The assessment tasks have been designed to enable students to demonstrate critical thinking skills and problem-solving skills in the understanding of how the auditory system works, psychoacoustics and speech perception.

Completion of All Assessment Tasks:

All assessment tasks are compulsory. It is a requirement of this unit that students make a serious attempt to complete all assessment tasks. Failure to make a serious attempt to complete all assessment tasks may result in failure in the whole unit even if the total marks for completed tasks add up to more than 50%. In such cases, failure results from the learning outcomes of the unit not being met.

Assignment Submission:

All assignments must be submitted via turnitin. For each assignment, you MUST submit the assignment in pdf format. Add a footer to each page of the assignment, with page numbering, your name and student number, “SPH312 2018”, and the assignment number clearly marked. Assignments without a footer may be returned late, may be marked incorrectly, or may not be accepted at all. Students must keep a copy of each assignment as proof that it was completed and submitted in the event that a submitted assignment is misplaced or damaged.

Return of Marked Assignments:

Students’ marked assignments will, in general, be returned to them within 3 weeks of submission. Students will receive letter grades (and not marks) for their assignments. Any marks that students may receive, see, or infer from a Turnitin rubric are only approximations, and cannot for the basis for an appeal. 

How to apply for a late submission of an assignment

All requests for special consideration, including extensions, must be submitted via ASK.mq.edu.au and provide suitable supporting documentation.

Please make us aware of any circumstance that may affect your ability to complete an assessment on time. We are often able to help you manage your study load if we are aware of the situation before the assignment deadline. Requests for special consideration must always be submitted via ASK.mq.edu.au, within 5 days after the assignment deadline.

Late Assignment Submission

• Late submissions without an extension will receive a penalty of 5% of the total mark available for the assignment per day
• Late submission of an assignment without an extension will not be permitted after marks have been released to the rest of the class.
• Extensions will only be given in special circumstances, and can be requested by completing the Special Consideration request at ask.mq.edu.au and providing the requisite supporting documentation.
• For more information on Special Consideration, see the university website https://students.mq.edu.au/study/my-study-program/special-consideration
• Assignments submitted after the deadline, regardless of the reason, will be marked and returned at a date determined by the unit convenor.
• Extensions cannot continue beyond the start of the following semester, and students should be aware that long extensions may impact graduation dates.

Appeals Against Grades

If a student has a problem with the mark given for a particular assessment, the student should contact the Unit Convenor directly. A request for a re-mark must be lodged within two weeks of the date of receipt of the assessment. If a remark is granted, the final mark can be sustained, raised or lowered.

If a student wishes to appeal against a final grade for a unit, then the student should lodge their appeal via ask@mq.edu.au.

http://students.mq.edu.au/support/complaints_appeals/appeals/

Week 1

Holt, L. L., & Lotto, A. J. (2010). Speech perception as categorization. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 72(5), 1218–1227. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.5.1218

Note: Parts of the Holt & Lotto paper will be re-read during the other weeks.

Suggested: Raphael, L. J. (2008). Acoustic Cues to the Perception of Segmental Phonemes. The Handbook of Speech Perception, 182–206. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757024.ch8  

Week 2:

Dupoux, E., Pallier, C., Sebastian, N., & Mehler, J. (1997). A Destressing “Deafness” in French? Journal of Memory and Language. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2500

Suggested:  Cutler, A., Oahan, D., & Donselaar, W. Van. (1997). Prosody in the Comprehension of Spoken Language: A Literature Review*. LANGUAGE AND SPEECH, 40(2), 141–201.

Week 3:

Ingvalson, E. M., Ettlinger, M., & Wong, P. C. M. (2014). Bilingual speech perception and learning: A review of recent trends. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006912456586

Week 4:

Nittrouer, S., Caldwell-Tarr, A., Moberly, A. C., & Lowenstein, J. H. (2014). Perceptual weighting strategies of children with cochlear implants and normal hearing. Journal of Communication Disorders, 52, 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.09.003

Week 5:

Junge, C., Boll-Avetsijan, N., & Benders, T. (submitted) Speech perception and discrimination: from sounds to words. Submitted chapter <note: no library access yet>

Suggested: Walley, A. C. (2008). Speech Perception in Childhood. In D. B. Pisoni, R. E. Remez, & A. C. Walley (Eds.), The Handbook of Speech Perception (pp. 449–469). Wiley Online Library. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.62

Background in tutorial: Holt, C. M., Demuth, K., & Yuen, I. (2015). The use of prosodic cues in sentence processing by prelingually deaf users of cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing, 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000253

Week 6:

Week 1 reading repeated

Categorical Perception Assignment:

Pisoni, D. B. (1973). Auditory and phonetic memory codes in the discrimination of consonants and vowels. Perception & Psychophysics, 13(2), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214136

Experiment Proposal Assignment:

Self-selected article from 2016 and 2017 issues of “Ear & Hearing” or “The Journal of Phonetics”. If you want to select a paper from another journal as the basis of your experiment proposal, please discuss this with Titia Benders before the week 5 tutorial on this assignment. All articles are subject to approval by Titia Benders.

DPOAE Assignment:

Fettiplace R. Hackney CM. (2006). The sensory and motor roles of auditory hair cells. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7; 19-29. Londsbury BL.

Martin GK. (1990). The clinical utility of distortion-product otoacoustic emissions. Ear & Hearing, 11; 144-154.

Kemp DT. (2002). Otoacoustics emissions, their origin in cochlear function, and use. British Medical Bulletin, 63 (1): 223-241.

Learning outcome 4 has been changed from:

4. Analyse, interpret and report on audiometric data to engage with theoretical issues relating to clinical assessment techniques

to

4. Analyse, interpret and report on clinical auditory data to engage with theoretical issues relating to clinical assessment techniques

Changes have gone through the University's Quality Assurance mechanism (FSQC) for approval.