Teaching Idiomatic Expressions: A Comparison of Two Instructional Methods Robert K. Rittenhouse, Patricia L. Kenyon American Annals of the Deaf, Volume 135, Number 4, October 1990, pp. 322-326 (Article) Published by Gallaudet University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2012.0530
For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/385365/summary
Access provided by Australian National University (19 Sep 2018 11:27 GMT)
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions A Comparison of Two Instructional Methods Robert K. Rittenhouse and Patricia L. Kenyon Twenty hearing-impaired children enrolled in a state residential school for deaf
students in a large south central U.S. city participated in a study that compared the efficacy of two instructional designs used to teach idiomatic expressions. One of the
methods consisted of videotape presentations followed by classroom discussion, and the other consisted of extended classroom discussions. The children ranged in age from 13 to l6years, with a mean age of 13 years, 11 months. Their reading grade level scores ranged from 1.9 to 6.9, with a mean of 3-5.
Sixteen popular idiomatic expressions were selected and original scripts depicting the expressions were prepared and then performed by members of the local deaf acting club. Each expression was also captioned on the tape. At the conclusion of the filming, the skits were edited into two videotapes consisting of eight idioms each. The children were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the videotape group
or the classroom discussion group. Both groups improved their understanding of the idioms significantly over the course of the study. However, improvement was significantly greater when the children received instruction under the videotape
method. Tests given to the students 8 and 16 weeks after the experiment showed that they had retained the knowledge. Researchers have recently begun to take an interest in the ability of deaf children to understand and use figures of speech—similes, metaphors, and idioms (Fruchter, Wilbur, & Fraser, 1984; Israelite, Schloss, & Smith, 1985; Iran-Nejad, Ortony, & Rittenhouse, 1981; Rittenhouse, Morreau, & Iran-Nejad, 1982; Rittenhouse & Stearns, 1982; Rittenhouse, Kenyon, Leitner, & Baechle,
However, the studies have been exploratory in nature— that is, conducted in clinical settings under highly controlled conditions—rather than naturalistic, which allows environmental variables to be observed over time. And
although they compared instructional materials, they did not attempt to compare instructional methods. This study compares the efficacy of two instructional methods in teaching idiomatic expressions to deaf children. One of the methods was a combination of videotape and
1989). Studies show that the ability of deaf students to grasp figurative language improves significantly when certain instructional materials (e.g., reading texts) are modified.
classroom discussion and the other consisted of extended
classroom discussions. The study was conducted in classroom settings over a period of eight weeks.
Dr. Rittenhouse is professor of special education and director of the education of hearing-impaired children at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Ms. Kenyon recently received her master's degree in educational technology from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. She is a high school teacher of math at the Arkansas School for the Deaf in Little Rock.
322
Instructional Methods
Despite the recent proliferation of studies, information on figurative language and deaf children is still relatively AAD
Vol. 135, No. 4
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
scanty. The lack of information as well as "professional
a statistically significant relationship between one's ability to conserve and metaphorical understanding that was
intuition" has led those who teach the deaf to conclude that
independent of hearing loss or measured intelligence.
the use of figurative language does not often come spontaneously for deaf children, as it does for hearing
Modified Piagetian conservers (those who solve conservation tasks only after modifications have been made to clarify the dimension or principle property) were able to solve novel
children.
Educators disagree, however, as to the best way to teach figurative language to deaf children. Generally, when figurative language appears in reading material for deaf students, the text has been modified, presumably to make it easier for deaf children to understand. Yet, feelings about these "simplified texts" have split educators into two groups: those who favor them and those who are against
metaphorical problems with little difficulty (Rittenhouse & Spiro, 1979; Rittenhouse, 1981; & Rittenhouse, 1987b) . Giorcelli (1982) constructed a "Test of Figurative Language" consisting of 10 specific aspects of figurative language. The hearing subjects performed at significantly higher levels than the deaf subjects on the total test and on 7 of the 10 subtests. The 18-year-old deaf subjects did not
them. Those who favor them suggest that complex
perform as well as the 9-year-old hearing subjects on any
vocabulary and syntax either be reconstructed (Hart, 1979) or be introduced gradually (Quigley & King, 1983). However, standards are seldom used to reconstruct the language (LaSasso, 1978) and the figurative forms (called tropes) are not introduced systematically (Rittenhouse, 1987a). Those against simplified texts (Locke, 1978; Lichtenstein,
of the subtests. Payne (1982), using verb-particle combinations (e.g., "run up a hill"), found that hearing subjects performed better than deaf subjects across all levels of controlled semantic and syntactic structures.
Fruchter et al. (1984) found that the use of pictures to represent idiomatic expressions enhanced figurative understanding in the deaf subjects and that the level of enhancement was a direct function of their reading ability. In addition, a regression analysis showed that when both groups were given related supplementary pictures, the good readers understood idioms significantly better than
1980; Rittenhouse, 1986) argue that the lack of figurative language control in deaf children is not a problem of
linguistic complexity but one of cognitive processing: deaf children can grasp inferred or indirect meaning if the
"referential domain" is made clear. Take, for example, the metaphor "The pharaoh's heart had hardened to stone." If
the teacher makes it clear that she (or he) is the pharaoh and that her sternness of personality from many years of
the poorer readers. Israelite et al. (1985) showed that a game board activity can be used to help deaf children learn to understand idioms. The study also suggested that this activity can help them improve their understanding of novel idiomatic passages. In a more recent study (Rittenhouse et al., 1989) deaf
teaching is analogous to that of the pharaoh who is now very stern with his subjects, deaf students will grasp the
figurative meaning. Deaf children can comprehend figurative language by way of demonstration, practice, and feedback
children were grouped according to the three modes of
(Iran-Nejad et al., 1981; Rittenhouse et al., 1989); it need not present a special problem for them.
demonstrate no ability to use it spontaneously. Recent studies conducted independently of each other seem to
communication that they use (cued speech, manually coded English, and oral-aural) and presented with a series of figurative language stories (Rittenhouse, 1987a). Whereas performance within the groups varied, there were no statistically significant differences in performance among the three deaf groups. And performance differences between the hearing-impaired groups and the hearing control group disappeared when all groups received practice and feedback before the stories were presented.
arrive at a similar consensus. Iran-Nejad et al. (1981) found
All of the above studies were conducted in clinical
that deaf children ranging in age from 9 to 17 years could
settings, under highly controlled conditions. None were conducted in naturalistic settings, where variables are
Past Studies
Teachers may disagree on the best teaching method, but
they generally agree that deaf children can gain control of figurative language, although again, deaf children
grasp the use of metaphors as long as practice and feedback were provided. They concluded that deaf children
observed over time. In addition, these studies did not
probably do not suffer from a special deficiency when it comes to understanding metaphors, although they do likely suffer experientially. Rittenhouse et al. (1982) tested
attempt to manipulate and compare instructional methods; rather, they compared modified textual material.
for the relationship between metaphorical understanding
Media Presentations
and conservation in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Conservation in this sense is the ability to understand that
With the infusion of technology into instructional designs
the principle properties of materials are preserved when the materials change in appearance (e.g., a ball of clay weighing 8 ounces still weighs 8 ounces after being shaped
over the past decade, media presentations have become popular forms of instruction. Nevertheless, reviewers of studies that compare media presentations regularly point out that a majority of the studies found "no statistically
into a "doughnut" or a "hot dog"). The researchers found Vol. 135, No. 4
AAD
323
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
instructors actually use media and conventional methods of
Table 1. Characteristics of the Children
instruction.
In this study comparing the efficacy of using videotape and classroom discussion in teaching idiomatic expressions, care was taken to design a study that would address the
Reading Groups First Video First Lecture
Mean Age
Level
Better Ear HL
13yrs, 10 mos. 14yrs
81dB 79dB
errors enumerated above.
3.5g 3.6g
Method
Subjects Twenty hearing-impaired children enrolled in a state residential school for deaf students in a large south central U.S. city were selected for the study. Nine boys and eleven
Figure 1 : The Sixteen Idiomatic Expressions Experiment 1
Experiment 2
See eye to eye
On the blink
girls, ranging in age from 13 to 16 years with a mean age
Throw in the towel
Looking for a needle
The pits Don't bug me Can't put my finger on it
in a haystack Burning the midnight oil Work my fingers to the
of 13 years, 11 months, participated. They had aided bilateral hearing losses ranging from 4OdB to 95dB in the better ear and a mean aided hearing loss of 8OdB in the better ear. Their reading grade levels ranged from 1.9 to 6.9, with a mean reading grade level of 3-5. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the children. Differences among the groups on age, hearing, and reading ability were not statistically significant.
In one ear and out the other
Call it a day Hit the books
bone
Catch my breath Give my right arm Lift a finger Shake a leg
Procedure
Sixteen popular idiomatic expressions (Figure 1) were selected and a script was prepared for each one (Kenyon & Daly, in press). Members of the local deaf acting club performed one three-minute scene depicting each idiomatic expression on videotape. The skits were filmed "on location" (in proper context). Each idiomatic expression was also captioned on the tape. At the conclusion of the filming, the skits were edited into two tapes consisting of eight idioms each (Kenyon & Daly, 1990). The children were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the videotape group and the lecture group (Experiment 1). Eight idioms were taught in the first 4 weeks, and they were presented to both groups in the same order. The groups were given 20 minutes to complete each of the eight idiom lessons. The videotape group viewed the skit, discussed it, and then completed the practice work sheet. The lecture group was taught the same idioms through extended class discussion and then completed the same practice work sheet. At the end of the 4 weeks, the students switched training methods and the same experimental procedures were followed using a new set of eight idiomatic expressions (Experiment 2). Before studying the 16 idiomatic expressions, all of the subjects were given pretests to obtain baseline data on their knowledge of the expressions. Throughout the study, recognition and recall tests were given to determine the subjects' level of comprehension. The recognition tests evaluated the students' understanding in a multiple choice
significant difference" in learning between the experimental group and the control group (Heinich, Molenda, & Russell, 1989). Does this mean that audio-visual presentations are equivalent to lectures or that films are equivalent to slides and videotapes in their impact on the audience? Critics have pointed out a number of major faults in the media presentation studies, including the very use of the concept "media presentation," that cast doubt on their usefulness for making real-life decisions. In some studies the media presentation was nothing more than a videotaped lecture used to ensure that the contents and the method of
presentation were the same for both groups. In addition, the "conventional instruction" method varied greatly from study to study, consisting of whatever was considered traditional in that setting—a lecture, a lecture plus discussion, or some combination of these and other methods. It is no wonder that the cumulative results of these media
comparison studies are difficult to interpret. As one critic put it, it is like trying to compare "can-of-worms A" with "can-of-worms B" (Heinich et al., 1989).
The more successful the researchers were in controlling the conditions, the less the presentation resembled what is normally considered good practice in using media as a mode of instruction. For example, to control as many extraneous variables as possible, the presentations ordinarily excluded such normal practices as introductory and followup discussions. What was done to meet laboratory standards of purity bore little resemblance to how creative 324
format. On the recall tests, the students were given the
idiom phrase and instructed to write what they thought it AAD
Vol. 135, No. 4
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
meant in their own words. If a student had trouble writing what they wanted to say in English, he or she signed it to the experimenter in American Sign Language out of view of the other students. Students were given post-tests 8
Table 2. Recall Performance of Each Group in Both Experiments, Reported In Percentages and In Statistical Comparisons
weeks after the end of both idiom units to check for
Statistical
retention and then again 8 weeks later.
Comparisons
Performance Scores Sum
Results and Discussion
Groups
Before the results are presented and discussed, some limitations to this study should be addressed. Most significant was the nonrandom way in which subjects were chosen. Because of limited resources, it was necessary to
select a site that was geographically close to the principal investigator but still large enough to yield an adequate pool
Initially 8wks.
16wks.
Video-E1
1.4%
50%
64%
Lecture-E1
2.5%
44%
47%
Video-E2
8.3%
48%
77%
Lecture-E2
11%
38%
37%
49%
70.5%
Sq
DF F
29.95
1
171
.00
30.47
1
189
.00
25.95
1
145
.00
size. All of the children were considered old enough to grasp idioms, given previous research findings on other
Video-Corn 4.9%
figurative language forms such as metaphors (Rittenhouse
Lecture-Corn 7%
et al., 1989; Giorcelli, 1982). However, only those children whose parents returned permission forms were allowed to participate. The children were assigned to one of the two
Note: E1 means Experiment 1 ; E2 means Experiment 2;
41%
P
42%
Com means combined
comparison groups on a random basis.
The study was also limited by the small number of children who were able to participate. The sample size
restricted the use of statistical procedures and reduced
support earlier research indicating that deaf children are able to grasp figurative language (Iran-Nejad et al., 1981; Rittenhouse et al., 1988). The results are of particular importance as textual modifications were not made, interventions were compared (Experiment 1-Experiment 2) and took place over an extended period of time, and the students retained the knowledge acquired during the
statistical power somewhat. Including children from other age groups may have been advisable; however, previous research with younger and older hearing- impaired children indicates that there are floor and ceiling effects when metaphor and simile understanding are tested in these age groups.
A third possible limitation was that the children were somewhat aware of the experiment and communicated
study.
In another component of the study, teachers in the school building where the children attended classes were given a list of the idiomatic expressions and asked to note whenever the children wrote or signed one of the expressions. However, the record-keeping was quite inconsistent, and the results were spurious. During the first 2 weeks of the study, numerous occurrences of idiomatic use were cited, but after the first 2-week period, teachers reported that they became lax in their record keeping. They did say that the children continued to use the idiomatic expressions in their written and signed communication substantially more than usual. No solid conclusion can be drawn from these data regarding the mode of instruction (lecture and videotape). The finding that video presentations enhance comprehension and retention of idioms is encouraging, because it suggests that instruction could be standardized to the benefit of deaf children. Not only could figurative language be "packaged" but also quality control measures
with each other across groups. The investigators predicted that this might happen and decided to allow for intergroup exchanges to occur normally and to quantify them. Finally, teacher styles were not controlled, although a single teacher taught all of the idioms to all of the children, and she was hearing impaired. AU students improved significantly over the course of
the study (p
For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/385365/summary
Access provided by Australian National University (19 Sep 2018 11:27 GMT)
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions A Comparison of Two Instructional Methods Robert K. Rittenhouse and Patricia L. Kenyon Twenty hearing-impaired children enrolled in a state residential school for deaf
students in a large south central U.S. city participated in a study that compared the efficacy of two instructional designs used to teach idiomatic expressions. One of the
methods consisted of videotape presentations followed by classroom discussion, and the other consisted of extended classroom discussions. The children ranged in age from 13 to l6years, with a mean age of 13 years, 11 months. Their reading grade level scores ranged from 1.9 to 6.9, with a mean of 3-5.
Sixteen popular idiomatic expressions were selected and original scripts depicting the expressions were prepared and then performed by members of the local deaf acting club. Each expression was also captioned on the tape. At the conclusion of the filming, the skits were edited into two videotapes consisting of eight idioms each. The children were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the videotape group
or the classroom discussion group. Both groups improved their understanding of the idioms significantly over the course of the study. However, improvement was significantly greater when the children received instruction under the videotape
method. Tests given to the students 8 and 16 weeks after the experiment showed that they had retained the knowledge. Researchers have recently begun to take an interest in the ability of deaf children to understand and use figures of speech—similes, metaphors, and idioms (Fruchter, Wilbur, & Fraser, 1984; Israelite, Schloss, & Smith, 1985; Iran-Nejad, Ortony, & Rittenhouse, 1981; Rittenhouse, Morreau, & Iran-Nejad, 1982; Rittenhouse & Stearns, 1982; Rittenhouse, Kenyon, Leitner, & Baechle,
However, the studies have been exploratory in nature— that is, conducted in clinical settings under highly controlled conditions—rather than naturalistic, which allows environmental variables to be observed over time. And
although they compared instructional materials, they did not attempt to compare instructional methods. This study compares the efficacy of two instructional methods in teaching idiomatic expressions to deaf children. One of the methods was a combination of videotape and
1989). Studies show that the ability of deaf students to grasp figurative language improves significantly when certain instructional materials (e.g., reading texts) are modified.
classroom discussion and the other consisted of extended
classroom discussions. The study was conducted in classroom settings over a period of eight weeks.
Dr. Rittenhouse is professor of special education and director of the education of hearing-impaired children at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Ms. Kenyon recently received her master's degree in educational technology from the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. She is a high school teacher of math at the Arkansas School for the Deaf in Little Rock.
322
Instructional Methods
Despite the recent proliferation of studies, information on figurative language and deaf children is still relatively AAD
Vol. 135, No. 4
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
scanty. The lack of information as well as "professional
a statistically significant relationship between one's ability to conserve and metaphorical understanding that was
intuition" has led those who teach the deaf to conclude that
independent of hearing loss or measured intelligence.
the use of figurative language does not often come spontaneously for deaf children, as it does for hearing
Modified Piagetian conservers (those who solve conservation tasks only after modifications have been made to clarify the dimension or principle property) were able to solve novel
children.
Educators disagree, however, as to the best way to teach figurative language to deaf children. Generally, when figurative language appears in reading material for deaf students, the text has been modified, presumably to make it easier for deaf children to understand. Yet, feelings about these "simplified texts" have split educators into two groups: those who favor them and those who are against
metaphorical problems with little difficulty (Rittenhouse & Spiro, 1979; Rittenhouse, 1981; & Rittenhouse, 1987b) . Giorcelli (1982) constructed a "Test of Figurative Language" consisting of 10 specific aspects of figurative language. The hearing subjects performed at significantly higher levels than the deaf subjects on the total test and on 7 of the 10 subtests. The 18-year-old deaf subjects did not
them. Those who favor them suggest that complex
perform as well as the 9-year-old hearing subjects on any
vocabulary and syntax either be reconstructed (Hart, 1979) or be introduced gradually (Quigley & King, 1983). However, standards are seldom used to reconstruct the language (LaSasso, 1978) and the figurative forms (called tropes) are not introduced systematically (Rittenhouse, 1987a). Those against simplified texts (Locke, 1978; Lichtenstein,
of the subtests. Payne (1982), using verb-particle combinations (e.g., "run up a hill"), found that hearing subjects performed better than deaf subjects across all levels of controlled semantic and syntactic structures.
Fruchter et al. (1984) found that the use of pictures to represent idiomatic expressions enhanced figurative understanding in the deaf subjects and that the level of enhancement was a direct function of their reading ability. In addition, a regression analysis showed that when both groups were given related supplementary pictures, the good readers understood idioms significantly better than
1980; Rittenhouse, 1986) argue that the lack of figurative language control in deaf children is not a problem of
linguistic complexity but one of cognitive processing: deaf children can grasp inferred or indirect meaning if the
"referential domain" is made clear. Take, for example, the metaphor "The pharaoh's heart had hardened to stone." If
the teacher makes it clear that she (or he) is the pharaoh and that her sternness of personality from many years of
the poorer readers. Israelite et al. (1985) showed that a game board activity can be used to help deaf children learn to understand idioms. The study also suggested that this activity can help them improve their understanding of novel idiomatic passages. In a more recent study (Rittenhouse et al., 1989) deaf
teaching is analogous to that of the pharaoh who is now very stern with his subjects, deaf students will grasp the
figurative meaning. Deaf children can comprehend figurative language by way of demonstration, practice, and feedback
children were grouped according to the three modes of
(Iran-Nejad et al., 1981; Rittenhouse et al., 1989); it need not present a special problem for them.
demonstrate no ability to use it spontaneously. Recent studies conducted independently of each other seem to
communication that they use (cued speech, manually coded English, and oral-aural) and presented with a series of figurative language stories (Rittenhouse, 1987a). Whereas performance within the groups varied, there were no statistically significant differences in performance among the three deaf groups. And performance differences between the hearing-impaired groups and the hearing control group disappeared when all groups received practice and feedback before the stories were presented.
arrive at a similar consensus. Iran-Nejad et al. (1981) found
All of the above studies were conducted in clinical
that deaf children ranging in age from 9 to 17 years could
settings, under highly controlled conditions. None were conducted in naturalistic settings, where variables are
Past Studies
Teachers may disagree on the best teaching method, but
they generally agree that deaf children can gain control of figurative language, although again, deaf children
grasp the use of metaphors as long as practice and feedback were provided. They concluded that deaf children
observed over time. In addition, these studies did not
probably do not suffer from a special deficiency when it comes to understanding metaphors, although they do likely suffer experientially. Rittenhouse et al. (1982) tested
attempt to manipulate and compare instructional methods; rather, they compared modified textual material.
for the relationship between metaphorical understanding
Media Presentations
and conservation in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Conservation in this sense is the ability to understand that
With the infusion of technology into instructional designs
the principle properties of materials are preserved when the materials change in appearance (e.g., a ball of clay weighing 8 ounces still weighs 8 ounces after being shaped
over the past decade, media presentations have become popular forms of instruction. Nevertheless, reviewers of studies that compare media presentations regularly point out that a majority of the studies found "no statistically
into a "doughnut" or a "hot dog"). The researchers found Vol. 135, No. 4
AAD
323
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
instructors actually use media and conventional methods of
Table 1. Characteristics of the Children
instruction.
In this study comparing the efficacy of using videotape and classroom discussion in teaching idiomatic expressions, care was taken to design a study that would address the
Reading Groups First Video First Lecture
Mean Age
Level
Better Ear HL
13yrs, 10 mos. 14yrs
81dB 79dB
errors enumerated above.
3.5g 3.6g
Method
Subjects Twenty hearing-impaired children enrolled in a state residential school for deaf students in a large south central U.S. city were selected for the study. Nine boys and eleven
Figure 1 : The Sixteen Idiomatic Expressions Experiment 1
Experiment 2
See eye to eye
On the blink
girls, ranging in age from 13 to 16 years with a mean age
Throw in the towel
Looking for a needle
The pits Don't bug me Can't put my finger on it
in a haystack Burning the midnight oil Work my fingers to the
of 13 years, 11 months, participated. They had aided bilateral hearing losses ranging from 4OdB to 95dB in the better ear and a mean aided hearing loss of 8OdB in the better ear. Their reading grade levels ranged from 1.9 to 6.9, with a mean reading grade level of 3-5. Table 1 shows the characteristics of the children. Differences among the groups on age, hearing, and reading ability were not statistically significant.
In one ear and out the other
Call it a day Hit the books
bone
Catch my breath Give my right arm Lift a finger Shake a leg
Procedure
Sixteen popular idiomatic expressions (Figure 1) were selected and a script was prepared for each one (Kenyon & Daly, in press). Members of the local deaf acting club performed one three-minute scene depicting each idiomatic expression on videotape. The skits were filmed "on location" (in proper context). Each idiomatic expression was also captioned on the tape. At the conclusion of the filming, the skits were edited into two tapes consisting of eight idioms each (Kenyon & Daly, 1990). The children were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the videotape group and the lecture group (Experiment 1). Eight idioms were taught in the first 4 weeks, and they were presented to both groups in the same order. The groups were given 20 minutes to complete each of the eight idiom lessons. The videotape group viewed the skit, discussed it, and then completed the practice work sheet. The lecture group was taught the same idioms through extended class discussion and then completed the same practice work sheet. At the end of the 4 weeks, the students switched training methods and the same experimental procedures were followed using a new set of eight idiomatic expressions (Experiment 2). Before studying the 16 idiomatic expressions, all of the subjects were given pretests to obtain baseline data on their knowledge of the expressions. Throughout the study, recognition and recall tests were given to determine the subjects' level of comprehension. The recognition tests evaluated the students' understanding in a multiple choice
significant difference" in learning between the experimental group and the control group (Heinich, Molenda, & Russell, 1989). Does this mean that audio-visual presentations are equivalent to lectures or that films are equivalent to slides and videotapes in their impact on the audience? Critics have pointed out a number of major faults in the media presentation studies, including the very use of the concept "media presentation," that cast doubt on their usefulness for making real-life decisions. In some studies the media presentation was nothing more than a videotaped lecture used to ensure that the contents and the method of
presentation were the same for both groups. In addition, the "conventional instruction" method varied greatly from study to study, consisting of whatever was considered traditional in that setting—a lecture, a lecture plus discussion, or some combination of these and other methods. It is no wonder that the cumulative results of these media
comparison studies are difficult to interpret. As one critic put it, it is like trying to compare "can-of-worms A" with "can-of-worms B" (Heinich et al., 1989).
The more successful the researchers were in controlling the conditions, the less the presentation resembled what is normally considered good practice in using media as a mode of instruction. For example, to control as many extraneous variables as possible, the presentations ordinarily excluded such normal practices as introductory and followup discussions. What was done to meet laboratory standards of purity bore little resemblance to how creative 324
format. On the recall tests, the students were given the
idiom phrase and instructed to write what they thought it AAD
Vol. 135, No. 4
Teaching Idiomatic Expressions
meant in their own words. If a student had trouble writing what they wanted to say in English, he or she signed it to the experimenter in American Sign Language out of view of the other students. Students were given post-tests 8
Table 2. Recall Performance of Each Group in Both Experiments, Reported In Percentages and In Statistical Comparisons
weeks after the end of both idiom units to check for
Statistical
retention and then again 8 weeks later.
Comparisons
Performance Scores Sum
Results and Discussion
Groups
Before the results are presented and discussed, some limitations to this study should be addressed. Most significant was the nonrandom way in which subjects were chosen. Because of limited resources, it was necessary to
select a site that was geographically close to the principal investigator but still large enough to yield an adequate pool
Initially 8wks.
16wks.
Video-E1
1.4%
50%
64%
Lecture-E1
2.5%
44%
47%
Video-E2
8.3%
48%
77%
Lecture-E2
11%
38%
37%
49%
70.5%
Sq
DF F
29.95
1
171
.00
30.47
1
189
.00
25.95
1
145
.00
size. All of the children were considered old enough to grasp idioms, given previous research findings on other
Video-Corn 4.9%
figurative language forms such as metaphors (Rittenhouse
Lecture-Corn 7%
et al., 1989; Giorcelli, 1982). However, only those children whose parents returned permission forms were allowed to participate. The children were assigned to one of the two
Note: E1 means Experiment 1 ; E2 means Experiment 2;
41%
P
42%
Com means combined
comparison groups on a random basis.
The study was also limited by the small number of children who were able to participate. The sample size
restricted the use of statistical procedures and reduced
support earlier research indicating that deaf children are able to grasp figurative language (Iran-Nejad et al., 1981; Rittenhouse et al., 1988). The results are of particular importance as textual modifications were not made, interventions were compared (Experiment 1-Experiment 2) and took place over an extended period of time, and the students retained the knowledge acquired during the
statistical power somewhat. Including children from other age groups may have been advisable; however, previous research with younger and older hearing- impaired children indicates that there are floor and ceiling effects when metaphor and simile understanding are tested in these age groups.
A third possible limitation was that the children were somewhat aware of the experiment and communicated
study.
In another component of the study, teachers in the school building where the children attended classes were given a list of the idiomatic expressions and asked to note whenever the children wrote or signed one of the expressions. However, the record-keeping was quite inconsistent, and the results were spurious. During the first 2 weeks of the study, numerous occurrences of idiomatic use were cited, but after the first 2-week period, teachers reported that they became lax in their record keeping. They did say that the children continued to use the idiomatic expressions in their written and signed communication substantially more than usual. No solid conclusion can be drawn from these data regarding the mode of instruction (lecture and videotape). The finding that video presentations enhance comprehension and retention of idioms is encouraging, because it suggests that instruction could be standardized to the benefit of deaf children. Not only could figurative language be "packaged" but also quality control measures
with each other across groups. The investigators predicted that this might happen and decided to allow for intergroup exchanges to occur normally and to quantify them. Finally, teacher styles were not controlled, although a single teacher taught all of the idioms to all of the children, and she was hearing impaired. AU students improved significantly over the course of
the study (p
