Relationship of Communication Mode in the Classroom
to Level of Hearing Loss

1992-1993 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth
Center for Assessment and Demographic Studies
Gallaudet University, 1994

A. Total number of deaf and hard of hearing students in 1992-1993 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth with reported hearing loss and communication information: 46,531
B. N with profound loss only (91+db loss or greater) 17,453   (38% of A.)
B2. Number of B. in auditory/oral only classrooms 1,714   (10% of B.)
C. N with severe/profound loss (71 db loss or greater) 25,694   (55% of A.)
C2. Number of auditory/oral only classrooms 3,756   (15% of C.)
D. N with less than severe loss (hard of hearing) 20,837   (45% of A.)
D2. Number of D. in auditory/oral only classrooms 15,453   (74% of D.)

While only 10% of students with profound loss are in auditory/oral only instructional programs; 74% of those with less than severe hearing loss are in such programs.

We estimate survey coverage to be about 70% of population of deaf and hard of hearing students in special education. Thus Ns above can be multiplied by about 1.4 to get a closer estimate of actual numbers. (For example, 1,714 x 1.4=2399.6; or, we estimate that, nationwide, there are approximately 2400 profoundly deaf kids in auditory/oral only instructional programs.

AS93FULL.SSD was analyzed through SAS/ASSIST on GALLUX/UNIX X-Windows; transported via Pathworks to MS-DOS Word Perfect for Windows in document COMBYAUD.W51, created January 5, 1994, and converted to an HTML document. (TEA)

[Last modified: 2011.12.05 16:50:34. by Kevin Cole]

DISCLAIMER: This website contains documents with terms that may be considered by today's reader as outdated and even offensive. For example, the term "hearing impairment" is sometimes used as a category for levels of hearing loss, such as hard of hearing and deaf. Some people now see cultural identification and communication preference as defining characteristics behind terms such as hard of hearing and deaf, and they do not favor terms conveying medical distinctions and loss. Yet we recognize that removing and changing terms may alter the precise meaning of the scientific author. A solution may be found by expanding the scope of future research to include non-medical perspectives.
Valid HTML 5 Valid CSS 3 WAVE (WebAIM) Approved