The acoustic environment of the classroom is deemed significant to enhance the learning quality and the learning outcomes. Noise exposure levels and reverberation are the main acoustic parameters to consider in the classroom because it affects speech intelligibility. As a result of the modern teaching methods especially in the practical faculties. Workgroup activities have become a common tool for learning, it has a higher noise level than independent work. Therefore, the specialists become face a great challenge to achieve acoustic comfort in classrooms. In spite of that, in Egypt, acoustic conditions are rarely implemented into classroom design practice. This study evaluated the acoustic performance of a typical classroom in Badr University, Egypt in unoccupied condition for four cases. Unoccupied ambient noise level (ANLs) and reverberation time (RTs) were measured by using Testo 815 device, and Ecotect software. Additionally, the measurements were compared with the standards and norms. Acoustic treatments using absorbent materials were suggested by simulation in Ecotect for three cases (four scenarios).
WinnipegM. School building, space standards. Winnipeg, MB: The Public Schools Finance Board, 2018.
2.
KlatteMBergströmKLachmannT. Does noise affect learning? A short review on noise effects on cognitive performance in children. Front Psychol2013; 4: 578.
3.
ImmsWMahatMByersT, et al. Type and use of innovative learning environments in Australasian Schools ILETC Survey No. 1. Technical report 1/2017, Melbourne, 2017. http://www.iletc.com.au/publications/reports (accessed 15 February 2022)
4.
SaeedDMElkhatibWFSelimAM. Architecturally safe and healthy classrooms: eco-medical concept to achieve sustainability in light of COVID-19 global pandemic. J Asian Archit Build Eng2021; 1–16.
5.
MealingsKDemuthK, et al. An assessment of open plan and enclosed classroom listening environments for young children: Part 2 - teachers’ questionnaires. J Educ Pediatr Rehabil Audiol2015; 1: 1–19.
6.
Standards New Zealand. AS/NZS 2107:2016. Acoustics - recommended design sound levels and reverberation times for building interiors. Wellington: Standards New Zealand, 2016.
7.
BrännströmKJJohanssonEVigertssonD, et al. How children perceive the acoustic environment of their school. Noise Health2017; 19(87): 84–94.
8.
SpratfordMWalkerEAMcCreeryRW. Use of an application to verify classroom acoustic recommendations for children who are hard of hearing in a general education setting. Am J Audiol2019; 28: 927–934.
9.
ZhuPTaoWLuX, et al. Optimisation design and verification of the acoustic environment for multimedia classrooms in universities based on simulation. Build Simul2022; 15: 1419–1436.
10.
RicciardiPBurattiC. Environmental quality of university classrooms: subjective and objective evaluation of the thermal, acoustic, and lighting comfort conditions. Build Environ2018; 127: 23–36.
11.
AstolfiABottalicoPBarbatoG. Subjective and objective speech intelligibility investigations in primary school classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am2012; 131: 247–257.
12.
ZhouTWuYMengQ, et al. Influence of the acoustic environment in hospital wards on patient physiological and psychological indices. Front Psychol2020; 11: 1600.
13.
ChristensenJHSaundersGHPorsboM, et al. The everyday acoustic environment and its association with human heart rate: evidence from real-world data logging with hearing aids and wearables. R Soc2021; 8: 201345.
14.
KangJAlettaFObermanT, et al. Acoustic environments and soundscapes in London during the Spring 2020 lockdown. J Acoust Soc Am2021; 149: A27–A27.
KlatteMHellbrückJSeidelJ, et al. Effects of classroom acoustics on performance and well-being in elementary school children: a field study. Environ Behav2010; 42(5): 659–692.
17.
AmasuomoJ. Lecture Hall acoustics as a determinant for effective learning-teaching environment. J Educ Sociol2014; 5: 26–30.
18.
CiprianoMAstolfiAPelegrín-GarcíaD. Combined effect of noise and room acoustics on vocal effort in simulated classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am2017; 141: EL51–EL56.
19.
ProdiNVisentinCFelettiA. On the perception of speech in primary school classrooms: Ranking of noise interference and of age influence. J Acoust Soc Am2013; 133: 255–268.
20.
OsmanHSullivanJR. Children’s auditory working memory performance in degraded listening conditions. J Speech Lang Hear Res2014; 57: 1503–1511.
21.
SullivanJROsmanHSchaferEC. The effect of noise on the relationship between auditory working memory and comprehension in school-age children. J Speech Lang Hear Res2015; 58: 1043–1051.
22.
van ReenenCPlessisCD. Acoustics in South African classrooms: Regulations versus reality. Build Acoust2022; 29(1): 157–178.
23.
Persson WayeKMagnussonLFredrikssonS, et al. A screening approach for classroom acoustics using web-based listening tests and subjective ratings. PLoS One2015; 10: e0116572.
24.
British Standards Institution. BS ISO 9921-1: 1996. Ergonomic assessment of speech communication-Part 1: Speech interference level and communication distances for persons with normal hearing capacity in direct communication (SILmethod), 1997.
25.
MealingsK. Classroom acoustic conditions: understanding what is suitable through a review of national and international standards, recommendations, and live classroom measurements. In: 2nd Australasian acoustical society’s conference, ACOUSTICS 2016, Brisbane, Australia, 2016.
26.
HabibiS. Improving building envelope performance with respect to thermal, sound insulation, and lighting: a case study. Build Acoust2019; 26(4): 243–262.
27.
AstolfiAPellereyF. Subjective and objective assessment of acoustical and overall environmental quality in secondary school classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am2008; 123: 163–173.
28.
ToyinboOShaughnessyRTurunenM, et al. Building characteristics, indoor environmental quality, and mathematics achievement in Finnish elementary schools. Build Environ2016; 104: 114–121.
29.
ChoiY-J. An optimum combination of absorptive and diffusing treatments for classroom acoustic design. Build Acoust2014; 21(2): 175–179.
30.
RussoDRuggieroA. Choice of the optimal acoustic design of a school classroom and experimental verification. Appl Acoust2019; 146: 280–287.
31.
ChoiY-J. Effects of periodic type diffusers on classroom acoustics. Appl Acoust2013; 74: 694–707.
32.
MirSHAbdouAA. Investigation of sound-absorbing material configuration of a smart classroom utilizing computer modeling. Build Acoust2005; 12: 175–188.
33.
CuchareroJHänninenTLokkiT. Influence of sound-absorbing material placement on room acoustical parameters. Acoustics2019; 1: 644–660.
34.
SanaviASchäfferBHeutschiK, et al. On the effect of an acoustic diffuser in comparison with an absorber on the subjectively perceived quality of speech in a meeting room. Acta Acust United Acust2017; 103: 1037–1049.
35.
ShtrepiLAstolfiAD’AntonioG, et al. Objective and perceptual evaluation of distance-dependent scattered sound effects in a small variable-acoustics hall. J Acoust Soc Am2016; 140: 3651–3662.
36.
LordPTempletonD. Detailing for acoustics. New York: Spon Press, 2001.
37.
IswatiTY. Evaluation of reverberation time in the auditorium: case of Assembly Hall of Engineering Faculty, Universitas Sebelas Maret. In: 18th International conference on sustainable environment and architecture. Advances in Engineering Research, 2019, vol. 156.
38.
ChoiY-J. Evaluation of acoustical conditions for speech communication in active university classrooms. Appl Acoust2020; 159: 107089.
39.
SatoHBradleyJS. Evaluation of acoustical conditions for speech communication in working elementary school classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am2008; 123: 2064–2077.
40.
LabiaLShtrepiLAstolfiA. Improved room acoustics quality in meeting rooms: investigation on the optimal configurations of sound-absorptive and sound-diffusive panels. Acoustics2020; 2(3): 451–473.
41.
UNICEF for Every Child, UN Educational and WHO. Considerations for school-related public health measures in the context of COVID-19, 2020.
42.
ChoiYJ. Effect of occupancy on acoustical conditions in university classrooms. Appl Acoust2016; 114: 36–43.
43.
ISO. EN ISO 12354-3:2017. Building acoustics—estimation of acoustic performance of buildings from the performance of elements. Part 3: airborne sound insulation against outdoor sound. Geneva: ISO.
44.
SecchiSAstolfiACalossoG, et al. Effect of outdoor noise and façade sound insulation on indoor acoustic environment of Italian schools. Appl Acoust2017; 126: 120–130.
