Education Instructors and Students: Get even more insight and information from Suzanne's book or by having her speak to your class/group in-person or virtually. CLICK HERE!

〰️

Education Instructors and Students: Get even more insight and information from Suzanne's book or by having her speak to your class/group in-person or virtually. CLICK HERE! 〰️

 
 
 

Researching Teacher Benefits / Preference

 

Sound enhancement systems provide many benefits to teachers as well as to the students; reduced vocal fatigue and increased mobility are the two most obvious.  The technology eliminates the need for teachers to raise their voice in an effort to project it across the classroom (all day); thus eliminating vocal fatigue and strain.  Sound enhancement systems also improve teacher mobility because regardless of where the teacher is in the classroom or how their body is positioned (such as with their back to the students while writing on a whiteboard), the volume of their voice remains the same. 

Another benefit commonly reported may be less physically obvious, but is nonetheless, just as essential to their jobs. Many teachers report an increased energy when using a sound enhancement system. This technology creates a calm environment for both students and teachers. It allows teachers to speak in a conversational tone of voice which is more conducive to learning and behaviors. Increased access to the teacher’s voice means that students need less repetition of instructions and are more on-task. The combination results in students who are better behaved and more engaged, ultimately leading to improved teacher job satisfaction.

 

Reduced Vocal Fatigue

When background noise is competing for a teacher's attention, the teacher automatically raises his or her voice. In some cases, with an average background noise of 50 decibels, a teacher would have to raise his or her voice up to 83 decibels for children seated eight feet a way to be able to understand what they are hearing. A conversational voice is around 65 decibels. A prolonged increase in volume results in fatigue and strain on the teacher's vocal chords; causing teachers to be twice as likely as non-teachers to suffer voice problems.1 In fact one study found that 50% of US teachers experienced three or more voice symptoms that negatively impacted their ability to teach.2 Female teachers are especially at risk because their vocal chords are shorter and thinner than males.3

It simply is unnatural to speak this long and this loudly for the majority of the working day. That is why teachers are 32 times more likely to be plagued with voice problems than any other voice dependent occupation.4 Subsequently, teachers are often absent from work for a vocal related issue. According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, teachers miss an average of 7 days per year due to vocal fatigue.5

Teachers, often unaware of the significance of this occupational hazard, don't realize what a profound deleterious effect excessive loud talking has not only on their own health, but on education and society in general. When voice related issues become serious enough that a teacher misses school, the children and society pay for it. Learning is interrupted, and there is a significant financial cost as well. The voice problems of teachers cost the U.S. economy more than $2.5 billion annually.6 Money that could be better spent on equipment which protects the teacher's voice AND provides acoustic accessibility to the students.

A study by Laurie Allen (1995) in Dubuque, Iowa confirmed the financial benefit of a sound enhancement system on reduced teacher absenteeism as cited by Crandell, Smaldino, and Flexer. In this study, 60% of the teachers who had ever used a sound enhancement system estimated that they took an average of .97 sick days per year due to a vocal related illness. However, the 40% who used a sound enhancement system averaged only .34 days per year per teacher for a vocal related illness.7 Therefore, this data supports the idea that the installation of sound enhancement equipment not only prevents vocal abnormalities and conserves teachers' health, but also offers a tremendous financial cost-savings benefit to the school district – enough to pay for itself within a short period of time.

Relief from vocal strain is the most obvious benefit to teachers from use of sound enhancement systems. However, integrating this technology in the classroom produces changes in the temperament of the students, which provides a secondary benefit to teachers.

Improved Classroom Management

Sound enhancement systems allow students to easily hear and understand their teacher, conserving energy that would otherwise be spent on processing sounds and trying to decipher their meaning. More energy to the student means less "tuning-out" from exhaustion and fatigue. The student is able to focus on the lesson or the task and becomes an active participant engaged in discussion, activities, and learning. This in-turn changes the total dynamics of the classroom and reduces the burden of classroom management for the teacher.

"When the Audio Enhancement infrared sound field systems were installed in all of Florida's Ocoee Middle School classrooms as part of the SMART project, the principal noted a 40% decline in discipline incidents over a one-year period."8

In Iowa, Allen and Patton (1990) found that "students in amplified elementary classrooms showed an average 17 percent increase in their overall on-task behavior" as referenced in an article published by Miami-Dade County Public Schools.9 Teachers who use sound enhancement equipment report that students are more attentive, less distractible, and require fewer directions repeated. This all lends itself to a calmer classroom environment that is more conducive for learning and more apt to retain good teachers who will not "burn-out" too quickly.

Greater Mobility

Sound enhancement systems allow the teacher greater mobility in the classroom, because the teacher no longer has to be concerned about acoustical barriers and interrupted speech signals. With speakers strategically placed throughout the classroom, every child is within a short distance of the teacher's voice, ensuring that all students have a signal to noise ratio of +15 dBA. This means that teachers can talk while writing on chalk boards or white boards and not be concerned about the auditory needs of children who previously needed preferential seating. In essence, all children in the class have "preferential seating" without the stigma or formality of qualifying for it. This takes a tremendous burden off the teacher, so that she or he can concentrate on what needs to be said, rather than where to say it.

The following is a summary of Sound Enhancement Efficacy Studies Demonstrating Benefits to the Teachers.

Study references and descriptions below taken from Sound Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom Acoustics (Second Edition) by Carl C. Crandell, Joseph J. Smaldino, and Carol Flexer. This book is an invaluable resource for anyone researching this topic and highly recommended.

Mendel, Roberts, & Walton (2003): Study included seven kindergarten and first-grade teachers.  Survey indicated 95% positive response, indicating universal support for use of sound enhancement in kindergarten and first grade classrooms.

Rosenberg et al. (1999): Study included 55 general education K-2 teachers. Teachers agreed 100% that reduced vocal strain was the greatest benefit from SES

Baldwin & Dougherty (1997): Study included 19 general education elementary classroom teachers.  Results showed that sound enhancement helped to reduce emotional strain and vocal fatigue (79%).

Osborn, Vonder Embse and Graves (1989): Study included 47 amplified K-3 regular education classrooms. Results showed fewer teacher absences due to fatigue and laryngitis when using a sound enhanced classroom.

Nelson & Schmidt (1993): Study included twenty general education K-3 teachers.  Teachers in open classrooms reported greater success than those in traditional classrooms, although all teachers identified benefits from using a sound enhancement system.

Allen (1993): Study included 90 general education elementary teachers.  Results showed that once familiar with the system, teachers ranked SES usefulness above other instructional delivery equipment.

  1. Cindy Long, “Teacher Voice Problems Are an Occupational Hazard. Here’s How to Reduce the Risk,” NEA News, National Education Association, https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/teacher-voice-problems-are-occupational-hazard-heres-how-reduce, published June 23, 2016.

  2. Shimon Sapir, Anat Keidar, and Barbara Mathers-Schmidt, “Vocal Attrition in Teachers: Survey Findings,” European Journal of Disorders or Communication 28, no. 2 (April 1993): 177-85.

  3. Eric J. Hunter, Marshall E. Smith, and Kristine Tanner, “Gender Differences Affecting Vocal Health of Women in Vocally Demanding Careers,” Logopedics, Phoniatrics, Vocology 36, no. 3 (July 2011): 128-136.

  4. Elaine Smith, Jon Lemke, Margaretta Taylor, H. Lester Kirchner, and Henry Hoffman, “Frequency of Voice Problems Among Teachers and Other Occupations,” Journal of Voice 12, no. 4 (January 1998): 480-488.

  5. Ahmed A. Alrahim, Rawan A. Alanazi, and Mohammad H. Al-Bar, “Hoarseness Among School Teachers: A Cross-Sectional Study from Dammam,” Journal of Family and Community Medicine 25, no. 3 (Sep-Dec 2018): 205-210.

  6. Katherine Verdolini and Lorraine O. Ramig, “Review: Occupational Risks for Voice Problems,” Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology 26, no. 1 (February 2001): 37-46.

  7. Carl C. Crandell, Joseph Smaldino, and Carol Flexer, Sound Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom Acoustics (Canada: Thomson Delmar Learning, 2005), 103.

  8. Crandell, Smaldino, and Flexer, Sound Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom Acoustics, 102.

  9. “Improving the Classroom Environment: Classroom Amplification Systems,” Information Capsule Research Services, Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Vol. 0607, March 2007.