I

MPROVING THE DESIGN

The of the physical environment has

enhanced workers' health, safety,
and productivity in a wide variety of
educational jobs. Imagine, though, settings in which
thousands of people daily try to integrate
complex new information and tasks while
process is being hampered by inadequate work space,
lighting, air quality, or noise reduction.
enhanced Imagine further that significant human
factors research for these settings is nearly
nonexistent; that both new construction
when and renovation efforts assign little impor-

The
Learning-Friendly
ClassrooD1
human factors tance and few resources to improving the
settings, relying instead on designs that
are decades old. This scenario is routinely
principles are played out in lecture halls and classrooms
on college campuses nationwide.

integrated Shortcomings in Current

Classroom Design
into classroom Wendell Brase (1988) described the
need of the University of California, Santa
Cruz, to spend $1.5 million to improve
design. classroom quality on a campus less than 25
years old. Part of the problem, he noted,
was that neither the university nor the
archi tect considered classroom design a
BY crucial or difficult design issue. What we
BARRETT S. should have done, he said in retrospect, was
this:
CALDWELL

1. told the executive architects that effective

classroom design is important;

30 ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN· JANUARY 1994

Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015

2. stated design objectives that were unam- ignored in modern classroom design, as
biguous and understandable to everyone exemplified in Photos 1 and 2.
involved in the design process;
3. specified criteria in enough detail to hold
the designers accountable for the results;
and
4. required follow-up by designers to en-
sure that design criteria were met.

From a human factors evaluation and

application perspective, these are all crucial
elements of design. However, there is at
least one step missing. How are architects
and administrators to know what the rele-
vant and critical design objectives are? Now
that UCSC has to accomplish the redesign
process, the answer to another question
is required. What are the students' and
instructors' priorities and requirements for 1. An example of poor ergonomic design in a lec-
improved design? ture hall: detail of Room 159 seating, circa 1930.
Note the small writing area and impassable space
Human Factors Relevance (approximately 4 inches) between rows.
to Classroom Design
The most comprehensive examination Integrating Human Factors
of the effects of the physical environment into Classroom Design
on learning was conducted by Darrell Boyd Two difficulties confront the researcher
Harmon in the late 1940s and early 1950s. in the area of classroom design. First, liter-
The culmination of Harmon's efforts is the ature exists regarding elements of technical
series of lectures and monographs entitled presentations, including visual angle and
"The Co-ordinated Classroom." Although his stroke-height ratios of characters on dis-
primary focus was on elementary schools, plays, ideal viewing angles for optimal con-
his theoretical approach and emphasis on centration and reduced musculoskeletal
integrating diverse research disciplines remain fatigue, and sound level and signal-noise
appropriate to the college lecture hall. ratios of presentation media. However, this
Harmon's approach conceived of the literature resides in diverse areas: education,
classroom environment as architecture, engineering, psychology, and
environmental design. Most of the research
an occupational environment - a and applications literature on classroom
working surround in which [students],
through participating in organized
experiences, can grow and develop in
an optimum manner, and channel their
unfolding capacities into construc-
tive and satisfying living. (Page 3)

He advocated a systematic approach to "occu-

pational hygiene" to evaluate and improve
the classroom, focusing on enhancing stu-
dents' learning performance.
Harmon's ideas integrate several major
elements of the human factors perspective:
organization of information and resources
devoted to improving performance and sat-
isfaction of persons in a complex environ-
ment. Nonetheless, his work, and that of 2. Detail of Room 1121 seating, circa 1970,
his few intellectual successors, is largely shows little improvement in 40 years.

JANUARY 1994 • ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN J I

Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015

 3. McVey's educational sciencesclassroom design,
circa 1970. Note the angled, continuous writing
surfaces and staggered rows of tiered seating.
design has been published in education and
instructional technology sources, despite
the fact that human factors engineering and
psychology reference data are required for
effective room design.
Second, to complicate matters, human
factors principles have rarely been applied in
a unified manner to the real-world environ-
ment of the college classroom. There are
some notable exceptions, and efforts have
been made to quantify classroom design
variables. For example, an early issue of
Sound and Vibration included the article,
"Guidelines for Acoustical Design of Class-
rooms" (Kingsbury and Taylor, 1968). Also,
Frederick Knirk's (1987) reference work
attempts to provide guidelines for educators,
but it is not based on human factors or
ergonomics expertise.
. large flat-screen displays, and acoustics that
4. Example of a new ergonomic movable seating
option: UW-Krueger International joint design
prototype for Room 2540.
32 ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN· JANUARY 1994
Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015
A more focused and long-term view is
seen in the work of Gerald McVey, whose
classroom design applications began at the
University of Wisconsin's Educational
Sciences Center and continue at the Boston
University School of Education's media and
technology program.
Instructional Technology
and Classroom Design
The cover story of the May 5, 1993, issue
of the Chronicle of Higher Education high-
lights a recent emphasis of many campuses
on advances in instructional technology and
advanced classroom presentation tech-
niques. Moreover, technological integration
is different for the arts and humanities
as opposed to science and engineering.
Improving the effectiveness of learning
tools and enhancing the quality of curri-
culum presentation are certainly worthy
goals. However, the presentation of technical
material is only one component of the sys-
tems process of education (Caldwell, 1993).
The emphasis on instructional technolo-
gy does not preempt the need to focus on
the physical design of the classroom envi-
ronment. A computer-based lecture demon-
stration, no matter how well conceived or
organized, is ineffective if students cannot
see it because of poor lighting or acute
visual angles. Likewise, a distance video-
conferencing presentation will teach nothing
if the student can't hear the videoconfer-
ence because of excessive background noise.
In fact, instructional technologies such
as large, computer-supported lecture halls
and multimedia presentations may exacer-
bate the effects of existing environmental
conditions because of the noise and heat
generated by the equipment. In addition,
changes in room features may be required,
such as lighting for display terminals and
video screens, seating that permits vision of
enhance audibility of speech from sources
other than the lecture podium. The addi-
tion of instructional technology may there-
fore necessitate directing even more atten-
tion to improving classroom design.
User Evaluations as
Input to Design
An underutilized but crucial component
of the design process (and particularly the
identification of priorities for redesign or
renovation) is user-based and user-centered
environmental evaluation. Environmental
psychologists and architects have labeled
this process postoccupancy evaluation, or POE.
This method allows one to determine which
of several possible design flaws most severe-
ly detract from a consistent, effective, and
high-quality educational experience for stu-
dents. Well-designed evaluation instruments
provide information not only about design
problems but also about the user's priorities
for improvement, which are crucial on
those frequent occasions when budget and
time constraints prevent a complete recon-
struction or comprehensive repair effort.
My classroom design research has used
POEs in conjunction with other human fac-
tors data. This work provides clear descrip-
tions of existing problems and priorities
for change. Students and faculty have been
generally enthusiastic about the POE
approach, although some administrators
were initially skeptical. As users of the
classroom, the former two groups are the
ones who are most familiar with the dynam-
ic performance of the instructional space, as
well as factors that enhance or detract from
its function. The POE survey my col-
leagues and I have developed has evolved
to include aesthetic, ergonomic, and func-
tional aspects of classroom and other
instructional spaces.
Research at DC Davis
Kathy Hoyt and I conducted a POE-based
study of aesthetic characteristics of eight
classrooms at the University of California,
Davis. Respondents to our survey included
43 faculty members and 890 students from
a number of departments and majors. The
survey asked questions regarding ideal aes-
thetic, emotional, and functional aspects of
classrooms. The respondents also evaluated
the specific classroom where they received
the survey and identified their priorities for
changing specific room features.
Overall, the responses indicated a tional spacing between rows of seats, from
preference for a comfortable, functional,
uncrowded facility with inexpensive, acade-
mically relevant enhancements rather than
"country club" or "living room" adorn-
ments such as wood paneling. (Both terms
were used by students as examples of an
undesirable model for classroom improve-
ment.) These reports surprised some admin-
istrators, who had assumed that the stu-
Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015
dents would opt for a "country club" (the
administrators' term) classroom rather than
a cost-effective learning area.
Preferences for wall colors, although
showing some differences across rooms,
were strongly for white and pale shades of
blue and yellow. Seat design and placement
and wall colors were generally evaluated
negatively, and they were rated as high
priorities for improvement. A surprising
finding was that many of those surveyed
recommended that live plants be brought
into some smaller classrooms. These find-
ings provided the basis for additional POE
surveys conducted at the University of
Wisconsin -Madison.
Human
Research at UW
My current research attempts to com- factors and
bine environmental and ergonomic data
collection with user surveys from both stu-
dents and faculty to identify areas of lost
ergonomics
performance and impaired environmental
quality in engineering classrooms. This design criteria
emphasis requires less focus on aesthetic
and emotional responses to the classroom have much to
and greater attention to physical features
such as acoustics, air quality, and thermal
conditions, as well as illumination, viewing,
offer to
and seating factors.
Difficulties in analyzing priority ranking improve the
data in the Davis research and Wisconsin
pilot research led to the use of a priority quality of
point allocation (constant sum) scoring sys-
tem. Users are asked to distribute a total of
100 points among a set of room features
instructional
(Table 1) according to their priorities for
addressing room design problems. A fixed spaces.
number of total points imposes a realistic
constraint, given that schedules and budgets
limit what can be done first.
This method - known as Pareto analysis
in total quality management - allows us to
determine the relative importance of, for
instance, improving the quality of lighting,
changing the wall colors, or providing addi-
the perspective of improving the students'
learning processes. The results point to a
small number of features that should com-
mand the majority of room improvement
efforts.
One limitation of point allocations is
that these data do not indicate the impact
of a poor physical environment on learning.
Therefore, the survey also asked users to
JANUARY 1994 • ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN 33
 estimate the amount of time that was wast-
ed (via distractions or lost concentration)
T BLE I
that could be attributed to any of several air Features Among Which 100 Points
quality, acoustic, ergonomic, and illumina- Were lIocated and Productivity
tion environmental factors (see Table 1). Losses Rated in the POE Study
These productivity loss estimates assume,
of course, that the student is the best judge A STHETIC (point allocation only)
of how much the e~vironment may distract ew tyle of flooring
him or her from the task of learning. Room color
More than 1000 University of Wiscon- Po ters, art, photos
sin students have responded to the postoc- Wallpaper, paneling
cupancy evaluation survey in the classrooms Live plants
selected for data collection. Students report- IR Q LIT
ed that the existing seating design and light- Temperature
ing, acoustic, and thermal characteristics of Humidity
the classrooms significantly impeded their 'r flo
learning. Point allocations for improvements
ILL MI TIO
in five classrooms identified chair design and
Lighting
Students spacing, noise level, and temperature control
ew presentation area
as top priorities. Students reported that
12% to 27% of the lecture period was wasted Legibility of boards
reported that because of environmental factors (see Table 2 Projection quality
on the next page). co STIC
12%·27% of the Room noise
A Perfect Classroom? Outside noise
lecture period These findings demonstrate that the ERGO OMIC
average classroom is in clear need of a
Chair quality
human factors/ergonomics-oriented, user-
was wasted centered improvement strategy. Although
Chair pacing
Desk size
research has shown that students prefer
because of classrooms designed in accordance with
ergonomic principles rather than architec- uation of Room 1121 (constructed in 1969)
environmental tural traditions (McVey and Bethune, 1992), highlights design flaws in seating and light-
few classrooms are ergonomically designed. ing that occur when ergonomic considera-
McVey's classroom designs at the UW cam- tions are ignored; the seating design shows
factors. pus provide good examples of an ergonomic no improvements over Room 159, which was
approach to classroom environmental design designed 40 years earlier (see Photos 1 and 2
(see Photo 1). Some of the features he includ- on page 31).
ed in this 1972 design were The design of movable seating also
needs improvement, as identified in POEs
• room noise reduction, of Rooms 152 and 2540. In cooperation
• voice amplification (via two-way speakers with a major furniture manufacturer, I have
in writing surfaces), worked with our campus Instructional Space
• wall and ceiling reflectances that focus Office to design ergonomically improved
attention toward the presentation, seating (see Photo 4 on page 32).
• seating design that allows adequate view- In addition to providing useful data, the
ing angles and space between rows and human factors design and POE processes
between seats, and can offer practical learning experiences for
• large, angled writing areas with medium- students. At the University of Wisconsin-
reflectance matte surfaces to minimize Madison, these experiences have been formal-
glare and muscle fatigue when writing. ized as an industrial engineering senior-
level integrated design course in human
Other classrooms designed at the same factors. Students in the course gain a vari-
time do not have these features and are the ety of practical experiences and exposure to
subject of numerous complaints from stu- ergonomic tools (including quality engi-
-dents and faculty. The postoccupancy eval- neering tools). They can also apply their

] 4 ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN· JANUARY 1994

Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015

 prior classroom experiences and human fac-
tors education to a personally relevant setting.
Human factors design criteria have much
o to offer to improve the quality of instruc-
tional spaces. Improving the physical envi-
ronmental design of the classroom has the
\ iati n potential to enhance the quality and pro-
ductivity of students' learning experience
and, thereby, the quality of the education
\115_( ::. 1_) process itself.
Out it!· fltllSe: 1 . '0 (1/ •• 0)
1 cl1lpcr.Jturl' II.-'I (10.16) Resources
Brase, W. (1988). Design criteria for effective classrooms.
l). k .,iH' 11.4- 1 _.0)
Planning for Higher Education, 17(1), 81-91. A good
R, (1m !l(li t.: 9.r (I ~.6 ) description of the classroom design problem from the
hail' ~p.lcing i..i (1 •. 32) educational administrator's perspective, based on the
I'ranion 01 kCLurc author's valuable - and painful- 'experience.
Caldwell, B. S. (1993). Applying total quality manage-
\ ;\stc 1( = 19 O••• (j()
ment to engineering education: A systems approach
to instructional quality. In Proceedings of the American
0\1 1-9 ( = J 6) Society for Engineering Education Centennial Conference: These relevant
Dc, k :Ill.~ 20.1)1) 1 ).;:n Shaping Our World - Century II (pp. 1406-1413).
Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering
( luir llu'llit} .0 .•9 17.H ) Education. This paper is a brief summary of my views
factors have
.h. ir p.1Clng 19.0 (I6.lJi) of applying systems engineering principles to the edu-
'I cmpcr.lture I - .Oll 16. i) cational process, including the role of environmental rarely been
ir no \ ...
L ( .' ,) design and human factors in teaching and learning.
Harmon, D. B. (1953). Controlling the thermal environment
['r:letion of Icctlll'c
\ .Itcd ( • = _i »
of the co-ordinated classroom. Minneapolis, MN: Hon- applied to the
0.1 I eywell Corp. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
ED 033 5311EF 002 330.) One of Harmon's classic
R ( ) \1 1 7 -l ( ::. III lecture works, focusing on elementary education. real·world
Kingsbury, H. F., and Taylor, D. W. (1968). Guidelines
Chilir q U<1 Itt} I for acoustical design of classrooms. Sound and Vibra-
11\' • plant . tion, 2, 16-28. An example of a researcher's descrip- environment of
m!> I.llun.: tion of the process of conducting acoustic design
evaluations and improvements in the college class-
Room l:ulllr
room environment. One of the most recent applied
the college
ir " \ .00 works in this area.
rr3cti In r Icc llt' Knirk, F. G. (1987). Instructional facilities for the informa- classroom.
\\.) tcd ( = 105) 0.111 tion age. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Infor-
mation Resources. Knirk has attempted to provide an
easy-to-read reference for educators and education
= _ 92)
administrators. However, Knirk's background is not
- I. () in human factors or engineering, and the work
9.7. attempts to integrate data from elementary through
•. 50 postsecondary education without providing a clear
guide to the limitations of the data.
7._5 McVey, G. F., and Bethune, J. D. (1992). User assess-
fl.70 ments of selected lecture halls and the relative merits
of architectural standards and ergonomic guidelines.
In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annu-
al Meeting (pp. 586-590). Santa Monica, CA: Human
Factors and Ergonomics Society. McVey pioneered
:l ) I 2 40 ( ::. 9 ) the application of human factors and ergonomics prin-
ut ide !lois· 1 7 ciples to media presentation and college classroom
facilities. This paper summarizes the benefits (from a
T mp ratur 1~.6
student evaluation perspective) of implementing these
hair \lI,Jlit\ 9.06 human factors engineering principles in college lec-
ir 00\\ .01 ture hall design .
Roort! (lor
Fraction III' lecture Barrett S. Caldwell is an assistant professor in the
J T", 1 no 0 .• -I) (C.201) Industrial Engineering Department at the Univer-
sity of Wisconsin-Madison. IIIil

JANUARY 1994 • ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN 35

Downloaded from erg.sagepub.com at CORNELL UNIV on June 25, 2015