Despite the trend for mainstreaming children with cochlear implants (CI), a considerable number, either with or without additional disabilities, attend schools for the deaf today. The purpose of this study was to address approaches and practices, interdisciplinary involvement, and challenges within schools for the deaf for managing the communication needs of students with CI. Focused semistructured interviews of school personnel were used for documenting current practices and drawing out areas of concern. Several differences emerged across schools but also between past and current practices in managing the communication of students with CI. These included management of technology, speech–language pathologist (SLP) involvement, instruction models, student regrouping, and modifications in communication mode in teacher–student interchange. Challenges were related to technology, interactions with other professionals and carriers, and reaching the student’s oral communication potential. The importance of an interdisciplinary approach and the school’s orientation are discussed as key factors in the management process.
AllenT. E.AndersonM. L. (2010). Deaf students and their classroom communication: An evaluation of higher order categorical interactions among school and background characteristics. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 15, 334–337.
2.
AuerbachC.SilversteinL. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York, NY: New York University Press.
3.
Bat-ChavaY.MartinD.ImperatoreL. (2014). Long-term improvements in oral communication skills and quality of peer relations in children with cochlear implants: Parental testimony. Child: Care, Health and Development, 40, 870–881.
4.
BellJ. (2007). How to write a scientific paper: A guide on research methodology (in Greek). Athens, Greece: Metaixmio.
5.
CharmazK. (1995). Grounded theory. In SmithJ. A.HarrR.van LangenhoveL. (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27–49). London, England: SAGE.
6.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: SAGE.
7.
ChristiansenJ. B.LeighI. W. (2004). Children with cochlear implants: Changing parent and deaf community perspectives. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 130, 673–677.
8.
CohenL.ManionL.MorrisonK. (2008.). Methodology of educational research (in Greek). Athens, Greece: Metaixmio.
9.
ConnorC. M.CraigH. K.RaudenbushS. W.HeavnerK.ZwolanT. A. (2006). The age at which young deaf children receive cochlear implants and their vocabulary and speech-production growth: Is there an added value for early implantation?Ear and Hearing, 27, 628–644.
10.
ConnorC. M.HieberS.ArtsH. A.ZwolanT. (2000). Speech, vocabulary, and the education of children using cochlear implants: Oral or total communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 1185–1204.
11.
CosettiM. K.WaltzmanS. B. (2012). Outcomes in cochlear implantation: Variables affecting performance in adults and children. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America, 45, 155–171.
12.
DamenG. W.LangereisM. C.SnikA. F.ChuteP. M.MylanusE. A. (2007). Classroom performance and language development of CI students placed in mainstream elementary school. Otology & Neurotology, 28, 463–472.
13.
Eckl-DornaJ.BaumgartnerW. D.JappelA.HamzaviJ.FreiK. (2004). Successful integration of cochlear-implanted children in regular school system. International Congress Series, 1273, 409–412.
14.
FaganM. K.PisoniD. B. (2010). Hearing experience and receptive vocabulary development in deaf children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 15, 149–161.
FosterS.Mudgett-DecaroP.Bagga-GuptaS.De LeuwL.DomforsL. Å.EmertonG.. . . WelchO. (2003). Cross-cultural definitions of inclusion for deaf students: A comparative analysis. Deafness & Education International, 5(1), 1–19.
17.
Gallaudet Research Institute. (2008). Regional and national summary report of data from the 2007-08 annual survey of deaf and hard of hearing children and youth. Washington, DC: Gallaudet Research Institute, Gallaudet University.
18.
GeersA.TobeyE.MoogJ.BrennerC. (2008). Long-term outcomes of cochlear implantation in the preschool years: From elementary grades to high school. International Journal of Audiology, 47(Suppl. 2), S21–S30.
19.
GeersA. E.NicholasJ. G.SedeyA. L. (2003). Language skills of children with early cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing, 24(1), 46S-58S.
20.
GovaertsP. J.De BeukelaerC.DaemersK.De CeulaerG.YpermanM.SomersT.. . . OffeciersF. E. (2002). Outcome of cochlear implantation at different ages from 0 to 6 years. Otology & Neurotology, 23, 885–890.
HammesD. M.NovakM. A.RotzL. A.WillisM.EdmondsonD. M.ThomasJ. F. (2002). Early identification and cochlear implantation: Critical factors for spoken language development. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. Supplement, 189, 74–78.
23.
HydeM.PunchR.KomesaroffL. (2010). A comparison of the anticipated benefits and received outcomes of pediatric cochlear implantation: Parental perspectives. American Annals of the Deaf, 155, 322–338.
24.
JachovaZ.KovacevicJ. (2010). Cochlear implants in the inclusive classroom: A case study. Support for Learning, 25(1), 33–37.
25.
LampropoulouV.PadeliaduS. (1997). Teachers of the deaf as compared with other groups of teachers on attitudes towards people with disabilities and inclusion. American Annals of the Deaf, 142(1), 26–33.
26.
LincolnY. S.CubaE. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163–188). London, England: SAGE.
27.
MillwardL. (2004). Encyclopedia of social science research methods: “Focused interviews.”Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
MoogJ. S.GeersA. E.GustusC.BrennerC. (2011). Psychosocial adjustment in adolescents who have used cochlear implants since preschool. Ear and Hearing, 32(Suppl. 1), 75S-83S.
29.
MukariS. Z.LingL. N.GhaniH. A. (2007). Educational performance of pediatric cochlear implant recipients in mainstream classes. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 71, 231–240.
30.
NicholasJ. G.GeersA. E. (2003). Personal, social, and family adjustment in school-aged children with a cochlear implant. Ear and Hearing, 24(1), 69S–81S.
31.
NikolopoulosT. P.O’DonoghueG. M.ArchboldS. (2006). Age of implantation: Its importance in pediatric cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope, 109, 595–599.
32.
NiparkoJ. K.TobeyE. A.ThalD. J.EisenbergL. S.WangN. Y.QuittnerA. L.FinkN. E. (2010). Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 303, 1498–1506.
33.
OkalidouA. (2009, May14–17). Beyond rehabilitation: Changing education, what is needed in education for long-term support?Proceedings of the 9th European Symposium on Pediatric Cochlear Implantation, Warsaw, Poland.
34.
OkalidouA. (2010). What is needed in education for long-term support of children with cochlear implants. Cochlear Implants International, 11(Suppl. 1), 234–236.
35.
OkalidouA.AnagnostouF.KitsonaM.TsoukalaM.GoudaS.SantzakliS.. . . NikolopoulosTh. (2011). Enhancing listening skills through a child-centered intervening structure of the curriculum. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 75, 81–82.
36.
OkalidouA.KitsonaM.AnagnostouF.TsoukalaM.SantzakliS.GoudaS.. . . NikolopoulosT. P. (2014). Knowledge, experience and practice of SLTs regarding (re)habilitation in deaf children with cochlear implants. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 78, 1049–1056.
37.
OkalidouA.LampropoulouV.NikolopoulosTh.ChuteP.NevinsM. E. (2010, July18–22). Piloting changes in education for CI students in Greece: Program outcomes of a teacher-centered and a student-centered approach. Paper presented at the 21st International Congress on the Education of the Deaf, Vancouver, Canada.
38.
Percy-SmithL.Caye-ThomasenP.GudmanM.JensenJ. H.ThomsenJ. (2008). Self-esteem and social well-being of children with cochlear implants compared to normal hearing children. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 72, 1113–1120.
39.
RichS.LevingerM.WernerS.AdelmanC. (2013). Being an adolescent with a cochlear implant in the world of hearing people: Coping in school, in society and with self identity. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 77, 1337–1344.
40.
SorkinD. L.ZwolanT. A. (2004). Trends in educational services for children with cochlear implants. International Congress Series, 1273, 417–421.
41.
SpencerP.MarscharkM. (2003). Cochlear implants. In MarscharkM.SpencerP. E. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (pp. 434–448). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
42.
StinsonM. S.KluwinT. N. (2003). Educational consequences of alternative school placements. In MarscharkM.SpencerP. E. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (pp. 52–64). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
43.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
44.
SvirskyM. A.RobbinsA. M.KirkK. I.PisoniD. B.MiyamotoR. T. (2000). Language development in profoundly deaf children with cochlear implants. Psychological Science, 11, 153–158.
45.
ThoutenhoofdE. (2006). Cochlear implanted pupils in Scottish schools: 4-year school attainment data (2000–2004). Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 11, 171–188.
46.
TobeyE. A.RekartD.BuckleyK.GeersA. E. (2004). Mode of communication and classroom placement impact on speech intelligibility. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, 130, 639–643.
47.
WuC. M.LiuT. C.LiaoP. J.ChenC. K.ChangB. L.LinB. G. (2013). Academic achievements and classroom performance in Mandarin-speaking prelingually deafened school children with cochlear implants. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 77, 1474–1480.
48.
YoonP. J. (2011). Pediatric cochlear implantation. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 23, 346–350.
49.
ZwolanT. A.SorkinD. L. (2004). Parental perspectives on educational services for children with cochlear implants. International Congress Series, 1273, 401–404.
