Computerized Sign Language-Based Literacy Training for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children.
Emil Holmer, Mikael Heimann, Mary Rudner
PMID 28961874WHAT IT FOUND
Sign language-based computer training did not significantly improve reading comprehension in deaf and hard-of-hearing children.
Word reading showed a borderline improvement. Children with better imitation of unfamiliar signs progressed faster in word reading, suggesting sign phonological skills support decoding.
Key findings
01The intervention had a negligible effect on reading comprehension, with no significant improvement over regular schoolwork.
02There was a marginally significant effect of the intervention on word reading, but it did not reach conventional statistical significance.
03Ability to imitate unfamiliar signs predicted both initial word reading level and the rate of improvement in word reading over time.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample size was very small (16 children), which limits the statistical power to detect effects. There was a high degree of missing data due to technical errors and participant absence. The groups were not randomly assigned but matched, which can introduce bias. The study did not control for the amount of teacher support provided during training, which varied. Participants had heterogeneous backgrounds, including different ages, grades, and levels of sign language proficiency.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Institute for Disability Science.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the borderline p-value for word reading as proof that this software works. The study was underpowered, and the primary outcome for comprehension was null. The natural improvement in reading scores over time likely reflects general schooling and maturation rather than the specific effect of the computer training.