Listening Technologies for Individuals and the Classroom

Topics in Language Disorders

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 31-50

  Marttila, Joan ^a  

^a Mississippi Bend Area Educ Agency   (United States)

Author keywords

Assistive technology; Classroom acoustics; Classroom amplification; Evidence based practice; Hearing assistive technology; Universal design

Indexed keywords

EID: 1642418486     PISSN: 02718294     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00011363-200401000-00005     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. About the SETT Framework (2002). Retrieved November 10, 2003, from http://sweb.uky.edu/~jszaba0/ JoySETT.html.
2. American Academy of Audiology. American Board of Audiology: Code of ethics. Retrieved November 10, 2003, from http://www.audiology.org/professional/aba/ethics.php.
3. American National Standards Institute Inc. (2002). Acoustical performance criteria, design requirements and guidelines for schools (ANSI S 12.60-2002). New York: ANSI.
4. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2001). Scope of practice in speech-language pathology [Electronic version]. Rockville, MD: Author.
5. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2002). Guidelines for audiology service provision in and for schools. Rockville, MD: Author.
6. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2003). Code of ethics (revised). [Electronic version]. ASHA Supplement, 23, 13-15.
7. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2003). 2003 Omnibus survey: Practice trends in audiology. [Electronic version]. Rockville, MD: Author.
8. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2003). 2003 Omnibus survey caseload report: SLP. [Electronic version]. Rockville, MD: Author.
9. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2004). Scope of practice in audiology. ASHA. In press.
10. Anderson, K. (2001). Kids in noisy classrooms: What does the research really say? Journal of Educational Audiology, 9, 21-33.
11. Apel, K. (2001). Developing evidence-based practices and research collaborations in school settings. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 32, 196-197.
12. Center for Universal Design. What is universal design? Retrieved November 10, 2003, from http://www. design.ncsu.edu/cud/univ_design/ud.htm.
13. Chambers, A. C. (1997). Has technology been considered? A guide for IEP teams. Albuquerque, NM: The Council of Administrators of Special Education, Inc.
14. Classroom Acoustics Working Group. (2000). Improving acoustics in American schools. Working draft of standard "acoustics in school classrooms and other learning spaces. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 391-393.
15. Crandall, C., and Smaldino, J. (2000). Classroom acoustics for children with normal hearing and with hearing impairment. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 362-370.
16. Eriks-Brophy, A., and Ayukawa, H. (2000). The benefits of sound field amplification in classrooms of Inuit students of Nunavik: A pilot project. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 324-335.
17. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. (1992). Evidence-based medicine: A new approach to the practice of medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 268, 2420-2425.
18. Flexer, C., Kemp Biley, K., Hinkley, A., Harkema, C., & Holcomb, J. (2002). Using sound-field systems to teach phonemic awareness to pre-schoolers. The Hearing Journal, 55(3), 38-44.
19. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Amendments of 1997 (1997). 20 U.S.C. § 140 et seq.
20. Letter to Seiler, 20 IDELR 1216 (Office of Special Education Programs 1993). Retrived January 14, 2004, from http://www.listen-up.org/rights2/osep1.htm
21. Letter to Culbreath, 25 IDELR 1212 (Office of Special Education Programs 1997).
22. Mainstream amplification resource room study (MARKS). Retrieved November 10, 2003, from http:// www.ed.gov/pubs/EPTW/eptw12/eptw12d.html.
23. Marttila, J. (1999). [Assistive technology funding process]. Unpublished raw data.
24. Nelson, P., and Soli, S. (2000). Acoustical barriers to learning: Children at risk in every classroom. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 356-361.
25. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Retrieved July 22, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml.
26. Peach, R. (2002). From the editor. [Electronic version]. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 322.
27. Reed, P (Ed.). (2000). Assessing students' needs for assistive technology: A resource manual for school district teams. Oshkosh, WI: Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative.
28. Rosenberg, G., Blake-Rahter, P., Heavner, J., Allen, L., Myers Redmond, B., Phillips, J., et al. (1999). Improving classroom acoustics (ICA): A three-year FM sound field classroom amplification study. Journal of Educational Audiology, 7, 8-28.
29. Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology. Retrieved November 10, 2003, from http://sweb.uky.edu/~jszaba0/QIAT.html.
30. Siebein, G., Gold, M., Siebein, G., & Ermann, M. (2000). Ten ways to provide a high-quality acoustical environment in schools. [Electronic version]. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 376-384.
31. Witt, S. L. (1992). Classroom listening behavior and sound field amplification. Unpublished master's thesis. University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa.
32. Zabel, H., and Tabor, M. (1993). Effects of soundfield amplification on spelling performance of elementary school children. Educational Audiology Monograph, 3, 5-9.