Advocating for Optimal Listening in the Classroom

ABSTRACT

Hearing professionals need to be prepared for today's students as the ultimate arbiters regarding acceptable hearing assistive technology (HAT). Current educational laws and acts along with best practice standards are in place for assistive technology teams to implement collaborative goals and objectives to improve student achievement and close the achievement gap for students with hearing loss. Although the benefits of HAT are documented, historically its use declines for older students and those mainstreaming to their home school with normally hearing peers. Not wanting to be different and/or not receiving acceptable benefit are issues of the past. Now, being different is the norm, and students can be more like their peers through the use of technology. HAT allows student access and connectivity to home, school, and community. In this article, guidelines are discussed as they pertain to the role of the audiologist on the school assistive technology team. It is the responsibility of the audiologist to bring new HAT developments to the assistive technology team and advocate for optimal listening in the classroom. Audiologists need to step up and embrace new technology trends and keep options attractive to students. Professionals can arm themselves for this challenge with the supportive documentation presented in this article.

KEYWORDS

Hearing assistive technology - IDEA - advocacy - educational audiologist - school teams

REFERENCES

• 1 Educational Audiology Association .Advocacy for audiologists working in the schools. 2006. Available at: http://www.edaud.org Accessed July 15, 2009
• 2 Zirkel P. Section 504: an update.  Principal. 2009;  (March/April) 60-62
• 3 Holler R, Zirkel P. Section 504 and public schools: a national survey concerning “section 504 only” students.  NASSP. 2008;  92 19-43
• 4 Thibodeau L. Implementing classroom acoustics standards; a progress report. 2009. Available at: http://www.access-board.gov/acoustic Accessed July 15, 2009
• 5 Acoustical Society of America .Position on the use of sound amplification in the classroom. 2008. Available at: http://asa.aip.org/amplification.pdf Accessed July 15, 2009
• 6 Anderson K L, Goldstein H. Speech perception benefits of FM and infrared devices to children with hearing aids in a typical classroom.  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2004;  35 169-184
• 7 Niskar A S, Kieszak S M, Holmes A, Esteban E, Rubin C, Brody D J. Prevalence of hearing loss among children 6 to 19 years of age: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.  JAMA. 1998;  279 1071-1075
• 8 Bess F H, Dodd-Murphy J, Parker R A. Children with minimal sensorineural hearing loss: prevalence, educational performance, and functional status.  Ear Hear. 1998;  19 339-354
• 9 Crandell C, Smaldino J. Classroom acoustics for children with normal hearing and with hearing impairment.  Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2000;  31 362-370
• 10 Finitzo-Hieber T, Tillman T W. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children.  J Speech Hear Res. 1978;  21 440-458
• 11 DeConde-Johnson C. Amplification in inclusive classrooms.  J Educ Audiol. 1998;  6 33-44
• 12 Snyder N. House passes school modernization bill with classroom acoustics provisions. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Web site. 2009. Available at: http://www.asha.org/advocacy/2009/schoolmodbillclassroomacoustics.htm Accessed June 29, 2010
• 13 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: IDEA recovery funds for services to children and use with disabilities. U.S. Department of Education Web site. 2009. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/recovery/factsheet/idea.html Accessed July 14, 2009
• 14 Advocacy for Audiologists Working in the Schools .Educational Audiology Association Web site. 2006. Available at: http://www.edaud.org Accessed July 14, 2009
• 15 DeConde Johnson C, Anderson V, Boothroyd A et al.. Clinical Practice Guidelines: Remote Microphone Hearing Assistance Technologies for Children and Youth Birth–21 Years. American Academy of Audiology website. 2008. Available at: http://www.audiology.org/resources/documentlibrary/documents/hatguidelines.pdf Accessed June 29, 2010
• 16 Bausch M, Jones Ault M. Assistive technology implementation plan a tool for improving outcomes.  Teach Except Child. 2008;  41 6-14
• 17 Ogletree B, Bull J, Drew R, Lunnen K. Team-based service delivery for students with disabilities: practice options and guidelines for success.  Intervention Sch Clin. 2001;  36 138-145
• 18 Chambers J, Shkolnik J, Perez M. Total expenditures for students with disabilities, 1999–2000: spending variation by disability. American Institutes for Research Web site. 2003. Available at: http://www.csef-air.org/publications/seep/national/final_SEEP_Report_5.pdf Accessed July 28, 2009
• 19 Nemes J. Amplification in the classroom: new technologies new challenges.  Hear J<. 2008;  61 17-21
• 20 Eiten L R, Lewis D E. Verifying frequency-modulated system performance: it's the right thing to do.  Semin Hear<. 2010;  31(3) 233-240
• 21 Smith S L, West R L. The application of self-efficacy principles to audiologic rehabilitation: a tutorial.  Am J Audiol. 2006;  15 46-56
• 22 Margolis R. Boosting memory with informational counseling: helping patients understand the nature of disorders and how to manage them.  The ASHA Leader. 2004;  28 10-11
• 23 Cheffo S, Dawson D. Working together: the clinical educational consultant in the school.  Volta Voices. 2004;  11 36-37
• 24 Salathiel K. Transition for Individuals with Hearing Loss: Maintaining Momentum FROM the Individual Education Program to the Real World. Mt. Pleasant, MI; Central Michigan University 2007
• 25 Phonak Hearing Systems .Inspiro Discover Dynamic FM (V 1.00) [Brochure]. Murten, Switzerland; Phonak Hearing Systems 2007
• 26 Fabry D. Future research and clinical needs. In: Fabry D, Deconde Johnson C ACCESS: Achieving Clear Communication Employing Sound Solutions. Abery stwyth, United Kingdom; Immediate Proceedings Limited 2003: 247-254