1. 1 Language Background Effects on Deaf Written English Kathleen Eilers-crandall, Ph.D. National Technical Institute for the Deaf Rochester Institute of Technology TESOL – 2003 - Baltimore, Maryland Session #2313 Convention Center, Room 320 Thursday, March 27, 2:00 pm to 2:45 pm

2. 2 Study Background  In a language diverse classroom, the teacher has little information how previous language experiences are influencing the students' written English.  The teacher does not know the ways students' use of English may be related to the students' first language experiences.  However, the teacher observes that students who have similar scores on English placement tests do not necessarily experience the same success in learning.

3. 3 Study - Objective  To determine if there is a relationship between language background factors and written English characteristics of Deaf students who are writing at a basic level

4. 4 Language Background  Two groups ASL Dominant Students Non ASL Dominant Students

5. 5 Students Criteria – for both groups 1. Born in the U. S. 2. Enrolled in Level A reading and writing courses 3. Deafness onset before 1 year of age

6. 6 ASL Dominant Students Selection Characteristics based on L/CBQ  Began learning sign at birth  Preferred communication mode; self-rating = Sign Alone  Excellent sign skills; self-rating of sign skill = 5  Less than excellent speech skills; self-rating of speech skills < 5

7. 7 Non ASL Dominant Students Selection Characteristics based on L/CBQ 1. Did not begin learning sign at birth 2. Preferred communication mode; self- rating = Speech Alone, or, Speech and Sign 3. Excellent or very good speech skills; self-rating = 5 or 4 4. Less than excellent sign skills; self- rating of sign skills < 5

8. 8 Student Characteristics ASL Dominant - Means  PTA better ear = 100.8 dB HL  Age of deafness onset = birth  Age began learning sign = birth  Sign skill rating = 5  Speech skill rating = 2 Non ASL Dominant - Means  PTA better ear = 96.9 dB HL  Age of deafness onset = 0.1 year  Age began learning sign = 9.9 years  Sign skill rating = 3.4  Speech skill rating = 4.4

9. 9 Data Collection  Daily journals in response to specific questions/topics  Digitally submitted via Message Board  http://www.rit.edu/~kecncp/discus http://www.rit.edu/~kecncp/discus

10. 10 Message Board

11. 11 Message Board – Topic Examples

12. 12 Message Board – Entry Examples

13. 13 More Entry Examples

14. 14 Analyses Conducted  Quantity Number of words Number of clauses Number of words per clause  Variety Number of unique words Number of unique clause types

15. 15 Analysis Process  An MS Word Macro was written to organize samples into one word per line.  These data were transferred into MS Excel Worksheets.  MS Excel contains a unique item filter. This was applied to determine unique words.  Clause analyses were done by hand for the first 500 words.  Visual basic routines were written to count total and unique clause types.

16. 16 Vocabulary Analysis Examples II was not sure about that and i went to there.there Total words: 18 Unique words: 13 I was shock that was last year.year

17. 17 Clause Types - Some Examples s Independent cl.I was in NYC si..with infinitiveI want to go to NYC sg … with gerundI enjoy traveling sig … with inf & gerI hope to enjoy traveling one day sii … with 2 infsI want to go to see NYC sgg … with 2 gersI enjoy traveling and meeting people dav Dep adv cl.I saw the WTC when I was in NYC. daj Dep adj. cl.I also saw my friend who lives there. dno Dep noun cl.I hope that I can live in NYC.

18. 18 Clause Analysis Examples I was not sure about WTC s+cs and I went to there. +cs I was not believe s+dno it was last year.+dno Independent Clauses = 5 Dependent Clauses = 2 Unique Ind. Types = 4 Unique Dep. Types = 1 I walk to my TV s+cs and I saw +cs+dno something happen it +dno

19. 19 Quantity Analyses  Vocabulary: Number of words used  Grammar: Number of clauses in 500 words Number of independent clauses Number of dependent clauses Number of words per clause

20. 20 ANOVA: F= 0.180; (p = 0.67); Not significant

21. 21 ANOVA: F= 0.144; (p = 0.71); Not significant

22. 22 [ALL] Ind v. Dep -- ANOVA: F= 202.96; (p = 8.45E-14); Significant Ind by group -- ANOVA: F = 0.176; (p = 0.68); Not significant Dep by group -- ANOVA: F = 0.009; (p = 0.93); Not significant

23. 23 ANOVA: F= 0.280; (p = 0.61); Not significant

24. 24 Variety Analyses  Vocabulary Variety: Number of unique words  Clause Variety: Number of unique independent clause types Number of unique dependent clause types

25. 25 ANOVA: F= 67.66; (p = 3.11E-08); Significant

26. 26 ANOVA: F= 67.66; (p = 3.11E-08); Significant

27. 27 Variety by group – ANOVA: F = 5.34; (p = 0.039); Significant

28. 28 Variety by group -- ANOVA: F = 5.56; (p = 0.036); Significant

29. 29 Variety by group -- ANOVA: F = 7.99; (p = 0.015); Significant

30. 30 Variety by group – ANOVA: F = 1.58; (p = 0.23); Not Significant

31. 31 Summary -- Quantity Overall Significant Differences Both groups used a larger number of unique vocabulary words in longer samples (213 Unique Words in 500 words, 330 in 1000 words, and 418 in 1500 words). Both groups used more independent clauses than dependent clauses (Independent Clauses: 56.14; Dependent Clauses: 20.50).

32. 32 Summary -- Variety Significant Differences between Groups Variety of independent clause types (average = 14.50 in 500 words for ASL Dominant students and 18.37 for Non ASL Dominant students) Variety of single independent clause types (average = 3.83 in 500 words for ASL Dominant students and 3.13 for Non ASL Dominant students) Variety of compound clause types (average = 4.17 in 500 words for ASL Dominant students and 6.25 for Non ASL Dominant students)

33. 33 Summary – Quantity & Variety No Significant Differences between Groups  Quantity: 1. Number of words used in 50 journal entries 2. Number of clauses in 500 words 3. Number of words per clause 4. Number of independent clauses used in 500 words 5. Number of dependent clauses used in 500 words  Variety: 1. Unique words used in 500, 1000, 1500 words 2. Unique dependent clauses used in 500 words

34. 34 Discussion  How do these results compare to the writing of native speakers of English?  What about appropriateness of vocabulary items?  What about the frequency of specific types of independent and dependent clauses?  What about grammatical acceptability for clause types?

35. 35 Presenter Kathleen Eilers Crandall, Ph.D. Department of English National Technical Institute for the Deaf Rochester Institute of Technology Lyndon Baines Johnson Building - 2264 Phone: (585) 475-5111 Fax: (585) 475-6500 Email: kecncp@rit.edukecncp@rit.edu Web: http://www.rit.edu/~kecncphttp://www.rit.edu/~kecncp