Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired - batod

This is a translation of main parts of the Swedish report on goalfulfillment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired.It has been carried out with thanks to Interverbum translation company,Rachel O’Neill at University of Edinburgh, Paul Simson Batod andKarin Angerby former international coordinator and head teacher,Sweden.To give our international readers a short introduction to the SwedishSchool system we have expanded the first part of the report and attachedfive presentation/information chapters produced at the NationalAgency of Education. We recommend new readers to start with thoseinformation parts. They give a short introduction and work as a frameof the report.For information about questionnaires we kindly refer to the SwedishversionFor more information about the Swedish school system and the Sign-Bilingual programme we recommend further contact with the officialagencies presented below.Ola HendarAuthorThis is a report within Specialskolemyndigheten (SPM).SPM provided education for deaf and hard of hearing pupils that, to as great an extentas possible, emulated compulsory schools. SPM also provided education for deaf andhard of hearing pupils with learning disabilities and pupils who were deafblind adaptedto their needs. SPM contained six special schools. On the 1 july 2008, the functionsof SPM passed on to the National Agency for Special Needs Education and Schools(Specialpedagogiska skolmyndigheten, SPSM).© Author and Specialskolemyndigheten.A presentation of a commission in accordance to budget document, executed 2007.Project manager: Ola Hendar, ÖstervångsskolanPublished: 2008-05 (English version: 2009-05)Text layout: Sofia ÅkerbergFront design: Plan 2, SundsvallOrder number: 00133 (English version: 00195)ISBN (pdf versions): 978-91-28-00133-5 (English version: 978-91-28-00195-3)The report can be dowloaded as a pdf document from the website of the The NationalAgency for Special Needs Education and Schools: www.spsm.seGoal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

”Deaf and hearingimpaired pupils havedifferent needs anddifferent goals in school.They have differentprerequisites and receivedifferent types of supportbut many still do notachieve the knowledgegoals.”Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table of ContentsTables and diagramsAbbreviations and terms78AppendicesI. Curriculum and Syllabuses 11IntroductionBackground 13The instruction and project aim 14Consultation partners 14Hearing impaired and deaf pupils 15Types of schools 16Special schools 17Compulsory school – Schools for the hearing impaired 19Compulsory school – Individually placed pupils 19Compulsory school for pupils with learning disabilities 20Governing documents 20Curriculum 20Syllabuses 21Timetables 21Assessment and grading 22Evaluation of education 22Who achieves the goals? 23Goal fulfilment of hearing impaired and deaf pupils in school 23Values of the school 24Method and implementationMethod 26Implementation 26Model for implementation 27Basis for grade comparison 31Basis for comparison of questionnaire results 32ResultsTypes of schools 34Hearing loss and deafness 34Deaf and hearing impaired with additional disabilities 34Grades at group level 36Subject grades 41Action Plan 48Participation 50About schools 53Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table of Contents, contd.Concluding analysisThe National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf… 55Degree of hearing loss and deafness 55Proportion of pupils with additional disabilities 56Proportion of pupils born in other countries 56Application of exception from goals while grading, due to disability 57Pupils who change type of school 57Conditions for teaching 57The National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf… 59Sign language 59Governing documents 59Premises and environment 60Transition between schools 60Cooperation with other players 60Disabilities in school 60Inclusion 60Basic competency 61Need for further evaluation 61LiteratureUnpublished sources 62Published sources 62Appendice I1II. Compulsory School 68Appendice IIIIII. Assessment and grading 69Appendice IVIV. Special school for the deaf and hearing impaired 70Appendice VV. Compulsory school for children with intellectual disabilities 71Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Tables and diagramsTable 1. Types of school examined under the project 17Table 2. Comparison of compulsory and special school’s timetables. 21Table 3. Collection from hearing centres. 27Table 4. Final grades year 9 (year 10 special school) years 2002-2006. 29Table 5. Basis for results from parent questionnaire. 30Table 6. Basis for results from school questionnaire. 31Table 7. Distribution of responses to the questionnaires. 32Table 8. Four criteria for division into different levels of hearing loss. 35Table 9. Proportion (%) of pupils qualifying for upper secondary school… 38Table 10. The proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades…in Swedish. 40Table 11. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades…in Swedish. 40Table 12. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades…in Swedish. 40Table 13. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades…in English. 41Table 14. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades…in English 42Table 15. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades…in English. 42Table 16. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades…in mathematics. 43Table 17. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades…in mathematics. 43Table 18. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades…in mathematics. 43Table 19. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded…in sign language/sign language for the hearing 45Table 20. Proportion (%) of boys awarded…in sign language/sign language for the hearing. 45Table 21. Proportion (%) of girls awarded…in sign language/sign language for the hearing. 45Table 22. Proportion (%) of pupils who, according to the teachers, have an action plan… 46Table 23. Proportion (%) of action plans for pupils in the younger and older school years… 46Table 24. General recommendations regarding adaptation requirements for deaf… 47Table 25. Proportion (%) in respect of importance for choice of school in relation to pupil’s hearing. 49Table 26. Proportion (%) in respect of importance for choice of school, per type of school. 50Table 27. Number of pupils born 91-99 who, according to the parents, have changed… 51Diagram 1. Occurrence of deaf and hearing impaired pupils with hearing aid and… 30Diagram 2. Parent estimation of hearing loss, in total. N=1610 35Diagram 3. Parent estimation of hearing loss, per type of school. N=1610 36Diagram 4. Number of grades on which the pupil’s merit rating is based. N=1275 36Diagram 5. Merit ratings for the deaf and hearing impaired in different types of schools. N=1275 37Diagram 6. Merit ratings for the deaf and hearing impaired in different types of schools… 37Diagram 7. Merit rating for hearing impaired pupils born in Sweden and… 38Diagram 8. Proportion (%) of teachers who say that the premises are acoustically adapted… 47Diagram 9. Proportion (%) of teachers and parents who think that school provides… 51Diagram 10. Proportion (%) of teachers and parents who think that the school develops… 52Diagram 11. Proportion (%) of teachers who say they will make use of the possibility… 52Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Abbreviations and terms 1SPMSVSITThe National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (Specialskolemyndigheten)Birgittasolan, Kristinaskolan, Manillaskolan, Vänerskolan, Östervångsskolan and ÅsbackaskolanThe National Agency for Education (Skolverket)The Swedish Institute for Special Needs Education (Specialpedagogiska institutet)Schools for the hearing impaired Solander School, Park School, Alviks School, Nya Bro School, KannebäcksSchool, Söder School, Silvia School, Elinebergs School and Nya Stenkula School-In the presentation of grades, the six schools for the hearing impaired that hadschool-leavers in 2002-2006 are included-The questionnaire survey includes pupils from all nine schools for the hearingimpaired that in 2007 taught hearing-impaired/deaf pupils (born 1991-1999)Established on 1 July 2008The National Agency for Special Needs Education and SchoolsTaking over previous functions of• the National Agency for Special Educational Support – SISUS• the Swedish Institute for Special Needs Education – SIT• the National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing – SPMwww.spsm.seThe Swedish National Agency for Education is the central administrative authority for the Swedish public schoolsystem for children, young people and adults, as well as for preschool activities and child care for school children.The Agency also has responsibility for coordinating national initiatives for pupils with disabilities, environmentalissues and issues relating to pupils who have just arrived in Sweden.www.skolverket.seThe Swedish School inspectorywww.skolinspektionen.se1This is an expanded introduction with more explanations and information compared to the Swedish version.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

DeafHearing impaireddBSSLBilingualHaving sign language as their first languageHaving an average hearing loss of >30dBDecibelSwedish Sign Language (In the following text, ”sign language” is equal to Swedish SignLanguage)Sign-BilingualGradesGVGMVGEUMPassPass with distinctionPass with special distinctionGoals not attainedAverage merit rating Total merit rating of the 16 best grades, where G is equivalent to 10 credits, VG 15credits and MVG 20 credits. Maximum rating is thus 320 credits. The average meritrating is calculated for pupils who have been awarded grades in at least one subject.The target groupPupils with a hearing loss who have need for hearing aids, cochlear implants or signlanguage.-In the presentation of grades, the six schools for the hearing impaired that had schoolleaversin 2002-2006 are included-The questionnaire survey includes pupils from all nine schools for the hearing impairedthat in 2007 taught hearing-impaired/deaf pupils (born 1991-1999)Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

The Swedish Compulsory SchoolCompulsorySchoolSyllabusesNo of Schoolleavers appr/year(Normal hearingappr 100 000/year)Most commonlevel of hearinglossMainstreamed Ordinary Appr 180/year Mild andModerate hearingimpairmentSchools for hearingImpairedSpecial SchoolCompulsoryschool for pupilswith learningdisabilitySami schoolOrdinary Appr 40/year Moderate andsevere hearingimpairmentSign-BilingualAdapted syllabusesKnowledgeAdapted syllabusesSami language andculture adaptedsyllabusesAppr 60/yearSchools for pupilswith severe andprofound learningdisabilitiesSchool for theSami populationwith their ownschool boardSevere andprofound hearingimpairmentAll levels ofhearing lossLocal authoritiesare organizers ofthese schools.Local authoritiesare organizers ofthese schools.State is organizerof Special schoolsSami board isorganizer of SamiSchoolLevel of hearing lossLevel of hearing lossDeaf (Profound)Can’t hear spoken language with hearing equipment within adistance of 1 metreHard of hearing (Severe) Have difficulties hearing spoken language within a distance of 1metreModerate hearing impairment Can hear spoken language within a distance of 1 metre usinghearing equipmentMild hearing impairment Can hear spoken language within a distance of 1 metre withouthearing equipment10 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

AppendicesIIIIIIIVVCurriculum and Syllabuses (see below)Compulsory School (at the end)Assessment and grading (at the end)Special schools (at the end)Compulsory school for pupils withlearning disabilities/for children withintellectual disabilities (at the end)I. Curriculum and Syllabuses (Fromwww.skolverket.se)The basic regulations for the compulsoryschool are set out in the Education Act(1985:1100) and the Compulsory SchoolOrdinance (1994:1194). The Government andParliament through the curriculum lay downthe fundamental values that are to permeate theschool’s activities and the goals and guidelinesthat are to be applied. Apart from theseregulations governing the activity of the school,there are also the syllabuses. These are bindingregulations containing the requirements the stateimposes on education in different subjects.The introductory text to the syllabus covers theaim of the subject and its role in education,and makes clear how the subject contributes tofulfilling the goals of the curriculum, as well asthe reasons for studying the subject in order tofulfil different societal and civic needs.Goals to aim for express the direction the subjectshould take in terms of developing pupils’knowledge. They clarify the quality of knowledgewhich is essential in the subject. These goals arethe main basis for planning teaching and donot set any limits to the pupils’ acquisition ofknowledge.The section on the structure and nature of thesubject deals with the core of the subject andspecific aspects, as well as essential perspectives,which can provide the basis for teaching in thesubject. Since the subjects are different, they aredescribed in different ways.Goals to attain define the minimum knowledgeto be attained by all pupils in the fifth and ninthyear of school. The goals thus set out a basic levelof knowledge required in the subject from boththese time perspectives. Goals to attain in theninth year of school are the basis for assessingwhether a pupil should receive the ”Pass” grade.The majority of pupils will advance further andshould, of course, also advance further in theirlearning.The syllabuses are designed to make clear whatall pupils should learn, at the same time as theyprovide great scope for teachers and pupilsto choose their own materials and workingmethods. The syllabuses do not lay down waysof working, organisation or methods. Onthe other hand, they lay down the qualitativeknowledge which teaching should developand thus provide a framework within whichthe choice of materials and methods are to belocally determined. At each school and in eachclass, the teacher must interpret the nationalsyllabuses and together with the pupils planand evaluate teaching on the basis of the pupil’spreconditions, experiences, interests and needs.Common to all subjects in the compulsoryschool is that they should impart pleasure inbeing creative and a desire to continue learning.In their education pupils should develop theability to draw conclusions and generalise, aswell as explain and be able to provide the reasonsfor their thinking and their conclusions. Basedon their own experiences and questions, pupilscan develop good judgement and get a feeling ofwhat is important.Both the curriculum and the syllabuses shouldserve as the foundation for planning teaching.Fundamental values such as people’s inviolability,the freedom and integrity of the individual,the equal value of all people, equality betweenwomen and men, and solidarity with the weakand vulnerable, should not only permeateall teaching in each subject, but should alsoinfluence the organisation and co-ordinationGoal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired11

of teaching in different subjects, as well as thechoice of working methods. The goals in thecurriculum lay down the orientation of theteaching and the guidelines set out the principleson how the work is to be carried out.The following sections deal with the syllabusesin alphabetical order. The subjects of biology,physics and chemistry are presented under theheading science studies and the subjects ofgeography, history, religion and civics underthe heading social studies. The common textsfor science studies and social studies, and thesyllabuses for individual subjects in each of thesegroupings together set out the national task ofeducation in these subjects.The division into subjects is a practical way oforganising the contents of the education, butthe aim is not, however, to create boundariesbetween them. Co-operation across subjectsis necessary in order to make possible the allround,meaningful development of knowledge inaccordance with the fundamental values of thecurriculum, its goals and guidelines. (Skolverket2008-12-15)12 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

IntroductionBackground”Special schools are for children who, due todeafness or impaired hearing, cannot attendcompulsory school or the equivalent section ofschool for the mentally disabled” (The SwedishEducation Act, chapter 1, section 6.) 6§).The state is the principal organizer of theseschools, through the National Agency for SpecialSchools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing(SPM). The Swedish Institute for Special NeedsEducation (SIT) is a national agency for thecoordination of government support relating tospecial needs issues, with principal responsibilityfor the special needs which result from disability.The support is intended for school organisers andstaff in all types of schools. The National Agencyfor Education is the national administrativeagency for the public school system and itspecifies goals, provides information, inspectsschools and has overall responsibility forimplementing disability policy within thissystem.In its annual reports the SPM states that theproportion of pupils from special schoolsqualifying to apply for the national uppersecondary programmes is low in comparisonwith other school (SPM 2007). In thegovernment’s official report on the status ofsign language, SOU 2006:54, it is pointed outthat no analysis has been made of the reason forso many pupils leaving special school withoutcomplete grades. The commissioner of thereport writes that the reason for this may be thatthe bilingual environment at school does notcompensate sufficiently for the fact that mostchildren are born into families in which there isno knowledge of sign language from the start.He also points out that there is a structuraldifference between the way special schools andother schools are governed.In its assessment of special school in 1997, theNational Agency for Education raised severalquestions regarding the target group, methodsof working and organisation (Skolverket 1997).In 1999, the Swedish National Associationfor Deaf, Hearing Impaired and LanguageImpaired Children (DHB) drew the attentionof the National Agency for Education to thefact that pupils at special schools did not achievethe goals to the extent that could be expected.This resulted in the Agency giving ÖrebroUniversity the task of investigating this issue in2000 (Bagga-Gupta 2002). The resulting reportindicated the need for research into everydaycommunication and also into teaching. Thereport also states that the proportion of pupilsfrom special school who did not qualify for thenational programmes at upper secondary in1998/99 and 1999/90 was about 60%.The SPM wrote in its annual report for 2006that one reason contributing to the smallproportion of pupils achieving the goals atspecial school may be that many pupils startthere in the later years of school, when theyneed particularly great support. Silvia School,one of the schools for the hearing impaired, alsoclaims that this is one of the reasons for themreporting low grade averages (Skolverket 2004c;Hörselskadades riksförbund 2007).The proportion of pupils with learningdisabilities and entitled to a place at compulsoryschool for pupils with severe learning disabilitiesbut who choose not to study in accordance withthat school’s syllabus may be higher in specialschool than in other compulsory schools. TheSPM, in its latest annual report, therefore calledfor an analysis of comparable groups (SPM2007). The Association of Hard of HearingPeople (HRF) also states in its latest annualreport that many hearing impaired pupils donot achieve the goals in school and that theproportion of hearing impaired people whostudy at university and institutes of highereducation is low in comparison with the rest ofthe population (Handikappförbunden... 2006;HRF 2007).Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired13

The SPM has in the report “Pupils requiringspecial support…” charted the presence at specialschool of pupils who require a considerableamount of support (Hendar 2006). About 40%of pupils at special school were estimated to havesuch a degree of difficulties at school that theyrequired special support (Hendar 2006). In turn,the National Agency for Education states in aprogress report (Skoverket 2004b) that about athird of pupils at SPM’s regional special schoolshave disabilities in addition to their deafness.Other sources state that as many as 40-60% ofhearing impaired children may have additionaldifficulties, which affect the child’s development(Picard 2002;Konradsson & Järvholm 2004).This report presents goal fulfillment for pupilsat special school in comparison with deaf andhearing impaired pupils in other types of schoolsand with children with normal hearing. Withthe support of national and international studies,the SPM concludes the report with an analysisand with proposals for measures to achieve bettergoal fulfilment; these measures can benefit alldeaf and hearing impaired pupils, not just thoseattending special schools.During the course of this evaluation project,the Ministry of Education and Research hasconducted a number of surveys within this field.The evaluation project has been able to take intoaccount the following surveys:• Assignment regarding review of the timetablefor special school etc. [Uppdrag angåendeöversyn av timplanen för specialskolan m.m.](U2007/4930/S)• Review of the goals and follow-up systemsetc. at compulsory school [Översyn avgrundskolans mål- och uppföljningssystemm.m.] (Utredningen... 2007)• Special state schools – better conditions andclearer division of responsibility [Statligaspecialskolor – bättre förutsättningar ochtydligare ansvarsfördelning] (U2006/9245/S)• Directive to change the authority structurein the school system [Uppdrag att förändramyndighetsstrukturen inom skolväsendet](Skolmyndighetsutredningen 2007)The instruction and project aimThe National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing shall, in consultation with theNational Agency for Education, analyse and report any differences in goal fulfilment between pupils at specialschool and pupils who are deaf or hearing impaired but who attend another type of school (Regleringsbrev2006).Consultation partnersThe project was carried out by the SPM. TheSPM’s steering group consisted of Greger Bååth,Signild Salander and Bengt Danielsson. Theadministrator was Ola Hendar.The following people were members of theworking group formed between the NationalAgency for Education, the SIT and the SPM:• Claes-Göran Aggebo (the National Agencyfor Education’s department for educationalinspection)• Madelene Dahlborg (the NationalAgency for Education’s unit for governingdocuments)• Staffan Engström (the National Agencyfor Education’s department for educationalissues)• Mikael Henningsson (the National Agencyfor Education’s unit for educational statistics)• Eva Andåker The Swedish Institute forSpecial Needs Education (SIT)• Ola Hendar (SPM).14 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

The National Agency for Education has playedan important part in this evaluation project. TheSIT, through its work on support in issues ofspecial needs education, has been invited to, andhas participated in, the working group.During the evaluation project, the SPM has alsobeen in contact with and has collected opinionsregarding planning and models from the SwedishAssociation of Local Authorities and Regions(SKL), the National Board of Health and Welfareand the Swedish Data Inspection Board. TWhen defining and assuring the target group,cooperation has taken place with Radi Jönsson,consultant, Sahlgrenska University Hospital,Gothenburg, and Jan Grenner, consultant, LundUniversity Hospital.There has also been cooperation with schoolheads with regard to collection of gradesfrom six of the seven schools for the hearingimpaired. The schools for the hearing impairedparticipating in the grade analysis wereKannebäcks School, Alviks School, Söder School,Silvia School, Solander School and Park School.Nya Bro School in Stockholm chose not toparticipate.When drawing up the questionnaires,reference has been made to experience fromprevious Swedish studies in the field. On thebasis of these contacts, opinions have beencollected from the Institute for Special NeedsEducation, the University of Stockholm, andthe Teacher Training Programme at MalmöUniversity. Several parents and teachers have alsocontributed their views on the questionnaires.Statistics Sweden, on behalf of the SPM,performed the task of sending out questionnairesand compiling data and grades.User organizations for Deaf, Hard of hearingpeople and parents were contacted andinformed, and ideas were gathered from severalof them.Oddvar Hjulstadt, Oslo University, generouslyinterpreted certain results and contributedvaluable reference data. Magnus Järvholm,consultant at the Ear, Nose and Throat Clinic atVäxjö Central Hospital, has been a great help inassessing hearing data.Hearing impaired and deaf pupilsEach year about 1‐4 children per thousandare born with hearing impairments thatrequire habilitation (Van Naarden, Decouflé& Caldwell 1999; Andersson 2002; NCHAM2003; Parving, Hauch & Christensen 2003;Statens beredning… 2004 Statens beredning…2006). Habilitation requirements refer here tosome form of technical assistive hearing device(hearing aids and cochlear implants) or signlanguage tuition (Statens beredning… 2006).The degree of hearing loss a child must have inorder to be deemed to require habilitation variesbetween countries and within countries. If theagreed hearing loss, measured in dB, is low,the size of the group increases, whereas if theloss is high, the number of children decreases(NCHAM 2003). The type, degree and reasonfor the hearing loss can vary considerably withinthe group (Van Naarden, Decouflé & Caldwell1999; Parving, Hauch & Christensen 2003,Konradsson & Järvholm 2004). If a certainnumber of children are born with a hearingloss that requires habilitation, this number isestimated to have doubled by the time they startschool (Fortnum, Stacey & Summerfield 2006).There are pupils at school who have similar typesof hearing loss but who have different types ofassistive devices. For this reason, children withthe same type of hearing loss can be in need ofcompletely different types of support at school.Moreover, children, parents and schools can allexperience and perceive hearing loss in differentways. This contributes to the variation in thesupply and demand of support in school.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired15

In addition to the variation in type, degree andcause of hearing loss, there are also differences asregards choice of technical auditory equipmentand communication.In this report we use the term “habilitationrequirements” to refer to all hearing impairedand deaf pupils who use hearing aids or cochlearimplants as well as those who use sign language.The schooling alternatives for hearing impairedand deaf pupils who want an adapted teachingenvironment are limited. Parents are expectedto make independent choices on the basis ofhearing loss, communication, assistive hearingdevices, adapted premises, distance to schooland, not least, what the child itself wants. 2Habilitation units go hand-in-hand with thefamilies during the years when the children aregrowing up and they play a very active part inrecommendations regarding choice of school.According to the Association of Hard of HearingPeople (HRF), more than two-thirds of allhearing impaired and deaf pupils attend ordinaryclasses or a small class for the hearing impaired.The remaining third either attend special schoolor schools for hearing impaired (HRF 2007).The degree of the child’s hearing loss is of crucialimportance regarding choice of school.There is more than one user organization inSweden representing parents and children.Among them there has been different viewstowards sign language and assistive hearingdevices, especially cochlear implants. This hasalso affected teaching. However, these divisionsare reducing and being replaced by more openattitudes, which are of benefit to everyone.(Willstedt Svensson 1999; Anmyr & Lundin2006).Even though views regarding communicationhave changed, they still divide the hearingimpaired, their parents, and professionals. Thereis a habilitation goal, that as many people aspossible should be able to hear and speak, andconsiderable efforts are being made in theseareas. To recommend sign language at the sametime can thus, for some, seem contradictory.The user organisations, on the other hand, agreein principle on the need for sign language forthe hearing impaired and deaf. What dividesthem is the assessment of when, where and howmuch the hearing impaired and deaf pupils andtheir parents need to learn. Similarly, there isdisagreement as to how much sign languagethere should be in the school environment.Types of schoolsThis project includes a comparison of specialschool with other types of school.We have chosen to compare special schools withother compulsory schools and with compulsoryschools for pupils with learning disabilities (seetable 1). Compulsory schools also includesindependent schools. Compulsory schools havedifferent ways of structuring their teaching forthe deaf and hearing impaired.We compare pupils at special schools with pupilsin schools for hearing impaired and those atmainstreamed schools were hearing impairedpupils attend regulary classes with hearing pupils.In mainstreamed schools the hearing impairedchild may be the only one in the class or theremay be groups of hearing impaired pupils.2In Sweden it is culturally normal and common for parents to take in account the will of their children in daily life choices.When choosing school it is common that the wishes of the child makes the final decision.16 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table 1. Types of school examined under the project.Special schoolCompulsory schoolLocal schools and Independent schoolsa) Schools for the hearing impairedb) Small classes for the hearing impairedc) Individually placedCompulsory schoolfor pupils withlearning disabilitiesThe schools for the hearing impaired sometimesonly admit pupils from their own municipality,but certain schools also admit pupils from othermunicipalities. SISresources (Special initiatives inschool) help to stimulate this activity.Sami schools are not included in the comparisonsince there are very few hearing impaired ordeaf pupils who attend this type of school.(See abbreviation for more information aboutSamischool).Special schoolsSpecial schools are a type of school for deafand hearing impaired pupils who, due to theirhearing losses, cannot attend compulsoryschool. Special schools have years 1‐10 and areregulated by the Education Act, the SpecialSchool Ordinance, the Lpo 94 curriculum andthe national syllabuses. To as great an extentas possible, special schools should emulatecompulsory schools, while, with their bilingualenvironment, they should be adapted tothe needs of their pupils (Skolverket 2004b;Hermanson & Dravins 2007). The syllabuses forthe subjects Sign Language, Swedish, English,Modern Languages and Movement and dramaare adapted to this particular type of school. Thetimetable is also adapted.The number of deaf and hearing impaired pupilsattending special school, compared to those whochoose other types of schools, varies when seenfrom a longer perspective. During the 1960s ,following political decisions and technologicaldevelopments in the area of hearing, manypupils left institutions/special schools and wereintegrated into ordinary schools; as a result thenumber of pupils went down from 507 to 339in 10 years (Lundahl & Odin 1974). Fromthe early 1980s to the mid 1990s the numberof pupils increased at special schools for thedeaf and hearing impaired when sign languagewas recognized as a language of instruction in1981. Although after 2000 the number fellagain (Skolverket 2004b). The number of pupilsattending special school depends on the natureof educational policy, development in hearingtechnology, the birth rate and the attitudes ofparents and others – habilitation and healthcaresectors – to this type of school.So to a greater extent than in other parts of theeducation system, the number of deaf childrenattending special schools is dependent on thegoverning documents of the school, as well asthe views of pupils, parents, user organizationsand hearing habilitation professionals. This typeof school should, in other words, satisfy severaldifferent, and sometimes contradictory, needs.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired17

Attitudes to sign language, long regarded asonly being of benefit to deaf pupils at specialschool, have also changed. For many years, theAssociation of Hard of Hearing People has madeactive efforts for a greater number of hearingimpaired pupils to be able to learn sign languageat school (HRF 2007). There are now more deafand hearing impaired pupils than ever beforewho either are taught in sign language or wholearn it at school, as a bilingual environment isregarded as being a support for hearing impairedas well as deaf pupils.In Sweden, it remains the case that only pupilswho attend special schools are able to study inaccordance with the special school’s course goals.Deaf pupils who choose to attend other types ofschools study in accordance with the compulsoryschool’s goal documents.Many deaf and hearing impaired people haveadditional disabilities and the proportion ofdeaf and hearing impaired at compulsoryschools for pupils with learning disabilities istherefore high. Special schools also offers pupilswho cannot achieve the goals on account oflearning disabilities the opportunity to study inaccordance with the compulsory school syllabusfor pupils with learning disabilities. Pupils withthese needs are thus able to attend a bilingualschool.The idea behind the state-run special school hasbeen that it would be easier for the pupils, in anadapted school environment, to achieve the goalsthat pupils with normal hearing strive towards inordinary compulsory school. As the proportionof pupils with severe hearing loss and deafness issmall in relation to pupils with normal hearing,the distance to the nearest special school hasbeen considerable for many pupils. To facilitateschooling for these pupils, special schools havebeen designed as boarding schools.The concept of special school as a school typehas been much debated throughout time.The issues that have been discussed the mosthave related to the teaching of languages (signlanguage – spoken language), type of boarding,teaching models (whole-word based learning –sound based learning), attitudes towardsspoken language and hearing (quiet, signingenvironment – speech and signing – speechonly), and type of organisation (state – countycouncil/regional – local authorities) (Pärson1997).The pupil base consists at present of pupilswho primarily want a bilingual (sign language)environment for their teaching. Special schoolsalso admit pupils who are deaf-blind.From the end of the 1960s until the present,the emphasis has been on strengthening thepossibility for deaf and severely hearing impairedpupils to attend a school where the teaching isconducted in such a way that knowledge is madeaccessible. The reform in Lgr 80 (Curriculumfor Compulsory School 1980), which allowedteaching in sign language, contributed to this.The governing documents have progressedfrom, in general, not providing anyone with thepossibility of further education, to the presentsituation where everyone is expected to achievethe goals. Thanks to this process, an increasingnumber of deaf and severely hearing impairedpupils have progressed much further in theeducation system.One result of this development is that Sweden,in an international perspective, can demonstratevery high figures regarding the proportion ofdeaf students attending university and otherinstitutes of higher education. Even if, accordingto the Association of Hard of Hearing People,the proportion of hearing impaired students issmaller than could be expected, the educationalpossibilities and the trend in Sweden is positivefor those who are deaf and hearing impaired. It isno longer a question of whether it is possible fordeaf and severely hearing impaired students tostudy at university but rather of how school canbest prepare the pupils for further studies.At the same time, increasing attention is beinggiven to those pupils in all types of schools who,in spite of their school being adapted, do notachieve the knowledge goals.18 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Compulsory school – Schools for thehearing impairedThere are at present nine schools for thehearing impaired in Sweden: Solander School,Park School, Alviks School, Nya Bro School,Kannebäcks School, Söder School, Silvia School,Elinebergs School and Nya Stenkula School.These schools using speaking and listeningwith hearing impaired pupils are run by localauthorities, with the exception of Nya Browhich is an independent school.The targetgroup of these schools consists of pupils whoneed acoustically adapted premises and assistivetechnical devices for their schooling.The teaching language in schools for the hearingimpaired is spoken Swedish. The number ofpupils in each teaching group is smaller thanfor groups of children with normal hearing.All of the schools offer lessons in Swedish SignLanguage. In addition, Kannebäcks Schooland Nya Bro School offer a signing teachingenvironment for a group of deaf pupils.Kannebäcks School also has a small group ofdeaf pupils who study in accordance with thecourse goals of compulsory school for pupils withlearning disabilities.In this assessment, we have no informationabout the way in which Nya Bro School dealswith the awarding of grades for its deaf pupils, ofwhich there were 5 in the school year 2006/2007according to the Association of Hard of HearingPeople. Kannebäcks School awards grades insign language and movement and drama inaccordance with the special school syllabus(Skolverket 2005b). The school is partly bilingualbut, under present regulations, it cannot baseits work on the adapted goals that apply withinspecial schools.Compulsory school – Individually placedpupilsThis group refers to hearing impaired and deafpupils who attend schools other than specialschool and schools for hearing impaired. It isa relatively heterogeneous group, consisting ofpupils with very varying degrees of hearing lossand varying types of hearing devices. What thepupils do have in common is that, in spite oftheir hearing loss or deafness, they do not attendschools for hearing impaired nor special schools.The group is thus composed of pupils whoattend, either alone or possibly together with oneother hearing impaired pupil, a class for pupilswith normal hearing. Pupils in classes for thehearing impaired, where hearing impaired pupilshave a class of their own at an regular school,are also included in this group. Schools for thehearing impaired are permanent, while classes forhearing impaired pupils may not be long term inany one school.According to the Association of Hard of HearingPeople, this is a large group of between 4,000and 5,000 pupils. In our assessment we havelimited ourselves to only focusing on those pupilswho have assistive hearing devices or who aredeaf. According to the Association, this involvesaround 2,000 pupils. This group of pupils has,over the years, been given different designations:‘individually integrated’, ‘individually placed’and ‘included’ are terms that occur in theliterature (Powers 2002). These terms haveprimarily referred to hearing impaired pupilssince the number of deaf pupils in the group issmall, but an increasing proportion is composedof children with cochlear implants who, withoutthese devices, would probably have attendedspecial schools. Pending a term that can betterdescribe the group, in this report we use theexpression ‘individually placed pupils’.Another difference between this group andpupils at special schools, apart from what hasalready been mentioned, is the opportunityto study sign language (an explanation of thedifference between the subject ‘sign language’within special schools and ‘signing for peoplewith normal hearing’ within compulsory schoolsis provided further on in the section ‘Governingdocuments’.)Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired19

Compulsory school for pupils withlearning disabilities‘School for the mentally disabled exists forchildren and young persons who cannot attendcompulsory comprehensive and upper secondaryschool because of mental disability’ (SFS1985:1100 Chap. 1. 5§). Approximately 1.5-2%of each year’s cohort is composed of childrenwith learning disabilities. The proportion ofdeaf and hearing impaired children at schoolsfor pupils with learning disabilities is large.The need for functioning communication andcomprehensibility in order to promote pupilparticipation is of course as important in thistype of school as in other types. Compulsoryschool for pupils with learning disabilitieshas adapted knowledge goals and works inaccordance with the Lpo 94 curriculum.The basis of the goals according to Lpo 94 is theintellectual disorder that a learning disabilityinvolves. In this evaluation project we have notdifferentiated between compulsory school forpupils with learning disabilities and trainingschool (for pupils with profound learningdisabilities).Compulsory schools for pupils with learningdisabilities are a separate type of school, for years1‐9 and with the possibility to continue for atenth year.Admission into school for pupils with learningdisabilities is regulated by the Education Act.Governing documentsFundamental provision for all types of schoolsare contained in the Education Act (SFS1985:1100) and in the respective schoolordinances (SFS 1994:1194; SFS 1995:206; SFS1995:401).The report on the status of sign language pointsto the governing documents as a possible reasonfor the pupils at special school not achievingall the goals. According to current regulations,special schools should emulate compulsoryschools at the same time as adapting theirenvironment to enable the pupil group to achievemore goals at school than they would if theyhad not attended special school. The governingdocuments fill a very important function asregards these two aspects. If too much attentionis given to emulating compulsory schools, thereis a risk that less focus will be placed on specialadaptations. Special schools today are faced withthe challenge of being adapted schools which aimto prepare as many pupils as possible for furthereducation.CurriculumThe Lpo 94 Curriculum lays down the structurewithin the following eight teaching areas, and theminimum goals that pupils must have achievedby the time they leave school:•••••••Norms and values – KnowledgePupils’ responsibilities and influenceSchool and homeTransition and cooperationSchool and the surrounding worldAssessment and gradesResponsibility of the school headsThe goals for compulsory school also apply tospecial schools. The curriculum is clear in thatrespect. It is only in the ”Knowledge” area thatspecial schools, Sami schools and compulsoryschools for pupils with learning disabilities differfrom compulsory school.20 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

SyllabusesSyllabuses are binding directives that expressthe demands that the government places on theeducation system. The syllabuses contain ’goalsto aim for’, ’goals to attain’ and informationabout the subject’s character but not, however,about ways of working, organisation or method.They do, nevertheless, lay down the knowledgequalities that the teaching should develop. Thesyllabuses for children with severe learningdisabilities also applies to pupils at special schoolswho are deaf and hearing impaired and who, inaddition, have severe learning disabilities.(Seeabbreviations for more information). There areexceptions in the case of the Sign Language,where the pupils follow the syllabus for specialschool.TimetablesThe timetables specify the minimum guaranteedtime for which the pupils are entitled to receiveteacher-led tuition in different subjects. The’timetable trial’, during which schools were givengreater freedom to control the tuition time inschool themselves, has been prolonged and stillapplies in certain parts of the country.Special school is for years 1‐10 and, during thattime, 7,845 hours are devoted to the differentsubjects. However, the pupils do not study formore hours than compulsory school pupils inall corresponding subjects, but the situationcan vary in the case of, for instance, Swedishand mathematics (see table 2). As the tableshows, pupils at special school study fewerhours of Swedish in 10 years than compulsoryschool pupils do in 9 years. The situation is thereverse in mathematics (see the section ”Subjectgrades”).SubjectTable 2. Comparison of compulsory and special school’s timetables.No. of hoursin 9 years ofcompulsoryschoolNo. of hoursin 10 years ofspecial schoolArt 230 300Home and consumer science 118 140Physical education and health 500 600Music 230 –Movement and Drama – 260Crafts 330 380Swedish 1490 1360Sign language – 710English 480 480Mathematics 900 1040Geography, History, Religion and885 905Civics (combined)Biology, Physics, Chemistry,800 830Technology (combined)Language choice 320 320Pupil’s choice 382 520Total guaranteed teaching time 6665 7845Of which school’s choice 600 600Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired21

In 2007, the SPM reported to the Ministryof Education and Research on an assignmentregarding the harmonisation of the timetables ofthe different types of schools.Assessment and gradingFinal assessment in school is carried out by theawarding of grades. To be awarded a Pass (G),the pupil must have at least have fulfilled theofficial ’goals to attain’ – targets in syllabuses –that are specified in each type of school syllabus.With regard to the grades Pass with distinction(VG) and Pass with special distinction (MVG),there are national criteria that the NationalAgency for Education, by order of thegovernment, has adopted in special directivesthat are applicable to all types of schools.However, if there are special reasons, the teachermay, when grading, disregard certain goals thatthe pupil should have achieved or certain criteriathat should have been fulfilled (SFS 1994:1194;SFS 1995:401). ’Special reasons’ refer to learningdisabilities or other personal conditions that arenot of a temporary nature and that constitute adirect obstacle to the pupil being able to achievea certain goal or fulfil a certain criterion.The fundamental principles of assessmentcarried out at the schools are relatively similarin the different types of schools. The specialschools’ assessment is, however, made on thebasis of criteria that in certain respects are a littledifferent since the teaching is conducted from abilingual perspective and involves significantlymore visual elements than compulsory school.Sign language as a subject for pupils with normalhearing in compulsory schools has the characterof a modern language (foreign language) ormother tongue (for pupils with deaf/hearingimpaired parents), while sign language in specialschools has a key role as the first language.In special schools, sign language is also oftenthe language of tuition for subjects, parallel towritten and/or spoken Swedish.So sign language has a different role in differentinstitutions.Evaluation of educationThe goal of school is, through teaching, whichimparts knowledge and necessary skills, toprepare the pupils both for working life and forthe continuation of lifelong learning (Rådet…2005). Broadly speaking, there are three waysof evaluating this goal: (1) by checking that thepupil has learnt the skills that the school teaches,(2) by seeing whether the pupil, in adulthood,has succeeded in putting the skills into practice,or (3) by evaluating whether the school reallydoes teach the intended skills. These threemethods show different aspects of the quality ofthe school. In the following assessment, in spiteof considerable differences between the types ofschools, we have chosen to describe the results ofthe merit ratings, i.e. an evaluation of what thepupils have learned. We also attempt to describehow parents and teachers regard the school’spotential towards achieving the specified goals.This survey does thus not refer to how the pupilgroup, on the basis of what they have learnedat special/compulsory school, manages at uppersecondary or to how they apply their knowledgein adulthood and in the labour market.In recent years, Swedish schools have increasedtheir efforts to get as many pupils as possibleto achieve the knowledge goals. Not achievinga Pass in mathematics, Swedish and Englishmeans that a pupil does not qualify to study onnational programmes at upper secondary school.This knowledge-oriented perspective of school22 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

also affects special schools, which only fiftyyears ago were significantly more practically andvocationally oriented.The goals in school, in addition to those that areknowledge-related, also include goals that arebased on society’s values. The goals cover ‘goalsto aim for’, which constitute the foundation ofthe system, and ‘goals to attain´, which formthe basis for evaluation and assessment. Onemeans for achieving the goals is deemed to bethe working environment. Special schools andschools for the hearing impaired have adaptedtheir environment to a specific target group.By way of facilitation and compensation, theworking environment enables the pupils tobenefit from the teaching and to achieve thegoals (Rådet… 2003). Other hearing impairedpupils should also have access, to varying degrees,to different types of adaptation for the purposeof making the tuition accessible. Schools mustadapt their methods so that pupils requiringsupport can, to as great an extent as possible,achieve the goals.According to the Education Act, school mustrest on a democratic foundation and everyonewho works in school must promote (the pupils’)respect for every individual’s intrinsic value.Schools thus have a considerable responsibility,to ensure that the system lives up to thedemocratic goals of society.In this report, we present an evaluation of goalfulfilment in accordance with the syllabuses,through the collection of grades. We also assessparts of the curriculum’s general goals and valuesby way of questionnaires to parents and teachers.Who achieves the goals?The National Agency for Education reports thatthere is a spread of merit ratings both betweenand within schools (Skolverket 2005a; 2005dc).Differences between schools are normally lessthan differences within schools. Accordingto the National Agency for Education, gradedifferences between schools can be explainedby factors other than the quality of teaching. Itis well known that socioeconomic background,gender and ethnic background all affect pupils’merit ratings. Thus when one of these categoriesbecomes too large at one school, the effecton that school’s total grade average increases(Skolverket 2005c).There are, however, other factors than thosementioned above that affect a school’s, andindividual pupils’, grade averages. The NationalAudit reported that in 2006, only 57% of allpupils with disabilities achieved the goals inSwedish, English and mathematics (Larfors &Casson 2006). International studies and reportsare equally clear as regards the possibilitiesfor pupils with learning disabilities to achieveknowledge goals in school. For instance, studiesshow that children who have had meningitis,one of several causes of severe hearing lossand deafness, encounter an increased risk ofdifficulties occurring at school (Grimwood et al.1995). A link is also reported between low birthweight and future school-related difficulties. Thereading and numerical development of childrenwith hearing impairment is also significantlyaffected if they have additional disabilities(Resnick et al. 1999; Nafstad et al. 2002).It is thus also probable that schools with a largeproportion of pupils who have difficulties inaddition to hearing impairment and deafnesshave a lower grade average.Goal fulfilment of hearing impaired anddeaf pupils in schoolIn the 1960s it was common for deaf childrennot to receive adequate language habilitationduring their pre-school years. In her 1993thesis, Heiling indicated that early habilitationefforts involving sign language and early readingthrough spontaneous, play-related situations atpre-school in the company of adults increasedthe possibility for deaf pupils to achieve moreknowledge goals. She has also subsequentlypointed out that the removal of the early learningof reading with adult support could be onereason for the deterioration of deaf and hearingGoal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired23

impaired pupils’ reading levels in the latter partof the 1990s (Heiling 1993; Heiling XXXX –will soon be published).Petersson et al. (2000) show that readingcomprehension among deaf pupils does not havea normal distribution. One group of pupils hasrelatively normal reading development whileone large group has particular difficulty withreading comprehension. What is otherwisemost common is that deaf pupils’ readingdevelopment is presented as a mean value for thewhole group, but this is not a correct picture asthe group does not have a normal distribution(O’Donaghue 1999).It was apparent from a Swedish report from2003 regarding the reading development ofhearing impaired pupils that the pupils’ readingcomprehension was normal in the early schoolyears but that their difficulties increased theolder they became (Hendar 2004).The California School for the Deaf reportedthat a very large proportion of the deaf pupilsin 2007 had difficulties in achieving the goals inmathematics and that hearing impaired pupilshad the same type of difficulties (California…2007a; 2007b).The University of Edinburgh reports identicalfindings from a collection of study resultsof young deaf and hearing impaired Scots(Thoutenhoofd 2006). It is clear that, whenexpectations and knowledge requirementsincrease, deaf pupils as a group get left furtherand further behind (Grimes & Cameron 2005).The University of Birmingham reports in anarticle on the difficulties involved when analysingpupil results from deaf schools in England. Toomany variables that co-vary have a negativeeffect on the results. The factors that the authorhighlights are degree of hearing loss, cause ofhearing loss, use of hearing aids, intelligence,additional disabilities, age, gender, use of signlanguage, parents’ hearing loss, mother tongue,ethnic origin, school placement, teachinglanguage, early habilitation and the family’ssocioeconomic status (Powers 2003). Anotherstudy shows that if parents have a high level ofeducation, this has a positive influence on theschool results of the hearing impaired and deafpupils (Spencer, Gantz & Knutson 2004).There have always been deaf and hearingimpaired pupils who have not achieved theschool goals; on this point, the conclusionsof international and national studies overtime are in agreement (Antia, Kreimeyer &Johnson 2005; Karchmer & Mitchell 2003; Roe2007). This is the case, in other words, if theknowledge goals are expected to be the same fordeaf and hearing impaired pupils as for pupilswith normal hearing and if the goals are to beachieved within the same time by these differentpupil groups. Factors such as these make theyears at school rather complicated for the hearingimpaired and the deaf (Nordén, Tvingstedt& Äng 1990; Bergkvist 2001; Karchmer &Mitchell 2003; Roe 2007; Lindahl & Nilsson2007).For this reason, special schools have workedperiodically with value-based goals rather thanknowledge goals for the group of pupils who,in spite of adapted teaching, are still unable toachieve the knowledge goals. This has been donewithin the framework for what is now called a‘reduced course of studies’. Special schools weremade into a ten-year programme to compensatefor the fact that all pupils did not have access tosign language and Swedish from an early age.An extra year after the three first years at schoolbecame the tenth year. The SPM now putsforward the tenth year on the basis of a bilingualperspective as well. Sign language as a subject,which does not exist in compulsory schools,takes up a total of 710 hours at special school,which is approximately equivalent to one schoolyear.Values of the schoolValues of the school are formulated in thecurriculum for compulsory schools, Lpo 94.These are ‘goals to aim for’ and they must beevident in all the work of the school. Schoolmust be equal, promote learning and be24 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

characterised by attention to the individual.School should prepare the pupils for adult life.It is not sufficient for schools only to providetuition in the different elements; they must alsowork and be organised in accordance with thevalues. This applies to all types of schools.School should promote social development sothat the pupils learn to solve tasks, independentlyas well as in groups.In addition, school should support andencourage pupils to continue with their studies,in other words: prepare them for highereducation.The National Agency for Education conductsassessments of how well schools succeed in theirwork with the values. The Agency’s NationalAssessment of Compulsory School – NU – is thebasis for the evaluation we are presenting here.When we have compared types of schools, wehave used the Disability Federation’s definitionof accessibility: physical, communicative,informative and psychosocial accessibility.Participation is an important factor for pupilswho need a greater degree of visual teaching onaccount of hearing loss or deafness. Participationis important not only in teaching situations butalso in free activities and social, friendmakingsituations. The idea of ‘participation’, contraryto ‘accessibility’, puts the focus on the interplaybetween the individual and the group. Whenthe pupil is in an environment in which heor she can communicate comfortably witheveryone at the school irrespective of the methodof communication (spoken language – signlanguage), the possibilities for participationincrease. This is basically a question of theschool’s interaction with the pupil.Sometimes, however, there can be considerableshortcomings in this interaction. In one survey,it was reported that only one third of aninterviewed group of teachers worked activelyto enable hearing impaired and deaf pupils toparticipate in classroom discussions. ‘Actively’was deemed here to mean that the teachers,without being asked, should ensure that thepupil microphone was passed round in theclassroom during discussions (Bergkvist 2001).Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired25

Method and implementationMethodPrevious studies and assessments directed at deafand hearing impaired pupils and performedoutside the scope of the county councils haveeither depended on patients giving the hearingclinics their consent or on reaching the targetgroup through other channels, such as peripateticteachers of the deaf or association registers. All ofthese models involve methodological difficulties.One has to go back to the 1970s to findreports where attempts were made to makenational comparisons. At the end of the 1970s,Hammarstedt and Amcoff made a nationalcompilation of deaf and hearing impaired pupilsthat was based on hearing data and choice ofschool (Hammarstedt & Amcoff 1979).As a basis for analysis and conclusions, aquestionnaire evaluation has been made ofthe school situation of pupils born between1991‐1999, and a questionnaire evaluation ofhow parents of pupils born in the same periodregard their children’s school and schooling.We have compared pupils at special school withhearing impaired and deaf pupils at compulsoryschool and at schools for pupils with learningdisabilities. We have compared the types ofschool as regards grades, governing documents,course goals, accessibility, participation, teaching,and also based on some of the value areascontained in the Curriculum for CompulsorySchool – Lpo 94.In order to compare pupils at special school withdeaf and hearing impaired pupils at all othertypes of schools, a total population assessmenthas been made of final grades for pupils bornbetween 1986-1990.ImplementationPerformance of the assignment was commencedby the SPM in cooperation with the NationalAgency for Education in the spring of 2006.These agencies together drew up a frameworkfor the evaluation project and a definition of thetarget group.At the start of the project in 2006, no agencyhad a coordinated national register of thepupils in the target group, with details of theirwhereabouts. Regional hearing centres onlyhad details of children and young people withhearing loss within their respective geographicarea. A national register – The Register ofHearing Impaired Children in Växjö – was inthe process of being compiled but in the autumnof 2006 it did not have national coverage(Konradsson & Järvholm 2004).Nor has anyone been able to provide an overallpicture of the goal fulfilment situation for alldeaf and hearing impaired pupils in all types ofschools (HRF 2007; SPM 2007).26 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Model for implementationOne necessary condition for implementing theevaluation project has been the ability to identifythe pupils and young people included in thetarget group and to collect the necessary detailsabout them.Our starting point in this project has been atotal population model since the target group issmall and, as such, susceptible to non-response.We also chose this model since, in recent years,results have been reported that have been basedon major international collections of data inthe field (Gallaudet… 2005; Stacey et al. 2006;Thoutenhoofd 2006; ADPS 2007).By compiling a register of hearing impaired anddeaf pupils, an evaluation could be made, notonly of the types of school(s) as was the initialpurpose, but also of descriptive habilitating dataso that the combination of hearing habilitationand education was made. As already mentioned,special schools have the goal of working inaccordance with the governing documents, butthere are at the same time an increasing numberof more or less habilitating goals that are linkedto choice of school and educational content.The model was based on all hearing centresvoluntarily participating in this assessment andsubmitting to Statistics Sweden (SCB) the civicregistration numbers of all the deaf and hearingimpaired pupils in the age group in questionin Sweden. As instructed by the SPM, SCBtherefore gathered civic registration numbersand sent out questionnaires to parents andschools. The SPM also initiated a campaign bywhich, through notices, information to userorganisations and advertising in user journals andthe daily press, they told the target group aboutthe project.The expected occurrence of hearing loss requiringhabilitation is 0.1% to 0.4% per year cohort,and in our assessment the percentage of civicregistration numbers varied between 0.13% bornin 1986 up to 0.33% born in 1991. As appearsin diagram 1, we have probably succeeded ingathering together a very large proportion of thegroup in question for those born 1988‐1998Regarding the oldest age groups, however, thenumber of civic registration numbers per agegroup is too low to be significant. We judgedthat the reason for this is that older pupils donot have the same kind of contact with theaudiological health care service as they did whenthey were younger; the health service refers to itas ‘deregistered patient data’.The details of the older pupils have sometimesbeen taken over by other units within the sameclinic. For the youngest group, born in 1999, itis not so easy to understand the low number. Apossible explanation could be that the number ofhearing check-ups at the age of 4 has decreasedwhile the screening of new-born children hasbeen introduced and extended (HRF 2007).According to one study, it is possible that about95% of all hearing impairments are discoveredby the age of 8 (Van Naarden, Decouflé &Caldwell 1999). We believe all the same thatthe year cohorts born in 1988-1998 provide arelatively good picture of the occurrence of deafand hearing impaired children. For these elevendifferent age groups, the prevalence was 2.8 perthousand (95% confidence interval 2.7‐3.0).Table 3. Collection from hearing centres.RowNumber1 No. of civic reg. nos. 1986-1999 39852 Of which born 1986-1990 13133 Of which born 1991-1999 2672Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired27

Figure 1. Flow chart of the collection of questionnaires and grades.3985Total number ofparticipants:26721991-1999Year of birth13131986-1990Year of birth1770Number of parentswho participated in theschool questionnaireKannebäcksskolan,Söderskolan,SilviaskolanAlviksskolan,Parkskolan ochSolanderskolan200Number of grades fromSchools for hearingimpaired:911Number of grades2002-2006 :2630Number ofquestionnaire send toparents1770Number ofquestionnaire send tothe schoolsManillaskolan,Kristinaskolan,BirgittaskolanVänerskolan ochÖstervångsskolan306Number of grades fromSpecial schools:801Number of grades fromIndividually placedpupils:1841Number of receivedquestionnaire fromparents1341Number of receivedquestionnaire fromschool teachers28 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Of the 2,672 guardians of pupils born1991‐1999, 66% sent in details to SCB of wheretheir child goes to school (see table 3). Thismeans that more questionnaires were thereaftersent out to parents than to the schools.In the spring of 2007, the SPM, the NationalAgency for Education and the SIT drew upone questionnaire for parents and one for (the)schools, which was answered by the pupils’teacher. The basis for the questions was theNational Agency for Education’s nationalassessment – NU (Skolverket 2004a), SIT’sreport dated 2007 (Coniavitis Gellerstedt2007a) as well as experience from other studies(Bergkvist 2001; Tvingstedt & Preisler 2006).The purpose of the questionnaires was to enableus to understand and analyse the pupils’ goalfulfilment. The Swedish National Association forDeaf, Hearing Impaired and Language ImpairedChildren’s (DHB’s) had recently reported onthe shortcomings in the adaptation of premisesfor deaf and hearing impaired children, so wealso wanted to acquire a basis for analysingthe accessibility of the learning environment(Sjöström 2007).In the autumn of 2007, SCB thus sent out2,630 parent questionnaires and 1,770 schoolquestionnaires (see table 5, row 15, table 6,row 23 and figure 1). Of these, 1,841 parentquestionnaires and 1,341 school questionnaireswere received back. Pupils who had startedupper secondary were included in the responsesreceived. As they were not to be included inthe target group, they have been subtractedTable 4. Final grades year 9 (year 10 special school) years 2002-2006.Row Number Girls Boys4 Special school 306 142 1645 Schools for the200 98 102hearing impaired6 Individually801 407 394placed7* Total 13078 Number of grades with merit rating 0credits, and pupils who have attendedWaldorf school329* Row 7 - row 8** Total 127510 Of Special school 298 140 158which11 Schools for the199 97 102hearing impaired12 Individually778 395 383placed*Row 7 are the grades included in the subject comparison.Row 9 are the grades on which the comparison of types ofschools is based.** The row should be read as a subtraction between row 7 androw 8.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired29

3,503,002,50Prevalence2,001,501,000,500,0019861987198819891990199119921993Year of birth199419951996199719981999Diagram 1. Occurrence of deaf and hearing impaired pupils with hearing aid and cochlear implant fromhearing centres. N=3985Table 5. Basis for results from parent questionnaire.RowNumber13 Population for parent questionnaire (Row 3) 267214 Non-response and over-coverage 4215 No. of questionnaires sent out by SCB 263016 No. who responded 184117 Over-coverage (Upper secondary pupils) 15418 Corrected population (Row 13 – Row 14 – Row 17) 247619 Corrected number of responses (Row 16 - Row 17) 168720 Response frequency 68%from the final result. Of 2,672 civic registrationnumbers, after calculating for non-response andover-application, 2,476 remain (see row 18 intable 5).We had thus received answers and coverage from68% of the parents and 75% of the schools.However, school coverage is in fact only 53% aswe did not have addresses for all of the schools(see table 6).On the basis of national and internationalcomparisons, this can be regarded as being agood result, particularly in respect of the schoolquestionnaire. We asked three different bodies,initially independent of each other, for theirvoluntary participation. This participation hastaken place in a chain in which the result fromthe schools has been dependent on the parents’participation and that, in turn, has depended onthe hearing centres.30 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Basis for grade comparisonAccording to the Association of Hard of HearingPeople, the target group in question consists onaverage of 300 children per year cohort.The collection of data from the hearing centresgave an average of approximately 280 children ineach annual cohort.Statistics Sweden worked on the basis of1,313 civic registration numbers in the groupborn 1986‐1990 and retrieved these pupils’final grades from their registers. This searchresulted in only 911 grades, which can beexplained by the registers not containing anygrades from special school or any details ofassessments from compulsory school for pupilswith learning disabilities. Of 911 grades, 110were from different schools for the hearingimpaired and these were removed with thehelp of Statistics Sweden. A total of 801 gradesremained, from individually placed pupils.Special schools register final grades and, for theyears 2002‐2006, there were 306 final gradesfrom school year 10. A total of 200 gradeswere reported from the schools for the hearingimpaired for the same period.Some pupils – 32 in all – had a merit ratingof 0. These pupils were not included in thecomparison between types of schools. Theywere, however, included in the reporting of theproportion of pupils qualifying for a nationalprogramme and the proportion who achievedthe goals in all subjects.The non-response regarding grades is causedby the absence of merit ratings from Nya BroSchool. According to information from theNational Agency for Education, this involves fivepupils. A certain under-coverage of individualpupils at schools for the hearing impaired canalso occur. The greatest non-response arisesfrom the under-reporting of civic registrationnumbers from the years of birth 1986 and 1987.This means that the number of grades fromindividually placed pupils is on the low side forthe years 2002 and 2003. The under-reportingTable 6. Basis for results from school questionnaire.RowNumber21 Population for school questionnaire (Row 3) 267222 Non-response and overcoverage902*23 No. of1770questionnaires sentout by SCB24 No. who1341responded25 Over-coverage (Upper secondary pupils) 2426 Corrected population (Row 21 – Row 22 – Row 24) 174627 Corrected number of responses (Row 23 - Row 24) 131728 Response75%frequency*** Only 66% of parents sent in details of where their children went to school.Thus the high non-response rate.** If 1,317 responses from the schools are divided by 2,476 (Row 18) the result is 53%.This is probably the correct degree of coverage by the school questionnaire.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired31

Table 7. Distribution of responses to the questionnaires.ParentAntalquestionnairesTotal 1687 % Girls BoysOf which Special school 238 14 124 113Schools for the hearing 211 13 114 97impairedIndividually placed 1090 66 543 547Compulsory school for 121 7 56 65pupils with learningdisabilitiesNon-response 27 837 822SchoolquestionnairesTotal 1317Of which Special school 203 16 102 101Schools for the hearing 133 10 72 61impairedIndividually placed 854 66 419 435Compulsory school for 109 8 44 65pupils with learningdisabilitiesNon-response 18 637 662by the hearing centres has not affected thenumber of grades from special school nor fromthe schools for the hearing impaired.By comparing the number of grades thatStatistics Sweden found on the basis of thepersonal details from the hearing centreswith those we received from the schools forthe hearing impaired and the details that theNational Agency for Education registers in theSIRIS/SALSA database, we can show that underreportingdid occur.Basis for comparison of questionnaireresultsThe parent questionnaires were addressed tothe total population of parents of children andyoung people whose civic registration numbersthe hearing centres had submitted. Apartfrom the over-coverage reported by StatisticsSweden and the over-coverage revealed bythe questionnaire responses (upper secondarypupils), there is also, as mentioned above, acertain under-coverage of the number of civicregistration numbers from the hearing centres.The parent questionnaire was returned by 68%of the parents. The degree of non-response tothe parent questionnaire is slightly greater inrespect of parents of boys with an immigrantbackground and of parents who live in majorcities and larger municipalities. This is, however,only a question of a few per cent difference incomparison with the group that did respond.75% of the pupils’ teachers responded to theschool questionnaire.32 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

As with other questionnaire assessments, weprobably have an internal dropout caused byparents and schools not recognising themselvesin all the questions. We wanted to come incontact with several different types of hearingloss in many different contexts. This resulted ina certain number of specifically asked questionsand the questionnaire’s degree of internal nonresponseto those questions was high. Gatheringschool addresses from the parents involvedan initial non-response of about 30% but theprocedure was necessary as there is no nationalregister combining both disability and school.On the other hand, gathering addresses meantthat we could give the parents information aboutthe assessment at an early stage, thus giving themthe opportunity to decide whether to participate.The result was that we have pupils for whom thedetails come from both the parent and the schoolquestionnaire, pupils for whom the details onlycome from the parent questionnaire and somepupils for whom the details only come from theschool questionnaire.The responses we received were divided by typeof school. We then saw that the parents of pupilsin schools for the hearing impaired respondedto a slightly greater extent than the same pupils’teachers did (see table 7). As regards specialschool and school for pupils with learningdisabilities, the situation was the opposite: moreteachers than parents responded. But if we madea comparison with the population of pupils inschools for the hearing impaired and specialschools, we saw that the degree of response washighest for parents of children in schools for thehearing impaired while it was lowest for thosepupils’ teachers (59 and 37% respectively). Inthe autumn term, 464 pupils were in years 2‐10of special school and 360 pupils in years 2‐9 ofschools for the hearing impaired.According to the Association of Hard of HearingPeople’s statistics, 68% of the pupil group arewhat we call ‘individually placed’, 17% attendspecial school and 12% attend schools for thehearing impaired (HRF 2007). Bearing in mindthat in this report we also account for schoolfor pupils with learning disabilities, and thatthe Association of Hard of Hearing People inits statistics also reports on another group ofpupils who attend mainstreamed schools withan audiotory profile 3 , which constitutes about3%, it can be stated that the distribution in ourunderlying data reflects in general terms thesituation for deaf and hearing impaired pupilsin school. Although, as table 6 shows, we onlyhave a coverage ratio of just over 50% for theschool questionnaire, we have, on the otherhand, a distribution between the types of schoolsthat coincides with the Association of Hard ofHearing People’s statistics.A non-response analysis that the SIT conductedshowed that the difference between thegroups – those that responded and those thatdid not respond – was less than expected. Theconclusion was that the responses received inthe survey could, in spite of everything, beregarded as representative for the population(Coniavitis Gellerstedt 2007b). But there is stilla risk that non-response of the size in the currentstudy may contain systematic errors. It could,for instance, be expected that parents of highersocio-economic status were those who responded(Fortnum, Stacey & Summefield 2006).In our questionnaire, the rate of non-responseby parents and schools can therefore be deemedto be too great to allow any confident statementsto be made about the whole population. It is, onthe other hand, possible to make descriptionsof and comparisons between those who didrespond.The purpose of the questionnaires was to give anin-depth picture of and provide underlying datafor analysis of the results received in the gradecomparison. The numerical collection, in spite ofnon-response, provided sufficient data for this.3Audiotory profile = Schools where they make temporary arrangem,ents for hearing imaired pupils. E.g. Sign Language andcommunication classes, encourage hearing impaired pupilsGoal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired33

ResultsTypes of schoolsSchools in Sweden must be equal. This meansthat special schools must offer education thatis as equivalent as possible to that offered atlocal compulsory schools. All deaf and hearingimpaired pupils must be given the opportunityto attend schools that offer equal education. Inpractice, however, there are differences betweenthe types of school, and we present thesedifferences here.They involve primarily the composition ofthe pupil body, the degree of hearing loss andthe goal documents governing their activities.The schools also differ in the areas of tuitionlanguage, timetable and number of years that thecompulsory period covers. All these factors meanthat making fair comparisons is a challenge.Our assessment shows how the four groups ofhearing impaired and deaf pupils have managedin their respective teaching environments. Thedifferences that we can report on here givean illustration of the conditions for teachingand of the challenges that teachers and schoolmanagement face when planning the tuition.Hearing loss and deafnessAdmission to special schools and schools forhearing impaired is based on the degree ofhearing loss, on communication and on theneed for an adapted environment. Unlike inspecial schools, there are no formal governingdocuments – apart from the general ones – thatregulate the possibility of choosing classes for thehearing impaired.As has already been mentioned, we do not inthis assessment have any hearing-related medicaldetails. To acquire a picture of the pupils’degree of hearing loss, parents and schools wereasked a number of questions about these. Weused four criteria to divide hearing loss intodifferent levels (see table 8), basing this on theWHO’s questions on hearing function, but weadapted them to Swedish conditions (WorldHealth Organisation, WHO 2006). Questionsof function in respect of hearing constitute acontroversial area in which there are variations invalidity. An audiogram shows what the ear picksup but not whether the brain has understood.Questions of function focus instead on thecommunicative side of hearing (Noble 1998;Borg & Bergkvist 2006).Diagram 2 presents the parents’ descriptionof the pupils’ hearing loss. What is apparent isthat deaf pupils are generally only found withinspecial schools. Other hearing impairments arefound in all types of schools. Diagram 3 showsthat most pupils whose parents judge them to bedeaf or severely hearing impaired attend specialschools.Deaf and hearing impaired withadditional disabilitiesPupils at special schools do not all achievethe goals at school. The SPM states in itsannual reports that one reason for this is thatthe proportion of pupils with school-relateddifficulties in addition to deafness or hearingimpairment is greater in special school than inother types of school (SPM 2007). However,there is at present no form of register wheremedical diagnoses can be combined with resultsin school. Nor is the support in Swedish schoolsbased on medical diagnoses. Pupils are to begiven assistance in their school environmentirrespective of diagnosis.The SPM performed a survey in 2005 thepurpose of which was to get an idea of themagnitude of the difficulties that pupils at specialschool had in addition to their hearing loss anddeafness. The result of this survey showed that,on the basis of a classification via the WHO’s34 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

7%14%49%Mild hearing impairedModerate hearing impairedHard of hearing (Severe)Deaf (Profound)30%Diagram 2. Parent estimation of hearing loss, in total. N=1610ICF 4 , approximately 40% of the pupils inthat school year had difficulties additional totheir deafness or hearing impairment (Hendar2006). These difficulties had a significant effecton the teaching and on the pupils’ possibilitiesof achieving the goals. Within municipalcompulsory school too, there are pupil groupsfor whom the learning context is complicated(Asp Onsjö 2006).In our questionnaires, we asked teachers andparents whether their pupils and childrenhad difficulties in addition to their hearingimpairment and deafness. According to theparents, about 40% of the pupils in schools forhearing impaired and special schools had oneor more difficulties in addition to their hearingloss. For other, individually placed pupils atcompulsory schools, the corresponding figurewas about 25%. When we asked the teacherswhether the pupils needed special support otherthan that related to their hearing loss, 60% ofthe teachers in schools for the hearing impairedresponded that the pupils did need that support.Of the teachers at schools for pupils withlearning disabilities, 85% responded that sucha need existed. (Note, however, that the pupilsat these schools, in addition to being deaf andTable 8. Four criteria for division into different levels of hearing loss.How would you as a parent/teacher describe the level of your child’s hearing impairment?1. Mild: Can hear spoken language within a distance of 1 metre without hearing equipment2. Moderate: Can hear spoken language within a distance of 1 metre using hearing equipment3. Hard of hearing (Severe): Have difficulties hearing spoken language within a distance of 1 metre4. Deaf (Profound): Can’t hear spoken language with hearing equipment within a distance of 1 metre4ICF, International classification of Disability, World Health Organization 2006.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired35

100908070Procent60504030Mild hearing impairedModerate hearing impairedHard of hearing (Severe)Deaf (Profound)20100Special schoolSchools forhearingimpairedIndividuallyplacedCompulsoryschool for….Diagram 3. Parent estimation of hearing loss, per type of school. N=1610hearing impaired, also have a learning disability.)As regards other types of schools, the responseswere 44% for special school and 34% forindividually placed pupils.In nearly all types of school, the need for supportwas greatest among boys, except for one schoolfor pupils with learning disabilities, where therewas a majority of girls who needed extra support.Grades at group levelEven if grades in themselves can be anuncertain instrument for describing knowledgeassimilation, they are the only instrument wehave at present apart from the national tests.Thanks to excellent cooperation from thecounty councils hearing centres, the heads ofschools for the hearing impaired and the SPM,Special school School for hearing impaired Individually placed66,569,7Percentage361921,2 20,31716,72,60,56,52,9 49,56,70 1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16Number of gradesDiagram 4. Number of grades on which the pupil’s merit rating is based. N=127536 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

300285250265 265250200150145230190220185 190150230160210175135100105506540750Special schoolSchools for hearingimpairedIndividually placed Compulsory school 2006N= appr 124000Diagram 5. Merit ratings for the deaf and hearing impaired in different types of schools. N=1275we can present grades, (from the leaving classes2002‐2006), from all types of school where thereare deaf and hearing impaired pupils.The leaving certificates and subject grades ofthese pupils are compared with those of pupilsleaving compulsory school in 2006. Schools forpupils with learning disabilities are not includedin the grade comparison.All the box diagrams show the distributionbetween the10th percentile up to the 90thpercentile. The diagram boxes show thedistribution between the 25th and the 75thpercentile. The median value is marked in themiddle of the bar. Thus we do not accountfor the weakest 10% of pupils nor for thestrongest 10%. The definition from the NationalAgency for Education is that the merit ratingis comprised of the sum of the grade values for3002502502752452402702402602252001501002051701102051701102001751002001801351951651151801505060507570200Special.s. girls Special s. boys Schools.f.h.girlsSchools.f.h.boysIndividually p.girlsIndividually p.boysDiagram 6. Merit ratings for the deaf and hearing impaired in different types of schools, by gender. N=1275Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired37

the 16 best grades in a pupil’s leaving certificate(G=10, VG=15 and MVG=20). The possiblemaximum value for each individual pupil is 320credits. The average merit rating is calculated forpupils who have been awarded grades in at leastone subject. Pupils lacking grades in all subjectsand pupils who have attended Rudolf Steinerschool – Waldorf – are not included.Diagram 5 shows that special schools have amedian merit rating value of 145. This shouldbe compared with the schools for the hearingimpaired and the individually placed pupilswhich have a median value of 185 and 190respectively. In 2006 the median value for allother pupils at compulsory school was 210.This shows that, in general, it is difficult fordeaf and hearing impaired pupils to achieve theknowledge goals at school but that the group of300250265225235275240265230200185195195210150160165165140100110851206550500Boys born in SwedenBoys born in anothercountryGirls born in SwedenGirls born in anothercountryDiagram 7. Merit rating for hearing impaired pupils born in Sweden and born in another country, by gender.N=887Table 9. Proportion (%) of pupils qualifying for upper secondary school and pupils not achieving the goals.Proportion (%) of pupils qualifying for upper secondary schoolProportionSpecial school 38Schools for the hearing impaired 65Individually placed 78Compulsory school 2006 90Proportion (%) of pupils not achieving the goals in one, several or all subjectsProportionSpecial school 68Schools for the hearing impaired 44Individually placed 32Compulsory school 2006 2438 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

pupils at special school have lower merit ratingsthan deaf and hearing impaired pupils whoattend other types of school.It is difficult for hearing impaired and deaf pupilsto achieve higher grades irrespective of the typeof school. The difference in comparison withother pupils at compulsory school is significant.It should, however, be noted that many deaf andhearing impaired pupils do succeed in achievinghigh grades at their chosen type of school. Thenumber of grades on which the merit ratingis based – the sum of the pupil’s sixteen bestgrades – differs between the types of school(s).The merit ratings from special schools are basedon a smaller number of grades; the pupils, inother words, have been awarded grades in fewersubjects. Only 56% of the pupils at specialschool have grades in more than 11 subjects.With regard to other hearing impaired and deafpupils the equivalent figure is approximately85% (see diagram 4).If one looks at the difference between boys’and girls’ merit ratings (diagram 6), thedifference between the sexes is greatest in specialschools. Diagram 5, moreover, shows that thedistribution of merit ratings is very wide inspecial schools, particularly for the boys.In the most recent statistics for compulsoryschool as a whole, the National Agency forEducation presents a difference between the sexesin which the average grade value for girls (schoolleaving year 2006) is 218 and the correspondingvalue for boys is 196. This being so, girlsgenerally achieve school goals better than boys.The proportion of hearing impaired and deafpupils who qualify to apply for upper secondaryis smallest within special schools (see table 9).The group comprising hearing impaired anddeaf pupils in compulsory schools also hasa lower proportion of pupils qualifying forthe national programmes. The same patternapplies to the proportion of pupils who didnot achieve the goals in one, several or allsubjects. It is more difficult for pupils bornin other countries to achieve the knowledgegoals in school, and the proportion of pupils atspecial schools with a mother tongue other thanSwedish is high compared to that in compulsoryschools. According to the responses receivedfrom parents, the proportion of pupils bornin another country is greater in schools for thehearing impaired and special schools than it isfor hearing impaired pupils in other compulsoryschools. In the summary of grades in this project,we have only had access to details of countryof birth for individually placed pupils. Indiagram 7 we present grades of 778 individuallyplaced pupils, divided by gender and wherethey were born. The diagram shows that hearingimpaired pupils born in other countries also havedifficulties at school, and this applies to boys inparticular.If the parents’ level of education is considered,this too has significance for the pupils’ meritrating. If the parents’ highest level of educationis compulsory school or equivalent, the medianmerit rating for 778 hearing impaired pupilsis 165 and 175 respectively, depending onwhether the mother’s or the father’s schoolingis taken into account. If we compare this withparents who have a minimum of a 3‐year courseof higher education, the pupils’ median meritratings are then 220 and 230 respectively.To find out whether systematic errors hadoccurred in respect of the merit ratings on thebasis of the previously mentioned underreportingby the audiological health care service, wecompared individually placed pupils’ medianvalues over time with special school and schoolsfor the hearing impaired. Between the yearsof leaving school 02‐03 and 04‐05 and 06, wefound that the merit ratings fell in all threegroups, the most being by 15 points for specialschools. This was during a period when the meritratings of all the other pupils at compulsoryschool increased. This means, in other words,that the individually placed pupils’ merit ratingsfollowed the same trend as those of pupilsin other types of schools in this project and,for this reason, we have concluded that theunderreporting from the audiological health careservice has not affected the merit ratings.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired39

Table 10. The proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction or Pass withspecial distinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in Swedish.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 29,4 19,1 7,7 43,8Schools for the hearing impaired 50,8 27,6 6,0 15,6Individually placed 49,0 32,4 10,8 7,8Compulsory school 2006 42,8 37,2 15,6 4,3Table 11. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction or Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in Swedish.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 27,0 12,6 1,9 58,5Schools for the hearing impaired 58,8 20,1 1,0 19,6Individually placed 57,4 26,1 5,7 10,7Compulsory school 2006 54,9 31,1 8,2 5,8Table 12. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass withspecial distinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in Swedish.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 32,1 26,4 14,3 27,1Schools for the hearing impaired 42,3 35,1 11,3 11,3Individually placed 40,7 38,5 15,7 5,1Compulsory school 2006 30,1 43,5 23,4 2,940 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Subject gradesThe structure we used for presenting grades isthe same as that used by the National Agency forEducation in its annual summaries.As shown in table 9, it is more difficult for deafand hearing impaired pupils to achieve the goalsin comparison with pupils with normal hearing.We have less information, however, aboutpupils’ achievement in individual subjects. Theofficial statistics don’t tell us whether the pupilsattempted a subject and failed, or if they didn’ttake this subject. Just less than 20% of the pupilsat special school have a reduced course of studies.We have no details about reduced courses ofstudies in other types of school.In the following section we present gradesin Swedish, English, mathematics and signlanguage for all pupils. As a comparison, we haveused the National Agency for Education’s annualstatistics from compulsory school. Our groupsof ‘individually placed pupils’ and ‘schools forthe hearing impaired’, which comprise justless than 1% of the total basis for the Agency’sstatistics, are included in our figures as well as inthe underlying data for children in compulsoryschool. Pupils who did not achieve the goals inthe subjects are presented in the tables under thecolumn EUM.SwedishBelow we present grades in the subject ofSwedish. None of the pupils at special schoolstudy Swedish as a second language but, for thepurposes of comparison, ‘Swedish as a secondlanguage’ is presented as a part of ‘Swedish’ forpupils at schools for the hearing impaired andindividually placed pupils. In our presentation,‘Swedish as a second language’ is also part of‘Swedish’ in the case of compulsory school (seetables 10‐12).The situation for Swedish is unique – amongother things, it is one of three subjects that givequalification to progress to upper secondaryschool. Over the years, Swedish has been givena great deal of attention in special schools(Skolöverstyrelsen 1991; Henning 1995;Henning 2003). Above all, attempts have beenmade to develop the subject and the tuition onthe basis of the awareness that most deaf pupils,while growing up, do not acquire the sameexperience of the Swedish language as pupilswith normal hearing. Moreover, many deaf andhearing impaired pupils who come from othercountries have normally not received any activehabilitation while growing up and they thereforecome to school neither with experience of signlanguage nor of written language. Swedish hasthus been regarded periodically as a foreignlanguage. For these pupils sign language isregarded as their first language. The NationalAgency for Education has given an explanationof this in a common syllabus text. 5 As has alreadybeen mentioned, fewer hours of Swedish arestudied at special school than at compulsoryschool.Table 13. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in English.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 29,4 12,6 3,8 54,3Schools for the hearing impaired 40,8 25,0 9,7 24,5Individually placed 46,4 30,6 9,9 13,1Compulsory school 2006 39,5 37,2 17,3 5,95For more information about the common syllabus text, see appendix III.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired41

Table 14. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in EnglishG VG MVG EUMSpecial school 23,4 9,1 2,6 64,9Schools for the hearing impaired 39,6 18,8 7,9 33,7Individually placed 45,4 29 8,1 17,5Compulsory school 2006 43,6 35,2 14,3 6,8Table 15. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass withspecial distinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in English.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 36,0 16,5 5,0 42,4Schools for the hearing impaired 42,1 31,6 11,6 14,7Individually placed 47,3 32,2 11,6 8,9Compulsory school 2006 35,3 39,3 20,4 5The basis for assessment in the grading procedurealso differs between compulsory and specialschools, as the latter take into consideration, intheir goals and grade criteria, the fact that thepupils are hearing impaired and deaf.Common to hearing impaired and deaf pupilsin all types of school is that the group of pupilswho do not achieve the subject goals is relativelylarge, but the proportion is greatest withinspecial schools. It is also the case that fewerdeaf and hearing impaired pupils achieve thehigher grades, irrespective of type of school.The difference between boys and girls is strikingwithin all the different school types.It was apparent from the teacher questionnaireresponses, irrespective of type of school, that20% of the teachers were worried about thepupils’ knowledge development in Swedish. Thecorresponding figure for the parents was 30%.This applied to pupils in years 2‐9/10. It can besupposed that this concern includes those pupilswho risk not achieving the goals and those pupilswho only achieve the lower knowledge goals.A little more than 70% of the teachers, in answerto the question whether the pupil is always oroften taught in teacher-led whole class activities,say that is the case in Swedish, irrespective oftype of school. Teaching as a whole class activityis a common occurrence. Only about 8‐10% ofthe pupils are seldom or never taught in wholeclass activities. It should, however, be pointed outthat a whole class for individually placed pupilsprobably means 20‐30 pupils, while a wholeclass in a school for hearing impaired and specialschool means an average of 4‐8 deaf pupils or5‐15 hearing impaired pupils.42 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table 16. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in mathematics.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 32,1 14,7 4,0 49,2Schools for the hearing impaired 51,3 17,1 7,5 24,1Individually placed 58 21,5 8,1 12,5Compulsory school 2006 52,9 27,7 12,8 6,6Table 17. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in mathematics.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 24,5 15,1 3,1 57,2Schools for the hearing impaired 53,9 16,7 6,9 22,5Individually placed 57,4 22,5 8,1 12Compulsory school 2006 55 26,3 11,7 7Table 18. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in mathematics.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 40,7 14,3 5,0 40,0Schools for the hearing impaired 48,5 17,5 8,2 25,8Individually placed 58,5 20,5 8,1 12,9Compulsory school 2006 50,7 29,1 14 6,2Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired43

EnglishThe goals for the learning English in the differenttypes of schools are relatively similar. As regardsspecial schools, the tuition and the goals haveto be adapted to the pupils’ situation andprerequisite conditions. The syllabus state:In the subject of English in the Specialschool, language learning is influenced bythe fact that for the majority of the pupils,this takes place visually and also by the factthat English is usually the third language.The pupils encounter English mainly throughreading and learning based on the flow oflanguage provided by reading. When learninga language, pupils must use their knowledgeof their first language, sign language, andtheir second language, Swedish. Sign languagecan be used for discussions and explanations.Written Swedish is an aid i.a. for the pupils’understanding of words and expressions.Written English is used when reading,studying texts, interacting in writing andtheir own production of texts. Based on theirindividual conditions, pupils can also developthe ability to use spoken English (Syllabus forEnglish at Special School ).When looking at how the pupils have achievedthe goals in the subject, it can be stated that itis difficult or very difficult for many hearingimpaired and deaf pupils to achieve the goals.Tables 13‐15 show that the proportion ofpupils not achieving the goals in English isgreatest within special schools. At compulsoryschool, there are also many of the hearingimpaired pupils who do not achieve the goalsin that subject. Tables 13‐15 also show that theproportion of pupils who received MVG (Passwith special distinction) in English is low for allhearing impaired and deaf pupils, irrespectiveof type of school. The proportion is lowest,however, within special schools.A quarter of the teachers in our assessmentexpress concern about how the pupils developtheir knowledge of English. The correspondingfigure for parents is 37%.MathematicsIn mathematics, it can be stated that the formof teaching in itself does not explain low grades.Nor can it be said that the lack of concepts insign language fully explains the low grades.Hearing impairment, irrespective of type ofschool, seems to involve poorer possibilities forthe pupil to achieve the goals.Tables 16‐18 show that special schools have ahigher proportion of pupils who did not achievethe goals in mathematics. In the same way, thetables indicate that the proportion of pupilswho received MVG in mathematics is lowest inspecial schools.Just over a fifth of the teachers in our assessmentexpress concern about how the pupilsdevelop their knowledge in mathematics. Thecorresponding figure for the parents is 28%.Communication and reading are of greatimportance for learning mathematics, and theSPM has taken this into account in its proposalfor a review of the special school timetable.Sign languageSign language as a subject is called ‘SignLanguage’ in special schools while, incompulsory school, it is called ‘Sign language forthe hearing’.Sign language was introduced into compulsoryschools as a general language subject in 1995 6but spoken language is still the main language;sign language is only a complement for hearingimpaired pupils. The teaching of sign languageas an optional subject in compulsory schoolsdiffers from the teaching provided at specialschools. Kannebäcks School and Nya Bro Schoolare exceptions as there are pupils there who aretaught primarily in sign language. Sign languageacts there both as a prerequisite for the deafpupils achieving the goals in school and as acomplement for the hearing impaired pupils.6At Special School Sign Language was recognized as a language of instruction in 1981.44 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table 19. Proportion (%) of pupils awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in sign language/sign language for the hearingG VG MVG EUMSpecial school 51,5 20,6 5,8 22,0Schools for the hearing impaired 29,4 38,1 15,7 16,8Individually placed 45,0 30,0 20 5Compulsory school 2006 29,1 34,3 23 13,5Table 20. Proportion (%) of boys awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in sign language/sign language for the hearing.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 51,3 14,1 1,3 33,3Schools for the hearing impaired 34,7 34,7 9,9 20,8Individually placedCompulsory school 2006 33,3 30,2 16,7 19,8Table 21. Proportion (%) of girls awarded the grades Pass, Pass with distinction and Pass with specialdistinction, and pupils who did not achieve the goals, EUM, in sign language/sign language for the hearing.G VG MVG EUMSpecial school 51,9 28,1 11,1 8,9Schools for the hearing impaired 24,0 41,7 21,9 12,5Individually placedCompulsory school 2006 26,1 37,3 27,6 9Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired45

Table 22. Proportion (%) of pupils who, according to the teachers, have an action plan in thesubjects Swedish, English, mathematics and sign language.Sv Eng Ma TspSpecial school 30 24 32 18Schools for the hearing impaired 26 26 23 5Individually placed 22 17 20 1Table 23. Proportion (%) of action plans for pupils in the younger and older school years respectively, in thesubjects Swedish, English, mathematics and sign language.School year Special school Schools for the Individually placedhearing impaired1 - 5 29* 27 466 - 9 71* 73 54* skolår 1-6 respektive 7-10At Kannebäcks School and in special schoolsteachers find that it is easier for hearing impairedpupils who learn sign language to work alongsidedeaf pupils (Carlsson et al. 2000). This probablyconfirms the accepted idea that communicationarises when people meet, and that those whomeet choose the method of communication thatis most effective for everyone involved.Many people believe that special schools have anenvironment that is completely silent and signlanguage-oriented. That is not the case. About80% of the pupils at special school communicatemainly via sign language but an increasingnumber of pupils ask for both sign language andspoken language. The National curriculum statesthat Special schools have a bilingual task. In theschools for the hearing impaired, according tothe parents, 28% of the pupils communicatemainly via sign language at school. Among theindividually placed pupils, 2% communicatemainly in sign language.Even if the investigation into the status of signlanguage (Översyn… 2006, SOU 2006:54)makes it clear that the question of sign languageis an issue of accessibility and democracy, thereis a growing debate about which pupils actuallyare dependent on sign language. At specialschools,there are already pupils who are taughtin spoken language for part of the day. It is alsouncertain whether sign language supports orobstructs positive linguistic development forthose children who have cochlear implants. Thismeans that there is probably uncertainty amongparents and cochlear implant teams as to whetherthe bilingual environment at the special schools,Nya Bro School and Kannebäcks School, reallydoes optimise hearing habilitation. The linguisticdevelopment is recognized in both sign languageand Swedish.Interest in sign language as a subject seems tobe half-hearted in compulsory schools. In itsstatistics for the school year 2005/2006, theNational Agency for Education reports that only230 pupils out of 124,285 chose the subject‘sign language for the hearing’ at compulsoryschools. In the schools for the hearing impairedand special schools, sign language is of coursean important subject, studied by all the pupilsin these types of schools. However, only 20 of46 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table 24. General recommendations regarding adaptation requirements for deaf and hearing impaired pupils,with and without assistive hearing devices.SignlanguageTechnicalreinforcement ofspoken languageAcousticadaptationVisual supportand lightadaptationDeaf * *Deaf with CI * * * *Hearing impaired with CI (*) * * *Hearing impaired with hearing (*) * * *aidHearing impaired withouthearing aid(*) (*) (*)801 hearing impaired pupils outside specialschools and schools for the hearing impairedwere awarded grades in this subject in the yearsof leaving 2002‐2006. There are indications,however, that there is an interest in sign languagein compulsory schools, but that teachingdoes not take place due to formal regulations(Skolverket 2004b).It is worth noting that the proportion of pupilswho do not achieve the goals for a pass grade insign language at special school is as high as 22%.This is a total of 64 pupils who have consciouslychosen a bilingual environment but whononetheless have not achieved a pass grade insign language. The average credit for their meritrating is, however, 50, and they have on averageonly been awarded grades in five subjects. This,in other words, is a group of pupils who haveconsiderable difficulties at school.Diagram 8. Proportion (%) of teachers who say that the premises are acoustically adapted orequipped with technical hearing equipment.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired47

It is also important to note that the prerequisiteconditions and the goals for the subject ‘signlanguage’ at special school and ‘sign language forthe hearing’ at compulsory school are different.Even if the subjects cannot be compared on thebasis of results, we have indicated here the areaswhere there are differences within and betweenthe types of school. There is, in addition, pupilswho start at special school during their laterschool years and who have not previously studiedsign language.Among the teachers, 16% are concerned abouthow the pupils develop their knowledge of signlanguage. The parents were not asked about anyconcerns in relation to sign language as a schoolsubject.Action PlanDespite the fact that the grades we have reportedapply to a group of pupils who have finishedschool, we nevertheless asked whether the pupilswho attend school at present have establishedaction plans. In this project, the parents andteachers have expressed a general concern abouthow the pupils’ knowledge in the differentsubjects is developing. The occurrence of actionplans for all deaf and hearing impaired pupils ishigh (Table 22).In special school and schools for the hearingimpaired, the incidence of action plans ishighest in the later years of school. This maybe a possible indication that, for individuallyplaced pupils, the needs are discovered earlier(Table 23).In addition, many pupils have the support ofan assistant at school. For just over one-tenth ofthe pupils who have an assistant, this is to meetneeds linked with hearing and communication.Most of these pupils attend school for pupilswith learning disabilities. The need for assistantsto provide support in the areas of learning andsocial difficulties is greatest in special school andschool for pupils with learning disabilities.The physical environment of schoolsAdaptations should be in accordance with need(Table 24). Many hearing impaired and deafpupils have technical assistive devices to enablethem to actively participate in the teaching andin the school’s other activities. For these pupils,their environment is decisive for how wellthey are able to assimilate the teaching. In thisproject we addressed on the one hand, pupilswho are hearing impaired and have a cochlearimplant or hearing aid and, on the other hand,deaf pupils who do not have hearing aids orcochlear implants. According to the parentswho responded to the questionnaire, 85% havea hearing aid or cochlear implant and, of these,just over three-quarters always or often use thesedevices in school.One should be able to assume that all thepeople who function around a hearing impairedchild in school are aware of and are able touse the equipment available but, when weasked the teachers about acoustics and hearingtechnology, the result indicated a troublesomesituation. Diagram 9 shows how all teachersin all types of schools responded. The columnsshow in per centage terms the proportion ofresponding teachers who say that the premisesare acoustically adapted or that technical hearingequipment exists.Just less than one-tenth of the teachers do notknow whether there is a hearing loop or FMsystem in the teaching premises. One-third saysthat there is no technical hearing equipment.Behind these responses there are probably pupilswho, for different reasons, do not want to usetechnical hearing equipment in school. Severalother reasons, such as lack of investment, canalso explain this situation. But the figures shownonetheless that, in Swedish schools, there arefar too many pupils who are not being taught inan optimal teaching environment, either withregard to equipment or knowledge.Even minor hearing impairments remove thefoundation for satisfactory spoken languagedevelopment (Amcoff 1973). If suitableadaptations are not made in school, the pupilsthus risk missing out on the teaching on which48 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

their knowledge will subsequently be assessed. Itcan even be the case that a high noise level cantrigger stress reactions for these pupils (Wålinderet al. 2007).About two-thirds of pupils at special schools andindividually placed pupils have Swedish lessonsin acoustically adapted premises. However, allpupils at schools for the hearing impaired aretaught Swedish in such premises.Of the schools for the hearing impaired, 90% saythey have loops and FM systems in the premiseswhere Swedish is taught. The correspondingfigure for special schools and for individuallyplaced pupils is 50%. The fact that the proportionwithin special schools is lower can be explainedby the proportion of profoundly deaf pupils beinglarger. At schools for pupils with learningdisabilities, 33% of the pupils have access totechnical hearing equipment in school.The results presented here show that, duringphysical education and crafts lessons, and in theschool corridors, only between20‐30% of thepupils are in acoustically adapted premises. Theincidence of access to loops and FM systems forphysical education and health and for crafts isvery low – under 20%. It should, however, benoted that this is a question of premises that areprobably very difficult to adapt acoustically. Halfof the pupils have music in premises that are notacoustically adapted.Something that all the schools in our assessmenthave in common is that none of themconsiders the corridor to be important from acommunicative perspective. No research hasbeen carried out, however, to indicate that thefree activities that take place during breaks and incorridors are of less communicative importancethan those taking place during teaching.But a good teaching environment is not onlya question of adapted premises and hearingtechnology. For many pupils, comfortablecommunication is a decisive factor for them toenjoy school, increase their knowledge and createsolid relationships. When we asked the parentsof pupils at special schools about their children’smain method of communication at school,78% responded that it is sign language. Whenwe asked the parents of pupils at schools forthe hearing impaired, the corresponding figureTable 25. Proportion (%) in respect of importance for choice of school in relation to pupil’s hearing.Hearing loss as per table 8Light Moderate Severe DeafHearing technology/hearing resources 5 14 15 7Recommendation from audiologicalhealth care service5 11 19 15Recommendation from parent associations 1 2 2 2Recommendation from SPM/SIT 2 4 7 8Sign language/bilingual environment 2 8 17 31Proximity to own home 44 26 12 12Friends 24 19 15 12Level of knowledge 5 6 5 5School’s orientation 11 10 9 6Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired49

Table 26. Proportion (%) in respect of importance for choice of school, per type of school.SpecialschoolHearing classschoolIndividuallyplacedCompulsoryschool forlearningdisabledHearing technology/hearing resources 12 28 5 4Recommendation from audiologicalhealth care service 18 24 5 5Recommendation from parentassociations2 3 1 1Recommendation from SPM/SIT 10 4 1 17Sign language/bilingual environment 31 14 1 8Proximity to own home 4 5 46 14Friends 11 6 27 7Level of knowledge 3 5 5 20School’s orientation 8 10 9 25was 27%. For pupils at compulsory school,outside the schools for the hearing impaired, thefigure is only 2%. When we asked the teachershow the pupils communicate during the schoolday, teachers at special schools respondedthat 63% of the pupils communicate by signlanguage.In many surveys, the pupils are asked whetherthey get headaches during their school day, asheadaches can be an indication of shortcomingsin the environment. According to the parentsof pupils at special schools, 8% say that theirchildren often or always have headaches. Asregards hearing impaired and deaf pupils inother types of schools, the corresponding figuresare 10 and 12% respectively. Most of them areafflicted during or after the school day. Thiscan be an indication that the school’s workingenvironment is not optimal for many hearingimpaired pupils, and many studies have alsoattempted to illustrate this problem (Bergkvist2001; Coniavitis Gellerstedt 2007a; Lindahl& Nilsson 2007; Nordén, Tvingstedt & Äng1990;Tvingstedt 1993).ParticipationParticipation in one’s environment usuallyinvolves being able to take part in the activitiesoffered without being confronted by anyobstacles or difficulties. Participation as a processfor attaining knowledge has become increasinglyimportant in school. When using the concept inthis assessment, we referred to the ICF in whichit is defined as ‘involvement in a life situation’(Socialstyrelsen 2003).The pupils interact with their surroundingstogether with friends and take on challengesin order to promote their ideas and interests.Schools must guide pupils forward in thisprocess using curriculum goals so that they canprogress independently and democratically intothe adult world. Unfortunately, they are facedwith a number of obstacles in the course ofthat progression. We have described above, forinstance, how the pupils’ working environmentas regards the acoustic adaptation of premisesand access to technical auditory equipment wasnot completely satisfactory.50 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Table 27. Number of pupils born 91-99 who, according to the parents, have changed from oneschool type to another.ToSpecial schoolSchools for thehearing impairedIndividuallyplacedCompulsoryschool forpupils withlearningdisabilitiesFrom Special school * * *Schools for the * 35 *hearing impairedIndividually28 38 26placedCompulsory* * *school for pupilswith learningdisabilities*The number is less than 10 N=160TeachersParents877679 78676962Percentage55Special schoolSchools for hearingimpairedType of scoolIndividually placedCompulsory school forpupils with learningdisabilitiesDiagram 9. Proportion (%) of teachers and parents who think that school provides an equaleducation irrespective of hearing loss.When we asked the parents whether thechildren had friends at school, a majority, 75%,responded that they thought their children hadenough friends. When we asked the teachersthe same question, 80% responded that thepupil had 3 or more friends at school. Thegreat majority of pupils thus do have friendsat school. This is a somewhat better picturethan that shown by other, previous surveys(Barnombudsmannen 2002). It is, however,Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired51

TeachersParents91878176 76726564PercentSpecial schoolSchools for hearingimpairedIndividually placedCompulsory school forpupils with learningdisabilitiesDiagram 10. Proportion (%) of teachers and parents who think that the school develops thepupils’ ability to work together.important to emphasise that this also means thatmore than 20% of the pupils have fewer thanthree friends. To get a picture of the obstaclesthat hinder participation, we also asked theparents whether their children were subjected tobullying at school by other pupils and by adults.About one-tenth of the parents said that theirchild was a victim of bullying at school. Of allthe parents, irrespective of type of school, 2%thought that adults at school were involved inthe bullying.60504030YesNoDon't know20100Special school Schools for hearing impaired Individually placedDiagram 11. Proportion (%) of teachers who say they will make use of the possibility to disregard certaingoals, per type of school.52 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Just less than one-third of the parents are oftenor always actively involved in the school’sparental activities and a slightly larger proportionof the pupils are often or always active in theschool’s pupil democracy groups. Two-thirds ofthe teachers think that the pupils can often oralways pursue their interests independently atschool.Of the 1,305 teachers who responded to thisquestion, 98% of them think that the pupilsoften or always feel secure at school. This isthe same figure as that with which the parentsresponded. There is no significant differencebetween the types of school. This is a higherfigure than was reported by special schools in2003 (Utredningsinstitutet Handu 2003).About schoolsMost parents usually choose a school which isclosest to home. In the National Agency forEducation’s survey of 2003, 80% of parents gavethis response. On account of circumstances,parents of hearing impaired and deaf childrenare, however, impelled to choose a school on thebasis of other criteria than parents of childrenwith normal hearing (see tables 25 and 26).Many parents of pupils with moderate to severehearing impairments select a school on thebasis of access to hearing technology. Manymake the choice on a recommendation fromthe audiological health care service. For parentsof deaf pupils, sign language and bilingualismare the most important factors in the choice ofschool.Many parents say that they are pleased or verypleased with their choice. Parents of pupils atclasses for the hearing impaired are the mostsatisfied – 88%. This result corresponds well withother surveys (Hässleholms kommun 2005). Asregards special schools, 78% of the parents arepleased or very pleased.Mobility between the types of schools is relativelysmall even if a certain mobility always does exist(Thoutenhoofd 2006). On the basis of 1,660parent responses, it is apparent that the greatestmobility is among pupils moving betweenschools for hearing impaired and ordinarycompulsory schools. But a large proportionof pupils choose to go directly from ordinarycompulsory schools to special schools.Even if there are quite natural reasons for thesemoves, nevertheless there are complicationsfor pupils, for example in the adaptation ofpremises and different communication methods(Wrennstad Gyllenram 2006).There are discussions within schools for thehearing impaired and special schools as towhether pupils from compulsory schools oftenchange to these types of schools because ofencountering significant difficulties at a previoustype of school. Pupils with difficulties thatdevelop gradually in a non-adapted environmentand that, in addition, are perhaps discovered late,are not easy to rehabilitate in the space of a fewyears in schools for hearing impaired or specialschools. Table 27 shows, on the basis of ourquestionnaire responses, pupil mobility betweenthe different types of schools. Freedom of choiceis considerable in Sweden, as regards types ofschools for deaf and hearing impaired pupils, incomparison with many other countries.In response to the question whether the childhad repeated a year 7 , an average of about 10%of the parents said that their child had. In thiscase there was no difference between the types ofschools.It goes almost without saying that the differenttypes of schools should provide equal educationirrespective of hearing impairment. If the typesof schools are looked at from an historicalperspective, special schools have distinguishedthemselves by only using sign language, while7If parents apply, School head have a possibility to decide a retention year for a pupil. (See Compulsory School Ordinance(1994:1194))Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired53

other types have used spoken language. Specialschools are now bilingual schools for specialneeds education. When we asked parents andteachers whether they felt that the schoolhad succeeded in giving the pupils an equaleducation, irrespective of hearing impairment,the parents were more doubtful than theteachers. Diagram 9 shows whether parents andteachers think that the school has succeeded ingiving the pupils an equal education ‘to quite agreat extent or a very great extent’.The pupils’ self-confidence and ability tocooperate are essential elements of the task of theschool, but the schools’ success in this respectdepends on several different factors. We askedparents as well as teachers whether they thoughtthat the schools had succeeded with this.The responses showed that there is a cleardifference between how parents perceive theschool’s work on these issues and the school’sown understanding of the situation (seediagram 10). Special school’s parents andteachers have a similar picture of how the schoolsucceeds in its task of developing the ability ofpupils to cooperate.A hearing/communication factor can, of course,exist here, affecting the possibility for the schoolsto succeed in developing the pupils’ ability tocooperate, and this can be an explanation forspecial schools having a smaller proportionthan other types of schools. When we asked theteachers what it is that governs the teaching, itseems that in compulsory school – but not inschools for the hearing impaired – it is commonthat recommendations from peripatetic teachersgovern the teaching for 60% of the pupils. Atschools for the hearing impaired and specialschool, this is much less common, probably dueto the expertise existing at the school. Instead,the work team has a greater influence on theteaching. All of the schools, however, do ofcourse have the pupil’s needs in focus whenplanning the teaching.We wondered whether any differences existedbetween the type of schools with regard to theteachers’ assessment of what is important forachieving goals in school. The teaching at schoolsfor the hearing impaired seems to emphasiseprimarily that the pupils should present workof their own, carry on discussions in class, plantheir own work and talk about books they haveread. At special schools, unlike other schools, ithas been deemed in respect of a small proportionof pupils (10%) that presentation of the pupil’sown work, discussions in class, conversationsabout the pupil’s own texts and writing simpletexts are not particularly important, or notimportant at all, for goal fulfilment. Otherwise,the schools seem to be alike in this respect.School for pupils with learning disabilitiesdistinguish themselves here as they works inaccordance with other goals. According to theteachers, the most important aspect here is thatthe pupils put forward their own opinions. Thiscorresponds well with these schools activities andgoals.Finally, we wondered whether the teachers, whenawarding grades, would disregard certain goalsif the pupil had a permanent disability or someother similar, non-temporary personal condition(SFS 1994:1194; SFS 1995:401). Of the teachersof hearing impaired pupils at compulsory schoolsoutside the schools for the hearing impaired,20% responded that they would make use ofthis possibility.The proportion of teachers whodo this at special schools is the same. At schoolsfor the hearing impaired, on the other hand, asmany as 40% of the teachers say they would usethis possibility (see diagram 11).54 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Concluding analysisThe National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing’s assessment”They have different needs and different goals in school. They have different prerequisites and receive differenttypes of support but many still do not achieve the knowledge goals.”The National Agency for Special Schools forthe Deaf and Hard of Hearing has carried outthis evaluation project in consultation with theNational Agency for Education. The evaluationproject was addressed to the National Agencyfor Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing in the Government approval documentfor the year 2006. The National Agency forSpecial Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing therefore presents the closing analysishere.The evaluation project has revealed that, withreference to goal fulfilment, there are proven,clear differences between special schools andother types of school.This project has shown that merit ratings aresignificantly lower in special schools thanin schools for the hearing impaired and forindividually placed pupils. The proportion ofpupils qualifying for upper secondary school islower in special schools, while the proportionof pupils not achieving goals in one or moresubjects is significantly higher in this type ofschool. The lower grade values in special schoolsapply to all the qualification subjects. Pupils atspecial schools have, on average, grades in fewersubjects.The assessment also shows that the distributionof grades is greatest for pupils at special schoolbut particularly for boys at special school and forboys born outside Sweden.The differences are especially marked with regardto the way in which the types of schools areorganised, the pupil base and the results we havepresented through using grades. Differencesalso occur in the way in which the goals in thecurriculum are achieved.There could be many reasons for the resultsappearing as they do. Here, the National Agencyfor Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing highlights six explanations for thesignificant differences:Degree of hearing loss and deafness Proportionof pupils with additional disabilities Proportionof pupils born in other countries Applicationof exception from goals while grading, due todisability Pupils who change type of schoolConditions for teaching (visual teaching asopposed to auditory)Degree of hearing loss and deafnessSpecial schools admit pupils who, due totheir hearing loss and deafness, cannot go tocompulsory school and who have actively soughta bilingual environment. When, in this project,we asked parents about their children’s hearingloss and about the grounds on which theyhad chosen a school, it became apparent thatthe pupils’ hearing loss and deafness are moreimportant as reasons for choice of school withinspecial school than in compulsory school. Theparents of these children seek a school that cancreate an environment that will function fromthe communicative perspective. Thus they choosea school partly on the basis of other criteria thanother parent groups. For this reason, there aremore deaf and severely hearing impaired pupilsat special schools than at other types of schools.On comparing special school with compulsoryschool, it is therefore important to rememberthat the groups are not 100% comparable.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired55

On the basis of the assessment results, it isapparent that lower grades are more commonin the profoundly deaf and severely hearingimpaired group. These results are concordantwith international findings. 8The National Agency for Special Schools forthe Deaf and Hard of Hearing is of the opinionthat, when the proportion of pupils with severehearing loss and deafness increases in this typeof school, the proportion of pupils with lowergrades also increases.Proportion of pupils with additionaldisabilitiesIn SPM’s 9 annual report 2007, special schoolstates that the proportion of pupils withadditional disabilities and difficulties is highwithin that type of schoolThe National Agency for Education has reportedthat the proportion of pupils with additionaldisabilities within the regional special schools isabout 30%. In this assessment it appears that theproportion of pupils with disabilities additionalto hearing loss is high, not only in special schoolsbut also in schools for the hearing impaired.This is supported by national and internationalobservations.Additional disabilities affect school results. In theopinion of National Agency for Special Schoolsfor the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, the resultspresented are influenced by the proportion ofpupils with additional disabilities. In a qualityreport 10 , the National Agency for SpecialSchools for the Deaf and Hard of Hearinghas demonstrated the complexity involved inteaching pupils with multiple difficulties atschool . Such difficulties affect not only thepace of the teaching but also its content. This isthe group of pupils who need most support inschool.The SPM concludes that, when the proportionof pupils with additional disabilities and otherdifficulties increases, the proportion of pupilswith lower grades also increases.Proportion of pupils born in othercountriesThe proportion of pupils born in anothercountry, according to the parent responses, ishigher within special schools and in schoolsfor the hearing impaired than in the rest ofcompulsory school. The conditions for thesepupils are significantly different than for pupilsfrom the same countries with normal hearing.Attitudes towards disabilities vary throughout theworld and most pupils born in countries otherthan the industrialised ones have rarely or neverexperienced effective habilitation that focuses onlanguage and communication. Their first contactwith sign language is usually when they cometo Sweden. The parents of these children meettwo completely new cultures and languages. Firstthey have to learn Swedish and learn about theSwedish culture. Then they also have to learnabout our attitudes towards disabilities andcommunication. Pupils from other countriesoften find themselves in a linguistic dilemma.Often, they not only have to learn new languagesbut also basic communication and life skills.The National Agency for Special Schools for theDeaf and Hard of Hearing concludes that, whenthe proportion of pupils with a mother tongueother than Swedish increases, the proportion ofpupils with lower grades also increases.8APDS Scotland9National Agency for Special Schools for Deaf and Hard of hearing.10Hendar 2006: ”Pupils with need for an extensiv support at special school”.56 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Application of exception from goalswhile grading, due to disabilityThe compulsory school and special schoolordinance gives teachers who award grades thepossibility of disregarding certain subject goalsif the pupil has a disability. Special schools, withtheir bilingual situation, are a compensatoryenvironment – the school has to compensatefor the pupils’ hearing loss and deafness. It istherefore not odd at all that the proportionof teachers who invoke the right to disregardgoals on account of disability is lower withinspecial schools than schools for the hearingimpaired. But this situation possibly also reflectsthat, at schools for the hearing impaired, therecan be pupils who are in need of the adaptedenvironment that exists at special school. Forthat reason, the Agency would like here tocounsel caution in interpreting what the provendifference actually means. Are disabilitiesperceived in the same way in the different typesof schools? Or are the goals in the syllabusesvalued differently? The possibility to disregardgoals when grading can be a contributoryexplanation to the differences that have beenfound.The National Agency for Special Schools for theDeaf and Hard of Hearing does not concludewhether the above really is a contributoryexplanation but declares that a difference existsbetween the types of schools and that this oughtto be given attention.Pupils who change type of schoolIn this evaluation project, parents have describedhow pupils change type of school and activityduring their school years. The assessment hasshown that 10% of the pupils repeat a schoolyear. According to the parents, about 30 pupilshave changed from individual placement tospecial school. As many again have changedto and from schools for the hearing impaired.These pupils have probably changed becausethey see their possibilities as being greater inanother school than in the one they attend.The National Agency for Special Schools forthe Deaf and Hard of Hearing considers thatchoice is positive. What is often forgotten isthat pupils who change have probably been,from a hearing and communicative angle, inan environment that is not the most favourablefor them. The changes do not only take placeon the basis of educational factors but also onfactors that are audiological and communicative.For the receiving school, this often involves aparticularly challenging pedagogic situation. Themotivation for school work is affected negativelyif the changes take place on account of thesituation not having worked in the previousenvironment. The pupil may have been in anincorrect environment for much too long. TheNational Agency for Special Schools for the Deafand Hard of Hearing considers that this may bean explanation for some of the low grades in thisevaluation project. The Agency also thinks thatthis can be an explanation for the low gradesthat occur in all types of school – the pupilsare in substandard environments for too long,where the need for social effort is great, andthis affects their knowledge level. The NationalAgency for Special Schools for the Deaf andHard of Hearing concludes that, when thereis an increase in the proportion of pupils whochange type of school in the older age groupsbecause the previous environment did not work,the proportion of pupils with lower grades alsoincreases.Conditions for teachingThis project shows that there is a widedistribution as regards merit ratings within thehearing impaired and deaf pupil groups. Tuitionof deaf pupils is usually described as more timeconsumingas visual forms of communicationare used to a great extent (Foisack 2003). Quitesimply, it takes longer to teach the same amountof knowledge in two languages than in one.Teaching in a small group, where the pupils’needs and levels vary greatly, is also timeconsuming,irrespective of the type of school. Itis common in special schools that the teachinggroups include several pupils with difficulties atschool additional to hearing loss and deafness.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired57

For instance, it can be mentioned that deafchildren receive instructions in sign languagewhile all other material is written in Swedish.This involves a complicated teaching situationunless all the pupils have a complete commandof written Swedish.If the variation in needs and levels in a groupis large and the visual side of communicationdoes not work satisfactorily because one or morepupils have difficulties additional to deafnessand hearing impairment, the teaching situationis affected – that of giving the pupils theopportunity to develop on the basis of their ownneeds. The Agency , SPM, considers that oneexplanation for the differences that occur is thatthe conditions for teaching are different in thedifferent types of schools.The Agency, SPM, concludes that, when theproportion of pupils who request adaptedteaching in the school increases, the proportionof pupils with lower grades also increases.58 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

The National Agency for Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing’s other recommendations”Deaf and hearing impaired pupils have different needs and different goals in school. They have differentprerequisites and receive different types of support but many still do not achieve the knowledge goals.”The overall conclusion is that the teaching ofhearing impaired and deaf pupils is a challengeand that every pupil’s needs should be central toall planning. The National Agency for Schoolsfor the Deaf and Hard of Hearing considersthat it has been possible to compile an overviewmainly owing to the audiological health careservice, parents and teachers. There is a generalinterest in the information that is published here.The Agency also concludes that, for manyhearing impaired and deaf pupils, it is difficult toachieve higher grades, irrespective of the type ofschool. In this evaluation project it has becomeapparent that this is particularly difficult forboys, especially boys at special schools and boysborn outside Sweden.The project has also resulted in a collection ofdata that allows each sector of activity to makeits own assessments and evaluations.The Agency has compiled areas it considersimportant to take into account and work within every school sector where deaf and hearingimpaired pupils receive their compulsoryeducation.Sign languageThe National Agency for Special Schools forthe Deaf and Hard of Hearing does not findit satisfactory that, outside special schools andschools for the hearing impaired, there are sofew deaf and hearing impaired pupils who studysign language, when the user organisations agreethat the need exists. More opportunities shouldbe available, i.e. through training more signlanguage teachers. By using distance teaching,the internet and communication technology,hearing impaired pupils can be offered regulartuition regardless of where they are in thecountry. Schools are thus no longer dependenton access to teachers or the requirement of aminimum of five pupils choosing the subject.These courses need to be complemented withthe possibility, for longer or shorter periods,of learning sign language at those locationsin the country where there are sign languageenvironments. ‘Sign language for siblings’, whichat present is conducted at special schools, shouldserve as a model for this activity.In addition, the grade criteria for the subjectsign language in compulsory schools and specialschools must be revised. The opportunity forbecoming bilingual within compulsory schoolsmust be improved. It should be possible for thesign language timetable at special schools toapply to pupils at compulsory school as well.Governing documentsAs has already been mentioned, it is not possibleon the basis of the results of evaluation projectto comment on the role of the governingdocuments in relation to goal fulfilment. Thedifferences highlighted in the report with regardto timetables in the subject Swedish and tocertain course goals in the language subjects andsign language (both for special schools and thesubject sign language for the hearing) need to bereviewed and the documents made to correspondbetter with each other at a fundamental level.At the same time, the fact that so many pupilshave great difficulties at school must be takeninto consideration. This does not only dependon the school environment but also on thepupils’ hearing impairment in combinationwith other difficulties. This group does notbelong to the group of those who attend schoolfor pupils with learning disabilities, but israther a communicatively weak group that hasparticularly great difficulty with knowledgeoriented elements. The National Agency forGoal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired59

Special Schools for the Deaf and Hard ofHearing concludes that these pupils requirespecial attention. What is required for thisgroup is a combination of educational methoddevelopment and an adaptation of the school’sgoals.The National Agency for Special Schools for theDeaf and Hard of Hearing has, on behalf of thegovernment in accordance with u207/4930/s,prescribed a timetable change that will makespecial schools more equal to compulsoryschools. The proposal involves harmonisationof the timetables between special schools andcompulsory schools. In this connection, theNational Agency for Special Schools for the Deafand Hard of Hearing also highlights the needfor a review of the language syllabuses from abroader, bilingual perspective.Deaf and hearing impaired pupils have differentneeds and different goals in school. They havedifferent prerequisites and receive different types ofsupport but many still do not achieve the knowledgegoals.Premises and environmentThere are far too few school premises that areadapted for this pupil group. The Agency’ssuggestion in this respect is to review thepossibility of giving schools financial stimulationto invest in hearing technology and, not least,expertise in the form of hearing technicians. Theneed is greatest in compulsory school, but specialschools must also adapt (its) their premises sincethe pupil group will be undergoing changesin the immediate future. Many pupils wantan acoustically adapted school that can offer abilingual environment.to change. There are more pupils with spokenlanguage who want a bilingual environment, andthis has led to a need for a review of syllabusesfrom a wider bilingual perspective.Cooperation with other playersThere are at present many different intereststhat govern pupils’ and parents’ choice ofschool. If pedagogy is to have priority, theremust be a more open dialogue between parents,the audiological health care service, userorganisations and schools. Habilitation goalsmust be clarified. Speech training is a pedagogicundertaking based on the goals in school, butit is just as important from the perspectiveof habilitation. If the schools are no longerthe subject of a tug-of-war between differentinterests, the possibility will open up to makingtheir pedagogical profile more visible.Disabilities in schoolContinued, in-depth work has to be doneto create equivalent structures for assessingdifficulties additional to hearing impairmentand deafness. It is unsatisfactory that there isno uniform system for categorising difficultiesin school. The systems that are used todaymix categorisation of how difficulties manifestthemselves with their causes and with whatshould be done about them.It is also a complication that certain types ofproblem descriptions have to be dealt withwithin different secrecy fields, even in school.This means that there are different professionalsinvolved, who work within different confidentialityrules.Transition between schoolsDifficulties tend to arise at present when pupilschange from one type of school to another,and so the procedures regarding admission andchanges must be simplified. The pupil group inspecial schools has changed and will continueInclusionInclusion as a goal or as a method is animportant issue, and this report’s target groupwould benefit if work could be conducted on thebasis of both these aspects. Certain pupils need60 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

special schools while others need another type ofenvironment. A greater choice of possibilities isof benefit to the pupils.deaf pupils. This means that school authorities,together with other players, must guarantee theprovision of training in sign language, audiologyand hearing technology for all staff.Basic competencyIt is of considerable importance that teachersof pupils with hearing impairment have basicknowledge of audiology, hearing technologyand pedagogy. The ability to communicate withthe pupils is essential. For certain pupils, signlanguage is necessary if they are to assimilatethe teaching and so sign language must be ofan academic standard at those schools that haveNeed for further evaluationThe greatest obstacle standing in the way of thisassessment has been the lack of existing dataand the difficulties in reaching the target group.A national commission is required, to gatherand present national data concerning disabledpupils in school. Similar assessments ought to beconducted on a regular basis.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired61

LiteratureUnpublished sourcesConiavitis Gellerstedt, L. 2007b. ”Om elevermed hörselskada i skolan – Svarare och bortfall ielevstudie våren 2006”. PM. Hälsovetenskapligainstitutionen, Institutet för handikappvetenskap,Örebro universitet.Heiling, K. Kommande. Teckenspråk ärnödvändigt – men inte tillräckligt.Henning, L. 1995. ”Synen påsvenskundervisning för döva: Utveckling ochförändring under drygt 100 år”. B-uppsats.Institutionen för Nordiska språk, Lundsuniversitet.Henning, L. 2003. ”Syllabuses in a bilingualsetting”. Föredrag vid European Days of DeafEducation (EDDE) konferens. 8-11 maj,Örebro.Published sourcesADPS: Achievements of Deaf Pupils in Scotland.2007. .Hämtad 20 november 2007.Amcoff, S. 1973. Relationer mellan språkligauttrycksformer: Een undersökning av elever ispecialskolan för hörselskadade. Pedagogiskforskning 1973:1. Institutionen för pedagogik,Uppsala universitetAndersson, E. 2002. Spädbarn medhörselnedsättning: Diagnostik och habilitering;en handlingsplan för samlade insatser rörandediagnostik, behandling och habilitering. Vällingbyoch Göteborg: Hjälpmedelsinstitutet och VästraGötalandsregionen.Anmyr, L. och Y. Lundin. 2006.”Cochleaimplantat på barn – föräldrarnassynpunkter på omhändertagandet och samarbetetmellan hörselvården, CI-teamet och förskola/skola”. Karolinska universitetssjukhuset.Sjukvård, Vuxen, Kliniker & enheter,Öron-, näs- och halskliniker, HuddingeCocleaimplantat. .Hämtad 20 november 2007.Antia, S., K. Kreimeyer och C. Johnson. 2005.”Academic Status and Progress of D/HHStudents in Public Schools”. Föredrag vid”International Congress on Education of theDeaf (ICED): Longitudinal Study of Academicand Social Status of D/HH Students in PublicSchools”, Maastricht, Netherlands, July, 2005.Website for the longitudinal study of academicand social status of deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH) students in public schools. . Hämtad 20november 2007.Asp Onsjö, L. 2006. Åtgärdsprogram – dokumenteller verktyg? En fallstudie i en kommun.Doktorsavhandling. Göteborg studies ineducational sciences 248. Institutionen förpedagogik och didaktik, Göteborgs universitet.Bagga-Gupta, S. 2002. Vardagskommunikation,lärande och måluppfyllelse i tvåspråkiga regionalaspecialskolor. Stockholm: Skolverket. . Välj rubrik “Publikationer”och sök på författare eller dokumentets namn.Hämtad 20 november 2007.Barnombudsmannen. 2002. Många syns intemen finns ändå: BO:s rapport till regeringen 2002.Stockholm: Barnombudsmannen.Bergkvist, H. 2001. 74 röster om skolan: Att varahörselskadad individualplacerad i år 7, 8 eller9: Enkätundersökning bland elever i DESUWlän som är ordinerade hörapparat. Örebro:Specialpedagogiska institutet. . Hämtad 20 november 2007.Borg, E. och C. Bergkvist. 2006. En nyverktygslåda för vuxenhabilitering: Enkäter förbakgrundsanalys, uppföljning och beskrivningav tillfredsställelse med rehabiliteringsarbetet.62 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

A. Utveckling och utvärdering av enkäter.AFI-rapport nr 10A. Örebro: Ahlsénsforskningsinstitut. . Hämtad 9januari 2008.California Department of Education. 2007a.”California Standardized Testing and ReportingProgram. STAR 2007 Test Results.” CaliforniaSchool for the Deaf – Northern District,Alameda County. . Hämtad 21 november2007.California Department of Education. 2007b.”California Standardized Testing and ReportingProgram. STAR 2007 Test Results”. CaliforniaSchool for the Deaf – Southern District,Riverside County. . Hämtad 21 november2007.Carlsson, B. et al. 2000. “Möte i teckenspråkigundervisning ger vinster för alla – erfarenheterfrån samarbete mellan en dövklass ochen hörselklass på Kannebäcksskolan”.Kannebäcksskolans rapportserie: nr 2.Kannebäcksskolan: Göteborg. . Hämtad 9 januari 2008.Coniavitis Gellerstedt, L. 2007a. Om elever medhörselskada i skolan. Specialpedagogiska institutet.Foisack, E. 2003. Döva barns begreppsbildningi matematik. Doktorsavhandling. Malmöstudies in educational sciences, 1651-4513; 7.Lärarutbildningen, Malmö högskola.Fortnum, H., P. Stacey och A. Summerfield.2006. ”An exploration of demographic biasin a questionnaire survey of hearing-impairedchildren: Implications for comparisonsof children with and without cochlearimplants”. International Journal of PediatricOtorhinolaryngology 70, nr 12: 2043-2054.Gallaudet Research Institute. 2005. ”Regionaland National Summary Report of Data from the2004-2005 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard ofHearing Children and Youth”. Washington, DC:GRI, Gallaudet University. . Hämtad 20 november 2007.Grimes, M. och A. Cameron 2005. ”Inclusionof Deaf Pupils in Scotland: Achievements,Strategies and Services”. Föredrag vid”Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress:International Special Education Conference:Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity?” 1st - 4thAugust 2005. Glasgow, Scotland. . Hämtad 20 november 2007.Grimes, M., E. Thoutenhoofd och D. Byrne.2007. “Language Approaches Used With DeafPupils in Scottish Schools: 2001–2004”. Journalof Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 12, nr 4: 530-551.Grimwood, K. et al. 1995. ”Adverse Outcomesof Bacterial Meningitis in School-Age Survivors”.Pediatrics 95, nr 5: 646-656.Hammarstedt, B. och S. Amcoff. 1979.Integration av hörselskadade elever i grundskolan:En kartläggning vårterminen 1978. PedagogiskForskning i Uppsala nr 15. Pedagogiskainstitutionen, Uppsala universitet.Handikappförbunden, Vuxenutbildning för alla.2006. ”Utbildningsnivån fortsatt låg för personermed funktionshinder”. . Hämtad20 november 2007.Heiling, K. 1993. Döva barns utveckling i etttidsperspektiv: Kunskapsnivå och sociala processer.Doktorsavhandling. Studia psychologica etpaedagogica. Series altera: 108. Institutionen förpedagogik, lärarutbildningen, Malmö högskola.Hendar, O. 2006. Elever i behov av särskilt stortstöd inom specialskolan för döva och hörselskadade:En studie utifrån WHO:s klassificeringsinstrumentICF. Rapport 2006:3. Örebro.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired63

Specialskolemyndigheten. . Hämtad 29 november2007.Hermanson, M. och C. Dravins. 2007.Tvåspråkighet: Resultatet av diskussioner blandSpecialskolemyndighetens personal. Rapport2007:4. Örebro: Specialskolemyndigheten.. Hämtad 8 januari 2008.Hässleholms kommun. 2005.”Kvalitetsredovisning 2005: OmrådeSilviaskolan”. Silviaskolan, Kvalitetsredovisning.. Hämtad 21november 2007.Hörselskadades riksförbund. 2007. Äh, detvar inget viktigt: Om hörselskadades situation iSverige. Årsrapport. Stockholm: Hörselskadadesriksförbund.Karchmer, M. och R. Mitchell. 2003.“Demographic and achievement characteristicsof deaf and hard-of-hearing students”. IOxford Handbook of Deaf studies, Language andEducation, red. M. Marschark och P. Spencer.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Konradsson, K. och M. Järvholm. 2004.”Introducing a national paediatric hearingregister in Sweden”. Audiological medicine:International forum for hearing, balance andcommunication disorders 2, nr 2: 113-122.Larfors, K. och S. Casson. 2006. ”Elever medfunktionshinder – statens ansvar och insatser”.Riksrevisionen. Dnr 31-2005-0233. . Hämtad 22november 2007.för vårdvetenskap och socialt arbete, Växjöuniversitet. . Hämtad 22 november 2007.Lundahl, A-B. och A-M. Odin. 1974.Hörselskadade barns skolsituation: En komparativundersökning rörande gravt hörselskadadeelever i årskurserna 5-8 inom olika skolformer.Doktorsavhandling. Pedagogisk forskning1974:1. Institutionen för pedagogik, Uppsalauniversitet.Nafstad, P. et al. 2002. “Birth Weight andHearing Impairment in Norwegians Born From1967 to 1993”. Pediatrics 110, nr 3: e30. . Hämtad 29 november 2007.NCHAM: National Center for HearingAssessment and Management. 2003. “Prevalenceof Permanent Congenital Hearing Loss”.Resources for Establishing and OperatingUniversal Newborn Hearing ScreeningPrograms, Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ ). . Hämtad 22 november 2007.Noble, W. 1998. Self-assessment of hearing andrelated functions. London: Whurr.Nordén, K., A-L. Tvingstedt och T. Äng. 1990.Hörselskadade elever i vanliga skolor. Vad sägerforskningen? 90:7. Stockholm: Skolöverstyrelsen.O’Donoghue, G. 1999. “Hearing withoutears: Do cochlear implants work in children?”Editorial. BMJ (British Medical Journal) 318, 9Jan: 72-73.Parving, A., A-M. Hauch och B. Christensen.2003. “Høretab hos børn - epidemiologi,identifikation og årsager gennem 30 år”.Ugeskrift for Laeger 165, nr 6: 574.Lindahl, S. och J. Nilsson. 2007. ”’Säg tillom du inte har hört!’ – En studie om nioungdomar med hörselnedsättning och derassyn på sin skolgång”. C-uppsats. Institutionen64 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Petersson, M. et al. 2000. ”Resultat frånlästest genomförda i klasser med teckenspråkigundersvining: Med modifierade instruktioner.”Rapport 2001:1. Yrkesföreningen psykologer fördöva och hörselskadade: StockholmPicard, M. 2002. ”Children with PermanentHearing Loss and Associated Disabilities:Revisiting Current Epidemiological Data andCauses of Deafness”. The Volta Review 104, nr 4:221-236.Powers, S. 2002. “From Concepts to Practice inDeaf Education: A United Kingdom Perspectiveon Inclusion”. Journal of Deaf Studies and DeafEducation 7, nr 3: 230-243.Powers, S. 2003. “Influences of Student andFamily Factors on Academic Outcomes ofMainstream Secondary School Deaf Students”.Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 8, nr1: 57-78.Pärson, A. 1997. Dövas utbildning i Sverige 1889-1971: En skola för ett språk och ett praktiskt yrke.Doktorsavhandling. Avhandlingar från historiskainstitutionen i Göteborg: 17. Historiskainstitutionen, Göteborgs universitet.Resnick, M.B. et al. 1999. ”The Impact ofLow Birth Weight, Perinatal Conditions, andSociodemographic Factors on EducationalOutcome in Kindergarten”. Pediatrics 104, nr 6:e74. . Hämtad 29 november2007.Roe, S. 2007. ”Monitoring Progress of StudentsWho Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing”. NationalCenter on Student Progress Monitoring,Library, Articles and research. . Hämtad 28november 2007.Rådet för skolans måluppfyllelse och fortsattautveckling. 2003. Skolans måluppfyllelse 2002:Rådets första delrapport. Stockholm: Rådet förskolans måluppfyllelse och fortsatta utveckling.Rådet för skolans måluppfyllelse och fortsattautveckling. 2005. Måluppfyllelsen i svensk skolaoch förskola 2000-2004: Rådets slutrapport.Stockholm: Rådet för skolans måluppfyllelse ochfortsatta utveckling.SFS 1985:1100. Skollag.SFS 1994:1194. Grundskoleförordning.SFS 1995:206. Särskoleförordning.SFS 1995:401. Specialskoleförordning.Sjöström, M. 2007. ”Anpassningar i praktikenför elever med hörselnedsättning – enutvärdering av hinder och möjligheter”.Delrapport 1. Riksförbundet för döva,hörselskadade och språkstörda barn, Verksamhet,Projekt. . Hämtad 8januari 2008.Skolmyndighetsutredningen. 2007. Tre nyaskolmyndigheter: Betänkande. SOU 2007:79.Stockholm: Fritzes.Skolverket. 1997. Utvärdering av statensspecialskola. Stockholm: Skolverket. . Välj rubrik “Publikationer”och sök på författare eller dokumentets namn.Hämtad 28 november 2007.Skolverket. 2004a. Nationella utvärderingenav grundskolan 2003: Sammanfattandehuvudrapport. Rapport 250. Stockholm:Skolverket.Skolverket. 2004b. Utbildningsinspektion i Piteåresursskolor. Inspektionsrapport från Skolverket,Dnr 53-2003:2889. Stockholm Skolverket.”Skolverket: Siris, information om kvalitetoch resultat”. . Väljkommun “Piteå”, välj dokument ”. Hämtad 28november 2007.Skolverket. 2005a. Om skolors olikheter och derasbetydelse för elevernas studieresultat. Rapport 273.Stockholm: Skolverket.

se>. Välj rubrik “Publikationer” och sök påförfattare eller dokumentets namn. Hämtad 28november 2007.Skolverket. 2005b. Utbildningsinspektioni Kannebäcksskolan, grundskola F–9.Inspektionsrapport från Skolverket 2005:68,Dnr 53-2004:1600. Stockholm Skolverket.”Skolverket: Siris, information om kvalitetoch resultat”. . Väljkommun “Göteborg”, välj verksamhetsform”Grundskolan” och välj sedan skola”Kannebäcksskolan”. Hämtad 28 november2007.Skolverket. 2005c. Vad gör det för skillnadvad skolan gör? Om skolors olikheter och derasbetydelse för elevernas studieresultat. Stockholm:Skolverket.Skolverket. 2006a. Läroplan för det obligatoriskaskolväsendet, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet Lpo94. Stockholm: Skolverket.Skolverket. 2006b. Skolverkets lägesbedömning2006: Förskola, skola och vuxenutbildning.Rapport 288. Stockholm: Skolverket.Skolverket. 2006c. Utbildningsinspektion iSilviaskolan: Förskoleklass, grundskola årskurs 1–9.Inspektionsrapport från Skolverket 2006:108,Dnr 53-2005:3060. Stockholm Skolverket.”Skolverket: Siris, information om kvalitetoch resultat”. . Väljkommun “Hässleholm”, välj verksamhetsform”Grundskolan” och välj sedan skola”Silviaskolan”. Hämtad 28 november 2007.Skolöverstyrelsen. 1991. Metodbok: Svenska fördöva: Läsa, skriva, tala. Servicematerial S91:7/.Stockholm: Skolöverstyrelsen.Socialstyrelsen. 2003. Klassifikation avfunktionstillstånd, funktionshinder och hälsa:Svensk version av International Classificationof Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.Specialskolemyndigheten. 2007. Årsredovisning2006. Örebro: Specialskolemyndigheten.. Hämtad 29 november 2007.Spencer, L., B. Gantz och J. Knutson. 2004.”Outcomes and Achievement of Students WhoGrew Up with Access to Cochlear Implants”. TheLaryngoscope 114: 1576-1581.Stacey, P. et al. 2006. “Hearing-impairedchildren in the United Kingdom, I: Auditoryperformance, communication skills, educationalachievements, quality of life, and cochlearimplantation”. Ear and Hearing 27, nr 2: 161-186.Statens beredning för medicinsk utvärdering.2004. ”Allmän hörselscreening av nyfödda”. SBUAlert-rapport 2004-03-31. . Hämtad 8januari 2008.Statens beredning för medicinsk utvärdering.2006. ”Bilaterala cochleaimplantat (CI) hosbarn”. SBU Alert-rapport nr: 2006-01. . Hämtad 21 november 2007.Thoutenhoofd, E. 2006. ”Cochlear implantedpupils i Scottish schools: 4-year schoolattainment data (2000-2004)”. Journal of DeafStudies and Deaf Education 11, nr 2: 171-188.Tvingstedt, A-L. 1993. Sociala betingelserför hörselskadade elever i vanliga klasser.Doktorsavhandling. Studia psychologica etpedagogica series altera CIII. Stockholm :Almqvist & Wiksell International.Tvingstedt, A-L. och G. Preisler. 2006. ”Apsychosocial follow up study of children withcochlear implants in different school settings”.Educare 2: Educare vetenskapliga skrifter 2/2006.Lärarutbildningen, Malmö högskola.66 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Utredningen om mål och uppföljning igrundskolan. 2007. Tydliga mål och kunskapskravi grundskolan: Förslag till nytt mål- ochuppföljningssystem: Betänkande. SOU 2007: 28.Stockholm: Fritzes.Utredningsinstitutet Handu. 2003. ”Eleveroch föräldrar tycker (till) om Specialskolorna”.Stockholm: Handu. Hämtad 21 november2007.Van Naarden, K., P. Decouflé och K. Caldwell.1999. ”Prevalence and Characteristics ofChildren With Serious Hearing Impairment inMetropolitan Atlanta, 1991-1993”. Pediatrics103, nr 3: 570-575.World Health Organisation. 2006. Primary Earand Hearing Care: Training Resource – Advancelevel. Geneve: WHO Press.Wrennstad Gyllenram, A-C. 2006. ”Ifrågasättinte föräldrarna”. Ledare. Barnplantabladet,hösten 2006.Wålinder, R. et al. 2007. “Physiological andpsychological stress reactions in relation toclassroom noise”. Scandinavian Journal of WorkEnvironment and Health 33, nr 4: 260-266.Översyn av teckenspråkets ställning. 2006.Teckenspråk och teckenspråkiga: Översyn avteckenspråkets ställning: Slutbetänkande. SOU2006:54. Stockholm: Fritze.Willstedt Svensson, U. 1999. ”Att höra eller intehöra: En studie om barn med cochleaimplantat”.Examensarbete vid institutionen förspecialpedagogik, Lärarhögskolan i Stockholm.Specialpedagogiska institutet, Forskning ochutveckling, Rapporter och uppsatser, Dövhörsel.. Hämtad 29 november 2007.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired67

Appendice I1II. Compulsory School (from www.skolverket.se)Compulsory school lasts for 9 school years. Eachschool year consists of an autumn term and aspring term.Compulsory school is nine years of mandatoryschooling. Children who are unable to attendregular compulsory school can attend the specialschool for the deaf and hearing-impaired orcompulsory school for children with learningdisabilities.Who attends compulsory school?Compulsory school is mandatory and is open toall children aged 7-16.How is the school organised?The vast majority of schools in Sweden aremunicipally-run, which means that themunicipality is the principal.The usual thing is for children to attend amunicipal school close to their homes. However,the pupils and their parents are entitled to chooseanother municipal school, or a school that is runindependently.Independent schools are open to all childrenand must have been approved by the NationalAgency for Education. Teaching in independentschools is to have more or less the sameobjectives as those of the municipal school, butcan have an orientation that differs from thatof the municipal schools. If the school does notcomply with current regulations, the NationalAgency for Education can withdraw its permit.It is common for independent schools to havea different orientation from municipal schools,including special teaching methods (Montessorior Waldorf), a linguistic/ethnic orientation, or tobe schools with a certain religious profile.Personal progress reviewEach term throughout compulsory school, theteacher is to have a personal progress reviewtalk with the pupil and the pupil’s guardian(s).This is to involve a discussion of how the pupil’sknowledge acquisition and social developmentare best supported. The information shouldbe based on an evaluation of the pupil’sdevelopment in relation to the goals of the syllabiand should clarify what measures are necessaryfor the pupil to achieve the goals. At the requestof the pupil’s guardian(s), the teacher is toprovide written information about the pupil’sprogress at school to supplement the progressreview. This must not be of the nature of a grade.What rules govern compulsory school?A national curriculum describes the school’svalue base and basic goals and guidelines. Theseare common to the compulsory comprehensiveschool, the Sami school, compulsory school forchildren with learning disabilities and the schoolfor the deaf and hearing-impaired.A national syllabus for each individual subject.A national time schedule which states theminimum guaranteed time that pupils areentitled to teacher-led instruction in the varioussubjects.A municipal school plan that shows how themunicipality’s schools are to be organised anddeveloped.A local work plan for each school, which isan adaptation of the contents of the nationalcurriculum, the syllabi and the school planto the organisation, work methods and localcircumstances of that school.68 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Appendice IIIIII. Assessment and grading (from www.skolverket.se)How does assessment take place?End-of-term reports are provided at the end ofthe autumn and spring terms of year 8, and atthe end of the autumn term in year 9. Leavingcertificates are issued when the pupil finishescompulsory school. Pupils are no longer obligedto attend school after the end of the spring termof the calendar year in which they turn 16.End-of-term reports and final grades in leavingcertificates are set by the teacher. The followingscale is used:Pass (G)Pass with distinction (VG)Pass with special distinction (MVG)There are national criteria for the grades VGand MVG. In deciding whether to pass a pupilduring the assessment prior to setting the finalgrade in year 9, the teacher is to consider thegoals of the syllabus. Grades in end-of-termreports are awarded in relation to the set localobjectives for a subject.If a pupil does not achieve a Pass in a subject orfor all subjects in a block, no grade is issued. Awritten assessment is instead to be provided toshow how things have gone in that subject orsubject block. The assessment can say what extrahelp has been provided.Compulsory school for pupils with intellectualdisabilitiesOn leaving school, the pupil is given a certificateshowing that (s)he has completed his or hereducation. If a guardian so requests, thecertificate can be supplemented by a generalassessment describing the pupil’s ability to followa course of study. (The assessment is to intendedto function as a guideline for the future, and isnot an evaluation of the pupil’s knowledge).At the request of a pupil or guardian (not theschool), an end-of-term report can be providedat the end of each term in years 8 and 9.A leaving certificate can be awarded after year9, and after year 10 for pupils who attend for10 years. If grades are set, the pupil’s knowledgeof the subject is to be assessed in relation to therequirement levels of the syllabus.End-of term grades and final grades are set by theteacher. The following scale is used:Pass (G)Pass with distinction (VG)No grades are given at training school. This doesnot mean that follow-up and evaluation do nottake place on an ongoing basis. The startingpoint can be objectives in the individual studyplan that was drawn up together with the pupil’sguardian(s).Special schoolEnd-of-term reports are provided for eachterm from the ninth school year, and a leavingcertificate after the tenth school year.The same rules and assessment criteria apply tothe school for the deaf and hearing-impairedas to regular compulsory school. The gradingcriteria for Pass (G), Pass with distinction (VG)and Pass with special distinction (MVG) onlyapply to the tenth school year however.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired69

Appendice IVIV. Special school for the deaf andhearing impaired (from www.skolverket.se)This is a school for deaf children or those whohave severe hearing impairments.It comprises 10 school years and is to beequivalent to regular compulsory school as far aspossible.Who attends the special school for the deaf andhearing impaired?Deaf children and children with severe hearingimpairments, whose first language is signlanguage.What rules govern the special school for the deafand hearing impaired?The national curriculum is the same as that forregular compulsory school. The same syllabi alsoapply to most subjects.The goals that compulsory school pupils are tohave achieved by the end of the fifth year are tohave been achieved by the end of the sixth in theschool for the deaf and hearing-impaired. Thegoals that the compulsory school pupils are tohave achieved by the end of the ninth year are tohave been achieved by the end of the tenth in theschool for the deaf and hearing-impaired.Special syllabi have been drawn up for thesubjects sign language, Swedish, English, modernlanguages and movement and drama. These havebeen designed so that they can be used by pupilsin the school for the deaf and hearing-impaired.However, pupils who have learning disabilitiesin addition to being deaf or hearing-impairedfollow the syllabi of the compulsory school forpupils with learning disabilities.70 Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired

Appendice VV. Compulsory school for children withintellectual disabilities (from www.skolverket.se)Compulsory school for children with intellectualdisabilities comprises two parallel types ofschool – comprehensive school for children withintellectual disabilities, and the ”training school”for those with profound intellectual disabilities.Pupils are entitled to a voluntary tenth schoolyear to broaden or deepen their knowledge.Who attends compulsory school for childrenwith intellectual disabilities?Children with intellectual disabilities attend thisschool.Children with mild intellectual disabilities attendcompulsory school for children with intellectualdisabilities.The ”training school” is for children who cannotattend compulsory school for children withintellectual disabilities.How is compulsory school for children withintellectual disabilities organised?Compulsory school for children with intellectualdisabilities,The pupil studies more or less the same subjectsas comprehensive school pupils do. The contentand scope of the subjects is adapted to the pupil’sown abilities. This means that an individualstudy plan is drawn up for each pupil.No grades are given at training school. This doesnot mean that follow-up and evaluation do nottake place on an ongoing basis. The startingpoint can be objectives in the individual studyplan that was drawn up together with the pupil’sguardian(s).What rules govern the compulsory school forchildren with intellectual disabilities?The national curriculum is the same as forregular compulsory school, but the school forchildren with intellectual disabilities has its ownsyllabi.The syllabi for compulsory school for pupils withintellectual disabilities cover twelve subjects: art,English, home economics and consumer studies,sport and health, mathematics, mother tongue,music, natural science subjects, social sciencesubjects, handicrafts, Swedish, and Swedish as asecond language.Syllabi for the training school cover five largesubject areas: artistic activity, communication,motor skills, activities of daily living andawareness of reality. Mother tongue tuition inthe training school is covered in the subjectcommunication.School for children with profound intellectualdisabilities,Instead of individual subjects, the ”trainingschool” syllabus contains five subject areas:artistic activity, communication, motor skills,activities of daily living and awareness of reality.Goal fulfilment in school for the deaf and hearing impaired71

The National Agency for Special Needs Education and Schools coordinates the government’s support for special needseducation. The agency offers advice and support to school managements ensuring equal education for children, young peopleand adults with disabilities. In addition, the agency promotes access to special teaching materials, runs special needs schools andallocates funding to certain education providers and adults with disabilities in short-term education. The National Agency forSpecial Needs Education and Schools was established on 1 July 2008.ISBN:Best.nr: 00195978-91-28-00195-3 (pdf)www.spsm.se