Voice Problems In Teachers

Introduction

Our voice forms an important part of our everyday lives. However, it is when the voice is used as a part of one’s profession, that it becomes indispensable. Teaching is one such profession (Buekers, Bierens, Kingma & Marres, 1995; Simberg, Sala & Ronnemaa, 2004). Teachers regularly face vocal abuse at work (Smith et al., 1998), the effects of which manifest themselves in ways more than speaking on the job (Sovani & Mukundan 2010). In spite of this, very little is currently being done in India to address voice problems of teachers (Sovani & Mukundan, 2010).

Need for the study

Though Koufman and Isaacson’s (1991) vocal usage classification system classifies teachers as Level II vocal professionals, this does not, in any way, reduce

In India, there is often a large number of teachers per school, a low teacher- student ratio, shorter rest periods for each teacher, etc. (Mehta, 2005). These and other factors might impede the effectiveness of efforts to address vocal pathology in teachers.

Implementing and testing the efficacy of a module for addressing vocal pathology of teachers in India; and studying factors affecting the success of such a module is, therefore, extremely essential.

Aims and objectives

The present study aimed at quantifying the efficacy of a module for vocal hygiene education and VFE in school teachers.

A secondary aim that emerged during the study was to investigate the factors affecting the efficacy of this module.

Primary objectives:

1. To measure voice handicap of teachers before implementing the module.

2. To measure voice handicap six weeks after implementing the module.

3. To compare voice handicap before and after implementing the

However, the mean rating for self-perceived severity was between normal and mild vocal handicap (Mean= 1.38). Responses to the Brief Voice History questionnaire showed awareness of vocal abuse. Informal conversation revealed that they were highly motivated to learn from the workshop. One way ANOVA revealed no significant differences between VHI scores or self-perceived severity ratings of pre-primary, primary and secondary school teachers, or across years of experience. There was a moderate positive correlation (0.55) between VHI scores (converted to severity ranks) and self-ratings of severity, the self-ratings of severity being consistently lower. The correlation was high (0. 75) for teachers with more than 10 years of