Advertisement

The “Toolkit Project”: Introduction

  • Elizabeth Halper
  • Thomas Allen
  • Donna A. Morere
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter presents the rational for the establishment of the VL2 Psychometric Toolkit, beginning with a brief history of psychometric testing with deaf individuals and the complexities of using psychometric instruments with this population. The chapter explains the goal of developing a set of achievement, cognitive, and language instruments which could be administered to a sample of deaf individuals as a set, rather than piecemeal, allowing for investigation of relationships among the areas of skill and functioning. Legal and ethical reasons that such investigations are need are reviewed, as is the unique nature of the relationship between literacy and cognitive functioning in this population. The cognitive and achievement constructs and the assessments used to evaluate them are introduced. This chapter functions as a brief introduction to the overall VL2 Psychometric Toolkit Project and its goal of providing information for a wide range of consumers, including researchers, clinicians, and students in many fields, concerning cognitive functioning, learning, and academic achievement, and the interactions among these parameters, in signing deaf individuals.

Keywords

Differential Item Functioning Phonological Awareness Executive Functioning Mental Rotation Sign Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Allen, T. E. (1986). Patterns of academic achievement among hearing impaired students: 1974 and 1983. In A. N. Schildroth & M. A. Karchmer (Eds.), Deaf children in America (pp. 161–206). San Diego, CA: College Hill Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, T. E., White, C. S., & Karchmer, M. A. (1983). Issues in the development of a special edition for hearing impaired students of the seventh edition of the Stanford Achievement Test. American Annals of the Deaf, 128(1), 34–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA), & National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA, APA, NCME.Google Scholar
  4. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.Google Scholar
  5. Andrews, J. F., Leigh, I. W., & Weiner, M. T. (2004). Deaf people: Evolving perspectives from psychology, education, and sociology. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Google Scholar
  6. Auer, E. T., & Bernstein, L. E. (2007). Enhanced visual speech perception in individuals with early-onset hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(5), 1157–1165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bavelier, D., Dye, M. W., & Hauser, P. C. (2006). Do deaf individuals see better? Trends in Cognitive Science, 10(11), 512–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bavelier, D., Newport, E. L., Hall, M. L., Supalla, T., & Boutla, M. (2008). Ordered short-term memory differs in signers and speakers: Implications for models of short-term memory. Cognition, 10, 433–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Benedict, R., Schretlen, D., Groninger, L., Dobraski, M., & Shpritz, B. (1996). Revision of the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test of normal performance, reliability, and validity. Psychological Assessment, 8(2), 145–153.Google Scholar
  10. Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bialystok, E., & Martin, M. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Developmental Science, 7, 325–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bialystok, E., & Shapero, D. (2005). Ambiguous benefits: The effect of bilingualism on reversing ambiguous figures. Developmental Science, 8, 595–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bickley, C. (2010). Visual language and visual learning. Washington, DC: Science of Learning Center.Google Scholar
  14. Biederman, J., Monuteaux, M. C., Doyle, A. E., Seidman, L. J., Wilens, T. E., Ferrero, F., et al. (2004). Impact of executive function deficits and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on academic outcomes in children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(5), 757–766.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonvillian, J. D., & Folven, R. J. (1993). Sign language acquisition: Developmental aspects. In M. Marschark & M. D. Clark (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on deafness (pp. 229–265). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Bosworth, R. G., & Dobkins, K. R. (1999). Left-hemisphere dominance for motion processing in deaf signers. Psychological Science, 10(3), 256–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bosworth, R. G., & Dobkins, K. R. (2002). The effects of spatial attention on motion processing in deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners. Brain and Cognition, 49(1), 152–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Braden, J. P. (1994). Deafness, deprivation, and IQ. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
  19. Brownfeld, A. (2010). Memory spans in the visual modality: A comparison between American Sign Language and print in deaf signers. USA: Gallaudet University.Google Scholar
  20. Bull, R., Espy, K. A., & Senn, T. E. (2004). A comparison of performance on the Towers of London and Hanoi in young children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(4), 743–754.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Case, B. (2005). Accommodations to improve instruction and assessment of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Boston: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  22. Culbertson, W. Z., & Eric, A. (2005). Tower of London—Drexal University (2nd ed.). North Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health Systems, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (1987). The California verbal learning test. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  24. Drever, J., & Collins, M. (1928). Performance tests of intelligence. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
  25. Dye, M. W. G., Hauser, P. C., & Bavelier, D. (2008). Visual attention in deaf children and adults: Implications for learning environments. In M. Marschark & P. C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp. 250–263). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Feng, X., Bialystok, E., & Diamond, A. (2009). Do bilingual children show an advantage in working memory? China, Canada, Toronto, Canada: Nanjing University, York University, University of British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  27. Furth, H. H. (1966). A comparison of reading test norms of deaf and hearing children. American Annals of the Deaf, 111(2), 461–462.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Gallaudet Research Institute. (1996). Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition, Form S: Norms booklet for deaf and hard of hearing students. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University, Gallaudet Research Institute.Google Scholar
  29. Galvan, D. (1999). Differences in the use of American Sign Language morphology by deaf children: Implications for parents and teachers. American Annals of the Deaf, 144, 320–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Halper, E. (2009). The nature of relationships between mental rotation, Math and English in deaf signers. Unpublished dissertation, Gallaudet University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  31. Hammill, D., Brown, V., Larsen, S., & Wiederholt, J. L. (1994). Test of adolescent and adult language (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662–720.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hauser, P., & Marschark, M. (2009). What we know and what we don’t know about cognition and deaf learners. In M. Marschark & P. C. Hauser (Eds.), Deaf cognition: Foundations and outcomes (pp. 439–457). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hauser, P. C., Paludnevičienė, R., Supalla, T., & Bavelier, D. (2008). American sign language-sentence reproduction test: Development and implications. In R. M. de Quadros (Ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future (pp. 160–172). Petrópolis, Brazil: Editora Arara Azul.Google Scholar
  35. Heaton, R. K., Chelune, G. J., Talley, J. L., Kay, G. G., & Curtiss, G. (1993). Wisconsin card sorting test manual: Revised and expanded. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  36. Holt, J. (1993). Stanford Achievement Test, 8th edition: Reading comprehension subgroup results. American Annals of the Deaf, 143(2), 172–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Holt, J., Traxler, C. B., & Allen, T.E. (1997). Interpreting the scores: A user’s guide to the 9th Edition Stanford Achievement Test for educators of deaf and hard-of-hearing students (Technical Report 97–1). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University, Gallaudet Research Institute.Google Scholar
  38. Karchmer, M. A., Milone, M. N., & Wolk, S. (1979). Educational significance of hearing loss at three levels of severity. American Annals of the Deaf, 124(2), 97–109.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Karchmer, M., & Mitchell, R. (2003). Demographic and achievement characteristics of deaf and hard of hearing students. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language and education (pp. 21–37). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman brief intelligence test (2nd ed.). Bloomington, MN: Pearson, Inc.Google Scholar
  41. Kessels, R., van Zandvort, M., Postma, A., Kapelle, L. & de Haan, E. (2010). The Corsi Block-Tapping Task: standardization and normative data. Applied Neuropsychology 7(4), 252–258.Google Scholar
  42. Koo, D. C., Kelly, L., LaSasso, C., & Eden, G. (2008). Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing and deaf individuals of different communication backgrounds. Learning, Skill, Acquisition, Reading, and Dyslexia, 1145, 83–99.Google Scholar
  43. Kovács, A. (2009). Early bilingualism enhances mechanisms of false-belief reasoning. Developmental Science, 12, 48–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leybaert, J. (2005). Learning to read with a hearing impairment. In C. H. M. J. Snowling (Ed.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 379–396). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lezak, M. D., Howieson, D. B., & Loring, D. W. (2004). Handbook of normative data for neuropsychological assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. MacSweeney, M. (1998). Short-term memory processes and reading by deaf children. Paper presented at the ACFOS II.Google Scholar
  47. Markwardt, F. C. (1998). Peabody individual achievement test-revised normative update. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
  48. Marschark, M. (2001). Language development in children who are deaf: A research synthesis. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED455620.Google Scholar
  49. Marschark, M., & Clark, M. (1993). Psychological perspectives on deafness. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Martin-Rhee, M. M., & Bialystok, E. (2008). The development of two types of inhibitory control in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mather, N., Hammill, D., Allen, E. A., & Roberts, R. (2004). TOSWRF examiner’s manual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  52. Mayberry, R. I., & Eichen, E. B. (1991). The long-last advantage of learning sign language in childhood: Another look at the critical period for language. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 486–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mayberry, R. I., Giudice, A., & Lieberman, A. M. (2011). Reading achievement in relation to phonological coding and awareness in deaf readers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16(2), 164–188.Google Scholar
  54. Meltzer, L. (Ed.). (2007). Executive function in education: From theory to practice. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  55. Mezzacappa, E. (2004). Alerting, orienting, and executive attention: Developmental properties and sociodemographic correlates in an epidemiological sample of young, urban children. Child Development, 75, 1373–1386.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits to our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mitchell, R. (2005). Can you tell me how many deaf people there are in the United States? Retrieved September 23, 2011, from Gallaudet Research Institute: http://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/deaf-US.php.
  58. Mitchell, R., Young, T., Bellamie, B., & Karchmer, M. (2006). How many people use ASL in the United States? Why estimates need updating. Sign Language Studies, 6(3), 306–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Moeller, M. P. (2000). Early intervention and language development in children who are deaf and hard of hearing. Pediatrics, 106(3), 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Morere, D. (2008). The fingerspelling test. Washington, DC: Science of Learning Institute Visual Language and Visual Learning.Google Scholar
  61. Morere, D. A., Fruge’, J. G., & Rehkemper, G. M. (1992, August). Signed Verbal Learning Test: Assessing verbal memory of deaf signers. Poster presented at the 100th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  62. Myklebust, H. E. (1960). The psychology of deafness. New York: Grune and Stratton.Google Scholar
  63. Neville, H. J., & Lawson, D. (1987). Attention to central and peripheral visual space in a movement detection task: An event-related potential and behavioral study. II. Congenitally deaf adults. Brain Research, 405, 268–283.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Osterlind, S. J. (1983). Test item bias (Quantitative applications in the social sciences). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. Petitto, L. A., Zatorre, R., Gauna, K., Nikelski, E. J., Dostie, D., & Evans, A. (2000). Speech-like cerebral activity in profoundly deaf people while processing signed languages: Implications for the neural basis of human language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(25), 13961–13966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pintner, R., & Patterson, D. G. (1915). The Binet Scale and the deaf child. Journal of Educational Psychology, 6, 201–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pintner, R., & Patterson, D. G. (1916). A measurement of the language of deaf children. Psychological Review, 23, 413–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pintner, R., & Patterson, D. G. (1917). Psychological tests for the deaf children. Volta Review, 19, 661–667.Google Scholar
  69. Pintner, R., & Patterson, D. G. (1924). Results obtained with the non-language group tests. Journal of Educational Psychology, 15, 473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Quigley, S., Steinkamp, M., & Jones, B. (1978). The assessment and development of language in hearing impairment individuals. Journal of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, 11(1), 24–41.Google Scholar
  71. Raifman, L. J., & Vernon, M. (1996). Important implications for psychologists of the Americans with disabilities act: A case in point, the patient who is deaf. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 27(4), 372–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schorr, E. A., Roth, F. P., & Fox, N. A. (2008). A comparison of the speech and language skills of children with cochlear implants and children with normal hearing. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 29(4), 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Simon, H. A. (1975). The functional equivalence of problem solving skills. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 268–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Smith, T. E. C. (2005). IDEA 2004: Another round in the reauthorization process. Remedial and Special Education, 26(6), 314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Traxler, C. B. (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th edition: National norming and performance standards for deaf and hard of hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(4), 337–348.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Vernon, M. (2005). Fifty years of research on the intelligence of deaf and hard-of-hearing children: A review of the literature and discussion of implications. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(3), 225–231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
  79. Young, A. R., Beitchman, J. H., Johnson, C., Douglas, L., Atkinson, L., Escobar, M., et al. (2002). Young adult academic outcomes in a longitudinal sample of early identified language impaired and control children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(5), 635–645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth Halper
    • 1
  • Thomas Allen
    • 2
  • Donna A. Morere
    • 3
  1. 1.Doctor Halper & AssociatesFairfaxUSA
  2. 2.Science of Learning Center on Visual Language and Visual LearningGallaudet UniversityWashingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyGallaudet UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations