PERSPECTIVES OF MIDDLE SCHOOL PRINCIPALS REGARDING FLOOR COVERING
AND A COMPARISON OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE WITH SOUND INTENSITY LEVELS
by
CATHY LYNN FOLDEN
(Under the direction of C. Kenneth Tanner)
ABSTRACT
This study explored perspectives of middle school principals
on the importance of interior design elements in Georgia middle
schools. School principals are the instructional leaders within
the school and therefore have a unique viewpoint on the classroom's
learning environment. They should also be influential in the design
of new schools. Floor covering and its role in absorbing noise,
classroom flexibility and safety in respect to student achievement
was a focus of this study. Other design elements such as aesthetics,
comfort and safety were also investigated.
The following questions guided this research study:
1. What perspectives do Georgia middle school principals have
concerning the influence of interior design elements such as floor
covering, lighting, flexibility, acoustics, color texture, patterns,
cleanliness and maintenance on student achievement, teacher retention
and student attendance?
1. What are the Georgia middle school principals' preferred floor
coverings for the middle school classroom environment?
2. How do the acoustics of the environment relate to student achievement?
3. What floor coverings create the best acoustical environments
when student achievement is considered?
4. Does the floor covering in the classroom relate to student
achievement?
Public middle schools in Georgia for the year of 2002 served as
the population for this study. A questionnaire was distributed
to a random sample of 100 Georgia middle school principals. A
sample of 12 schools having carpeted classrooms and 12 schools
having hard surfaces were chosen based on the results of the survey.
Site visits were completed to collect data regarding reverberation
time and background noise in classrooms. A sound level meter and
reverberation time meter were used for these measurements. Official
state records provided information regarding student performance,
teacher experience, and certification. Ninety-seven percent of
principals surveyed agreed that classroom design affected student
achievement. Classroom volume, surface area, and background noise
were used as covariates to develop adjusted reverberation times.
Negative correlations between student achievement and reverberation
times were found. Student achievement was adjusted for socioeconomic
status, teacher education and experience. This correlation
indicated that as reverberation time decreased, student achievement
increased.
INDEX WORDS: school facility, design, floor covering, carpet,
student achievement
Perspectives of Middle School Principals Regarding Floor Covering and A Comparison of Middle School Student Performance With Sound Intensity Levels
by
CATHY LYNN FOLDEN
B.S, Georgia Southern University, 1994
M.Ed., The University of Georgia, 1995
A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
Athens, Georgia
2002
© 2002
Cathy Lynn Folden
All Rights Reserved
Perspectives of Middle School Principals Regarding Floor Covering and A Comparison of Middle School Student Performance With Sound Intensity Levels
by
CATHY LYNN FOLDEN
Major Professor: C. Kenneth Tanner
Committee: C. Thomas Holmes
Sally J. Zepeda
CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction and Rationale
If schools are to provide students with the latest in technology,
scientific breakthroughs and literature, consideration of the
physical environment in which these students will absorb these
materials should be of prime concern. With the invention of devices
such as automobiles and computers, societal needs have changed.
Students are required to have more knowledge when they exit the
twelfth grade than ever before. Can they learn this new and more
advanced material and become prepared for the working world in
a classroom that was designed 30-40 years ago in a world that
was much different than today? When the audience changes, the
program must change with it. Education must keep up with the needs
of the workforce just as advertisers must track the desires of
consumers. "Education has been obliged to become more inviting,
more consumer-oriented; less lecture-oriented and more learner-oriented."
(Patterson, 1998, p. 74).
Middle school is a critical time for students. In 1994, only 29
% of eighth graders participating in the National Assessment for
Educational progress scored at a proficient reading level and
31 % did not read on grade level (Mizell, 1995). Mizell (1995)
reported that 7 % of the eighth grade class of 1988 dropped out
of school and by 1992 that number had risen to 12%. Can various
components of school design and the learning environment contribute
to their students' chances of academic success? Public school
buildings should reflect the needs of the students they serve.
The design of the school should balance the social-emotional needs
with intellectual development of the students it will house. The
learning environment should be safe physically and emotionally.
A classroom should be a place where students belong and feel attached
(Mizell, 2000).
Never before has more opportunity and knowledge existed about
how to build a more learning-conducive school. Fix (2000) stated
that schools should be viewed as truly important places where
learning occurs, not merely buildings. If the hope for the future
of this country does lie in young people who are primarily served
through public education, what more important place is there?
School planning and design and the influence they have on academic
achievement should be considered foremost when new construction
or remodeling is needed or when new curriculum programs are being
contemplated. Factors that have been researched and determined
to be instrumental in the success of designing and planning a
school, according to Hawkins (2001), are smaller schools, lower
teacher/student ratios, building location, and parental/community
involvement. Hawkins (2001) pointed out that, "Bricks and
mortar can't eliminate teen incarceration, pregnancy, or substance
abuse. But when facilities support a structure that speaks to
the latest educational research and the local community's challenges
and desires, they can certainly help" (p. 31).
One factor in middle school design that has received minimal exposure
and was explored in this study is the area of sound or acoustics
in classrooms. It is clear that an increase in noise, whether
it is internal or external can interfere with a student's ability
to listen and comprehend, therefore information retention is diminished.
Many researchers have concluded that listening decreases as classroom
noise increases (Day, 1999). Therefore, the typically noisy classroom
could potentially put every child at risk of learning difficulties.
"Children, especially elementary and middle school students
struggle in noisy classrooms" (Anderson, 1997). Considerations
are made for students who suffer from hearing impairments through
legislation such as, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
and through the efforts of The U.S. Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board, or The Access Board, which provides
support for the implementation of the ADA (Anderson, Smaldino
& Crandall 2000). What has not been adequately addressed,
however, is the effects of noise on normal hearing children and
to what extent noise is a barrier to the learning and academic
achievement of the regular education student. If good classroom
acoustics could be a positive and successful factor in student
achievement it should be explored further.
In an effort to create school buildings that adequately reflect
the needs of the community including parents, students and area
businesses, local school boards must solicit community support.
Constructing new school facilities usually begins with a comprehensive
community study and economic analysis as wells as an analysis
of school curriculum and finances (Castaldi, 1994; National Center
for Education Statistics, 2000). The value of teacher and principal
perceptions should also be considered and used to guide further
research regarding how the school's physical environment affects
student achievement. Because teachers and principals have a hands-on
perspective of the classroom environment and how students relate
to it, their perspectives are unique. This study focused on design
elements that may bridge the gap between student achievement and
the physical environment. A major component that was targeted
was floor covering as it relates to classroom acoustics.
Statement of the Problem
One aspect of the problem addressed in this study was that
there is limited knowledge regarding perspectives of school principals
concerning the school's physical environment and its relationship
to student outcomes. Another component of the problem was that
there is limited evidence regarding the effects of classroom acoustics,
especially in carpeted and non-carpeted classrooms, and how sound
levels in these two environments relate to student outcomes. The
overall problem addressed was how does the physical environment
possibly influence student outcomes? Two aspects of this problem
were addressed: first, perspectives of curriculum leaders regarding
the physical environment, the principal, and second, classroom
acoustics and student outcomes. Additionally, how do students
fare academically in schools with carpeted floor coverings compared
to schools without carpeted floor covering? Five research questions
were examined:
1. What perspectives do Georgia middle school principals have
concerning the influence of interior design elements such as floor
covering, lighting, flexibility, acoustics, color texture, patterns,
cleanliness and maintenance on student achievement, teacher retention
and student attendance?
2. What are the Georgia middle school principals' preferred floor
coverings for the middle school classroom environment?
3. How do the acoustics of the environment relate to student achievement?
4. What floor coverings create the best acoustical environments
when student achievement is considered?
5. Does the floor covering in the classroom relate to student
achievement?
Statement of the Purpose
School Design is not limited to the blueprints and physical
layout of the building. The interior of the building is of equal
importance. Recognizing the detrimental effects that poor acoustics
can have on academic achievement and understanding the need to
acknowledge and address options for controlling noise in the classroom
combined to formulate one major aspect of this study. By comparing
sound absorbing materials in classrooms through the use of sound
tests, and comparing those results to students' standardized test
scores, it was assumed that a trend in favor of carpeted or non
carpeted classrooms would be found.
A recent survey of more than 1,000 teachers, cooperatively sponsored
by the International Interior Design Association and The Carpet
and Rug Industry, examined what teachers perceive are the most
important features in an ideal learning environment. Results included
good lighting, adequate temperature control, comfortable and flexible
furnishings and carpeting (Sellers, 2001, Schapiro, 2000). This
study was loosely based on the concept of surveying educators,
in this case, principals, about their perspectives of the physical
environment of their schools and how it may or may not influence
students and teachers. However, this study also was extended into
taking field measurements of the acoustics in a random sample
of 8th grade classrooms in middle schools across the state of
Georgia in an effort to compare noise levels and student achievement.
Significance of the Study
Data concerning facility design is needed now more than ever
and the market is ripe for more detailed research in the area
of acoustical design. Next to roads and highways, schools are
the largest infrastructure investments in the United States, and
statistics reveal school enrollments are expected to increase
each year, nationwide (Jones, 1997). If ever there was a time
for facility planners to acquire as much information as possible
about the relationship between student learning and the physical
environment, that time is now. While children who suffer from
hearing impairments have certain rights as provided by the Americans
with Disabilities Act (1990), very little research has been done
concerning the effects of poor classroom design and acoustics
on all of the regular education students.
Assumptions of the Study
The first assumptions involved in conducting this study was
that appropriate methodology and instrumentation could be designed
to answer the specified research questions in a scientific and
effective manner. Second, it was assumed that bias could be restricted;
hence, socioeconomic status and teacher training and experience
were controlled when comparisons of student achievement were made.
The third supposition involved the measures of student achievement,
assuming that they were valid and reliable. The fourth, assumption
was that the measures of the physical environment were also valid
and reliable. Finally, it was assumed that the procedure used
to collect the principals' perspectives was comprehensive.
Constraints of the Study
Limitations that existed in this study were addressed to provide
a perspective for the results to be well founded and useful. These
limitations included valid survey responses from the school principals,
the socioeconomic status and teacher education and experience
at the schools surveyed, and the ability of the researcher to
understand the complex set of acoustical variables being evaluated.
To compensate for gaps that occurred, the researcher was trained
in the use of sound measuring devices.
The population of middle schools was represented by a random sample
of 100 schools. This sample was selected from all Georgia middle
schools containing grades 6-8. From this sample, 30 school sites
were selected for further acoustical study based on items 16,
17, 28 and 30 in the principal's questionnaire (see Appendix B).
Definition of Terms
Middle School - a school consisting of only grades 6 to 8
Noise Reduction Coefficient (Scott, 1999) NRC, measures
the ability of a material to absorb sound
Rural (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000b) all territory, population
and housing units, located outside of urbanized areas and urban
clusters
Urban - (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000b) all territory, population
and housing units, located within urbanized areas and urban clusters.
Urban Areas - (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000b) consists of densely
settled territory that contains 50,000 or more people.
Urban Clusters - (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000b) consists of densely
settled territory that has at least 2,500 people but fewer than
50,000 people.
Procedures
The procedures for this study were as follows:
1. A questionnaire, for school principals, was developed to complement
the national survey of schoolteachers (Shapiro, 2000). The results
of this questionnaire were also used to select the sample of schools
for site visits and acoustics testing.
2. The questionnaire was sent to a stratified random sample of
100 middle schools in Georgia based on a rural or urban classifications.
The researcher used this survey to determine a sample size of
30 schools. In these 30 schools, 15 were well maintained and carpeted
and 15 had poorly maintained, non-carpet, floor covering as determined
by the survey.
3. An expert in the field of acoustical engineering tutored the
researcher in the use of scientific acoustical measuring instruments.
4. Data were collected to measure acoustic levels within the selected
schools. These data were collected using standardized instruments
and measurement procedures on a site visit by the researcher.
5. The researcher collected information regarding the student
achievement of the selected schools from the public information
data set on the Internet. The data included information from standardized
test scores on the Stanford 9, a test taken by all 8th grade students
in the state of Georgia.
6. Also retrieved from the Internet, were data revealing student
ethnicity and socioeconomic status as well as information regarding
the school faculty. This information included teacher training,
years of experience, certification level, and ethnicity. The information
received in this category was used as a covariate in order to
increase validity and decrease the risk of error and bias.
7. All data collected were coded and submitted to frequency counts,
percentages, analysis of covariance and a multiple regression
analysis. An alpha of .05 was assumed for this study.
Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 provided the introduction, statement of the problem
and the purpose of the study. This chapter also details the research
questions concerning this study as well as the limitations, assumptions
and definition of terms. A summary of procedures used for this
study is also located in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 presents a review
of the literature concerning acoustics, carpet and school design.
Chapter 3 is a description of the methodology used in this study.
The analysis of data is targeted in Chapter 4 and a summary of
the study's results is located in Chapter 5.
Floor Covering and Acoustics
There were no statistically significant differences in reverberation
times for either test (starter pistol or paper bag) when compared
to floor covering (alpha = .05). Reverberation times were consistently
lower in carpeted classrooms. For example the mean reverberation
time for the starter pistol in carpeted classrooms was 1.2425
seconds and 1.2950 seconds in hard surfaced classrooms. In all
classrooms the reverberation time exceeded the ASA standards of
.4-.6 seconds. In addition, the decibel readings of the background
noise in each classroom also exceeded ASA standards of 35 decibels.
The mean reading in hard surfaced classrooms was with the HVAC
system turned off was 37.5 when the HVAC system was turned on
the decibel level rose to 44.5. Every carpeted classroom in this
study had lower decibel readings. The mean decibel reading with
the HVAC system off was 36.3 and when the HVAC system was turned
on, 42.9. While carpeted classrooms did have lower decibel readings
and reverberation times, neither met ASA standards in these categories
and again, there was no statistically significant difference related
to student achievement. Chart 4.8 and 4.9 demonstrates these data.
Chart 4.8 Comparison of Mean Reverberation Times with ASA Standards
|
|
Figure 4.1 Adjusted Reading Scores
|
|
Figure 4.2 Adjusted Mathematics Scores
 |
Figure 4.3 Complete Test Battery Scores
|
|
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this study was to examine the perspectives
of middle school principals concerning school design and the relationship
of school design elements on student achievement. A secondary
focus of this study was the relationship between acoustics and
floor covering and as a function of student performance.
Chapter 1 of this study described the problem, purpose and importance
of the study as well as a list of terms. The review of literature,
in Chapter 2, laid the brickwork for the study through an examination
of previous research. Chapter 3 detailed the collection of data
and procedures used to analyze the data. In Chapter 4, data were
analyzed and presented in a multitude of charts, graphs and tables.
The final chapter, Chapter 5, is intended to summarize the findings
from this study and suggest recommendations for further study
in the area of school design or classroom acoustics.
Comparison of Findings
The surveys sent to Georgia middle school principals were
intended to identify their perspectives regarding school and classroom
design elements and how they relate to student achievement. Exactly
100 % of principals reported that interior design is important
for creating a good learning environment. In a recent national
teacher survey by Shapiro (2000) 99% of teachers agreed that a
school's interior design is important for creating a good learning
environment. (See Chart 5.1)
Chart 5.1 Comparison of Teacher's and Principal's Perspectives of Interior Design
 |
When comparing responses of teachers and principals on teacher retention, both teacher and principals concur, 89% and 95% respectively, that interior design has a positive effect (Shapiro, 2000). Chart 5.2 compares teacher and principal responses to the importance of interior design in teacher retention. In relation to student attendance, principal's rated the school design factor a bit higher than teachers, 87% and 79%, respectively (Shapiro, 2000). This information is found in Chart 5.3.
Chart 5.2 Comparison of Teacher and Principal Perspectives on Teacher Retention
 |
Chart 5.3 Comparison of Teacher's and Principal's Perspectives on Student Attendance
|
|
Classroom design has a strong impact on student achievement according to 97% of principals surveyed. (See Chart 5.4) Shapiro (2000) reported 92% of teachers agreed classroom design does affect student achievement. Principals stated (92%) that classroom design elements such as natural lighting have a strong impact upon student achievement and 83% viewed the ability to control lighting in the classroom as a strong interior design element in relation to student achievement. Another high-ranking factor in student achievement is the flexibility in arranging the classroom, according to 97% of principals surveyed.
Chart 5.4 Comparison of Teacher and Principal Perspectives on Student Achievement
|
|
On the issue of floor covering in classrooms, initially, only 35% of principals agreed that carpet impacts student achievement whereas 93% recognized the importance of carpet in the classroom to decrease noise levels therefore positively affecting student achievement. In addition, 55% identified carpet as a key factor in student achievement as it reduces accidents such as slips or falls. Carpeting is acknowledged by 78% of principals as being a more comfortable surface for students and teachers to stand on. Additionally, almost 70% of respondents agree that carpeted classrooms provide more flexibility to teachers. Other interior design factors strongly impacting student achievement in the middle school classroom, as reported by Georgia middle school principals, were comfortable seating (100%) and ease of classroom maintenance (75%). Items viewed as having little or no impact on student achievement were floor texture (60%) and floor patterns (60%), and floor coloring (55%).
In terms of carpeted floor covering, 80% of principals reported
their carpet was well to very well maintained and cleaned. Principals
stated that carpet gives teachers the flexibility to utilize learning
space in the classroom (69%) and is more comfortable for teachers
to stand on (78%). However, even with all of the admitted benefits
of carpet 75% of principals declared carpet was hard to maintain.
Regarding the overall condition of their school buildings, 60%
of principals surveyed stated their buildings were in good to
very good condition while 58% stated their classrooms were in
good to very good condition. In these classrooms, 46% had neutral
toned floors. Overall, 43% of principals graded their classrooms
with a "B" and 28% gave their rooms a "C".
In reference to the classroom acoustics in their building Georgia
middle school principal's rated their classrooms as follows: Seventy-two
percent of principals gave their school an above average rating
of "B" while only 10% gave their classrooms an excellent
rating of an "A".
When principals were asked about what type of flooring they preferred
in classrooms 37% preferred tile, 32% preferred a combination
and only 28% preferred carpet. Since carpet had previously been
labeled as difficult to maintain this may have contributed to
the low preference rating, despite the positive responses to the
value carpet adds to the noise level of a classroom.
Research questions 3, 4, and 5 were analyzed with data collected
from school site visits. First, research question 3, "Do
the acoustics of the environment relate significantly to student
achievement?" A significant difference was found between
carpeted classrooms and hard surfaced classrooms. In all comparisons,
correlation between student achievement scores and reverberation
times were negative, indicating that as mean reverberation time
increased, mean student achievement scores decreased. Nixon (2002)
stated, "Children are especially vulnerable to interference
of the acoustical signal, with reverberation and background noise
being the most notable culprits." (p. 23). Carpet may be
considered in creating a more learning-conducive environment for
students.
Research question number 4 addressed which floor coverings create
the best acoustical environments when student achievement is considered
and was also examined through data collected on site visits. Reverberation
times were consistently lower in carpeted classrooms visited for
this study. It is important to note that reverberation in a classroom
can significantly decrease a student's ability to distinguish
words during teacher lessons. Carpet is a cost-effective way to
improve learning in schools by improving the acoustical environment
and should be evaluated (Day, 1999). Carpet does decrease the
reverberation time in a classroom by adding absorption material
to the floor.
The final research question for this study asked, if the floor
covering in the classroom relate to student achievement. There
were no statistically significant differences when floor coverings
were compared to student achievement, however in all cases the
mean achievement score was higher for students who had access
to carpeted classrooms. In fact for reading scores, students in
carpeted classrooms scored an average of 5.7 points higher. In
mathematics, students scored 6 points higher. On the complete
battery score students had an average of 5 points higher in carpeted
classrooms than in hard surfaced rooms. Adding 5 points to standardized
test scores is worth considering. Noise, whether intermittent,
constant, or in sudden unpredictable burst, does interfere with
concentration, reading and mathematics ability, and auditory processing
(Bronzaft & McCarthy, 1975; Dahlquist, 1999; Frese, 1973;
Woodhead, 1964, Viteles & Smith, 1946). Evans and Maxwell
(1997) produced a study with similar findings. Their study indicated
that children in noisy classroom environments presented with lower
reading skills and were less able to distinguish the spoken word
in their environment than were students in environments where
noise was minimal and controlled. This tendency appears to favor
carpeting as classroom flooring.
Conclusions
On the average, students who have access to carpeted classrooms
score higher on standardized tests, therefore solidifying the
argument for good acoustics in the learning environment. Although
there were not any causal relationships ascertained in this study,
the scales have been tipped toward carpet in the classroom. Sound
absorbing surfaces, such as carpet have been established, in this
study, as a substantial benefit in reducing acoustical problems
in the classroom. These findings are supported by previous research
by the Acoustical Society of America (2000) and the Carpet and
Rug Institute (2000a, 2000b, 2001).
Recommendations
In an effort to promote more accurate conclusions some recommendations
for change are necessary. This study took place during student
holidays. For a more accurate prediction of the acoustic atmosphere
it is suggested that a normal classroom atmosphere and furniture
arrangement should exist. When visiting classrooms the researcher
should have a more definitive method of quantifying absorbent
materials such as corkboards and bookcases as these may affect
the acoustics of a room. Also, a more precise method of measuring
the condition of carpet should be instituted. Therefore the condition
and quality of the carpeting can be added into the analysis of
data. More research on carpet, types of carpet and carpet padding
would be beneficial as well.
When measuring acoustics in a classroom, it is recommended that
a white noise generator with omni-directional speakers be used
to create a consistent noise in each environment. White noise
is most similar to the noise made by human speech. Speech intelligibility
software with omni-directional microphones are available to measure
the sound and reverberation with a computer rather than a hand
held measuring device and the use of a starter pistol and paper
bag. This would provide more precise and consistent results by
measuring different octaves and frequency ranges and reducing
the variation in reverberation times. In this case, students would
not need to be present.
In reference to the survey, shortening and simplifying the survey
may increase the return and provide more information regarding
specific classrooms and grade levels. For example removing the
"combination" option in the type of flooring category,
questions #28-29. Also, focusing the survey toward specific rooms
in same grade levels and with similar dimensions would increase
the likelihood of selecting schools that are comparable.
This study was conducted in the state of Georgia. Another suggestion
is to go beyond the existing scope of this study and include other
states. While extending the study nationally would be a daunting
task involving massive data reporting, this recommendation would
align the study more with Shapiro's (2000) national study of teachers.
Expanding the study would reveal principal attitudes regarding
floor covering from various parts of the United States where weather
and climate are not similar to Georgia. Other differences may
also factor into the end results.
It is earnestly recommended to teacher training institutions and
higher learning facilities to place a finer emphasis on the importance
of the physical environment and the effect it has on student achievement.
Because the mean reverberation times and decibel readings in this
study were higher than standards allow, the final recommendation
is for policy regarding classroom acoustics to be implemented
by state and local boards of education. This policy should address
noise control, background noise levels, and reverberation times.
