Table 11.
| Investigators | Population | Results Obtained With FM Sound Field Amplification |
|---|---|---|
| Allen (1993) | 90 general education elementary teachers | (preference) Once familiar with the system, teachers ranked sound field's usefulness above that of other instructional delivery equipment. |
| Nelson & Schmidt (1993) | 20 general education K-3rd grade teachers | (open classroom) Teachers in open classrooms reported greater success than those in traditional classrooms, although all teachers identified benefits. |
| Osborn, VonderEmbse, & Graves (1989) | 47 amplified K-3 regular education classrooms | (teacher's voice) Fewer teachers absences and laryngitis when using sound field amplification |
| Rosenberg et al. (in press) | 55 general education K-2 teachers | (teacher's voice) 100% agreement that reduced vocal strain was the greatest benefit from sound field amplification |
| Rosenberg (1998) | 1 acoustically modified and 1 amplified relocatable classroom | (cost) Sound field amplification was provided at 1/5 the cost of acoustical modifications in newly constructed relocatable classrooms |
| Rosenberg et al. (1999) | 64 general education K-2 amplified classrooms | (cost) Typical classroom (25 students, 1 teacher) daily cost per person was $.14 or $.03/day over 5 years. |