This qualitative study explored the challenges faced by Malaysian primary school teachers in using sign language

for English instruction among Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students, as well as the factors contributing to

these challenges. The study employed semi-structured interviews with four teachers experienced in teaching

DHH learners. Data were transcribed and analyzed thematically using Braun and Clarke’s (2023) six-phase

framework to identify recurring patterns of meaning. Findings revealed that teachers encountered multifaceted

challenges, including fragmented sign systems, communication barriers, limited vocabulary resources, and a lack

contributes to the growing body of research on bilingual education for DHH learners and underscores the

importance of empowering educators as key agents of linguistic and educational equity.

Educating Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students presents persistent challenges in language education,

particularly in literacy development. Unlike their hearing peers, DHH learners rely primarily on visual

communication, necessitating instructional approaches that integrate sign language as a core medium of learning

(Terblanche & van Staden, 2021). One of the critical barriers to English literacy is the difference between

Bilingual–bimodal approaches, which use sign language alongside spoken or written languages, have

demonstrated positive outcomes in enhancing comprehension, vocabulary, and metalinguistic awareness (Canon

et al., 2022; Beal et al., 2024). Within this paradigm, the use of Language Learning Strategies (LLS) tailored for

DHH learners has gained increasing attention. Strategies such as visualization, fingerspelling, collaborative

learning, and metacognitive reflection have been found to improve engagement and retention (Oxford, 1990;

Terblanche & van Staden, 2021). Despite these global advances, significant gaps remain in translating these

insights into classroom practice, especially in developing contexts such as Malaysia.

In Malaysia, the linguistic and educational landscape for DHH students is uniquely complex. Several sign systems

are used in schools and communities: Bahasa Isyarat Malaysia (BIM), the natural language of the Malaysian Deaf

community; Kod Tangan Bahasa Melayu (KTBM), a manually coded system representing Malay grammar; and,

Isyarat Malaysia (BIM) will become a compulsory subject for special education students and optional for

mainstream learners. However, implementation remains hindered by insufficient teacher training, limited sign-

based resources, and the absence of standardized curricula for sign-supported English instruction (Chong &

Hussain, 2021; Asaari & Rashid, 2024). Consequently, teachers often integrate sign language into English

teaching without adequate professional guidance or institutional support.

Although inclusive education is expanding in Malaysia, teachers face multiple barriers when using sign language

in English instruction. These include a lack of formal training, limited access to teaching materials,

communication challenges, and time constraints in mixed-ability classrooms (Noor & Rahman, 2021). The

coexistence of multiple sign systems further leads to inconsistency and confusion, affecting both teaching

effectiveness and student comprehension (Hassan & Yusof, 2020). Research on teachers’ lived experiences in

students.

2. To identify factors that contribute to these challenges in Malaysian primary school settings.

1. What challenges do teachers face when using sign language with DHH students?

2. What factors contribute to these challenges in Malaysian primary school settings?

This study integrates theories of bilingualism, language acquisition, and strategic language learning to justify the

use of sign language in English instruction for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students within bilingual-

bimodal contexts. These frameworks explain how linguistic and cognitive transfer between sign language and

English occurs and establish the theoretical basis for this research.

Underlying Proficiency (CUP) of shared cognitive skills. Although Bahasa Isyarat Malaysia (BIM) and English

differ in modality, both draw upon this shared base. Research shows that literacy and reasoning abilities

developed through sign language enhance English learning despite modality differences (Simpson & Mayer,

2023; Subin & Liang-Itsara, 2022). DHH students who construct narratives in BIM can transfer these structures

into English writing, illustrating the cognitive link described by Cummins.

Bimodal bilingualism involves two languages in distinct modalities—a visual-gestural language (e.g., BIM or

SEE) and a spoken or written language (e.g., English). This dual channel promotes metalinguistic awareness,

cognitive flexibility, and literacy (Beal et al., 2024). Family use of bimodal communication strengthens language

written languages show stronger literacy and adaptability (Donati, 2021; Lillo-Martin, Gagne, & Chen Pichler,

2022). Teachers who integrate both modalities enhance comprehension and inclusion (Marshall et al., 2021),

whereas suppressing sign language restricts meaning and engagement. Embracing both modes is therefore

The integration of sign language into English instruction has attracted considerable scholarly attention in bilingual

grammar and syntax (Nugroho & Lintangsari, 2022). Early language acquisition—whether signed or spoken—is

vital for cognitive growth (Terblanche & van Staden, 2021). Language deprivation contributes to lower academic

performance and reading difficulties. Teachers report limited resources and inadequate assessment tools for

hearing-impaired learners (Ishrat, Iqbal, & Khan, 2022). Proficiency in bilingual pedagogy is crucial for bridging

communication gaps (Karuppannan et al., 2021). Structural differences between sign languages and English

Teachers face practical and pedagogical obstacles when using sign language in English instruction. Many lack

formal training, teaching materials, and supervisory support (Karuppannan et al., 2021). Consequently,

confidence in applying bimodal strategies remains low (Ishrat et al., 2022). Disparities in signing proficiency

Malaysia employs four main sign systems—BIM, KTBM, SEE, and ASL—creating linguistic and pedagogical

inconsistency (Salsabiilah, 2024). KTBM and SEE mirror spoken grammar and support curriculum goals but

impose higher cognitive demands (Saiful Bahri et al., 2023). In contrast, natural sign languages like BIM and

ASL have unique syntactic structures and cultural depth but differ from English and Malay (Yasin et al., 2021).

Teachers frequently alternate between systems—using SEE or KTBM for instruction and BIM for

communication—which may confuse students and complicate assessment (Saiful Bahri et al., 2023).

Standardized resources remain limited (Pfenninger et al., 2023). Without clear pedagogical guidance, this

Multiple sign systems further complicate bilingual-bimodal implementation. Yasin et al. (2021) classify the four

Malaysian systems, each varying in syntax and use. Coded systems such as SEE align with English grammar but

communication that supports language transfer (Singleton & Meier, 2021). Structural differences between sign

and written languages create cognitive strain for students learning English (Ballard, 2022). Grounded in

Cummins’ (1979) Interdependence Hypothesis, bilingual-bimodal instruction posits that a strong L1 foundation

sign systems. Most existing studies emphasize student outcomes; few explore teachers’ lived experiences in

instruction for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) students. A qualitative research design was employed to capture

teachers’ lived experiences, instructional practices, and perceived challenges in implementing bilingual-bimodal

and interpretations within their real-world teaching contexts (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The chapter describes

the research design, participants and sampling, ethical considerations, data collection and analysis procedures,

and the strategies used to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings.

This study adopted a qualitative research design using semi-structured interviews as the primary data collection

method. This approach allows participants to express their experiences and reflections in detail while providing

Through this design, the research sought to understand how teachers interpret their professional roles and

challenges in using sign language for English instruction among DHH students. The focus on subjective meaning

and contextual understanding makes qualitative inquiry particularly suitable for investigating complex, human-

reflect Malaysia’s broader educational context, where bilingual and inclusive practices coexist.

training, linguistic fragmentation of sign languages multiple systems, and systemic constraint. Two overarching

themes emerged: (a) the pedagogical and communicative challenges teaching through sign language, and (b) the

institutional and structural factors that contribute to these challenges.

systemic neglect in professional preparation for bilingual – bimodal education. These findings support Cummins’

(1979) Interdependence Hypothesis, illustrating that inconsistent exposure to sign language (L1) disrupts the

shared cognitive foundation needed for effective transfer of literacy skills to English (L2).