|
|
 |
THE FUNCTIONAL LISTENING EVALUATIONDownload The Functional Listening Evaluation Purpose of The Functional Listening EvaluationThe purpose of this evaluation is to determine how listening abilities are affected by noise, distance, and visual input in an individual's natural listening environment. It is designed to simulate listening ability in situations that are more representative of actual listening conditions than can often be replicated in sound booth assessment. Through observation of the administration of the evaluation, the student's teachers, parents, and others may gain appreciation of the affects of adverse listening conditions encountered by the student. The evaluation results are also useful in justifying accommodations, such as assistive listening devices, sign language or oral interpreters, notetakers, captioning, special seating, and room acoustic modifications. This protocol is based on a listening paradigm suggested by Ying (1990), and by Ross, Bracken, and Maxon (1992). Materials Needed
Environment for TestingUse the student's classroom during a time when it is empty. If this is not possible, choose a room that most closely approximates the size, ambient noise level, and floor and wall surfaces of the student's classroom. While performance during actual class sessions would seem ideal, the test process itself may be disruptive to instruction for the rest of the class and may not reflect the adverse conditions encountered by the student throughout the day. Physical Set-up of Test EnvironmentDue to room size and instructional style variations, the occupied classroom should be observed to determine maximum listening distances. The distance used should be recorded on the scoring form. These distances can be marked using masking tape on the floor. Be sure that the markers are from the student's ear to the examiner's mouth.
Revised 2004 by Johnson. Based on Functional Listening Evaluation by C.D. Johnson & P. Von Almen, 1993. Types of Evaluation MaterialsIn order to simulate classroom listening ability, the evaluation material utilized should approximate material that is encountered by the student in the classroom. Additionally the stimuli should have sufficient length to reflect reverberation characteristics of the room. Consideration should also be given to both familiar and new material that a student may encounter. Individuals will usually perform better with familiar material than with stimuli containing unfamiliar vocabulary. Individuals with unilateral and mild hearing losses tend to perform well under all conditions due to the audibility and inherent redundancy in phrase and sentence material utilizing familiar vocabulary. Nonsense phrases have been constructed to decrease these performance effects. Age, limited language, and memory abilities of the individual should also be considered when determining the test stimuli. In selecting word, phrase or sentence materials, consider whether the vocabulary and syntax are appropriate for the student's language ability. For students with poor speech intelligibility, it may be necessary to use materials that permit picture-pointing responses. If closed-set materials are utilized, performance can be expected to be better than with open-set materials. Once the type of stimuli is determined, it must remain constant throughout the assessment so that the variables manipulated are noise, distance, and visual input. Report the material used on the scoring form.
In many of the above materials there will not be enough lists for the entire protocol (8 lists are needed). If it is necessary to use a list twice, select the lists that were more difficult for the student in order to reduce familiarity with the material. Presentation LevelsSpeech to noise ratios should be based upon the auditory environment encountered by the student in the classroom. Sound level measurements of classroom discourse and activity may be necessary to determine these levels. For this example, levels will achieve approximate values of a +5 dB speech to noise ratio in the close condition and a .5dB speech to noise ratio in the distant condition (12-15ft). Levels will vary slightly depending upon the acoustics of the room and consistency of the speaker's voicing of the stimuli. Record the classroom ambient noise level (unoccupied) and approximate speech and noise levels on the scoring form.
Presentation ProtocolThe evaluation should be conducted in the student's typical hearing mode. If hearing aids are usually worn at school, they should also be worn during the evaluation. This evaluation can also be used to demonstrate the improved listening ability with FM or other assistive amplification, whether personal or sound field. Eight sentence or word lists should be presented in the order indicated by the numbers on the scoring matrix. This order balances for difficulty across conditions so that the final task is the easiest of the distance conditions. The examiner may choose to alter the order for other reasons however. The examiner should present the speech materials at a normal speaking rate. The student repeats the test stimuli or points to the appropriate picture, as dictated by the material used. Test administration takes approximately 30 minutes, including set up, with sentences and 20 minutes with words.
ScoringScoring should be completed using the protocol established for the selected test materials. All scores should be reported in percent correct in the Scorebox. Variations in ProtocolThis protocol is based on the listening situation of a typical classroom. For an individual student, it may be useful to modify this protocol to account for variations in the level and source of noise, classroom size, teacher's voice, typical listening distances for the student, or other factors. In order to accommodate these variations, the following modifications may be considered. Modifications other than distance and speech and noise levels should be noted on the test form.
Interpretation MatrixThe Interpretation Matrix analyzes the effects of noise, distance, and visual input for the various conditions. It is completed by transferring the scores from the Scorebox to the interpretation matrix. Individual scores are averaged to determine the overall effect of each condition. Although scores may be affected by different speakers, rate of speaking, attention of the listener, or status of amplification, as long as these variables are kept constant throughout the evaluation, comparisons are valid. Individual and condition scores can be used to justify accommodations that may be beneficial for the student. They should be discussed with the student, his/her parents, and teachers to help them understand the student's listening abilities and needs. A summary of the Interpretation Matrix and appropriate recommendations should be included on the scoring form. Revised 2004 by Johnson. ReferencesAuditec of St. Louis , Multitalker Noise Tape. 2515 S. Big Bend Blvd. , St. Louis , MO 63143-2105 ; 800-669-9065, www.auditec.com Johnson, C.D. & VonAlmen, P.(1993). The Functional Listening Evaluation. In Educational audiology handbook , (pp 336-339). Johnson, Benson, & Seaton (1997). San Diego : Singular Publishing Group, Inc. Johnson, C.D. Benson, P.V., & Seaton, J.(1997). Educational audiology handbook, Sentence and Phrase Lists, Appendix Section 15 (pp 477-489). San Diego : Singular Publishing Group, Inc. Ross, M., Brackett, D. & Maxon, A. (1991). Communication Assessment. In Assessment and management of mainstreamed hearing-impaired children (pp 113.127). Austin , Tx : Pro-Ed. Ying, E. (1990). Speech and Language Assessment: Communication Evaluation. In M. Ross (Ed.), Hearing- impaired children in the mainstream (pp 45.60). Parkton , MD : York Press.
Revised 2004 by Johnson. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright 2005 Hands & Voices :: Privacy Policy :: Credits |
