Most studies on buildings’ renovations in relation to indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and occupants’ well-being have focused on offices, while those investigating schools focused on students rather than teachers. Most of these studies limited their assessment of well-being to occupants’ satisfaction with IEQ factors, overlooking essential aspects related to psychological, social and physical well-being. This article presents results of a research conducted in 32 schools in Manitoba, Canada, to assess teachers’ IEQ satisfaction and well-being in new, renovated and non-renovated schools. The research involved adapting and refining an IEQ satisfaction survey and developing and refining three new surveys to assess teachers’ psychological, social and physical well-being. The results of the refined surveys showed statistically significant differences in teachers’ satisfaction with IEQ factors between the new and renovated schools on one hand and the non-renovated ones on the other. However, no statistically significant differences were found in teachers’ psychological, social and physical well-being perceptions between all pairs of the three school categories analysed. Association analyses suggested a potential indirect impact of schools’ renovations on teachers’ well-being via their satisfaction with IEQ. The results of this study should aid school managers in making strategic decisions about the maintenance of their existing schools.
Langevine R, Allouche M and AbouRizk S. Decision support tool for the maintenance management of buildings. In: Joint international conference on computing and decision making in civil and building engineering, Montréal, Canada, 14–16 June 2006, ASCE, ICCCBE, DMUCE, CIB-W78 and CIB-W102, pp.2292–3301, 2006.
2.
MendellMJHeathGA. Do indoor pollutants and thermal conditions in schools influence student performance? A critical review of the literature. Indoor Air2005; 15: 27–52.
3.
GaudreaultVOvertonDTrstenjakJ. Age of education infrastructure: recent trends. Investment and Capital Stock Division. Report no. 11-621-M, no. 81, Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2009.
4.
Statistics Canada. Capital and repair expenditures by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), Canada, http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26 (2016, accessed 24 October 2016).
5.
Exner D, D’Alonzo V, Paoletti G, Pascual R and Pernetti R. Building-Stock Analysis for the Definition of an Energy Renovation Scenario on the Urban Scale. In: SSPCR 2015, the 1st International Conference on Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions, Bolzano, Italy, November 19–20, 2015, Springer, pp. 33–54, 2017.
6.
OttWBolligerR. Pitfalls in the Economic and Ecological Evaluation of Energy Related Building Renovation Strategies and Measures. Energy Procedia2015; 78: 2340–2345.
7.
AngelaLAbbasEDavidR. Linking energy and maintenance management for sustainability through three American case studies. Facilities2011; 29: 243–254.
8.
LiuLRohdinPMoshfeghB. Evaluating indoor environment of a retrofitted multi-family building with improved energy performance in Sweden. Energy and Buildings2015; 102: 32–44.
9.
WellsEMBergesMMetcalfMKinsellaAForemanKDearbornDGGreenbergS. Indoor air quality and occupant comfort in homes with deep versus conventional energy efficiency renovations. Building and Environment2015; 93, Part 2: 331–338.
10.
NorisFAdamkiewiczGDelpWWHotchiTRussellMSingerBCSpearsMVermeerKFiskWJ. Indoor environmental quality benefits of apartment energy retrofits. Building and Environment2013; 68: 170–178.
11.
GhitaSACatalinaT. Energy efficiency versus indoor environmental quality in different Romanian countryside schools. Energy and Buildings2015; 92: 140–154.
12.
ThomsenKERoseJMørckOJensenSØØstergaardIKnudsenHNBergsøeNC. Energy consumption and indoor climate in a residential building before and after comprehensive energy retrofitting. Energy and Buildings2016; 123: 8–16.
13.
FöldváryVBukovianskaHPPetrášD. Analysis of energy performance and indoor climate conditions of the Slovak Housing Stock before and after its renovation. Energy Procedia2015; 78: 2184–2189.
14.
HongistoVHaapakangasAVarjoJHeleniusRKoskelaH. Refurbishment of an open-plan office - Environmental and job satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology2016; 45: 176–191.
15.
SinghMKAttiaSMahapatraSTellerJ. Assessment of thermal comfort in existing pre-1945 residential building stock. Energy2016; 98: 122–134.
16.
AllenPMarplesCL. Notched-noise and quiet detection thresholds as early indicators of auditory system damage in school-aged children. Canadian Acoustics - Acoustique Canadienne1998; 26: 62–63.
17.
BradleyJSSatoH. The intelligibility of speech in elementary school classrooms. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2008; 123: 2078–2086.
18.
ToyinboOShaughnessyRTurunenMPutusTMetsämuuronenJKurnitskiJHaverinen-ShaughnessyU. Building characteristics, indoor environmental quality, and mathematics achievement in Finnish elementary schools. Building and Environment2016; 104: 114–121.
19.
BuckleyJSchneiderMShangY. Fix it and they might stay: School facility quality and teacher retention in Washington, DC. The Teachers College Record2005; 107: 1107–1123.
20.
HarrisDNSassTR. Skills, productivity and the evaluation of teacher performance. Economics of Education Review2014; 40: 183–204.
21.
EwedaAZayedTAlkassS. Space-based condition assessment model for buildings: Case study of educational buildings. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities2015; 29: 04014032–04014032.
22.
ZinziMAgnoliSBattistiniGBernabiniG. Deep energy retrofit of the TM Plauto School in Italy—A five years experience. Energy and Buildings2016; 126: 239–251.
23.
AlmeidaRMSFde FreitasVP. Indoor environmental quality of classrooms in Southern European climate. Energy and Buildings2014; 81: 127–140.
24.
SchreuderEvan HeelLGoedhartRDusseldorpESchraagenJMBurdorfA. Effects of newly designed hospital buildings on staff perceptions: A pre-post study to validate design decisions. Health Environments Research and Design Journal2015; 8: 77–97.
25.
SinghMKMahapatraSTellerJ. Relation between indoor thermal environment and renovation in liege residential buildings. Thermal Science2014; 18: 889–902.
26.
SallehNMKamaruzzamanSNRileyMAhmad ZawawiEMSulaimanR. A quantitative evaluation of indoor environmental quality in refurbished kindergarten buildings: A Malaysian case study. Building and Environment2015; 94: 723–733.
27.
BluyssenPMAriesMvan DommelenP. Comfort of workers in office buildings: The European HOPE project. Building and Environment2011; 46: 280–288.
28.
TurunenMToyinboOPutusTNevalainenAShaughnessyRHaverinen-ShaughnessyU. Indoor environmental quality in school buildings, and the health and wellbeing of students. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health2014; 217: 733–739.
29.
VieiraEMdASilvaLBdSouzaELd. The influence of the workplace indoor environmental quality on the incidence of psychological and physical symptoms in intensive care units. Building and Environment2016; 109: 12–24.
30.
DodgeRDalyAPHuytonJSandersLD. The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing2012; 2: 3–3.
31.
RyffCD. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology1989; 57: 1069–1069.
32.
HaysRDMoralesLS. The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Annals of Medicine2001; 33: 350–357.
33.
VeitchJACharlesKEFarleyKMJNewshamGR. A model of satisfaction with open-plan office conditions: COPE field findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology2007; 27: 177–189.
34.
SadickA-MIssaMH. Occupants’ indoor environmental quality satisfaction factors as measures of school teachers’ well-being. Building and Environment2017; 119: 99–109.
ASHRAE 55:2010. Thermal environmental conditons for human occupancy, Atlanta: the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, 2010.
38.
WittersehTWyonDPClausenG. The effects of moderate heat stress and open-plan office noise distraction on SBS symptoms and on the performance of office work. Indoor Air2004; 14: 30–40.
39.
MadureiraJAlvim-FerrazMCMRodriguesSGonçalvesCAzevedoMCPintoEMayanO. Indoor air quality in schools and health symptoms among Portuguese teachers. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal2009; 15: 159–169.
40.
van BommelWJM. Non-visual biological effect of lighting and the practical meaning for lighting for work. Applied Ergonomics2006; 37: 461–466.
41.
TannerCK. Explaining relationships among student outcomes and the school’s physical environment. Journal of Advanced Academics2008; 19: 444–471.
42.
NielsenANJensenRLLarsenTSNissenSB. Early stage decision support for sustainable building renovation–A review. Building and Environment2016; 103: 165–181.
