Once they are educated on the topic, most school district officials and administrators will not argue the benefits of a sound enhancement system. But, the overwhelming response to any new initiative is how much does it cost? And when a single classroom cost is multiplied over an entire school district, the financial considerations seem to overshadow the need and benefits for implementation.

The cost of a classroom sound enhancement system varies greatly depending on the manufacturer, the specific product, number of speakers throughout the classroom, extra options, installation considerations, portability, etc. Additional considerations should include: the life of the equipment, the average number of students using it each day, and the number of hours it is used each day. Unlike many other pieces of instructional technology, research on this one has proven a positive impact on academic achievement. Research has also shown that proper and consistent use of a sound enhancement system has financial benefits as well; enough in some cases, to completely recover the purchase and installation cost within a short period of time. The financial savings that offset the cost are derived from two sources: a reduction in the number of special education referrals and a reduction in the number of teacher absences for vocal related problems.

Special Education Reductions

According to a Special Education Expenditure Project (SEEP) report issued by the American Institutes for Research, during the 1999-2000 school year, the 50 states and the District of Columbia spent approximately $50 billion on special education services, amounting to $8,080 per special education student. The total spending to provide a combination of regular and special education services to students with disabilities amounted to $77.3 billion, or an average of $12,474 per student. An additional one billion dollars was expended on students with disabilities for other special needs programs such as Title I, English language learners, or gifted and talented students, bringing the per student amount to $12,639. Based on these figures, the total expenditure to educate the average student with disabilities is an estimated 1.90 times that expended to educate the typical regular education student with no special needs. Excluding expenditures on school facilities, the ratio of current operating expenditures on the typical special education student is 2.08 times that expended on the typical regular education student with no special needs.¹

The financial cost to society to "label" a child as needing Special Education services are staggering. A reduction in the number of children ear-marked for Special Education programs provides a significant financial return on investment. Sound enhancement systems have been proven to do just that.

From 1985 to 1990, the Putnam County School District in Ohio (Phonic Ear, 1994) phased in 60 sound enhancement units to help children with learning disabilities attend to verbal instruction in the mainstream classroom. The cost of the equipment at $1,500 per unit totaled $90,000. However, over the 5 year period, the number of students placed in learning disabilities programs declined nearly 40%, a reduction of 26 students, at a savings of $2,600 per student.²

Therefore, the total savings in reduced learning disabled referrals was $67,600. Projecting that decline forward an additional 5 years (realistically because ALL the systems were then in place) would result in a total savings of $338,000, more than 3.7 times the cost of the sound enhancement equipment.

In Oconto Falls, Wisconsin, a school district installed systems in every K-5 classroom. Eight months later, the 2,000-student district saw its special education referrals cut in half over levels from the prior nine years.³

Long term data from the MARRS project showed an approximate 40 percent reduction in special education referrals after using sound enhancement systems for five years.⁴

Reduced Teacher Absences

As discussed on the Teacher Benefits page, among the sound enhancement benefits to teachers is a reduction in vocal strain and fatigue. This ultimately reduces the number of teacher absences and the need and expense for substitute teachers. Several studies have confirmed this reduction. One such study is below.

A study by Laurie Allen (1995) in Dubuque, Iowa reported a 56% decline in absences of elementary teachers from vocal fatigue. Teachers in sound enhanced classrooms took on average .34 days per year per teacher for a vocal related illness, compared to those NOT in sound enhanced classrooms that averaged .97 sick days per year for a voice related problem.⁵

While these cost savings are significant and note-worthy, some individuals will advocate for acoustical modifications to the school facilities as opposed to the purchase and installation of sound enhancement systems.

Less Expense than Acoustical Modifications

There will always be school districts that claim to recognize the importance of acoustics in learning, but opt to refer to the ANSI S12.60-2002 standards as a means to improve the learning environment. As discussed on the Poor Acoustics page, the ANSI standards emphasize the importance of good acoustics and provide a worthwhile baseline for establishing acoustical standards. But in addition to falling short of providing an effective means to ensuring that ALL children have a signal to noise ratio of +15 dBA, implementation of the recommended building materials and improvements to achieve the desired level of background noise and reverberation are very costly. So much so, that in 2002, the International Code Council rejected the inclusion of the ANSI standards into the 2003 International Building Code.

Renovations of existing older school buildings may be even more costly and less effective. Overcoming intrusive exterior and interior ambient noise or HVAC noise is more difficult and costly. Expenses may include the cost of a new HVAC system, redoing the duct work, installing acoustical tile, replacing existing windows with a sound insulating type, etc.

One parent, Melanie Doyle, petitioned her school district to make the necessary acoustical modifications to her son's public elementary school in San Diego. Her son, Crosby, has a severe to profound hearing loss. Melanie fought to have the ANSI specifications regarding background noise and reverberation written into her son's IEP. "The overall cost to the district for all the modifications at Curie Elementary came to $22,000 with Owens Corning donating $10,000 in the form of testing, supervision and product."⁶ This amount represents acoustical modifications made JUST to her son's classroom, school auditorium, and speech therapy room. Sound enhancement systems at the maximum per classroom cost of $1,800 (during that same time period) would have cost a total of $5,400 for the equivalent space.

It is important to recognize the elements and materials that support good acoustics, and to every extent possible, make the cost-effective improvements that can help contribute to good acoustics. But the cost and benefits of installing sound enhancement systems, significantly outweigh those of implementing the ANSI standards by themselves.