Abstract
Green or sustainable schools are an important building type from which to explore questions of changing social behaviors and the often overlooked social dimensions of sustainable development such as equity and inclusion. Building performance studies, including post-occupancy evaluations (POE) are increasingly taking into account behavioral and social dimensions of the build environment, as well as the more common objectives of reductions in energy efficiency, and adopting ethnographic and art-based research methodologies to examine building users’ interaction with their environments. In this paper we examine contemporary evaluation methods in the context of school buildings to explore how some popular POE approaches imply only superficial objectives for green building. The need to create new habits of living and the role of the built environment in this task goes without question; but confronting scientific methods and engineering perspectives typical within the industry, meets professional barriers. In order to improve commonly adopted POE methods in the context of sustainable building, it is important that we are able to contest the meaning of sustainable design and include evaluation tools that have radical educational and transformative objectives, in particular those that allow communities to explore futures that demand both social and technical change. This paper suggests that through user feedback, architects and other building professionals have not only important tools to improve the performance of sustainable buildings, but also to confront the limited expectations of architects and engage users in a sustainable future. POE tools are educational and in listening to users, co-researching ways to transform environments, architects can transform their approaches to sustainable design.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahmadi, R. T., Saiki, D., & Ellis, C. (2016). Post occupancy evaluation an academic building: lessons to learn. Journal of Applied Sciences and Arts, 1(2), Article 4.
Bansbach, J., Grafwallner, R., Gonzalez, L., Hedges, G., Howe, K., Langford, A., et al. (2012). A practical guide to planning, constructing, and using school courtyards. A Report for Maryland State Department of Education.
Barr, S. K., Cross, J. E., & Dunbar, B. H. (2014). The whole-school sustainability framework. In Guiding principles for integrating sustainability into all aspects of a school organization. http://centerforgreenschools.org/Libraries/Publications/Whole-School_Sustainability_Framework.sflb.ashx.
Bentsen, P., Sondergaard Jensen, F., Mygind, E., & Barfoed Randrup, T. (2010). The extent and dissemination of udeskole in Danish schools. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 9(3), 235–243. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2010.02.00.
Browning, W., Ryan, C., & Clancy, J. (2014). 14 Patterns of biophilic design (pp. 1–60.1). New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.
Building Research and Information. (2001). Special issue of post-occupancy evaluation. Building Research and Information, 29, 158–163.
Canton, M. A., Ganem, C., Barea, G., & Llano, J. F. (2014). Courtyards as a passive strategy in semi dry areas. Assessment of summer energy and thermal conditions in a refurbished school building. Renewable Energy, 69, 437–446. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2014.03.06.
Choi, J.-H., Loftness, V., & Aziz, A. (2012). Post-occupancy evaluation of 20 office buildings as basis for future IEQ standards and guidelines. Energy and Buildings, 46, 167–175.
Dettweiler, U., Unlu, A., Lauterbach, G., Becker, C., & Gschrey, B. (2015). Investigating the motivational behavior of pupils during outdoor science teaching within self-determination theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–16. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00125.
González, M. S. R., Fernández, C. A., & Cameselle, J. M. S. (1997). Empirical validation of a model of user satisfaction with buildings and their environments as workplaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(1), 69–74.
Kim, T. W., Cha, S. H., & Kim, Y. (2016). A framework for evaluating user involvement methods in architectural, engineering, and construction projects. Architectural Science Review, 59(2), 136–147.
Moncaster, A. M., & Simmons, P. (2015). Policies and outcomes for UK sustainable schools. Building Research and Information, 3218, 1–13. doi:10.1080/09613218.2015.1005518.
Pink, S. (2007). Walking with video. Visual Studies, 22(3), 240–252.
Pink, S. (Ed.). (2009). Visual interventions: Applied visual anthropology (Vol. 4.) Berghahn Books.
Pink, S. (2015). Doing sensory ethnography. London: Sage.
Pink, S., Tutt, D., Dainty, A., & Gibb, A. (2010). Ethnographic methodologies for construction research: Knowing, practice and interventions. Building Research and Information, 38(6), 647–659.
Preiser, A. (2002). Learning from our buildings: A state of the practice summary of post-occupancy evaluation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.Books.nap.edu/books/0309076110/html. Accessed January 2004.
Sanni-Anibire, M. O., Hassanain, M. A., & Al-Hammad, A. M. (2016). Holistic post-occupancy evaluation framework for campus residential housing facilities. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 30(5), 04016026.
Schoenefeldt, H. (2016). The lost (first) chamber of the house of commons. AA Files, 72, 161–173.
Wheeler, A., & Malekzadeh, M. (2015). Exploring the use of new school buildings through post-occupancy evaluation and participatory action research. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 11(6), 440–456.
Wheeler, A., Boughlaghem, D., & Malekzadeh, M. (2011). What do young people tell us about sustainable lifestyles when they design sustainable schools. PLEA 2011 Proceedings, 1, 65–70.
Zimmerman, A., & Martin, M. (2001). Post-occupancy evaluation: Benefits and barriers. Building Research and Information, 29(2), 168–174.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the seed funding obtained from Iowa NSF EPSCoR to carry out this research activity in addition to a small grant obtained from the Iowa Energy Centre of $4500 entitled: “The Commercialization of a Qualitative and Quantitative Building Assessment Tool for Energy Efficient and Sustainable Schools in Iowa” July 2015–Jan 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wheeler, A., Illahe, H., Newalka, R. (2018). Rethinking Post-occupancy Evaluation for Sustainable Learning Environments. In: Leal Filho, W. (eds) Handbook of Sustainability Science and Research. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63007-6_59
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63007-6_59
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63006-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63007-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)