Communication plans for deaf and hard of hearing students
By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated
Short answer
A communication plan for a deaf or hard of hearing student records the student's language and mode, the family's input, access to peers and staff who share that language, communication access services, technology, and the options the team considered. Some states require a separate plan; elsewhere the same questions go into the IEP's communication special factor.
Federal rules require every IEP team to consider the language and communication needs of a student who is deaf or hard of hearing. That includes chances for direct communication with peers and staff in the student's language and communication mode, the student's academic level, and the full range of needs, including chances for direct instruction in the student's language and mode.[1]
Federal rules do not require a separate document. Some states do, usually through a law often called a Deaf Child's Bill of Rights or through state special education rules, and the form goes by names such as communication plan or language and communication plan. Most states have no separate form. Check your state's rules. If your state has none, the template below still works as a worksheet for writing the special factor section of the IEP.
The plan is written by the IEP team, usually drafted by the teacher of the deaf, with the family. It respects every language path. ASL, spoken English, both together, cued speech and English-based signing are all choices families make for good reasons, and the plan's job is to make sure the school can deliver on the choice.
The fill-in communication plan
Copy the table into your IEP software or a document. Each row is one section.
| Section | What to fill in |
|---|---|
| 1. Student's language and communication mode | Primary language (for example ASL, spoken English, both); modes used at school and at home; how the student prefers to receive and express information |
| 2. Family input | Family's language(s) at home; family's goals for language and communication; date and method of the family's input |
| 3. Language level | Current level in each language, with the tool or sample used and the date; who assessed it |
| 4. Direct communication with peers | Number and ages of peers who share the student's language and mode, in the class, school and program; how often the student interacts with them |
| 5. Direct communication with staff | Staff who communicate directly in the student's language, such as teachers of the deaf or signing teachers; their proficiency; how many hours per week of direct instruction |
| 6. Communication access services | Interpreting or transliterating (mode), real-time captioning, note-taking; settings where each is provided, including extracurricular activities |
| 7. Hearing and assistive technology | Hearing aids, implants, remote microphone, captioning tools; who checks them daily; who maintains them |
| 8. Deaf and hard of hearing role models | Access to deaf or hard of hearing adults and peers, such as mentors, events or programs |
| 9. Educational options considered | Programs and placements discussed, such as general education with services, a regional program, or a school for the deaf; why the chosen option fits |
| 10. Safety and emergency communication | Visual alerts, an assigned adult for emergencies, communication on buses and field trips |
| 11. Review | Who is responsible for each part; date to review |
Section notes: what reviewers and parents look for
Language and mode (sections 1 to 3). Reviewers look for a clear statement of the language, not "total communication" with no detail. Parents look for whether the plan reflects what they said. Write the student's level in each language from an actual measure, such as a scored language sample, not a guess.
Peers (section 4). This is often the weakest section. A student who is the only signer in a school of 600 has no peers for direct communication, and the plan should say so honestly. Reviewers want a number and a frequency, not "opportunities will be provided."
Staff (section 5). Name roles, not people, and state proficiency. A teacher who knows 50 signs is not providing direct instruction in ASL. Interpreted instruction is access, not direct instruction; the plan should keep the two apart.
Access services (section 6). Families often find gaps here: no interpreter at the science fair, no captions on the bus video. List every setting, not only the classroom. Interpreting is a related service under federal rules, and it includes sign language interpreting, oral and cued language transliteration, and transcription services such as real-time captioning.[2]
Technology (section 7). Schools must make sure hearing aids and external implant parts worn at school are working.[3] Name who checks and when. The hearing aid check data guide shows a simple log.
Role models (section 8). Many families value contact with deaf and hard of hearing adults. Reviewers in states that require this section look for something concrete, such as a mentor program or a regional event each semester.
Options considered (section 9). Parents want to know the team discussed real options, not only what the building already offers. Record each option and the reason for the choice.
Completed example
This is a fictional fourth grader. The numbers are illustrations.
| Section | Example entry |
|---|---|
| 1. Language and mode | Leo is bilingual in ASL and English. ASL is his primary language for instruction and conversation. He reads and writes English. He uses bilateral hearing aids and some spoken English with family members. |
| 2. Family input | Parents use ASL and spoken English at home; grandparents use spoken English only. Family goal: strong ASL and grade-level English literacy. Input given at a planning meeting on 9/14 and by email. |
| 3. Language level | ASL: retells a signed story with 3 of 4 story elements on a rubric, scored by the teacher of the deaf from video on 9/20. English reading: instructional level about 1 year below grade, from the classroom reading assessment on 9/18. |
| 4. Peers | 3 signing peers in grades 3 to 5 in the regional DHH program in the same building. Leo joins them daily for 45 minutes and at lunch 3 days a week. |
| 5. Staff | Teacher of the deaf, fluent in ASL, provides 5 hours per week of direct English literacy instruction in ASL. Classroom teacher does not sign; instruction there is interpreted. |
| 6. Access services | ASL interpreter for all general education instruction, specials, assemblies, field trips and the after-school robotics club. Captions on all media. Note-taker copy for science and social studies. |
| 7. Technology | Bilateral hearing aids and a remote microphone worn by the classroom teacher. Morning check by the classroom para; monthly check by the educational audiologist. |
| 8. Role models | Monthly deaf mentor visit through the state program; family invited to the regional deaf youth day each spring. |
| 9. Options considered | General education with interpreter only (rejected: no signing peers); regional DHH program with general education inclusion (chosen); state school for the deaf (discussed; family prefers to stay local this year). |
| 10. Safety | Visual fire alarm strobes in all rooms Leo uses; classroom para assigned to alert him in drills; bus driver given a picture card set for emergencies. |
| 11. Review | Teacher of the deaf manages the plan; reviewed at each annual IEP meeting and if placement changes. |
Turning the plan into IEP goals and services
The plan describes access. The IEP turns it into services and goals:
- Services and minutes for the teacher of the deaf, interpreting and audiology go on the services page. See IEP services and minutes.
- Accommodations such as captions and seating go in the accommodations section. See deaf and hard of hearing accommodations.
- Goals for language, listening and self-advocacy come from the language levels in section 3. See IEP goals for deaf and hard of hearing students and templates on the visual communication goals and auditory skills goals pages.
- Goals for using an interpreter well are in working with an educational interpreter.
If something is missing
If the team cannot fill a section, write what is missing and the plan to fix it, with a date. "No signing peers in the building; team will explore the regional program's peer days by November 1" is honest and useful. A blank row helps no one. Parents can ask for a meeting to revise the plan or the IEP at any time. The low-incidence disabilities guide explains who owns each part of the plan. ASHA's guidance on hearing loss in children describes the range of communication approaches families choose.[4]
Frequently asked questions
Is a communication plan required for deaf students?
Not by federal law. Federal rules require the IEP team to consider the student's language and communication needs. Some states require a separate communication plan; most do not. Check your state's special education rules.
Who writes the communication plan?
The IEP team writes it together. The teacher of the deaf usually drafts it, with input from the family, the educational audiologist, the SLP and, when appropriate, the student.
Does the communication plan favor ASL or spoken language?
It should not favor either. The plan records the family's and student's language choice and checks that the school can provide peers, staff and access in that language and mode.
What if my state does not have a communication plan form?
Use the same questions to write the IEP's communication special factor. The team must still consider language, peers, staff, academic level and the full range of needs.
Use it in IEP Atlas
- IEP goals for hearing loss
- Auditory skills goals (access skills)
- Goals for the DHH teacher role
- Visual communication goals (access skills)
- Special factors in the IEP glossary
- American Sign Language in the IEP glossary
Related guides
- Low-incidence disabilities in the IEP: vision, hearing, deaf-blindness and physical needs
- IEP goals for deaf and hard of hearing students
- Accommodations for deaf and hard of hearing students
- Working with an educational interpreter: student IEP goals
- Self-advocacy goals for deaf and hard of hearing students
Sources
- 34 CFR §300.324: Development, review, and revision of IEP, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 34 CFR §300.34: Related services, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 34 CFR §300.113: Routine checking of hearing aids and external components of surgically implanted medical devices, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- Hearing Loss in Children, ASHA
Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.