Hearing parents as sign language learners: describing and evaluating the ASL skills of parents learning ASL with their deaf children

Figures & data

Table 1. Demographic information.

	Overall (N = 55)
Child's age (years)
Mean (SD)	5.45 (5.80)
Median [Min, Max]	3.75 [0.667, 32.0]
Gender
Female	25 (45.5%)
Male	27 (49.1%)
Missing	3 (5.5%)
Race
More than one	1 (1.8%)
Native American/Alaskan	1 (1.8%)
White	47 (85.5%)
Missing	6 (10.9%)
Ethnicity
Hispanic or Latino	6 (10.9%)
Not Hispanic or Latino	45 (81.8%)
Missing	4 (7.3%)
Region
Midwest	13 (23.6%)
Northeast	6 (10.9%)
Southeast	12 (21.8%)
Southwest	6 (10.9%)
West	15 (27.3%)
Other	2 (3.6%)
Missing	1 (1.8%)
Parental education
Doctorate	2 (3.6%)
Masters	16 (29.1%)
College degree	18 (32.7%)
Some college	13 (23.6%)
High school degree	1 (1.8%)
No high school degree	1 (1.8%)
Missing	4 (7.3%)
Born deaf/hard of hearing
No	12 (21.8%)
Yes	43 (78.2%)
Additional disability
No	41 (74.5%)
Yes	14 (25.5%)
Parent length learning ASL (years)
Mean (SD)	4.42 (5.34)
Median [Min, Max]	2.88 [0.250, 34.0]
Missing	5 (9.1%)

Figure 1. ASL Comprehension test (ASL-CT) Scores.

Note: This figure shows the mean and distribution of ASL-CT scores in the current sample, alongside hearing ASL student group means of the ASL-CT norming study (Hauser et al. 2016), and another study of ASL L2 learners (Hall and Reidies 2021).

Figure 2. Expressive language sample: Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) Scores.

Bar graph showing the distribution of CEFR level scores on the Video retelling prompt.

Figure 3. Expressive language sample: CEFR scores across four rubrics in video retelling prompt.

Four bar graphs show the distribution of CEFR levels on four rubrics: Overall production, Vocabulary, Grammar, Fluency.

Figure 4. Correlation between ASL-CT and CEFR Score.

A scatterplot shows a positive correlation between Video retelling overall score (1-5) on the x-axis and ASL-CT Score (%) (20-80) on the y-axis.

Figure 5. Second expressive language sample: common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) Scores (n = 20).

A bar graph shows the distribution of CEFR levels on the Family Narrative prompt.

Figure 6. Expressive language sample: CEFR scores across four rubrics in family narrative prompt (n = 20).

Four rubrics show the distribution of CEFR scores on the family narrative prompt for four rubrics: Overall Production, Vocabulary, Grammar, and Fluency.

Table 2. Summary of sign type in expressive language sample

Sign category	Mean number of signs (video retelling)	Mean number of signs (family narrative)
Lexical signs	38.6 (14.99)	77.9 (39.99)
Classifiers	10.5 (6.73)	2.15 (2.8)
Finger-spelled words	3.95 (2.95)	4.65 (4.86)
Total signs produced	53.05 (18.61)	84.7 (43.63)

Table 3. Summary of errors in expressive language sample.

Error type	Mean number of errors (video retelling)	Mean number of errors (family narrative)
Phonological errors	4.60 (2.72)	6.40 (4.90)
Lexical errors	1.5 (2.19)	1.25 (1.71)
Total errors	6.10 (3.66)	7.65 (4.99)

Figure 7. Classifier constructions.

Note: These images are reproduced by the authors to maintain participant anonymity. Left panel shows a classifier construction depicting the house and the location of the spaceship relative to the house. Right panel shows a classifier construction depicting the bed and the boy hovering above the bed. Still frames from Klokline Cinema (2019).

Two photos of a woman signing placed above a still frame of an animation image. On the left, the image is of a house and a UFO, and on the left is an image of a boy lying down with bright light entering the window.

Hauser, P. C., R. Paludneviciene, W. Riddle, K. B. Kurz, K. Emmorey, and J. Contreras. 2016. “American Sign Language Comprehension Test: A Tool for Sign Language Researchers.” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 21 (1): 64–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/env051.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hall, M. L., and J. A. Reidies. 2021. “Measuring Receptive ASL Skills in Novice Signers and Nonsigners.” The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 26 (4): 501–510. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enab024

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Klokline Cinema. 2019, Feb 19. “2006 Lifted Official Trailer 1 HD Pixar Animation Studios [Video].” YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = 3937g8vL4fg.

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available at https://osf.io/qjmek/.