The purpose of these studies was to utilize a novel multilinguistic analysis of spelling in the writing samples of children. The first study evaluated the clinical utility of a multilinguistic spelling assessment, the POMplexity for Roots and Affixes, for identifying different profiles among four spellers. The clinical implications of the resulting distributions of phonological, orthographic, and morphological spelling errors were then described. The second study assessed the spelling of words produced in writing samples of 188 children who are hard of hearing (CHH) and 93 children with normal hearing (CNH). Unexpectedly, compared to CNH, the CHH produced fewer misspelled words. The CHH demonstrated some areas of linguistic weakness (e.g., fewer phonologically plausible errors, more consonant errors, more omitted affixes), as well as areas of linguistic strength (e.g., fewer vowel errors). When comparing different levels of aided audibility among CHH, poorer aided audibility was associated with more single sound errors (e.g. omissions, additions), and fewer multiple sound errors. The third study evaluated the spelling of 23 children with cochlear implants (CIs). The spelling performance of the subset of nine children who received a CI by 24 months was compared with age-matched CNH and CHH. Compared to CNH, children with CIs demonstrated a similar proportion of misspelled words but a different distribution of errors. The errors produced by children with CIs suggested areas of linguistic weakness (e.g. fewer phonologically plausible errors) and areas of linguistic strength (e.g., fewer misspelled roots in multimorphemic words, fewer vowel errors) relative to peers with typical hearing. Compared to CHH, children with CIs demonstrated a similar proportion of misspelled words as well as a similar distribution of errors. The results of these studies suggest that the novel multilinguistic spelling assessment has the sensitivity to detect important differences in spelling performance of individual and groups of children. Furthermore, the findings suggest that children with hearing loss who have benefitted from early intervention and use a spoken language approach demonstrate similar, if not better, spelling accuracy than CNH, while demonstrating differences in the degree to which they utilize phonological, orthographic, and morphological awareness to inform their spelling.