Assessment of school buildings’ physical conditions and indoor environmental quality in relation to teachers’ satisfaction and well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building indoor spaces are enclosed by elements including walls, windows, and floors; however, the physical conditions of these elements are not assessed in indoor environmental quality (IEQ) studies. IEQ field observations have focused on recording the presence of elements like operable windows and building characteristics like floor finish type. Additionally, existing building condition assessment instruments were not conceptualized with IEQ enhancement as a prime objective. Most IEQ studies have restricted the definition of occupants’ well-being to IEQ satisfaction while existing well-being measures in the social sciences literature are generally context-free and would likely exclude well-being dimensions unique to teachers in school context. Therefore, there is limited evidence on how physical conditions of building elements influence indoor environments and subsequently building occupants especially teachers in school context given that most IEQ studies in schools have centered on students. This two-stage research, conducted in 32 schools in southeastern Manitoba province, assessed the impact of school buildings’ physical and indoor environmental conditions on teachers’ IEQ satisfaction and well-being. Stage one focused on developing an IEQ-related building condition assessment instrument to assess physical conditions of classroom space envelope elements, and an IEQ field measurement protocol for schools. Additionally, an existing IEQ satisfaction survey was adapted for teachers, and preliminary surveys developed for assessing teachers’ well-being in school context only. Stage two included conducting IEQ-related building condition assessments and IEQ field measurements in 10 of the 32 schools. Additionally, the adapted IEQ satisfaction survey and the preliminary well-being surveys were administered to teachers in all 32 schools. The results suggested that physical conditions of space enclosing elements were likely to influence classroom environments and teachers. For example, low and high concentrations of particulate matter were likely to have negative and positive effects respectively on teachers’ IEQ satisfaction based on IEQ-related openings defects. No statistically significant direct impact of schools’ indoor environment on teachers’ well-being was found; however, an indirect impact was suggested through their IEQ satisfaction. Findings of this exploratory research would contribute to developing school buildings’ operation and maintenance strategies with enhancement of occupants’ satisfaction and well-being as a prime objective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".