Hard of hearing learners in a school for the deaf: A case study in the Eastern Cape province.
Thabisa P Ndwandwe, Lavanithum Joseph
PMID 40599011WHAT IT FOUND
Eight hard-of-hearing learners in a deaf school described feeling comfortable and accepted.
They relied on sign language and speech-reading. They struggled when teachers were not fluent in sign language. Their hearing aids were lost or broken. This describes their experience; it does not prove the school is better.
Key findings
01All eight learners felt the school was fitting for them and could participate in all activities, reporting positive feelings towards the environment.
02Learners communicated using a mix of South African Sign Language and spoken language, relying heavily on speech-reading to cope with conversation.
03None of the eight learners were using their hearing aids at the time of the study, as they had been lost or damaged.
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 study included only eight learners from a single school, so the findings cannot be generalised to all hard-of-hearing learners or other schools. The sample was purposive and small, which limits the breadth of experiences captured. The study did not include speech audiometry results, so it is unclear how well the learners could understand speech in noise or without visual cues. Hearing aid status was self-reported and record-based; the study did not investigate why the aids were lost or damaged in detail.
Declared interests
The authors received no financial support for this research and declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the learners' positive feelings as evidence that a school for the deaf is the best placement for all hard-of-hearing children. This is a small descriptive study of eight students who were already enrolled; it does not compare outcomes with mainstream or other inclusive settings.