Subscribe to this blog 
Schools: Design Effects Performance
June 9th, 2010 by Morgan Andenas
If you remember, last week I wrote a post on the health and learning benefits attributed to green schools. I asked, is it that unrealistic to build green schools in rural areas, and can it be obtained by those who don’t have a lot of money to throw around?
I wanted to expand the statistics found in my last post. Air Quality Sciences, Inc interviewed 667 executives involved in green and traditional educational facilities and this is what they had to say.
- 75% thought green schools cost less over 20 years, but only 50% said that total lifecycle costs are considered when planning a new building.
- The average age of schools before a major renovation is 42 years. 50% of our schools are over 45 years old, 30% are over 60 years old and 21% are 60-50 years old.
- Green schools will cost less to operate over the first 20 years and their lifetime than traditional schools. This is a great opportunity for school districts to get some money back on their investment
- 74% thought that the greatest obstacle to building green schools was a higher construction cost (an average of $3/square foot).
- 67% said that there is not enough awareness about the benefits of green schools.
I think we now all understand the tremendous benefits of green schools for our students, teachers, and administrators, but not every district can afford a new building and I believe that doing something, no matter how small, is better than doing nothing. This led me to seek out information on what others can do to improve the buildings they already have.
A study found in the book Green Schools: Attributes for Health and Learning focused on rural high schools in Virginia. School personnel surveyed the building based on topics, ranging from thermal comfort to the condition of the flooring and the color of the walls, in order to rate the building as substandard, standard or above standard. The study found that there was a significant difference in student performance from students in substandard buildings compared to their peers in above standard buildings. And, the students said the building’s cosmetics, like the condition of the floors and the color of the walls, were more important than the structure of the building.
Teachers from two similar elementary schools in rural Tennessee reported that students in the modern school had a lower level of discipline and health issues and a higher attendance rate than students in a building from 1939.
These results are great news for rural schools that are feeling the pinch, but want to do some upgrading. While more sunlight, better heating and cooling systems, and rain water reuse programs are great, brightly colored walls can make a huge difference on the way people perceive a room. Nicer furnishings and classrooms also solicit more respect from students.
I want to leave you with a video I found to be truly inspiring. Imagine how much happier the world would be if all our students got to study in a place like this, and all of our office and retail buildings had these great characteristics.
Manassas Park Elementary School from Chesapeake Bay Program on Vimeo.
Tags: education, green building, Rural, rural communities
Posted in education, Quality of Life, Rural | Comments (
2 )
June 9th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
Not sure I believe the great improvement in student performance is related to newness of school buildings. My guess is the better teachers gravitate to the “better” systems and controlling for that in these studies may be difficult.
I doubt I can remember the color of all classrooms or the decor, but I can remember which teachers or professors were worth a tinker’s damn.
Builders, teachers, school administrators have a vision of a school in their heads. It is almost always a nice brick facility. What would make more sense would be all steel buildings with narrow wings with lots of south-facing glass that can be covered at night with garage doors. Restrooms for every two classrooms to cut down on hall traffic, etc. Also build the schools so that if abandoned, they can be converted to something else easily.
Let (or require) parents and students to help paint and clean the schools. Maybe they would have a bit more respect for the facilities.
June 10th, 2010 at 8:45 am
Doug, thanks for the great comment and points you bring up.
I agree that these studies are not perfect. A great teacher will be able to reach out to his or her students better and be more effective at helping students learn than a teacher with lesser abilities. These better teachers may be recruited by schools with more money. The studies I mentioned tried to statistically deal with those factors, and the book talks directly about those issues. I encourage you to read the chapter I linked to for more information about the studies.
I know I remember the good teachers from my years in Howard, but I also remember the drab nature of the rooms once I left the elementary school. I would ask, do you not remember the rooms because they were nothing out of the ordinary; they didn’t catch your attention in a way that would create lasting memories?
I would love to see classrooms with big windows and garage door covers (I bet the kids would love opening them up every morning too) and an adaptable floor plan. I also think you make an excellent point when you say parents and students should/need to be involved. Schools belong to the community they are serving, and the community deserves to feel some connection to the mission those schools serve. I bet students, parents and community members would jump at the chance to design and paint murals in our schools if we would just ask.