ENHANCING LISTENING, LANGUAGE, AND LITERACY IN THE CLASSROOM: LESSON IDEAS

Transcription

1 PROGRAM/COURSE SYLLABUS ENHANCING LISTENING, LANGUAGE, AND LITERACY IN THE CLASSROOM: LESSON IDEAS INSTRUCTOR: Summer 2006 Dr. Sherwood Williams 2073 Lost Dauphin Rd De Pere WI Work Phone: Home Phone: DATES/TIMES: Monday-Thursday, July 10-13, 2006 (5:00-8:45 p.m.) LOCATION: UW-Green Bay Campus Important note to participants: Credit/Noncredit distinctions are noted throughout the syllabus; please review carefully. One Graduate Credit Course Number: ED & HUD 795-6, 725 (0193C) *Tuition: $ Prerequisite: Graduate Standing (Must have earned a bachelor s degree) Noncredit Program Number: 0193C Fee: $155 Prerequisite: None *For those who qualify as a Wisconsin Resident for tuition purposes. This amount does not include student activity/segregated fees that are charged for on-campus courses. Segregated fees are waived unless you are enrolled on-campus during the same semester/session. Please note: this summer 2006 course is considered off-campus for fee purposes. I. EMPHASIS: (Credit and Noncredit) Participants will develop beliefs, skills, and behaviors to manage acoustic accessibility for students in the classroom by: Investigating recent auditory brain research Examining the relationship between classroom acoustics and student academic achievement. Reviewing studies discussing background noise, signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) in classrooms, noise affects on academic teacher performance, speaker-to-listener distance, and speech perception in the classroom. 1

2 II. OBJECTIVES: (Credit and Noncredit) To understand how speech perceptual competency of a student determines literacy growth. To understand the influence of sound-field amplification on the perceptual abilities and psycho educational development of students. To understand the dynamics of classroom acoustics. To understand that the efficacy of sound field amplification is supported by results of research studies that have demonstrated changes in students academic achievement, speech recognition scores, attending skills, and learning behaviors. To develop listening strategies for teachers and students. III. TEXT: (Credit Only) Crandell, Carl C., Smaldino, Joseph J., and Flexer, Carol (2004). Sound-Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom Acoustic. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group, Inc. IV. REQUIRED READINGS: Crandell, C.C. & Smaldino, J.J. (2000). Classroom Acoustics for Children with Normal Hearing and With Hearing Impairment. Language, Speech, and hearing Services in Schools, 31, Nelson, P.B. (2000). Improving Acoustics in American Schools. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, ; Nelson, P.B. & Soli, S. (2000). Acoustical Barriers to Learning: Children at Risk in Every Classroom. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Siebein, G., & Gold, M.A., & Siebein, G., & Ermann, M.G. (2000). Ten Ways to Provide a High Quality Acoustical Environment in Schools. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Smaldino, J.J. & Crandell, C.C. (2000). Classroom Amplification Technology: Theory and Peory and Practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Sorkin, Donna L. (2000). The Classroom Acoustical Environment and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 31,

3 V. REQUIREMENTS: Class discussion (Credit and Noncredit) Presentation of the text and readings. (Credit only) One written paper that outlines an understanding of the course objectives and research from the class discussion, text, and readings and the implications for the participant s classroom/school, community, or home. This paper should be a presentation to your school with appropriate appendix, of charts, graphs, etc., doublespaced, of five to ten pages, using the APA style. (Credit only) VI. EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT: Grades for credit participants are based on the following criteria: Attendance and active participation during the scheduled classes. A paper that develops a plan of how to use the research in your work, community, or home. Class presentations of your understanding of the text and readings. The students grade (A, AB, B, C, CD, D, or F) will be based on a demonstrated understanding of the following: A =Attendance, active participation, class presentation, written response to article handouts, and a paper of the implementation plan for your organization that uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of technology to encourage children s development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. B =Attendance, participation, written response to article handouts, and a paper of the implementation plan for your organization that uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of technology to encourage children s development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. C =Attendance, participation, and a paper of the implementation plan for your organization that uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of technology to encourage children s development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. D =Attendance F =No attendance AB, CD will be based on the quality and completeness of the class presentations, written response to article handouts, and the paper of the implementation plan for your organization. Noncredit participants will receive a certificate of completion upon successful completion of the course, including active participation for all required hours. 3

4 VII. STANDARDS: (Credit and Noncredit) Wisconsin Standards for Teacher Development and Licensure: #3: Teachers understand that children learn differently: The teacher understand how pupils differ in their approaches to learning and the barriers that impede learning and can adapt instruction to meet the diverse needs of pupils, including those with disabilities and exceptionalities. #4: Teachers now how to teach: The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of technology to encourage children s development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. Wisconsin Standards for Administrator Development and Licensure: #4: The administrator ensures management of the organization, operations, finances, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment. VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1995). Guidelines for acoustics in educational environments. Asha, 37 (Suppl. 14), Beranek, L. (1954). Acoustics. New York: McGraw-Hill. Berg, F. (1993). Acoustics and sound systems in schools. Boston, MA: College- Hill Press. Bess, F. (1985). The minimally hearing-impaired child. Ear and Hearing, 6, Bess, F., Sinclair, J., & Riggs, D. (1984). Group amplification in schools for the hearing-impaired. Ear and Hearing, 5, Blair. J. (1977). Effects of amplification, speech reading, and classroom environment on reception of speech. Volta Review, 79, Boney, S., & Bess, F. (1984, October). Noise and reverberation effect sin minimal bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Paper presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Convention, San Francisco, CA. 4

5 Bradley, J. (1986). Speech intelligibility studies in classrooms. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 80, Crandell. C. (1991). Classroom acoustics for normal-hearing children: Implications for rehabilitation. Educational Audiology Monographs, 2, Crandell, C. (1992). Classroom acoustics for hearing-impaired children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92, Crandell, C. (1993). Noise effects on the speech recognition of children with minimal hearing loss. Ear and Hearing, 7, Crandell, C., & Smaldino, J. (1992). Sound-field amplification in the classroom. American Journal of Audiology, 1(4), Crandell, C., & Smaldino, J. (1994). The importance of room acoustics. In R. Tyler & D. Schum (Eds.), Assistive listening devices for the hearing impaired (pp ). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins. Crum, D. (1974). The effects of noise, reverberation, and speaker-to-listener distance on speech understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Crum, D., & Matkin, N. (1976). Room acoustics: The forgotten variable. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 7, Dixon, P. (1976). The effects of noise on children s psychomotor, perceptual, and cognitive performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Elliott, L.L. (1979). Performance of children aged 9 to 17 years on a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence material with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 66(3), Eriks-Brophy, A., & Ayukawa, H. (2000). The benefits of sound field amplification in classrooms of Inuit students of Nunavik: A pilot project. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Finitzo-Hieber, T., & Tillman, T. (1978). Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 21, Hawkins, D. (1986). Options in classroom amplification systems. In F. Bess (Ed.), Hearing impairment in children (pp ). Baltimore, MD: York Press. 5

6 Kodaras, M. (1960). Reverberation times of typical elementary school settings. Noise Control, 6, Knecht, H., Nelson, P., Whitelaw, G., & Feth, L. (in press). Structural variables and their relationship to background noise levels and reverberation times in unoccupied classrooms. American Journal of Audiology. Markides, A. (1986). Speech levels and speech-to-noise ratios. British Journal of Audiology, 20, McCroskey, F., & Devens, J. (1975). Acoustic characteristics of public school classrooms constructed between 1890 and NOISEXPO Proceedings, Nebelek, A., & Nabelek, I. (1994). Room acoustics and speech perception. In J. Katz (ed.). Handbook of clinical audiology (4 th ed. Pp ). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins. Nilsson, M.J., Gellnet, D., Sullivan, J., & Soli, S.D. (1992). Norms for the Hearing In Noise Test: The influence of spatial separation, hearing loss, and English language experience on speech reception thresholds, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 92, S2385. Niskar, A.S., Kieszak, S.M., Holmes, A., Esteban, E., Ruben, C., & Broday, D.J. (1998). Prevalence of hearing loss among children 6 to 19 years of age, Journal of the American Medical Association, 279 (14), Sanders, D (1965). Noise conditions in normal school classrooms. Exceptional Children, 31, Sapienza, C., Crandell, C., & Curtis, B. (1999). Effect of sound field FM amplification on vocal intensity in teachers. Journal of Voice, 23, Schappert, S. (1992). Office visits for otitis media: United States, Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics, 214, Siebein, G. (1994). Acoustics in buildings: A tutorial on architectural acoustics. New York: Acoustical Society of America. Siebein, G., Crandell, C., & Gold, M. (1997). Principles of classroom acoustics: Reverberation. Educational Audiology Monographs, 5, Siebein, G., Gold, M., Siebein, G., & Ermann, M.G. (2000). Ten ways to provide a high-quality acoustical environment in schools. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31,

7 Smaldino, J., & Crandell, C. (2000). Classroom amplification technology: Theory and practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Soli, S.D., & Sullivan, J.A. (1997). Factors affecting children s speech communication in classrooms. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, S3070. Sorkin, D. (2000). The classroom acoustical environment and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, Stoll, L., & Fink, D. (1996). Changing our schools: Linking school effectiveness and school improvement. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. United States Access Board. (1998). Request for information on classroom acoustics [On-line]. Available: Wolf, D.,Bixby, J., Glenn, J., & Gardner, H. (1991). To use their minds well: Investigating new forms of student assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, Last updated 04/04/06 wpm 7