Effects to teaching environment of noise level in school classrooms
Abstract
This study determines noise level in school classrooms during school hours and identifies the effects of noise to teaching environment in classrooms using a Sound Level Meter (SLM) and a questionnaire survey on 44 teachers and 150 students. Data analyses, using t-test, one sample t-test and one-way ANOVA (Tukey's HSD Post Hoc test), indicates that noise level in school classroom during school hours exceeded WHO guideline value. This noise affects teachers and students in term of teaching and learning process and human health.
... As such, many studies have already addressed the devastating effect of noise pollution. According to the WHO the average daily exposure at school should be 72dB, meanwhile during teaching and learning hours, noise level should not exceed 35dB [11]. The Threshold Limit Value (TLV) of the noise for the school is 55 dBA [22]. ...
... Excessive levels of noise usually affect the outcome of students learning process negatively because it interferes with their rate of understanding and assimilation during lectures. Besides its effects on students, teachers are also affected health wise [11,29,30]. Higher noise level in these lecture halls is attributed largely to the increase in the number of admitted students due to the introduction of additional Faculties and courses. ...
... The admin block was supposed to serve as a control in TI but the influx of students for registration and other administrative purposes has increased the noise levels in the building. To reduce the noise level here, online registration and payment of any form should be adopted by the management of the institution; otherwise, the health of both staff and students exposed to this daily noise dosage will be affected [11,29]. ...
... Noise in hospitals is offensive and an annoyance to patients. It produces physiological and psychological response in patients and has contributions to chronic physical and mental health (Seetha et al., 2008). Noise is also well known for its devastating roles in some diseases such as: hypertension, difficulty in sleeping, high blood pressure, memory loss, stress related illness, cardiovascular diseases etc. (Anees et al., 2014;Münzel et al., 2014). ...
... The recommended average noise levels around school environments should be 72 dB(A) and is rated satisfactory Table 1 (ISO, 1999; WHO, 2001). However, during lessons, noise levels should be within 35 to 55 dB(A) so as not to cause stress and distraction among students (Tiesler et al., 2015;Seetha et al., 2008). ...
There are limits recommended for environmental noise and occupational noise by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Standardization Organization (ISO). Therefore, noise levels were assessed in four different schools in Jalingo, the capital of Taraba State using a Lutron sound level meter, model SL-4030. The aim of the study was to compare noise levels in the schools with the limits recommended by WHO and ISO, so as to make appropriate recommendations in case of undesirable results. The ANOVA statistical tool was used to demonstrate that the noise levels differ in the classrooms and the Least Significant Difference (LSD) statistics was used to show the significance of the variation of noise levels in the classrooms as suggested by the ANOVA. The mean equivalent noise levels (Leq (dB(A)) varied considerably above WHO recommended limits in classrooms. In the classrooms across all the schools, noise levels were within satisfactory range (61-75 dB(A)). This range however, exceeds the recommended noise limits in classrooms (35-55 dB(A)). Meanwhile, the control sample locations had mean noise level within the good range (41-60 dB(A)). It was also observed that at the control sites, mean noise levels were within the range recommended for classrooms during lessons. Higher noise levels than the endorsed limits by the WHO in the classrooms across all the schools are justifiable by so many factors such as: proximity to busy roads, students-Teacher's activities and perhaps some acoustical reasons. Interestingly, the control of noise pollution in these schools to meet the international recommended standards is much possible if the recommendations from this study are obeyed.
... Different studies pointed out that the excess of noise is related to the incidence of voice symptoms such as sore throat [18,35,36]. Furthermore, it affects the teaching process [36]. ...
... Different studies pointed out that the excess of noise is related to the incidence of voice symptoms such as sore throat [18,35,36]. Furthermore, it affects the teaching process [36]. ...
Background
The university teaching faculty members are one of the occupational fields in education that are more exposed to voice disorders. The current study aimed to examine the association among vocal symptoms reported by faculty teaching professionals, impact of voice problems on daily activities, their vocal habits, and knowledge on vocal hygiene in relation to specialist consultation and to identify which of the assessed factors triggered the most for medical consultation. An online questionnaire was completed by 420 faculty teaching professionals from 7 universities in Egypt between November 2019 and December 2019.
Results
All assessed vocal symptoms were significantly associated with specialist consultation ( p -value <0.01). Most common bad vocal habits included increased voice loudness (71.2%), talking for long time (69.3%), and frequent throat clearance (54.0%). The most commonly reported preventive measures included avoid screaming (88.3%), stop smoking (87.1%), and taking periods of voice rest (86.4%). The strongest predictor of having specialist consultation was frequent throat clearance, recording an odds ratio of 23.809.
Conclusion
Based on information obtained from the current study, ideas are suggested for setting up vocal hygiene programs throughout a professional voice career for keeping a healthy voice. Avoid passive smoking and using microphones are considered remarkable adequate methods for healthy voice.
... Among the twenty-five studies that took place in real classrooms, fifteen used intelligibility tests, that were administrated to students of 5 ÷ 7 year old in six cases [11,60,76,77,85,86], of 8 ÷ 11 year old in ten cases [14,70]- [60,80,84,86,87,69] [73]and of 12+ year old in six cases [14,60,75,84,86,58], while ten used questionnaires assessing subjective perceptions of students of 5 ÷ 7 y.o. in three cases [11,21,83], of 8 ÷ 11 y.o. in five cases [11,22,38,80,83] and of 12+ y.o. in seven [22] [30,38,54,83,88,58]. Fig. 5 shows the occurrences of each specific acoustical parameter in the selected papers. ...
... [86] occ IN, AN In classrooms 121 ÷ 187 m 3 , T occ, 0.5-1 kHz = 0.6 ÷ 1.0 s, the "babble and activity noise" has the worst effect on performance whereas noise from the floor upstair (Tp) and external traffic noises (Tr) are less disruptive when the overall L Neq = 60 dBA. [87] occ IN, AN In classrooms 121 ÷ 187 m 3 , T occ, 0.5-1 kHz = 0.6 ÷ 1.0 s, in the better listening conditions, the performance in the speech reception (accuracy and response time) worsens under traffic and babble noise, while in the worse listening conditions adaptation is observed for the traffic noise alone [31] unocc AN In classroom with T occ, 0.5-1 kHz <0.6 s, L Neq unocc heating and cooling systems active = 33 ÷ 54 dBA student reading and language subject areas may be negatively impacted by higher unoccupied L Neq (when not controlling for the percent of students in each classroom receiving free or reducedprice lunches on achievement) [88] occ IN, AN In classrooms where L Neq = 73 dBA the noise affects students learning process and human health. [16] occ IN, AN External noise (L Neq = 57 dBA) was found to have a significant negative impact upon performance, the effect being greater for the older children and for individual external events. ...
A review on the reference values of the acoustical parameters that have the greatest influence on students' performance at different ages has been completed in this study. Published studies from 2002 to 2020 were summarized, which focus on testing learning attainments and cognitive skills, speech intelligibility, and subjective perceptions under different classroom acoustic conditions. Only 38 papers out of the 56 containing empirical findings on the influence of acoustical parameters on students’ performance were considered, as the remaining 18 lacked ecological validity or did not respond to the selection criteria. Studies were only included if they considered normal hearing subjects and typical lesson settings provided in classrooms without an amplification system. Thus, the studies selected involved subjects between 5 and 40 years old. The values of the acoustical parameters that led to better or worse learning performance were tabulated and the distribution of occurrences was created. The median and interquartile range for the distribution of occurrences were used to describe the central tendency and dispersion and analyzed considering two different age groups. The results obtained were used to develop classroom acoustic guidelines for better learning performance for students under or over 12 years of age, and identified the thresholds that lead to worse performances.
... In the classroom, noise may adversely affects educational atmosphere (Hodgson et al., 1999) and may cause hypertension, hampers teaching-learning process, obstruct cognitive development, and depreciate learning performance of students. Students exposed to high levels of noise may suffer from attention loss, social compliance and increased conflicting interactive relation (Seetha et al., 2008). ...
The Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) is a prime campus of agricultural study on 488 hectares of scenic land on the western array of the old Brahmaputra River. This study aimed to measure the prevailing levels of traffic generated noise pollution at the core academic points and to assess the impacts of noise pollution on students’ health at BAU. The recorded Lave ranges from 55–85 dB. The Lave ranges from 79–85 dB throughout the whole day at FoA and FoAH. The Lave at these two core academic points are almost the double than the permissible limit of 45 dB. The Lmax pressure (96 dB) at Jobber moor during the noon is the maximum inside the whole BAU campus. The movement of traffic vehicles is responsible as the main sources of these noises. The noise level indices and their degree of fluctuation as given by Leq, Lnp, and NC are higher in roadside locations namely at FoA, FoAH, FoAERS. In terms of noise pollution, three of the sampled areas namely FoA, FoAH, and KR market show ‘moderate risk’ (Lave: 81 dB) during the morning whilst, the FoAH possessed the ‘high risk’ with the Lave of 85 dB. The results show that the FoA, FoAH, KR market, Jobber moor, and administration building can be labelled as the highest zone of noise level intensity. Due to excessive noise, university students are facing disorders like irritation, headache, nervousness, insomnia, anxiety, hearing problem, and hypertension. Controlling noise pollution is an absolute necessity for BAU to ensure noise-less academic culture whilst the dwellers of BAU is in the risk of serious noise related health hazards. The results would be very useful for BAU authority to monitor and formulate a structural noise management policy, and to control excessive noise at our beloved BAU.
... In the classroom, noise may adversely affects educational atmosphere (Hodgson et al., 1999) and may cause hypertension, hampers teaching-learning process, obstruct cognitive development, and depreciate learning performance of students. Students exposed to high levels of noise may suffer from attention loss, social compliance and increased conflicting interactive relation (Seetha et al., 2008). ...
The Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) is a prime campus of agricultural study on 488 hectares of scenic land on the western array of the old Brahmaputra River. This study aimed to measure the prevailing levels of traffic generated noise pollution at the core academic points and to assess the impacts of noise pollution on students' health at BAU. The recorded Lave ranges from 55-85 dB. The Lave ranges from 79-85 dB throughout the whole day at FoA and FoAH. The Lave at these two core academic points are almost the double than the permissible limit of 45 dB. The Lmax pressure (96 dB) at Jobber moor during the noon is the maximum inside the whole BAU campus. The movement of traffic vehicles is responsible as the main sources of these noises. The noise level indices and their degree of fluctuation as given by Leq, Lnp, and NC are higher in roadside locations namely at FoA, FoAH, FoAERS. In terms of noise pollution, three of the sampled areas namely FoA, FoAH, and KR market show 'moderate risk' (Lave: 81 dB) during the morning whilst, the FoAH possessed the 'high risk' with the Lave of 85 dB. The results show that the FoA, FoAH, KR market, Jobber moor, and administration building can be labelled as the highest zone of noise level intensity. Due to excessive noise, university students are facing disorders like irritation, headache, nervousness, insomnia, anxiety, hearing problem, and hypertension. Controlling noise pollution is an absolute necessity for BAU to ensure noiseless academic culture whilst the dwellers of BAU is in the risk of serious noise-related health hazards. The results would be very useful for BAU authority to monitor and formulate a structural noise management policy, and to control excessive noise at our beloved BAU.
... According to the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Agriculture, the desirable range for noise in classrooms and laboratories is 40-50 dBA [40]. Other organizations, such as WHO, have recommended that acoustic levels be held below 35 dBA to ensure a productive teaching and learning environment [41]. However, the present study's analysis indicated that the university settings investigated had noise levels of 50-70 dBA, which is well above recommended levels and could negatively affect student performance. ...
This study measured noise levels in Saudi university laboratories and classrooms to determine whether they meet international standards. The study was conducted by highlighting primary noise components and their combined influence. A design of experiments (DoE) approach was employed for nine noise components in university classrooms and laboratories. In total, 1024 readings were obtained from Saudi university classrooms and laboratories using a sound-level meter. Using analysis of variance (ANOVA), nine noise variables were evaluated for their effects both independently and through mutual interactions. The study found that the noise level in classrooms and laboratories was 50–70 dBA, which is above the tolerable level (40–50 dBA). Although the noise variables analyzed had minor primary impacts, the study revealed eleven statistically significant interactive effects, indicating the variables’ combined effects for classroom and laboratory noise. This study fills a research gap on classroom noise in Saudi university settings, equipping educational leaders with the understanding needed to apply noise-abatement techniques, which will improve teaching and learning.
... Westen (1999) reports that any behaviour followed by pleasant stimuli is likely to be repeated. Therefore, the inclusion application of the operant conditioning theory may be helpful in managing classroom acoustics and reduce the frustrations that teachers experience during class activities due to noise (Seetha, Karmegam, Ismail, Sapuan, Ismail & Moli, 2008;Shield & Dockrell, 2003). Furthermore, the active reduction of internal classroom noise such as the suggestion by one participant to use pillows as sound absorption strategy can go a long way towards enhancing classroom noise levels, especially for children with special needs who may have less inhibition. ...
In South Africa, education is considered a basic right and our constitution calls for accessible educational contexts which ought to be conducive for learning. Even though schools are meant to be places in which learning can occur, poor classroom acoustics may threaten that basic right to education. The aim of this study was, therefore, to explore and understand how teachers in special needs schools managed classroom acoustics in their efforts to enhance learning. We report on a qualitative study using semi-structured face-to-face interviews with teachers from 2 special needs schools in Johannesburg in the Gauteng province of South Africa. A non-probability purposive sampling strategy was used to recruit participants. The results of this study confirm that classrooms in special needs schools may not be acoustically sound spaces which teachers feel may compromise effective learning. As a result, teachers reported using a variety of active and passive strategies to manage classroom acoustics in order to enhance learning. The results of this study contribute to existing knowledge on the importance of the strategies used by teachers in managing classroom acoustics. Further research is required to determine the efficacy of these and other strategies used by teachers in special needs schools.
... The participants indicated that large class size is a major factor because of overcrowded classrooms (Ahmad et al., 2014;Farrukh & Shakoor, 2018;UNESCO, 2018). Also, a noisy environment creates stress and a low studentteacher interaction (Grebennikov, 2006;Seetha et al., 2008). Asian Development Bank (2019, p. 24) reported classroom-pupil ratios of 38 in fundamental and 48 in secondary education in Pakistan. ...
Teachers’ roles are dynamic among all the factors contributing to educational achievements. Teachers’ performance is an important factor associated with policy implementation and organizational outcomes. This article elicited the teachers’ perceptions of fundamental factors affecting the teaching profession. The study conducted a focus group interview and analyzed it. A list of indicated factors was prepared and corroborated with existing literature. An online survey was conducted, and participants were asked to rank these suggested factors in order of priority for amelioration to sustain the teaching profession. The interdependence of preferences in identified seven critical areas was tested through teachers’ demographics. The finding discussed factors affecting the teaching profession, including current issues in Pakistan's education sector. This study illustrates factors for prioritizing policy reforms through teachers’ insights.
Learning environments and the classroom setting abound with sonic activity which may be desired or not depending on the listener context. Undesired sonic activity is often perceived as noise and can result to loss of concentration, disturbances to learning, and hearing issues related to health. Technology could potentially be used to design tools that help regulate sonic activity in the classroom. In this paper, we embark on a user-centred-design process to explore sonic activity in the classroom and design and evaluate tangible prototypes that monitors sound level in the classroom and gives ambient feedback to students and teachers. We started by interviewing teachers from three schools and obtained requirements. Regulating sonic activity turned out to be a complex process that requires the participation and negotiation from both teachers and students due to the subjective nature of sound perception. Furthermore, solutions based on smartphones are not practical because they divert student attention. A tangible device coupled with an ambient display may provide a viable solution. We sketched and evaluated several possibilities which addressed the requirements as well as possible. Based on feedback from teachers, we developed 3D printed tangible prototypes with input controls that provide visual and sonic feedback and can be coupled to an ambient display. These were further developed based on two iterations which included evaluation in a controlled environment. The solution monitors sound level and reports violations but also allows both students and teachers to report annoyance due to noise to the rest of the classroom. Furthermore, it can be coupled to an ambient display of sonic activity. The result from the iterations indicates that monitoring and negotiation sonic activity in classrooms with an IoT device can help teachers regulate the unwanted “noise” through enabling feedback from students.
This article reports on two studies that examined how typical student behavior patterns contribute to predicting burnout among teachers in general (Study 1) and among male and female teachers possessing different pupil control ideologies (Study 2). The sample for Study 1 involved 348 teachers from both religious and secular schools in Israel and 356 of their students. The sample for Study 2 involved 391 elementary and secondary schoolteachers (122 were classified “humanistic” and 119 “custodial”). The teachers sampled completed a questionnaire composed of an adapted version of the Maslach Burnout Inventory, the Pupil Behavior Patterns Scale (Studies 1 and 2), and an adapted version of the Pupil Control Ideology scale (Study 2). The students in Study 1 filled out an open-ended questionnaire. The typical student behaviors—disrespect, inattentiveness and sociability—accounted for 22% of teacher burnout variance for the whole sample and for 33% of burnout variance in teachers in religious schools. Humanistic teachers were affected mainly by disrespect, whereas custodial teachers were affected mainly by inattentiveness. Burnout among male teachers was mainly affected by students' inattentiveness, whereas burnout among female teachers was mainly affected by students' disrespect.
SUMMARY An analysis of German and international reference works shows that classroom acoustics have been sadly neglected worldwide. This is just as true for German as for other countries. In the United States, however, classroom acoustics has become increasingly important. From all parts of the world, values for noise levels are being reported which are no longer permissible in industrial and commercial places of work. That means: while parents are protected at their places of work, their children are ex- pected to endure such conditions for years. The investigations also show that children suffer from learning difficulties under such stressful condi- tions. On occasions these can even lead to children doing significantly worse in tests in their noisy classrooms than under quiet conditions. Our report summarizes the verifiable difficulties children have when learning to read and speak in noisy surroundings. Today there appears to be justifi- cation for the assumption that poor performance at school has, to a great extent, to be put down to the inadequate ergonomic conditions found in schools. Noise caused in schools themselves together with the dreadful acoustics are mainly responsible for that.
This paper reports a preliminary investigation into the vocal health of primary, secondary and grammar school teachers. Data is specific to Northern Ireland and was obtained through the use of specially designed questionnaires which were sent to speech and language therapists and a group of teachers and non-teachers outside the clinical setting. The findings show that teachers run a considerably higher risk of presenting in clinic with a voice problem. There is evidence of marked differences in self-reported symptoms, perceived causative factors and attitudes to management of voice problems among teachers compared to non-teachers. These findings support the implementation of specific voice conservation and care for those in the teaching profession.
A comprehensive survey of teacher stress, job satisfaction and career commitment among 710 full-time primary school teachers was undertaken by Borg, Riding & Falzon (1991) in the Mediterranean islands of Malta and Gozo. A principal components analysis of a 20-item sources of teacher stress inventory had suggested four distinct dimensions which were labelled: Pupil Misbehaviour, Time/Resource Difficulties, Professional Recognition Needs, and Poor Relationships, respectively. To check on the validity of the Borg et al. factor solution, the group of 710 teachers was randomly split into two separate samples. Exploratory factor analysis was carried out on the data from Sample 1 (N = 335), while Sample 2 (N = 375) provided the cross-validational data for a LISREL confirmatory factor analysis. Results supported the proposed dimensionality of the sources of teacher stress (measurement model), along with evidence of an additional teacher stress factor (Workload). Consequently, structural modelling of the 'causal relationships' between the various latent variables and self-reported stress was undertaken on the combined samples (N = 710). Although both non-recursive and recursive models incorporating Poor Colleague Relations as a mediating variable were tested for their goodness-of-fit, a simple regression model provided the most parsimonious fit to the empirical data, wherein Workload and Student Misbehaviour accounted for most of the variance in predicting teaching stress.
Exposure to noise constitutes a health risk. There is sufficient scientific evidence that noise exposure can induce hearing impairment, hypertension and ischemic heart disease, annoyance, sleep disturbance, and decreased school performance. For other effects such as changes in the immune system and birth defects, the evidence is limited. Most public health impacts of noise were already identified in the 1960s and noise abatement is less of a scientific but primarily a policy problem. A subject for further research is the elucidation of the mechanisms underlying noise-induced cardiovascular disorders and the relationship of noise with annoyance and nonacoustical factors modifying health outcomes. A high priority study subject is the effects of noise on children, including cognitive effects and their reversibility. Noise exposure is on the increase, especially in the general living environment, both in industrialized nations and in developing world regions. This implies that in the twenty-first century noise exposure will still be a major public health problem.
Images
Figure 2
This article reports two studies intended to develop and assess conceptual models of how different factors mediate and moderate the annoyance reaction in school environments. In the first, a survey of 207 pupils was conducted where assumptions about mediators and moderators were formulated and tested. In the best model, general sensitivity and adaptation led to a higher degree of annoyance causing stress symptoms. In the second study, focus group interviews with 16 pupils were performed to set up a model of mediating and moderating factors from pupils’statements in the formation of annoyance. The objectivewas also to get their opinions aboutways to improve the sound environment in school. The interviews indicated a serial arrangement in which stress symptoms and distraction mediated between chatter and disturbance. Thus, the two studies suggested different models for the prediction of the annoyance reaction. The pupils’ views about how to improve the school sound environment are discussed in the framework of an empowerment model.
The purpose of this study was to create guidelines for stress management intervention by investigating the relationship of 12 factors with stress reactions (emotional exhaustion and irritation) and feelings of mastery among Swedish comprehensive school teachers. Data were collected via a questionnaire distributed to 928 teachers in 27 schools. The response rate was 89%. Multiple regressions were conducted on colleague support, cooperation, coordination problems, goal clarity, learning orientation, manager support, negative feedback, positive feedback, pupil misbehaviour, teacher age, work control and perceived work demands, all as independent variables. Perceived work demands was treated as a dependent variable in an additional regression analysis. Teacher stress reactions were best predicted by perceived work demands, pupil misbehaviour and negative feedback. Feelings of mastery were best predicted by learning orientation, positive feedback and goal clarity. In the additional analysis perceived work demands was best predicted by pupil misbehaviour, coordination problems and (low) work control. Practical implications are discussed.
School teaching is regarded as a stressful occupation, but the perception of the job as stressful may be influenced by coping responses and social support.
To assess the associations between teacher stress, psychological coping responses and social support, taking into account the plaintive set engendered by negative affectivity.
Questionnaire survey of 780 primary and secondary school teachers (53.5% response rate).
In stepwise multiple regression, social support at work and the coping responses behavioural disengagement and suppression of competing activities predicted job stress independently of age, gender, class size, occupational grade and negative affectivity. High job stress was associated with low social support at work and greater use of coping by disengagement and suppression of competing activities.
It is suggested that behavioural disengagement and suppression of competing activities are maladaptive responses in a teaching environment and may actually contribute to job stress. Coping and social support not only moderate the impact of stressors on well-being but influence the appraisal of environmental demands as stressful.
Recordings were made at the beginning and end of workdays of teachers who experience vocal fatigue (n = 22) and those who do not experience fatigue (n = 17). Those who experienced fatigue were recorded on days in which they did and did not fatigue. Both groups evaluated their vocal characteristics, each time they made a recording. Subsequently, a listener panel evaluated the same characteristics from the recordings. Both groups estimated the amount and characteristics of their talking time, completed a psychological evaluation and provided medical histories. The authors interpret the data obtained as indicating that the vocal characteristics of teachers who fatigue and those who do not fatigue are similar on days the former group does not fatigue and that the two groups are similar in the amount and loudness of their talking time, at work and at home. However, teachers who fatigue tend to spend more time in activities that appear to be vocally demanding and are more likely to perceive situations as being anxiety producing. Teachers who fatigue tend to be in good health, but have had more hearing problems and allergies than their colleagues and more of their family members have had voice problems.
This study compared the frequency and effects of voice symptoms in teachers to a group of individuals employed in other occupations. Teachers were more likely to report having a voice problem (15 vs. 6%), having 10 specific voice symptoms, and having 5 symptoms of physical discomfort. They averaged almost 2 symptoms compared with none for nonteachers. Likewise, teachers were more likely to perceive that a voice problem would adversely affect their future career options, had done so in the past, and was limiting their current job performance. Over 20% of teachers but none of the nonteachers had missed any days of work due to a voice problem. These findings suggest that teaching is a high-risk occupation for voice disorders and that this health problem may have significant work-related and economic effects.