1 / 23

Faith Loven University of Minnesota Duluth Nancy Anderson Hermantown Elementary School Kelly J. Fisk Cedar Mt. School

“ The Effects of Classroom Amplification Systems on Early Elementary Students’ Academic Achievement, Attending Behavior, and Their Ability to Hear Their Teacher”. Faith Loven University of Minnesota Duluth Nancy Anderson Hermantown Elementary School Kelly J. Fisk Cedar Mt. Schools

lawrencia
Download Presentation

Faith Loven University of Minnesota Duluth Nancy Anderson Hermantown Elementary School Kelly J. Fisk Cedar Mt. School

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “The Effects of Classroom Amplification Systems on Early Elementary Students’ Academic Achievement, Attending Behavior, and Their Ability to Hear Their Teacher” Faith Loven University of Minnesota Duluth Nancy Anderson Hermantown Elementary School Kelly J. Fisk Cedar Mt. Schools Sheila J. Johnson Children’s Hospitals and Clinics

  2. Background Information Importance of audition in the classroom 45% of a child’s school day is spent engaged in listening (Berg, 1987) Schools are terrible auditory environments Noisy Reverberant An audio example of the auditory environment of a typical classroom

  3. Speech Understanding Poor acoustics and speech understanding Loven & Collins (1987)

  4. Children with Hearing Loss in the Classroom Unidentified hearing loss Fluctuating hearing thresholds Otitis media On any given day, 30% of children in a regular education placement are struggling with an educationally significant hearing loss, known or unknown (Nelson & Schmidt, 1993) Loss of important linguistic cues and contextual information

  5. FM Amplification Systems Improves the acoustics of the classroom A picture A demonstration

  6. Sound Field Amplification Systems Address the problems of personal FM systems Benefit ALL children Not so much an amplifying system as it is an equalizing system

  7. Efficacy of Sound Field FM Amplification Systems Mainstream Amplification Resource Room Study (MAARS) in 1980 Hearing impaired children in regular classroom settings made greater academic improvement than similar children in a resource room placement Other studies Improvement in Academic achievement (Sarff, Ray, & Bagwell, 1981) Test taking performance (Burgener & Deichmann,1982) Vocabulary growth (Lovass, 1986) Identification of vowels and environmental sounds (Lovass, 1986) Speech discrimination ability (Jones, Berg, & Viehweg, 1989) Language development (Gilman, 1989)

  8. The Research Questions What are the effects of classroom amplification on “normal” hearing students in primary grade classrooms in terms of the following dimensions? Academic achievement in three core areas Reading Mathematics Spelling Objective attending behavior Students’ subjective judgments of the listening environment

  9. Methods Subjects 48 second grade boys and girls in two separate classrooms in a northern Minnesota K-3 elementary school Predominantly Caucasian Ages ranged from 7-9 years 24 students were in each classroom No known impairments that would affect learning

  10. The Amplified Classroom Classroom “A” Deluxe Classroom Amplification System manufactured by Audio Enhancement 4 ceiling-mounted speakers Cordless microphone and transmitter Used during instructional time Gain adjusted to provide a 65 dBA presentation level

  11. Sound Level Measurements of the Classrooms Classroom “B” (non-amplified) Average signal-to-noise ratio was +5 dB Occupied teacher quiet vs occupied teacher talking Classroom “A” (amplified) Average signal-to-noise ratio was +14 dB Occupied teacher quiet vs occupied teacher talking

  12. Measures of Academic Achievement Core area curriculum used in both classrooms Math in My World (McGraw Hill, 1998) Collections from Young Scholars (Open Court Publications, 1999) Dolch Sight Word Lists (University of Illinois Press 1974) Unit tests in reading, mathematics, and spelling Scores recorded by the classroom teacher # items correct/# items possible Data periods Period 1: November-December. Pre-amplification Period 2: January-March: First comparison Period 3: April-May: second comparison

  13. Measures of Attending Behavior Six students (3 boys/3 girls) randomly selected in each classroom Observation recording form Attending behaviors: Eye contact w/teacher Eye contact w/another student called upon by the teacher Eye contact w/materials currently in use by the class 20 random observations Observations made during period 1 and the end of period 3

  14. Measures of Listening Judgments Student survey form Filled out by every student in Classroom A and B and two first grade classrooms and two third grade classrooms during period 1 and at the end of period 3 144 students surveyed

  15. Results for Academic Achievement Each curricular area analyzed separately Figure shows the average reading test scores as a function of observation period for amplified and non-amplified classrooms T-test determined a significant (p<.05) difference between the two classrooms during period 3

  16. Results for Academic Achievement Figure shows the average spelling test scores as a function of observation period for amplified and non-amplified classrooms T-test determined a significant (p<.05) difference between the two classrooms during period 3

  17. Results for Academic Achievement Figure shows the average mathematic test scores as a function of observation period for amplified and non-amplified classrooms T-test determined no significant (p<.05) differences between the two classrooms any of the three observation periods

  18. Summary of Results for Academic Achievement Significantly better performance was demonstrated in the amplified classroom, compared to the non-amplified classroom, after some period of exposure to the system in the areas of reading and spelling. No differences were evident between the two classrooms for math.

  19. Results for Classroom Attending Behaviors Two-way factorial analysis of variance Procedure (ANOVA) ANOVA summary suggests a significant (p<.05) interaction between classroom and observation period

  20. Results for Classroom Attending Behaviors Figure plotting the average number of positive attending behaviors recorded as a function of classroom and observation period Tukey Test for Honestly Significant Differences Significant (p<.05) differences involve the May time period between the amplified and non-amplified classroom

  21. Summary of Results for Classroom Attending Behavior Observations of attending classroom behaviors increased significantly in the classroom with the FM sound field amplifier, after installation of the unit

  22. Results for Listening Judgments Tables show the averaged responses to each survey item across all classrooms The last item shows a difference between the average %-change across the two classrooms

  23. Summary and Conclusions Classroom amplification systems, used in classrooms with normally hearing, normally developing second graders, lead to significant gains in academic achievement The benefit of amplification is not immediate Objective measures of classroom listening behavior increases in an amplified classroom May be related to the childrens’ perception of a quieter classroom in the amplified classroom

More Related