This study critically examines the biases and methodological shortcomings in studies comparing deaf and hearing populations, demonstrating their implications for both the reliability and ethics of research in deaf education. Upon reviewing the 20 most-cited deaf-hearing comparison studies, we identified recurring fallacies such as the presumption of hearing ideological biases, the use of heterogeneously small samples, and the misinterpretation of critical variables. Our research reveals a propensity to biased conclusions based on the norms of white, hearing, monolingual English speakers. This dependence upholds eugenics ideas and scientific ableism, which reinforces current power dynamics that marginalize the epistemologies and lived experiences of deaf populations. Going forward, it will be imperative for deaf people to be included in meaningful roles in deaf-related research as active contributors who help define the whole research process. Without this shift, the research risks remaining detached from the very populations it seeks to understand.

Digital accessibility has become one of the most critical components for post-secondary student learning success because accessibility is the first step of learning and the diverse college student population. However, emerging studies showed that teacher candidates experience high challenges in completing the program due to inaccessible course materials or course implementation. Furthermore, teacher educators addressed the need for more knowledge and skills in utilizing digital accessibility. Despite the demands, few guidelines exist for teacher educators to improve classroom digital accessibility. This article suggests multiple avenues of action for teacher educators to enhance accessibility through the lens of universal design for learning so that all teacher candidates with and without disabilities can succeed. Embedded vignettes illustrate an experience of a practicing teacher educator faced with modifying content with increased demands beyond their own training in special education.

The mention of Cued Speech (CS) within the field of deaf education and deaf studies is sure to spark some strong opinions. In this systematic review of the literature, the existing evidence related to the use of CS is examined thematically. While several studies indicate differences between modalities, the purpose of this paper is not to refute any modality, but to give an historical understanding of the research related to CS. In addition, the authors provide a chronicle of the themes related to CS since its inception in the 1960s, illustrating a shift in use over time. Discussion and implications for future research is provided.

In education today, there is an increasing population of individuals who are d/Deaf/Hard of Hearing and English Learners (d/DHH/ELs). This population of students need innovative teaching strategies to achieve optimal outcomes. Schools are challenged with providing education to these students, and there are many barriers to overcome. Teachers receive little to no education on how to teach this combined population of learners. Knowing this, the chapter will discuss characteristics of the population, literacy and language acquisition, barriers, and strategies to promote literacy development in the d/DHH/EL population. Request access from your librarian to read this chapter's full text.

Literacy always has currency in deaf education. This text addresses multiple topics that are relevant and necessary for understanding literacy’s broad implications. Chapters and units are addressed thematically. The section titled “Fundamentals of Literacy and Deafness” (chapters 2–6) provides a solid overview of the context of literacy and deaf education.The section begins with a brief history of literacy attainment by Margaret Harris and Emmanouela Terlektski (chapter 2), who summarize past work by Marschark and Harris (2020). In a review by Carol McDonald Connor and Jamie Greenberg (chapter 5, “Prevailing Theories of Reading Development and Deafness”), theories of reading development are outlined and applied to deaf education literacy practices. Connor and Greenberg also describe the Simple View of Reading, the lexical quality hypothesis, and lattice models.