Description

This quasi-experimental study is designed to evaluate the effects of the Signing and Integrated Signing Instruction (SISI) framework on teachers' instructional practices and students' development in signing and writing. The study focuses on comparing two groups: an experimental group, which implements the SISI framework, and a control group, which does not.

The experimental group will consist of approximately 10 teachers, each teaching approximately 5 to 7 students. These teachers will receive professional development in the SISI framework and will implement its evidence-based strategies for signing and writing instruction. Schools that participated in the nationwide pre- and post- study during the 2024-2025 academic year will be automatically placed in this group for the 2025-2026 academic year, provided they express interest in continuing their participation.

The control group will also include approximately 10 teachers, each with approximately 5 to 7 students. These teachers will continue with their regular instructional practices without implementing the SISI framework. Schools new to the study in the 2025-2026 academic year will be assigned to this group.

Data will be collected twice: once in the fall of 2025 (pre-test) and again in the spring of 2026 (post-test). All participating students will complete three prompts representing different genres: a personal narrative, an informational report, and a persuasive piece. Their responses, both in signing and in writing, will be analyzed using rubrics adapted from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) standardized writing assessments.

Teachers' application of the SISI framework will be assessed to determine the level of fidelity in the experimental group. It is hypothesized that experimental group teachers will exhibit significantly higher implementation of the framework compared to the minimal use expected in the control group.

The study hypothesizes that students in the experimental group will demonstrate greater language growth in signing and writing compared to students in the control group, whose progress is expected to be minimal. This hypothesis aligns with the expectation that contemporary evidence-based instruction has a stronger impact on language development than traditional methods.

This research seeks to contribute to the growing body of evidence supporting the role of high-quality signing and writing instruction in fostering language development, particularly for deaf students. It also aims to highlight the practical benefits of professional development in evidence-based teaching strategies for teachers.