The Benefits of Sound Field Amplification in Classrooms of Inuit Students of Nunavik
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This pilot study investigated the potential benefits of sound field amplification for Inuit first and second language learners in a remote community of Nunavik, Northern Québec. Hearing screening results showed that 26% of students attending the local school had hearing loss due to otitis media. The study used speech intelligibility and attending behavior measures, as well as interviews, to examine the appropriateness of sound field amplification in the multilingual and multilevel instructional contexts found in the classrooms of Nunavik. METHOD: Sound field amplification systems were installed in three representative classrooms for a period of 3 months. Speech intelligibility of Inuttitut syllables was compared in amplified versus non-amplified conditions for 10 students with hearing loss and 10 age-matched normal hearing peers. Observations of four categories of attending behaviors for a separate set of seven students were carried out prior to the installation of the systems and with the systems in place. Teacher and student comments were collected during the study and after the study was completed. RESULTS: Results showed significant improvements in speech intelligibility scores for students with hearing impairment and normal hearing in the amplified condition. Total scores for on-task behavior improved for six of the seven students observed; all students demonstrated improvement in at least one category of attending behavior. Teacher and student comments identified numerous advantages of the amplification systems. IMPLICATIONS: Results point to the potential benefits of sound field amplification for multicultural populations that are similarly challenged by high rates of hearing loss, as well as for second language learners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it