Voice Augmentation System

Wanted to share . . .

Introduction:

Students finally have a voice! I can’t count how many times I have asked a student to respond to a question, and I just can’t hear them. No longer do I have to ask them several times to repeat themselves leaving only myself to hear the response. The voice augmentation system allows all to hear what they have to say. This system allows teachers and students to speak in normal tones while everyone pays attention. Amazingly, students are attentive throughout the day learning from not only the teacher, but their peers as well. This system made a great difference in my classroom, and it has done the same for training staff during meetings. Collaboration of learning is enhanced through individuals listening, responding, challenging and adding to others’ thoughts through the clarity of the voice. Not only is the teacher’s voice drawing attention, but students’ voices have given perception to the learning progress and enriched classroom discussions.

Research:

District teaching improvement programs and research support the voice augmentation system from providing appropriate feedback to engaging students to higher-order thinking.
A great teacher doesn’t monopolize lessons through constant speaking, but engages them through challenges of discovering their voice and thoughts. Parker Palmer in The Courage to Teach expresses the need for students to share. He states, “Behind students’ fearful silence, they want to discover their voices, speak their voices, and have their voices heard.” TESA, Teacher Expectations & Student Achievement, also focuses upon the importance of listening to students’ responses. The TESA program encourages teachers and students to listen to others’ viewpoints. The author of TESA found that low achieving students spend considerably more time listening than being heard. The voice augmentation system allows all students to speak and be heard. `

Reflection of Usage:

I began using the microphone system Oct. 20, 2010. It was installed on Oct. 19, 2010. On Oct. 20th, I had approximately 45 students due to another teacher’s illness. I decided to combine her students with my own in order to assure that all students received intentional, standard-based, data-driven instructional learning lessons in spite of their teacher’s absence. What was extremely amazing was that all students stayed focused during instructional periods. When I spoke to students in a soft yet firm instructional manner all were attentive even with the number of students for this day. I had no discipline problems throughout all lessons. Amazing! I was not loud at any time. Students responded more quickly when given direction and complied with transition quickly and effectively. They were completely attentive! I am not a teacher that lectures for long periods of time, but promotes student engagement. With this system I was able to speak and facilitate student shared responses as they spoke into their microphone. At first, I thought that the passing of the microphone may be a problem with so many students. It was not. They took control to hand the mic to whoever was called upon. One student interrupted and asked if he could add a comment to a previous student’s response. The number of students wanting to respond and share increased dramatically by the show of hands. Students were not shy, but felt comfortable in sharing and speaking as they developed their understanding of cause and effect (Indiana State Standard 4.3.2) responses from the novel and theatrical performance viewing (Indianapolis Repertory Theatre) of Holes by Sachar. From my observation students seemed powerful through their voice and wanted to be heard. Students’ articulation of words and sentence structure was surprising to me. I had no idea they were so fluent in expressing their understanding of the lesson concepts and viewpoints of their understanding of the novel. These concepts were even backed up with evidence in a clear and thorough, thoughtful explanation. I gained a whole new respect to listening to students’ verbal understanding of the objective and application of the presented standard. Another aspect that surprised me was student eye contact with the speaker. Students were actively listening to one another as they shared their understandings of the concept giving examples and personal opinions of the content. This has been a struggle not only this year, but for many years of teaching. I believe students were actively learning from one another for the first time this school year.
The Principal, students and teachers in the building have commented how the system makes a distinctive difference in instruction. Team meetings are often held in my classroom due to the effectiveness of technology I am so fortunate to house. The Principal of the school, Mrs. Buntin, was amazed how the microphone system helped keep her teachers focused. She states, “When I had the opportunity to use it during a staff meeting, there was a noticeable difference in how the teachers and staff responded to the information that was being presented. Even though the meeting was held in a regular size classroom, the difference in the sound from the microphone and overhead speakers helped clear any other distractions.” Other teachers in the building also spend time in my classroom to assist students’ learning needs. Mrs. Jacobs commented, “I think the system is valuable for many reasons. It gives students the opportunity to have a little “think” time as they pass the microphone, which is keeping with Best Practices/TESA. The system obviously makes it much easier to hear each other in these old buildings, especially when so many of our students/staff experience cold, sinus issues, etc. It gives the students a self-esteem boost because everyone is attentive, and it also makes us all feel like rock stars.” I completely agree. I never have to raise my voice. I speak softly while wearing my neck microphone and students pay attention. One student said, “It helps me hear better.” Another states, “You can just use your regular voice and everyone can hear. To me it feels like I have everybody’s attention. I can also hear other students when they talk in it. I usually can’t hear what they say.”


Conclusion:

The voice augmentation system in my classroom is a necessity. I never need to raise my voice to get the attention of the class. Students respond immediately when the direct instruction portion of my lesson begins. They listen attentively to others as they speak. I have utilized this system with two speakers as well as four. I found that two speakers were enough. These speakers are installed centrally in the ceiling panels of the classroom. When four speakers were installed I had to tune the system down. Students never commented with recognizing a difference when the additional speakers were installed.
Students sharing, commenting and challenging one another’s opinions is the ultimate goal a teacher can only hope to accomplish in a school year. I have been utilizing this system for less than two months, and the results of classroom interaction are amazing. Inner-city children have the need to gain strength over others. Most often they find that power physically. Redirecting students from the physical responses to voicing their concerns brings upon collaboration and understandings of one another. Many times some students are often overlooked for they are quiet and avoid attention. The most silent students are now feeling strong and important through their words.


References:

Miller, Anita, Dr., and Marilyn Black. Teacher Expectations & Student Achievement: A Staff Development Program for All Educators. California: Downey, 2002.

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The Courage to Teach. California, San Francisco.