Literature Report

Education can take vicinity anywhere but superb or better outcomes can solely be attained in educational systems with the accelerated learning environment. Learning in universities depends on enough physical environment to supply quality education. The place or training setting ranges from present day facilities such as gyms, well-equipped buildings and sufficient open-air used for open-air gatherings. The architectural designs have an impact on effective gaining knowledge of which is difficult to measure. The teachers’ sense of efficacy, working condition, and grasp play an integral role in education. However, infrastructure, type size, and quality dimensions may additionally be taken into account when determining academic achievement. Structural Design Galster (2012) located that improvement of the environmental factors in the course of the designing process has a positive impact on the performance of students. Appropriate spacing in hotels and classrooms, easy accessibility, and prevention of overcrowding are primary factors to ensure good health and better performance. Kolarevic& Klinger (2013) proposes for the use of long-lasting materials to save in cost and ensure that the structures’ design remains for long. According to a study by Peter &Lippman (2010), many architects focus on the size of structures, accessibility, resources, and their ability to accommodate many students and staff members. As a result, most of these structures lack the good qualities such as noise resistance, overcrowding prevention, and weather control which are essential for improved learning qualities. The temperature determines how comfortable the students are in the classroom. The neither too hot nor too cold is perhaps the ideal temperature. Earthman (2002) carried out an examination of prime temperature for optimal outcomes in learning. The findings indicate that 50% humidity and temperatures ranging from 20 and 24 degree Celsius are comfortable and most conducive to learning.

The various aspect of the built environment has a significant impact on people in those structures. In the United Kingdom, the Department of Education measured the schools’ pedagogical value and finance injected into the learning environment. The survey focused on the building performance thus assessed the relationship between capital investment in schools and performance of the learners. The capital investments strongly impact on students’ motivation and behavior (Martorell, Stange & McFarlin, 2016). The improved building design must accommodate traffic flows for easy movement. The state and location of the classroom enable a variety of teaching strategies. The approaches need to be tailored so that they facilitate understanding in ‘difficult’ section or areas of study.

Acoustics

Research by Edwards &Naboni (2013) showed that manipulating features such as color and design translates into positive impacts in learning quality. It leads to increased lighting in the structures as well as control of other conditions such as heat, cold, brightness, and sound. This is essential in universities as it can lead to a reduction in the cost of energy while it increases satisfaction and self-reliance. Colors affect individuals’ experience of the world. The exposure to certain colors such as red, green, black in the learning environment impairs or enhances academic performance. For instance, the greater frontal hemisphere activation is high when people are exposed to the red color. According to Gifford, Steg & Reser, (2011) in environmental psychology, argued that better performance reading and math indicated to perform well in class painted in green. The red color increases pulse while the green color brings about the judgment, balance, arrested stasis and movement.

Space

Space several studies explored the link between pedagogy and learning environment design that helped in an in-depth problem-based learning. Some examples include the Architecture of school (Martorell, Stange & McFarlin, 2016). According to Bess, James, Dee, Jay (2008), there are design features that facilitate collaborative and project-based education. The factors may include variably sized settings with the adequate workspace. The environment must have presentation spaces, access to food and beverages. Additionally, it must include studios, galleries, collaboration incubator, and laboratories. Moreover the getaway niches; display areas as well as good access to technology.

The previous focus on size, accessibility, resources, and convenience of structures does not seem to enhance quality in learning today. Peter &Lippman (2010) found that interaction between learners or staff members with the environment regarding space and design requirements has significantly become important. Currently, the integration of technology in the manipulation of the structures designs has been used to ensure comfort, increased convenience, and satisfaction.

The seat arrangement effectively manipulates the physical characteristic of the learning environment to ensure the performance of both teachers and students. The social-petal seating arrangement allows greater social interaction among the learners and professors. Comfortable physical characteristics must correlate well with stronger performance. The quality of seating determined performance is more regarded highly more by the teachers due to their status on the campus. According to Douglas and Gifford (2001), however, the classroom users rated other classroom properties such as the size of the room, brightness and aesthetic complexity as less important elements.

References

Bess, James L. & Dee, Jay R (2008): Understanding College and University Organization. Sterling. Virginia. Volume II., Chapter on “Organisational change in higher education”. pp. 790-825.

Douglas, D., & Gifford, R. (January 01, 2001). Evaluation of the physical classroom by students and professors: a lens model approach. Educational Research London Then Slough-, 43, 295-310.

Earthman, Glen I. (2002). School Facility Conditions and Student Academic Achievement. (Earthman, Glen I.(2002). School Facility Conditions and Student Academic Achievement. UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education, & Access. UCLA: UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access. Retrieved from: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5sw56439.) eScholarship, University of California.

Edwards, B. W., &Naboni, E. (2013). Green buildings pay: Design, productivity and ecology. Routledge.

Galster, G. C. (2012). The mechanism (s) of neighborhood effects: Theory, evidence, and policy implications. In Neighborhood effects research: New perspectives (pp. 23-56). Springer Netherlands.

Gifford, R., Steg, L., & Reser, J. P. (January 01, 2011). Environmental Psychology. 440-470

Kolarevic, B., & Klinger, K. (Eds.). (2013). manufacturing material effects: rethinking design and making in architecture. Routledge.

Martorell, P., Stange, K. M., & McFarlin, I. (2016). Investing in schools: Capital spending, facility conditions, and student achievement.