Abstract:

The research aim:
Educational process, and especially the special education activities towards different groups of individuals, has been traditionally highly demanding in terms of educator´s voice capacity, as well as its quality and proper use within his/her everyday professional routine. Teachers and special educators officially belongs to the group called “voice professionals”. Although we should consider the group of students at Pedagogical faculties (preparing educators or teachers) as highly aware of their “professional voice” treatment believing they are free of any serious kind of voice pathology signs, some of the research results show that the reality a bit differs from this logical presumption.
The aim of the research was to analyse the frequency of the particular problems with voice in specific groups of teachers and university students with an emphasis on accentuating the need of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of voice disorders in education studies students and that way avoiding secondary consequences negatively influencing the quality of the education process (including the perception of a educator´s real statement, mood, etc. as voice reflected in prosodic features of speech is one of the strongest emotional mediator). Secondary it can endanger the educator’s future competitiveness on the labour market.

Methodology:
The research was primarily supported by the analysis of a questionnaire survey conducted using the Voice Handicap Index (VHI), which was distributed in electronic or printed form of voice professionals represented in each group during the autumn of 2013. The subgroups of teachers of different school levels were compared with other voice professionals. Then, during the spring of 2014, more specifically investigated and analysed a group of students, including those focused on educational or other vocally demanding profession.

Results:
In terms of moderate voice problems we recorded almost equal representation within all groups which reported severe difficulties – especially in professional coaches, high school teachers and actors, what reflects the same distribution as within the group of mild problems. The survey shows, among other things, that appropriate treatment of the voice (vocal hygiene) should be, particularly in this high-risk group including teachers, a neglected area and states that despite the high signals of functional voice problems, the knowledge of so called vocal hygiene rules is unfortunately minimal. Specific findings also present the results of comparison group of university students of Faculty of Education, which were further analysed using the same research tool.

Conclusion:
Finally we would like to alert those of the academics preparing future professionals in educational programs, as well the educators themselves to be more aware of the possibility of using a special assessment and intervention to treat voice dysfunctions in students and academics and prevent their future loss of their voice and, as a consequence, endanger, or even loss, their job position. The need of lifelong education and acquiring special voice pedagogy techniques seems to be more than a possibility for teachers during their professional career, as their voice faces the aging and bio-psychological internal and external pathological influences (hormonal changes, thyroid surgery in female educators, neurosis, burn-out syndrom, hearing losses, noise pollution).

Keywords:

Voice disorders, vocal hygiene, university students, education, educator, special education.