This Issue: Something for Almost Everybody

Paul, P. V. (2016). This issue: Something for almost everybody. American Annals of the Deaf, 160(5), 433–436.

This issue, including this editorial, represents the last publication for Volume 160 of the Annals. After perusing and digesting the contents of the articles and book review, you might conclude that we are ending with a bang, not a whimper. Indeed, there seems to be something for everybody—well, almost everybody.

The articles in this issue are filled with mouthwatering topics such as the use of single-subject/case design research, inclusion for linguistic and culturally diverse d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) students, career and college readiness, understanding d/Dhh individuals within a social constructionist framework (or something like that), and deafblindness. My original intent was to offer in-depth analytical perspectives on these articles, including the review of a book that I also read quite some time ago. I admit that it is tempting to perform a deep critique, especially on topics that have been the subjects of several of my previously published editorials. Nevertheless, I will take the easy way out for now and only provide a few remarks to pique your interest and encourage you to read further.

The article by Cannon, Guardino, Antia, and Luckner actually warmed my heart because, for one thing, I am all for quality indicators and evidence-based practices (EBPs). I can be convinced easily to accept that single-subject/case designs (SSCDs) can be utilized to produce EBPs; albeit, I suspect that we need to proceed with caution. Perhaps my caution is influenced by my (archaic?) thinking that EBPs need to be based on generalizations involving group experimental designs (the so-called gold standard). However, it is possible to proffer EBPs at the individual—or micro level—using SSCDs. For the macro level, one would need a series of SSCD experiments. Adding to this challenge is the notion that the definitions of constructs such as quality indicators and EBPs are debatable and somewhat arbitrary. Nevertheless, it is important to continue this dialogue because, definitions notwithstanding, our field needs more EBPs—micro and macro.

Nagle, Newman, Shaver, and Marschark examine courses taken by d/Dhh students in high school. Their focus is on whether d/Dhh students graduate from high school prepared to enter the world of work (careers, so to speak) or college (postsecondary education). At first blush, you might be skeptical that simply taking a number of courses, especially ones in challenging subjects such as algebra and physics, would yield usable valid findings. Surely, you might say, there are other factors—the quality of teachers, the motivation or interest level of students, the ability to read and write English, cognitive ability, and so on. And what about the grade inflation bit?

In essence, the findings of Nagle et al. are not only telling, but also are based on robust statistical analyses and interpretations. Oh, Nagle et al. do recommend additional research on other important related issues and concerns. My favorite is their call for further investigations to

examine DHH students’ access to courses that promote college and career readiness as well as ways to facilitate uptake of information in those courses for students who may lack the language fluency, content knowledge, and world knowledge of peers in the general population.

(p. 479)

Call me a biased individual obsessed with English literacy, but I cannot shake off the idea that print literacy is critical to improving one’s content, cultural, and world knowledge, all of which are important for academic success in school and postschool success in our print- and technology-literate society. It is certainly possible to increase one’s knowledge using non–reading/print literacy avenues, but that is a huge challenge—and success might not be easily obtainable.

Remember the “I” word: inclusion? This was a hot topic in Ohio during the 1990s, and it seems to be making a comeback. The article by Ayantoye and Luckner should add to our research base on inclusion for d/Dhh children and adolescents, but with a twist: The focus is on d/Deaf students who...