View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students
Language: English
Authors: Peterson, Jeremy M., Borders, Christy M., Ely, Mindy S.
Source: American Annals of the Deaf. 2023 167(5):583-596.
Availability: Gallaudet University Press. 800 Florida Avenue NE, Denison House, Washington, DC 20002-3695. Tel: 202-651-5488; Fax: 202-651-5489; Web site: https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/index.htm
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 14
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Descriptors: Deafness, Hearing Impairments, Students with Disabilities, Comorbidity, Special Education, Incidence, Elementary Secondary Education
ISSN: 0002-726X
1543-0375
Abstract: Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) students are often labeled with one or more educationally significant disabilities in addition to their hearing loss. According to the Gallaudet Research Institution's most recent Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth (2013), almost 40% of d/DHH students nationwide receive special education services for one or more comorbid disabilities. However, relatively few prevalence rate estimates have been published over the last decade. Knowledge regarding the current prevalence of educationally significant disabilities among d/DHH students is therefore limited. The present study surveyed teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing (TODHHs) in a midwestern state regarding the number of d/DHH students on their caseloads with one or more comorbid disabilities. Within the sample population (N = 451), nearly 65% were reported to receive special education services for disabilities other than deafness or hearing impairment.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Access URL: https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/archives.htm
Accession Number: EJ1389004
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFxlLyeG7Z81v7clu5-KKx2AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDMM5bTHWMLukgNGmpgIBEICBm37ZAf-G9xzWsrzCt5w-O6A-nm10cyevdcYLK_r7X5F88LtPMHdYetwDGzsEbMhVOXOw9o8UA7tcdgov0-saciL4VOfL7pJm4Xlk1CgVQRbzxUd-UIvzOtBm--L-FjBQx_JN20SIslvCin9wq5GLs4KbXkB_B_4ZURVzTf2V2U2qzLcR9ogzyulHe3yqoZUKwTBq36CWUrrSh5H8
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0163631052;aod01jan.23;2023May12.05:10;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0163631052-1">Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities Among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students </title> <p>Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) students are often labeled with one or more educationally significant disabilities in addition to their hearing loss. According to the Gallaudet Research Institution's most recent Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth (2013), almost 40% of d/DHH students nationwide receive special education services for one or more comorbid disabilities. However, relatively few prevalence rate estimates have been published over the last decade. Knowledge regarding the current prevalence of educationally significant disabilities among d/DHH students is therefore limited. The present study surveyed teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing (TODHHs) in a midwestern state regarding the number of d/DHH students on their caseloads with one or more comorbid disabilities. Within the sample population (N = 451), nearly 65% were reported to receive special education services for disabilities other than deafness or hearing impairment.</p> <p>Keywords: additional disability; deaf and hard of hearing; deaf with disability; Gallaudet Research Institute; prevalence; special education; teacher of the deaf and hard of hearing</p> <p>There are an estimated 64,000 students in the United States with an educationally significant hearing loss who receive special education services under Public Law 108–446, the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref1">27</reflink>]). Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) students are an incredibly heterogeneous population, as individual differences in the severity of hearing loss and educational programing attest ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref2">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref3">20</reflink>]). Consequently, it has been difficult to gather accurate statistical and demographic information on d/DHH students ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref4">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>One source of information has been the federal child count, recently published as part of the <emph>Forty-Third Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act</emph> (hereafter Annual Report to Congress; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref5">33</reflink>]). The Annual Report to Congress includes population statistics from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the outlying territories (i.e. American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, U.S. Virgin Islands), the Bureau of Indian Education, and the freely associated states (i.e. Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of Palau, Republic of the Marshall Islands). Statistics regarding the number of students who receive special education services, as well as racial and ethnic demographics, are reported for each of the 13 disability categories under IDEA. Other information in the Annual Report to Congress includes state assessment participation rates, the various educational placements of students with disabilities (e.g. general education, special education, residential schools), and graduation and dropout rates. While some researchers find these statistics beneficial, the Annual Report to Congress does not provide much insight into the demographics of d/DHH students nationwide. Pertinent demographic information such as hearing loss severity and communication modality is not included in the report. Furthermore, the Annual Report to Congress only includes data related to a student's primary disability, thereby excluding statistics on the prevalence of comorbid disabilities. Without this, it is difficult to ascertain potential demographic changes in the d/DHH student population using only the information found in the Annual Report to Congress.</p> <p>Additional data are therefore necessary to learn more about the national d/DHH student population ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref6">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref7">24</reflink>]). The <emph>Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth</emph> (hereafter GRI Annual Survey), formerly conducted by the Gallaudet Research Institute (GRI), is another source of information regarding d/DHH student demographics ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref8">14</reflink>]).[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref9">1</reflink>] Unlike the Annual Report to Congress, the GRI Annual Survey included information collected on a wide range of demographic attributes related to deafness (e.g. the severity and etiology of hearing loss, use of hearing technology, parental hearing status, language of instruction, educational placements, additional disabilities/conditions). Though the last GRI Annual Survey to be made publicly available was issued in 2011 ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref10">14</reflink>]), this data source is still considered the most comprehensive collection of demographic information concerning d/DHH students nationwide ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref11">30</reflink>]). Therefore, the findings are extremely important to the field of deaf education, as knowledge of the national d/DHH population relies "almost exclusively on the analysis of the GRI Annual Survey" ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref12">23</reflink>], p. 338).</p> <p>There are, however, several limitations of the GRI Annual Survey that prevent an accurate depiction of the national d/DHH student population ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>]). Over the years, the push for inclusion in the public schools made it increasingly difficult to locate and recruit d/DHH participants for large-scale survey research ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref14">3</reflink>]). Many d/DHH students, especially those attending rural schools, consequently have been inadvertently omitted. A systematic analysis conducted by [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref15">23</reflink>] found that the 1999–2000 Annual Survey ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref16">5</reflink>]) included almost half as many d/DHH students as the <emph>Twenty-Third Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref17">31</reflink>]), for which data were collected within the same time frame. This remained true as well for the Annual Survey conducted a decade later ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref18">14</reflink>]), which included about half (~48%) the number of d/DHH students as the comparable <emph>Thirty-Fourth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref19">32</reflink>]). However, it should be noted that unlike the data collected for the Annual Report to Congress, data for the GRI Annual Survey were provided completely voluntarily (at an estimated participation rate of 44%). As a result, it is possible that the results of the GRI Annual Survey were unintendedly biased toward particular geographic regions of the United States with well-established d/DHH programs and, as such, were not indicative of the national population itself ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref20">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref21">23</reflink>]). Yet even with concerns about potential sample bias, the GRI Annual Survey remains the main source of demographic information for making statistical and demographic assumptions about the national population of d/DHH students ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref23">29</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-2">Deaf With Disabilities and Additional Conditions</hd> <p>Many terms have been used to describe students identified with both a hearing loss and a comorbid disability ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref24">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref25">2</reflink>]). Labels such as deaf plus or deaf with an additional disability have become outdated; a more inclusive term is d/Deaf and hard of hearing with a disability/disabilities (DWD; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref26">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref27">28</reflink>]). Our knowledge regarding the number of students nationwide who are DWD comes almost exclusively from the GRI Annual Survey. Referred to comorbid disabilities as "additional conditions," the GRI Annual Survey includes prevalence rates for such as conditions as low vision, legal blindness, developmental delay, learning disability, orthopedic impairment, traumatic brain injury, mental retardation, emotional disturbance, other health impairment, and autism, as well as medical conditions such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and Usher syndrome ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref28">14</reflink>]). The last publicly available GRI Annual Survey ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref29">14</reflink>]) includes an estimate that nearly 40% (n = 12,593) of the included d/DHH students (N = 32,334) had one or more disabilities or conditions in addition to hearing loss (see Table 1). But this is most likely an underestimate, as almost 15% of the respondents did not provide any information on additional disabilities/conditions ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref30">17</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref31">23</reflink>], however, had found that the available data for this category were a statistically accurate representation of national demographics.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>Click for larger view View full resolution</p> <p>Table 1.</p> <p>Prevalence Data on Additional Conditions From the 2009–2010 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref32">14</reflink>])</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-3">Need for Demographic Information on DWD</hd> <p>Knowing the prevalence of students with both hearing loss and comorbid disabilities is essential for development of effective preparation programs for future teachers of the deaf (TODHHs). The lack of accurate demographic information makes it difficult to adequately prepare preservice TODHHs to meet the unique needs of their future students who will require specific educational programming to address the compounded effects of multiple conditions ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref33">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref34">28</reflink>]). Unfortunately, it has been found over the years that most preparation programs do not include content related to the education of students who are DWD ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref35">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref36">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref37">26</reflink>]). In a national survey of practicing TODHHs, more than half (54%) reported that they felt that their coursework did not prepare them to work with students who were DWD ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref38">17</reflink>]).</p> <p>Consequently, there is a real need for information on d/DHH students with educationally significant comorbid disabilities. However, the current prevalence rate of ~40% is based on data over a decade out of date, as the last publicly available GRI Annual Survey was published in 2011. Several authors (e.g. [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref40">19</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref41">26</reflink>]) have cited a prevalence rate nearer 50% based on the Regional and National Summary Report of Data From the 2011–2012 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref42">15</reflink>]); however, this particular report is not publicly available. Although [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref43">17</reflink>] suggested that this figure was in line with previous surveys, in the present article we will use the results of the 2011 GRI Annual Survey and cite a prevalence rate of about 40%. The prevalence rates for additional disabilities/conditions reported in the GRI Annual Survey since the category's inclusion in 1999 are shown in Figure 1.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>Click for larger view View full resolution</p> <p>Figure 1.</p> <p>Gallaudet Research Institute Annual Survey: Prevalence of Additional Conditions Over Time</p> <p>Notes. d/DHH = d/Deaf and hard of hearing. The GRI Annual Survey was not conducted during the 2008–2009 and 2010–2011 school years. Data for 2011–2012 are derived from the 2013 GRI Annual Survey, which is no longer publicly available.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-4">Methodology</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0163631052-5">Research Questions</hd> <p>The present study sought to explore the prevalence of educationally significant disabilities in the d/DHH student population. TODHHs in one midwestern state were recruited to participate in an online survey concerning the different disability categories that qualified their students for special education services. The present study attempted to answer the following research questions:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. What percentage of d/DHH students received special education services for disabilities other than hearing loss?</item> <p></p> <item> 2. What are the prevalence rates for specific disability categories (e.g. Emotional Disturbance, Autism, Other Health Impairment, etc.) within the sample population?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0163631052-6">Participants</hd> <p>Our targeted survey population was TODHHs who directly instructed or provided special education services to K–12 d/DHH students in either public or private school settings. After receiving institutional review board (IRB) approval, we sent a recruitment email to members of a statewide professional organization for TODHHs. An advertisement with similar content requesting participation was posted on a Facebook page for graduates of a midwestern public university's deaf education program. Finally, additional recruitment was performed through snowball sampling in the professional community.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-7">Survey Design</hd> <p>The electronic survey asked participants to identify the primary and secondary disabilities of each d/DHH student on their caseload, using the 13 categories outlined in [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref44">21</reflink>]. These included</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> • autism</item> <p></p> <item> • deaf-blindness</item> <p></p> <item> • emotional disturbance</item> <p></p> <item> • intellectual disability</item> <p></p> <item> • multiple disabilities</item> <p></p> <item> • orthopedic impairment</item> <p></p> <item> • other health impairment</item> <p></p> <item> • specific learning disability</item> <p></p> <item> • speech/language impairment</item> <p></p> <item> • traumatic brain injury</item> <p></p> <item> • visual impairment</item> <p></p> <item> • hearing impairment</item> <p></p> <item> • deafness</item> </ulist> <p>The demographic information of the participants (teaching credentials, educational setting, classroom environment, etc.) was also collected through short-answer and multiple-choice questions. A detailed list of the survey questions is provided in Figure 2.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-8">Procedure</hd> <p>Using a listserv from a midwestern statewide organization for TODHHs, we sent members an invitation to participate in our research study. Each invitation explained the purpose of the survey, detailed compliance with IRB requirements, listed the possible consequences of their participation, and included a hyper-link to our online survey. The same recruitment information was posted on a Facebook page for graduates of a midwestern public university's deaf education program as well. During the first 3 hours the survey was live, an unexpected error occurred when response data were not accurately collected by the survey tool. As a result, the survey was taken offline for less than an hour for necessary modifications. During the time the survey was initially live, three participants completed the survey. Their information therefore was purposely deleted from the database during the reformatting. A second recruitment advertisement was sent out in the</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>Click for larger view View full resolution</p> <p>Figure 2.</p> <p>Survey Questions</p> <p>same manner as before, but additionally contained an explanation for why the survey had been temporarily unavailable and a request for previous participates to resubmit their information. The link to the survey remained active for 48 days, with the majority of the responses occurring within the first month. After 2 weeks of inactivity, the survey was closed for analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-9">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0163631052-10">Self-Identified Attributes of the Survey Participants</hd> <p>Forty-eight individuals completed the research survey; however, three of the participants did not identify themselves as being TODHHs (a social worker, a learning behavior specialist, and a speech-language pathologist) or listed teaching credentials that were not related to deaf education (elementary education, learning, and behavior). Their responses were subsequently removed from final analysis. This left a total of 45 TODHHs who provided caseload information on the primary and secondary disabilities that qualified their students for special education services.</p> <p>Twenty-five of the TODHHs (55.6%) reported that they worked for a special education cooperative district; the others (n = 20; 44.4%) reported that they worked for an independent school district. None of the participants reported working at a residential school for the deaf.</p> <p>All but one of the participants (N = 44) provided information regarding their classroom environment(s). Slightly more than a third of these TODHHs (n = 16; 35.6%) worked as itinerants, while a third (n = 15; 33.3%) reported that they taught in self-contained classrooms. The remaining TODHHs reported teaching in a mixture of itinerant and self-contained environments (n = 7; 15.6%), or in other environments: a mainstream classroom or private school (n = 5; 11.1%) or a resource room (n = 2; 4.4%).</p> <p>The average caseload per TODHH was 10 d/DHH students, with a majority of the participating TODHHs (n = 39; 86.7%) reporting that they taught at least one student who was DWD.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-11">Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities</hd> <p>The TODHHs initially reported the primary and secondary disability qualifications for 485 students; however, they also reported that 25 of these students were not receiving special education services for deafness and hearing impairment. In addition, another nine students had a primary disability of deaf-blindness, which is not considered a comorbid disability under IDEA. Information for these two sets of students (n = 35) was removed from analysis. However, students who qualified for both the hearing impairment/deafness and visual impairment/deaf-blindness categories were included, as these conditions were listed separately. As a result, the sample population consisted of 451 d/DHH students. In regard to the first research question, it was reported that 291 (64.52%) d/DHH students had an educationally significant disability. The reported prevalence rates for each individual disability category (see the second research question) are provided in Table 2.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p>Click for larger view View full resolution</p> <p>Table 2.</p> <p>Reported Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities Among d/Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students (Present Study)</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-12">Discussion</hd> <p>It is important that the field of deaf education consider the potential for the presence of educationally significant disabilities in the d/DHH student population. By knowing the prevalence of comorbid disabilities, teacher education programs can better prepare preservice TODHHs to meet the unique needs of students who are DWD. To that end, our objective was to examine the number of d/DHH students who received special education services for conditions other than hearing loss, as well as note which particular conditions were more prevalent. This was achieved by collecting and examining caseload information from TODHHs in one midwestern state. In the remainder of the present article, we discuss the implications of our research findings, as well as possible directions for future research on DWD.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-13">Implications</hd> <p>National demographic data suggest that almost 40% of d/DHH students have a comorbid condition ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref45">14</reflink>]; see Figure 1). And while this statistic is useful for knowing the total number of students who are DWD, it does not adequately represent the number of d/DHH students who experience a negative educational impact because of their comorbid condition(s). It is certainly possible to have a documented disability but not qualify for special education services under IDEA. However, because we were interested in the prevalence of educationally significant disabilities (i.e. conditions that qualified for special education services), we specifically requested that our participants provide special education disability qualifications to account for this difference.</p> <p>On the basis of the results of our survey, we found that nearly 65% (n = 291) of the d/DHH students had one or more conditions that qualified them for special education services outside the categories of hearing impairment and deafness. Our results suggest that many d/DHH students could require educational services beyond those traditionally provided by TODHHs. For hearing students, most special education services for disabilities such as autism or emotional disturbance are provided by special education teachers (i.e. learning/behavior specialists) who have had training and coursework specific to these conditions. But this is often not the case for many TODHH, as their teacher preparation programs frequently lack such specialized content. Furthermore, having dual certification and/or coursework in both special education and deaf education does not necessarily mean that a TODHH is prepared to meet a student's unique needs. Effective educational programming for many students who are DWD is not as simple as addressing the effects of both hearing loss and the additional disability in isolation. Instead, successful academic interventions must address educational impact of both comorbidities in tandem, as multiple conditions can have a compounded negative effect on student learning. And given the large number of d/DHH students with comorbid disabilities, it is imperative that TODHHs be adequately prepared to meet the unique needs of students who are DWD.</p> <p>To help address this need, in the present article we offer some considerations for practicing TODHHs and teacher preparation programs. With nearly 65% of d/DHH students in our sample having an educationally significant disability, as well a national prevalence rates of comorbidity at almost 40%, the need for teacher preparation programs to focus on this population is apparent. Often, students who are DWD experience unique academic challenges that may require different educational practices than those used with students who are just deaf. It may therefore be beneficial for teacher preparation programs to incorporate coursework and pedological approaches from adjacent special education fields to better acquaint and prepare preservice TODHHs with other disabilities. With this knowledge, practicing TODHHs could potentially develop more effective educational practices to meet the needs of their students who are DWD. Toward that end, preservice TODHH should also be encouraged to seek additional licensure or coursework related to special education to gain a better understanding of how comorbid disabilities could affect their d/DHH students.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-14">Limitations</hd> <p>There are several limitations that should be considered in interpretation of the results of the present study. It would be inappropriate to compare our research findings to larger, national data collections such as the GRI Annual Survey, given our relatively small sample size (N = 491). It is quite possible that our prevalence rate of 65% comorbidity is not indicative of the national population; nor does it suggest that there has been an increase in the number of students who are DWD since 2011. Further, our prevalence rate was reliant on the reporting of 45 TODHHs from one midwestern state. It may be that more students who are DWD are concentrated in this limited geographic area compared to the entirety of the United States. Our use of a statewide professional organization and Facebook could have had an impact on our results. It was impossible to determine just how many TODHHs were solicited with our recruitment advertisement, given the ever-changing membership numbers for both sources. It is unknown whether the professional organization kept an up-to-date listserv for membership; nor it is possible to know whether these email addresses were still active. The same could be said for the Facebook group as well.</p> <p>Being unable to determine the response rate created uncertainty about the accuracy of our data. Given the topic of our study, it is possible that TODHHs with many students who were DWD on their caseloads decided to participate, thus artificially increasing the prevalence statistics. This could be reflected in the fact that 87% (n = 39) of the TODHHs reported at least one student who was DWD on their caseload. Our focus on TODHHs could have further limited our results. In some instances, other educational professionals provide academic services and caseload management in place of a TODHH. This may have resulted in omission of a number of students who were DWD.</p> <p>Another limitation concerns the difficulties in identifying some comorbid disabilities in d/DHH students, as it is not a straightforward endeavor. For some disabilities, it can be challenging to determine whether academic achievement is affected by a lack of language exposure resulting from hearing loss or is due to an underlying disability based on physical and/or neurological differences. For example, speech-language impairment was found to be the most prevalent educationally significant disability in our sample (n = 65; 14.41%). However, it is difficult—if not impossible—to accurately determine whether an observed speech-language impairment is a distinct disability in its own right or whether it could be attributable to having hearing loss. The same could be said about specific learning disabilities, especially in the area of reading. How does one separate the negative effects of language deprivation often caused by hearing loss from any underlying neurological difference that could potentially result in a reading disability? Finally, there are many disabilities (e.g. emotional disturbance, autism) whose diagnosis depends on subjective interpretation of testing results. It is certainly possible that some d/DHH students are misidentified as having a particular disability, especially if evaluators are unfamiliar with the deaf population. But it was beyond the scope of the present study to determine the veracity of proper identification of educationally significant disabilities in d/DHH students. Instead, the results of our study were wholly dependent on the responses we were given. It is possible, therefore, that certain disabilities in our sample were over- or underidentified, and thus did not represent the actual demographics of the included d/DHH students.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-15">Future Research</hd> <p>Additional research concerning the prevalence of educationally significant disabilities among d/DHH students is needed. Large-scale demographic research surveys of d/DHH students should be continued to better identify any potential changes in the composition of the national d/DHH population. Even statewide or regional surveys of d/DHH students would be helpful in determining whether the prevalence of comorbid disabilities has remained constant or if a particular disability category warrants additional research attention. Toward that end, the resumption of the Gallaudet Research Institute's Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth would be a good start. In addition, requiring the Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act to collect data on both the primary and secondary disability categories would provide valuable data on DWD. This is especially important considering that participation is mandatory and that the Annual Report to Congress is the largest dataset available on students with disabilities nationwide.</p> <p>By having updated and reliable data on the prevalence of educationally significant disabilities among d/DHH students, preservice teacher preparation programs can better design coursework that addresses the needs of the field. More research is needed to better understand how comorbid disabilities might compound the academic difficulties experienced by d/DHH students. There is currently a dearth of evidenced-based practices for this population, and it is unlikely that simply modifying existing evidence-based practices used with other disabilities will suffice for DWD. In this vein, the exploration of teaching practices specifical designed for students who are DWD using experimental research would be of benefit to the field.</p> <hd id="AN0163631052-16">Conclusion</hd> <p>The study reported here provides an important look at the current population of students receiving special education services under the category of hearing impairment/deafness. Notably, this population includes a significant number of students with educationally significant disabilities in addition to their hearing loss. It therefore behooves the field of deaf education to ensure that TODHHs are appropriately trained to meet the needs of their d/DHH students beyond educational practices typically associated with hearing loss, as many of their current (or future) students will have a comorbid disability.</p> <ref id="AN0163631052-17"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref9" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> "Gallaudet University collected information on deaf and hard of hearing children and youth between 1968 and 2014 through its <emph>Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children & Youth</emph>. The project has been suspended due to changing trends, new school regulations and rules, and limited resources."—from the website of the Gallaudet University Office of International Affairs, https://gallaudet.edu/international-affairs/demographics/ (accessed January 6, 2023)</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0163631052-18"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Bruce, S., & Borders, C. (2015). Communication and language in learners who are deaf and hard of hearing with disabilities: Theories, research, and practice. American Annals of the Deaf, 160(4), 368–384. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0035">http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0035</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref25" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bruce, S., DiNatale, P., & Ford, J. (2008). Meeting the needs of deaf and hard of hearing students with additional disabilities through professional teacher development. American Annals of the Deaf, 153(4), 368–375. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.0.0058</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref14" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Cawthon, S. W. (2006). Pebbles in the mainstream: How do we find them? American Annals of the Deaf, 151(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2006.0024</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref33" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Davis, T. N., Barnard-Brak, L., Dacus, S., & Pond, A. (2010). Aided AAC systems among individuals with hearing loss and disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 22(3), 241–256. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-009-9180-6">http://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-009-9180-6</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref16" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2001). Regional and national summary report of data from the 1999–2000 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2000_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2002). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2000–2001 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2001_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2003a). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2001–2002 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2002_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2003b). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2002–2003 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2003_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2005a). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2003–2004 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2004_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2005b). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2004–2005 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2005_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2006). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2005–2006 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2006_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2007). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2006–2007 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2007_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2008). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2007–2008 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2008_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2011). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2009–2010 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file]. https://research.gallaudet.edu/Demographics/2010_National_Summary.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallaudet Research Institute. (2013). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2011–2012 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth [Data file].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guardino, C. (2008). Identification and placement for deaf students with multiple disabilities: Choosing the path less followed. American Annals of the Deaf, 153(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.0.0004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guardino, C. (2015). Evaluating teachers' preparedness to work with students who are deaf and hard of hearing with disabilities. American Annals of the Deaf, 160(4), 415–426. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0030">http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0030</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guardino, C., & Cannon, J. E. (2015). Theory, research, and practice for students who are deaf and hard of hearing with disabilities: Addressing the challenges from birth to postsecondary education. American Annals of the Deaf, 160(4), 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0033</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guardino, C., & Cannon, J. E. (2016). Deafness and diversity: Reflections and directions. American Annals of the Deaf, 161(1), 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2016.0016</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hendar, O., & O'Neill, R. (2016). Monitoring the achievement of deaf pupils in Sweden and Scotland: Approaches and outcomes. Deafness and Education International, 18(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/14643154.2016.1142045</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act Amendments of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108–446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luckner, J., & Carter, K. (2001). Essential competencies for teaching students with hearing loss and additional disabilities. American Annals of the Deaf, 146(1), 7–15. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2012.0065">http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2012.0065</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mitchell, R. E. (2004). National profile of deaf and hard of hearing students in special education from weighted survey results. American Annals of the Deaf, 149(4), 336–349. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2005.0004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mitchell, R. E., & Karchmer, M. A. (2006). Demographics of deaf education: More students in more places. American Annals of the Deaf, 151(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2006.0029</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moores, D. (2001). Educating the deaf: Psychology, principles, and practices (5th ed.). Houghton Mifflin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Musyoka, M. M., Gentry, M. A., & Meek, D. R. (2017). Perceptions of teachers' preparedness to teach deaf and hard of hearing students with additional disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 29(4), 827–848. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-017-955-z">http://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-017-955-z</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Office of Special Education Programs. (2021). IDEA section 618 data products: Static tables Part B child count & educational environments Table 3. [Data file]. https://data.ed.gov/dataset/idea-section-618-data-products-static-tables-part-b-count-environ-table3/resources</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paul, P. V. (2015). d/Deaf and hard of hearing with a disability or an additional disability: The need for theory, research, and practice. American Annals of the Deaf, 160(4), 339–343. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0029">http://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2015.0029</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ries, P. (1986). Characteristics of hearing impaired youth in the general population and of students in special educational programs for the hearing impaired. In A. N. Schildroth &M. A. Karchmer (Eds.), Deaf children in America (pp. 1–31). College Hill Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Szymanski, C. A., Brice, P. J., Lam, K. H., & Hotto, S. A. (2012). Deaf children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(10), 2027–2037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1452-9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Twenty-third annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 2001 [Data file]. https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2001/toc-execsum.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education. (2012). Thirty-fourth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 2012 [Data file]. https://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/2012/parts-b-c/34th-idea-arc.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> U.S. Department of Education. (2021). Forty-third annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 2021 [Datafile]. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/43rd-arc-for-idea.pdf</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Jeremy M. Peterson; Christy M. Borders and Mindy S. Ely</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>All three authors are affiliated with Illinois State University, Normal. Peterson is a doctoral candidate, Department of Special Education. Borders is the director of the Illinois Tutoring Initiative, Cecilia J. Lauby Teacher Education Center. Ely is an associate professor, Department of Special Education.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref44"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1389004
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Peterson%2C+Jeremy+M%2E%22">Peterson, Jeremy M.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Borders%2C+Christy+M%2E%22">Borders, Christy M.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ely%2C+Mindy+S%2E%22">Ely, Mindy S.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22American+Annals+of+the+Deaf%22"><i>American Annals of the Deaf</i></searchLink>. 2023 167(5):583-596.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Gallaudet University Press. 800 Florida Avenue NE, Denison House, Washington, DC 20002-3695. Tel: 202-651-5488; Fax: 202-651-5489; Web site: https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/index.htm
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 14
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deafness%22">Deafness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hearing+Impairments%22">Hearing Impairments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comorbidity%22">Comorbidity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Education%22">Special Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Incidence%22">Incidence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0002-726X<br />1543-0375
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) students are often labeled with one or more educationally significant disabilities in addition to their hearing loss. According to the Gallaudet Research Institution's most recent Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth (2013), almost 40% of d/DHH students nationwide receive special education services for one or more comorbid disabilities. However, relatively few prevalence rate estimates have been published over the last decade. Knowledge regarding the current prevalence of educationally significant disabilities among d/DHH students is therefore limited. The present study surveyed teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing (TODHHs) in a midwestern state regarding the number of d/DHH students on their caseloads with one or more comorbid disabilities. Within the sample population (N = 451), nearly 65% were reported to receive special education services for disabilities other than deafness or hearing impairment.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: URL
  Label: Access URL
  Group: URL
  Data: <link linkTarget="URL" linkTerm="https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/archives.htm" linkWindow="_blank">http://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/archives.htm</link>
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1389004
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1389004
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 14
        StartPage: 583
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Deafness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hearing Impairments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Comorbidity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Special Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Incidence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary Secondary Education
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Prevalence of Educationally Significant Disabilities among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Peterson, Jeremy M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Borders, Christy M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ely, Mindy S.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0002-726X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1543-0375
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 167
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: American Annals of the Deaf
              Type: main
ResultId 1