School & Classroom

Effects of ASL Rhyme and Rhythm on Deaf Children’s Engagement Behavior and Accuracy in Recitation: Evidence from a Single Case Design

Holcomb et al. (2020) · Children 2020
★ The Verdict

Rhyming ASL stories during circle time boost deaf preschoolers' engagement and signing accuracy.

✓ Read this if BCBAs and teachers working with deaf or hard-of-hearing preschoolers.
✗ Skip if Practitioners serving only hearing or older elementary students.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Holcomb et al. (2020) tested a new ASL story-time trick. They told preschool deaf children two kinds of stories. One kind used handshape rhymes and rhythm. The other kind did not rhyme.

The team switched the story types every session. They watched which style kept kids more engaged and improved their signing accuracy.

02

What they found

Rhyming ASL stories won. Kids stayed focused longer and copied the signs more correctly than with plain stories.

The gains showed up fast and stayed across sessions.

03

How this fits with other research

Bouck et al. (2016) seems to disagree. They found older deaf children using spoken English still struggled with story details. The difference is modality: Holcomb used ASL, C et al. used speech. ASL handshape patterns give deaf preschoolers a visual phonics boost that spoken English cannot.

van Berkel-van Hoof et al. (2016) adds support. They showed that adding signs to new words helps only deaf/hard-of-hearing preschoolers, not typical peers. Both studies say sign language itself is the key ingredient for this group.

Chiviacowsky et al. (2013) set the long-term stage. Their longitudinal work proved early visual language exposure lifts deaf literacy. Holcomb gives a practical way to deliver that exposure during circle time.

04

Why it matters

If you run a deaf preschool classroom, swap half your story books for ASL rhyming versions. Pick tales that repeat the same handshape like 'B' or '5.' Model the rhyme, pause, and let children sign it back. You should see more eyes on you and cleaner signs within a week. No extra gear or training needed—just use the language they already see.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Pick one story, highlight handshape rhymes, and prompt kids to sign the rhyme back.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
alternating treatments
Sample size
5
Population
not specified
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Early language acquisition is critical for lifelong success in language, literacy, and academic studies. There is much to explore about the specific techniques used to foster deaf children’s language development. The use of rhyme and rhythm in American Sign Language (ASL) remains understudied. This single-subject study compared the effects of rhyming and non-rhyming ASL stories on the engagement behavior and accuracy in recitation of five deaf children between three and six years old in an ASL/English bilingual early childhood classroom. With the application of alternating treatment design with initial baseline, it is the first experimental research of its kind on ASL rhyme and rhythm. Baseline data revealed the lack of rhyme awareness in children and informed the decision to provide intervention as a condition to examine the effects of explicit handshape rhyme awareness instruction on increasing engagement behavior and accuracy in recitation. There were four phases in this study: baseline, handshape rhyme awareness intervention, alternating treatments, and preference. Visual analysis and total mean and mean difference procedures were employed to analyze results. The findings indicate that recitation skills in young deaf children can be supported through interventions utilizing ASL rhyme and rhythm supplemented with ASL phonological awareness activities. A potential case of sign language impairment was identified in a native signer, creating a new line of inquiry in using ASL rhyme, rhythm, and phonological awareness to detect atypical language patterns.

Children, 2020 · doi:10.3390/children7120256