Assessing Aircraft Noise Conditions Affecting Student Learning, Volume 2: Appendices (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 130-139
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 130... ...
APPENDIX G Detailed Analysis Results G.1.
|
From page 131... ...
Two additional types of aircraft noise measure were considered, namely average SEL and Lmax of the school day aircraft events, with the averages taken over events exceeding 70 and 80 dB for SEL, and 65 and 75 dB for Lmax. In these comparisons, shown in Tables G-2 and G-3, data from schools not exposed to aircraft noise or only exposed to aircraft noise below the specified threshold are not included in the analysis.
|
From page 132... ...
G.2. Non-Decibel Metrics Two non-decibel metrics were also analyzed.
|
From page 133... ...
per day, a small but statistically significant negative effect that increases with the noise level as would be expected. For example, for Grade 4 reading, 10 minutes per school day of aircraft noise above 60dB is associated with a decrement of 0.0231 standard deviations of average test scores, and for 10 minutes above 70dB per day, the decrement is 0.0641 standard deviations.
|
From page 134... ...
ambient levels, there will be a certain degree of masking by the ambient noise for a large portion of the target schools. Taking the approach that any decrement in test scores may be related to the amount by which the total (aircraft plus ambient)
|
From page 135... ...
50 to 55 dB, 55 to 60 dB, and greater than 65 dB. At ambient levels less than 50 dB, the sample size is too small to draw definite conclusions.
|
From page 136... ...
There are two different designs for making the comparison: (1) Same Schools - comparing adjusted scores of students in the two groups in each school, then averaging the differences over all target schools; or (2)
|
From page 137... ...
The results for the "Same Schools" analysis show that the effects of aircraft noise are significantly greater on non-disadvantaged than disadvantaged students, 71 percent more so for reading and 48 percent more for math. In fact, the effects for disadvantaged students in the "Same Schools" analysis, unlike the effects in the other three columns of Table G-7, are not statistically significantly different from zero.
|
From page 138... ...
TABLE G-8 Average Changes in Test Scores Associated with School Sound Insulation. Math Grade 3 Math Grade 4 Math Grade 5 Reading Grade 3 Reading Grade 4 Reading Grade 5 Unadjusted Change -0.1635 0.0406 -0.0067 -0.1600 0.0198 0.0199 Students t -1.65 0.41 -0.07 -1.68 0.22 0.21 Demographically Predicted Change -0.1287 -0.0391 -0.1086 -0.0774 -0.1199 -0.1421 Students t -3.14 -0.89 -2.43 -2.07 -1.96 -3.06 Adjusted Change -0.0348 0.0797 0.1020 -0.0826 0.1397 0.1620 Students t -0.30 0.88 1.00 -0.75 1.56 1.59 Number of Schools 22 19 23 23 20 21 Note: Differences are in standard deviations of school average test scores The models posited three noise effects, namely (1)
|
From page 139... ...
TABLE G-9 Effect of Sound Insulation on Test Scores. Test Insulation Y/N Estimated Noise Effect*
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.