Walk into most early childhood rooms during a busy morning and you'll notice it immediately. The hum of activity. The squeal of delight. The scrape of chairs. Children's voices layered on top of each other, bouncing off hard floors and glass walls. It's the sound of children being children - and most of us have simply accepted it as part of the job.
There’s more to acoustics than just ‘noise’ and it's worth noting.
Research going back to the 1980s - and growing steadily ever since - tells a consistent story: noise levels in early childhood settings routinely exceed safe thresholds, and the effects on children and educators are real, measurable, and largely going unaddressed (Mealings & Buchholz, 2025; Degotardi et al., 2025; Persson Waye et al., 2019).
What the research says about children
Noise isn't just uncomfortable for children - it actively interferes with the very things we're trying to support. Excessive classroom noise impacts language development and speech perception (Bates et al., 2021; Mealings, 2016), impairs working memory and attention (Erickson & Newman, 2017; Werner et al., 2015), and can lead to physical symptoms including headaches, stomachaches, and fatigue (Winroth et al., 2023; Zulkifli et al., 2025). Some children respond by "tuning out" - a coping strategy that can look a lot like disengagement or inattention (Persson Waye et al., 2013). Others show increased anxiety, hyperactivity, or aggression (Evans, 2006).
Through a Phoenix Cups lens, this makes complete sense. A child whose Safety Cup is being drained by a chronically overwhelming sensory environment is a child whose nervous system is working hard just to cope, increasing the likelihood of stress responses.
What the research says about educators
The impact on educators is just as significant - and arguably less acknowledged. Many educators are regularly exposed to noise levels that exceed Australian occupational health and safety standards (Grebennikov & Wiggins, 2006; Mealings, 2016), yet the usual workplace solution - ear protection - is completely impractical when you're trying to attune to and connect with children, and uphold active supervision.
What follows is a well-documented pattern: educators raise their voices to be heard, which increases room noise further, which drives voices higher still - known as the Lombard Effect (Erickson & Newman, 2017). Chronic exposure contributes to voice strain, fatigue, disturbed sleep, headaches, and burnout (Bates et al., 2021; Brachtl & Trimmel, 2023). Up to 30% of educators in some studies report severe psychological distress directly linked to noise (Brachtl & Trimmel, 2023; Grebennikov & Wiggins, 2006).
The relationship piece - why this matters most
Most significantly, noise elevates cortisol - the body's primary stress hormone. When an educator's nervous system is under chronic acoustic pressure, their stress response becomes visible to children through tone of voice, body language, and the quality of their presence. Children's nervous systems are exquisitely tuned to pick this up. Research confirms that elevated cortisol in educators is directly linked to elevated cortisol in the children they care for (Oberle & Schonert-Reichl, 2016; Schlueter et al., 2024). But this works in both directions. A room full of children who are struggling to cope with acoustic overwhelm generates its own stress signal - and educators absorb that too. Stress moves through relationships, and in a noisy room, it can circulate in ways that are genuinely difficult to interrupt.
This is worth sitting with as a moment of genuine reflection. If children in your room are showing elevated stress, anxiety, or distress, the question isn't just "what is happening for this child?" It's also worth asking: is the environment unintentionally acting as a stressor? Acoustic stress is invisible but has significant impact on educator practice through shortened patience, compassion fatigue, social withdrawal, less attuned interactions with children, less richness in these interactions and a general degrading of the educator; child relationship.
A note on decibels and reverberation time - small changes, big difference
Acoustic noise is measured in decibels (dB) and this is a measure of sound intensity. The dB scale is not linear which means that even a small increase in dB can represent a doubling in perceived sound.
For example a 3 dB increase represents a double increase in sound intensity, and is perceived as roughly twice as loud by humans. (Wynn, 2025).
Likewise even small decreases in dB can result in significant reductions in perceived sound. A 6dB reduction gives a 34% decrease in perceived sound meaning background noise feels quieter and speech sounds – critical for language learning and communication – sound louder to the human ear (Acoustical Surfaces, Inc., 2023). In other words, you don't need to achieve silence to make a meaningful impact.
Noise level alone doesn't tell the whole story. Reverberation time - the way sound bounces off hard surfaces and lingers in a room - is an equally important factor, and one that gets far less attention. Children need speech to be significantly louder relative to background noise than adults do, simply to hear it clearly - their developing auditory systems require a higher signal-to-noise ratio just to process what is being said (Mealings & Buchholz, 2025; Winroth et al., 2023). When reverberation time is high, it can essentially swallow critical speech sounds, making an educator's voice unintelligible to the children in the room. This isn't a reflection on the educator's communication or the child's listening - it is a feature of the environment. Which means it can be changed.
For children and adults with a hearing impairment the acoustic conditions are even more important. Children with a hearing loss need even lower background noise and reverberation to hear clearly and learning language. Adults with hearing impairments need quieter working environments to clearly communicate with each other, receive messages from families and colleagues and ensure active supervision. Additionally, long term exposure to noise has been linked to hearing damage and tinnitus in educators (Bates et al., 2021; Persson Waye et al., 2013).
So what can we actually do?
The good news is that practical, evidence-informed strategies exist - and many don't require a building renovation.
Soft furnishings and acoustic panels. Hard surfaces reflect sound; soft surfaces absorb it. Rugs, cushions, fabric wall panels, and soft play areas all reduce both noise levels and reverberation time. Acoustic panels can be beautiful, meaningful displays that also happen to bring the noise down.
Furniture buffers such as felt strips on shelves and table cloths help to buffer some of the sound where hard items like blocks are stored and felt padding under chair and table legs soften the scraping sounds as chairs are pushed in and out.
Intentional room arrangement. Grouping noisier activities away from quieter zones creates natural acoustic buffers. Even low bookcases can break up the path sound travels across a room.
Quieter routines. Transitions are peak noise moments. Slowing them down, reducing the number of children moving at once, and using soft signal cues - a chime, a visual prompt - can significantly reduce spikes.
Smaller group sizes and outdoor time. Both are well evidenced for reducing noise. More children in a confined space with hard surfaces and few breakout options is a predictable recipe for acoustic overwhelm.
Keeping background music, particularly at sleep times, at acoustically safe levels. A great litmus test is – if the background noise is overwhelming or bothering you, it is most likely causing overwhelm for children too.
Advocating for acoustic design. New builds and renovations present an opportunity. Australian Standard AS/NZS 2107:2016 offers acoustic design recommendations for educational spaces - these should be part of any capital works conversation.
This is a cup-filling conversation
Every child deserves an environment where their nervous system can rest, not just survive. Every educator deserves a workplace where they can bring their warmth, their attunement, and their relational best - without fighting sensory overwhelm to do it.
The research is clear. The solutions exist. What's needed now is for the sector to take acoustic health seriously - not as an added extra, but as a foundational element of quality.
References
Acoustical Surfaces, Inc. (2023, July 6). Perceived noise reduction & charting noise with decibels (dB). https://www.acousticalsurfaces.com/soundproofing_tips/noise_reduction.htm
Bates, S., Page, W., & Sue, S. (2021). The impact of noise in early childhood settings. Early Childhood Folio, 25(1), 20-25.
Brachtl, S., & Trimmel, M. (2023). Noise in preschools and its psychological and cardiovascular effect on preschool teachers. Noise and Health, 25(118), 121-134.
Degotardi, S., Sharma, M., Sweller, N., Djonov, E., & Kelly, M. N. (2025). Noise levels in infant-toddler early childhood classrooms. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 50(3), 305-318.
Erickson, L. C., & Newman, R. S. (2017). Influences of background noise on infants and children. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 451-457.
Evans, G. W. (2006). Child development and the physical environment. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 423-451.
Grebennikov, L., & Wiggins, M. (2006). Psychological effects of classroom noise on early childhood teachers. The Australian Educational Researcher, 33(3), 35-53.
Mealings, K. (2016). Classroom acoustic conditions: Understanding what is suitable through a review of national and international standards, recommendations, and live classroom measurements. ACOUSTICS 2016.
Mealings, K., & Buchholz, J. M. (2025). The effect of classroom acoustics and noise on preschool children's listening, learning, and wellbeing: A scoping review. Building Acoustics, 32(1), 109-121.
Oberle, E., & Schonert-Reichl, K. A. (2016). Stress contagion in the classroom? Social Science & Medicine, 159, 30-37.
Persson Waye, K., et al. (2019). Preschool teachers' perspective on how high noise levels affect children's behavior. PLOS ONE, 14(3).
Persson Waye, K., van Kamp, I., & Dellve, L. (2013). Validation of a questionnaire measuring preschool children's reactions to noise. BMJ Open, 3(5).
Schlueter, L. J., et al. (2024). Physiologic stress in the classroom. Psychology in the Schools, 61(6), 2240-2254.
Werner, C. D., et al. (2015). Noise in center-based child care. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42, 190-201.
Winroth, J., et al. (2023). Child-centred room acoustic parameters of public preschools in Sweden. Buildings, 13(11), 2777.
Wynn, T. (2025, October 6). Understanding decibels: How sound intensity increases with higher levels. SoundCy. https://soundcy.com/article/does-sound-increase-with-decibel
Zulkifli, N. I., et al. (2025). Acoustic comfort in non-purpose-built kindergartens. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 3156(1).
AUTHOR: Linda Price