ZINinNGT: A Mobile Tool to Aid Hearing Parents Learning Dutch Sign Language

Around 90-95% of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children are born to hearing parents, most of whom have no prior knowledge of a sign language. This creates a risk of language deprivation, with long-term effects on language, cognitive, and social-emotional development. Research shows that sign language input supports children's development without hindering spoken language acquisition. Yet many hearing parents of DHH children are discouraged from learning sign language by unfounded claims from professionals or by restrictive support systems. In the Netherlands, parental sign language courses are covered by health insurance, which reduces financial barriers but also reinforces a medical framing of deafness and sign language and limits parental choice by assigning families to a single provider. Higher-level sign language courses are scarce, and most materials focus on vocabulary rather than sentence formation, leaving parents at a basic level while their children progress rapidly. This brief highlights what is known about hearing parents' experiences learning sign language and calls for systemic changes: unbiased professional guidance, inclusion of DHH role models, greater parental choice in courses, and a socio-cultural view on sign language.

There has been a significant improvement in Deaf education that have occurred in the last century. Despite this improvement, deaf learners continue to face significant obstacles in their daily lives. The findings revealed that support obstacles by hearing parents to Deaf learners in sign language acquisition were enhanced by being born in a hearing family who does not have a background in sign language. In South Africa, deafness is often diagnosed only when a child is between the ages of four and eight. In most cases, a child's language capacity develops during the first two years of life. deaf children enter their first grade at a school for the Deaf with little to no sign language skills. Most deaf children of hearing parents do not have or lack linguistic input at home. Thus, if hearing parents have a deaf child, they have to learn sign language to interact with their deaf children, and usually learn sign language at the same time as their deaf children. This study adopted a qualitative method using a descriptive case study as the research design. A purposeful sampling of six Deaf learners, and their six hearing parents was included in the study. The fact that signed language has been adopted as the 12th South African official language, is a good development for the deaf. There is a dearth and less research conducted, mostly international. It is of significant to investigate further to improve sign language acquisition to Deaf learners in South Africa.

Most deaf children have hearing parents who do not know a sign language at birth and are at risk of limited language input during early childhood. Studying these children as they learn a sign language has revealed that timing of first-language exposure critically shapes language outcomes. But the input deaf children receive in their first language is not only delayed, it is much more variable than most first language learners, as many learn their first language from parents who are themselves new sign language learners. Much of the research on deaf children learning a sign language has considered the role of parent input using broad strokes, categorizing hearing parents as non-native, poor signers, and deaf parents as native, strong signers. In this study, we deconstruct these categories and examine how variation in sign language skills among hearing parents might affect children’s vocabulary acquisition. This study included 44 deaf children between 8- and 60-months-old who were learning American Sign Language (ASL) and had hearing parents who were also learning ASL. We observed an interactive effect of parent ASL proficiency and age, such that parent ASL proficiency was a significant predictor of child ASL vocabulary size, but not among the infants and toddlers. The proficiency of language models can affect acquisition above and beyond age of acquisition, particularly as children grow. At the same time, the most skilled parents in this sample were not as fluent as “native” deaf signers, and yet their children reliably had age-expected ASL vocabularies. Data and reproducible analyses are available at https://osf.io/9ya6h/.

In the United States, the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders estimates that 90% or more deaf children have hearing parents. Communication is one of the first aspects of family life impacted by having a deaf child. The hearing parents of deaf children and teachers often have difficulty communicating with their deaf children and need to interact with them using sign language. Deaf children and hearing parents still face many challenges in learning sign languages despite technological advances such as mobile apps, desktop and web applications, and new instructional materials and methods. In Qatar, 13.7% of the persons with disabilities have some difficulties, many challenges, or cannot hear totally, highlighting the need to include and foster ICT accessibility of deaf and hard of hearing persons in education. In this paper, we presented a new approach based on virtual reality (VR) to teach the basics of Qatari Sign Language (QSL) for teachers and parents, which can be extended to beginner interpreters for sign language. We experimented on 52 participants from specialized primary schools and higher institutes to teach them new signs in QSL (Arabic Sign Language). Virtual reality presented an innovative way for fast education through impact assessment conduct before and after the training sessions.

The present study focuses on the complex language situation of hearing families with deaf children in Ein Mahil, a village in northern Israel, where five distinct language varieties co-exist: Colloquial Arabic, Standard Arabic, Hebrew, Israeli Sign Language and Ein Mahil Sign Language. In this community, hearing parents must make difficult language choices for their deaf children in terms of language use in the home and at school. Data were gathered from 10 hearing parents of deaf children who did not share a fully accessible language with their children from birth. Using questionnaires, we explore language proficiency, preference, and usage as expressed by hearing parents. Findings show that deaf children in Ein Mahil are more proficient in EMSL than the dominant sign language, ISL, despite their hearing parents' preferences for ISL. That said, parents in this study indicate that each language is used for a specific purpose: Colloquial Arabic and EMSL for ideological reasons, ISL and Hebrew for instrumental reasons, and Standard Arabic for religious purposes. This study highlights the language situation faced by the minority deaf communities in Israel, particularly the importance of family and school language policies in this process.<p> </p><p><strong> Article visualizations:</strong></p><p><img src="/-counters-/soc/0711/a.php" alt="Hit counter" /></p>

Recent evidence suggests that deaf children with CIs exposed to nonnative sign language from hearing parents can attain age-appropriate vocabularies in both sign and spoken language. It remains to be explored whether deaf children with CIs who are exposed to early nonnative sign language, but only up to implantation, also benefit from this input and whether these benefits also extend to memory abilities, which are strongly linked to language development. The present study examined the impact of deaf children's early short-term exposure to nonnative sign input on their spoken language and their phonological memory abilities. Deaf children who had been exposed to nonnative sign input before and after cochlear implantation were compared to deaf children who never had any exposure to sign input as well as to children with typical hearing. The children were between 5;1 and 7;1 years of age at the time of testing and were matched on age, sex, and socioeconomic status. The results suggest that even short-term exposure to nonnative sign input has positive effects on general language and phonological memory abilities as well as on nonverbal working memory-with total length of exposure to sign input being the best predictor of deaf children's performance on these measures. The present data suggest that even access to early short-term nonnative visual language input is beneficial for the language and phonological memory abilities of deaf children with cochlear implants, suggesting also that parents should not be discouraged from learning and exposing their child to sign language. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: This is the first study to examine the effects of early short-term exposure to nonnative sign input on French-speaking children with cochlear implants' spoken language and memory abilities. Early short-term nonnative exposure to sign input can have positive consequences for the language and phonological memory abilities of deaf children with CIs. Extended exposure to sign input has some additional and important benefits, allowing children to perform on par with children with typical hearing.

The importance of hearing parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children learning sign language is well documented. However, parents face many challenges in this learning process. This study investigates the experiences of Dutch hearing parents learning Dutch Sign Language (NGT) or Sign-supported Dutch through semi-structured interviews with 21 parents and 6 NGT teachers. The interviews explored parents’ and teachers’ perspectives on parental sign language courses, additional learning materials, and the challenges parents face in learning sign language. The findings highlight the value of DHH teachers and home-based initial courses, as well as the importance of courses aligning with the child’s developmental stage and extending beyond vocabulary level. Both parents and teachers appreciated learning materials that could be used together by parent and child but expressed a need for additional and more elaborate resources. Common challenges included language-specific difficulties, such as mastering sign order and adapting to a visual language, and external barriers, such as difficulties accessing courses and conflicting expert advice regarding the use of sign language. These findings underscore the need for more accessible courses, longer-duration support, and greater consistency among professionals in their advice. This would better support hearing parents in effectively learning sign language and ensuring their DHH children have full access to language from an early age.

Deaf Children of Hearing Parents Have Age-Level Vocabulary Growth When Exposed to American Sign Language by 6 Months of Age

Impoverished access to natural human language during early childhood reduces semantic structure encoding in the left dorsal anterior temporal lobe, which provides positive evidence for the role of language in forming specific neural semantic representations in the human brain.

Impoverished access to natural human language during early childhood reduces semantic structure encoding in the left dorsal anterior temporal lobe, which provides positive evidence for the role of language in forming specific neural semantic representations in the human brain.

Research has shown parallels in the development of linguistic aspects found in sign languages and spoken languages when acquired as a first language (Newport & Meier, 1985). Deaf children of deaf parents (DCDP) are exposed to sign language early and are able to acquire it effortlessly. However, only about 10% of deaf children have deaf parents. More commonly the deaf child is born into a hearing family. These hearing parents usually use a communication system in which spoken words are supported simultaneously with signs. Such a sign system differs considerably from a sign language as it is not a natural language. Deaf children of hearing parents (DCHP) come into contact with sign language when they go to a school for the deaf. Research indicates that DCHP do acquire sign language structures, but this acquisition is delayed (Knoors, 1992). In this study a description of the development of morpho-syntactic and lexical aspects of the Sign Language of the Netherlands is given. The sign language production of three DCDP is analysed every six months from 1;0 to 3;6. Furthermore, the sign language production of three DCHP at the age of 3;6 is compared with that of the DCDP at the same age. The study includes both general measures such as Mean Length of Utterance and Type/Token Ratio and aspects specific to sign languages such as the use of POINTS in two sign combinations. Recommendations will be made with respect to the improvement of observational research on language acquision of DCDP and DCHP.

Although previous research shows that the use of rhyme in early language stimulation has a positive impact on children’s sign language development, this area of sign language acquisition has not been adequately researched. 90% of deaf children are born to hearing parents who barely know sign language before their child is born, and yet they are the primary language role models in their child’s life. As L2 sign language users, hearing parents of deaf children teach language skills in their L2 to their deaf child who acquires sign language as one of their L1s. In this article, we focus on the potential application of the Icelandic Sign Language (ÍTM) handshape inventory in both early language intervention with signing children and in teaching ÍTM as an L2. We argue that the handshape inventory can be used as a teaching tool when teaching sign language as M2L2 to hearing adults and as a visual language stimulation tool for signing children (M1L1 or M2L1). The main purpose of using the handshape inventory is to raise phonological awareness of signing children and adults learning sign language. This can be done by explicitly teaching handshapes to adult learners and using signed rhymes in early language stimulation.

Almost all hearing impaired children are born to hearing parents. Moreover, in Japan since there are few hearing impaired teachers for the hearing impaired in the kindergarten of a school for the hearing impaired, the children acquire sign language with little contact with a native speaker of sign language. Given this, this study longitudinally observed 5 year-old hearing impaired children who were born to hearing parents, and were enrolled in the kindergarten of a school for the hearing impaired and instructed by hearing teachers, to clarify the sign language acquisition process. We videotaped hearing impaired children's free play over half a year, and analyzed the hearing impaired child's sign language utterances. Consequently, the following points became clear. At first, hearing impaired children communicate with gestures different from gestures used by their hearing age peers. Next, the gestures and sign language that a hearing impaired child uses have many features grammatically similar to the sign language used by adult hearing impaired. Lastly, it was clarified that a hearing impaired children elaborate ambiguous input as sign language from their hearing parents or their teachers to be "language", and acquires it as the first language by the hearing impaired children's group power. A review may be required for what should be taught in a school for the hearing impaired for sign language, compared with the sign language acquisition process of a hearing impaired child with a hearing impaired parent based on the findings achieved in this study.

Hearing parents with deaf children face difficult decisions about what language(s) to use with their child. Sign languages such as American Sign Language (ASL) are fully accessible to deaf children, yet most hearing parents are not proficient in ASL prior to having a deaf child. Parents are often discouraged from learning ASL based in part on an assumption that it will be too difficult, yet there is little evidence supporting this claim. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed hearing parents of deaf children (n=100) who had learned ASL to learn more about their experiences. In their survey responses, parents identified a range of resources that supported their ASL learning as well as frequent barriers. Parents identified strongly with belief statements indicating the importance of ASL and affirmed that learning ASL is attainable for hearing parents. We discuss the implications of this study for parents who are considering ASL as a language choice and for the professionals who guide them.

The study examined factors in deaf parents' decision between cochlear implantation (CI) and traditional hearing aids for their child. The subjects were 6 Flemish children ages 5-9 years with severe/profound congenital hearing loss, with at least 1 deaf parent. The researchers, who conducted thematic content analysis of qualitative data collected through parent interviews, found that with the exception of a family with 1 hearing parent, parents gave priority to Deaf identity, sign language, and ethical issues in deciding between CI and hearing aids. Medical risks were also mentioned. The researchers conclude that the decision-making processes of the parents involved factors that have also been found among hearing parents, as well as aspects that have not been reported to play a role in hearing parents' decision making. A further conclusion is that deaf parents' perspective merits attention in professional practice and empirical research.