Abstract
The cognitive milestones, academic achievement and social interactions of children with hearing loss are affected by language development, early detection and intervention, and the extent of resources provided to schools for the Deaf and to families, amongst others. The responsibility of navigating these complex educational, linguistic, and psychosocial demands rests largely with the staff working in schools for the Deaf. These professionals are required to translate policy into practice, adapt curricula, support learners with diverse needs, and engage with families and communities. Limited information exists regarding the challenges and experiences of staff who are tasked with to educate and support children at schools for the Deaf in South Africa. This descriptive qualitative survey study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of staff members working at schools for the Deaf in South Africa. Self-administered semi-structured open-ended questionnaires were completed by 144 staff members. The data was analyzed using reflective thematic analysis. The staff's perceptions and experiences are described in five themes: language and communication, knowledge and support, educational limitations, capacity building and psychological and behavioral implications. Main issues that were raised included communication barriers, lack of knowledge and support from stakeholders, limited resources, delayed diagnosis and interventions for learners, inadequate staff training and negative educational impact from psychosocial impacts. The research suggests a need to improve approaches toward capacity building, early intervention and highlights the potential supportive role of various stakeholders. These findings could be a useful guide to assist staff working in the schools for the Deaf in overcoming challenges and enhancing their teaching environment and learner outcomes.
1 Introduction
According to the World Health Organization, hearing loss (HL) is defined as having reduced hearing in one or both ears, which can be mild, moderate, severe or profound (World Health Organization, 2025). Globally, congenital and early onset childhood HL is a relatively common occurrence with approximately 400 million people affected by disabling HL, of which approximately 34 million are children, ranging from 0 to fifteen years (, ; World Health Organization, 2021). Approximately 15.5 million children with HL are younger than 5 years (). In South Africa, hearing loss occurs in 4 to 6 per 1,000 live births, which is aligned with other developing countries' rate of 6 per 1,000 live births (). However, in developed countries such as the United States of America, European countries, and Australia, the HL incidence is significantly lower at a rate of 1.7 to 3.2 per 1,000 children (Uhlén et al., 2020).
Social-emotional and cognitive development of a child can be impacted when they have hearing loss. Some of the competencies children should acquire include the capacity to coordinate communication, cognition and behaviors, build and maintain relationships, identity development, independent thinking, adaptability, and critical thinking. Many children with hearing loss experience challenges in acquiring these competencies and developmental milestones, which may have adverse effects on their academics, social interactions, psychological wellbeing, and future achievements (). Furthermore, studies suggest that delayed language development in persons with HL results in a hindrance to achieving their full academic performance, unless efforts are made to stimulate learning and communication at an early stage (Theunissen and Swanepoel, 2008; ). These aspects demonstrate the need for teachers in schools for the Deaf to be adaptable and highly proficient communicators who can facilitate comprehension while maintaining strong academic rigor. The ways in which teachers use language, structure their utterances, and engage in classroom interactions play a critical role in the learner's academic success, yet this requires skills and practice and is not easily acquired and executed by all educators (). One contributing factor to children not receiving early interventions is the knowledge gaps and beliefs of parents or caregivers (). Children with hearing loss may require assistance with communication, cognition, sensory development and social and emotional aspects (). For parents to effectively engage with these aspects, they need to overcome some of their own challenges related to their child's HL. Parents require support from the community and educational system, and easy access to information about HL and adequate resources (). Parent-teacher collaborations remain vital to achieve educational goals; however, this can be hindered by socioeconomic factors, lack of understanding, parental lack of involvement, and different beliefs about the child's education. Although educators are cognizant of the importance of this collaboration, these factors constrain the extent to which such partnerships can be successfully realized in practice, creating ongoing challenges for the staff ().
Considering that the extent of academic, psychosocial, and economic support a child receives at home and within the community can have an impact on teaching and learning (), families and communities can play a key role in supporting children with HL to achieve their maximum potential in education and psychosocial wellbeing. Nonetheless, many SA households are formally semiliterate and communicate in native African languages. This means that learners with HL must master multiple languages if they are to thrive better in their day-to-day, academic and social activities ().
In South Africa, the Department of Basic Education (DBE) asserts that all children, including those with learning barriers, are entitled to quality basic education (; ; ). This inclusive educational mandate implies that pedagogical approaches, learning materials, and classroom practices must be adapted to accommodate the diverse needs of learners, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing (). Although South African Sign Language (SASL) has been gradually incorporated into the school system, the same national curriculum content and educational cycle used in mainstream schools is still applied in schools for the Deaf. As a result, learners who are deaf often face significant educational challenges (; Storbeck and Martin, 2010; ). This lack of meaningful curriculum adaptation exacerbates challenges for educators, and they face persistent barriers, which make curriculum differentiation difficult and further hinders inclusive teaching practices (; ).
To achieve the expected curricular outcomes, deaf learners typically require tailored teaching strategies that emphasize visual learning, repetition, and expression (). Moreover, their success is highly dependent on the availability of trained educators with both linguistic proficiency in SASL and pedagogical competence in Deaf education (). However, there are currently no formal regulations requiring that teachers in schools for the Deaf receive training in SASL or specialized instruction in Deaf pedagogy prior to employment. This gap in professional training has a direct impact on the quality of instruction and support services available to deaf learners (; Storbeck, 2023). This training gap imposes considerable professional strain on teachers themselves, who often feel underprepared and overwhelmed by their limited proficiency in SASL and specialized Deaf pedagogy. In rural multi-grade school environments, hearing teachers frequently report communication barriers stemming from inadequate SASL skills, leading them to use other augmentative and alternative communication methods, such as gestures, visual aids, written instructions, and picture cards, to facilitate basic instruction and engagement (; ). These improvisations add to their workload and frustration, particularly when attempting group activities or individualized support in diverse classrooms, where limited SASL proficiency restricts effective interaction (). Teachers express feeling inadequately prepared overall because of insufficient training and scarce resources, highlighting the urgent need for ongoing professional development in SASL, multimodal strategies, and institutional support to enhance their confidence and ability to deliver inclusive teaching without constant adaptation struggles (; ).
In 2023, there were 43 educational institutions for the Deaf registered in South Africa (SA) (). These schools are located in both urban and rural or semi-rural settings, with some being day schools, and others boarding schools (SLED Development, 2020; Stemela-Zali et al., 2022). For many years, a bilingual-bicultural approach was implemented at many schools, in which sign language was used for communication whilst a spoken language such as English was used for reading and writing or speech () and a hearing teacher was teamed together with a deaf teaching assistant to provide education (Umalusi, 2018). In 2023, South African Sign Language (SASL) became an official language in SA, which has created more avenues for SASL to be integrated into the schooling system and communities (). Currently, the majority (38) of the schools for the Deaf in SA use SASL as their primary language of teaching and learning (). However, learners still need to read and write, and therefore, need to learn another language such as English to develop text literacy (; Umalusi, 2018; ). This requirement presents notable challenges for teachers in Deaf schools, who often grapple with a lack of clarity on how to effectively integrate SASL as the primary instructional language while supporting English literacy development for reading and writing. Case studies of English literature classrooms reveal scenarios where teachers face proficiency mismatches, such as using SASL and English in ways that do not fully align with learners' limited English skills, leading to restricted communication modes, teacher-centered instruction, and difficulties in fostering meaningful dialogue (). Teachers in these settings express the need for better training to leverage both languages as semiotic resources, adapt to fluid learner practices, and ensure visual accessibility ().
Despite the growing body of literature addressing the challenges faced by deaf learners (Xie et al., 2014; Phiri, 2021; ), few studies have explored the perspectives of the professionals tasked with supporting their educational development. It remains unclear how staff in South African schools for the Deaf perceive and experience the institutional and structural barriers to effectively support deaf learners' education, and what insights they offer into the obstacles confronting learners and their caregivers, as well as the key influences on learners' academic achievement. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of staff members working in schools for the Deaf in South Africa. Specifically, the study sought to (1) examine staff experiences and perceptions of the systemic and institutional challenges they face in supporting deaf learners within the schools, (2) explore their perceptions of the obstacles faced by learners, (3) explore the perceptions of the challenges faced by the caregivers, and (4) identify key factors perceived to influence learners' academic achievement. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive and recent study implemented across all regions in South Africa. For the purpose of this article the term ‘deaf' refers to hearing loss in a medical or audiological sense, whereas the term ‘Deaf ‘refers to a cultural and linguistic identity associated with the Deaf community ().
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Study design
This study formed part of a larger research project exploring the genetic etiology of HL in children and the knowledge of staff working at schools for the Deaf. This qualitative component was embedded within a larger project investigating the genetic etiology of childhood deafness in South Africa. While the larger study included medical and genetic components, this sub-study, which lasted 12 months, used a descriptive qualitative survey design to focus on the experiences of staff and their educational challenges. This approach was selected as it allows for a rich description of the phenomenon in participants‘ own terms in comparison to closed-ended surveys, to produce in-depth data (Tombs and Strange, 2024; ). Reflexivity was maintained through memoing, helping the researchers acknowledge their own assumptions and remain grounded in participants' voices during data interpretation ().
2.2 Population and sampling
Staff members, which included teachers, class assistants, principals, vice principals, audiologists, speech therapists, social workers, occupational therapists, and heads of departments, were recruited from 11 schools for the Deaf in five of nine provinces in South Africa: Western Cape, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Northwest and Limpopo. Staff who did not provide academic assistance or therapy to learners were excluded. The schools for the Deaf were purposively selected as they were already part of the bigger research project investigating the genetic etiology of HL in children attending the schools for the Deaf. Due to the qualitative survey design, deaf staff members were able to participate and were included in the study, as no special requirements, such as a sign language interpreter, were needed. These members could read and complete the document as per their hearing colleagues. The survey did not enquire about the hearing status of the participants.
2.3 Data collection
The data was collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire, which was available in English and Afrikaans, as per the official languages spoken at the schools at the time of the study. These questionnaires were deemed ideal for this population as rich contextual data could be collected while removing barriers associated with participants having to avail themselves for interviews and no concerns of internet connection (Tombs and Strange, 2024, p. 281; , p. 641). As a nationwide study it was not feasible for the research team to conduct in-person interviews and such methods would have resulted in the exclusion of deaf staff. Therefore, to avoid such discrimination, the qualitative survey was deemed most suitable. The self-administered questionnaire consisted of two parts. Section A collected demographic data, including gender, professional role, education level, and years of experience. Section B contained 12 open-ended questions exploring staff perceptions on the main challenges they face working with children who have HL, educational outcomes, staff training, resource availability, and parental and learner challenges. The instrument was created by one of the researchers (MM), who performed a review to determine the gaps in Deaf education in South Africa. The survey allowed ample space for the participants to elaborate on their answers. A pilot version was tested with individuals in a non-study school to assess clarity and relevance. Information sheets and the questionnaires were given to the principal or a designated representative of the different schools for distribution to staff. The staff members who consented to participate completed the questionnaires at their convenience. All completed questionnaires were later collected in person by the researcher or returned by courier. To ensure confidentiality, no names were acquired on the questionnaire, and each participant was assigned an alphanumeric code (P1–P144).
2.4 Data analysis
All open-ended responses in Afrikaans were translated to English by one of the researchers and back translated by a different research member to ensure validity. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted following Braun and Clarke's six-phase process (). One researcher (KT) coded the responses using NVivo 12 Pro software. Codes were discussed with the research team (CDK, MM) to reach consensus, and themes were refined through iterative process. Reflexivity was maintained through systematic memoing throughout the analysis. A structured codebook was developed to guide the coding process. The researchers familiarized themselves with the data, and in this process of mapping, they found recurring concepts that were coded. Once coding was complete, themes and subthemes were developed (). The demographic data was entered into REDCap (), which is a secure, web-based software platform used to capture any data acquired from research studies.
2.5 Ethical considerations
Research ethics clearance and administrative authorizations were obtained from the Faculty of Health Sciences, Human Research Ethics Committee, University of Cape Town (Ref 104/2018) and the Department of Education (DOE) for each province, respectively. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, they were allowed to omit answers to any of the questions they did not want to answer, and they were able to withdraw from the study at any time. Access to data was restricted exclusively to the research team to ensure confidentiality. To enhance reflexivity and analytical rigor, the research team engaged in positionality reflection and maintained detailed notes on assumptions and values that could influence data interpretation. The primary researchers are genetic counselors and researchers with backgrounds in human genetics, education, ethics and community health. None of the authors identify as a member of the Deaf community. To mitigate potential bias and power dynamics, reflexive team discussions were held in the first phases of the study. Having an interdisciplinary team added depth to the analysis and facilitated comprehensive data triangulation (; ).
3 Results
3.1 Study settings and participants' description
A total of 144 staff members at schools for the Deaf in South Africa participated in the survey. The schools were located in the Western Cape (4), Gauteng (3), Limpopo (2), Kwa-Zulu Natal (1) and Northwest (1) provinces. Seven were in urban settings while four were in rural settings. Females made up 117 of the 144 study cohort (Table 1).
Table 1
| Demographics | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender (N =141) | ||
| Males | 24 | 17.0 |
| Females | 117 | 83.0 |
| Staff role (N =133) | ||
| Educator | 82 | 61.7 |
| Principal | 5 | 3.8 |
| Vice principal | 3 | 2.3 |
| Head of department | 16 | 12.0 |
| Class assistant | 3 | 2.3 |
| Audiologist | 8 | 6.0 |
| Speech therapist | 5 | 3.8 |
| Occupational therapist | 2 | 1.5 |
| Social worker | 1 | 0.7 |
| Sports coach | 2 | 1.5 |
| Other | 6 | 4.4 |
| Education level (N=122) | ||
| Doctorate | 0 | 0 |
| Postgraduate | 68 | 56.0 |
| Undergraduate | 33 | 27.0 |
| Other | 21 | 17.0 |
| Years working with HI (N=136) | ||
| < 1 year | 4 | 3.0 |
| 1–10 year | 75 | 55.1 |
| 11–20 years | 29 | 21.3 |
| 21–30 years | 12 | 8.8 |
| > 30 years | 16 | 11.8 |
Participant characteristics.
*N indicates the number of staff members who answered the question.
Most staff were educators whilst only a few of the cohort were school managers, and more than half of the participants had been working with children with HL between one and 10 years and the remainder had over 10 years' experience. Most participants had a tertiary qualification (Table 1).
3.2 Themes
Five themes emerged from the data: Language and communication, knowledge and support, educational limitations, capacity building and psychological and behavioral implications (Table 2).
Table 2
| Themes | Sub-themes |
|---|---|
| Theme 1: Language and communication | • Family Communication • Multiple communication approaches • Academic implications |
| Theme 2: Knowledge and support | • Parental knowledge and support • The general public's knowledge and support • The DOE's knowledge |
| Theme 3: Educational limitations | • Curriculum limitations • Early diagnosis and intervention |
| Theme 4: Capacity building | • Resources • Staff training • More schools |
| Theme 5: Psychological and behavioral implications | • Rejection and insolation • Psychosocial implications of isolation and rejection • Impact on the educators and learning environment |
Themes.
3.2.1 Theme 1: language and communication
The staff members highlighted language and communication as the main challenges to educate and engage with children with HL. It is also thought to be one of the biggest hurdles for parents. Challenges with language and communication were a cumulative of different factors, such as the lack of sign language at home, the use of multiple languages by learners, some educators are still learning sign language, and the impact that the delays in language development have on the overall academic performance of a child.
3.2.1.1 Family communication
Many parents do not know sign language and are unable to effectively communicate with their signing children and vice versa. Many of the children are also unable to engage with the community. This creates multiple challenges for the children when they are not at school and hinders an optimal learning environment at home.
“Communication is the challenge because they only communicate at school, the community and family do not know how to communicate with them.” (P140, Deputy principal, 10 years' experience with HL)
3.2.1.2 Multiple communication approaches
Many learners with HL must communicate in multiple languages, including a combination of sign language and a second and often third language, further delaying development. For example, at the time of this study, they communicated in sign language, and in many instances had to study in English or Afrikaans, which might be different from the language spoken at home.
“These children come from homes with different languages as their home language, and we have to teach in sign language, and their instructions are in English. We therefore have kids who have to comprehend three languages all at once, and I believe it is hard on them as well as it is on us.” (P126, Educator, 1 year experience working with HL)
3.2.1.3 Academic implications
Staff members explained that some of the learners' experience language delay due to the above-mentioned factors or due to late medical and educational intervention, which create long term implications for their development and academic achievement.
“The main challenge is the child coming into school with a language delay. Once the gap is there, it is very difficult to fill it because they have missed the opportunity to obtain a language at an earlier stage. This stage is the most crucial when it comes to learning a language. This then causes a delay in all learning areas.” (P96, Educator, 5 years' experience with HL)
Due to the spectrum of hearing loss, some teachers note that they are required to teach children who have various language capacities, which creates challenges with adjusting their teaching approach to an adequate level that will meet the educational needs of the children.
“Hearing children with very different levels of language development in the same class.” (P54, Educator, 6 years' experience with HL)
“Not all the learners can sign and not all learners use the same signs, thus communication and teaching is difficult” (P9, Educator, 28 years' experience with HL)
Some of the participants noted that they themselves are still learning sign language, therefore, they cannot fully communicate with the students and in some instances, they need to take on the ‘student' role where they are taught sign language by the students.
“Some teachers are not competent or fluent in sign language.” (P134, Head of department, 12 years' experience with HL)
3.2.2 Theme 2: knowledge and support
Staff members in various schools also highlighted that a lack of knowledge about various aspects of HL and social support, from parents and the community, influences the ability of learners with HL to achieve their full academic capability.
3.2.2.1 Parental knowledge and support
The lack of family support and involvement is an area of concern noted by many staff members. When the staff were asked what the challenges were when working with children who have HL, many responded with an answer similar to Participant 54. They highlighted the lack of parental support.
“Lack of parent involvement and support.” (P54, Educator, 6 years' experience with HL)
“Parental support and involvement is not always as desired.” (P59, Vice principal, 19 years' experience with HL)
“There are low expectations from parents/family members, and no parental support or encouragement, causing a negative impact” (P3, Principal, 30 years' experience with HL)
The lack of parental support can be attributed to various aspects, such as communication barriers, for example, parents who are not literate in sign language or have a lack of knowledge about HL and the Deaf community and not knowing how to manage a child with HL. These different factors limit the extent to which parents and families are able to be involved in the academic and psychosocial life of their children with HL. This, in effect, tends to impact the learners' academic performance.
“Parents are unable to support learners at home due to their lack of information, sign language or out of ignorance.” (P23, Educator, 2 years' experience with HL)
Additional factors leading to a lack of parental involvement were stated to be socio-economic factors such as inability to purchase hearing aids, access to audiology services or being unable to attend school meetings. These challenges that parents face first need to be overcome before parents are able to fully support their child and cooperate with the school's expectations.
“Very costly with hearing aids, audiologists, ENT, speech therapy etc.” (P94, Head of department, 18 years' experience with HL)
Sometimes parents struggle to obtain guidance or information to access education and psychosocial support services for children with HL and for their families.
“Getting little support from the government regarding guidance after you find out your child is Deaf, what to do now, which school, learning SASL etc.” (P124, Educator, 4 years' experience with HL)
In some instances, this is exacerbated by a lack of support groups that could serve as a shared space to discuss how the different challenges may be navigated.
“Not enough support groups for parents.” (P60, Educator, 4 years' experience with HL)
For some staff members, lack of knowledge, challenges faced, or minimal support create hurdles in parents' acceptance of their child having HL; this sometimes hinders the parent from seeking the appropriate educational institution, and other aids for their child.
“To process the trauma of a handicapped child, to accept it and to rise to the challenges in a positive way.” (P64, Educator, 20 years' experience with HL)
3.2.2.2 The general public's knowledge and support
Besides the lack of parental knowledge and support, some staff members also reported that society's overall awareness of HL and perception of the Deaf community could lead to a lack of social acceptance of children with HL.
“Society know very little about hearing impairment, I don't think society has made place for the hearing impaired, thus a low tolerance and very low understanding.” (P9, Educator, 29 years' experience with HL)
This leads to a significant number of misconceptions, such as all people with HL have cognitive impairment, and often results in rejection by the community. Furthermore, schools that promote verbal acquisition struggle with society's incorrect perception that speech is not achievable.
“Society thinks that hearing impaired people can't talk and do not understand how hearing aids & cochlear implants work.” (P58, Educator, 20 years' experience with HL)
3.2.2.3 The DOE's knowledge
The DOE is also said to lack sufficient knowledge about deaf learners and their educational needs.
“I feel decisions made by the Department of Education are made by people who do not have the necessary insight and knowledge of hearing impairment and what is needed to provide these children with good educational systems.” (P58, Educator, 20 years' experience with HL)
It was noted that the DOE should physically engage with the schools to become aware of the educational needs of the learners.
“They can do more by coming into the school to see what requirements are needed and the everyday life of the Deaf learner, to have a better understanding of Deaf education and the needs.” (P11, Educator, 15 years' experience with HL)
A handful of participants felt that improvements had been made by the DOE and that the support was sufficient.
“I see the Department of Education striving and committing to better the situation with our hearing-impaired learners and Deaf schools. As inclusive education is in place, to accommodate our Deaf school.” (P74, Educator, 3 years' experience with HL)
3.2.3 Theme 3: educational limitations
It was noted that some limitations, such as a curriculum that is not tailored to the learning capacity of the students, exacerbated by delays in diagnosis and treatment interventions, result in less optimal academic outcomes for the students and create challenges for the educators to teach students optimally.
3.2.3.1 Curriculum
In SA, the curriculum content is the same for Deaf schools and mainstream schools. Some staff members stated that it is not a feasible educational platform for many of the learners, suggesting a need for more modified curriculum content for schools for the Deaf.
“There is no set curriculum to follow for children who are' deaf. It is very challenging to keep up with the mainstream curriculum.” (P23, Educator, 2 years' experience with HL)
Participants noted that learners were required to write and take their assessments in English, but they received their teaching in sign language. This created challenges for the students to efficiently answer questions and write examinations, as they could not seamlessly transition between the two.
“The biggest challenge is SASL being used as a medium of instruction and English used as a language of assessment and writing. The learners use SASL structure to answer the questions, and they do not know how to switch between the two.” (P117, Educator, 10 years' experience with HL)
Although inclusive education has been implemented and a modified curriculum tailored to SASL was implemented, the way in which it has been done does not necessarily favor students with HL because aspects such as timeframes were overlooked.
“The department is slow to take Deaf learners into consideration, especially when designing material. They assume that what the learners in the mainstream can do at a certain stipulated time can also apply to Deaf learners, whereas it is not.” (P73, Educator, 10 years' experience with HL)
3.2.3.2 Early diagnosis and intervention
Some study participants have highlighted the importance of early diagnosis and intervention; however, these aspects often seem to be overlooked and hinder the child's capacity to acquire good learning outcomes.
“Society does not recognise the importance of screening at birth, early diagnosis and intervention.” (P59, Deputy principal, 19 years' experience with HL)
It was noted that in some instances, the delay in diagnosis and intervention could be due to parents being in denial or thinking that the child is merely slow and will start reacting and talking later. In other instances, parents might realize something is wrong, but as mentioned previously, they lack the capacity to seek medical assistance.
“Often late intervention occurs, parents are neverminded and in denial about their deaf child and also a lot of the time their children come from very underprivileged homes and thus resources to get them to the different centres like schools or audiology are limited.” (P23, Educator, 2 years' experience with HL)
Besides late diagnosis and intervention, working with children who have comorbidities, ranging from physical to learning disorders, creates extra challenges for teachers. These children have needs that extend beyond their HL, and they require extra interventions to assist them.
“Most learners in our school have comorbidities. They are not ‘only' deaf” (P43, Occupational therapist, 5 years' experience with HL)
3.2.4 Theme 4: capacity building
Staff highlighted some aspects that require attention and could be improved to create a more optimal outcome for staff and students. This includes increased availability of educational and support services, resources for learners with HL and ongoing staff training.
3.2.4.1 Resources
The staff had varying views about the availability of resources such as visual aids, classroom space, hearing technology, resource material in SASL and interactive whiteboards, amongst others. Staff members such as participant 86, who is from a rural/semi-rural setting, felt that they were not supplied with all the necessary resources.
“Even the Department of Education is still behind in providing the resources needed by these children.” (P86, Educator, 5 years' experience with HL)
Whereas some staff members, such as participant 110, who are from an urban setting, felt that they had received sufficient resources and support.
“I feel that the DOE provides sufficient resources for special needs schools. They ensure safety and security, and they provide a feeding scheme as well. The department shows interest in the school as well as the learners.” (P110, Educator, 1 year experience with HL)
Participants in the rural and urban settings had resource needs, however, those in the urban settings voiced a need for additional specialized staff such as nurses, social workers, audiologists, speech therapists, smaller class numbers, and more visual aids, whereas those in rural settings indicate that they have minimal resources available and require tablets or laptops, DVD materials, data projectors and classroom assistants, amongst others.
3.2.4.2 Training
Although training is provided for staff, it is not necessarily accessible to all staff and is not at an equal level.
“It (DOE) tries to develop teachers, but those in urban areas, while in rural areas, teachers were trained once in many years, while urban teachers are developed very often.” (P78, Educator, 10 years' experience with HL)
“Working without having proper training, not having qualifications relevant to hearing impairment.” (P86, Educator, 5 years' experience with HL)
Those, such as participant 96, who have undergone substantial training, have found it very beneficial.
“I better understand children with hearing impairment. How they feel, how they receive and how they learn. This allows me to deliver better prepared, better quality and beneficial lessons.” (P96, Educator, 5 years' experience with HL)
3.2.4.3 More schools
Schools for the Deaf are limited in the country, to an extent that some areas have no such schools, and accessibility is a challenge, resulting in learners needing to travel long distances or stay in boarding schools.
“Not having access to suitable schools in their environment - having to board/travel long distances to school” (P58, Educator, 20 years' experience with HL)
This is even more of a prominent issue for institutions that teach oral communication
“There are not enough schools for the Deaf in all areas that promote the use of spoken language!” (P62, Audiologist, 5 years' experience with HL)
3.2.5 Theme 5: psychological and behavioral implications
Having HL affects the learners in many ways; they experience rejection and ill treatment, they feel isolated and self-conscious, which impacts their mental wellbeing. These implications seep into the learning environment and also impact the student-teacher relationships and classroom dynamics.
3.2.5.1 Rejection and isolation
Various participants noted that learners are unable to ‘fit in' and they get mocked, ridiculed and bullied. This is particularly the case when they move out of their safe schooling environment into the community.
“I have said before I believe language is hard on them, but I think they also face the challenge of not being accepted in their communities, of being bullied because of their disability or are being belittled just because people feel these children are different from them. Most of these are often very confident among their peers, especially children with hearing impairments, yet I believe their confidence levels drop as soon as they are with their peers who have no hearing impairments” (P126, Educator, 1 year experience with HL)
A few participants noted that students who do try to ‘fit in' turn to inappropriate or less acceptable behavior to try to achieve this goal.
“Their desperate desire to be accepted sometimes leads to unacceptable promiscuous behavior” (P3, Principle, 30 years' experience with HL)
Those who do not take various measures to try to be accepted end up feeling isolated on a regular basis.
“This is ongoing, and learners (deaf) feel isolated often - Emotional, physical, and social isolation” (P99, Principle, 18 years' experience with HL)
3.2.5.2 Psychosocial implications of isolation and rejection
The isolation, rejection and prejudice they experience can cause students to become more self-conscious than they should be.
“They can be self-conscious about their handicap and their apparatus” (P65, Educator, 30 years' experience with HL)
It is further noted that they can feel less important and less worthy than the hearing individuals in the community.
“They can be prejudiced against and made to feel inferior by the hearing community” (P107, Educator, 3 years' experience with HL)
More importantly, these different aspects can then potentially lead to significant mental health challenges for these youngsters.
“The isolation and rejection can sometimes lead to severe social and emotional issues, which may manifest as mental health issues.” (P3, Principle, 30 years' experience with HL)
3.2.5.3 Impact on the educators and learning environment
Since the children feel self-conscious, it hinders their confidence in the class. This can affect the way children engage in the classroom and can hinder interaction or the ability to speak up, leading to further learning disadvantages, which then also creates challenges for the teacher. The staff needs to provide constant reassurance to the students in an attempt to reduce their insecurities.
“Self-confidence is suffering if, in class, they react differently as a result of not hearing, and the others notice it. Or when they have to ask the teacher to repeat something which they did not hear or understand.” (P1, Sports & culture coach, 12 years' experience with HL)
“They need constant reassurance that they are as good as their hearing peers” (P97, Educator, 3 years' experience with HL)
Due to various reasons such as communication barriers and misunderstandings, students with HL become frustrated and angry easily, both in a classroom setting and in social environments.
“Some children throw tantrums very easily when we cannot understand them” (P65, Educator, 30 years' experience with HL)
“As the children are unable to express themselves, this leads to a learner being frustrated with themselves, others around them and their hearing impairment situation.” (P74, Educator, 3 years' experience with HL)
Their attention span is low, and it is difficult for the educator to keep the children engaged during class. Some of the children are also said to be dependent on the teacher, which makes it challenging to provide sufficient support.
“In the classroom, they are talkative as they may be asking their friends what they have just missed. They are dependent, they can't do things on their own without the advice of the teacher.” (P116, Educator, 4 years' experience with HL)
“Their concentration span is low” (P81, Educator, 7 years' experience with HL)
Creative thinking and comprehension of abstract concepts is reported to be limited for learners with HL. Educators need to navigate this, as these are core skills children need to engage with the educational content.
“The fact that they cannot hear any sound, they have nothing to stimulate their mind to be able to think and reason creatively. What they see means nothing to them because they do not understand it.” (P144, Educator, 6 years' experience with HL)
4 Discussion
Speech and language were identified as the main factors affecting children with HL, which was further emphasized by staff reports of the challenges faced with language and communication. Inadequate sign language proficiency and communication breakdown amongst learners with HL and educators could negatively impact how learners grasp the course content, and this could inhibit academic performance (). Similarly, parents also struggle with communication breakdown on the grounds of the speech perception of the child, the extent to which the child has acquired language skills, the home language and how it correlates with the school language and sign language. This was also observed amongst some children with cochlear implants (Zaidman-Zait, 2008). As experienced by the participants in our study, the way in which students with HL construct their thoughts and perceptions differs from their hearing peers, because the grammatical and linguistic structure of SASL differs from verbal language. This creates challenges in navigating the curriculum and classroom environment ().
Many staff members were not satisfied with the level of parental support and engagement. Reid's (2019) evaluation of previous research indicates that parental support is a key aspect in the educational success of their child, and that the more parents are involved in the child's education, the better their communication ability will be. For parents to be more involved they need to overcome some of the challenges they face in relation to their knowledge and awareness of HL, understanding of Deaf culture, the importance of social support and access to resources, and acceptance of their child's HL, amongst others (; Quittner et al., 2010; ; Wonkam-Tingang et al., 2021). Similar studies in other countries had the same outcome from participants, who were also educators at schools for the Deaf, who sought more academic and social involvement of the parents (; ). The following quote from Magongwa's study underscores the importance of parental involvement and finding ways to encourage the parents to actively participate and assist them to overcome barriers, and which echoes the participants' sentiments:
“There is no support from parents of deaf children. Parents are not active participants in the education of their deaf children. They don't come to check or consult us on how their children are progressing. We don't have an opportunity to share our experiences of teaching SASL with them because they don't contact us. This lack of consultation with parents makes the implementation of SASL difficult because parents are not involved. The learning of SASL does not continue at home” (, p. 9).
A major challenge reported by the participants was the late diagnosis and integration of children with HL into the educational system, resulting in delays in linguistic and cognitive development as well as teaching literacy skills. For optimal outcomes, intervention is recommended to be implemented by the age of 9 months, but generally in SA, HL is diagnosed from 2 years and older, in some instances, they are only diagnosed at 8 years, with an 8-month waiting period before the necessary interventions are introduced (Swanepoel, 2009; ). According to findings by , this has a crucial impact on school readiness and affects children when they enter school. In addition, children with physical or learning challenges affected the teachers' ability to educate them. In a study at a school for the Deaf in Swaziland, teachers expressed that they are not proficient in Deaf education and that some of their learners have multiple disabilities, further complicating their teaching and being underprepared ().
Having sufficient training to work with deaf learners is necessary for staff members to conduct their work efficiently. However, according to the study by , staff may feel that they are not provided with sufficient training, which affects their teaching ability and experience and like some of the participants in the study, they may feel incapable of providing good education and support. This further reiterates the statements made by Umalusi (2018), Storbeck (2023) and that it is necessary for staff to receive appropriate training, which is subject to quality control throughout their profession.
Quality education also relies on the suitability of the curriculum for Deaf schools (; ). The educators who participated in our study struggled with the teaching and learning process when the curriculum is not tailored to the needs of children with HL, a challenge also reported by educators in Jordan (). Staff in previous studies conducted in South Africa and other African countries have confirmed the incompatibility of curricula used in schools for the Deaf (; ; ). Although great strides have been taken to improve Deaf education since the integration of SASL orientated Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) and sign language became an official language in SA, it remains important that the DOE continues to evaluate the curriculum for learners enrolled in schools for the Deaf and make necessary adaptations.
Some staff noted the need for more resources and specialized personnel. During the data collection phase, we noted that some schools for the Deaf in rural areas lacked infrastructural resources and external support, suggesting the need for educational support in these schools. The DOE have noted the importance of specialized equipment, assistive devices and learning support materials (). Yet another study on schools for the Deaf in South Africa found that the available resources noted by educators at the schools did not include many of the items on the SASL CAPS document stipulating the required materials, and the educators mentioned that they do not have sufficient resources, which limited their teaching capacity (). Furthermore, the DOE have mentioned that schools need to be easily accessible to the community (Department of Basic Education, 2010), but this has not been observed by the participants, in terms of Deaf schools.
The DOE was noted to not have full knowledge and expertise about children with HL and should not be the sole stakeholders in the educational design and implementation. This view is supported by , who notes that attempts have been made to educate the DOE on Deaf education as they have limited capacity to make some decisions. In addition to challenges faced with the DOE, the staff noted that the lack of understanding about HL and the Deaf community, by the public, also creates a platform for misconceptions and discrimination, which is in line with other research findings (; Terry et al., 2017).
The psychosocial implications of having HL were not only perceived to have a direct impact on the children, but it also influenced their classroom engagement and interactions with the staff. A study on deaf learners in mainstream schools in Zimbabwe also found that the children were also ridiculed, were excluded and bullied, felt depressed and required emotional support from their teachers (). found similar experiences amongst deaf college and high-school students with HL, who reported feeling sad, lonely, rejected, inferior and frustrated.
4.1 Practical implications
This research acknowledges the importance of schools that cater for the special needs of children with HL. A review and adjustment of the curriculum would be beneficial to create an easier learning environment for staff and learners. It is also vital that educators are provided with thorough training and continuous professional development to optimize their teaching capacity. If more schools for the Deaf are not created and situated in areas where no such schools exist, then families are unable to access these facilities and obtain the necessary educational support.
4.2 Research recommendations
As most of this research was conducted at schools where children learn sign language, it would be useful to conduct research at institutions for children with HL that promote aural communication. Such a study would result in in-depth and adequate data on both settings, and a comparison can then be made of the experiences of oral versus sign language-based settings. It might also be useful to gain information from the DOE on how they perceive their involvement and the inclusion of schools for the Deaf.
4.3 Study limitations
Conducting qualitative research by means of a self-administered questionnaire instead of interviews can result in limited responses and do not allow for further probing as one would in individual face-to-face interviews. Although the researchers contacted all provinces in SA, not all the provinces and schools for the Deaf were included in this study, therefore, there might be additional themes not identified in this study as these findings are based on the perceptions and experiences of those who participated. The study was conducted in the official languages at the participating schools; however, it will be useful to include other indigenous languages in future studies.
5 Conclusion
Our findings, synthesized across five interrelated themes, highlight the complex and systemic challenges faced by staff working in schools for the Deaf. Language and communication barriers present significant challenges, not only within the academic setting, where teachers struggle to effectively communicate with learners and appropriately pitch their lessons to meet diverse needs, but also within families, where affective and consistent communication is often limited. An insufficient degree of support and knowledge among various stakeholders emerged as another area of concern. Staff described limited family involvement in supporting children's ongoing educational development beyond the school environment, while the Department of Education and broader community were perceived as demonstrating inadequate knowledge and understanding of Deaf learners and deaf education. Educational limitations were also prominent, ranging from a curriculum not adequately tailored to deaf education, to delayed diagnosis and intervention, both of which hinder learner progress. In addition, learners experience psychological and behavioral challenges associated with isolation and rejection. These struggles not only negatively affect the children themselves but also create additional pressures and hurdles for educators within the classroom environment. Collectively, these factors do not foster an optimal educational environment. The findings suggest the need for early identification and intervention and ongoing engagement with various stakeholders such as the educational system, community and parents or caregivers. Furthermore, capacity building in the form of staff training, contextually appropriate resources and an increase of schools for the deaf is necessary to overcome some of the challenges identified by participants and to promote more equitable educational outcomes for deaf learners in South Africa.
Statements
Data availability statement
The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because they contain sensitive qualitative data. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to awonkam1@jhmi.edu.
Ethics statement
The study involving humans were approved by Faculty of Health Sciences, Human Research Ethics Committee, University of Cape Town. The study were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
KT: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Project administration, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft. MM: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Validation, Writing – review & editing. CdK: Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing. KK: Writing – review & editing. AW: Funding acquisition, Resources, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This research was funded by National Institutes of Health, grant number U01HG009716; the Wellcome trust and the African Academy of Sciences, grant number H3A/18//001 and National Institute of Mental Health and NIH award number U01MH127692.
Acknowledgments
We appreciate the participants who gave their time and shared their experiences. We thank the schools for the Deaf for granting permission for the research to be conducted and for assisting with the recruitment process.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1
BashirR.KanwalA.AnwerS. (2023). Challenges of parent-teacher collaboration in the education of deaf students. J. Dev. Soc. Sci.4, 555–565. doi: 10.47205/jdss.2023(4-III)52
2
BatchelorM. (2010). The teacher experience deaf education at Sizwile school: challenges and strengths. Am. Ann. Deaf155, 498–500. doi: 10.1353/aad.2010.0022
3
BelottoM. (2018). Data analysis methods for qualitative research: managing the challenges of coding, interrater reliability, and thematic analysis. Q. Rep.23, 2622–2633. doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3492
4
BöhringerC.StorbeckC. (2025). Bilingual-bicultural deaf education in South Africa—three case studies of the modes of communication in English literature classrooms. Int. J. Bilingual Educ. Bilingualism. 28, 1110–1130. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2025.2529541
5
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2012). “Thematic analysis,” in APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology eds. H. Cooper et al. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association), 57–71. doi: 10.1037/13620-004
6
BraunV.ClarkeV.BoultonE.DaveyL.McEvoyC. (2021). The online survey as a qualitative research tool. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol.24, 641–654. doi: 10.1080/13645579.2020.1805550
7
CalderonR.GreenbergM. T. (2012). “Social and emotional development of deaf children: family, school, and program effects,” in The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education, Vol. 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 188–199. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199750986.013.0014
8
ChaukeM.LedwabaR. G.MotitsweJ. M. (2025). Teaching deaf learners in multi-grade classes: perceptions from a rural Mpumalanga special school. Afr. J. Disabil.14:1710. doi: 10.4102/AJOD.v14i0.1710
9
ChimhengaS.SibandaP. (2016). Accessibility of curriculum by learners with hearing impairment in schools: a case study of Bulawayo Secondary School in Zimbabwe. Global. J. Adv. Res.3, 947–952.
10
CreswellJ. W.PothC. (2016). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
11
DavidsR.RomanN.SchenckR. (2021). The challenges experienced by parents when parenting a child with hearing loss within a South African context. J. Family Soc. Work 1–19, 1852639. doi: 10.1080/10522158.2020.1852639
12
Department of Basic Education and Republic of South Africa (2010). Guidelines for Full-Service/Inclusive Schools, Education White Paper 6, Special Needs Education, Building an Inclusive Education and Training System. Available online at: https://wcedonline.westerncape.gov.za/Specialised-ed/documents/GuidelinesforFull-service-InclusiveSchools2010.pdf (Accessed November 28, 2025).
13
DiazJ. (2024). The Lived Experiences of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in a Mainstream Education System. Master's thesis. De La Salle University. Available online at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384763073 (Accessed November 28, 2025).
14
DlaminiS. P. (2021). Sign Language Challenges Encountered by Deaf Learners Born to Hearing Parents (Master's thesis). University of Pretoria. Available online at: https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/86149 (Accessed December 2, 2025).
15
du PlessisC. L. (2025). Deaf students and South African Sign Language (SASL) in teacher training: avoiding a Procrustean ‘BEd'. J. Lang. Teach.59:6682. doi: 10.56285/jltVol59iss1a6682
16
EhlertK.CoetzerC. (2020). Maternal knowledge and views regarding early hearing detection and intervention in children aged 0–5 years at a semi-urban primary care clinic in South Africa. S.Afr. J. Commun. Disord. 67(2225–4765 (Electronic)), e1–e8. doi: 10.4102/sajcd.v67i1.681
17
El-ZriagatI.SmadiY. (2012). Challenges of educating students who are deaf and hard-of-hearing in Jordan. J. Human. Soc. Sci.2, 150–158.
18
FlahertyM. (2015). What we can learn from hearing parents of deaf children. Aust. J. Spec. Educ.39, 1–18. doi: 10.1017/jse.2014.19
19
GBD 2019 Hearing Loss Collaborators (2021). Hearing loss prevalence and years lived with disability, 1990–2019: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet397, 996–1009. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00516-X
20
GlaserM.van PletzenE. (2012). Inclusive education for deaf students: literacy practices and South African sign language. South. Afr. Ling. Appl. Lang. Stud.30, 25–37. doi: 10.2989/16073614.2012.693707
21
HankinsR. C. (2015). Social Interaction Between Deaf and Hearing People. Honours thesis. University of Mississippi. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/787?utm_source=egrove.olemiss.edu%2Fhon_thesis%2F787utm_medium=PDFutm_campaign=PDFCoverPages
22
HarrisP. A.TaylorR.MinorB. L.ElliottV.FernandezM.O'NealL.et al. (2019). The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J. Biomed. Inf.95:103208. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208
23
HaufikuI.NghitoolwaH.AbahJ. (2024). Teachers' barriers in implementing the revised curriculum for deaf learners: The case of two special schools in Northern Namibia. J. Res. Policy Pract. Teach. Educ.14, 28–44. doi: 10.37134/jrpptte.vol14.2.3.2024
24
HlayisiV. (2024). “The nature of hearing impairment and its impact on learning,” in Disability Studies in Inclusive Educationeds. J. McKenzie et al. (Cape Town: Including Disability in Education in Africa (IDEA) Research Unit, Division of Disability Studies, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Cape Town).
25
HolcombL.DostalH.WolbersK. (2024). A comparative study of how teachers communicate in deaf education classrooms. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ.30, 80–93. doi: 10.1093/jdsade/enae043
26
KhanN. B.JosephL. (2024). Risk factors and hearing outcomes in infants and young children in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Commun. Disord.71, e1–e11. doi: 10.4102/sajcd.v71i1.1031
27
MagongwaL. (2010). Deaf Education in South Africa. Am. Ann. Deaf155, 493–496. doi: 10.1353/aad.2010.0042
28
MagongwaL. (2024). Factors inhibiting the implementation of South African Sign Language curriculum in schools for deaf learners. Per Linguam40, 1–23. doi: 10.5785/40-2-999
29
MalulekeN.Khoza-ShangaseK.KanjiA. (2021). School readiness and academic achievement of children with hearing impairment: a South African exploratory study. S. Afr. J. Child. Educ.11:a898. doi: 10.4102/sajce.v11i1.898
30
MangaT.MasukuK. (2020). Challenges of teaching the deaf-blind learner in an education setting in Johannesburg: experiences of educators and assistant educators. S. Afr. J. Commun. Disord.67, 1–7. doi: 10.4102/sajcd.v67i1.649
31
MapepaP.MaganoM. D. (2018). Support to address barriers to learning for learners who are deaf. Afr. J. Disabil.7:a381. doi: 10.4102/ajod.v7i0.381
32
MoustacheN.MakhobaM. (2024). Teaching deaf learners in multi-grade classes: perceptions from a rural Mpumalanga special school. Afr. J. Disabil. 13:a1710. doi: 10.4102/ajod.v14i0.1710
33
MukunaR.MaizereJ. (2022). Exploring the experiences of d/deaf and hard of hearing children in a mainstream school in Zimbabwe: a narrative analysis. Am. Ann. Deaf166, 601–620. doi: 10.1353/aad.2022.0000
34
NgobeniW.MaimaneJ.RankhumiseM. (2020). The effect of limited sign language as barrier to teaching and learning among deaf learners in South Africa. S. Afr. J. Educ.40, 1–7. doi: 10.15700/saje.v40n2a1735
35
NowellL. S.NorrisJ. M.MoulesN. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int. J. Qual. Methods16:9406917733847. doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847
36
NtindaK.ThwalaS.TfusiB. (2019). Experiences of teachers of deaf and hard- of- hearing students' in a special needs school: an exploratory study. J. Educ. Train. Stud.7:79. doi: 10.11114/jets.v7i7.4274
37
NugrohoF.LintangsariA. (2022). Deaf students' challenges in learning English: a literature review. IJDS Indon. J. Disabil. Stud.9, 217–224. doi: 10.21776/ub.ijds.2022.009.02.06
38
ParkinI. (2010). Factors affecting deaf education in South Africa. Am. Ann. Deaf155, 490–493. doi: 10.1353/aad.2010.0038
39
Parliament of South Africa (2023). The NA Approves South African Sign Language as the 12th Official Language. Parliament of the Republic of South Africa. Available online at: https://www.parliament.gov.za/press-releases/na-approves-south-african-sign-language-12th-official-language (Accessed November 27, 2025).
40
PeelE. L. (2004). Inclusive practice in South Africa: A Deaf Education Perspective. Masters thesis. University of the Witwatersrand.
41
PhiriM. (2021). Challenges faced by deaf children in accessing education in Malawi. Deaf. Educ. Int.23, 234–249. doi: 10.1080/14643154.2021.1952374
42
QuittnerA. L.BarkerD. H.CruzI.SnellC.GrimleyM. E.BotteriM.et al. (2010). Parenting stress among parents of deaf and hearing children: associations with language delays and behavior problems. Par. Sci. Pract.10, 136–155. doi: 10.1080/15295190903212851
43
SLED and Development S.L.E. (2020). SLED Annual Raport. Available online at: https://www.sled.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/SLED-Annual-Report-2019-2020-v2-medium.pdf (Accessed December 1, 2025).
44
Stemela-ZaliU.KathardH.SefothoM. M. (2022). The matrix of linguistic exclusions impeding career construction for D/deaf learners. Afr. J. Disabil.11:935. doi: 10.4102/ajod.v11i0.935
45
StorbeckC. (2023). “Sign language is now official in South Africa—how this will help education in deaf schools,” in The Conversation Africa. Available online at: https://theconversation.com/sign-language-is-now-official-in-south-africa-how-this-will-help-education-in-deaf-schools-207126 (Accessed November 27, 2025).
46
StorbeckC.MartinD. (2010). South African deaf education and the deaf community. Am. Ann. Deaf155, 488–490. doi: 10.1353/aad.2010.0034
47
SwanepoelD. (2009). Early detection of infant hearing loss in South Africa. S. Afr. Med. J.99, 158–159.
48
TerryD.LêQ.NguyenH.MalatzkyC. (2017). Misconceptions of the Deaf: Giving voice to the voiceless. Health, Culture and Society. 9. 47–61. doi: 10.5195/HCS.2017.211
49
TheunissenM.SwanepoelD. (2008). Early hearing detection and intervention services in the public health sector in South Africa. Int. J. Audiol. 47, 23–29. doi: 10.1080/14992020802294032
50
TombsM.StrangeH. (2024). Using qualitative questionnaires in medical education research. Persp. Med. Educ.13, 280–287. doi: 10.5334/pme.1102
51
UhlénI.AllisonM.RosenhallU. (2020). Prevalence of childhood hearing impairment in the County of Stockholm—a 40-year perspective from Sweden and other high-income countries. Int. J. Audiol.59, 866–873. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1776405
52
Umalusi (2018). Sign of the Times. The Quality Assurance of the Teaching and Assessment of South African Sign Language. Pretoria, Umalusi. Available online at: https://www.umalusi.org.za/docs/reports/2018/sa_sign_language.pdf (Accessed December 3, 2025).
53
Wonkam-TingangE.Kengne KamgaK.AdadeyS. M.NguefackS.De KockC.MunungN. S.et al. (2021). Knowledge and challenges associated with hearing impairment in affected individuals from Cameroon (Sub-Saharan Africa). Front. Rehabil. Sci.2:726761. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2021.726761
54
World Health Organization (2021). World Report on Hearing. Geneva. Available online at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240020481 (accessed July 3, 2021).
55
World Health Organization (2025). Deafness and Hearing Loss. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available online at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/hearing-loss#tab=tab_1 (Accessed November 10, 2025).
56
XieY, H.PotměšilM.PetersB. (2014). Children who are deaf or hard of hearing in inclusive educational settings: a literature review on interactions with peers. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf. Educ.19, 423–437. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enu017
57
Zaidman-ZaitA. (2008). Everyday problems and stress faced by parents of children with cochlear implants. Rehabil. Psychol.53, 139–152. doi: 10.1037/0090-5550.53.2.139
Summary
Keywords
deaf education, educational limitations, hearing loss, language and communication, schools for the deaf, teaching
Citation
Tavares K, Malope M, de Kock C, Kengne Kamga K and Wonkam A (2026) Perceptions and experiences of staff members working at schools for the deaf in South Africa. Front. Educ. 11:1783864. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1783864
Received
08 January 2026
Revised
16 February 2026
Accepted
23 February 2026
Published
19 March 2026
Volume
11 - 2026
Edited by
Konstantinos M. Ntinas, Ministry of Education, Religious Affairs and Sports, Greece
Reviewed by
Chipo Chitereka, University of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe
Damene Matsana Malado, Dilla University, Ethiopia
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Tavares, Malope, de Kock, Kengne Kamga and Wonkam.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ambroise Wonkam, ambroise.wonkam@uct.ac.za; awonkam1@jhmi.edu
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.