Professional Paper
AN ASSESSMENT OF GREEN DESIGN IN AN EXISTING
HIGHER EDUCATION CLASSROOM: A CASE STUDY
Submitted by
Annie Lilyblade
Department of Construction Management
In partial fulfillment of the requirements
For Degree of Master of Science
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
Fall 2005
Table of Contents
Abstract
3
Introduction
4
Review of Literature
5
The Case Study at a Higher Education Institution:
A Remodel of an Existing Classroom
5
Purpose
14
Glossary of Terms
14
Methodology
15
Findings
19
Discussion and Conclusion
29
References
34
Appendices
LEED for Commercial Interiors Guidelines and Credits
The Talloires Declaration
The Guggenheim LEED Checklist
36
2
Abstract
The purpose of this case study was to assess the quality of a classroom remodel in a higher
education institution. Both the teaching and learning environments as well as the level of green
design integration were assessed. The methodology for this qualitative study involved five steps
of data collection including an existing pre-design survey, interviewing five members of the
initial design team, interviewing two faculty members, a post-design survey, and an assessment
of the level of sustainability utilizing the LEED – CI (Commercial Interiors) rating system. The
data collected were to assess both the perceptions of the design team and the end users. Overall,
results from the data collected demonstrated end-users satisfaction as well as that the classrooms
meet the criteria of a sustainable classroom. The case study proved to be a concerted effort by an
integrated team. The project results now teach others how to provide sustainable sites, increase
water efficiency, improve overall energy performance, and how to use of sustainable materials
and resources. Furthermore, these findings show how to decrease construction waste, create a
healthy indoor environment, and how to create an optimal teaching and learning environment.
3
Introduction
The built environment, through design, construction, and operation practices, generates a highly
significant impact on the earth and its resources. Aspects of buildings that affect the natural
environment include overuse of energy, air pollution, and generation of waste resulting in
expansion of landfills. Beginning in the mid-1980s, several design professionals associated a
building’s indoor environment with a building’s design and construction. Early observations,
including issues such as sick building syndrome related to poor indoor air quality, overuse of
electric light, and poor daylighting, raised public awareness and opened the door for future
sustainable design values. Advocates of healthy indoor environments indicated that buildings
could improve human performance, pay back a client’s investment, and provide an overall
healthy environment (Coleman 2002).
The healthy building movement evolved into what is known today as sustainable design.
Sustainable or ‘green’ design implements a comprehensive “systems” mode of thinking when
designing built environments which, if followed, preserves our resources, raises environmental
sensitivity, promotes higher resource efficiency, and allows for cultural and community
responsiveness (USGBC, 2003). This concept affects many aspects of society such as
agriculture, transportation, manufacturing, and construction. Green building practices, those that
reduce impacts the built environment has on nature, contribute to sustainability within design and
construction practices.
4
Today, many higher education institutions have begun to implement sustainable design practices
on campus. Several institutions have signed the Talloires Declaration, an official statement made
by university administrators to commit to sustainability in higher education, and to incorporate
sustainability and environmental literacy in teaching, research, operations, and environmental
outreach. The Talloires document has been signed by over 300 university presidents and
chancellors from more than 40 countries (ULSF, 2005). Using sustainable design principles, this
paper will assess the remodel of a classroom located on a higher education campus, whose
administration has signed the Talloires Declaration.
Review of Literature
With the movement towards sustainable design, the USGBC (United States Green Building
Council) developed the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) guidelines
which offered a rating system to quantify a building’s level of sustainability. LEED was created
to define ‘green building’ by establishing a common standard of measurement; to promote
integrated, whole-building practices; to encourage and recognize environmental leadership in the
building industry; to raise consumer awareness of green building benefits; and, to transform the
building market (LEED, 2000). The rating system is organized into five categories including
sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, environmental quality, and materials
and resources. Using the LEED rating system, model classrooms can be developed as instruments
for educational institutions to expose and educate the campus communities about sustainability
and green building.
5
One method to educate the campus community about sustainable design is to incorporate green
building principles into teaching and learning environments.
We have assumed, wrongly I think, that learning takes place in buildings, but that
none occurs as a result of how they are designed or by whom, how they are
constructed and from what materials, how they fit their location, and how well
they operate . . . buildings have their own hidden curriculum that teaches as
effectively as any course taught in them (Orr, Earth in Mind, p ll3).
David Orr, professor of Environmental Studies at Oberlin College, emphasizes that universities
are here to teach, and the teaching and learning process should be supported by our buildings’
architecture and settings in which classes are taught. A number of universities, along with
primary and secondary schools, have heeded Orr’s call by designing and constructing buildings
that teach.
It’s tough to dispute the overwhelming benefits that come from using schools as
instruments of learning…countless studies have been conducted linking the architectural
characteristics of schools to attitudes, behaviors and achievements…studies released by
Cornell University showed direct connections between educational architecture and high
performing students (Cunningham, 2002).
When designing a classroom it is essential that the environment enhances and promotes learning,
provides comfort for all users, promotes a healthy environment, accommodates the needs of all
occupants so every student has an opportunity to learn, provides for health, safety, and the
security for all users, and makes effective use of all available resources (Niemeyer, 2003,
Smarter, 2003, Babey, 1991).
In an effort to enhance levels of design in a college classroom, a framework has been developed
by education researchers. Three different research efforts since 1991 have identified seven
design principles that should be addressed during schematic design and design development
6
phases of a classroom design process. The seven principles identified are to empower faculty,
emphasize flexibility, and to encourage student interaction, simplicity, connectivity, reduced
cost, and attention to classroom details (Niemeyer, 2003, Smart, 2003, Babey, 1991).
The design process for educational environments can be developed using aspects of
environmental psychology, such as the study of relationships between individuals and their
physical environment (Gifford, 1997). There are four assumptions about educational
environments related to a psychological foundation. First, the physical environment of a
classroom can either contribute to the success of students, or inhibit their learning. These
physical aspects include direct factors, such as crowding or noise levels. Secondly, the effects of
physical environments on learning are often affected by other social, psychological, and
instructional variables. Third, a learning environment should match teaching objectives and
styles, student learning styles, and the social setting. The fourth principle acknowledges that
learning is optimized when physical environments are treated in the same focused way that
curricular material and teacher presentations are created (Graetz, Goliber, 2002).
Since the late 1990s, school districts and campus committees have begun to embrace the
principles of sustainable design. Green design and construction processes contribute to several
potential benefits for a classroom environment. The list of benefits includes improved indoor air
quality, reduced energy cost for heating and cooling, and conservation of resources through the
use of recycled or reused materials, coupled with construction waste recycling. A building’s
green design classroom can provide the tools to educate students about sustainability in addition
to reducing its environmental impact.
7
A related trend in sustainable school design involves the creation of high performance school
buildings. High performance designs share many similarities of sustainable design. There are
three main goals involved in the creation of a high performance school. The first seeks to provide
a healthy and productive environment for students and teachers. This goal is addressed by
providing high levels of acoustic, thermal, and visual comfort, large amounts of natural daylight,
good indoor air quality, and a safe and secure environment.
The second goal seeks to create a design that is cost effective to operate and maintain. Energy
analysis tools that optimize energy performance and life cycle cost methods should be used to
reduce the total cost of operations. A building commissioning process that evaluates that the
building is designed, constructed, and operated as intended, helps to ensure the potential of a
healthy, productive interior environment. The third goal is to focus on sustainability by
integrating energy conservation, and ideally, renewable energy strategies. To satisfy this goal,
high performing mechanical and lighting systems, environmentally-responsive site planning,
sustainable materials and products, and water-efficient design ideas are incorporated.
Creating a design that encompasses all of these recommendations requires an integrated and
whole systems approach, to the design process. By addressing each of the three goals, a building
can be optimized to achieve long-term value and performance. A high performing, sustainable
school facility enhances teaching and learning, reduces operating costs, protects the environment
and is an asset to the entire community (High Performance Schools, 1999).
8
College and university campuses around the country are beginning to incorporate environmental
principles into course curriculum and facility operations. Several universities have signed the
Tallories Declaration, publicly acknowledging that they are promoting a sustainable future. In
2001, former Colorado State University president Al Yates, signed the Tallories Declaration.
This new initiative is designed to extend beyond the creation of new programs to develop
"greening" of campuses. These initiatives often include "environmental audits" that examine the
environmental impacts of university operations in solid waste, water, energy, and transportation.
“Colleges and universities wield incredible power – and yet, at least in terms of
the environment, most have not wielded well. Our institutions of higher learning
provide the knowledge that will guide our future architects, engineers, policy
makers, community activists, industrialists, mothers, fathers, potential teachers,
all. Nonetheless, with only a few noteworthy exceptions, most colleges and
universities fail to educate their students in the environmental ramifications of
their fields of study. We will persist in designing buildings that are energyinefficient, products that pollute, and systems that throw off waste, we will go on
doing all these things and more, as long as our educators fail to teach their
students that it does not have to be this way. There is a better and less expensive
way. Ultimately, design is an expression of intent. What is needed is thought and
planning about function, aesthetics, conservation, efficiency; in other words,
intent.” Teresa Heinz – delivered to the Campus Earth Summit
At Brown University, the ‘Brown Is Green’ program uses student research, administrative
structure, and on-going education, to reduce the environmental impacts of specific operations,
including water and electrical consumption and solid waste management. The Center for
Regenerative Studies at California State Polytechnic University, uses solar energy and natural
sewage treatment to support housing, classroom, and research facilities for 90 students, faculty,
and staff. At Georgia Institute of Technology, the Center for Sustainable Technology introduces
9
ecological principles to the design of new and existing buildings. South Carolina's three research
universities–Clemson University, the University of South Carolina , and the Medical University
of South Carolina – have created a collaborative sustainability initiative that involves
representatives from state agencies and other participants (Greening, 2004).
The Campus Earth Summit Initiatives for Higher Education, a project of the Heinz Family
Foundation, was designed to help develop and recommend a technique for developing a
Blueprint for a Green Campus. Ten recommendations came out of the Campus Earth Summit. 1.)
Integrate environmental knowledge into all relevant disciplines, 2.) Improve undergraduate
environmental studies course offerings, 3.) Provide opportunities for students to study campus
and local environmental issues, 4.) Conduct a campus environmental audit, 5.) Institute an
environmentally responsible purchasing policy, 6.) Reduce campus waste, 7.) Maximize campus
energy efficiency, 8.) Make environmental sustainability a top priority in campus land-use,
transportation, and building planning, 9.) Establish a student environmental center, and 10.)
Support students who seek environmental responsibility. Each of these recommendations can be
evaluated when applying them to a campus classroom (Blueprint, 1995).
The Case Study at a Higher Education Institution: A Remodel of An Existing Classroom
Picture 1: Prior to remodel
Picture 2: After remodel
Picture 3: After remodel
10
Located along the front range of the Rocky Mountains and identified as a Carnegie 1 research
institution, Colorado State University forms the setting for a case study analysis of a classroom
remodel. The Green Classrooms of Guggenheim Hall pioneered initial efforts to the campus
declaration to provide a sustainable campus. Guggenheim Hall, one of the first buildings built on
campus, was constructed in 1926. Students in the Facilities Planning and Management graduate
level course were given a rare opportunity to incorporate design ideas through charrettes and
research for the first ‘green’ classrooms on the CSU campus. The goal was to create a positive
teaching and learning atmosphere while reducing the impact that traditional construction has on
the environment.
In the first phase of the design, students and other campus members participated in a design
charrette - an intensive, integrated, group workshop, to outline common project goals. To
compile a list of design features that needed attention, the graduate class administered a survey to
students who used the existing classrooms. From this list, the graduate students began
researching materials and techniques to be used in developing a sustainable classroom design.
The students then formally presented the research to CSU Facilities Management, the Campus
Classroom Review Board, and the Construction Management faculty and administration. After
final approval by the University administrators, the project was handed over to the faculty and
elected students to decide which features, based on feasibility and cost, from the research
proposals were best for the renovations. Two class participants, who were LEED accredited
professionals, coordinated the project through completion.
11
Each element of the design was evaluated for functionality, sustainability, aesthetics, and cost.
Ideas and materials were evaluated by the various stakeholders. In addition, the students used the
LEED – CI (Commercial Interiors) rating system as an evaluation tool to determine the
sustainability of each classroom suggestion. The ideal products were durable, contained recycled
content, were low in VOCs (volatile organic compounds), energy efficient, and were natural and
/ or locally manufactured products. The project coordinators then created ‘sole source’
descriptions for the products to enable the Purchasing and Facilities Management departments to
procure sustainable products.
The Green Classrooms of Guggenheim Hall have several sustainable features. The existing
fluorescent fixtures were taken down, cleaned, touched up with new paint, and were retrofitted
with energy-saving ballasts and bulbs. Re-orientation of lighting contributed to a significant
decrease in the amount of fixtures in each room. Dimmable, energy efficient track lighting and
ceiling fans were also installed. The new classrooms now have far less fixtures, while providing
greater functional flexibility.
To monitor the amount of energy being used in classroom #227 of Guggenheim Hall, a
voltameter was installed. A solar assisted exhaust fan located in a chimney vent provides a small
amount of additional ventilation from a natural source. The classrooms were painted with low
VOC paint, contributing to healthy air quality both during and after the construction process. The
students chose a light yellow-white shade which is shown to increase comfort and clarity for the
eyes, while increasing the effect of daylight in the classrooms. Translucent rolling shades were
installed to allow for exterior views while minimizing sunlight infiltration, heat gain and glare.
12
The wood trim around the windows and doors was reused and faux painted to mimic historic
wood tones. Soundboards were installed to increase acoustical performance while serving as
announcement and display boards for students. The substrate of the soundboards consisted of
recycled fiberglass and the fabric contained 100% recycled polyester fibers, derived from plastic
bottles. The carpet installed in the classrooms also contained 100% recycled content backing and
75% recycled fibers. All existing carpet was reclaimed and shipped to the Interface Flooring
Company, a company which routinely re-manufactures reclaimed carpet into new carpet
backing. The construction waste throughout the process was sorted and recycled.
Diagram 1: First Floor Plan
Diagram 2: Second Floor Plan
CSU Facilities Management coordinated the demolition and the construction phases of the
classroom remodel. The project scope included three medium-sized lecture classrooms, and the
men’s and women’s restrooms. The classrooms were re-opened for classes in August, 2002. The
largest of the three classrooms accommodates 70 students, while the other two each hold 30.
Framed displays illustrate the design process and materials and methods for the classroom design
to enable all faculty, students, and visitors to learn from these documented experiences.
13
The Guggenheim Green Classroom project was also presented with the unique opportunity to
participate in the pilot program for LEED – CI. The Guggenheim classrooms were one of the
first efforts towards CSU becoming a leader in environmental education and research. Not only
are the classrooms designed to be a showcase for sustainable design on the campus of CSU,
numerous opportunities to communicate the green tenant finish process has also occurred.
The remodel of the Guggenheim classrooms proved to be a great opportunity for students and the
department to become involved in the design and construction process. The collaboration process
allowed students to look at the elements of teaching and learning classroom, listen to new ideas,
be exposed to the phases of a university construction project, and above all, to learn to apply the
concepts of sustainable building in an existing setting. The Green Classrooms at Guggenheim
Hall have been recognized on and off-campus for the innovative process and results.
Purpose
The purpose of this case study was to assess the quality of a classroom remodel in a higher
education institution. Both the teaching and learning environments as well as the level of green
design integration were assessed.
Glossary of Terms
All of the following terms are from LEED, which has compiled the most accurate and up-to-date
definitions on the current technologies.
14
Green design – a process to design the built environment while considering environmental
responsiveness, resource efficiency, and cultural and community sensitivity.
Whole Systems Thinking – a process that includes all members of the design team including building
owners, architects, engineers, manufacturers, contactors, maintenance staff, and building occupants.
Volatile Organic Compound – (VOC) any carbon compounds that participate in atmospheric
photochemical reactions.
Thermal Comfort – a condition of mind experienced by building occupants expressing satisfaction with
the thermal environment.
Daylighting – the controlled admission of natural light into a space through glazing with the intent of
reducing or eliminating electric lighting. By using solar light, daylighting creates a stimulating and
productive environment for building occupants.
Reuse – a strategy to return a material to active use in the same or a related capacity.
Reduce – a strategy to use less of a material or to use it more efficiently.
Recycle – a strategy to process material to extend the usable life of the material.
(LEED, 2000)
Methodology
The methodology for this qualitative study involves the data collection (five steps), the
identification of the participants in this study, the data analysis, and the identification of
limitations. It is important to note that the data collection took place over a series of several
semesters over the course of three years. The data collection consisted of two phases (pre- and
post-design) and five steps:
15
Pre-Design – Step 1
The first step of the data collection process consisted of an assessment of a pre-design survey to
evaluate the perceptions of the students (the end users), regarding the largest of the three
Guggenheim classrooms, prior to the classroom remodel. This survey was administered prior to
the researcher’s involvement in the project. The survey assessed the students’ perceptions of the
temperature of the room, noise levels, room layout, acoustical characteristics, furniture and
equipment, audio visual equipment, lighting, aesthetics, daylighting, and personal space.
The survey was developed by graduate students enrolled in the MC 572 Facilities Planning and
Management course. Its goal was to define the characteristics of a teaching and learning
environment. The participants in this study were undergraduate construction management and
interior design majors enrolled in a course which met in the Guggenheim classrooms. The
surveys were analyzed using rudimentary statistical analysis that determined percentages and
total numbers. The researcher was given full access to this data to fully report the findings of this
existing study.
Post-Design – Step 2
The second step of the data collection process consisted of five personal interviews conducted by
the researcher. Participants were the initial design team members of the classroom remodel.
Questions used in the interviews centered on determining the lessons learned from the design and
construction process used in the remodel. The questions assessed the design team’s perceptions
of the success of the design process to implement sustainable principles in an existing classroom.
The questions also addressed utilized technologies in a remodel, the construction materials and
16
methods, the purchasing procedures, the change process, and then the teams overall satisfaction
with the results.
Participants in this study were selected because they had participated on the design team.
Members of the design team included faculty, facilities management, project management, the
engineering field, and one of the graduate students, who agreed to participate in this study. Data
collected in step 2 were transcribed and coded for themes that emerged.
Post-Design – Step 3
The third step of the data collection process consisted of two personal interviews conducted by
the researcher. The participants were the faculty members who had taught both in the ‘old’
classrooms, and who were currently teaching in the remodeled classrooms. Similar to the initial
pre-design survey, the interview assessed the quality of the learning environment including the
temperature of the room, noise levels, room layout, acoustical characteristics, furniture and
equipment, audio visual equipment, lighting, aesthetics, daylighting, and personal space.
Participants in this study were selected because they were faculty members who taught in both
the ‘old’ and remodeled classrooms and who agreed to participate in this study. As was done is
step 2, the data collected in step 3 was transcribed and coded for themes that emerged concerning
the perceptions of the professionals involved in the remodel project.
17
Post-Design – Step 4
The fourth step of the data collection process was a post-design survey administered to
undergraduate students with construction management and interior design majors to evaluate
student perceptions of the Guggenheim classrooms. This survey was identical to the survey
instrument administered in step 1, prior to the classroom design.
The participants for the post survey were students in MC 151 Construction Materials and
Methods and MC 363 Plan Reading for Estimating who were invited to complete the survey.
These surveys were administered and collected in the courses and included both construction
management and interior design students enrolled in the fall 2005 semester. These are the same
courses that were surveyed prior to the classroom remodel to increase the post-design survey’s
validity and reliability. The surveys were analyzed using the same method as step one,
rudimentary statistical analysis that determined percentages and total numbers.
Post-Design – Step 5
The final step of the data collection process was to assess the level of green design achieved in a
remodeled classroom using the LEED – CI rating system as an assessment tool. This assessment
was conducted by the researcher as part of a team that included three other LEED accredited
professionals, and resulted in a completed LEED – CI document listing the design strategies and
materials used in the new learning environment.
Steps 1 through 4 were sequential and the analysis of step 5 was a lengthy, detailed process and
occurred simultaneous to the interviews and the post-design survey. All five steps of the data
18
collection, including surveys and interviews, were distributed after approval from the human
subjects committee.
The limitations of this case study relate to issues such as 1.) perceptions versus reality and 2.) the
fact that a case study can not be generalized to a larger population. Consistent with most
research, it is beyond the control of the researcher to assess the authenticity or accuracy of a
participant’s thoughts and reflections.
Findings
The first step of data collection consisted of a pre-design survey to evaluate the student
perceptions of the largest of the three Guggenheim classrooms prior to the classroom remodel. In
the fall of 2001, the students were administered a survey by graduate students in the MC 572
Facilities Planning and Management course to determine which aspects of the classrooms could
be improved. The results provided guidelines to the graduate students who began initial design
research for the classroom remodel. Data from the initial pre-design survey were as follows:
Table 1: Percentage of responses to the survey in Step 1
QUESTION
1. The temperature of my classrooms are comfortable
and do not distract from my learning.
2. Noise from outside the classroom does not
interfere with hearing the instructor
3. I prefer classrooms with a lot of color in the
décor.
4. I prefer classrooms with neutral colors in the décor.
5. I am able to hear my instructors clearly most of the
time.
Strongly
Agree/
Agree
32%
No
Opinion
0%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
58%
66%
0%
34%
31%
50%
19%
40%
78%
47%
4%
13%
18%
19
QUESTION
6. The desks/tables are appropriate for the function
and setting of each room
7. The classroom furniture is comfortable and does not
distract from my learning.
8. Audio and video presentations are clear.
9. The lighting in my classrooms enhance note taking
and viewing of overheads, videos, and films.
10. Structural elements or equipment do not block my
line of sight to the instructor or screen.
11. The desk or table tops are clean and the floor is
clear of trash.
12. The aesthetics of the classrooms positively affect
my desire to go to class.
13. I believe natural light in classrooms improve (or
would improve) my motivation to learn and go to
class.
14. I associate the onset of headaches or other physical
ailments with being in this room for a substantial
amount of time.
15. I have enough personal space around me to
facilitate taking notes and listening to lectures without
distractions.
16. It is convenient for me to recycle and/or throw
away my trash while in the classrooms.
Strongly
Agree/
Agree
25%
No
Opinion
15%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
60%
20%
20%
60%
29%
38%
19%
26%
52%
36%
65%
11%
24%
62%
0%
28%
19%
41%
40%
68%
27%
5%
19%
40%
41%
34%
8%
58%
12%
33%
55%
With the results from this initial survey, the results would be utilized in the design of the
classroom remodel. Again, the overall goal was to create a positive teaching and learning
atmosphere while reducing the impact that traditional construction often has on the environment.
The graduate students assessed from the surveys that the temperature in the classroom, the
classroom furniture, and the audio/visual presentations were all areas that the majority of the
students using the classroom felt needed to be improved upon. It was also assessed that other
areas of concern involved outside noise and the lighting in the classrooms. Students felt that the
classroom décor and aesthetics were not significantly as important to their learning environment.
From this information, the design team began to strategize a plan for the classroom remodel.
20
The second step in the data collection process consisted of five interviews of the initial design
team members. The goal of this phase of the research was to determine the challenges and
lessons learned about the design process of the classroom remodel. The questions assessed the
design team’s perceptions of the success of the design process to implement sustainable
principles in an existing classroom. The questions also addressed utilized technologies in a
remodel, the construction materials and methods, the purchasing procedures, the change process,
and then the teams overall satisfaction with the results. A major challenge of the project related
to the level of student involvement. The students had four weeks in class to start the design
process and research sustainable options. According to design team members, it was a challenge
to coordinate all the information in a short amount of time. Two students were selected to
continue with the coordination of the project. There was some loss of control during the
construction process for the design team once CSU Facilities Management became the project
manager because the project manager often had to make quick decisions in the field. Another
challenge to the project was tracking and documenting the actions and decisions made
throughout the project.
Compared to other classrooms on campus, the design team noted that the University system
doesn’t easily allow the freedom to purchase alternative products. The team found it difficult to
procure materials from companies with which the University did not currently have a contract.
Additionally, State rules call for the minimum of three competitive bids on all purchased items
and, due to specific criteria used to select products, there were often less than three companies
selling the desired sustainable materials and products. The team determined that it was easier to
21
include the purchasing agents up front in the design process, work closely with them, and make
them aware of the design intent.
The design team attributed the success of the design to setting goals early, which made the
decision-making process easier and avoided conflicts within the team. By setting goals, the team
came to a consensus on the best materials and resources to use. Having the Talloires Declaration
signed aided in convincing people of the rationale for change and to look at alternative materials
and systems. Another reason for the success of these classrooms was the support from the
Construction Management department. Facilities Management found that the Construction
Management department and its students take pride in the classrooms and have taken care of the
classrooms.
Overall, the design team was very satisfied with the results of the classroom remodel. For the
Facilities Management design team member, the classroom remodel went beyond his
expectations. He found that most University classrooms across the campus have been designed to
look alike for ease of maintenance. The Guggenheim classrooms have helped to break down the
barriers to creating case-specific classroom design. The team has also received positive feedback
because of the low amount of energy use, increased natural light and ventilation, improved
acoustics, and the connection to the exterior.
The third step of the data collection process consisted of two personal interviews from faculty
members who had taught both in the ‘old’ classrooms, and who were currently teaching in the
remodeled classrooms. Faculty members were interviewed to assess how the classrooms
22
functioned as a teaching environment. The major concerns from the initial surveys included
temperature, outside noise, desks and tables, audio visual equipment, lighting, aesthetics, and
personal space. According to the faculty, the temperature of the classrooms has been improved.
The use of solar shades, the installation of the ceiling fans, and the increased ability to open the
windows have drastically improved the thermal comfort in the classrooms. However, the faculty
and students felt that it is still too hot on some summer and fall days.
The noise levels were also drastically improved. The old classrooms had problems with
reflection and reverberation, and the faculty members agreed that they sometimes couldn’t
clearly hear themselves speak. Whispering students were often a distraction in the old
classrooms, as the sound would echo throughout the classroom. Due to the reorientation of the
room and the installation of fabric covered soundboards, the acoustical environment has been
significantly improved for both the presenter and the students. The re-orientation of the room
also helped the faculty members to connect more with the students. It allowed for more visual
contact with the students. There is an area in one of the classrooms towards the north end where
students still have some difficulty seeing the projection screen.
The faculty felt that the equipment in the classrooms has significantly improved. The former
classrooms did not have any permanent equipment; and projectors and television screens had to
be rolled into the classrooms. New built-in technology in the front console and the ceilingmounted projector screen has vastly improved the use of technology. Problems occurred with the
first ceiling-mounted projector due to the amount of daylight coming into the space. This
projector was replaced with one that had more brightness capability to counteract the daylight.
23
Depending on the amount of light coming into the classrooms, and the time of the year, it
stillmay be hard to see all of the details on the screen. Despite the conflicts with the projectors,
however, the new daylighting conditions are a vast improvement over the old classrooms. The
previous classrooms had mini blinds that were almost always closed, which cut the quantity of
natural light and prevented a connection to the outside. With the new solar shades, views to the
exterior and the connection to the central campus were re-established. The faculty remarked that
they would like to have solar shades with slightly less transparency and have the ability to darken
the room more in the winter months. Overall, the faculty agrees that the new lighting layouts and
flexibility for different light levels are a great improvement.
The faculty joke that the classrooms went from orange to green, as the classrooms transformed
from a 70s inspired classroom to one that meets the functional needs of current faculty and
students, while re-establishing the historic aesthetics appropriate for a 1920s building. The
faculty members all agree that the students designing the classroom were mindful of integrating
features of an old building with elements of a modern classroom. By adding antique replica
ceiling fans and using the original chalkboards rather than the ubiquitous dry erase, the design
intent met the functional as well as qualitative needs of the users. One faculty member believes
that a prominent aesthetic feature of the classrooms is the faux-finished wood trim around the
doors and windows. He also values the effort to restore the original design intent of the building.
The fourth step of data collection consisted of a post-design survey to evaluate the student
perceptions of the largest of the three Guggenheim classrooms after the completion of the
remodel. This survey was identical to the survey used in step one. This survey was administered
24
to students from the Construction Management and Interior Design departments who were
currently enrolled in the Fall, 2005 semester. Data from the initial pre-design survey were as
follows:
Table 2: Percentage of responses to the survey in Step 4
QUESTION
1. The temperature of my classrooms are comfortable
and do not distract from my learning.
2. Noise from outside the classroom does not
interfere with hearing the instructor
3. I prefer classrooms with a lot of color in the
décor.
4. I prefer classrooms with neutral colors in the décor.
5. I am able to hear my instructors clearly most of the
time.
6. The desks/tables are appropriate for the function
and setting of each room
7. The classroom furniture is comfortable and does not
distract from my learning.
8. Audio and video presentations are clear.
9. The lighting in my classrooms enhance note taking
and viewing of overheads, videos, and films.
10. Structural elements or equipment do not block my
line of sight to the instructor or screen.
11. The desk or table tops are clean and the floor is
clear of trash.
12. The aesthetics of the classrooms positively affect
my desire to go to class.
13. I believe natural light in classrooms improve (or
would improve) my motivation to learn and go to
class.
14. I associate the onset of headaches or other physical
ailments with being in this room for a substantial
amount of time.
15. I have enough personal space around me to
facilitate taking notes and listening to lectures without
distractions.
16. It is convenient for me to recycle and/or throw
away my trash while in the classrooms.
Strongly
Agree/
Agree
55%
No
Opinion
8%
Disagree/
Strongly
Disagree
37%
75%
8%
17%
23%
59%
18%
30%
94%
65%
0%
5%
6%
84%
5%
11%
85%
5%
10%
84%
77%
8%
11%
8%
12%
94%
4%
2%
93%
1%
6%
41%
49%
10%
61%
31%
8%
11%
38%
51%
81%
9%
10%
80%
14%
6%
25
With the results from the post survey, the evaluations indicate that the improvements have had a
positive affect for the occupants of the spaces. The survey indicates a significant improvement in
the acoustics, classroom furniture, light levels, and personal space, which were all major
concerns from the initial pre-design survey. The majority of the students still felt that the
aesthetics of the classroom were not important to their learning environment.
The fifth step of the data collection process was the assessment of the design of the remodeled
classrooms with respect to the LEED-CI rating system requirements. The Green Classrooms of
Guggenheim Hall were completed in August, 2002 and, prior to the completion of this research,
had served the Department of Construction Management for two full school years. Currently,
results are being processed to submit the classrooms for LEED Silver certification under the pilot
program for LEED for Commercial Interiors. The following information is outlined based on the
LEED rating system to include sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere,
materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality.
Sustainable Sites: The Guggenheim Building is part of the Colorado State University campus,
and will continue to house the Department of Construction Management. Because of its central
location on campus and proximity to downtown Fort Collins, Guggenheim Hall has access to the
majority of the bus lines that run through the city. Bus drop-off stations are located both outside
of Guggenheim Hall and on the center of campus. The campus is also working to make
improvements to allow for better bicycle access and other alternative modes of transportation. In
addition, this campus also charges for onsite parking and has reduced parking fees for carpool
parking. These measures encourage the use of alternative transportation methods.
26
Water Efficiency: In an effort to accomplish lower water use in the building, the restrooms used
for the classrooms went through retrofits to increase the water efficiency. In both the Men’s and
Women’s restrooms, the water closets were replaced with low-flow systems using under 1.1
gallons per flush. The Men’s restroom was also equipped with two waterless urinals. The
lavatories in both restrooms were replaced with low-flow fixtures. Overall, these modifications
have a daily volume savings of over 2889 gallons and an annual volume decrease of 728,028
gallons a year. The plumbing retrofits have resulted in water use reduction of over 33% when
compared to the original fixtures.
Energy and Atmosphere: The lighting fixtures were modified to increase the energy efficiency
of the classrooms. The classrooms were evaluated by a professional lighting designer who found
that the classrooms had twice the amount of light fixtures and lighting capacity needed for the
space. The existing lighting fixtures were cleaned, replaced with more efficient lamps, and
rotated in the space to meet ambient lighting needs. The savings of power consumption due to
the lighting retrofit was reduced by 52.13% from the original lighting design. The classrooms
were equipped with programmable timers that turn the lighting off when the classrooms are not
in use. The restrooms were equipped with occupancy sensors that turned the lighting fixtures on
when the restrooms are in use. The audio visual equipment used in the classrooms are all
EnergyStar rated and permanently installed and calibrated to each classroom. The connected
equipment has a lighting load of less than .72 watts per square foot, which is significantly less
than most rooms can achieve.
27
Material and Resources: The materials and resources being used for the remodel were carefully
evaluated to meet the sustainable goals. The University encourages waste recycling.
Guggenheim Hall has recycling drop-off boxes for paper, cardboard, glass, plastics, and metals.
Each classroom also has a box for newspapers and co-mingled recycling.
The classrooms also maintained the majority of the non-shell components of the building. The
ceilings, floors, interior partition walls, and doors within the interior walls were reused. Over
71% of the building components were reused. The remodel also employed strategies to reduce
construction waste. The project diverted 85% of the construction waste by recycling or reusing
the materials. All of the excess light fixtures, ceiling panels, and 158 chairs were sent to the CSU
surplus center where they were sold at auction for reuse. The cardboard from all of the new
furniture pieces was recycled as well as the old carpet. Mini blinds used in the space were used
in other classrooms around campus. Paint buckets were reused by the Facilities Management
department. The classrooms also reused the light fixtures, projector screens, and blackboards, all
of which added up to a reused material value of 11.45% of the total construction materials cost.
The fabric, carpet, and wallboards contain both post-consumer and post-industrial recycled
content. Over 10% of the construction material cost contains recycled content.
Indoor Environmental Quality: The new carpets installed in the project were all tested by the
Carpet and Rug Institute, and have been labeled with the Green Label tag noting that the carpet
contains a low VOC number. Another modification to the classrooms was the use of daylighting.
The old classrooms had mini blinds on the windows that were almost always pulled closed. The
previous audio visual equipment in the classrooms required the room to be almost completely
28
dark. The audio visual equipment was replaced with new devices that allowed for daylighting
opportunities. The mini blinds were replaced with solar shades with a transparency level that
allows for a constant connection to the exterior.
Discussion and Conclusion
The purpose of this case study was to assess the quality of an existing classroom remodel in a
higher education institution. The five steps of data collection were utilized to assess the end users
perceptions of the Guggenheim classroom remodel. To assess the students perceptions of the
remodeled classrooms, evaluation of the two surveys, pre and post-design, were compared. The
perceptions of the faculty verified the enhancements to the classrooms that the students had
noted.
The results from the pre-design survey of students and faculty using the Guggenheim classrooms
offered insight into the need to provide a functional and healthy teaching and learning
environment. From the survey it was determined that some areas of the classrooms needed to be
addressed to improve the learning environment for the students. Temperature, outside noise, the
classroom furniture, the audio visual equipment, the lighting, the aesthetics, personal space, and
the ability to recycle, were all areas where students had concerns with the existing classrooms.
Equipped with this information each element of design proposed for the classroom remodel was
evaluated based on aesthetics, sustainability, cost, functionality, and availability. For these
elements to meet sustainability requirements, the products were evaluated by a class of
construction management graduate students, based on recycled content or if the product was
29
recyclable, durable, natural, contained a low amount of VOC, was energy efficient, and/or
regionally manufactured.
The results between the pre- and post-classroom remodel surveys show the success of the
classroom remodel. The temperature of the classroom was improved to the point where students
no longer note temperature as a distraction to their learning. However, temperature is still one
area that needs to be addressed to increase the comfort of the occupants. The students also felt
that noise is now less of a distraction. Although improved, external noise was still a concern for a
percentage of students. Guggenheim Hall is located next to train tracks and a busy street which
students agree can contribute to acoustical distractions. When students were asked about their
ability to hear the instructors, the responses improved significantly. The improved acoustics can
be attributed to classroom orientation and installation of the soundboards. With both surveys,
many students had no opinion about the aesthetics or design of the classroom. As expressed in
the survey, another major improvement was the classroom furniture. Overall, the surveys showed
an overwhelming positive support for the classroom design and remodel. It is evident students
are proud of the classroom and are taking care of it. They contribute to keeping it clean and clear
of trash.
Another major concern expressed in the initial survey of the classrooms was the lack of personal
space. After the remodel, students felt that they have more personal space, enjoy the larger tablet
arm desks, and appreciate the comfort of upholstery and padding on the seating. The classroom
occupancy of the largest room was reduced from 80 students to 70 students, which increased the
amount of personal space. Some faculty members would prefer to see these numbers drop to
30
closer to 65 student seats. The faculty also has a large amount of personal space in the front of
the classrooms to allow for lectures and presentations. The students agreed that the new desks
and tables were more appropriate for the classroom setting, that the furniture no longer distracts
from their learning, and that they now have more personal space. Students who responded to the
first survey stated that they had less personal space in the old classrooms. The presenter’s
moveable cart replaced with a large teaching table that better fits the room. Overall, both
students and faculty have more personal space than the old classrooms, which helped lead to the
positive survey and interview responses.
In analyzing the data, it is clear that the current audio visual presentations are superior to the old
classrooms. The students in the old classrooms were split when deciding if the lighting was
appropriate for note taking and viewing. The majority of the students in the new classroom found
that the light was appropriate for the tasks they were completing. With the reorientation of one of
the classrooms, the main entrance to the classroom was rotated from being at the front of the
classroom to being on the side. This new orientation reduced the amount of distraction when a
student would enter late or leave early.
The analysis using the LEED Rating system verifies that the design and construction processes
were comprehensive and confirms that the project classroom remodel can be correctly referred to
as a green classroom. The assessment of the remodeled classrooms against the LEED – CI rating
system clearly verified that the strategies used by the design team were aligned with green design
goals and principles.
31
As universities decide to remodel existing classrooms, there are several key factors that will aid
in the success of the classroom design. It is imperative to get student support and input when
designing the classrooms. The students who are the occupants of the space are in a position to
offer appropriate suggestions for improving and remodeling the classrooms. As can be observed
from the Guggenheim case study, student involvement in a classroom remodel offers excellent
opportunities for a service and learning project. Also, by involving the faculty who use the
classrooms, additional ideas and support can be provided.
One of the most important factors when completing a classroom remodel is to have well-defined
goals early on in the design process to act as a framework for the decision making process. The
Guggenheim team found that creating such a framework resulted in making appropriate,
sustainable selections when designing the classrooms. When going through the design process, it
is also imperative to get all members of the team and representatives from the various
stakeholders involved up front to examine the issues, set common goals and explore
opportunities for the project.
The sustainable classroom remodel for Colorado State University was a criteria first step in the
pursuit of an environmentally-conscious university setting and as a tenet of the Tallories
Declaration. The Green Classrooms of Guggenheim Hall were intended to be a showcase for
sustainable principles and a place to teach the students, faculty, and community members about
the benefits of green design. The Guggenheim project was successful in improving the teaching
and learning environment. In the process, thanks to a concerted effort by an integrated team, the
project results now teach others how to provide sustainable sites, increase water efficiency,
32
improve overall energy performance, use sustainable materials and resources, decrease
construction waste, create a healthy indoor environment, and how to create an optimal teaching
and learning environment. With an understanding of the specific issues experienced with the
Guggenheim Hall classroom remodel, the lessons learned can be carried on to other classroom
designs and remodels across the country.
33
References
Babey, E. (March 26, 1991). The Classroom: Physical Environments that Enhance Teaching and
Learning, U.S. California.
Blueprint for a Green Campus, The Campus Earth Summit Initiatives for Higher education,
Extracted from envirocitizen website, Blueprint for a Green Campus pp 1-2).
www.envirocitizen.org
Coleman, Cindy (2002). Interior Design, Handbook of Professional Practice. New York:
McGraw Hill
Cunningham, Cody (2002, Aug. 1). Buildings That Teach. American School and University.
www.asumag.com/ar/University_buildings_teach
Graetz, K. A. and Goliber, M.J., Designing Collaborative Learning Places: Psychological
Foundations and New Frontiers, The Importance of Physical Space in Creating Supportive
Learning Environments, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Winter, 2002, 92.
Greening the Campus: Sustainability and Higher Education, http://www.islandpress.org/ecocompass/general/detail.html, retrieved June 20, 2004.
High Performance School Buildings, Resource and Strategy Guide, Sustainable Buildings
Industry Council, 1999.
Niemeyer, D. (2003). Hard Facts on Smart Classroom Design: Ideas, Guidelines, and Layouts.
The Scarecorw Press, Inc. Lanham, Maryland.
Orr, David. (1994). Earth in Mind: On Education, Environment, and the Human Prospect.
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Smarter College Classrooms: http://www.classrooms.com, retrieved September 22, 2003.
34
U.S. Green Building Council http://www.usgbc.org, Oct 10, 2003
U.S. Green Building Council. (2001). Leadership in energy and environmental design (LEED)
Online. http://www.usgbc.org
ULSF, What is the Talloires Declaration? Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable
Future www.ulsf.org/programs_talloires.html
35
Appendices
LEED for Commecial Interiors Guidelines and Credits
The following information is the entire scorecard for the LEED for Commercial Interiors. Not all
of these credits applied to the green classrooms in Guggenheim Hall.
Sustainable Sites
7 points possible
Credit 1
Site Selection
1-3
Credit 2
Development Density
1
Credit 4.1
Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access 1
Credit 4.2
Alternative Transportation
1
Credit 4.4
Alternative Transportation, Parking Availability
1
Water Efficiency
2 points possible
Credit 3.1
Water Use Reduction 20% reduction
1
Credit 3.2
Water Use Reduction 30% reduction
1
Energy and Atmosphere
14 points possible
PreReq 1
Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning
req.
PreReq. 2
Minimum Energy Performance
req.
PreReq. 3
CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment
req.
Credit 1.1
Optimize Energy Performance, Lighting Power
1-3
Credit 1.2
Optimize Energy Performance, Lighting Controls
1-2
Credit 1.3
Optimize Energy Performance, HVAC
1-2
Credit 1.4
Optimize Energy Performance, Equipment & Appliances 1-3
Credit 3
Additional Commissioning
1
Credit 5.1
Measurement and Verification, Sub-Metering
1
Credit 5.2
Measurement and Verification, Energy Costs Paid
1
Credit 6
Green Power
1
Materials and Resources
14 points possible
PreReq 1
Storage & Collection of Recyclables
req.
Credit 1.1
Building Reuse, Long Term Lease
1
Credit 1.2
Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Non-Shell Systems
1
Credit 1.3
Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Non-Shell
1
Credit 2.1
Construction Waste Management, Divert 50%
1
Credit 2.2
Construction Waste Management, Divert 75%
1
Credit 3.1
Resource Reuse, Reuse 5%
1
Credit 3.2
Resource Reuse, Reuse 10%
1
Credit 3.3
Resource Reuse, Reuse 30%
1
Credit 4.1
Recycled Content, Use 5% Post-Consumer/10% total
1
Credit 4.2
Recycled Content, Use 10% Post-Consumer/20% total
1
Credit 5.1
Regional Materials, Use 20% manufactured regionally
1
Credit 5.2
Regional Materials, Use 10% extracted regionally
1
Credit 6
Rapidly Renewable Materials
1
Credit 7
Certified Wood
1
Indoor Environmental Quality
15 points possible
PreReq 1
Minimum IAQ Performance
req.
36
PreReq 2
Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control
req.
Credit 1
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Monitoring
1
Credit 2
Ventilation Efficiency
1
Credit 3.1
Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction 1
Credit 3.2
Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy 1
Credit 4.1
Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives and Sealants
1
Credit 4.2
Low-Emitting Materials, Paints
1
Credit 4.3
Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet
1
Credit 4.4
Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood
1
Credit 4.5
Low-Emitting Materials, Furniture and Furnishings
1
Credit 5
Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control
1
Credit 6
Controllability of Systems
1
Credit 7.1
Thermal Comfort
1
Credit 7.2
Thermal Comfort, Permanent Monitoring Systems
1
Credit 8.1
Daylight and Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces
Credit 8.2
Daylight and Views, Views for 90% of Spaces
1
Innovation and Accredited Professional
5 Additional Points
Credit 1.1
LEED CI Innovation Credits
1
Credit 1.2
LEED CI Innovation Credits
1
Credit 1.3
LEED CI Innovation Credits
1
Credit 1.4
LEED CI Innovation Credits
1
Credit 2
LEED Accredited LEED Professional
1
57 Total Points Available
LEED Certified for Commercial Interiors
21 to 26 credits
LEED Certified Silver for Commercial Interiors
27 to 31 credits
LEED Certified Gold for Commercial Interiors
32 to 41 credits
LEED Certified Platinum for Commercial Interiors 42 of more credits
37
The Talloires Declaration
The Talloires Declaration:
University Presidents for a Sustainable Future
We, the presidents, rectors, and vice chancellors of universities from all regions of the world are
deeply concerned about the unprecedented scale and speed of environmental pollution and
degradation, and the depletion of natural resources. Local, regional, and global air pollution;
accumulation and distribution of toxic wastes; destruction and depletion of forests, soil, and
water; depletion of the ozone layer and emission of "green house" gases threaten the survival of
humans and thousands of other living species, the integrity of the earth and its biodiversity, the
security of nations, and the heritage of future generations. These environmental changes are
caused by inequitable and unsustainable production and consumption patterns that aggravate
poverty in many regions of the world.
We believe that urgent actions are needed to address these fundamental problems and reverse the
trends. Stabilization of human population, adoption of environmentally sound industrial and
agricultural technologies, reforestation, and ecological restoration are crucial elements in
creating an equitable and sustainable future for all humankind in harmony with nature.
Universities have a major role in the education, research, policy formation, and information
exchange necessary to make these goals possible.
The university heads must provide the leadership and support to mobilize internal and external
resources so that their institutions respond to this urgent challenge. We, therefore, agree to take
the following actions:
1. Use every opportunity to raise public, government, industry, foundation, and
university awareness by publicly addressing the urgent need to move toward an
environmentally sustainable future.
2. Encourage all universities to engage in education, research, policy formation, and
information exchange on population, environment, and development to move
toward a sustainable future.
3. Establish programs to produce expertise in environmental management,
sustainable economic development, population, and related fields to ensure that
all university graduates are environmentally literate and responsible citizens.
4. Create programs to develop the capability of university faculty to teach
environmental literacy to all undergraduate, graduate, and professional school
students.
5. Set an example of environmental responsibility by establishing programs of
resource conservation, recycling, and waste reduction at the universities.
6. Encourage the involvement of government (at all levels), foundations, and
industry in supporting university research, education, policy formation, and
information exchange in environmentally sustainable development. Expand work
with nongovernmental organizations to assist in finding solutions to
environmental problems.
38
7. Convene school deans and environmental practitioners to develop research,
policy, information exchange programs, and curricula for an environmentally
sustainable future.
8. Establish partnerships with primary and secondary schools to help develop the
capability of their faculty to teach about population, environment, and sustainable
development issues.
9. Work with the UN Conference on Environmental and Development, the UN
Environment Programme, and other national and international organizations to
promote a worldwide university effort toward a sustainable future.
10. Establish a steering committee and a secretariat to continue this momentum and
inform and support each other's efforts in carrying out this declaration.
[Jean Mayer, President and Conference convener Tufts University, U.S.A. | L. Avo Banjo, Vice
Chancellor University of Ibadan, Nigeria | Robert W. Charlton, Vice Chancellor and Principal
University of Witwatersrand, Union of South Africa | Michele Gendreau-Massaloux, Rector
l'Academie de Paris, France | Augusto Frederico Muller, President Fundacao Universidade
Federal de Mato Grosso, Brazil | Calvin H. Pimpton, President and Emeritus American
University of Beirut, Lebanon | T. Navaneeth Rao, Vice Chancellor Osmania University, India |
Stewart Saunders, Vice Chancellor and Principal University of Cape Town, Union of South
Africa | David Ward, Vice Chancellor Canipinas, U.S.A. | Pablo Arce, Vice Chancellor
Universidad Autonoma de Centro America, Costa Rica | Boonrod Binson, Chancellor
Chuialongkorn University, Thailand | Constance W. Curris President University of Northern
Iowa, U.S.A. | Adamu, Nayaya Mohammed Vice Chancellor Ahmadu Bello University, Nigeria |
Mario Ojeda Gomez President Colegio de Mexico, Mexico | Wesley Posvar, President
University of Pittsburgh, U.S.A. | Pavel D. Sarkisow, Rector D. I. Mendeleev Institute of
Chemical Technology U.S.S.R. | Akilagpa Sawyerr, Vice Chancellor University of Ghana,
Ghana | Carlos Vogt, President Universidade Estadual de Brazil | Xide Xie, President Emeritus
Fudan University, People's Republic of China]
39