Sign Language Stimulus in Vocabulary Learning of a Brain-Injured Child

RESEARCH REPORT SIGN LANGUAGE STIMULUS IN VOCABULARY LEARNING OF A BRAIN-INJURED CHILD Problem: Many children are institutionalized with a diagnosis of brain (or Central Nervous System) damage. Those so diagnosed may differ in general development, but usually their acquisition of speech and language is severely retarded since CNS disorders may impair the ability to encode or to decode or both. It is hypothesized that when CNS damage limits either the receptive or expressive function, additional stimulation is needed; and, specifically, that the visual and kinaesthetic stimulation of sign language can supplement information in the auditory channel and so improve linguistic functioning. The case study reported here is that of a thirteen year old girl, for whom birth injury had resulted in cerebral palsy and grand mal epilepsy. Previous observers had reported her polite and cheerful but without expressive language and only fair receptive abilities. However her almost complete inability to follow instructions cast doubt on her receptiveintegrative functioning and for ten years (1962-1972) an I.Q. below 25 had been reported. Procedure: Two vocabulary lists of 10 words each (1) were presented to the subject in identical lesson situations twice a week during the entire learning period (65 days). Each work session was one hour in length and consisted of four fifteen minute exercises (2). One work session was presented in the morning and one in the afternoon, using the appropriate techniques. The afternoon items from one list were presented in speech only. The morning material from the other vocabulary list was presented simultaneously in speech and signing, using the conventional sign-word association familiar to those who work with the deaf (3). The correct response was taught during exercises I, II, & IV by use of the Peters experimenter's demonstration and modeling techniques. The subject was tested on both vocabulary lists (learning tasks) once a month with a recheck two weeks after the third monthly test. Responses were judged correct when the subject performed the action the item called for; e.g. after a word was spoken, or signed and spoken, the subject's action was found to be correct or incorrect. Results: The percentage of correct responses to test items was consistantly much higher with two-mode presentation. More important, as Table 1 shows, there is a sharp difference in the slope of the learning curve. Virtually no learning took place with words spoken only; learning did take place when words were accompanied with signs. 1 (20) 2 (33) Tests (intervals in days) 3 (12) 4 %correct * * * * 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 * items presented in sign and speech + items presented in speech only Table 1. Connpaiisonof responses to spoken and to spoken and signed words. - + - Sign Language Studies NOTES 1. Spoken test items: BIG, FAT, DIFFERENT, THIN, SMALL, SAD, SAME, HAPPY, GOOD, BAD Signed and spoken test items: NAME, SIT, STAND, RED, BLUE, ON, GIVE, TAKE, OVER, UNDER 2. Exercises: I. Word is presented verbally and the child is helped through a response to the word. II. Play a game with the words. (Child is allowed to perform a rewarding task if correct response is given to the word) III. Child is left to draw. Interaction is by auditory or auditory/ visual technique. IV. Repeat step I 3. Wm. C. Stokoe, Jr., The Study of Sign Language(Silver Spring, Md., N.A.D., 2e, 1972). Leslie J. Peters Sunland Training Center Gainesville, Florida Leslie John Petersis head of the Speech and Hearing Department of the Sunland Training Center, Gainsville, Florida. His research interests are in language, brain dysfunction, and education of the deaf, through the disciplines of psychology, audiology, and speech pathology. ...