Background: For Deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) children, early identification and intervention, and quality linguistic input during early childhood pave the way for optimal language development, educational achievement, and well-being. The decisions parents and caregivers make on behalf of their DHH child are influenced by their knowledge and beliefs. Parent/caregivers knowledge about child language development has been associated with children’s language abilities.

Aims: This study set out to examine the knowledge and beliefs about child language development held by parents and caregivers of DHH children in New Zealand. In doing so, it sought to identify (a) groups that may benefit from further support, and (b) specific areas of child language development where parent/caregiver views differ from the current literature base.

Methodology: Data was collected nationwide, via an online qualitative survey. Participants were 36 parents and caregivers of DHH children aged between zero and five years, who were living in Aotearoa New Zealand. Participants responded to demographic questions, followed by a 30-item survey on child language development and hearing needs, named the ‘Early Language Development for the Deaf or Hard of Hearing’ (ELD-DHH) survey. Participants were asked to indicate how much they ‘agreed’ or ‘disagreed’ with each item on a five-point Likert-type scale. The ELD-DHH was based on previous a survey by Suskind et al. (2018). Suskind et al.’s work was designed for typically developing children and not specifically for the New Zealand DHH population. Therefore, thirteen additional items were included, five of which were from an earlier study (Suskind et al., 2016a). Two additional open-text questions captured participant’s beliefs about the main influences on, and barriers to DHH children learning to talk and/or sign. These were analysed via thematic analysis.

Results: On average participants’ responses, as measured by the ELD-DHH, were reasonably consistent with international literature. However, responses varied considerably within the group. Participant responses aligned closely with the literature on early exposure to learning opportunities, and language development in infants and toddlers. In contrast, responses demonstrated low consistency with the literature base on the predictive power of linguistic input in the home and early vocabulary for later language development and academic outcomes. Participant’s views also differed from the literature on the importance of joint attention, high hearing amplification device use (aiming for ‘all waking hours’), child directed speech; and parents/caregivers providing the strongest linguistic model through their home language. Participants’ age and highest reported level of education were correlated with higher scores on the ELD-DHH. Thematic analysis of the open text questions indicated that participants believed the main influences on DHH children’s language development were, access to language; networks of support; language infused interaction; and hearing. Whereas barriers to language development were perceived as; barriers to accessing services and support, barriers to learning NZSL, and difficulties with hearing amplification. Within this question participants also responded with, facilitators of DHH children’s language development, and others reported experiencing no barriers.

Conclusions: Alignment of participant knowledge and beliefs with international literature varied within the group, and between specific areas of child language development. Many participants valued the and services and supports they had received, and others indicated the need for better access to these. Findings may indicate the need for (a) individualised educational support for parents and caregivers (b) education on specific topics where parents and caregivers of DHH’s knowledge and beliefs differed considerably from the international literature base on DHH children’s language development.