and Teacher Strategies for Optimising Acoustic Guidelines and Teacher Strategies for Optimising Learning Conditions in Classrooms Professor Julie Dockrell & Dr.Kate Rigby Institute of Education Professor Bridget Shield & Anne Carey School of Engineering Systems & Design London Phonak Seminar Odense 23.11.04 Phonak 23.11.04

Outline of talk The importance of acoustics in learning environments? Levels of noise in London schools External and Internal Noise and attainments Chronic Acute Identifying the key parameters to support inclusive education Teachers’ views Levels of concern and awareness Preparing the professionals Data from trainee teachers SFS – the way forward? Phonak 23.11.04

A typical classroom in the United Kingdom Wide range of visual materials Children sitting Round tables No front Phonak 23.11.04

What is the major noise source in UK classrooms ? Traffic noise  Aircraft noise  Children classroom noise  Children playground noise  Building noises  Phonak 23.11.04

Typical UK classrooms exposed to a range of sources of noise Noise from the children !! Phonak 23.11.04

Levels of noise in London primary classes External noise from 142 schools Internal noise 140 classrooms Phonak 23.11.04

Results of external noise surveys outside 142 schools London primary schools are exposed to a wide range of noise levels 65% of schools measured were exposed to external levels greater than 55 dB(A) LAeq 86% of schools were exposed to noise from road traffic Phonak 23.11.04

Results of internal noise surveys in 140 classrooms Classroom noise levels were determined by classroom activity A range of over 20 dB(A) between the noisiest and quietest activities External noise affected internal levels only when children working ‘in silence’ Classroom activity levels ‘Silent’ reading 56 dB(A) 1 person speaking 61 dB(A) Children at tables 65 dB(A) Movement around 72 dB(A) Group work at tables 73 dB(A) Group work+ movement 77 dB(A) Phonak 23.11.04

Impact ? Are children aware ? Yes  No  Does noise level affect attainments? Yes  No  Phonak 23.11.04

Questionnaire survey Participants 2036 children in Year 2 and Year 6 51 teachers Phonak 23.11.04

Questionnaire results - hearing and annoyance Older (Year 6) children more aware of external noise Younger (Year 2) children more annoyed by external noise Teachers and pupils ranking of sound sources highly correlated Hearing noise is related to external background noise levels Annoyance is related to external maximum levels Phonak 23.11.04

Classroom listening conditions   Classroom listening conditions 1. The teacher is talking but you cannot see her face. How well can you hear what the teacher is saying? very well quite well okay not very well not at all 2. The teacher is talking and moving around the classroom. How well can you hear what the teacher is saying?   very well quite well okay not very well not at all Phonak 23.11.04  

Conclusion from listening conditions questions In classrooms children’s ease of listening varied significantly across situations  no noise at all  doing a test In general younger children found listening conditions in classrooms worst apart from ‘ could not see teachers face’ when children making noise outside Phonak 23.11.04

Comparison of noise levels and Standard Attainment tasks Given to all children aged 7 (KS1) and 11 (KS2) in primary school Maths, English & Science Data collected country wide Classroom noise: Significant correlations between average background levels in occupied classrooms and most SATs scores Phonak 23.11.04

Classroom noise and SATs r = -0.635, p<.01 r = -0.765, p<.01 Phonak 23.11.04

Summary of effects of noise on SATs A CHRONIC NOISE EFFECT Noise has a detrimental effect upon schools’ SATs scores, especially at Key Stage 2 (age 10/11) RESULTS STILL HOLD WHEN SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS ACCOUNTED FOR Phonak 23.11.04

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY Compare children’s performance in Baseline …typical class Babble…levels recorded Babble + environmental …interspersed with environmental noise Range of tasks to reflect verbal and non verbal processing Reading, spelling, number, speed of information processing Some of the participants had special educational needs (predominantly literacy based) Phonak 23.11.04

OVERALL RESULTS No effects on Maths or Reasoning For typical children babble interfered with verbal tasks Babble + environmental interfered with non-verbal speed tasks BUT differential effect for children with Special Educational Needs Phonak 23.11.04

Children with special educational needs Phonak 23.11.04

Summary of impact on performance · The two noise conditions had differential effects on children’s performance · Performance on the verbal tasks (reading and spelling) was significantly reduced in the babble condition Children with special educational needs were differentially negatively affected for reading and spelling in the babble condition Phonak 23.11.04

Designing inclusive environments Schools need to become inclusive The right of children with SEN to be educated in mainstream schools where parents want this” SENDA (2001) Data indicate noise has a detrimental effect – children with SEN Successful teaching is the natural counterpart of successful learning SO Technology School buildings Teachers  Phonak 23.11.04

SCHOOLS & TEACHERS Noise policy – 25% Moderately noisy classrooms –61% Range of environmental noises reported matched pupils reports r=.945 Outside noise reported to affect performance Children with SEN negatively affected Teachers aware of noises (78.4%) Arrange quiet times (60.8%) BUT FEW EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES? Phonak 23.11.04

What do teachers do? Phonak 23.11.04

TRAINING NEEDS – KNOWLEDGE & BEHAVIOUR Examine trainee teachers Investigate effective teaching Noise management strategies Tasks thought to be influenced by noise Awareness of needs of children with hearing impairments Sample 318 trainees at start of training – followed up at end Little change over time in their views! Phonak 23.11.04

Effective teaching Trainees rated 13 different strategies to support effective teaching: Low ratings overall for Managing classroom noise Task organisation and furniture Type of classroom Although majority felt there were activities where noise should be avoided Phonak 23.11.04

Percentage of trainees reporting       Percentage of trainees reporting Match to objective data Reading  Tests But Low levels X Lack of differentiation across contexts X   Avoid noise Outside Avoid noise class children Start End Tasks Reading 22 19 12 Difficult task 8 5 6 Context Group work 2 7 3 9 Whole class 13 Individual work 10 Tests 17 24 14 Listening activity 11 1 4 Phonak 23.11.04    

Moderating noise?- differential ratings of strategies by trainee teachers Phonak 23.11.04

Knowledge base to implement strategies: Hearing impaired children 51% no experience of children with HI 92% no training 50% thought it very unlikely HI child in their class Majority thought they would change the way they taught if a HI child in classroom Help? 62% school SEN worker 17% head teacher 2% organisations Phonak 23.11.04

Phonak 23.11.04

How likely is it that these modifications Occur? Yes  No  Meet the needs of a child with an HI? Phonak 23.11.04

A typical classroom in the United Kingdom Wide range of visual materials Children sitting Round tables No front Phonak 23.11.04

Current Research ‘Acoustic design guidelines and teacher strategies for optimising learning conditions in classrooms for hearing and hearing-impaired children’. AIMS To identify those acoustic parameters that are most applicable to children's hearing and listening in classrooms To investigate ways of improving the acoustics in classrooms To investigate the use of sound field systems in schools Phonak 23.11.04

SFS as a solution? Evidence that SFS’s may have a beneficial effect on some teachers’ voices Phonak 23.11.04

Range of teachers voice levels before Sound Field System installed Correct type of SFS needs to be chosen for teachers’ teaching style And children’s age. YrR Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 96 94 92 90 88 86 84 Level of voice measured 20cm from mouth (dBA) 82 80 78 76 74 N.B. Square data points are male teachers Diamond data points are female teachers N.B. Square data points are male 72 Diamond data points are female 70 Children sitting on floor, teacher sitting or standing in front of them Children sitting at desks, teacher standing in front of them Children move bewteen floor & desks, teacher sitting or standing in front of them Phonak 23.11.04

Children’s views “Yes a difference, more clearer to hear than speaking” “Yes, a little different compered to normal. I think its better” “Depends – when its making wierd noises no but when its not yes” “Its quite annoying it makes noises which puts me off my work” Phonak 23.11.04

SFS as a solution The psychological data have provided some indication that SFS may have a beneficial effect on children’s classroom experience and overall attainment. The teachers need to be relatively positive and open to the appropriate use of SFS. Ongoing support and training may help to improve the teacher’s experience. Need for Guides for using SFS- minor difficulties restricted use – regular updating required Phonak 23.11.04

General conclusions from study Children in London primary schools are exposed to higher levels of noise at school than recommended by current guidelines Children were aware of noise levels and annoyed by specific sound sources Exposure to noise affected performance on academic tasks: real world & experimental Teachers concerned but ill prepared Trainee teachers –lack relevant knowledge about effects noise, strategies to moderate noise and the needs of children with HI Designing inclusive classrooms requires an awareness of teacher needs No simple solutions! Phonak 23.11.04