /s'/.)  108 I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t the v a r i o u s age groups respond w i t h c o n s i d e r a b l e s i m i l a r i t y when f a c e d w i t h i t e m s they do not know. group chose r u l e s 1, 4, 2, 3, and 5 i n t h a t o r d e r .  The A^  The  group  chose r u l e s 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 i n t h a t o r d e r and r e l i e d on r u l e 1 w i t h significantly  l e s s f r e q u e n c y than d i d t h e A^ group.  r e l i e d on r u l e 3 w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t l y  The A^ group  also  l e s s f r e q u e n c y than d i d t h e A^  T h i s l a t t e r group o r d e r e d i t s c h o i c e o f r u l e s 3, 1, 2, 5, 4.  group.  In  comparison w i t h the A^ group the A^ group r e l i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y more on r u l e 3 and s i g n i f i c a n t l y  l e s s on r u l e s 1 and  4.  These suggested r u l e s a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r two r e a s o n s .  They  i n d i c a t e t h a t age i s t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r i n d e c i d i n g w h i c h r u l e s deaf s u b j e c t s f o l l o w when f a c e d w i t h a B e r k o - t y p e t a s k and t h a t method i s not an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r .  The importance of the age f a c t o r here  u n d e r l i n e s the importance o f the f i n d i n g s of s i g n i f i c a n t  differences  f o r age found i n the e a r l i e r , s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s e s . Perhaps t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a c t i s t h a t t h e s e suggested r u l e s do not appear i n the grammar o f n o r m a l l y - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . of a group o f p e o p l e who have s i m p l i f i e d  They speak  grammars, grammars w h i c h  change w i t h age a t a much l a t e r d a t e than do t h e grammars o f o t h e r children.  Though a good many deaf s u b j e c t s appear t o s h a r e v a r i o u s  of t h e s e suggested r u l e s , they a r e not " u n i v e r s a l " .  Responses t e n d t o  be h i g h l y i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c even w i t h i n t h e s e g e n e r a l i z e d These f i n d i n g s a r e opposed  rules.  t o the s u g g e s t i o n by Cooper  (1965)  t h a t r e s p o n s e s t o B e r k o - t y p e i t e m s i n d i c a t e t h a t deaf and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n s h a r e u n i v e r s a l r u l e s o f grammar.  The deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h i s  study d e v i a t e d g r e a t l y from the h e a r i n g and appear t o be employing unique r u l e s f o r r e s p o n s e .  109 Dichotomy o f S u b j e c t Responses C e r t a i n groups of s u b j e c t s under b o t h language t e a c h i n g methods appeared u n a b l e t o respond c o r r e c t l y t o a l l o r a l m o s t a l l Menyuk and Berko i t e m s .  Other s u b j e c t s i n the  and A^ age groups responded  c o r r e c t l y t o n e a r l y a l l items w h i l e o t h e r s c o r r e c t e d h a l f or more. A^ s u b j e c t s demonstrated i n a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h the items 44 Appendices J and  All  ( T a b l e s 33 to  K).  I n a l l cases except one,  those s u b j e c t s i n the  lowest  q u a r t i l e s o f responses t o Menyuk items appeared i n the l o w e s t q u a r t i l e s o r r e s p o n s e s t o Berko i t e m s .  Though t h e r e i s not so s t r i k i n g a  comparison f o r the upper two q u a r t i l e s , t h e r e i s a tendency f o r those who  do w e l l on one  t o do w e l l on the o t h e r .  c o r r e l a t i o n between the two measures was df  The P e a r s o n Product-Moment  r = .59  ( s i g n i f i c a n t at  .05;  =73). Why  do some s u b j e c t s demonstrate such a b i l i t y w h i l e  the  m a j o r i t y demonstrate t o t a l or almost t o t a l i n a b i l i t y t o respond correctly?  I t would be s i m p l e t o d i s m i s s the u n i v e r s a l l a c k o f  among the youngest s u b j e c t s as a r e s u l t of i n a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of m a t e r i a l s or i n s t r u c t i o n . c o r r e c t n e s s t o one or two  items w h i l e o t h e r s demonstrate v a r y i n g  language p r i n c i p l e s u t i l i z e d had been p r e s e n t e d  The  In a d d i t i o n a l l  to a l l s u b j e c t s .  age n i n e some of t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s had been reviewed  By  regularly for a  f a c t t h a t s u b j e c t s d i d c o r r e c t or attempt  to c o r r e c t items i n d i c a t e s t h a t a t l e a s t some u n d e r s t o o d instructions.  test  Yet a few s u b j e c t s do respond w i t h p e r f e c t  degrees o f f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h p r i n c i p l e s b e i n g examined.  p e r i o d of three years.  ability  the  C e r t a i n l y a l l words and language c o n s t r u c t i o n s were  110 f a m i l i a r to the subjects.  I n a d d i t i o n a l l i n s t r u c t i o n s were p r e s e n t e d  i n s i g n language w i t h w h i c h t h e s u b j e c t s were f a m i l i a r . I t i s even more d i f f i c u l t t o suggest reasons why so many o l d e r s u b j e c t s o b t a i n m i n i m a l s c o r e s w h i l e a l i m i t e d number d e a l e a s i l y w i t h the m a j o r i t y of items.  Attempts were made t o group t h e s u b j e c t s  i n t o l o w - h i g h s c o r i n g groups f o r s t a t i s t i c a l comparison on t h e v a r i a b l e s o f h e a r i n g , i n t e l l i g e n c e , and e t i o l o g y . comparisons had a l r e a d y been made. c u l t i e s arose.  Age and sex  U n f o r t u n a t e l y a number o f d i f f i -  E t i o l o g y was n o t s u i t a b l e as a v a r i a b l e s i n c e  a p p r o x i m a t e l y h a l f o f t h e s u b j e c t s f e l l i n t h e unknown e t i o l o g y c a t e g o r y . I n a d d i t i o n n e i t h e r s e t o f t e s t s c o r e s r e v e a l e d a p l a t e a u where a l o g i c a l b r e a k i n t o l o w - h i g h groups was p o s s i b l e . the  At t h i s time, given  a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n , a d e f i n i t e e x p l a n a t i o n cannot be o f f e r e d . One d e f i n i t e statement can be made.  T h i s phenomenon o c c u r s  under b o t h m e t h o d o l o g i e s and t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same e x t e n t f o r b o t h tests. Response t o I n d i v i d u a l T e s t Items I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o i n t e r p r e t responses t o Menyuk and Berko items due t o t h e i n a b i l i t y  t o p e r f o r m an i t e m a n a l y s i s .  As n o t e d e a r l i e r  a few i t e m s i n each t e s t were somewhat more o r l e s s d i f f i c u l t . all of  However,  i t e m s i n each : t e s t were beyond t h e c o r r e c t i o n a b i l i t y o f t h e m a j o r i t y subjects. Menyuk's t e s t c o n t a i n e d too few exemplars o f any language  p r i n c i p l e t o suggest any r u l e s o f performance.  Item 6 i n w h i c h a noun  phrase was o m i t t e d appeared t o p r e s e n t e x t r a d i f f i c u l t y .  Item 24 i n  w h i c h a noun phrase redundancy appeared was among the b e t t e r  answered  items.  S i m i l a r comparisons  can be made f o r i t e m s 8 and 9, b o t h v e r b  form i t e m s , and 12 and 14, b o t h word o r d e r i t e m s . the o n l y exemplars  of t h e i r type.  A l l o t h e r i t e m s were  No p a t t e r n i s apparent except t h a t  r e v e a l e d i n e a r l i e r s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s e s f o r age and s e x . Berko's t e s t c o n t a i n e d a. number o f exemplars m o r p h o l o g i c a l forms i n v e s t i g a t e d .  o f most  P o s s e s s i v e items as a group p l u s  the p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e t e n s e form ( z i b b i n g ) and t h e two t h i r d s i n g u l a r p r e s e n t t e n s e forms (nazzes and loodges) appeared e x t r a d i f f i c u l t y t o t h e A^ and A^ age groups. appeared  person  to present  The p o s s e s s i v e forms  e s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e A^ f o r m a l method group. A l l  items were o f s i m i l a r d i f f i c u l t y f o r t h e A^ s u b j e c t s . Two a s p e c t s o f responses t o Berko i t e m s s t a n d o u t . t h a t some / s / and /ed/ items r e c e i v e d more c o r r e c t responses o t h e r exemplars  of t h e i r type.  One i s than  This occurred despite the fact that  t h e s e o t h e r exemplars were s i m i l a r i n every way except f o r t h e s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e and word.  I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t s u b j e c t s responded  inconsistently  t o s i m i l a r items r e q u i r i n g d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e same r u l e .  One  e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s i n t e r e s t i n g i n c o n s i s t e n c y would be t h a t some s u b j e c t s had n o t i n t e r n a l i z e d t h e r u l e s and were a p p l y i n g them on some b a s i s o t h e r than i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n . The p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t memory might be p l a y i n g an i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n responses must be c o n s i d e r e d when t h e r e a l word items " g l a s s e s " and " r a n g " a r e examined.  Though t h e s e items a r e formed u s i n g t h e same  r u l e s as t h e i r exemplars, they s t a n d out as b e i n g c o r r e c t e d a t a much higher l e v e l .  The o n l y l i k e l y e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t some s u b j e c t s  r e c a l l e d t h e forms o f t h e s e s p e c i f i c words from p r i o r e x p e r i e n c e  112 and responded t o them from memory.  Such a memory l e v e l  functioning  would e x p l a i n many o f t h e response p a t t e r n s o r l a c k o f p a t t e r n i n response n o t e d f o r b o t h t e s t s .  The Berko and Menyuk arguments i n f a v o u r  o f an i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n p o s i t i o n f o r h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r s t u d i e s , argue f o r a memory p o s i t i o n f o r t h e deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h i s study.  One cannot assume a l l deaf c h i l d r e n a r e memorizing  g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s r a t h e r than i n t e r n a l i z i n g them.  The a b i l i t y o f some  deaf s u b j e c t s t o respond c o r r e c t l y t o most s t i m u l u s i t e m s i n d i c a t e s f a i r l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d performance l e v e l s . cannot be assumed.  A t t h e same time i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n  The t o t a l o r almost t o t a l incompetence  o f many  deaf s u b j e c t s i n r e s p o n d i n g t o Berko and Menyuk items would n o t p e r m i t such an assumption.  113  CHAPTER V I I SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  1.  Summary  T h i s s t u d y was conducted  to evaluate the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of  n a t u r a l and f o r m a l language t e a c h i n g programmes d e v i s e d f o r use w i t h deaf c h i l d r e n .  The two methods were e v a l u a t e d r e l a t i v e t o each o t h e r  and r e l a t i v e t o t h e a b i l i t y o f h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n i n d e a l i n g w i t h s p e c i f i e d grammatical  principles.  F o r t y - n i n e n a t u r a l method and t w e n t y - s i x f o r m a l method subjects participated.  S u b j e c t s were a s s i g n e d t o t h r e e age groups  (A^ - 9 y e a r s , 0 months t o 10 y e a r s , 11 months; A^ - 12 y e a r s , 0 months to 13 y e a r s , 11 months; A^ - 15 y e a r s , 0 months t o 16 y e a r s , 11 months). Groups were a l s o i d e n t i f i e d by t e a c h i n g method (N^, N^ and N^ = n a t u r a l method A^, A^ and A^ groups; F^, F 2 , F^ = f o r m a l method A^, A^, and A^ g r o u p s ) .  E x c l u d e d from t h i s s t u d y were those s t u d e n t s w i t h I.Q.'s  of l e s s than 85 o r more than 115, w i t h a b e t t e r e a r h e a r i n g l o s s o f l e s s than 80 dB. I.S.O., who were deafened p o s t - n a t a l l y , who s u s t a i n e d a m u l t i p l y handicapping  c o n d i t i o n , w i t h a school h i s t o r y of l e s s  than  t h r e e y e a r s o r who had a t t e n d e d more than one day o r r e s i d e n t i a l s c h o o l for  t h e deaf. A l l s u b j e c t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d Menyuk's Test o f Grammatical  Competence and Berko's Test o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s .  These i n s t r u m e n t s  were employed t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f each programme under t h e SIP0 ( s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s , i n p u t f a c t o r s , p r o c e s s f a c t o r s , outcome f a c t o r s ) programme e v a l u a t i o n model.  A p p r o p r i a t e s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s were  u t i l i z e d t o compare t e s t r e s u l t s f o r h e a r i n g f o r n a t u r a l and f o r m a l method s u b j e c t s .  c h i l d r e n and t h e r e s u l t s  These l a t t e r comparisons  i n v e s t i g a t e d method, age and s e x d i f f e r e n c e s . s u b j e c t s were s u b j e c t e d  Results  f o r deaf  t o d e t a i l e d q u a l i t a t i v e as w e l l as q u a n t i t a t i v e  analysis.  2.  Results  Quantitative Both n a t u r a l and f o r m a l method deaf s u b j e c t s  obtained  s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w e r s c o r e s on t h e Menyuk and Berko t e s t s t h a n d i d hearing  subjects.  There was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between each deaf  group and t h e h e a r i n g  group f o r each t e s t .  These f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d  t h a t hypotheses one and two, s t a t i n g t h a t such a d i f f e r e n c e would be found, c o u l d n o t be r e j e c t e d . Hypotheses t h r e e and f o u r s t a t e d t h a t no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s would be found between t h e deaf groups f o r method.  The  o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g s i n t h i s a r e a were a method X sex and a method X age i n t e r a c t i o n f o r p o s s e s s i v e  i t e m s on t h e Berko t e s t .  Though t h e s e  two s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n s f o r t h i s one language p r i n c i p l e d e t r a c t s l i g h t l y from the consistency  o f r e s u l t s f o r t h e s i x major a n a l y s e s  i n v o l v e d i n i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e methods f a c t o r , i t appears t h a t t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e n a t u r a l method does not d i f f e r from t h a t o f t h e formal  method. Hypotheses f i v e and s i x i n d i c a t e d t h a t no s i g n i f i c a n t sex  d i f f e r e n c e would be found f o r r e s p o n s e s t o e i t h e r t e s t . d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r b o t h Menyuk a n a l y s e s .  Significant  No s i g n i f i c a n t main  e f f e c t d i f f e r e n c e s were found f o r t h e f o u r Berko a n a l y s e s though a  s i g n i f i c a n t method X sex i n t e r a c t i o n was found f o r p o s s e s s i v e These c o n t r a r y  items.  f i n d i n g s , i n t h e l i g h t o f no o t h e r f i n d i n g s f o r s e x  d i f f e r e n c e s among deaf s u b j e c t s  i n o t h e r language s t u d i e s ,  i n t e r e s t i n g are not e l u c i d a t i n g .  while  The s u g g e s t i o n t h a t s e x may be a  s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r f o r some language f u n c t i o n s i n d i c a t e s an i n t e r e s t i n g area of future The  research. l i t e r a t u r e has been d i v i d e d on t h e q u e s t i o n  d i f f e r e n c e s f o r language a b i l i t y o f deaf s u b j e c t s . and  o f age  Hypotheses seven  eight, suggesting s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s , i n v e s t i g a t e d  question.  S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the  groups were found f o r Menyuk a n a l y s e s .  this  and A^ and t h e A^ and A^  S i g n i f i c a n t differences f o r the  A^ and A^ groups were found f o r a l l Berko a n a l y s e s .  Significant  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e A^ and A^ groups were found f o r a l l Berko a n a l y s e s except p o s s e s s i v e s .  These f i n d i n g s argue s t r o n g l y f o r t h e  a c c e p t a n c e o f hypotheses seven and e i g h t .  They a l s o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e  i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between language a b i l i t y and age i s somewhat more complex than o t h e r s t u d i e s would suggest. Qualitative The  a n a l y s e s o f response p a t t e r n s  t o t h e two t e s t s suggested  t h a t t h e language a b i l i t y o f deaf c h i l d r e n may be l o w e r t h a n some i n v e s t i g a t o r s had e s t i m a t e d .  I n t h e case o f p h o n o l o g i c a l  i t would appear t h a t p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s subject  responses and r e p o r t e d  abilities  erred i n r e s t r i c t i n g  spuriously inflated  possible  data.  G e n e r a l d i f f i c u l t y was e v i n c e d when s u b j e c t s were r e q u i r e d t o r e p e a t a g r a m m a t i c a l sentences f i r s t as t h e y were g i v e n and t h e n w i t h appropriate  corrections.  Many s u b j e c t s were u n a b l e t o r e p e a t t h e  116  s e n t e n c e s under e i t h e r c o n d i t i o n .  Deaf c h i l d r e n d i d n o t d r a m a t i c a l l y  i n c r e a s e t h e i r number o f c o r r e c t i o n s to the a g r a m m a t i c a l when r e q u e s t e d t o make c o r r e c t i o n s .  sentences  Menyuk's s t u d y i n d i c a t e d  much younger h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n e x p e r i e n c e d l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y such r e q u e s t e d c o r r e c t i o n s .  that  performing  U n l i k e the h e a r i n g s u b j e c t s s t u d i e d by  Menyuk, t h e deaf n i n e to s i x t e e n y e a r o l d p l u s s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y demonstrated more o m i s s i o n s and s u b s t i t u t i o n s t h a n c o r r e c t i o n s and m o d i f i c a t i o n s of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s . V a r i o u s Menyuk i t e m s proved more o r l e s s d i f f i c u l t average f o r t h e deaf s u b j e c t s .  I t was n o t p o s s i b l e t o n o t e  particular patterns for d i f f i c u l t y  than any  due t o t h e l a c k o f s u f f i c i e n t  exemplars o f any one g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e  and t h e u n f o r t u n a t e  imbalance of s u b j e c t s which rendered s t a t i s t i c a l Deaf s u b j e c t s demonstrated  analysis impossible.  a c o n c l u s i v e l a g i n the a c q u i s i t i o n  of m o r p h o l o g i c a l r u l e s i n r e s p o n s e t o Berko i t e m s .  That such a l a g  e x i s t e d had been i n d i c a t e d i n e a r l i e r s t u d i e s but t h e e x t e n t o f t h e l a g was  s h i e l d e d by c e r t a i n d e s i g n problems  i n those s t u d i e s .  P a t t e r n s o f response t o Berko i t e m s a r e a p p a r e n t . p a t t e r n s may  be r e l a t e d t o r u l e s i n deaf c h i l d r e n ' s grammar.  r u l e s were n o t e d e a r l i e r .  These Suggested  Of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t i s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e  degree t o w h i c h deaf s u b j e c t s t u r n t o t h e s e s u g g e s t e d r u l e s appears t o be a g e - r e l a t e d and n o t m e t h o d - r e l a t e d .  I n a d d i t i o n , these r u l e s are not  a p p a r e n t i n t h e grammar o f n o r m a l l y - h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . As w i t h Menyuk i t e m s c e r t a i n Berko i t e m s or  lesser d i f f i c u l t y  difficult  t o t h e deaf s u b j e c t s .  f o r t h e overwhelming  presented greater  P o s s e s s i v e items were  m a j o r i t y of s u b j e c t s as were t h e  p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e t e n s e i t e m and t h e two t h i r d person s i n g u l a r p r e s e n t tense i t e m s .  A number o f p l u r a l items i n / s / and one p a s t  tense i t e m i n /ed/ p r e s e n t e d l e s s d i f f i c u l t y t o t h e deaf s u b j e c t s than did  o t h e r items o f s i m i l a r n a t u r e . Not a l l deaf s u b j e c t s were unable t o d e a l w i t h Menyuk and  Berko i t e m s .  A l i m i t e d number demonstrated a r e l a t i v e l y h i g h degree  of competence when f a c e d w i t h items from b o t h t e s t s .  A few o t h e r s  appeared a b l e t o d e a l w i t h t h e items i n one t e s t b u t demonstrated l e s s e r a b i l i t y when f a c e d w i t h t h e o t h e r . Both Berko and Menyuk advanced t h e o r i e s t o e x p l a i n how they were a b l e t o c o n c l u d e  t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r s t u d i e s had  i n t e r n a l i z e d grammatical o f response  apparent  rules.  These t h e o r i e s were based on p a t t e r n s  i n t h e data o b t a i n e d .  I f t h e Menyuk and Berko  p o s i t i o n s can be a c c e p t e d , t h e deaf c h i l d r e n i n t h i s s t u d y have n o t i n t e r n a l i z e d t h e s e same grammatical younger h e a r i n g c h i l r e n .  r u l e s t o t h e same e x t e n t as much  There i s more support f o r a statement  that  deaf c h i l d r e n memorize r u l e s than t h a t they i n t e r n a l i z e them.  3.  Conclusions  Q u a n t i t a t i v e and Q u a l i t a t i v e N e i t h e r t h e n a t u r a l method n o r t h e f o r m a l method language t e a c h i n g programme p r o v i d e s t h e deaf c h i l d w i t h t h e language a b i l i t y o f much younger h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n .  A few deaf c h i l d r e n i n t h e age  range t w e l v e t o s i x t e e n y e a r s demonstrate a f a i r degree of a b i l i t y b u t the g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y do n o t . The n a t u r a l method i s no more s u c c e s s f u l than t h e f o r m a l  118  method i n e n a b l i n g t h e deaf c h i l d t o d e a l w i t h t h e language studied.  principles  B o t h r e s u l t i n r e m a r k a b l y low s t a n d a r d s of performance f o r  t h e m a j o r i t y of s u b j e c t s .  E a r l i e r s t u d i e s employing Berko t y p e t e s t s  d i d not r e v e a l the t r u e e x t e n t o f language  deficiency.  I t i s not c l e a r whether o r not a sex d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s i n response t o language i t e m s .  Other language s t u d i e s have not examined  t h i s f a c t o r and the f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y a r e not  sufficiently  c o n c l u s i v e t o s u p p o r t a f i r m statement i n t h i s a r e a . I t i s c l e a r t h a t age i s a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r i n response t o language items o f t h e t y p e s t u d i e d h e r e .  Other s t u d i e s agree w i t h  this  f i n d i n g but not a l l agree t h a t language a b i l i t y i n c r e a s e s w i t h age a t a significant rate.  Pugh (1946), W r i g h t s t o n e e t a l (1962) and G e n t i l e  (1969) a l l p r e s e n t f i n d i n g s w h i c h i n d i c a t e i n c r e a s i n g a b i l i t y t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y age t e n o r t w e l v e w i t h a p l a t e a u e f f e c t  thereafter.  Garber (1967), Lowenbraun (1969) and S c h m i t t (1970) o f f e r e v i d e n c e of a c o n t i n u e d slow r a t e o f i n c r e a s e i n a b i l i t y w e l l p a s t t h e s e ages. T h i s s t u d y agreed w i t h the l a t t e r p o s i t i o n but suggested d i f f e r e n t i a l r a t e s of i n c r e a s e r e l a t i v e t o d i f f e r i n g language  tasks.  The wide range o f i n d i v i d u a l i z e d responses t o Menyuk and  Berko  items and t h e apparent p a t t e r n s f o r i n c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e s t o Berko items suggested t h a t some i n c o r r e c t l y i n t e r n a l i z e d r u l e s may i n groups of deaf i n d i v i d u a l s .  be  functioning  The f a c t t h a t normal r u l e s f o r the  g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s examined have n o t been i n t e r n a l i z e d i s o b v i o u s . The deaf s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y d i d not respond as do i n d i v i d u a l s who  have i n t e r n a l i z e d g r a m m a t i c a l r u l e s i f the arguments  f o r i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n advanced  f o r s u b j e c t responses i n the Berko  and  Menyuk s t u d i e s a r e v a l i d .  The s u b j e c t s o f t h i s s t u d y c o n s i s t e n t l y d i d  t h o s e t h i n g s w h i c h a r e much more consonant w i t h responses based on attempted m e m o r i z a t i o n o f t h e r u l e s i n v o l v e d . are  The f i n d i n g s o f one s t u d y  f a r from s u f f i c i e n t t o even suggest t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f deaf  s u b j e c t s f u n c t i o n on t h e b a s i s o f m e m o r i z a t i o n o f language  rules.  However, they a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o r e n d e r i t u n t e n a b l e t o assume an i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n of r u l e s p o s i t i o n . Programme E v a l u a t i o n E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s u c c e s s o f t h e two language programmes was difficult.  The major o b s t a c l e f a c i n g t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r was t h e l a c k o f  f o r m u l a t i o n o f programme g o a l s i n a manner c o n d u c i v e t o e v a l u a t i o n . Though t h e n a t u r a l method s c h o o l had developed a "programme book", t h i s "book" d i d n o t s t a t e e x p l i c i t g o a l s i n t h e a r e a o f language. C u r r i c u l a a r e b e i n g p r e p a r e d and i t i s t h e i n t e n t o f s c h o o l  officials  t h a t s p e c i f i c g o a l s w i l l be s t a t e d , but t h e s e statements were n o t a v a i l a b l e a t t h e time of t h i s s t u d y .  Though g o a l s e v a l u a t i o n was not  an o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s s t u d y , i t i s o b v i o u s t h a t b o t h s c h o o l s would b e n e f i t from e v a l u a t i o n o f t h i s t y p e . Due t o t h e vagueness o r l a c k o f g o a l s i t was i m p o s s i b l e t o c o n c l u d e whether t h e i n t e n d e d s i t u a t i o n s , i n p u t s and p r o c e s s e s grew l o g i c a l l y from programme g o a l s . c o n s i s t e n t w i t h one a n o t h e r .  These f a c t o r s do appear  logically  However, some i n c o n g r u e n c i e s appeared  between i n t e n d e d and observed i n p u t s and p r o c e s s e s .  The n a t u r a l method  s c h o o l r e l i e d t o some degree on d r i l l work and i n many r e s p e c t s t r e a t e d t h e i r c u r r i c u l u m g u i d e as a d e f i n i t e d e l i n e a t i o n o f t h e o r d e r i n w h i c h g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s were t o be t a u g h t .  Both a c t i o n s d e p a r t  120 from t h e i n t e n d e d  philosophy  o f t h e n a t u r a l method. The f o r m a l methdd  s c h o o l employed a number o f t e a c h e r s w i t h o u t s p e c i a l i z e d t r a i n i n g i n the a r e a o f h e a r i n g  impairment. I n a d d i t i o n m i n i m a l a t t e n t i o n was  p a i d t o t h e p r o v i s i o n of a u d i t o r y a m p l i f i c a t i o n systems f o r o l d e r students.  B o t h of t h e s e a c t i o n s d e p a r t from a c c e p t e d p r a c t i c e t i n  p r o v i d i n g t h e b e s t language i n s t r u c t i o n f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . O b s e r v a t i o n of p r o c e s s e s i n b o t h s c h o o l s modified  and i n t e n d e d  i n d i c a t e d t h a t l e s s o n p l a n s were o f t e n  p r o c e s s e s t h e r e b y a l t e r e d . I t was a l s o observed  t h a t t e a c h e r - c h i l d communications were n o t always i n t h e form for  use i n each s c h o o l . I t would appear t h a t t h e e x t e n t  intended  intended  to which  and observed i n p u t s and p r o c e s s e s a r e congruent i s l e s s than  p e r f e c t . Though t a r g e t t i n g e v a l u a t i o n , w h i c h i s concerned w i t h t h e e x t e n t of such congruency, was n o t an o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s s t u d y , such e v a l u a t i o n would be o f c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t . The d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f r e s u l t s o r outcomes and d i s c u s s i o n of programme g o a l s i n d i c a t e s t h a t a s i m p l e , p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e response as t o whether e i t h e r programme met t h e g o a l s i m p l i e d f o r i t would be i n a p p r o p r i a t e . C e r t a i n l y t h e outcomes f o r t h e programmes as u n i f i e d schemes do n o t meet t h e programme g o a l s s t a t e d . A l i m i t e d number o f i n d i v i d u a l s do meet s u c c e s s i n employing g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s but t h e m a j o r i t y do n o t . 4. I m p l i c a t i o n s Programme E v a l u a t i o n E d u c a t i o n o f t h e deaf i n d i v i d u a l appears t o be a f e r t i l e for  field  t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e programme e v a l u a t o r . U n l i k e o t h e r a r e a s of  education,  education  o f t h e deaf has n o t been i n v o l v e d i n c l o s e s c r u t i n y  of s c h o o l programmes beyond t h e a c c r e d i t a t i o n l e v e l found i n American  121 schools. Glass  (1970) has o u t l i n e d the weaknesses of the a c c r e d i t a t i o n  model i n programme e v a l u a t i o n . The deaf may  f i n d i n g s of t h i s s t u d y i n d i c a t e t h a t many s c h o o l s  for  the  not p o s s e s s w e l l - d e f i n e d programme g o a l s . I n a d d i t i o n  incongruencies p r o c e s s and  e x i s t between i n t e n d e d  and observed s i t u a t i o n a l ,  outcome f a c t o r s w h i l e the c o n t i n g e n c i e s  f a c t o r s are h i g h l y suspect. a s s i s t e d u c a t o r s and  Extensive  input,  imputed f o r these  evaluation a c t i v i t y could w e l l  o t h e r s i n d e f i n i n g u n i f i e d c u r r i c u l a and  in  p r o v i d i n g a much c l e a r e r v i e w of the p o t e n t i a l growth of deaf i n d i v i d u a l s i n v a r i o u s programme a r e a s . Language Programme S e l e c t i o n O f f i c i a l s i n a s c h o o l f o r the deaf t r a d i t i o n a l l y s e l e c t one the two  of  p r e s e n t mainstream language approaches f o r u n i v e r s a l use i n t h a t  school. Various  r e a s o n s are o f f e r e d f o r the s e l e c t i o n of t h a t programme.  T h i s s t u d y i n d i c a t e s t h a t n e i t h e r the n a t u r a l approach nor approach i s e f f e c t i v e i n t e a c h i n g s t u d e n t s nor i s one  the  formal  language t o the m a j o r i t y of deaf  approach more e f f e c t i v e than the o t h e r .  Careful  e v a l u a t i o n of p r o c e s s f a c t o r s s u g g e s t s t h a t more s i m i l a r i t y e x i s t s i n a c t u a l l e s s o n methodology than i s apparent i n the p h i l o s o p h i e s s u p p o s e d l y d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed programmes. E x t e n s i v e q u a l i t a t i v e examiniation  underlying  q u a n t i t a t i v e and  of outcomes demonstrates r e m a r k a b l y s i m i l a r  programme e f f e c t s . One deaf may  i m p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e f i n d i n g s i s t h a t e d u c a t o r s of  the  be much more f l e x i b l e i n c h o o s i n g a method t o f i t the c h i l d .  second i m p l i c a t i o n i s t h a t r e s e a r c h language and necessary.  i n t o a l t e r n a t e methods of  f i n a n c i a l and m o r a l support of p r o m i s i n g  teaching  programmes i s  A  122 5. Suggested F u t u r e R e s e a r c h 1. The major q u e s t i o n r i s i n g from t h i s s t u d y r e l a t e s t o t h e a b i l i t y o f a l i m i t e d number o f deaf s u b j e c t s t o d e a l w i t h t h e language p r i n c i p l e s examined w h i l e t h e m a j o r i t y demonstsate almost t o t a l l a c k of such s u c c e s s . examination success  I n d i v i d u a l s o f b o t h t y p e s s h o u l d be t h e s u b j e c t s of d e t a i l e d  t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e language methods were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e  o f some s u b j e c t s o r i f t h e f a c t o r s n e c e s s a r y  f o r success  r e l a t e d t o programme. E x t e n s i v e n e u r o l o g i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n  a r e not  s h o u l d not be  ignored. 2. Refinement of t h e two t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s  i s suggested. Both  appear t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e among deaf s u b j e c t s on t h e b a s i s o f langauge a b i l i t y b u t t h e a d d i t i o n of more items t o probe s p e c i f i c p r i n c i p l e s would r e s u l t i n heightened  d i a g n o s t i c v a l u e . The range of p r i n c i p l e s examined  c o u l d be u s e f u l l y extended to add t o t h e d i a g n o s t i c v a l u e as w e l l . 3. A d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s o f t h e congruence between programme o b j e c t i v e s and s i t u a t i o n a l , i n p u t , p r o c e s s  and outcome f a c t o r s i s  recommended. Programme o b j e c t i v e s appear u n r e l a t e d t o outcome f a c t o r s . Intended s i t u a t i o n a l , i n p u t and p r o c e s s  f a c t o r s appear congruent b u t  t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y i n l e a d i n g t o i n t e n d e d outcome f a c t o r s c a l l e d f o r by programme g o a l s i s o b v i o u s l y d e f i c i e n t . There a r e e a s i l y incongruencies  observable  between i n t e n d e d and observed i n p u t , p r o c e s s and outcome  f a c t o r s . S t u d i e s f o c u s s e d on g o a l s e v a l u a t i o n and t a r g e t t i n g e v a l u a t i o n are recommended f o r b o t h s c h o o l s . 4. S t u d i e s o f t h e success of o t h e r language t e a c h i n g programmes f o r deaf c h i l d r e n s h o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n . The success o f v a r i o u s programmes s h o u l d be s t u d i e d w i t h a v i e w toward d e f i n i n g a language programme most s u i t e d t o t h e needs of deaf i n d i v i d u a l s .  123 5. S t u d i e s examining the f a c t o r of sex i n language s u c c e s s s h o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n . 6. A d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s examining the f a c t o r of age i n language s u c c e s s s h o u l d be u n d e r t a k e n . 7. I t i s the v i e w of a number of i n d i v i d u a l s concerned w i t h the e d u c a t i o n of deaf c h i l d r e n t h a t t h e r e a r e p a r a l l e l s between the l e a r n i n g of E n g l i s h by deaf c h i l d r e n and the l e a r n i n g of E n g l i s h as a second language by n o n - E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g i n d i v i d u a l s . I t would be of (V i n t e r e s t t o a p p l y the t e s t s used i n t h i s s t u d y to members of t h i s group to document s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two B e n e f i t s may  latter  groups.  a c c r u e to b o t h as t h e r e s u l t of such i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . 5. L i m i t a t i o n s  1. The s u b j e c t s of t h i s s t u d y were s e l e c t e d from t h e p o p u l a t i o n s a v a i l a b l e i n two s p e c i f i c s c h o o l s . Each s c h o o l had developed an i n d i v i d u a l approach t o one of two s p e c i f i c mainstream  t e c h n i q u e s of  t e a c h i n g language to deaf c h i l d r e n . The s p e c i f i c r e s u l t s of t h i s s t u d y cannot be g e n e r a l i z e d beyond deaf c h i l d r e n meeting the c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i o n i n s c h o o l s w i t h s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n a l , i n p u t and p r o c e s s f a c t o r s . 2. The t e s t i n s t r u m e n t s i n v e s t i g a t e d a l i m i t e d number of g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s . G e r n e r a l i z a t i o n of r e s u l t s beyond these p r i n c i p l e s i s unwarranted. 3. C e r t a i n g r a m m a t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s were not i n v e s t i g a t e d i n depth by the i n s t r u m e n t s employed. G e n e r a l s t a t e m e n t s r e g a r d i n g response p a t t e r n s based on r e s p o n s e s t o t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s i s unwarranted. 4. Programme g o a l s were n o t w e l l - d e f i n e d by e i t h e r s c h o o l . Programme g o a l s were i m p l i e d by o f f i c i a l s and c u r r i c u l a i n b o t h s c h o o l s / : but t h e s e i m p l i e d g o a l s s h o u l d n o t be g e n e r a l i z e d to o t h e r s c h o o l s :  124  REFERENCES  B a r r y , K.E. The f i v e - s l a t e system. A System o f o b j e c t i v e language t e a c h i n g . P h i l a d e l p h i a : Sherman and Co., P r i n t e r s , 1899. C i t e d by P . J . S c h m i t t , V o l t a Review, 1966, 68, 85-105. B e r k o , J . The c h i l d ' s l e a r n i n g o f E n g l i s h morphology. 150-177.  Word, 1958,  B i r c h , J.W. and S t u c k l e s s , E.R. The i n f l u e n c e o f e a r l y manual communication on;the l i n g u i s t i c development o f deaf c h i l d r e n . American A n n a l s o f t h e Deaf, 1966, 111, 499-504. Brannon, J.B. L i n g u i s t i c word c l a s s e s i n t h e spoken language o f n o r m a l , h a r d - o f - h e a r i n g and deaf c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1968, 1 1 , 279-287. B u e l l , E.M. Book I I .  O u t l i n e o f language f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . Book I , R e v i s e d , Washington, D.C.: The V o l t a Bureau, 1954.  Bunch, G.O. The e f f e c t s o f s c h e m a t i c i l l u s t r a t i o n upon r e a d i n g a c h i e v e ment and r e l a t e d measures i n deaf a d o l e s c e n t s . U n p u b l i s h e d manus c r i p t , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1971. Bunch, G.O. Canadian s e r v i c e s f o r m u l t i p l y handicapped deaf c h i l d r e n . The Canadian Teacher o f t h e Deaf, 1973, 2, 27-31. C a n i g l i a , J . C o l e , N . J . , Howard, W., Krohn, E., and R i c e , M. A p p l e t r e e . L o v e l a n d , C o l o r a d o : C e n t e r f o r I n - S e r v i c e E d u c a t i o n , Box 754, 1972. Conry, R. and U n g e r l e i d e r , C. Notes on t h e development o f a g e n e r a l framework f o r e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n . U n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1974. Cooper, R.L. The development o f m o r p h o l o g i c a l h a b i t s i n deaf c h i l d r e n , i n R e s e a r c h s t u d i e s on t h e p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r o f deaf c h i l d r e n . Washington, D.C.: C.E.C., 1965. Cooper, R.L. and Kaye, J.D. The development o f a t e s t o f deaf c h i l d r e n ' s l i n g u i s t i c competence. F i n a l r e p o r t , BR No. 6-1196, 1967, L e x i n g t o n S c h o o l f o r t h e Deaf, New Y o r k , U.S. Department o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e . Cooper, R.L. and R o s e n s t e i n , J . Language a c q u i s i t i o n . o f deaf c h i l d r e n . V o l t a Review, 1966, 68, 58-67. D o c t o r , P.V. 568-572.  On t e a c h i n g t h e a b s t r a c t t o t h e Deaf.  V o l t a Review, 1950,  125 F i t z g e r a l d , E. S t r a i g h t language f o r t h e d e a f . S t a u n t o n , Va.: M c C l u r e Company, I n c . , 1929. ( R e p u b l i s h e d : Washington, D.C.: V o l t a Bureau, 1949.)  The The  G a r b e r , G.E. An a n a l y s i s o f E n g l i s h m o r p h o l o g i c a l a b i l i t i e s of deaf and hearing children. ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y ) , Ann A r b o r , M i c h . : U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , 1967, No. 67-16-279. G e n t i l e , S. Annual s u r v e y o f h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d c h i l d r e n and y o u t h , Academic achievement t e s t performance of h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d s t u d e n t s : U n i t e d S t a t e s : S p r i n g , 1969. Washington, D.C.: O f f i c e o f Demographic S t u d i e s , G a l l a u d e t C o l l e g e , 1969. G l a s s , G.V. The growth of e v a l u a t i o n methodology. Paper p r e s e n t e d a t the E v a l u a t i o n Workshop of t h e A d u l t E d u c a t i o n R e s e a r c h C o n f e r e n c e , M i n n e a p o l i s , March 1970. Goda, S. Language s k i l l s of p r o f o u n d l y deaf a d o l e s c e n t c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1959, 2, 369-378. G r o h t , M.A. N a t u r a l language f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . V o l t a Bureau, 1958.  Washington,  D.C.:  H a r t , B.O. and R o s e n s t e i n , J . Examining t h e language b e h a v i o r o f deaf c h i l d r e n . V o l t a Review, 66, 679-682, 1964. H e i d e r , R. and H e i d e r , G.M. Comparison of s e n t e n c e s t r u c t u r e of deaf and h e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . V o l t a Review, 1941, 43. K a t e s , S.L. Language development i n deaf and h e a r i n g a d o l e s c e n t s . F i n a l r e p o r t : RD-2555-S, F e b r u a r y 1972, C l a r k e S c h o o l f o r t h e Deaf, Northampton, Mass.: Department of H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e , Washington, D.C.. K i r k , R.E. Experimental design: Procedures f o r the b e h a v i o r a l sciences. Belmont, C a l i f . : Wadsworth P u b l i s h i n g Co.,. 1968. K o p l i n , J.H., Odom, P.B., B l a n t o n , R.L., and N u n n a l l y , J.C. Word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t performance o f deaf s u b j e c t s . J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1967, 10, 126-132. Lenneberg, E.H. B i o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s o f language. John W i l e y and Sons, I n c . , 1967.  New Y o r k :  Lowenbraun, S. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e s y n t a c t i c competence of young deaf c h i l d r e n . ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y ) , Ann A r b o r , M i c h . : U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , 1969, No. 70-7025. M a c G i n i t i e , W.H. A b i l i t y of deaf c h i l d r e n t o use d i f f e r e n t word J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1964, 7, 141-150.  classes.  126 Mager, R. F. P r e p a r i n g i n s t r u c t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s . Fearon P u b l i s h e r s , I n c . , 1962. McCarr, J . E . Lessons i n s y n t a x . P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1973. Menyuk, P.  Palo A l t o ,  Lake Oswego, Oregon:  Sentences c h i l d r e n use.  Calif.:  Dormac  Cambridge, Mass.: MIT P r e s s , 1969.  Montgomery, G.W. R e l a t i o n s h i p o f o r a l s k i l l s t o manual communication i n p r o f o u n d l y deaf a d o l e s c e n t s . American A n n a l s o f t h e Deaf, 1966, 111, 557-565. Moores, D.F. E d u c a t i o n o f t h e deaf i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . Occasional Paper #2, November 1970, U n i v e r s i t y o f M i n n e s o t a , P r o j e c t No. 332189, Grant No. OE-09-332189-4533(032), Department o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n and W e l f a r e , Washington, D.C.. M y k l e b u s t , H.R. 1960.  Psychology of deafness.  New Y o r k : Grune and S t r a t t o n ,  N u n n a l l y , J.C. and B l a n t o n , R.L. P a t t e r n s o f word a s s o c i a t i o n i n t h e d e a f . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1966, 18, 87-92. Odom, P.B., B l a n t o n , R.L., and N u n n a l l y , J.C. Some c l o z e t e c h n i q u e s t u d i e s o f language c a p a b i l i t y i n t h e d e a f . J o u r n a l o f Speech and H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1967, 10, 816-827. O n t a r i o S c h o o l f o r t h e Deaf. J u n i o r S c h o o l C u r r i c u l u m . O n t a r i o S c h o o l f o r t h e Deaf, 1966.  M i l t o n , Ontario:  Owrid, H.L. S t u d i e s i n manual communication w i t h h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d c h i l d r e n . The Teacher o f t h e Deaf, 1971, L X I X , 151-160. Pugh, G.S. Summaries f r o m a p p r a i s a l o f t h e s i l e n t r e a d i n g a b i l i t i e s o f a c o u s t i c a l l y handicapped c h i l d r e n . American A n n a l s o f t h e Deaf, 1946, 9 1 , 331-349. Pugh, B.L. Steps i n language development f o r t h e deaf i l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e F i t z g e r a l d Key. Washington, D.C.: The V o l t a Bureau, 1955. Q u i g l e y , S.F. The i n f l u e n c e o f f i n g e r s p e l l i n g on t h e development o f language, communication, and e d u c a t i o n a l achievement i n deaf c h i l d r e n . I n s t i t u t e f o r R e s e a r c h on E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n : U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s , 1969. Q u i g l e y , S.F. The deaf and t h e h a r d o f h e a r i n g . R e s e a r c h , XXXIX, F e b r u a r y , 1969.  Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l  Rhodda, M. A c r i t i q u e o f r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s on t o t a l Canadian Teacher o f t h e Deaf, 1973, 2, 10-18.  communication.  127 S c h m i t t , P . J . Deaf c h i l d r e n ' s comprehension and p r o d u c t i o n o f sentence t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s and verb t e n s e s . (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s ) , Ann A r b o r , M i c h . : U n i v e r s i t y of M i c r o f i l m s , No. 6015-381, 1970. S t a k e , R. The countenance o f e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n . R e c o r d , 1967, 68, 523-540.  Teachers C o l l e g e  S t r e n g , A. Reading f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . Washington, D.C.: A s s o c i a t i o n f o r the Deaf, I n c . , 1964.  A.G.  Bell  S t u f f l e b e a m , D.L. E v a l u a t i o n as enlightenment f o r d e c i s i o n making. In Improving E d u c a t i o n a l Assessment and an I n v e n t o r y o f A f f e c t i v e B e h a v i o r . Washington, D.C.: A s s o c i a t i o n f o r S u p e r v i s i o n and C u r r i c u l u m Development, N.E.A., 1969. C i t e d by R. Conry and C. U n d e r l e i d e r , Notes on the development o f a g e n e r a l framework of e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n . U n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1974. S t u f f l e b e a m , D.L. The use of e x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n i n e d u c a t i o n a l e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Measurement, 1971, 8, 267-274. Vernon, M. M u l t i p l y handicapped deaf c h i l d r e n : A study of the s i g n i f i c a n c e and causes o f t h e problem. U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Claremont Graduate S c h o o l , 1966. T e m p l i n , M.C. The development of r e a s o n i n g i n c h i l d r e n w i t h normal and d e f e c t i v e h e a r i n g . M i n n e a p o l i s ; U n i v e r s i t y o f M i n n e s o t a P r e s s , 1950. Van Uden, Rev. A. A w o r l d o f language f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . Rotterdam U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970. Watson, K. i n B.C..  Rotterdam:  The e d u c a t i o n a l needs of m u l t i p l y handicapped deaf c h i l d r e n J e r i c h o H i l l S c h o o l , Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, 1973.  Wing, G. The theory, and p r a c t i c e o f grammatical A n n a l s of the Deaf, 1887, 32, 84-92.  methods.  American  W o l l a s t o n , R.A. Programme book: O n t a r i o s c h o o l f o r the deaf. O n t a r i o : O n t a r i o S c h o o l f o r the Deaf, 1974.  Milton:  W r i g h t s t o n e , J.W., Aronow, M.S., and M o s k o w i t z , S. Development of r e a d i n g t e s t norms f o r deaf c h i l d r e n . P.N. 22-262, Bureau of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , Board o f E d u c a t i o n o f the C i t y o f New York,  1962.  APPENDIX A ASSESSING COMMUNICATION  BEHAVIOR  YODER MODEL I•  Language Content Semantics Concepts Comprehension Vocabulary Auditory  II.  I  Acuity Perception  Phonology Morphology  Written  Speech  Extra-Linguistic Variables Attention Perception Discrimination Memory  IV.  Task V a r i a b l e s Stimulus M a t e r i a l s — T H E t h i n g ; t h i n g representation Response F o r m — V e r b a l ; w r i t t e n ; g e s t u r a l ; r e f u s a l Consequences—Motivational  V.  events  Situational Variables P h y s i c a l Environment—Home; c l i n i c ; h o s p i t a l ; s c h o o l Examiner-Examinee S t a t u s Language Code D i f f e r e n c e s  Motor Graphic  Production  Syntax III.  Visual  I  Language S t r u c t u r e  Gesture  129 SELECTED TESTS OF LANGUAGE BEHAVIOR TO ASSESS THE STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF LANGUAGE (YODER) Language S t r u c t u r e  Tests  Phonology - Speech sounds b. c.  Morphology - Word forms tenses, p l u r a l i t y p o s s e s s i v e , comparative pronoun changes, p r e f i x e s , suffices  a. b.  and Syntax - Word o r d e r phrase s t r u c t u r e transformations h.  Semantics - Word meaning vocabulary (choice, v a r i e t y and number) concepts ( c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , r e l a t i o n a l and l o g i c a l )  c. d.  e. f. g. h.  T e m p l i n - D a r l e y S c r e e n i n g and Diagnostic Tests of A r t i c u l a t i o n Goldman-Fristoe A r t i c u l a t i o n Test The Deep T e s t o f A r t i c u l a t i o n (McDonald) Developmental A r t i c u l a t i o n T e s t (Hejna) T e s t o f E n g l i s h Morphology (Berko) E x p l o r a t o r y T e s t o f Grammar ( B e r r y and T a l b o t ) A u d i t o r y T e s t f o r Language Comprehension (Carrow) N o r t h w e s t e r n Syntax S c r e e n i n g T e s t (Lee) E v a l u a t i o n o f Grammatical C a p a c i t y (Menyuk) Grammatic C l o s u r e - s u b t e s t o f ITPA ( K i r k and McCarthy) Grammatical Comprehension T e s t (Bellugi-Klima) A n a l y s i s o f spontaneous Language samples S e l e c t e d items from Peabody Language Development K i t s Peabody P i c t u r e V o c a b u l a r y T e s t (Dunn) WISC: V o c a b u l a r y and S i m i l a r i t i e s Subtest Binet: Vocabulary subtest ITPA: A u d i t o r y r e c e p t i o n Visual reception Verbal expression Manual e x p r e s s i o n Auditory vocal association V i s u a l Motor a s s o c i a t i o n The B a s i c Concept I n v e n t o r y (Engleman) Boehm T e s t o f B a s i c Concepts (Boehm) A n a l y s i s o f spontaneous language samples S e l e c t e d items from Peabody Language Development K i t s  APPENDIX B Menyuk's T e s t of Grammatical Competence Items and E r r o r Source Sentence  Error  1. He wash h i s d i r t y f a c e .  v e r b form o m i t t e d  2. They s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r 3. They get mad  beds.  and then they pushed him.  Source  a u x i l i a r y omitted v e r b t e n s e agreement  4. The b a r b e r c u t o f f h i s h a i r o f f .  preposition  5. I want t o go New  p r e p o s i t i o n omitted  Y o r k i n t h e morning.  redundancy  6. He l i k e s t o l o o k a t  noun phrase o m i t t e d  7. My daddy has new o f f i c e downtown.  a r t i c l e omitted  8. He growed b i g g e r and b i g g e r .  v e r b form  9. He l i k e t e d t h a t funny game.  v e r b form  10. The l i t t l e boy i s washing  hisself.  form  word o r d e r  11. You p i c k up i t . 12. What name you're  reflexive  writing:  word o r d e r  13. There's t h r e e t r e e s .  verb-number agreement  14. Two b r o t h e r s and one s i s t e r I have.  subject-object  15. Don't put t h e h a t .  particle  16. I want a m i l k .  article  17. He took me a t t h e c i r c u s today.  preposition inappropriate  18. Where a r e t h e p e o p l e s ?  noun form  19. Mommy was happy so he k i s s e d B e t t y .  s u b j e c t - p r o n o u n agreement  20. The t e a c h e r w r i t e s t h a t numbers.  determiner  21. I t i s n ' t any more r a i n .  "There"  22. He took h i s k n i f e from  falling.  inversion  inappropriate  noun form  insertion  verb i n a p p r o p r i a t e  23. T h i s d r e s s green.  verb omitted  24. She t o o k i t away t h e h a t .  noun phrase  redundancy  131 APPENDIX C Menyuk's T e s t of Grammatical Competence Administration  Instructions  A l l i n s t r u c t i o n s a r e t o be g i v e n i n the a u d i t o r y , and p r i n t e d forms. S u b j e c t s a r e t o be t e s t e d  f i n g e r s p e l l e d , manual  i n groups o f seven t o t e n .  R e p e t i t i o n of Sentences: 1. The i n v e s t i g a t o r w i l l say t o the c l a s s . " I w i l l show you some s e n t e n c e s on the s c r e e n . You w i l l  see one sentence each t i m e .  W r i t e t h e sentence a f t e r you r e a d i t . W r i t e the sentence a f t e r I t u r n o f f the p r o j e c t o r . Do not ask any q u e s t i o n s about the s e n t e n c e . " 2. A s i n g l e sample sentence w i l l be p r o j e c t e d . allowed,  Seven seconds w i l l  e.g. They saw the dogg.  3. The i n v e s t i g a t o r w i l l say t o t h e c l a s s . " W r i t e the sentence  now.  Look a t me when you a r e f i n i s h e d . I w i l l show you a n o t h e r s e n t e n c e . " 4. The r e m a i n i n g i t e m s w i l l be t r e a t e d Repetition  of Sentences w i t h  i n a s i m i l a r manner.  Correction:  1. The i n v e s t i g a t o r w i l l say t o the c l a s s . " I w i l l show you t h e s e n t e n c e s a g a i n . The s e n t e n c e s a r e wrong. Make them c o r r e c t . W r i t e each sentence a f t e r you have r e a d i t . Do not ask any q u e s t i o n s about the s e n t e n c e . "  be  132  2. The sample sentence w i l l be p r o j e c t e d f o r seven  seconds,  e.g. They saw the dogg. 3. The i n v e s t i g a t o r w i l l say t o the c l a s s . " W r i t e the sentence  now.  Look a t me when you a r e f i n i s h e d . I w i l l show you a n o t h e r s e n t e n c e . Remember t o make the sentence  correct."  4. The t e s t s e n t e n c e s w i l l be t r e a t e d  i n a s i m i l a r manner.  APPENDIX D Menyuk's T e s t of Grammatical Competence Scaled  Scoring  System  Criteria - p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r source -no a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s e x c l u d i n g s p e l l i n g - a l l words i n c l u d e d - p u n c t u a t i o n not n e c e s s a r y - p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r source -some a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r e.g.  Sentence 3-They got mad and they pushed him. 7-My daddy has a new o f f i c e i n downtown. 9-He l i k e d thay funny t h a t .  a - p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r s o u r c e - m o d i f i c a t i o n of sentence meaning - a l l words or a p p r o p r i a t e s u b s t i t u t e s i n c l u d e d - i f a l l words not i n c l u d e d , the sentence must end appropriate punctuation e.g.  with  Sentence 2-They are s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r bags. 4-The b a r b e r was c u t t i n g h i s h a i r o f f . 19-Mommy was happy t o see h i s son so she k i s s e d h i s son on the cheek.  b - p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r s o u r c e - m o d i f i c a t i o n of sentence meaning -some a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r e.g.  Sentence 12-What a r e you w r i t i n g the name of t h i s  story  - i m p e r f e c t c o r r e c t i o n of e r r o r s o u r c e but an o b v i o u s attempt -may have a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s e.g.  Sentence 3-They get mad and them t h e y p u s h i n g to them. 12-What name you a r e w r i t i n g ? 2 1 - I t i s n ' t r a i n any more.  - m o d i f i c a t i o n of sentence meaning -no a d d i t i o n a l e r r o r s e.g.  Sentence 3-They get mad a t him because he pushed them. 12-What i s your name? 15-Don't hang the h a t . 18-The t e a c h e r w r i t e s a name.  - a l l o t h e r r e s p o n s e s i n c l u d i n g non-response  134 APPENDIX E Menyuk's T e s t o f Grammatical Competence Category D e f i n i t i o n s and Examples  C o r r e c t i o n - any c o r r e c t response i n c l u d i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n s o f t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s o r t r u n c a t e d , b u t c o r r e c t , responses f o l l o w e d by t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p u n c t u a t i o n mark, e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l  Sentence  He wash h i s d i r t y  face.  Responses: He washed h i s d i r t y  face.  He washes h i s d i r t y  face.  He washed. R e p e t i t i o n - a compete r e p e t i t i o n o f t h e a g r a m m a t i c a l s e n t e n c e . S p e l l i n g and p u n c t u a t i o n e r r o r s were i g n o r e d , e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l  Sentence  He wash h i s d i r t y  face.  Response: He wash h i s d i r t y  face.  N o n - r e p e t i t i o n - no r e s p o n s e a t a l l o r a response o f o n l y one o r two words a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s e n t e n c e , e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l  Sentence  He wash h i s d i r t y  face.  Response: None He Attempted C o r r e c t i o n - an attempt t o c o r r e c t t h e s o u r c e o f agrammati-  c a l i t y but w i t h an i n c o r r e c t form o r w i t h a c o r r e c t form b u t w i t h t h e i n c l u s i o n  of a d d i t i o n a l  errors. e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l Sentence They s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r beds. Responses: They s l e e p e d  i n t h e i r beds.  They s l e e p e d  a t t h e i r bed.  O m i s s i o n - t h e o m i s s i o n o f a w o r d ( s ) o r a morpheme, e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l Sentence They s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r beds. Responses: They s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r bed. The s l e e p i n g t h e i r bed. A d d i t i o n - t h e a d d i t i o n o f a w o r d ( s ) o r morpheme, e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l Sentence My daddy has new o f f i c e  downtown.  Responses: My daddy has new o f f i c e i n t h e downtown. S u b s t i t u t i o n - t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n o f a word(s) o r a morpheme f o r t h a t given i n the sentence, e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l Sentence He wash h i s d i r t y  face.  Response: He was a d i r t y  face.  Word Order - a change i n t h e o r d e r o f t h e o r i g i n a l s e n t e n c e .  136 e.g. A g r a m m a t i c a l Sentence They s l e e p i n g i n t h e i r beds. Response: They s l e e p i n g t h e i r i n beds.  APPENDIX F Berko's Test o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l  Rules  Sample Item  T h i s i s a wug.  Now t h e r e i s another one. There a r e two o f them. There a r e two  138 APPENDIX G Berko's Test o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s Items and E r r o r Source Item  E r r o r Source  1. T h i s i s a wug.  p l u r a l form  Now t h e r e i s a n o t h e r one. There a r e two o f them. There a r e two S i m i l a r l y f o r i t e m s : 2. g u t c h ; 4. k a z h ; 7. t o r ; 9. l u n ; 10. n i z ; 12. e r a ; 13. t a s s ; 17. h e a f ; 18. g l a s s : 2. T h i s i s a mean who knows how t o spow. He i s spowing. He d i d t h e same t h i n g  p a s t t e n s e form  yesterday.  What d i d he do y e s t e r d a y ? Y e s t e r d a y he . S i m i l a r l y f o r i t e m s : 5. r i c k ; 11. mot; 14. bod; 19. g l i n g ; 20. b i n g ; 23. r i n g : 3. T h i s i s a man who knows how t o n a z . He i s n a z z i n g . He does i t e v e r y day.  t h i r d person s i n g u l a r present t e n s e form  Every day he S i m i l a r l y f o r i t e m : 20. l o o d g e : 4. T h i s i s a n i z z who owns a h a t . Whose h a t i s i t ? I t i s the  possessive s i n g u l a r form  hat.  Now t h e r e a r e two n i z z e s . They b o t h own h a t s .  possessive p l u r a l form  Whose h a t s a r e they? They a r e t h e  hats.  5. T h i s i s a man who knows how t o z i b .  present progressive form  139  What i s he doing? He i s  .  6. T h i s i s an i c e cube. Ice melts. It i s melting. Now i t i s a l l gone. What happened t o i t ? It  p a s t tense form  APPENDIX H Berko's T e s t of M o r p h o l o g i c a l R u l e s Administration  Instructions  A l l i n s t r u c t i o n s w i l l be g i v e n i n the a u d i t o r y , and p r i n t e d forms.  f i n g e r s p e l l e d , manual  S u b j e c t s a r e t o be t e s t e d i n : groups o f seven t o t e n . 1. The e x p e r i m e n t e r w i l l i s s u e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s . " I want you t o l o o k a t some p i c t u r e s on the s c r e e n . Look a t the p i c t u r e s and r e a d t h e s e n t e n c e s . " 2. The f i r s t p i c t u r e and the accompanying t e x t w i l l be p r e s e n t e d . A f t e r f i v e seconds the e x p e r i m e n t e r w i l l emphasize t h e need t o r e a d the t e x t by p o i n t i n g t o each s e n t e n c e . 3. The e x p e r i m e n t e r w i l l p o i n t t o t h e b l a n k l e f t  i n t h e t e x t and a s k ,  "What word do you need here? T h i n k t o y o u r s e l f and do not t e l l anyone." 4. The e x p e r i m e n t e r w i l l d i s t r i b u t e the response s h e e t s a f t e r i s s u i n g the f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s . " I w i l l g i v e you an answer s h e e t . Look a t number one... W r i t e t h e word you need. You need o n l y one word. T h i n k c a r e f u l l y . 5. The i n v e s t i g a t o r w i l l ensure t h a t a l l attempt t h e q u e s t i o n . 6. The r e m a i n i n g items w i l l be t r e a t e d i n a s i m i l a r manner.  141 APPENDIX I Berko's T e s t o f M o r p h o l o g i c a l Scaled  Scoring  Rules  System  P l u r a l Form: Items:  wugs, t o r s , l u n s , e r a s , g u t c h e s , k a z h e s , n i z z e s ,  tasses,  glasses, heafes/ves: Score  Criteria  4  -perfect  3  -use o f major p a r t o f s t i m u l u s word (50% minimum) t o form some o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word - c o r r e c t p l u r a l ending  response  e.g. bugs, t a r s , l e a v e s , c r a c k e r s , 2  cros  a - s t i m u l u s word - c o r r e c t p l u r a l ending - i n a p p r o p r i a t e accompanying a r t i c l e e.g. a wugs b - s t i m u l u s word - i n a p p r o p r i a t e p l u r a l ending e.g. l u n e s , n i z z s ,  craies  c - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e t o produce a r e a l word - c o r r e c t p l u r a l ending -correct spelling e.g. c h i c k e n s ,  b i r d s , t e e t h , mushrooms  d-use o f a r e a l word d e s c r i b i n g some p a r t o f t h e s t i m u l u s picture - c o r r e c t p l u r a l ending -correct spelling e.g. hooks, l e g s , eyes 1  a - s t i m u l u s word - i n a p p r o p r i a t e p l u r a l ending  142  e.g. a g u t c h s , a kazhs b-use of an a p p r o p r i a t e pronoun  form  e.g. them c-any r e s p o n s e w i t h an a p p r o p r i a t e p l u r a l ending e.g. c h o s t s ,  traughts  143 P a s t Tense Form: Items: spowed, r i c k e d , motted, bodded, m e l t e d , g l i n g e d / g l a n g , binged/bang, r i n g e d / r a n g : Score  Criteria  4  - p e r f e c t response  3  -use o f major p a r t o f s t i m u l u s word (50% minimum) to form some o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker e.g. b r i n g e d , b i n n e d , m a t t e d , g l i n d e d , bonged  2  a - s t i m u l u s word - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker -no double f i n a l consonant where r e q u i r e d e.g. boded, moted b - s t i m u l u s word - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker -double f i n a l consonant where n o t r e q u i r e d e.g. bingged c - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e t o produce a r e a l word - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker -correct spelling e.g. w a l k e d , p l a y e d , c l i m b e d d-use o f a r e a l word d e s c r i b i n g some p a r t o f t h e stimulus p i c t u r e - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker -correct spelling e.g. bowled, .speaked  1  a-use o f major p a r t o f s t i m u l u s word (50% minimum) to form some o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word -no double f i n a l consonant where r e q u i r e d - c o r r e c t p a s t t e n s e marker e.g. mated .b-use o f major t o form some -double f i n a l - c o r r e c t past  p a r t o f s t i m u l u s (50% minimum) o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word consonant where n o t r e q u i r e d t e n s e marker  .g. g r i n g g e d a l l o t h e r responses i n c l u d i n g non-response  145  P r e s e n t P r o g r e s s i v e Tense Form: Item: Score  zibbing: Criteria - p e r f e c t response -Use o f major p a r t of s t i m u l u s word t o form some o t h e r r e a l or n o n - r e a l word - c o r r e c t p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e tense marker e.g. r i b b i n g a - s t i m u l u s word - c o r r e c t p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e tense marker -no double f i n a l consonant where r e q u i r e d e.g.  zibing  b - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e t o produce a r e a l word - c o r r e c t p r e s e n t p r o g r e s s i v e tense marker -correct spelling e.g.  carrying  -any response w i t h an a p p r o p r i a t e p r e s e n t t e n s e marker e.g.  progressive  earring  - a l l o t h e r r e s p o n s e s i n c l u d i n g non-response  146  T h i r d P e r s o n S i n g u l a r P r e s e n t Tense Form: Items: Scores  nazzes, loodges: Criteria  4  - p e r f e c t response  3  -use o f major p a r t o f s t i m u l u s word (50% minimum) to form some o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word - c o r r e c t t h i r d p e r s o n s i n g u l a r p r e s e n t t e n s e marker e.g. l o o d g s  2  - s t i m u l u s word - i n a p p r o p r i a t e t h i r d person s i n g u l a r present tense marker e.g. n a z z s  1  - s t i m u l u s word - i n a p p r o p r i a t e t h i r d person s i n g u l a r present tense marker form -no f i n a l double consonant where r e q u i r e d e.g. nazs  0  - a l l o t h e r responses i n c l u d i n g non-response  147  S i n g u l a r and P l u r a l P o s s e s s i v e Forms: Items:  n i z z ' s , b i k ' s , wug's, n i z z e s ' , b i k s ' , wugs':  Score  Criteria  4  -perfect  3  -use o f major p a r t o f s t i m u l u s word (50% minimum) to form some o t h e r r e a l o r n o n - r e a l word - c o r r e c t p o s s e s s i v e form  response  e.g. b i k e s ' , 2  kik's  a - s t i m u l u s word - i n a p p r o p r i a t e p o s s e s s i v e form e.g. wug's ( f o r wugs'), b i k s ' ( f o r b i k ' s ) b - i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t i m u l u s p i c t u r e t o produce a r e a l word - c o r r e c t p o s s e s s i v e form -correct s p e l l i n g e.g. b i r d ' s , t o a s t e r ' s , square's  1  a - r e p e t i t i o n o f word from s t i m u l u s t e x t - c o r r e c t p o s s e s s i v e form e.g. own's b - s u b s t i t u t i o n o f a p p r o p r i a t e p o s s e s s i v e pronoun e.g. h i s ( f o r s i n g u l a r ) , t h e i r ( f o r p l u r a l ) c-any response w i t h an / ' s / o r / s ' / e n d i n g e.g. n i z z e ' s , i t s ' , wuges's, bubs's  0  - a l l other responses i n c l u d i n g  non-response  form  148 APPENDIX J S u b j e c t Scores f o r Menyuk Items T a b l e 33 N^ Scores f o r Menyuk Items  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Total  Sex  1 F  2 M  3 F  4 F  5 F  6 F  Subject 7 8 M M M  9 10 F F  11 F  12 F  13 F  14  15  16 17 M M M  1 2 4  4 5  3  4  1 5  4  4  2  4 5  4  4  4  4  5  5  5 5 9 5  4 5  3  3  4  9  4  5  8  6  14  9 4  149  T a b l e 34 F^ Scores f o r Menyuk  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Total  Sex  1 M  2 F  3 M  Subject 4 M  4  4 4  4  4 4  5 13  16  Items  5  6 F  F  7 M  8 M  9 M  :  150".  T a b l e 35 N_ Scores f o r Menyuk Items  Item  1 Sex F  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 F M F M M F M F  1 2 3 4 5  5 5 4 5  7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  4 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5  Total  Subject 10 11 M M  12 F  13 F  14 F  15 F  16 M  17 F  2  4  20  18 F  19 F  2  4 5  5 5 2 5  5  5 100 7 19  5  2  3  3  9  44  5  151  T a b l e 36 F  Scores f o r Menyuk Items  Subject 1 F  Item Sex  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Total  2  3  4  M  M  4  4  M  5 F  5  5 5 2 4 5  4 2  5  6 F  2  4  5 3 3 3  7  8  F  M  4 5 5 5 5  4  5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5  3 1  4 5 4 5  4 9  22  5 3 1 5 3 5  5  5 5 25  5 16  9 F  5 5 5  3  3 4  5 5  5  71  21  1  5 5 5  1  104  152  T a b l e 37 N  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Total  Sex  1 M  2  2 F  3 M  Scores f o r Menyuk  4 F  5 F  Subject 6 7 8 M F F  5 3 1  2 4  4 5 5 5  4 4  5  3  3  4 3 5 2 5 5 5 3 4 4 3 5 3  5  6  14  82  2 4  5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 3 4  10 11 12 M F M  4 5  13 M  3  4  4  5 5  2  2 5  5 4  2 5 4 5 4 5  4  8  5  5  4  4  5  5 5  5 5  5  4 3. 24  9 M  5  3 5 4  4  Items  3 5 5  5 5  75  52  4  6  4 5  5 5  31  57  5  3  153  T a b l e 38 F  Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 . Total  Sex  1 F  4  2 M  Scores f o r Menyuk Items  3 F  Subject 4 F  5 F  6 F 5 5 5 5 5 5  2 2 5 5  5 5 5 5 4 3 4 3 4 3 3  5 5  5 5  5 5  5 5  4  5 5  4 2 2 2 4  4 5 2 2 5  4 1  5 5  5 5  5 5  5 5  4 3 2 3 5 5  64  86  90  4 4 5  5  32  49  2  4 5 5 5 2  2 2 4 3 3 5 5 5 4 4  7 F  8 M  4 4  3  4 4  4  5 4  12  20  154 APPENDIX K S u b j e c t S c o r e s f o r Berko Items T a b l e 39 N., S c o r e s f o r Berko Items  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total  1 Sex F  2 3 4 5 6 7 M F F F F M  Subject 8 9 10 11 MM F F  2  2 2 2 1 1 2  2  6  12 F  13 F  14 F  15 M  16 M  17 M  155  T a b l e 40 F^ Scores f o r Berko  Item  Sex  1 M  2 F  3 M  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  4  Total  4  Subject 4 M  Items  5 F  6 F  7 M 1  1 1  1 1 1  1 2 2  8 M 2 4 4 3 2  1 1  2  1  1  12  2  1  17  9 M  156'  T a b l e 41 N. Scores f o r Berko  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total  1 Sex F  2 F  3 M  2 2 3 3  4 2  4 2  2 2 2 4 4 4 1 2 3 3 4  15 38  3 4  4 F  5 M  4 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 •2 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 1 4 4 4 4 3 1  7 95 24  6 M  Items  Subject 7 8 9 10 -11 12 13 F M F M M F F  2 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1  4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 2 .2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4  4 4 4  4 4 4  4 4 4  2 2 2 2 1 1  1  4 4  2 2  4  4 4  4 1 4 53 58 54  10  1  12  14  4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 1 97  15 16 17 18 19 F F M F F F  2 2  2 2 4  2 1  2  4  4 4 4  4 4 4 2 1 1  1 1 10  2 2 2 2 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4  8  86  16  151 T a b l e 42 Scores f o r Berko Items  Item  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total  Sex  1 F  2 M  4  4  4 2  Subject 4 M  3 M  4 4 4 4 4 2 3  4 4 4 2 4 4  4 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4  5 F  6 F  2 4  3  1  8 M  2  4  1  4  4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 2  4 4 4 3  9 F  2  4 4  2 4  7 F  1 2 2 2 4  4 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2  4 1  1 3 2  10  53  65  14  3  49  26  2  69  •158 -  T a b l e 43 N„ Scores f o r Berko  Item  Sex  1 M  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  4 4 4 4  Total  54  2 2 4 2 4  2 F  1  2  4 4 4  3 M  4 F  5 F  4 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 2 2  4 4 4 4 4 '2 J 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4  4 2 4 4 4 4 4  3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1  4 4 4 2  90  73  4 4 4 4 4 4  Subj e c t 6 7 M F  3  2 2 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4  2 2  Items  8 F  9 M  10 M  11 F  2 2 2 4 2 4 4 2 2 4  12 M  13 M 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2  1  1 1 2  2  4 4 4 2  4 4 4  4 4 4 2  3  59  2  2 2 2 1 1 1  4 2 4 1  4 4  4 4  4 1 1  9  1 1  1 1 1  57  49  2  6  9  1?  159,  T a b l e 44 F^ Scores f o r Berko  Items  Subject Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Total  Sex  1 F  2 M  3  2 4 4 4 '• 4 2 2 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 3 4  2  4 F  F  .  1 4 4 4 1 1 3  75  1  4 3 4 4 4 4 .4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 -4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4  5 F 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4  6 F  7 F  2 2 2 2  4 4  2 2 2  2 2  2 1  2 2  4 2 2 2 2 4 4  2 2 2  4 4 2 2 2  1 1  4  8 M  1 99  77  35  11  26  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054431/manifest

Comment

Related Items