This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
- CELF —
- Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals
- DHH —
- deaf or hard of hearing
- MTL —
- mean turn length
- MLUm —
- mean length of utterance in morphemes
- TALI —
- technology-assisted language intervention
- TAU —
- treatment as usual
Helping children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) achieve their academic potential has been a priority in the United States since at least 1864, when President Abraham Lincoln signed the charter for what is now Gallaudet University, saying it would provide deaf people “a fair chance in the race of life.”1 Since that time, arguments have raged about how to best educate children who are DHH. Well-known examples include the Milan Congress of 1880, which passed a controversial resolution banning the use of sign language in schools2–4; the Babbidge Report commissioned by Congress in 1965 that stated, “The American people have no reason to be satisfied with their limited success in educating deaf children”5; and multiple recent articles in Pediatrics that have debated how to educate children who are DHH.6–9
With >150 years of often angry arguments about the “best way” to educate children who are DHH, it is refreshing and encouraging to read the article in this issue of Pediatrics by Meinzen-Derr et al,10 who demonstrate …
Address correspondence to Karl R. White, PhD, Director, National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management, Emma Eccles Jones Endowed Chair in Early Childhood Education, Professor of Psychology, Utah State University, 2615 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322. E-mail: karl.white{at}usu.edu
Individual Login
Institutional Login
You may be able to gain access using your login credentials for your institution. Contact your librarian or administrator if you do not have a username and password.