Advertisement

The Teaching Green Building: Five Theoretical Perspectives

  • Laura B. Cole
Chapter
Part of the World Sustainability Series book series (WSUSE)

Abstract

Teaching Green Buildings (TGBs) are designed to educate building users about green building design and often broader themes about the connection between buildings and their surrounding ecosystems. The outcomes of a well-designed TGB range from increasing knowledge to fostering a sense of place to promoting environmental behavior change. To date, however, these buildings have been weakly theorized in scholarship and haphazardly designed in practice. This chapter draws on an interdisciplinary research base to discuss five potential roles for TGBs as: symbol, science museum, 3D textbook, call to action, and place.

References

  1. Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 273–291. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azjen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barr, S. K. (2011). Green Schools that Teach: Identifying Attributes of Whole-School Sustainability. (Degree of Master of Science), Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, Z., Cole, R. J., Robinson, J., & Dowlatabadi, H. (2010). Evaluating user experience in green buildings in relation to workplace culture and context. Facilities, 28(3/4), 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bullitt Foundation. (2016). Bullitt Center. Retrieved November 1, 2016, from http://www.bullittcenter.org/.
  7. Canter, D. V. (1977). The psychology of place. New York: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  8. Chawla, L. (1998). Significant life experiences revisited: A review of research on sources of environmental sensitivity. The Journal of environmental education, 29(3), 11–21. doi: 10.1080/00958969809599114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8(5), 156–159. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cole, L. B. (2013a). The green building as a medium for environmental education. Michigan Journal of Sustainability, 1(1), 161–169. doi: 10.3998/mjs.12333712.0001.012.Google Scholar
  11. Cole, L. B. (2013b). The Teaching Green School Building: Exploring the Contributions of School Design to Informal Environmental Education. (Ph.D.), University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  12. Cole, L. B. (2014). The Teaching Green School Building: A framework for linking architecture and environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 20(6), 836–857. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2013.833586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cole, L. B. (2015). Green Building Literacy in the school building: A study of five middle schools in the united states. Children, Youth and Environments, 25(3), 145–174. doi: 10.7721/chilyoutenvi.25.3.0145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cranz, G., Lindsay, G., Morhayim, L., & Lin, A. (2013). Communicating sustainability. Environment and Behavior, 46(7), 826–847. doi: 10.1177/0013916513475449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darby, S. (2001). Making it obvious: Designing feedback into energy consumption. In P. Bertoldi, A. Ricci, & A. de Almeida (Eds.), Energy efficiency in household appliances and lighting (pp. 685–696). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Darby, S. (2006). The effectiveness of feedback on energy consumption: A Review for Defra of the Literature on Metering, Billing and Direct Displays. Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  17. Day, E. (2009). Fostering Whole-Systems Thinking Through Architecture: Eco-School Case Studies in Europe and Japan. (Undergraduate Honors Thesis), Cornell University, Ithaca. http://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/13216.
  18. De Young, R. (1993). Changing behavior and making it stick: The conceptualization and management of conservation behavior. Environment and Behavior, 25(3), 485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Young, R. (2000). New ways to promote proenvironmental behavior: Expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 509–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eco, U. (1997). Function and sign: The semiotics of architecture. In N. Leach (Ed.), Rethinking architecture: A reader in cultural theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Edwards, C. P., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. E. (1997). The hundred languages of children: the Reggio Emilia approach–advanced reflections. Greenwich, Conn.: Ablex Pub. Corp.Google Scholar
  22. Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-Formal, and informal Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171–190. doi: 10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  24. Falk, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2005). Using the contextual model of learning to understand visitor learning from a science center exhibition. Science Education, 89(5), 744–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Falk, J., Dierking, L., & Foutz, S. (2007). In principle, in practice: Museums as learning institutions. Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  26. Falk, J. H., Heimlich, J. E., & Foutz, S. (2009). Free-choice learning and the environment. Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  27. Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). Foundations of place: A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Guy, S., & Farmer, G. (2001). Reinterpreting sustainable architecture: The place of technology. Journal of Architectural Education, 54(3), 140–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hattenhauer, D. (1984). The rhetoric of architecture: A semiotic approach. Communication quarterly, 32(1), 71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heerwagen, J. (2000). Green buildings, organizational success, and occupant productivity. Building Research and Information, 28(5), 353–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Henderson, J. A. (2014). “Not for Everyone, but Kind of Amazing”: Institutional Friction and the Nature of Sustainability Education. (Ph.D.), University of Rochester.Google Scholar
  32. Hernandez, M., Hidalgo, C., & Ruiz, C. (2013). Theoretical and methodological aspects of research on place attachment. In L. C. Manzo & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and applications. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Hines, J., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1987). Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behavior: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. International Living Future Institute. (2016). The Living Building Challenge. Retrieved July 1, 2016. http://living-future.org/lbc.
  36. Jencks, C. (1980). The architectural sign. Signs, symbols and Architecture, 71–119.Google Scholar
  37. Kaplan, S. (1991). Beyond Rationality: Clarity-based decision making. In T. Gärling & G. W. Evans (Eds.), Environment, cognition, and action (pp. 171–190). NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kaplan, S. (2000). Human nature and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 491–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kaplan, S., & Kaplan, R. (2009). Creating a larger role for environmental psychology: The Reasonable Person Model as an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 329–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Karjalainen, S. (2016). Should we design buildings that are less sensitive to occupant behaviour? A simulation study of effects of behaviour and design on office energy consumption. Energy Efficiency, 9(6), 1257–1270. doi: 10.1007/s12053-015-9422-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kellert, S. R. (2011). Dimensions, Elements, and Attributes of Biophilic Design. In S. R. Kellert, J. Heerwagen, & M. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic design: The theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to life. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  42. Kong, S. Y., Rao, S. P., Abdul-Rahman, H., & Wang, C. (2014). School as 3-D textbook for environmental education: Design model transforming physical environment to knowledge transmission instrument. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(1), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. König, A. (2013). Regenerative sustainable development of universities and cities: the role of living laboratories. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kudryavtsev, A., Stedman, R. C., & Krasny, M. E. (2011). Sense of place in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 229–250. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2011.609615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Laura Healey, M., & Rosie, P. (2012). Reconceptualizing school design: Learning environments for children and youth. Children, Youth and Environments, 22(1), 11–22. doi: 10.7721/chilyoutenvi.22.1.0011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lepper, M., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. (1973). Underminding children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “overjustification” hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lewicka, M. (2011). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 207–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lilley, D., & Wilson, G. T. (2013). Integrating ethics into design for sustainable behaviour. Journal of Design Research, 11(3), 278–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Louv, R. (2008). Last Child in the Woods. New York: Algonquin Books.Google Scholar
  50. Malinin, L. H. & Parnell, R. (2012). Reconceptualizing school design: Learning environments for children and youth. Children, Youth and Environments, 22(1), 11–22. doi: 10.7721/chilyoutenvi.22.1.0011.
  51. Malone, K., & Tranter, P. J. (2003). School Grounds as Sites for Learning: Making the most of environmental opportunities. Environmental Education Research, 9(3), 283–303. doi: 10.1080/13504620303459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Marcinkowski, T. (2010). Major features of environmental literacy. Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Florida Institute of Technology. Melbourne, Florida.Google Scholar
  53. Mendell, M. J., & Heath, G. A. (2005). Do indoor pollutants and thermal conditions in schools influence student performance? A critical review of the literature. Indoor Air, 15(1), 27–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2004.00320.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nair, P., & Fielding, R. (2005). The Language of School Design: Design Patterns for 21st Century Schools. Designshare, Inc.Google Scholar
  55. National Academies Press. (2006). Green schools: Attributes for health and learning. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11756.html.
  56. O’Donnell Wicklund Pigozzi Peterson Architects Inc, Furniture, V. S., & Design, Bruce Mau. (2010). The third teacher: 79 ways you can use design to transform teaching & learning. New York: Abrams.Google Scholar
  57. Orr, D. W. (2002). Architecture as Pedagogy II. Conservation Biology, 11(3), 597–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Orr, D. W. (2006). Design on the edge: The making of a high-performance building. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  59. Ozguner, H., Cukur, D., & Akten, M. (2011). The role of landscape and urban planning disciplines to encourage environmental education among primary school children. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3(3), 369–386.Google Scholar
  60. Petersen, J. E., Shunturov, V., Janda, K., Platt, G., & Weinberger, K. (2007). Dormitory residents reduce electricity consumption when exposed to real-time visual feedback and incentives. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(1), 16–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ryan, C. O., Browning, W. D., Clancy, J. O., Andrews, S. L., & Kallianpurkar, N. B. (2014). Biophilic design patterns: emerging nature-based parameters for health and well-being in the built environment. International Journal of Architectural Research, 8(2), 62–76.Google Scholar
  62. Sawin, J. L., & Hughes, K. (2007). Energizing cities. In L. Starke (Ed.), State of the World 2007: Our Urban Future. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  63. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Seibold-Bultmann, U. (2007). What does sustainability look like? Green architecture as an aesthetic proposition. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(1), 3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sobel, D. (2008). Childhood and nature: Design principles for educators. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.Google Scholar
  66. Söderlund, J., & Newman, P. (2015). Biophilic architecture: A review of the rationale and outcomes. AIMS Environmental Science, 2(4), 950–969. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2015.4.950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Somerville, M., & Green, M. (2011). A pedagogy of “organized chaos”: Ecological learning in primary schools. Children, Youth and Environments, 21(1), 14–34. doi: 10.7721/chilyoutenvi.21.1.0014.Google Scholar
  68. Stedman, R. C. (2003). Is it really just a social construction?: The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society & Natural Resources, 16(8), 671–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Taylor, A. P. (1993). The learning environment as a three-dimensional textbook. Children’s Environments, 10(2), 170–179.Google Scholar
  71. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York, NY: Penguin Group.Google Scholar
  72. Tranter, P. J., & Malone, K. (2004). Geographies of environmental learning: an exploration of children’s use of school grounds. Children’s Geographies, 2(1), 131–155. doi: 10.1080/1473328032000168813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. UNESCO. (1976). The Belgrade Charter: A global framework for environmental education. In Unesco (Ed.). Paris, France.Google Scholar
  74. United States Green Building Council. (2008). LEED 2009 for Schools New construction and major renovations. https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-schoolsnew-construction-v2009-current-version.
  75. United States Green Building Council. (2009). LEED for New Construction. https://www.usgbc.org/resources/leed-new-construction-v2009-current-version.
  76. Vickers, V. G., & Matthews, C. E. (2002). Children and place: A natural connection. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 39(1), 16–24.Google Scholar
  77. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Wu, D. W.-L., DiGiacomo, A., Lenkic, P. J., Wong, V. K., & Kingstone, A. (2016). Being in a “Green” building elicits “Greener” recycling, but not necessarily “Better” recycling. PloS one, 11(1).Google Scholar
  79. Zacharias, J., & Ling, R. (2014). Choosing between stairs and escalator in shopping centers. Environment and Behavior, 47(6), 694–709. doi: 10.1177/0013916513520418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zachrisson, J., & Boks, C. (2012). Exploring behavioural psychology to support design for sustainable behaviour research. Journal of Design Research 14, 10(1–2), 50–66.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Missouri at ColumbiaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations