Does classroom amplification aid comprehension?

British Journal of Audiology

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 171-178

  Arnold, Paul ^b   Canning, David ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Acoustic environments; Classroom noise; FM sound field amplification; Neale Analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDIOLOGY; AUDITORY MEMORY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HEARING ACUITY; HUMAN; INTELLIGENCE; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; MALE; MICROPHONE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL CHILD; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 0032802430     PISSN: 03005364     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/03005369909090096     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Allen L, Anderson K. Marketing sound-field amplification systems. In: Crandell CC, Smaldino JJ, Flexer C, eds. Sound-field FM Amplification Theory and Practical Applications. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing, 1995; 201-221.
2. American Speech-Language -Hearing Association. Position statement and guidelines for acoustics in educational settings. ASHA 1995; 37: 15-19.
3. Berg FS. Facilitating Classroom Listening: A handbook for teachers of normal and hard of hearing students. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed; 1987.
4. Berg FS. Acoustics and Sound Systems in Schools. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing, 1993.
5. Berg FS, Blair JC, Benson PV. Classroom acoustics: the problem, impact, and solution. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 1996; 27: 16-20.
6. Bess FH. The minimally hearing-impaired child. Ear Hear 1985; 6: 43-47.
7. Crandell C. The effects of classroom acoustics on children with normal hearing: implications for intervention strategies. Educational Audiology Monographs 1991; 2: 18-38.
8. Crandell C. A comparison of commercially available frequency modulation sound field amplification systems. Educational Audiology Monograph 1993; 3: 15-20.
9. Crandell C. Effects of sound field FM amplification on the speech perception of ESL children. Educational Audiology Monograph 1996; 4: 1-5.
10. Dobie R, Berlin C. Influence of otitis media on hearing and development. Rhinol Laryngol 1979; 88: 48-53.
11. Elliott C, Murray DJ, Pearson LS. British Ability Scales. Windsor: NFER, 1978.
12. Elliot L. Effects of noise on perception of speech by children and handicapped individuals. Sound and Vibration 1982; December, 9-14.
13. Elliot LL, Hammer MA, Shoul ME. Fine grained auditory discrimination in normal children and children with language-learning problems. J Speech Hear Res 1989; 32: 112-119.
14. Flexer C. Classroom public address systems. In: Ross M, ed. FM Auditory Training Systems: Characteristics, selection and use. Timonium, ML: York Press, 1992.
15. Flexer, C. Sound-Field FM systems: questions most often asked about classroom amplification. Hearsay 1997; 11: 5-14.
16. Flexer C, Millin J, Brown L. Children with developmental disabilities: the effects of sound field amplification on word identification. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 1990; 21: 177-182.
17. Flexer C, Richards C, Buie C. Soundfield amplification for regular kindergarten and first grade classrooms: a longitudinal study of fluctuating hearing loss and pupil performance. Paper presented at the American Academy of Audiology Convention, Phoenix, AZ, 1993.
18. Fintizo-Hieber T, Tillman T. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability by normal and hearing impaired children. J Speech Hear Res 1978; 21: 440-458.
19. Finitzo T. Classroom acoustics. In: Roeser R, Downs M, eds. Auditory Disorders in School Children (second edition). New York: Thiéme Medical, 1988; 221-223.
20. Gravel J, Wallace I. Listening and language at four years of age: effects of otitis media. J Speech Hear Res 1992; 21; 440-458.
21. Guidelines for Environmental Design in Schools (Revision of Design Note 17). Building Bulletin 87. London: The Stationery Office, 1997.
22. Ling D. On auditory learning. Newsounds 1986; 11: 57-64.
23. Masuda T, Ikeda Y, Manako H, Komiyami S. Analysis of vocal use: fluctuations in phonation time and intensity in four groups of speakers. Acta Otolaryngol 1993; 113: 547-552.
24. McCormick L, Schiefelbusch R. Early Language Intervention. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing, 1984.
25. McSporran E. Towards better listening and learning in the classroom. Educational Rev 1997; 49: 102-111.
26. Mills M. A practical look at classroom amplification. Educational Audiology Monograph 1991; 2: 39-42.
27. Neale MD. Neale Analysis of Reading Ability: Revised British Edition (Reader). Windsor: NFER-Nelson, 1988a.
28. Neale MD. Neale Analysis of Reading Ability: Revised British Edition (Manual). Windsor: NFER-Nelson, 1988b.
29. Nober L, Nober E. Auditory discrimination for learning disabled children in quiet and classroom noise. J Learn Dis 1975; 8: 656-677.
30. Nozza RJ. The binaural masking level difference in infants and adults: developmental changes in binaural hearing. Infant Behavior Dev 1987; 10: 105-110.
31. Palmer CV. Quantification of the ecobehavioral impact of a soundfield loudspeaker system in elementary classrooms. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1998; 41: 819-833.
32. Raven JC. Progressive Matrices (Sets A, Ab, B). London: ET Heron & Co., 1947.
33. Ray H, Sarff LS, Glassford F. Soundfield amplification: an innovative educational intervention for mainstreamed learning disabled students. The Directive Teacher 1984; 6:18-20.
34. Rosenberg O, Blake-Rahter P. Sound-field amplification: a review of the literature. In: Crandall CC, Smaldino JJ, Flexer C, eds. Sound-field FM Amplification: Theory and practical applications. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing, 1995; 107-123.
35. Ross M, Brackett D, Maxon A. Assessment and Management of Mainstream Hearing-impaired Children. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed, 1991.
36. Ross M. FM Auditory Training Systems: Characteristics, selection and use. Timonium, ML: York Press, 1991.