BT_Moravkova

					      MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO
                FACULTY OF EDUCATION
           Department of English Language and Literature




    Deaf Students and their Motivation to
               Learn English

                            Bachelor Thesis




                              Brno 2011




Supervisor:                                               Author:
Dr. Rita Chalmers Collins                      Veronika Morávková
Declaration

     I hereby declare that I worked on my bachelor thesis on my own and that I
used only the sources mentioned in the bibliography section.




Brno, 19.5.2011                            .............................................................
                                                          Veronika Morávková
Acknowledgements

      I would like to express my thanks to Dr. Rita Chalmers Collins for her kind
help and valuable advice that she provided me with during my work on the bachelor
thesis.
Annotation
The bachelor thesis is focused on teaching English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) to
deaf students. In the theoretical part, it describes deafness in general and looking at
deafness from different points of view. The other two chapters of the first part of the
thesis deal with learning and teaching EFL and the motivation to learn a foreign
language. In the practical part, all three themes are connected to research on the
motivation of deaf students to learn EFL. The aim of the bachelor thesis is to look
deeper into the motivational problems of learning EFL and derive some conclusions
and ideas how to make learning EFL to deaf students more effective.




Keywords

Deaf, deafness, communication, motivation, language learning, learning English-as-
a-Foreign-Language (EFL).
Table of Content
       Declaration ................................................................................................................................. 2
       Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... 3
       Annotation ................................................................................................................................... 4
       Keywords ..................................................................................................................................... 4

TABLE OF CONTENT............................................................................................ 5

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 6

1. THE ISSUE OF DEAFNESS ............................................................................... 8

   1.1 DEAF ........................................................................................................................................... 8
   1.2 COMMUNICATION AND DEAFNESS .............................................................................................. 9
   1.3 LANGUAGE LEARNING .............................................................................................................. 10
   1.4 SUPPORT STAFF ........................................................................................................................ 12

2. DEAFNESS AND LANGUAGE ........................................................................ 14

   2.1 DEAFNESS AND LANGUAGE IN GENERAL .................................................................................. 14
       2.1.1 Communication Methods and Learning Programs .......................................................... 15
       2.1.2 Bilingual-Bicultural Education ........................................................................................ 15
       2.1.3 Practical Advise for Language Learning ......................................................................... 16
   2.2 DEAFNESS AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE ....................................................................................... 21
       2.2.1 Foreign Language Learning according to the Age .......................................................... 21
       2.2.2 Practical Advise for Foreign Language Learning ........................................................... 24
       2.2.3 Tools for Foreign Language Learning ............................................................................. 26

3. RESEARCH ........................................................................................................ 28

   3.1 RESEARCH INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 28
   3.2 RESEARCH GOAL ...................................................................................................................... 28
   3.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURE ............................................................................................................ 28
   3.4 PARTICIPANTS PROFILES ........................................................................................................... 29
   3.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................. 30
   3.6 RESEARCH RESULTS ................................................................................................................. 31
   3.7 QUESTIONNAIRE ANALYSES ..................................................................................................... 35

CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 40

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 41

LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................ 46




                                                                                                                                                      5
Introduction

     The deaf population in the Czech Republic is a minority group with specific
language and culture. As well as other minorities the deaf have different needs for
education than hearing people. The deaf students have two possibilities to get their
education. The first possibility is to attend the schools specialized for teaching the
students with hearing impairment. The second possibility is to attend mainstream
schools and be educated with hearing students. The decision depends on the student
or the student’s parents.
     The first language (mother tongue) of deaf is usually sign language and the
Czech language (or more generally the spoken language of their country) is their
second language. In the Czech Republic students have to also learn English
language from the third grade of primary school that means that the deaf children,
since they attend the third grade, have to acquire or learn three languages namely
Czech Sign language, Czech language and English language.
     The bachelor thesis is divided into two parts: theoretical part and practical part.
We believe that the first, theoretical, part would be more useful for foreign language
teachers who have no experience with the education of deaf students. In other
words, the first part would be more beneficial for the teachers from mainstream
education. The goal of the theoretical part is to provide basic information about deaf
and their education. The theoretical part provides a brief look at deafness as such,
gives overall idea about the education of the deaf, points out the main problems
which teachers face during teaching, shows the important differences between the
education of hearing and deaf students.
     In comparison to the first part the second, practical, part is believed to be
useful for all teachers (from main stream education as well as specialized education)
working with deaf students. Participants of the research were the students of the
secondary school Střední škola pro sluchově postižené a OU, Gellnerova 1, which is
specialized for the education of hard of hearing students with various study
programs. The aim of the research was to find out what relation participants have to
English-as-a-Foreign-Language, what their motives to learn EFL are and if they
want to learn EFL. Also we were interested in the diversity of the classes. We
looked on the diversity from two points of view. For the first we were interested in


                                                                                      6
the diversity from the hearing loss, for the second we were interested in the diversity
of the length of experience with EFL.




                                                                                     7
1. The Issue of Deafness

1.1 Deaf

     We can define types of deafness from several points of view such as the time
when the deafness occurred, the part of body which affects the ability to hear and
the degree of deafness.
         To focus on the time, there is difference between pre-lingual and post-
lingual deafness. Pre-lingual deafness occurs before the child acquires the language
and, logically, post-lingual deafness occurs later in life, after the process of
acquirement of language is finished (Nadoushan 16-17). The learning language
approaches, of course, differ in these two groups.
         Although the time of life when the deafness occurred is important, we can
not forget about the degree of deafness according to the sound volume that is
measured in the decibels. There are five categories into which the deafness is
divided and they depend on the detection of the sound. The first category,
characterized as mild, means that the lowest level of sound adult can hear is from
the range of 25-45 dB and child from the range of 20-40 dB. For the second
category called moderate the lowest level of sound is from the range of 41-55 dB.
For the third, moderately severe, only sounds louder than 56-70 dB can be heard and
for the fourth, severe, the sound has to be even over 71-90 dB. The last category
called profound includes individuals with the difficulties to hear the sounds under 90
dB (“Hearing Impairment”).
         The last point of view, from which we look at the deafness in this thesis, is
the loss of anatomical and physiological function of the body. The part of body
which negatively affects the ability to hear determines if the individual suffers from
conductive or perceptive hearing loss. In other words, the distinction between
conductive and perceptive hearing loss is dependent on the part of the body where
the dysfunction occurs (Mole, McColl and Vale 11):
                Conductive hearing loss means that the dysfunction occurs in any
                 part of hearing organs, for example in the middle ear, and is usually
                 connected to the volume of the sound.




                                                                                    8
                  Perceptive hearing loss means that the dysfunction occurs in the
                   brain where the sound should be interpreted and is usually
                   connected to the frequency of the sound.
     All of these types of deafness mentioned above influence the type of
communication and the approaches to language learning which are discussed in
following chapters.



1.2 Communication and Deafness

     Communication is the process of providing and receiving the information.
Following simplified chart show the relationships in the act of communication.


     ADDRESSER_____________MESSAGE_________________ADDRESSEE
                                       CODE
     Addresser provides the message to addressee using any communication mode
which is in common code (Dontcheva-Navratilova 13). In Grammatical Structures
in English Dontcheva-Navratilova claims: “The knowledge of the common code is
essential for the ability of the participants to encode and decode the message” (14).
In other words it means that the code, whether it is spoken, written or sign language,
has to be understood by both addresser and addressee to be able to communicate
with each other.
     From a psychological point of view we can distinguish the communication into
verbal and nonverbal communication. According to the information above, verbal
and nonverbal communication follows the code or communicational mode. For
example, the nonverbal communication includes body language, sign language and
writing. Verbal communication is built on the spoken language and among others
includes speech, tone of voice and pitch of voice.
     As well as hearing people, deaf people use many communication methods
during their communication. Among the communicational strategies there are:
            spoken mother tongue
            written mother tongue
            lip reading
            finger spelling



                                                                                    9
              sign language
              drawing
     The preference of the method depends on the other participant of
communication, when the deafness appeared etc. Usually a deaf person who lost
hearing after he or she acquired language or has mild to moderate hearing loss will
prefer the spoken language and in general will have developed speaking skills
comparable with a hearing person. On the other hand, a child who is born with
deafness and lives in a hearing family will have little chance to gain systematically
sign or spoken language and his or her communication will be a combination of
many communicational strategies. According to Nadoushan: “pre-lingually deaf
children who are born into hearing families usually experience some difficulties in
language acquisition......the amount of exposure they receive is not as rich as that
which deaf children of deaf parents or hearing children of hearing parents receive”
(16-17). These children as Nadoushan continues:”remain language deprived up until
their school exposure which is probably their first experience with a competent and
naturalistic language model” (17). “This early language deprivation explains the
troublesome statistics that 90 percent of deaf children born into homes with only
hearing caregivers experience delays in language acquisition compared to hearing
children in hearing families and deaf children in deaf families” (qtd. in Briggle 69).
Language acquisition and communication strategies are in more details discussed in
chapter 1.3.



1.3 Language Learning

     Deaf and hearing people living in the same country do not necessarily have the
same first language. For hearing impaired the spoken language of their country
might differ from their first language and can be second place after sign language.
As sign language does not necessarily follow the same grammatical rules as spoken
language of that particular country, it means that the deaf person has to acquire two
languages (spoken language of their country and sign language) in the same time.
To use an example of hearing person, it means that he or she would have to acquire
Czech language as a mother tongue and English language as to be able to
communicate with the majority of the people around. In other words, a deaf person


                                                                                   10
who uses auditory language in any form (spoken, written) and sign language in the
same time is bilingual.
     Before we look at the differences between sign and spoken language, we
should focus on another communicational strategy and it is lip-reading. Lip-reading
is in fact the combination of lip pattern, facial expression and body language and is
not 100% accurate as generally thought. According to Bauman, only 30-35% of
spoken English is lip-readable. Also accents and dialects can lower the chance to
lip-read the speech and if we also consider the misunderstanding caused by the fact
that lips looking the same can produce different sound we come to the conclusion
that lip-reading is more guessing than accurate communicational strategy (Mole,
McColl and Vale 16). The conclusion confirms the idea of using more methods of
communication as mentioned above.
     Before speaking about another communicational strategy - sign language - it is
useful to define language as such. The language: “may refer either to the specifically
human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication or to a
specific instance of such a system of complex communication” (“Language”). It is
also important to know that sign language has its own grammar and syntax and has
developed, as well as any other spoken language, during the period of time into
separate languages. The following citation clearly expresses the meaning. Sign
languages: “are not collections of gestures nor do they mirror their spoken language
equivalents; they are fully functioning languages in their own right”, moreover,
“Most sign languages are not grammatically linked in any way to their national
spoken language” (Mole, McColl and Vale 17). Every single country has it’s own
spoken as well as sign language and also dialects can be found in both types of
languages.
     The link between spoken language and sign language can be seen in the finger
spelling. Sign languages differ through out the countries (e.g. American Sign
Language, Czech Sign Language) and the finger spelling follows the same rule
which means that there are used different systems of finger spelling in different
countries. However, in general we can distinguish two groups namely one-handed,
for example used in Poland and two handed, for example used in Turkey. The
function of finger spelling is among the others to emphasis some part of the speech
or to finger spell the spoken word which has not an equivalent in the sign language.



                                                                                   11
1.4 Support Staff

      According to Mole, McColl and Vale, the support staff are: ”the ´human aids´
who help deaf people to communicate” and “refer to staff other than the ...teacher
and ...assistants who are supporting the deaf or hearing impaired learner” ( Mole,
McColl and Vale 21). There are many types of the support staff specialist but in this
thesis we will focus only on three of them
             sign language interpreter
             lip-speaker
             note-taker
      First of all, the sign language interpreter is one of who is well-known by the
broader public. A sign language interpreter has to be, as any other interpreter, fluent
in both languages because the translation proceeds simultaneously. For language
classes, the translator should be educated in mother tongue, sign language and
foreign language at the same time which puts a huge demand on him or her. The
reality is usually far from the ideal situation.
      The second type of support staff is lip-speaker who is in fact a kind of
translator. The work of a lip-speaker is to repeat everything what is said by the
person with the deaf person communicates but to make it easier for lip-reading. Lip-
speaker uses finger spelling if needed.
      The last but not least mentioned in this thesis is note-taker. The note-taker
should not differ from previous two members of support staff in terms that he or she
should provide the exact text that was said and not only summarize the important
points. In other words, the note-taker is a translator from spoken to written (Mole,
McColl and Vale 22). Once again the note-taker in a foreign language class should
have knowledge of the foreign language to be able to write what is really said
without mistakes.
      The support staff, student and teacher make one team and all of them
participate in the student’s learning. It is highly recommended or obligatory for the
support staff and teacher to have a meeting where they agree on their
communication which includes teachers´ providing supportive materials such as
handouts or presentations. Their cooperation should be of high quality from all sides
and if teacher have questions or suggestions the member of the support staff should
be willing to discuss it with him or her.


                                                                                    12
     It is not possible to say which kind of the support staff is better. Every hearing
impaired person prefers different support staff and ideally every deaf student should
have possibility to choose what is best for his or her studies thereby fulfilling the
right for education.




                                                                                    13
2. Deafness and Language


2.1 Deafness and Language in General

     First of all, it is necessary to look closer at the question connected to terms
such as first and second language, and spoken and sign language. It is important to
be aware of that the language widely spoken in the country where deaf people live
such as Czech language or English language may or may not be the first language
for deaf. However, it is the first language for the majority of citizens of the country
and usually is consistent with the official language. For our purposes, on the one
side, we will distinguish between first language (mother tongue) and second
language and, on the other side, between sign language and spoken language. As
mentioned in the first chapter, there does not exist only one first language among
deaf people of one country. Hard of hearing people can use sign language as their
first language and language of their country as the second one and vice versa. Also
the combination of both is possible too. We look closer on languages and bilingual
education in sub-chapter 2.1.1.
     Secondly, it is useful to focus on the differences between sign and spoken
languages. As mentioned in the first chapter, the grammar and vocabulary of sign
languages generally differ from spoken and written languages. Without the
knowledge of this, it is hard to understand the difficulties experienced by some deaf
with acquisition of the spoken language of their country. Hearing people are in
contact with spoken language most of the time even without focusing on it, such as
overhearing conversation in public transport, listening to the radio. The amount of
time which hearing people spend hearing or listening to the language is enormous
and can be hardly comparable to the amount of time which deaf people spend by
learning spoken language of their country (Lozanova and Savtchev 4).
     Also, it is important to know that the spoken language is, in contrast to sign
language, auditory based language, hence the language based on listening and
speaking (Eilers-Crandall 65). According to Gioia, Johnston and Cooper: “For
example, sign language cannot be written down, and as a visual language, it is
substantially different from an oral-aural language in term of structure and
organization.” (Gioia, Johnson and Cooper 3). Deaf students without previous



                                                                                    14
experience with the auditory languages are forced to use the auditory languages
while learning writing and reading (Eilers-Crandall 66). In other words, hearing
people usually learn to read and write in their first language, in contrary to deaf,
whose first language might be sign language, who learn to read and write in their
second language.



2.1.1 Communication Methods and Learning Programs


     To speak about communication of deaf, the methods have changed over the
years. We will briefly look at three basic methods. The first method is represented
by the manualists who sign or prefer to sign. The second one is represented by
oralists who lip-read or prefer to lip-read. Marschark says that: “the separation
between ´spoken language´ and ´sign language´.…. is clearly an oversimplification.
It is rare that deaf children are exposed only to spoken language or only to sign
language.” (13). We will continue with the last of the three methods which is Total
Communication. Total Communication combines the usage of sign and spoken
language as well as other means of communication. As usual, this method has
advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, Total Communication is connected
with breaking the communication barrier, because Total Communication: “can
provide a ´safety net´ for children who have difficulty following oral methods by
using English that is supported by sign” (Zapien). While using Total
Communication students might feel more secure during communication. On the
other hand, students are not exposed to language, either sign or spoken, as a
complex and, therefore they are not able to work on one language systematically
(Zapien).



2.1.2 Bilingual-Bicultural Education

     To speak about education of deaf, we will look closer at bilingual-bicultural
education. For the first, it would be efficient to define the term bicultural and
bilingual. To speak about culture, according to Finnegan, ”A person who is
bicultural can move freely within and between two different cultures. Biculturalism



                                                                                 15
implies an understanding of the mores, customs, practices, and expectations of
members of a cultural group and the ability to adapt to their expectations.” (qtd. in
Baker and Baker 2). To speak about language, “Individuals who are Deaf are
considered bilingual if they are able to communicate effectively in both American
Sign Language (ASL) and English or the spoken language of their country.” (Baker
and Baker 2).
     The bilingual-bicultural approach looks at sign language and spoken language
of one country as at two different languages (Baker and Baker 3). According to
Evans: ”ASL and English should be recognized as separate and distinct languages,
but valued equally. Each language has its unique grammatical features, but neither is
better or worse than the other.” (Evans 5). Evans continues: “Studies examining the
linguistic features of ASL show that ASL functions in the same way as spoken
languages.” (11).
     According to Marschark: “Preliminary findings suggest that programs that
combine sign language and spoken English (also known as bilingual education
programs) may prove more effective than programs that use either spoken or sign
language alone.” (Marschark 8).



2.1.3 Practical Advise for Language Learning


     “Because deafness is a low incidence disability, many teachers do not have a
strong knowledge about learners who are deaf or hearing impaired. To ensure that
students who are deaf receive the quality education they deserve, educators must
understand the learning needs of this population” (Briggle 68-69). In the following
paragraphs, we will look at some practical advice for teaching language to deaf
students.
     For the first, it is relevant to have a closer look at the connection between
education and culture. According to Ching: “Teaching bilingual students also
requires having an understanding of their cultural values.” (qtd. in Evans 21).
Someone might think that deaf living in the particular country have the same culture
as hearing citizens. It is important to recognize the differences between hearing and
deaf cultures and be at least aware that the differences exist. Teacher should be
aware of the differences between cultures and also should know about students


                                                                                  16
needs. Though, teacher should not make mistakes in a way of working with deaf
students just as like with hearing students. It is sufficient to give an example of two
important differences connected to needs of deaf students and their bilingualism.
Firstly, hearing students are expected to take notes while teacher is speaking which
is not possible for deaf students who need to keep visual contact with teacher. We,
as humans, are invested with some communication sensory channels. In
contradistinction to hearing people who recognize language through the auditory
channel sometimes with support of visual channel, deaf people recognize language
through visual channel sometimes with support of auditory channel (Anderson 77).
According to Marschark:


           Because most deaf children are dependent on the visual modality for
           language reception regardless of whether they are acquiring a spoken or
           sign language, they have to shift attention between their activities and
           their language partners in order to obtain information both about what is
           going on around them and about language itself (21).


     Secondly, deaf students learn academic language, written form of an auditory
language, as a second language. The decoding of the message is, more or less,
harder for deaf students (Anderson 76). Once again, teachers with no experience
with education of the deaf may come across the feeling that their deaf students are
not on the same level of the acquisition of the academic language and they might,
more or less, be impatient with their students. It is essential to be aware of the
differences and give to deaf students more time during their work.
     Moreover, we can look on the table made by mentor-teachers and teachers
who took part in Nover and Andrew’s research (60):


     Tab. 1 culturally influenced patterns of language use
Language Use Pattern         Deaf Culture                  Hearing Culture
Ways to get attention               shoulder tap                Shouting
                                    Light switch                Whistling
                                    Tap on table or             Clearing throat
                                     floor                       Making        noise



                                                                                    17
                                                                   (knock, bang, tap,
                                                                   etc.)
Ways        to      maintain         Eye contact                 Voice inflection
attention                            Ask questions               Ask questions
                                     Facial expressions          Ask for responses
                                     Feedback cues               Stop talking
Turn taking                          Stop signing                Voice     inflection
                                     One-on-one         or        (especially at the
                                      group eye contact            end of sentences)
                                                                  Questioning
                                                                  Pausing
Question patterns                    Eye              brow       Wh-questions
                                      movement                    Polite    questions
                                     Head tilt                    (would you, could
                                     Lean torso                   you, couldn’t you)
                                                                  How-how         are
                                                                   you?
     Source: Nover, Stephen M. and Jean F. Andrews. Critical Pedagogy in Deaf
     Education: Bilingual Methodology and Staff Development. USDLC Star
     Schools Project Report No 2. Year Two, 1998-1999. New Mexico, Santa Fe,
     1999.


     For the second, it is important for teacher to show their interest in the students´
lives. There is one possible way for teachers to help students and in the same time
show interest, the usage of students´ first language – sign language. Briggle says
about this topic:


            While most regular education teachers are far from fluent signers, those
            who learn and use basic, common signs show deaf students their interest
            in communicating. Students who are deaf will have an interpreter, but
            teachers can create a feeling of belonging by learning sign themselves
            and teaching sign to their classes (69).




                                                                                      18
           Basic knowledge of child’s first language is also necessary, in order to be
           aware of points of linguistic interference or conflict between the two
           languages. The knowledge helps teachers to identify errors that are
           systemic in nature and can be eliminated by emphasizing the distinction
           between languages rules (Evans 17).


       According to Nover and Andrews, it is also important for deaf children to be
in contact with deaf adults. Deaf adults, parent or teacher, provide to children adult
model of deaf and can help children to be able to orientate bicultural-bilingual
environment (Nover and Andrews 21). Moreover, in the Nover and Andrew’s
research: “Teachers stressed the importance of having deaf role models; teachers
recommended students read about famous deaf persons in history.” (56).
     To make the learning process as easy as possible, teachers should also keep in
mind that deaf students learn the most from the situations connected to real life,
emotions, self experience etc. such as role playing and acting in general (Anderson
78). Another useful tool is connected with teaching and learning vocabulary. It is
appropriate to teach new vocabulary in the thematic circles where there are new
words associated to each other or the known vocabulary (Anderson 78). Teaching
vocabulary does not need to be taught only in circles which include words with
associated meanings but also words with a grammatical association or words based
on the same root. To stay with the theme of teaching and learning vocabulary,
Anderson says that deaf students: “must learn a new word seven or more times in
order to own the word. Not only do they need to use it in different ways such as
defining, putting it in a sentence, teaching it to others, and using it in a puzzle.”
(Anderson 78). Two previous rules, learning through experience and learning
vocabulary in circles, as well as usage of new vocabulary in different ways, are
perfectly applicable to hearing students too.
     To continue with advice useful in learning process of deaf students, we will
now focus on the usage of graphic organizers. Graphic organizers present the
approach of visual teaching and can be used for a range of purposes such as for
grammar, story reading and writing. Anderson gives these examples of graphic
organizers: (1) fishbone diagrams, (2) Venn diagrams, (3) story structure maps, (4)
concept webs, (5) network trees, (6) continuum scales, (7) problem/solution
outlines, (8) chain of events, (9) cycles (Anderson 79). To let readers gain the


                                                                                   19
general idea about the types of graphic organizers, we will look closer at two of
them and three more graphic organizers can be found in Appendix A. Firstly,
fishbone diagrams can be used for identifying possible causes for a problem and
sorts ideas into categories. It is frequently used during brainstorming and team work
(“Write Design on Line”).




     Pic. 1




     [Fishbone Map]. 2008. Write Design On Line. GIF file.


     Secondly, Venn diagrams are good tools for visualization of similarities and
differences and are used as pre-writing activity to organize thoughts (“Write Design
on Line”).


     Pic. 2




                 [Venn Diagram]. 2008. Write Design On Line. GIF file.



                                                                                  20
     To sum up, graphic organizers help students to imagine the relation between
words, grammar rules, and etc. and they also help teachers to explain these relations.
Moreover, as mentioned above, the graphic organizers perfectly follow the rule of
visual teaching.



2.2 Deafness and Foreign Language


     As deaf people are, or at least should be, part of the society they experience the
globalization and the growth of communication all over the world as well as
everybody else. The need of knowledge of foreign language for hearing people goes
hand in hand with the need of knowledge of foreign language and the spoken
language for deaf people (Lozanova and Savtchev 5).
     There used to be, and still are, some mistaken beliefs that deafness is a
language disability (Lozanova and Savtchev 4). According to Leeson: “The
experience of countries where foreign languages – spoken and signed – are
introduced to deaf children (e.g. Sweden) demonstrates that this approach is
grounded in false beliefs about the nature of deafness.” (Lozanova and Savtchev 4).
Vidímová does not agree that opinions about deafness as a language disability are
still present. According to her, approaches to teaching foreign language to deaf have
changed over the years and it is believed that everyone can learn language. She says
that the main attention moved from the question: who is able to learn foreign
language to the question how to present foreign language and make the learning
easier (Vidímová).



2.2.1 Foreign Language Learning according to the Age


     We will briefly look at the school legislation of learning foreign languages in
the Czech Republic. Learning foreign language is in the Czech Republic compulsory
for children attending the third to the ninth grade of primary school. The amount of
lessons is three forty-five lessons per week (“Národní plán výuky cizích jazyků” 5-
6). During the education, students meet with foreign language studies also in


                                                                                    21
comprehensive and grammar schools. If students want to accomplish secondary
education with final exam they have to pass foreign language exam as its part.
Academic year 2010-2011 brought changes in the final exam which became
national, however the foreign language still remained as a compulsory part. In
tertiary education, such as universities, the foreign language does not necessary have
to be part of the study program.
     According to Brožík, deaf children usually attend school without knowledge of
any type of language on high level, therefore they have very hard way to acquire
two languages (spoken language of their country and sign language) and after two
years of this practice there stands one more inhibition in the form of foreign
language as their third language (Brožík). Following citation of Johnson represents
the same opinion: “The [children] tend to enter kindergarten without a sophisticated
competence in any language, signed or spoken.” (qtd. in Evans 14). Definitely not
all deaf children have the same problem. “Research during the 1980s, for example,
demonstrates that deaf children of deaf parents, who were exposed to sign language
as their first language, acquired that language at the same rate and with the same
milestones as hearing children acquired spoken language.” (Marschark 16).
Unfortunately, that can be mainly applied only to deaf children of deaf parents,
which means that 90 percent of deaf children may come across the literacy problems
because they are the first deaf person in the family. However, the previous
statements do not change the fact that if we compare the situation of deaf children
with hearing children, we can not see much logic in the system of language
education for deaf children. Hearing children who, moreover, experience a greater
exposure to language than deaf children, are supposed to learn two languages
(spoken language of their country and foreign language) whether deaf children need
to, more or less, acquire two languages on a high level (spoken language of their
country and sign language) and, last but not least, have to learn one foreign
language. The advantage of hearing children is also the fact that they usually learn
second language (foreign language) after they perfectly acquire the first language
(spoken language of their country). In contrast to the previous comment, deaf
children hardly acquire the first or second language before learning the third one.
The question is whether the number of languages to which deaf are exposed is too
high and negatively influences the speed and quality of learning process. The
question is, more or less, answered by the research accomplished by Výzkumný


                                                                                   22
ústav pedagogický v Praze (The Research Institute of Education in Prague).
Outcome of the research done in the Czech Republic was, that learning foreign
language from the third grade of primary school is too stressful for deaf children
(Géblová). On the other side, it is not appropriate to generalize the ability of deaf
children to learn foreign language. One of the factors is the level of the first
language. According to Cummins: “…for minority students who are academically at
risk, strong promotion of first language conceptual skills may be more effective than
either half-hearted bilingual approach or monolingual English ´immersion´
approach.” (qtd. in Evans 15).
     According to Vladovičová and her research done with students of secondary
education, deaf students, on the one hand, realize the importance of foreign
language knowledge, but on the other hand, they rather use the possibility to skip
final exam in foreign language. Vladovičová gives some possible reasons for this
dilemma, such as low level of teacher qualification and experience with teaching
deaf students, lack of study materials adjusted for hard of hearing students,
unfinished methodology specialized for teaching foreign language to deaf students
(Vladovičová 228). In other words, there are seldom perfect or at least satisfactory
conditions for the learning process of deaf students in the foreign language field.
     Šrejbrová points out the importance of motivation because according to her,
effort which has to be put into learning foreign language by a deaf student is
incomparable with effort put by hearing students. Usually, the progress made by
deaf students in learning foreign language is slower and students have to show a
presence of patience. With deaf students and foreign languages the statement that
´without hard work there is no success´ is truer than ever (Šrejbrová 53-54).
     In previous paragraphs, we focused on primary and secondary education. Now,
we will have a brief look at foreign language in tertiary education. At universities,
students are, in general, expected to work on their foreign language mainly during
their self-studies. Yet, according to Janáková, it is inadequate to expect the same
from deaf students, or more precisely to expect same result of their self studies. She
gives an opinion that deaf students need feedback from the teacher more than
hearing students, therefore their self studies will not bring much success (Janáková
27). Another difference between foreign language study of hearing and deaf
students, is amount of revisions and practice, which needs to be generally higher
while working with deaf students. Moreover, even at universities, deaf students


                                                                                      23
often lack adequate knowledge of the spoken language of their country. Some
students also mention that while studying English or other foreign language, even
thought they understand, they are not able to translate or explain the meaning in the
spoken language of their country (Janáková 27).



2.2.2 Practical Advise for Foreign Language Learning


     Considering the demand factor of the foreign language learning for deaf
students, it is important to make the learning process as easy as possible. Firstly,
during teaching foreign language to deaf students, there should be emphasized the
visual approach because visual communication carries 100% of communicative
information for the deaf (Brožík). All communication systems (sign language, finger
spelling, lip-reading, written foreign language, written language of their country,
pictures etc.) should be included in the teaching process. In the classroom of foreign
language there are three languages present namely foreign language, sign language,
spoken language of their country.
     Following advice is useful for students of every age. Also it gives the solution
to problem mentioned in the previous sub-chapter; problem which is connected with
the lack of ability to explain or translate the meaning of foreign language expression
into the spoken language of their country. According to Marschark: “Within the
classroom, reading and writing activities should be given high priority. Having
students retell stories at home, collect or draw relevant pictures, and act out portions
of stories can help establish links between written words and their meanings.”
(Marschark 11).
     It is necessary to realize that teaching foreign language to deaf students
requires careful preparation of the teacher. During teaching foreign language to deaf
pupils or students who still have not acquired sign language and spoken language of
their country perfectly, teachers should use students´ knowledge of these two
languages and start thematically with vocabulary well known in these two languages
(Vidímová). During teaching foreign language, especially teachers of deaf pupils in
lower grades of the primary school, mainly focus on the vocabulary of foreign
language. Language teachers of deaf children and students in general need to know
the differences between teaching hearing children and deaf children. The main point


                                                                                     24
which directs the whole style of teaching approach is the fact that many children do
not know same amount of the words as hearing children of the same age (Brožík).
The following citation uphold the previous statement: “The vocabularies of deaf
students and the rate of acquisition of new words have been found to be far below
those of their normally hearing peers.” (Charlesworth, Charlesworth, Raban and
Rickards 23). Usage of translation, for example from the Czech language to English
is not appropriate. In other words, explaining the meaning of the word in foreign
language through the first or second language equivalent does not guarantee success
(Brožík). The reason is non-complexity of vocabulary in the spoken language of
their country. Once and again, we come across the importance of the pictures and
other visual tools during foreign language lessons.
     Moreover, the variety of students from the degree of deafness point of view is
one of the biggest problems connected to teaching foreign language to deaf students.
Marschark mentions that: “the needs of children who are hard of hearing are very
often different than the needs of children who are deaf.” (13). Classes would be
ideally distinguished by the level of hearing loss. Practically, there are never enough
deaf students with the same level of hearing loss at particular school to create one
class and the size of the class is limited by financial and human recourses. In the
Czech Republic, English teachers in secondary education also experience classes
with students on very different level of English. Frequently, classes are compound
of students who learn English for more than five years, students who learnt other
foreign language and students with no experience with foreign language (Šrejbrová
53). The most adequate solution is to prepare exercises on different levels and, more
or less, work with students individually (Šrejbrová 53). Of course, this solution is
not ideal and, moreover, very complicated and demanding for teacher. The problem
with assessment comes hand in hand with the previous problem. If teacher works
individually with class, he or she has to also check and assess different exercises on
different levels of English (Šrejbrová 53). In this case, it is important to explain to
students the reason for different assessment.
     It is not necessary to teach all for skills – reading, writing, speaking and
listening. Teachers should do research in their classes and ask students whether they
want to learn speaking and listening mainly represented by lip-reading. Teacher
should be also aware of the difference between the degrees of hearing loss:



                                                                                    25
           People with mild hearing loss may be able to participate in group and
           individual conversations with little adaptation. People with more
           significant hearing loss usually have difficulty understanding speech
           from a distance of more than a few feet and may not be able to follow
           group conversations, with or without the aid of an amplifier. People with
           profound hearing disabilities often cannot interpret oral language and
           speech, even with amplification of sound (“Foreign Language Learning
           and Students with Disabilities”).



2.2.3 Tools for Foreign Language Learning


     As generally believed, the need of appropriate text book is very important for
hearing as well as deaf students. Vidímová gives important advice for the choice of
the text book. She points out the importance of: (1) presence of visual materials such
as pictures, photos; (2) understandable and logic organization of lessons, exercises;
(3) lessons organized to thematic cirques; (4) easy and understandable grammar; (5)
moderate growth of difficulty; (6) workbook connected to textbook (Vidímová).
     Secondly, Nover and Andrew’s research provide the advice given by teachers
of deaf students who participated in the research. The advice is following: “the
wearing of T-shirts with the manual alphabet on them. Having books with signs in
classroom, inviting deaf speakers, displaying the manual alphabet on the board, and
the teaching of formal Deaf studies courses.” (57).
     To speak about one more possibility how to make learning process more
interesting and satisfying for deaf students and in the same time to keep the rule
about visual learning, we come across the usage of internet. Kimmel built her class
of ´journal writing´ on the interactive approach with the help of computers and
internet and she proclaimed: “The use of the computer made the experience more
satisfying for my deaf learners. Their insecurities in spelling and some grammar
concerns could be reduced with the email systems.” (Kimmel 107). Kimmel
continues about the advantages of computer use: “When I compared the stack of
print outs of our email interactions and the written course assignments with those of
the traditional class, the stack was triple the size of the traditional class. I am fairly
certain I had more interactions with my journaling class than my traditional class as


                                                                                       26
result of the electronic journaling.” (Kimmel 113-114). It is possible to say that
Kimmel was successful in motivating students to use written English, share their
pieces of writing and interact with others via internet.
     Internet provides to students connection with the whole world and lets students
recognize the importance of the English, which is the best motivation for their
learning process. According to Luft: “The Internet has many capabilities that make
it especially useful with Deaf and hard-of-hearing students, who benefit from highly
visual presentation of information.” (Luft 85). Once again we come across the need
of deaf students to learn as visually as possible. Moreover, “The Internet provides
teachers with access to a wide variety of visually-based resources for use in the
classroom including pictures, graphics, and video.” (Luft 85). Internet also offers
many texts from all fields of interests and provides web sides specified to learning
English as a second or foreign language.




                                                                                 27
3. Research


3.1 Research Introduction

     The research focuses on motivation of the deaf to learn foreign language in the
Czech Republic. As it is widely believed, the motivation to learn is one of the
factors which determines, whether or not the learning process will be successful.
Rather then blindly follow the textbooks and curriculum and push the deaf to learn
foreign language, a teacher should know what the students' interests are and why
they wish to learn foreign language. Of course, the knowledge about students'
wishes and needs is important for teacher of hearing students too. Because the
foreign language is after spoken language and sign language of their country the
third language the deaf want to or need to acquire, teacher should put as much of the
attention on motivation and use his or her knowledge about the students.




3.2 Research Goal

     The goal of the research was, firstly, to find if the deaf students think that the
knowledge of English-as-a-Foreign-Language is important and if they are interested
in learning foreign language, especially English. Secondly, we wanted to gain the
information about students´ motives for learning English and their experience with
the use of English in their normal life, outside of the classroom. Also, we focused on
the diversity of the group (classes) concerning the hearing loss. Last but not least,
we were interested in the length of participants´ experience with learning English.




3.3 Research Procedure

     The research method was an anonymous questionnaire. The questionnaire was
created to use clear and simple expressions to give every participant the possibility
to understand without any difficulties. The language used in the questionnaire was
Czech language to fulfill the idea of the simple material as mentioned above. The



                                                                                      28
questionnaire used closed questions and students, who answered the questionnaire,
had very little or none opportunity to express themselves in a way of being creative
in their answers. The number of the main questions was nine and seven questions
out of nine required yes-no answer.
     The research took place in Brno, Czech Republic. Participants of the research
were the students of the secondary school Střední škola pro sluchově postižené a
OU, Gellnerova 1, which is specialized for the education of hard of hearing students
with various study programs. The questionnaire was given to students by their
teacher of English during their English lessons without the presence of the
researcher. The first and second grade students were questioned on 1st June 2010
and the third grade answered their questionnaires on 2nd June 2010. The answers
were then analyzed and for better orientation organized into the graphs and tables.



3.4 Participants Profiles

     As mentioned above, participants were secondary school students. Of nineteen
students, five students were the first grade students, seven were the second grade
students and seven were the third grade students.
     In the first grade, there were two female and three male participants. One of
the participants was sixteen years old and four were at the age of seventeen. From
the degree of deafness, one student was without any hearing loss, two students had
hearing impairment on the level of severe hearing loss and two students had hearing
impairment on the level of profound hearing loss.
     In the second grade, there were three female and four male participants. The
age of the participants was in the range from eighteen to twenty-one, whereof three
participants were eighteen years old, one student was at the age of nineteen, one
student at the age of twenty, one student at the age of twenty-one and the age of the
last participant was not fulfilled in the questionnaire and therefore is not known. In
this class three students had moderate degree of hearing loss, one student had
moderately severe degree of hearing loss, and two students had profound degree of
hearing loss and once and again there are no data about the degree of hearing loss of
one student.




                                                                                      29
     The last questioned students were the students of the third grade, of which four
were females and three were males. The age of the participants was from eighteen to
twenty-three. One of the participants was at the age of eighteen, three participants at
the age of nineteen, two participants at the age of twenty and one participant at the
age of twenty-three. In this group two participants had moderately severe degree of
hearing loss, three participants had severe degree of hearing loss and two
participants had profound degree of hearing loss.
     To conclude, the group of participants was in the age of eighteen to twenty-
three hence, from the age of point of view, quite homogenous. Also the group was
from gender point of view very balanced with nine females and ten males. From the
degree of hearing loss, the group was heterogeneous where on the one side there
was one student without any hearing impairment and on the other side seven
students with the profound degree of hearing loss. The diversity can be seen in the
following graph.


     Graph 1 diversity of the classes from the degree of hearing loss

                                                                           hearing
             3

            2,5                                                            moderate hearing loss

             2                                                             moderately severe hearing loss

            1,5                                                            severe hearing loss
             1                                                             profound hearing loss
            0,5
                                                                           not known
             0
                   first grade    second grade      third grade




3.5 Research Questions


     The research questionnaire can be found in the appendix. For original version
which is in the Czech language, please see Appendix B. For English version of
questionnaire, please see Appendix C.




                                                                                       30
3.6 Research Results


     In this sub-chapter, we follow the research questionnaire and provide answers
gained from participants organized in graphs and tables.


     (1) How many years have you been learning English language?


     Following graphs show for how many years participants have been learning
EFL in the date of the answering questionnaire.


     Graph 2 the length of the experience with EFL in the first grade


        3
      2,5
        2
                                                                    1 year
      1,5                                                           3 years
        1                                                           7 years

      0,5
        0
                             first grade




     Graph 3 the length of the experience with EFL in the second grade

       2

      1,5                                                        2 years
                                                                 3 years
       1                                                         5 years
                                                                 10 years
      0,5
                                                                 11 years

       0
                           second grade




                                                                               31
     Graph 3 the length of the experience with EFL in the third grade

      7
      6
      5                                                           4 years
      4                                                           5 years

      3                                                           6 years
                                                                  7 years
      2
                                                                  10 years
      1
      0
                             third grade



          Where have you been learning English language and how many years?


     68% of students learnt EFL in primary school, 100% learnt EFL in secondary
school, 10% in hobby group, 5% with private teacher and 5% by self-studies. The
students spent learning EFL 50 academic years in primary school, 47 academic
years in secondary school, 2 academic years in hobby group, 2 academic years with
private teacher and 1 academic year by self-studies. For more precise information
please see the Appendix D.


     (2) Do you like English language?


     Graph 4 the relation to EFL




                                                                               rather yes
                                                                               I do not mind
                                                                               rather not




     (3) Would you learn English language, if it was not the compulsory subject?


     68% of students would learn English language if it was not compulsory subject
while the remainder would not.



                                                                                   32
      (4) Have you ever used English language outside of the classroom? (e.g.
     travelling, internet, films).


      58% of students have experience with the use of English language outside of
the classroom.


     If yes: where, when, how did you feel?


        80% of participants, who had experience with the use of English outside of
the classroom, experienced the usage during travelling or other contact with
foreigners, 40%      while using internet, 10% while watching movies. They
experienced the use of English in different times and during their experience had
various kinds of feelings. For more precise information please see the Appendix E.


     (5) Do you think that the knowledge of English language is important?


     95% of participants answered that they thought that the knowledge of English
is important. 5% of participants thought that the English was and in the same time
was not important.




     (6) Would you prefer to learn only English language connected to your study
     subject? (e.g. vocabulary, technical papers).


     Graph 5 the preference of learning technical or general language




                                                                             only general language
                                                                             technical and general
                                                                             only technical language
                                                                             not known




                                                                                   33
      (7) Do you think you will use the knowledge of English language in the
     future?


     90% of students thought that they would use the knowledge of English
language in future. 5% of participants thought that they would not use the
knowledge of English language in future and 5% of participants did not answer to
this question.


     If yes, where:


     76% of participants, who thought that they would use the knowledge of
English language in their job, 88% during travelling, 65% in communication with
foreigners, 71% while using internet and 12% in other situations. For more precise
information please see the Appendix F.


      (8) If you had a possibility, would you choose another foreign language than
     English?


     Graph 6 the preference of another foreign language




                                                                                     no
                                                                                     yes
                                                                                     not known




      If yes, which one:


     Tab. 2 another foreign language
       P8    Czech
       P9    German
       P11   German
       P13   Slovene




                                                                               34
      P16   French                        Italian


     (9) If you had a possibility, would you learn English language and other
     foreign language?


     37% of participants would learn English language and one more foreign
language while 63% would not.


     If yes, which one:


     Tab. 3 one more foreign language
      P4    German
      P8    Czech
      P11   German
      P12   German
      P13   Slovene
      P14   Spanish
      P15   French                        Spanish




3.7 Questionnaire Analyses

     In this sub-chapter we will analyze the research results and compare it with the
information known from the theoretical part.
     Firstly, we will speak about the diversity of the group from the hearing loss.
As it can be seen from the first graph the whole group as well as every class is very
heterogeneous. The lesson should be created according to the degree of hearing loss
of the students which is not easy with the heterogonous group. As mentioned in
2.2.2., there is not necessary to teach all four skills – reading, writing, speaking and
listening and teachers should do research in their classes and ask students whether
they want to learn speaking and listening mainly represented by lip-reading. The
approach to teach speaking and listening (lip-reading), more or less, depends on the
degree of hearing loss. Teaching four language skills – speaking, listening, reading,


                                                                                     35
and writing – is mostly successful for students with moderate hearing loss. These
students are also successful in acquiring the ability to listen to the foreign language
as well as to speak in foreign language. On the other hand, for students with
profound hearing loss is the learning of speaking in the foreign language and
listening to the foreign language (which is in this case represented only by lip-
reading) hard and not motivating and usually brings little progress. However
complicated this situation is for the teacher, he or she should give the chance to
students with ability and motivation to learn listening and speaking and in the same
time should not push students who do not feel comfortable with the exercises for
learning listening and speaking. The teacher should be able to handle the situation
and work with two groups within the class separately.
     Secondly, we also come across the diversity connected with the level of
English of students attending one class. To be more precise we will look more on
the length of learners´ experience with English-as-a-Foreign-Language than on the
level of their English which we do not know. From graph in the previous sub-
chapter it can be seen how heterogeneous the classes were when the research was
done. Once again we can see the problems which are connected with the diversity of
the group. Teacher of classes which are heterogeneous have to work with the class
as with few different groups according to the level of students´ knowledge.
Especially the second grade students formed the group with great diversity when
two students studied for two years, one student for three years, one for five years,
two for ten years and one for eleven years. The research asked where the
participants gained the experience with learning EFL. The obtained data showed that
the participants spent the most years, with studies of EFL in primary school. The
second biggest amount of years was in secondary school. Participants also learnt
two years in hobby groups as well as with private teacher and one year by self study.
From the view of number of participants learning in each kind of education, the
secondary school was, of course, the most frequented answer that means that all
nineteen participants experienced studying EFL in secondary school. Only thirteen
students out of nineteen learnt EFL in primary school, two students also in hobby
group, one student with private teacher and one student by self study.
     Thirdly, the research focused on the students´ relation to EFL. Answers for the
question, if they like foreign language, were balanced. Six students answered that
they rather liked English language, seven answered that they did not mind and six


                                                                                    36
answered that they rather did not like English language. In our research we did not
focus on the reasons for their relation to EFL. However we analyzed the answers
and try to find the connection between the lengths of their experience with EFL and
positivity of their relationship. From the available information we concluded that it
is not possible to say whether the length of the experience with EFL have positive or
negative influence over the students´ relationship to the EFL. For example there
were three students with ten year experience with EFL per each, from which one
participant answered that he rather liked English, one answer that he did not mind
and one answered that she rather did not like English. Also we looked for the
connection between the level of hearing loss and positivity of the relationship. Once
again we did not find the connection between these two factors.
     The third question focused on the rational side of learning process. Thirteen
participants from nineteen would learn EFL even if it was not compulsory subject.
We compared the answers to the second and third questions and got to the results
that the answers to the third question were more positive. Especially in the third
grade 100% of participants would learn EFL if it was not compulsory subject even
though two participants did not mind English language and, moreover, two
participants rather did not like English language.
     The fifth question asked students their opinion about the importance of the
knowledge of English language. Eighteen participants out of nineteen answered that
they thought the knowledge of English language is important and only one
participant thought the knowledge of English language may or may not be
important. From the answers it is clear that participants were aware of the fact that
English language is a language which is used internationally.
     The research was also the interest in participants´ experience with the usage of
English in their daily life, outside the classroom. Eleven students admitted that they
used English language in their free time and eight students declared that they never
used English language during their life except at school. We again looked for
connection between the experience with the usage of English during participants´
free time and the length of the studies of EFL, and the experience with the usage of
English during participants´ free time and relationship to the EFL. We came to the
conclusion that there is no connection between experience with English outside the
classroom and the length of experience with EFL as well as there is no evidence
about connection between experience with English outside the classroom and


                                                                                   37
relation to English language. We searched further and detected that no experience
with usage of English during free time might have impact on the decision they
would make if English was not compulsory subject. 60% of participants who would
not choose to learn English if it was not compulsory had never used English in their
daily life. We also collected more precise information about the situation, in which
they experienced the contact with English in their daily life. The participants mainly
used their knowledge during travelling and the internet. One participant also chats
with her friends in English. Moreover we asked about students´ feelings during their
usage of English in their daily lives. We are not able to generalize their feelings
because they experienced various kinds from feeling fantastic, normal to stressed,
but we would say that their feelings were rather positive or neutral. We would
suggest to the teachers to ask their students about their experience and to use
obtained data about their students in learning process, in a way of focusing on the
topics students experienced as well as in discussions or writings about their
experience and feelings.
      The aim of this question was to find out whether the students wanted to learn
general English or technical English connected to their studies. From the results we
can say that seven students would prefer to learn only general English, one student
would prefer to learn only English connected to her studies, eight students would
rather learn technical as well as general English language and unfortunately, three
students skipped this question hence we do not know about their preference. Once
again we would suggest to teachers to ask their students about what would they
prefer and adjust their lessons to their students´ interest.
      Seventeen participants thought that they would use the knowledge of English
language in future. One participant thought that he would not use it and one
participant did not fill this question. The part of the question was also the situation
where they thought they would use the knowledge of English language. In the
various situations the most students (fifteen) thought they would use English during
travelling, thirteen in their job, twelve while working with internet, eleven while
communicating with foreigners. We would suggest to the teachers to once again
open the discussion about where students think to use the knowledge of English
language in future. Speaking or writing about this topic could give the students
reasons to learn English and their thoughts might become their motives for learning



                                                                                    38
English language. The obtained data can help teacher to make lessons interesting for
students.
     The last two questions were connected to other foreign languages and
preference of learning them. For the first, we were interested if the students would
prefer to learn other foreign language than English. The answers show that thirteen
students would prefer English language, two students German language, one student
French or Italian language, one student Slovenian language and one student Czech
language. For the second, we were interested if students would learn one more
foreign language if possible. The number of students who would like to learn more
foreign languages was surprisingly high. Six students would like to learn one more
foreign language and one student would even like to learn two more foreign
languages.
     Over 90 percent of participants in the research thought that the knowledge of
English-as-a-Foreign-Language is important. However only approximately 68
percent would learn English if it was not compulsory subject and less than 32
percent of participants had rather positive relation to English language. We also
found out that over 68 percent of students prefer learning English. Moreover less
than 37 percent would learn one or two more foreign languages.
     It is appropriate to speak about the students´ motives for learning English and
their experience with the usage of English in their normal life. From research, nearly
58 percent had previous experience with the usage of the knowledge of English
language during their free time. 90 percent of participants believed that they would
definitely use the knowledge of English in their future.
     To speak about the diversity of the group, we found out that the classes are
from the length of experience with EFL point of view very heterogeneous. The
most heterogeneous is the second grade class and the least is the first grade class.




                                                                                       39
Conclusion

     The aim of the thesis was to investigate whether the students of secondary
school Střední škola pro sluchově postižené a OU, Gellnerova 1 believe the foreign
language especially English is important for them or not and also whether they want
to learn EFL or eventually another foreign language. Moreover we wanted to find
out the diversity of the classes in the secondary education of deaf students
concerning hearing loss and the length of experience with EFL. The goal was not
only to investigate the situation in the secondary education but also to provide the
summary and the main points about the education of deaf students in general.
     The research confirms that the deaf students of secondary school Střední škola
pro sluchově postižené a OU, Gellnerova 1 are aware of the importance of the
foreign language namely EFL. Surprisingly, some students are interested in one
more foreign language. Over half of the questioned students used their knowledge of
English language outside the classroom; most of the students believe that they will
use the knowledge of English in their future. And two thirds of students would learn
language if it was not compulsory subject. On the other side only one third of the
questioned students have rather positive relation to the EFL.
     The research proved the high diversity of the classes in both research spheres.
Of course, the diversity slightly differs from class to class. However we do not know
the level of English of the students, who answered the questionnaire, the length of
their experience with English is in the range of one to eleven years. We believe that
it could be a complication for students as well as for teachers. From the hearing loss,
the classes are heterogeneous too.
     The research was done with a small sample of students and students were only
from one school. We would suggest questioning a larger sample of students all
around the Czech Republic to gain more general idea about the situation. Moreover
we would recommend investigating the level of English language rather than the
length of the experience with EFL. The interview with some students could be done
for better knowledge about students’ ideas, needs and wishes.
     To conclude, in our opinion the field of the foreign language education of deaf
needs more investigation and focus.




                                                                                    40
Bibliography

Anderson, Timothy J. “Teaching Reading/Writing by Visual Means and Thinking:
       Successful ESL Approaches Applied Across Content Areas.” Proceedings
       2000: International Seminar on Teaching English to Deaf and Hard-of-
       hearing students at Secondary and Tertiary Levels of Education, Prague,
       Czech Republic, 2-4 November 2000. Ed. Daniela Janáková. Prague:
       Charles University, 2001. 74-87.


Baker, Sharon and Keith Baker. “Educating Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of
       Hearing: Bilingual-Bicultural Education” ERIC Digest E553 (1997). Web.
       21 Feb. 2011.
< http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED414671.pdf>


Briggle, Sandra J. “Language and Literacy Development in Children Who Are Deaf
       or Hearing Impaired.” Kappa Delta Pi Record, winter 2006 (2006). Web. 20
       Feb. 2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ683441.pdf>


Brožík, Josef.   Výuka anglického jazyka u těžce sluchově postižených žáků.
       Metodický portál RVP, 2010. Web. 7 Jan. 2011.
<http://clanky.rvp.cz/clanek/c/S/8629/vyuka-anglickeho-jazyka-u-tezce-sluchove-
       postizenych-zaku.html/>


Charlesworth, Ann, Robert Charlesworth, Bridie Raban and Field Rickards.
       “Teaching Children with Hearing Loss in Reading Recovery.” Literacy
       Teaching and Learning, Volume 11, Number 1 (2006): 21-50. Web. 20 Feb.
       2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ903240.pdf>


Dontcheva-Navratilova, Olga. Grammatical Structures in English: Meaning in
       Context. Brno: MU, 2005.




                                                                                  41
Eilers-Crandall, Kathleen. “Reading and Writing as a Foreign Language: Variables
       to Consider for Deaf College Students.” Proceedings 2000: International
       Seminar on Teaching English to Deaf and Hard-of-hearing students at
       Secondary and Tertiary Levels of Education, Prague, Czech Republic, 2-4
       November 2000. Ed. Daniela Janáková. Prague: Charles University, 2001.
       65-75.


Evans, Charlotte. “Literacy Acquisition in Deaf Children.” (1998). Web. 21 Feb.
       2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED424751.pdf>


Gioia, Barbara, Peter Johnston and Laura Giovannelli Cooper. “Documenting and
       Developing Literacy in Deaf Children.” Literacy Teaching and Learning: An
       International Journal of Early Reading and Writing, 2001-2002, Volume 6,
       Number 1, California, 2002. 3-24.


Géblová, Alena. Výuce cizích jazyků brání sluchové postižení žáků. Výzkumný
       ústav pedagogický v Praze, 2010. Web. 3 Feb. 2011.
<http://www.vuppraha.cz/vyuce-cizich-jazyku-brani-sluchove-postizeni-zaku>




Janáková, Daniela. “Teaching English to Deaf and Hard-of-hearing Students at the
       Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague.” Proceedings 2000:
       International Seminar on Teaching English to Deaf and Hard-of-hearing
       students at Secondary and Tertiary Levels of Education, Prague, Czech
       Republic, 2-4 November 2000. Ed. Daniela Janáková. Prague: Charles
       University, 2001.26-29 .


Kimmel, Karen L. “Interactive Journal Writing with Deaf and Hard-of-hearing
       College Students.” Proceedings 2000: International Seminar on Teaching
       English to Deaf and Hard-of-hearing students at Secondary and Tertiary
       Levels of Education, Prague, Czech Republic, 2-4 November 2000. Ed.
       Daniela Janáková. Prague: Charles University, 2001. 104-120.



                                                                             42
Lozanova, Slavina and Boian Savtchev. “Analysis of Needs, Constraints, Practices
       and Challenges to the Deaf and Hearing-Impaired Learners of Languages.
       Preliminary Research.” Deaf Port Project. (2009). Web. 27 Jan. 2010.
<http://www.deafport.eu/up/Research/1.%20Deaf%20Port%20Preliminary%20Rese
       arch.pdf>


Luft, Pamela. “Visual Activities Using the Internet: Enhancing Experiential
       Learning, Concept Development, and Literacy.” Monograph of Collected
       Papers from 23rd Annual Conference (1997): 84-92. Web. 20 Feb. 2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED406768.pdf>


Marschark, Marc. Language Development in Children Who Are Deaf: A Research
       Synthesis (2001). Web. 20 Feb. 2011.
<http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED455620.pdf>


Mole, Judith, Hilary McColl and Mireille Vale. Deaf and Multilingual. A practical
       guide for teaching deaf students in foreign language classes. Brassington,
       Derbyshire: Direct Learn Services Ltd., 2005.


Nadoushan, Mohammad Ali Salmani. “Language and Literacy Development in
       Prelingually-Deaf   Children.”     I-manager´s   Journal   on   Educational
       Psychology, Vol. 2 No. 2, August – October 2008 (2008): 16-20. Web. 15
       Jan. 2010. <http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED504241.pdf>


Šrejbrová, Eva. “English in the class with Varied Levels of English.” Proceedings
       2000: International Seminar on Teaching English to Deaf and Hard-of-
       hearing students at Secondary and Tertiary Levels of Education, Prague,
       Czech Republic, 2-4 November 2000. Ed. Daniela Janáková. Prague:
       Charles University, 2001. 51-59.


Vidímová, Iveta. Výuka anglického jazyka v 7.ročníku ZŠ pro sluchově postižené
       žáky. Metodický portál RVP, 2010. Web. 7 Jan. 2011.



                                                                               43
<http://clanky.rvp.cz/clanek/c/s/8631/VYUKA-ANGLICKEHO-JAZYKA-V-7-
       ROCNIKU-ZS-PRO-SLUCHOVE-POSTIZENE-ZAKY.html/>


Vladovičová, Michaela. “Trendy vo výučbe cudzieho jazyka u žiakov so sluchovým
       postihnutím. Trendy a nové výzvy v špeciálnej pedagogike, Bratislava, 23-24
       September 2010. Web. 7 Jan. 2010.
<http://www.nepocujuci.sk/prispevky/vladovicova.pdf>


Zapien, Cheryl. Options in Deaf Education-History, Methodologies, and Strategies
for Surviving the System. 1998. Web. 15 Jan. 2010.
<http://www.listen-up.org/edu/options1.htm>


Continuum Scale. Write design On-line, 2008. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/sequence.html#continuum>


Fishbone Map. Write design On-line, 2008. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/analyze.html#fishbone>


Foreign Language Learning and Students with Disabilities. Mobility International
USA – MIUSA, 2007. Web. 10 Apr. 2011.
<http://www.miusa.org/ncde/tipsheets/foreignlanguage#deaf-and-hard-of-1>


Hearing Impairment. Wikipedia, 2009. Web. 5 Jan. 2010.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearing_impairment>


Language. Wikipedia, 2011. Web. 15 Mar. 2011.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language>


Národní plán výuky cizích jazyků. Ministerstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy,
2006. Web. 18 Feb. 2011.
<http://www.msmt.cz/vzdelavani/narodni-plan-vyuky-cizich-jazyku>


Network Tree. Write design On-line, 2008. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/brainstorm.html#networktree>


                                                                               44
Spider Web. Write design On-line, 2008. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/analyze.html#spider>


Venn Diagram. Write design On-line, 2008. Web. 9 Feb. 2010.
<http://www.writedesignonline.com/organizers/comparecontrast.html#venn>




                                                                          45
List of Appendices

Appendix A: Graphic organizers
Appendix B: Questionnaire in the Czech language (Dotazník)
Appendix C: Questionnaire in the English language
Appendix D: Tab. 4 place and the length of students experience with EFL
Appendix E: Tab. 5 the use of English outside the classroom
Appendix F: Tab. 6 the situations of the use of English in the future




                                                                          46
          Appendix A

          Graphic organizers



     Concept webs are the spider web-like diagrams for a hierarchical organization
of the particular topic. In language learning, we use concept webs for example for
learning vocabulary (“Write Design on Line”).


     Pic. 3




     [Spider Map]. 2008. Write Design On Line. GIF file.




     Time line is the well-known type of continuum scale. Continuum scales can be
also used for showing degrees, shades of meaning etc (“Write Design on Line”).


     Pic. 4




               [Continuum Scale]. 2008. Write Design On Line. GIF file.




                                                                                 47
     Network trees provide visualization of hierarchical relationship between
concepts or the line of progression of ideas (“Write Design on Line”).




     Pic. 5




[Network Tree]. 2008. Write Design On Line. GIF file.




                                                                          48
            Appendix B

                                       DOTAZNÍK

Datum:…………………

Věk:……………………

Pohlaví: ženské / mužské * (*nehodící se škrtněte)
Ročník:………………...

Stupeň postižení: lehká nedoslýchavost / středně těžká nedoslýchavost /
                 těžká nedoslýchavost /praktická hluchota / úplná hluchota *



        1) Kolik let se učíte anglický jazyk?...............

            Kde jste se učili anglický jazyk a kolik let?:
            V mateřské škole:………………………….
            Na základní škole:…………………………
            Na střední škole:…………………………..
            V zájmovém kroužku:…………………….
            Soukromě:…………………………………
            S rodiči:……………………………………
            Samostudium:……………………………..
            Další:………………………………………



        2) Máte rádi anglický jazyk?

            Velmi / spíše ano / nevadí mi / spíše ne / nesnáším ho *



        3) Učili byste se anglický jazyk, kdyby to nebyl povinný předmět?

            Ano / ne *




                                                                               49
4) Použili jste anglický jazyk někde jinde než v hodině anglického jazyka?
   (př.cestování, internet, film)

   Ano / ne *

   Pokud ano: Kde………………………………………
              Kdy……………………………………....
              Jak jste se cítili…………………………..



5) Myslíte si, že je znalost anglického jazyka důležitá?

   Ano / ne *



6) Učili byste se raději pouze anglický jazyk související s Vaším studijním
   oborem (př.slovní zásoba, odborné články)

   Pouze odborný jazyk / obecný i odborný jazyk / pouze obecný jazyk *



7) Myslíte si, že využijete anglický jazyk v budoucnu?

   Ano / ne *
   Pokud ano, kde: V práci:…………………………………
                   K cestování:…………………………….
                   Komunikace s cizinci:………………….
                   Internet:………………………………...
                   Ostatní:…………………………………



8) Pokud byste měli možnost, vybrali byste si jiný cizí jazyk než anglický?

   Ano / ne *
   Pokud ano, jaký:……………………………………¨


9) Pokud byste měli možnost, učili byste se anglický jazyk a další cizí
   jazyk?

   Ano / ne *
   Pokud ano, jaký:……………………………………



   Děkuji za vyplnění 


                                                                          50
             Appendix C

                                           QUESTIONNAIRE

Date: …………………

Age: ……………………

Gender: female / male * (*delete as appropriate)
Grade: ………………...

Degree of hearing loss: mild / moderate / moderately severe /severe / profound *




      1)     How many years have you been learning English language? ...............

             Where have you been learning English language and how many years?:
             In the kindergarten: ………………………….
             In the primary school: ……………………….
             In the secondary school: …………………….
             In hobby group: ……………………………..
             Privately: ……………………………………
             With your parents: …………………………..
             Self study: …………………………………..
             Others: ………………………………………

        2) Do you like English language?
           Greatly/ Rather yes/ I do not mind/ Rather not/ Hate it *



        3) Would you learn English language, if it was not the compulsory subject?
             Yes/No *


        4) Have you ever used English language outside of the classroom? (e.g.
             travelling, internet, films).
            Yes/No *
            If yes: Where: ………………………………………….
                   When: …………………………………………….
                   How did you feel? .................................................




                                                                                         51
5) Do you think that the knowledge of English language is important?
   Yes/No *



6) Would you prefer to learn only English language connected to your study
   subject? (e.g. vocabulary, technical papers).
   Only technical language/ technical and general language/ only general
   language *



7) Do you think, you will use the knowledge of English language in the
   future?
   Yes/No *
   If yes, where: In your work: ………………………………..
                 During travelling: …………………………...
                 In communication with foreigners: …………
                 Internet: …………………………………….
                 Others: ………………………………………




8) If you had a possibility, would you choose another foreign language than
   English?
   Yes/No *
   If yes, which one: ……………………………………


9) If you had a possibility, would you learn English language and other
   foreign language?
   Yes/No*
   If yes, which one: ……………………………………




                                                                           52
             Appendix D

             Tab. 2 place and the length of students experience with EFL

        Kindergarten   Primary   Secondary   Hobby   Privately   With      Self    Others
                       school    school      group               parents   study
P1      0              0         1           0       0           0         0       0
P2      0              0         1           0       0           0         1       0
P3      0              0         1           0       0           0         0       0
P4      0              6         1           0       0           0         0       0
P5      0              1         1           1       0           0         0       0
P6      0              1         2           0       0           0         0       0
P7      0              8         2           0       2           0         0       0
P8      0              0         5           1       0           0         0       0
P9      0              0         2           0       0           0         0       0
P10     0              7         4           0       0           0         0       0
P11     0              6         4           0       0           0         0       0
P12     0              0         2           0       0           0         0       0
P13     0              1         3           0       0           0         0       0
P14     0              6         4           0       0           0         0       0
P15     0              3         3           0       0           0         0       0
P16     0              2         3           0       0           0         0       0
P17     0              4         3           0       0           0         0       0
P18     0              3         3           0       0           0         0       0
P19     0              2         2           0       0           0         0       0
P1+19   0              50        47          2       2           0         1       0
P1= the first participant




                                                                                       53
      Appendix E

      Table-The use of English outside the classroom

       Where                         When                 Feeling

P1     internet                      3 years ago          strange


P2     internet


P8     In Brno                                            good


P11    internet                                           normal


       personal                                           interesting


P13    travelling                    All the time         fantastic


       Chatting with friends


P14    Abroad during holiday         Every year           Strange, nervousness


P15    In France                     three       months   Horrible – ashamed –I am not good
                                     ago                  at English
P16    Travelling, internet, movie                        Feeling       better   while   using
       etc.                                               dictionaries (internet or books)
P18    travelling                    Last year            Normal


P19    travelling                    Two years ago        Normal




                                                                                             54
      Appendix F

      Table-The situations of the use of English in the future


       job          travelling    Communication     internet   Others
                                  with foreigners
P1     yes          yes           no                yes        no
P2     no           yes           yes               yes        no
P3     yes          yes           yes               yes        no
P4     no           no            yes               yes        no
P5     no           yes           yes               yes        yes
P6     yes          yes           yes               no         no
P7     yes          yes           no                yes        no
P8     yes          yes           no                yes        no
P9     yes          no            no                no         no
P11    no           yes           yes               yes        no
P13    yes          yes           yes               yes        no
P14    yes          yes           yes               yes        no
P15    yes          yes           yes               yes        no
P16    yes          yes           yes               yes        yes
P17    yes          yes           no                no         no
P18    yes          yes           yes               no         no
P19    yes          yes           no                no         no




                                                                        55

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:6/28/2012
language:
pages:55