Impact of Classroom Determinants on Psychosocial Aspects of Voice Among School Teachers of Indore, India: A Preliminary Survey

  • Kamalika ChowdhuryEmail author
  • Hemina Dawar
Original Article


Teaching voice is the professional voice; often different in quality from our day-to-day speaking voice, and is supposed to be subjected to vocal abuse, misuse and overuse. This paper aims towards highlighting  the various classroom determinants that may impact teacher’s voice and how these impacts can affect the daily activities in terms of functional emotional and psychosocial aspects. To understand the same, a cross sectional prospective study was conducted across eight English medium institutions of Indore (a city in central India) region. The study was carried out in three phases: formulation of a questionnaire, data collection (through administration of the questionnaire and VHI among sixty school teachers) followed by data analysis, to determine whether any association exists between the various classroom determinants and voice impairment. Significant association was found between determinants like teaching experience; number of classes, duration of breaks, use of any alternate method of teaching and alternate use of any amplification device with physical, emotional and functional aspects of life. The findings holistically indicate that various factors within the classroom environment only has a significant bearing on the voice disturbances of a school teacher’s life thus deteriorating their quality of life. Thus it is substantial to begin a training programme by speech language pathologists in order to heighten awareness among teachers. After all voice disturbances are a real and treatable condition and with the right amount of training can be avoided.


Teachers Professional voice users Classroom determinants Questionnaire Voice Handicap Index 



We sincerely extend our thanks to Dr. B.K Sharma, Associate Professor (Statistics), Sri Aurobindo Medical College and PGI Indore, whose statistical expertise was invaluable during the analysis and interpretation of the data that has been collected. Also thanks to the Principals and teachers of all the participating schools for allowing us to collect data during their busy school hours.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that they no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Boominathan P, Chandrasekhar D, Nagarajan R, Madraswala NZ, Rajan A (2008) Vocal hygiene awareness program for professional voice users (Teachers). Asia Pac J Speech Lang Hear 11(1):39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pekkarinen E, Viljanen V (1991) Acoustic conditions for speech communication in classrooms. Scand Audiol 20:257–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rantala L, Paavola L, Korkko P, Vilkman E (1998) Working-day effects on the spectral characteristics of teaching voice. Folia Phoniatr Logop 50:205–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sapienza CM, Crandell CC, Curtis B (1999) Effects of sound-field frequency modulation amplification reducing teachers’ sound pressure level in the classroom. J Voice 13:375–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roy N, Merril RM, Thibeault S et al (2004) Prevalence of voice disorders in teachers and the general population. J Speech Lang Hear Res 47(2):281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Russell A, Oates J, Greenwood KM (2000) Prevalence of voice disorders among future teachers. J Voice 14(2):231–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sapir S, Keidar A, Mathers-Schmidt B (1993) Vocal attrition in teachers: survey findings. Eur J Disord Commun 28:177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith E, Lemke J, Taylor M, Kirchner HL, Hoffman H (1998) Frequency of voice problems among teachers and other occupations. J Voice 12:480–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller M, Verdolini K (1995) Frequency of voice problems reported by teachers of singing and control subjects and risk factors. J Voice 8:348–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morton V, Watson D (1998) The teaching voice: problems and perceptions. Logop Phoniatr Vocol 23:133–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sonninen A (1970) Phoniatric viewpoints on hoarseness. Acta Otolaryngol 263:68–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hertegård S (1988) Voice problems in a small Swedish town: a retrospective study of the prevalence and a follow up. J Voice 1:336–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacobson BH, Johnson A, Grywalski C et al (1997) The Voice Handicap Index (VHI): development and validation. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 6:66–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thibeault SL, Merrill RM, Roy N, Gray SD, Smith EM (2004) Occupational risk factors associated with voice disorders among teachers. Ann Epidemiol 14(10):786–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guthrie JW (1997) School finance: fifty years of expansion. Future Child 7(3):24–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alva A, Machado M, Bhojwani K, Sreedharan S (2017) Study of risk factors for development of voice disorders and its impact on the quality of life of school teachers of Mangalore, India. J Clin Diagn Res 11(1):1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woods M, Allen P (1997) Characteristics of physical education teachers. Phys Educ 54:150–160Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Simberg S, Laine A, Sala E, Ronnemma A (2000) Prevalence of voice disorders among future teachers. J Voice 14(2):231–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Urrutikoetxea A, Ixpizua A, Matellanes F (1995) Prevalence of vocal nodules in female teachers. In: 1st world voice congress, Oporto, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Safarti J (1989) Vocal re-training of teachers. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bordeaux) 110:393–395Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Preciado JA, Garcia-Tapia R, Infante JC (1998) Estudio de la prevalencia de los trastornos de la voz en los profesionales de la enseñanza. Factores que intervienen en su aparición o en su mantenimiento. Acta Otorrinol Esp 49:137–142Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Unger E, Bastian J (1981) Professional dysphonias. Deutsche Gesundh 36:1461–1464Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Masuda T, Ikeda Y, Manako H, Komiyama S (1993) Analysis of vocal abuse: fluctuations in phonation time and intensity in 4 groups of speakers. Acta Otolaryngol 113:547–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sala E, Laine A, Simberg S, Pentti J, Suonpaa J (2001) The prevalence of voice disorders among day care centre teachers compared with nurses: a questionnaire and clinical study. J Voice 15:413–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Buekers R, Bierens E, Kingma H, Marres EHMA (1995) Voice load as measured by the voice accumulator. Folia Phoniatr Logop 47:252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Martins RH, Pereira ER, Hidalgo CB, Tavares EL (2014) Voice disorders in teachers: a review. J Voice 28(6):716–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jonsdottir V, Rantala L, Laukkanen AM, Vilkman E (2001) Effects of sound amplification on teachers’ speech while teaching. Logop Phoniatr Vocol 26:118–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Titze IR, Hunter JE, Svec JG (2007) Voicing and silence periods in daily and weekly vocalizations of teachers. J Acoust Soc Am 121:469–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Titze IR, Svec JG, Popolo PS (2003) Vocal dose measures: Quantifying accumulated vibration exposure in vocal fold tissues. J Speech Lang Hear Res 46:919–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lindström F, Ohlsson AC, Sjöholm J, Persson WK (2010) Mean F0 values obtained through standard phrase pronunciation compared with values obtained from the normal work environment: a study on teacher and child voices performed in a preschool environment. J Voice 24:319–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vintturi J, Alku P, Lauri ER et al (2001) The effects of post-loading rest on acoustic parameters with special reference to gender and ergonomic factors. Folia Phoniatr Logop 53:338–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kooijman PGC, de Jong FICRS, Thomas G, Huinck W, Donders R, Graamans K et al (2006) Risk factors for voice problems in teachers. Folia Phoniatr Logop 58:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chen SH, Chiang SC, Chung YM, Hsiao LC, Hsiao TY (2010) Risk factors and effects of voice problems for teachers. J Voice 24:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roy N, Weinrich B, Gray SD, Tanner K, Stemple JC et al (2003) Three treatments for teachers with voice disorders: a randomized clinical trial. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 46:670–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Larsen JB, Blair JC (2008) The effect of classroom amplification on the signal-to-noise ratio in classrooms while class is in session. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 39:451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Roy N, Weinrich B, Gray SD, Tanner K, Toledo SW et al (2002) Voice amplification versus vocal hygiene instruction for teachers with voice disorders: a treatment outcomes study. J Speech Lang Hear Res 45:625–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Otolaryngologists of India 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Speech and HearingSri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences (SAIMS)IndoreIndia

Personalised recommendations