Opettajan ääntä auttamassa, luokan melua vähentämässä

It has been observed that teachers suffer from many voice disorders and difficulties in using their voices. Several different factors contribute to the origin of these disorders and how they are rehabilitated. Individual factors undermining the functionality of the voice include erroneous mode of voice production and inadequate knowledge of voice hygiene and voice ergonomy. My study had two main objectives: to enhance teachers’ vocal well-being and to improve the communicative conditions in the classroom. The well-being of teachers’ voices was intented to be improved by intensifying voice therapy with the help of Carryover methods. Exercises aimed to save on voice production were the means traditionally used in voice therapy, where the individual receiving therapy learns to use the voice more economically. However, in everyday life, the transitioning to the new mode of voice production has often been left to the responsibility of the individual client. Another approach to alleviate speaker’s difficulties in using the voice is voice ergonomy: an attempt to improve all those factors impairing the speaker’s – and also the listener’s – communication. Fifty-three female teachers participated in this study.

My dissertation consists of three studies. In the first study (I), I explored the nature of the activity noise during lessons (e.g. in the mother tongue, mathematics) in the primary school, and whether there was a connection between the activity noise and the loudness and pitch of the teachers’ voices, as well as voice symptoms (24 teachers). In the second study (II), I explored whether it was possible to reduce the level of the activity noise in the classroom by improving the acoustics and by performing workshop activity with the noise control model developed by me (so-called Noise workshop). In addition, I investigated if these interventions could influence the loudness and pitch of the teachers’ voices and voice symptoms, the teachers’ and pupils’ experiences of the sound environment, and how the pupils experienced the audibility and clarity of the teacher’s voice. Two teachers participated in this study with a total of 50 pupils. The third study (III) comprised an assessment of whether the Carryover method might serve to generalize the skills practised in voice therapy to everyday life (Carryover voice therapy group, 27 teachers). The results obtained were compared to the results of a group in which the application of the practice was not specially supported (Traditional voice therapy group, 26 teachers), and to the results of a control group (24 teachers) in which the teachers did not receive voice therapy during the eight-week control period.

The findings showed that the noise level during activities loaded the teachers’ voices in the lessons (Study I). A connection was found between the noise level and such vocal symptoms as tiring of the voice, dryness in the throat, and a sensation of mucus. The pitch of the voice ( f0) rose in the course of the day. After the installation of acoustic panels, the activity noise levels decreased (Study II). The reverberation time (T60), the speech audibility index (C50), and the speech transfer index (STI) showed that the listening conditions had improved. The loudness of the teachers’ voices (SPL) decreased, and teachers experienced less sensation of a lump and irritating mucus in their throats. The sensation of reverberation in the classroom and disturbance from extra sounds diminished. According to the pupils, the clarity and audibility of the teacher’s voice improved, and there was a reduction in noise from the ventilation equipment and the corridor. In addition, the disturbant noise from moving furniture diminished. After the noise workshops, the noise from the furniture being moved diminished, and the pupils felt that the clarity and audibility of the teacher’s voice improved, and also that the disruptive sound environment of the classroom diminished. Teachers suffered less often from the voice symptom I have voice breaks when talking. The findings of Study III showed that the vocal quality in the Carryover voice therapy group and in the Traditional voice therapy group changed similarly (for ex. the pressed nature of the voice diminished) during therapy and follow up. On the other hand, the internal scrutiny of the groups showed that the vocal symptoms of those using the Carryover method diminished and the quality of life related to vocal functionality improved throughout the six-months period of the follow up. Such improvement did not occur in the Traditional voice therapy group.

My dissertation shows that noise in the lessons of academic subjects is a burden on the teacher’s voice, and with voice ergonomic measures (improvement of the acoustics and noise workshop activity) it is possible to improve the communication conditions in the classroom, which in turn supports the teacher’s vocal well-being. Although my study did not demonstrate the superiority of Carryover methods, their use can nevertheless be recommended to try in voice therapy. They can be used to support the role of the client and the commitment to therapy rendering the changes in voice use more effective and long-lasting, because they enhance independent practice outside the therapy situation.