Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Effectiveness of a combined intervention using prior knowledge strategies to improve reading comprehension in Grade 2 deaf and hard-of-hearing students whose first language is Saudi sign language
This study examined the effectiveness of combining practices and intervention methods related to activating prior knowledge with five Grade 2 deaf and hard-of-hearing students identified by their teacher as having reading comprehension difficulties. The study employed a multiple-probe single-case design in a Saudi Arabian public general education school for boys that provided special education classrooms for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. The participants’ first language was Saudi Sign Language, and all were born to hearing parents. None had cochlear implants, and only one used bilateral hearing aids. All participants had severe-to-profound hearing loss. A teacher with a specialization in deaf and hard-of-hearing education, who was recruited and trained for the study, delivered instruction through pre-teaching vocabulary, guiding an overviewing strategy by previewing text content through topic discussion, using a graphic organizer, and incorporating social praise. The findings demonstrated significant improvement in the reading comprehension performance of all students, with positive changes observed as early as the first session. Pre-teaching vocabulary, overviewing and social praise emerged as the most effective tools. This study emphasized the benefits of this combined strategy intervention in developing reading comprehension in Grade 2 deaf and hard-of-hearing students and confirmed the value of activating prior knowledge strategies with this population.
AkubuiloF.OkorieE.U.OnwukaG.Uloh-BethelsA.C. (2015). Reading readiness deficiency in children: Causes and ways of improvement. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(24), 38–43.
2.
AlbalharethA.AlasmariA. (2023). Metacognitive strategies implemented with d/Dhh students in upper elementary schools in Saudi Arabia. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 47, 101222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101222
3.
AlbalharethA.PaulP.V.AlasmariA. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of metacognitive strategies and assessments used with d/Deaf and hard of hearing students. Journal Human Research in Rehabilitation, 12(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.21554/hrr.042201
4.
AldosiryN. (2022). Comparison of constant time delay and simultaneous prompting to teach word reading skills to students with intellectual disability. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 68(3), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2020.1771513
5.
AldosiryN. (2023). The effect of the simultaneous Prompting–Constant time delay instructional sequence on the teaching of early academic skills to students with intellectual disabilities. Learning and Instruction, 84, 101728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101728
6.
AlkafF.EmamM.M.AlmehriziR.KazemA.-M.TroiaG.A.Al-BulushiM. (2024). Predicting written language competence and pragmatics in students at risk of reading disability in Oman using teacher report data. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 45(2), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/15257401231160700
7.
AlnahdiG.H. (2015). Single-subject designs in special education: Advantages and limitations. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 15(4), 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12039
8.
Al-RowailyM.A.AlFayezA.I.AlJomieyM.S.AlBadrA.M.AbolfotouhM.A. (2012). Hearing impairments among Saudi preschool children. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 76(11), 1674–1677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.08.004
9.
AlvarezM.C. (1990, April16–20). Knowledge activation and schema construction [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, United States. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED317988.pdf
CairnR.WarderG. (2024). Inclusion of students with disabilities through primary sources. In WaringS.M. (Ed.), Teaching with primary sources for cultural understanding, civic mindedness, and democracy (pp. 32–46). Teachers College Press.
13.
Caldwell-HarrisC.L.HoffmeisterR.J. (2022). Learning a second language via print: On the logical necessity of a fluent first language. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.900399
14.
ChanY.C. (2023). Language development of Chinese-speaking hearing-impaired children: The roles of home literacy resources and shared book reading. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 39(1), 74–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/02656590231154827
DavenportC.A.WatsonM.CannonJ.E. (2019). Single-case design research on early literacy skills of learners who are d/Deaf and hard of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 164(3), 363–380. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2019.0018
DicataldoR.MoscardinoU.MammarellaI.C.RochM. (2023). Comprehension of explicit and implicit information in prereaders: The role of maternal education, receptive vocabulary, executive functions, and theory of mind. Discourse Processes, 60(3), 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2185406
20.
DickinsonD.K.TaborsP.O. (Eds.). (2001). Beginning literacy with language: Young children learning at home and school. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
21.
DyerA.MacSweeneyM.SzczerbinskiM.GreenL.CampbellR. (2003). Predictors of reading delay in deaf adolescents: The relative contributions of rapid automatized naming speed and phonological awareness and decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 215–229. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eng012
EnnsC.HennerJ.McQuarrieL. (2021). Discussing bilingualism in deaf children. Routledge.
24.
FranciscoM.P.B.U.PadillaP.P. (2023). Using multimodal approach in teaching literacy to Deaf college students. Reading and Writing, 37, 1035–1057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10440-4
25.
GiguereD.HoffE. (2023). Bilingual children’s vocabulary skills at 5 years predict reading comprehension development within, not across, languages. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 27(2), 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2023.2166397
26.
GolosD.B.MosesA.M. (2013). Developing preschool deaf children’s language and literacy learning from an educational media series. American Annals of the Deaf, 158(4), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2013.0039
27.
GuoD.ZhangS.WrightK.L.McTigueE.M. (2020). Do you get the picture? A meta-analysis of the effect of graphics on reading comprehension. AERA Open, 6(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420901696
HoffmeisterR.J.Caldwell-HarrisC.L. (2014). Acquiring English as a second language via print: The task for deaf children. Cognition, 132(2), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.014
30.
HoffmeisterR.J.HennerJ.Caldwell-HarrisC.NovogrodskyR. (2021). Deaf children’s ASL vocabulary and ASL syntax knowledge supports English knowledge. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 27(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enab032
31.
HornerR.D.BaerD.M. (1978). Multiple-probe technique: A variation on the multiple baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11(1), 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1978.11-189
32.
JohnstonP.H. (1984). Assessment in reading. In PearsonP.D.BarrR.KamilM.MosenthalP. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 147–182). Longman.
33.
JorgensenL.E.BensonE.A.McCreeryR.W. (2018). Conventional amplification for children and adults with severe-to-profound hearing loss. Seminars in Hearing, 39(4), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1670699
34.
KallioinenP.OlofssonJ.von MentzerC.N.LindgrenM.OrsM.SahlénB.S.LyxellB.EngströmE.UhlénI. (2016). Semantic processing in deaf and hard-of-hearing children: Large N400 mismatch effects in brain responses, despite poor semantic ability. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1146. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01146
35.
KameenuiE.J.CarnineD.W.FreschiR. (1982). Effects of text construction and instructional procedures for teaching word meanings on comprehension and recall. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(3), 367–388. https://doi.org/10.2307/747525
36.
Kusiak-PisowackaM. (2023). Exploring FL readers’ metacognitive beliefs: Narrations from learner diaries. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 9(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.31261/TAPSLA.12691
LaneH.HoffmeisterR.BahanB. (1996). A journey into the deaf-world. Dawn Sign Press.
39.
LedfordJ.R.GastD.L. (Eds.). (2018). Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Routledge.
40.
LiebermanA.M.MitchinerJ.PontecorvoE. (2024). Hearing parents learning American sign language with their deaf children: A mixed-methods survey. Applied Linguistics Review, 15(1), 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2021-0120
41.
McAnallyP.L.RoseS.QuigleyS.P. (2007). Reading practices with deaf children (2nd ed.). PRO-ED.
42.
McKnightK.S. (2010). The teacher’s big book of graphic organizers: 100 reproducible organizers that help kids with reading, writing, and the content areas. Jossey-Bass.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health – National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf
NicholasJ.G.GeersA.E. (2006). Effects of early auditory experience on the spoken language of deaf children at 3 years of age. Ear and Hearing, 27(3), 286–298. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aud.0000215973.76912.c6
48.
NippoldM.A.DuthieJ.K.LarsenJ. (2005). Literacy as a leisure activity: Free-time preferences of older children and young adolescents. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(2), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/009)
49.
NordstokkeD.StelnickiA.M. (2014). Pairwise comparisons. In MichalosA.C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 4575–4576). Springer.
50.
OttoW. (1971). Thorndike’s “Reading as reasoning”: Influence and impact. Reading Research Quarterly, 6(4), 435–442. https://doi.org/10.2307/746939
51.
PabisS.CatalanoJ. (2023). Explicit and contextualized math vocabulary instruction with deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 28(4), 424–425. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enad012
52.
ParisA.H.ParisS.G. (2003). Assessing narrative comprehension in young children. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 36–76. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.38.1.3
53.
ParisS.G.WasikB.A.TurnerJ.C. (1991). The development of strategic readers. In BarrR.KamilM.MosenthalP.PearsonP.D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 609–640). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54.
PearsonP.D. (2014). The roots of reading comprehension instruction. In IsraelS.E.DuffyG.G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 27–55). Routledge.
55.
PearsonP.D.KamilM.L.MosenthalP.B.BarrR. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of reading research (eBook ed.). Routledge.
56.
PeercyM.M.TigertJ.M.FredricksD.E. (2023). Core practices for teaching multilingual students: Humanizing pedagogies for equity. Teachers College Press.
57.
PierottiE.Coffey-CorinaS.SchaeferT.CorinaD.P. (2022). Semantic word integration in children with cochlear implants: Electrophysiological evidence. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 37(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2021.1957954
58.
RoseS.McAnallyP.L.QuigleyS.P. (2004). Language learning practices with deaf children. Pro-Ed.
59.
SalehomoumM. (2022). Think-aloud: Effect on adolescent deaf students’ use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 28(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enac037
60.
SeliamiG.StathopoulouM. (2022, May13–15). Teaching English to deaf/hard of hearing students in primary education: A suggested syllabus [Paper presentation]. 25th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (ISTAL), Thessaloniki, Greece. https://www.new.enl.auth.gr/istal25/programme/
TayibA.-M. (2016). The effect of using graphic organizers on writing (A case study of preparatory college students at Umm-Al-Qura University). International Journal of English Language Teaching, 4(5), 31–53.
63.
ThorndikeE.L. (1917). Reading as reasoning: A study of mistakes in paragraph reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 8(6), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075325
64.
YasinM.M.MohamadM. (2024). The use of visual aids to improve deaf students’ English vocabulary: A literature review. SHS web of conferences. EDP Sciences, 182, 02001. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202418202001
65.
ZhangD.YangX. (2016). Chinese L2 learners’ depth of vocabulary knowledge and its role in reading comprehension. Foreign Language Annals, 49(4), 699–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12225
66.
ZinkH.H.Van NormanE.R.KlingbeilD.A. (2024). Multiple baseline and multiple probe design studies targeting academic skills: Trends over time in effect sizes. Psychology in the Schools, 61(4), 1458–1473. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23120
