Exploration of the impact of impaired listening and processing skills is not generally reviewed in the educational context. The ability to process and interpret speech in noise, block out extraneous noise or the voices other than the person to whom the student needs to attend, is generically called Auditory Processing Difficulties (APD).  Auditory Processing Difficulties (or Disorder) is a complex condition that impacts people worldwide (Iladou et al., 2017) and is not always related to the functioning of the hearing organs. It is only recently that its links with other conditions, such as dyslexia (Richardson et al., 2004), dyspraxia, autism (O’Connor, 2012), ADHD (Witton, 2010), as well as students with hearing impairments and those learning in their non-first language. Although the study described here took place in the UK, it is relevant to the wider European and world-wide context as are the implications of the findings.

Although speech and listening is the main form of communication in HE (and education in general) with students  expected to work in groups with other students, teaching staff have little knowledge of the condition or about creating positive hearing and speech processing environments. Students have limited training in listening and speech processing skills. APD difficulties not only apply to listening to a lecturer, but also being able to understand who is speaking in a group and may impact performance in presentations when the student is asked questions.

This is among the first research to investigate the impact of APD on learning and teaching in the HE environment. This project extends previous research with younger children (Capewell, 2015) into the HE environment. It aims to raise awareness of the impact of APD among staff and non-affected students.

The underpinning theoretical framework is that according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) under Article 12, a 'child' has the right to express their views with Article 28 specifically including access to higher education for disabled students/young people. In the UK, the active involvement and right of individual students to express their needs as a basis for changing pedagogical pracitce  is identified in an Insight report (Office for students, 2020) which urges individual universities to consider the experience and outcomes for those students who identify as having a disability.

The aim of this research was to enable students with APD to analyse and evaluate their experiences of processing what a target speaker says to them in noisy environments and be central to the data collection and analysis.  It gives them a tool to identify enablers/barriers in learning and communicate this with their lecturers and for lecturers to have a structured way of identifying the practical and minor adjustments needed to improve the learning and teaching environment.

Research Questions:

What are the barriers/enablers for students with APD to understanding a targeted speaker in an environment with background noise?

How can students develop agency in identifying and sharing enablers/barriers to processing speech in noise, to those around them?

What information would help academic staff to implement minor adaptations in learning/teaching environments so that there could be a more inclusive environment for students with APD difficulties and evaluate such implementation?

A mixed methodology approach using quantitative and qualitative data provided a breadth of insight (Cohen and Manion, 1994). There were three phases to the project which consisted of, Phase 1, whereby students recording their hearing experiences using a Hearing Map, Phase 2 in which a small group of students worked with their lecturers then Phase 3 in which academics not included in the first two phases volunteered to implement the student suggestions into their teaching practice. Hearing Maps are a structured digital diary type format, which students used to chart their experience of understanding the speech of a targeted speaker. The Hearing Map identifes and explores the types of situations which a student finds to be barriers or enablers in helping them to understand what is being said to them by a targeted speaker. The student is in control of which situations to include in the Hearing Map, chooses how often iit is completed, where and when they record situations. The Hearing Map consists of details such as: the date and time; brief description of the location and its specific features; a selection from one of three options (I can understand all/most of what is said to me; I can understand some of what is said to me; I can understand little/none of what is said to me); a short explanation would identify the reasons for the choice of the option. An additional column was used by some students to reflect on these experiences as a way of considering how the individual could have agency to share their situation with others. The guided nature provides a framework for what information the student provides. The number of entries recorded was left for the student to choose. The data was collected over a timeframe of about three weeks. Students were encouraged to include both in-class and social environments. It is suggested that a range of situations and types of listening environments are included to document one of the three options identified above. The rational for including non-teaching situations was to attempt to capture the total higher education experience of the students. Each Hearing Map was collated on an excel spreadsheet for the individual student as to the percentage time in each condition. An overall collation was made of the barriers and enablers identified summatively by all students. The focus in this paper being on the outcomes from Phase 1.

Eighteen students were recruited from across the university. Because APD is not a unitary condition, students were asked to identify any other co-conditions they had. Of the students who completed their Hearing Maps, there were 9 who identified at Dyslexic, 5 with APD, 4 with Autism, 4 non-native English speakers, 3 with Dyspraxia and 2 with ADHD. A requirement of participation was that students had a formal diagnosis as required by the Disability Support Service in the University. Students ranged from newly diagnosed (within the last 12 months) to 21 years since diagnosis. In total 106 comments were provided which ranged from 3-12 individual entries. We speculate that although those students who identified as having ADHD were initially enthusiastic for the study, they completed less entries and were more likely to drop out, which could be related to their ability to maintain sustained participation. The three top barriers identified were the speed, tone and volume of delivery by the speaker; interfering background noises; and too much information being provided without having time to process it. The main enablers were being able to work in small groups; the speaker talking slowly and clearly; and lack of competing noises. These will be explained in more detail in the presentation. In the qualitative data provided students identified that their emotional responses (such as feeling stupid or not fitting in) and anxiety levels before entering a classroom or interacting 1:1 with others. The latter are mentioned in the literature (Iladou et al., 2017) and issues around reassurance and relationship development may be something for academics to consider.

Capewell, C. (2015) Hearing Maps: Documenting a child’s speech comprehension in noise. Audacity 7, 20-22. Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1994) Research methods in Education, 4th ed. London: Routledge. Iliadou V, Ptok M, Grech H, et al. (2017) A European Perspective on Auditory Processing Disorder: Current Knowledge and Future Research Focus. Front. Neurol. 8:622. Moore, D., Rosen, S., Bamiou, D., Campbell, N. and Sirimanna, T. (2013) Evolving concepts of developmental auditory processing disorder (APD): A British Society of Audiology APD Special Interest Group ‘white paper’. International Journal of Audiology, 52, 1, 3-13. O’Connor, K. (2012) Auditory processing in autism spectrum disorder: A review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews, 36, 836-854. Office for Students (2020) The National Student Survey: Consistency, controversy and change. Insight 6. Available on-line at https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/the-national-student-survey-consistency-controversy-and-change/ Richardson, U., Thomson, J., Scott, S., and Goswami, U. (2004) Auditory Processing Skills and Phonological Representation in Dyslexic Children. Dyslexia, 10, 215-233. UNICEF (1989) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available on line https://www.unicef.org.uk/what-we-do/un-convention-child-rights/ Witton, C. (2010) Childhood auditory processing disorder as a developmental disorder: The case for a multi-professional approach to diagnosis and management. International Journal of Audiology, 49, 83-87.