Students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (DHH) struggle to attain grade-equivalent literacy skills and require education interventions to improve. Recent literature reviews have revealed the need for high-quality intervention research for the following areas of reading: vocabulary development, reading comprehension, reading fluency, and grapheme–phoneme correspondence. The purpose of the current study was to determine the evidence surrounding morphological development for students who are DHH. The results were reported in a table as well as descriptively. This population exhibits a morphological knowledge delay that may be improved through explicit morphological instruction. Future researchers should consider conducting high-quality morphology intervention research with students who are DHH.
ApelK.BrimoD.DiehmE.ApelL. (2013). Morphological awareness intervention with kindergartners and first- and second-grade students from low socioeconomic status homes: A feasibility study. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 44, 161–173. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2012/12-0042)
2.
ApelK.LawrenceJ. (2011). Contributions of morphological awareness skills to word-level reading and spelling in first-grade children with and without speech sound disorder. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 1312–1328. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0115)
3.
ApelK.MastersonJ. (2001). Theory-guided spelling assessment and intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 182–195. doi:10.1044/0161–1461(2001/017)
4.
ArnbakE.ElbroC. (2000). The effects of morphological awareness training on the reading and spelling skills of young dyslexics. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 44, 229–251. doi:10.1080/00313830050154485
5.
BaumannJ.EdwardsE.BolandE.OlejnikS.Kame’enuiE. (2003). Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruction in morphology and context on fifth-grade students’ ability to derive and infer word meaning. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 447–494. doi:10.3102/00028312040002447
6.
*BennettJ. G.GardnerR.IIILeighnerR.ClancyS.GarnerJ. (2014). Explicitly teaching English through-the-air to students who are deaf or hard of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 159, 45–58.
7.
BerningerV. W.LeeY. L.AbbottR. D.BreznitzZ. (2013). Teaching children with dyslexia to spell in a reading-writers’ workshop. Annals of Dyslexia, 63, 1–24. doi:10.1007/s11881-011-0054-0
8.
BowC. P.BlameyP. J.PaatschL. E.SarantJ. Z. (2004). The effects of phonological and morphological training on speech perception scores and grammatical judgments in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 305–314. http://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enh032
9.
*BowersL.MccarthyJ. H.SchwarzI.DostalH.WolbersK. (2014). Examination of the spelling skills of middle school students who are deaf and hard of hearing. The Volta Review, 114, 29–54.
10.
*BreadmoreH. L.OlsonA. C.KrottA. (2012). Deaf and hearing children’s plural noun spelling. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 2169–2192. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.684694
11.
*BrownJ. B. (1984). Examination of grammatical morphemes in the language of hard-of-hearing children. The Volta Review, 86, 229–238. Retrieved from http://unc.summon.serialssolutions.com/
12.
BrownR. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
CarlisleJ. F. (2003). Morphology matters when learning to read: A commentary. Reading Psychology, 24, 291–322. doi:10.1080/02702710390227369
14.
CarlisleJ. F.McBride-ChangC.NagyW.NunesT. (2010). Effects of instruction in morphological awareness on literacy achievement: An integrative review. Reading Research Quarterly, 45, 464–487. doi:10.1598/RRQ.45.4.5
15.
CarnineD. W.SilbertJ.Kame’enuiE. J.TarverS. G. (2004). Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
16.
*ClarkM. D.GilbertG.AndersonM. (2011). Morphological knowledge and decoding skills of deaf readers. Psychology, 2, 109–116. doi:10.4236/psych.2011.22018
17.
DeaconS. H.KirbyJ. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 223–238. doi:10.1017/S0142716404001110
DixonL. Q.ZhaoJ.JoshiR. M. (2012). One dress, two dress: Dialectal influence on spelling of English words among kindergarten children in Singapore. System, 40, 214–225. doi:10.1016/j.system.2012.02.003
20.
DixonR.EngelmannS. (2007). Spelling through morphographs. DeSoto, TX: Science Research Associates/McGraw-Hill.
21.
EasterbrooksS. R.Beal-AlvarezJ. (2012). States’ reading outcomes of students who are d/deaf and hard of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 157, 27–40. Retrieved from http://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/
22.
EasterbrooksS. R.Beal-AlvarezJ. (2013). Literacy instruction for students who are deaf and hard of hearing. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
23.
EasterbrooksS. R.StephensonB. (2006). An examination of twenty literacy, science, and mathematics practices used to educate students who are deaf or hear of hearing. American Annals of the Deaf, 151, 385–397. Retrieved from http://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/
24.
EasterbrooksS. R.TrussellJ. W. (2016). Encouraging emergent reading in deaf and hard of hearing children. In MarscharkM.SpencerP. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies in language (pp. 377–392). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
25.
EngelmannS.OsborneJ. (1999). Language for learning teacher’s guide. Columbus, OH: Science Research Associates/McGraw-Hill.
26.
FraserC.BellugiU.BrownR. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension, and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 121–135.
27.
GallM. D.GallJ. P.BorgW R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allan & Bacon.
28.
*GaustadM. (1986). Longitudinal effects of manual English instruction on deaf children’s morphological skills. Applied Linguistics, 7, 101–127. doi:10.1017/S0142716400007347
29.
GaustadM. (2000). Morphographic analysis as a word identification strategy for deaf readers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5, 60–80. doi:10.1093/deafed/5.1.60
30.
*GaustadM.KellyR. (2004). The relationship between reading achievement and morphological word analysis in deaf and hearing students matched for reading level. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 269–285. doi:10.1093/deafed/enh030
31.
*GaustadM.KellyR.PayneJ.LylakE. (2002). Deaf and hearing students’ morphological knowledge applied to printed English. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(5), 5–21. doi:10.1353/aad.2012.0264
32.
GuoL.SpencerL. J.TomblinJ. B. (2013). Acquisition of tense marking in English-speaking children with cochlear implants: A longitudinal study. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18, 187–205. doi:10.1093/deafed/ens069
33.
HarrisM.SchumakerJ.DeshlerD. (2011). The effects of strategic morphological analysis instruction on the vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without disabilities. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 34, 17–33. Available from http://ldq.sagepub.com/
34.
HauserP.PaludnevicieneR.SupallaT.BavelierD. (2008). American Sign Language–Sentence Reproduction Test: Development & implications. In de QuadrosR. M. (Ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future (pp. 160–172). Petrópolis, Brazil: Editora Arara Azul.
35.
HurryJ.NunesT.BryantP.PretzlikU.ParkerM.CurnoT.MidgleyL. (2005). Transforming research on morphology into teacher practice. Research Papers in Education, 20, 187–206. doi:10.1080/02671520500078291
36.
KiefferM. J.LesauxN. K. (2012). Direct and indirect roles of morphological awareness in the English reading comprehension of native English, Spanish, Filipino, and Vietnamese speakers. Language Learning, 62, 1170–1204. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00722.x
37.
KooD.CrainK.LaSassoC.EdenG. (2008). Phonological awareness and short-term memory in hearing and deaf individuals of deaf individuals of different communication backgrounds. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1145, 83–99. doi:10.1196/annals.1416.025
38.
LeeJ. (2011). Size matters: Early vocabulary as a predictor of language and literacy competence. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 69–92. doi:10.1017/S01427164100000299
39.
*LooneyP. A.RoseS. (1979). The acquisition of inflectional suffixes by deaf youngsters using written and fingerspelled modes. American Annals of the New York Academy of Science of the Deaf, 124, 765–769.
40.
LucknerJ.CookeC. (2010). A summary of the vocabulary research with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. American Annals of the New York Academy of Science of the Deaf, 155, 38–67. Retrieved from http://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/
41.
LucknerJ.HandleyC. M. (2008). A summary of the reading comprehension research undertaken with students who are deaf or hard of hearing. American Annals of the New York Academy of Science of the Deaf, 153, 6–36. doi:10.1353/aad.0.0006
42.
LucknerJ.SebaldA. M.CooneyJ.YoungJ.MuirS. G. (2006). An examination of the evidence-based literacy research in deaf education. American Annals of the New York Academy of Science of the Deaf, 150, 443–456. Retrieved from http://gupress.gallaudet.edu/annals/
43.
LucknerJ.UrbachJ. (2012). Reading fluency and students who are deaf or hard of hearing: Synthesis of the research. Communications Disorders Quarterly, 33, 230–241. doi:10.1177/1525740111412582
44.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45.
MastersonJ.ApelK. (2000). Spelling assessment: Charting a path to optimal intervention. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(3), 50–65. doi:10.1097/00011363-200020030-00007
46.
MastersonJ.ApelK. (2010). The spelling sensitivity score: Noting developmental changes in spelling knowledge. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 35–45. doi:10.1177/1534508410380039
47.
McCardleP.ScarboroughH. S.CattsH. W. (2001). Predicting, explaining, and preventing children’s reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 230–239. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00023
48.
McCarthyJ. H.HoganT. P.CattsH. W. (2012). Is weak oral language associated with poor spelling in school-age children with specific language impairment, dyslexia or both?Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 26, 791–805.
49.
McGuckianM.HenryA. (2007). The grammatical morpheme deficit in moderate hearing impairment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 42(S1), 17–36. doi:10.1080/13682820601171555
50.
NagyW.BerningerV.AbbottR. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 134–147. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.134
51.
NielsenD.LuetkeB.StrykerD. (2011). The importance of morphemic awareness to reading achievement and the potential of signing morphemes to supporting reading development. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 275–288. doi:10.1093/deafed/enq063
52.
NorburyC.BishopD.BriscoeJ. (2001). Production of English finite verb morphology: A comparison of SLI and mild-moderate hearing impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 165–178. Retrieved from http://jslhr.pubs.asha.org/article.aspx?articleid=1780553
53.
NunesT.BurmanD.EvansD.BellD. (2010). Writing a language that you can’t hear. In BrunswickN.McDougallS.de Mornay DaviesP. (Eds.), Reading and dyslexia in different orthographies (pp. 109–126). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
54.
PaatschL. E. (1997). The effectiveness of the auditory skills program in developing auditory skills in severe to profound hearing-impaired children (Master’s thesis). The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.
55.
ReedD. K. (2008). A synthesis of morphology interventions and effects on reading outcomes for students in grade K-12. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23, 36–49. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00261.x
56.
ReichleE.PerfettiC. (2003). Morphology in word identification: A word-experience model that accounts for morpheme frequency effects. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 219–237. doi:10.1207/S1532799XSSR0703_2
57.
TrussellJ. W.EasterbrooksS. R. (2015). Effects of morphographic instruction on the morphographic analysis skills of deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 20, 229–241. doi:10.1093/deafed/env019
58.
TucciS. L.TrussellJ. W.EasterbrooksS. R. (2014). A review of the evidence on strategies for teaching children who are DHH grapheme-phoneme correspondence. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 191–203. doi:10.1177/1525740114523776
59.
van HoogmoedA. H.KnoorsH.SchreuderR.VerhoevenL. (2013). Complex word reading in Dutch deaf children and adults. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 1083–1089. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.12.010
60.
VerhoevenL.PerfettiC. (2003). Introduction to this special issue: The role of morphology in learning to read. Scientific Studies of Reading, 7, 209–217. doi:10.1207/S1532799XSSR0703_1
