Skip to content

Pace and Gardner, 1997

When visitors walk through King School, they are often surprised. It is very different from the schools they attended and from others they have seen. Instead of children sitting quietly in rows facing the teacher at the front of the room, they find youngsters returning from a field study with jars and basins full of pond specimens.

They see students working in cooperative groups, creating visual aids for a day of student-led workshops on environmental issues for the entire school community. Another group is rehearsing a musical about South Africa, called Sarafina, on the stage in the performing arts center. Children of all ages are updating their digital portfolios at computer stations throughout the school to prepare for student-teacher-parent conferences.

View article

By Dr. Linda Lemasters

Several years ago one of my doctoral students was appointed principal of a large inner city school.  He shared with me his shock at his first visit:  he said a horrible odor of urine and filth met him at the door.  Hallways were dirty from years of use, with no paint; lockers were peeling and rusted; floors looked dirty because dirt had been covered with wax; dirt was so accumulated in corners that the floor could not be seen.  Bathrooms were intolerable; no one would want to use them.  The thought of elementary children using them was unthinkable.  Classrooms were dingy, dirty, and uninviting; a long time had passed since the color of the walls was recognizable.  It was only a few weeks before school was to begin; he knew that he had to do something—anything—to make the school more welcoming and appropriate for teaching and learning.

My student was conducting his doctoral research on how the conditions of the school facility affect student achievement; he was familiar with the research and the preponderance of the evidence exhibiting a very strong connection between the places were students learn and achievement.  He also had an old, familiar dilemma:  he knew things he needed to do, but had no funds for his building.  Educators, however, do not always see a lack of funding as a reason not to get things done.  He got his leadership team and office staff together to develop a plan.   They decided to call for community cleaning days for the next weekend.  Posters when up; calls went out.  The principal contacted a couple of the local stores that sold paint and asked for any paint they were willing to donate, along with brushes, rollers, tape, and other supplies.  Parents were asked to bring cleaning supplies, brooms, and mops—and friends and neighbors willing to work on both the inside and outside of the school property.  Teachers were asked if they would volunteer to help paint and clean their classrooms and to make them inviting.

When school began the day after Labor Day, a miracle had happened.  Teachers and students opened the front doors to a bright and clean foyer, newly painted hallways, and lockers that had been scrubbed down.  Students entered freshly painted classrooms, with posters and bulletin boards that stood out on the clean walls.  Although a great deal of the donated paint had been white, tints were added to make the colors warm and inviting.  Restrooms were clean, painted, and smelled so much better.  Teachers were bubbly and happy about the changes; office staff benefitted from the teacher excitement, and the leadership team felt they had started the year on the right foot.

There was a phenomenon that was just the opposite of the broken windows theory.  Students, parents, teachers, and the community began to take great pride in their school and worked to continue the improvements begun during the work weekend.  A few days after school opened, the principal arrived to large pots of flowers at each front door; a local business donated new playground equipment; and, there seemed to be a school climate change taking place.  There was no research conducted on that particular school, but there is research that notes the condition of the school affects achievement.  Let’s look at a few research projects that had findings supporting this.

Indeed, in a study titled Clean Schools Promote Academic Success conducted at the Center for Facilities Research, the Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers noted several interesting findings.  Eighty-eight percent of college students reported that a lack of cleanliness became a distraction; 84% responded that orderly spotlessness and ordinary tidiness are essential to a positive learning environment; 78% noted that cleanliness affected their health.  Students rated cleanliness the fourth most important building element to influence personal learning.

Many of the observations noted earlier were based on visual assessments.  The International Sanitary Supply Association (ISSA) is actively involved in assisting school districts in realizing the importance of clean schools.  The video How Dirty Is Your Child’s School notes some alarming statistics and germ hotspots.  Some of those include water fountain spigots (2,700,000 bacteria per inch), cafeteria trays (33,800 bacteria per inch), cold water faucets (32,000 bacteria per inch), followed by the cafeteria plates, computer keyboards, and toilet seats.

In a report from the schools in New York City several years ago, 40% of those interviewed noted conditions in the schools that could cause complications to their allergies and asthma.  Thirty-nine percent with medical conditions said the school conditions made their health worse.  The Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies (2010) reviewed the condition of schools and achievement in California.  In student studies, student health was directly related to the condition of the school buildings and student achievement.  In addition student health was directly related to attendance and dropout rates.

So, what is the real impact?  The Healthy Schools Network published astonishing numbers on this topic:

  • Nearly 22 million school days are lost annually to the common cold.
  • Thirty-eight million days are lost each school year to influenza.
  • Elementary students contract 8 to 10 bouts of colds or flu each school year.
  • Student absences lead to a higher number of dropouts. Please note video below:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nF7fN0WuUs)

  • Only 43.5 percent of school districts provide guidance for infectious disease prevention.

We can say with a great deal of confidence that healthy schools have a positive influence on attendance, thus achievement.  What we have not discussed is the monetary value.  Most of what we hear is that school funds are being cut; custodial budgets are going down, rather than up; school maintenance can barely afford to make sure air exchange is appropriate, as well as filters being changed regularly.

There is a value, however, which can be placed on healthy schools and the prevention of student and teacher absences.  For instance, teacher absences cost school districts an estimated $4 billion a year.  While I could not find a single cost estimate related to student absences, the state information indicates that localities lose billions and billions to student absences, because most state funding formulas are based on student attendance.  Thus, research indicates we cannot afford not to keep our schools clean and healthy.  Students and teachers spend the majority of their days in school.  If healthy schools mean healthier students and teachers, if healthier students and teachers mean more money to spend on instruction, and, if healthy schools are related to student achievement, then keeping schools ultra clean should be a moot point.

References:

Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers.  (2008, June). Cleanliness and Learning in Higher Education.  Education Facilities. Downloaded January 13, 2016 from http://www.facilitiesnet.com/educationalfacilities/article/Study-Clean-Schools-Promote-Academic-Success-Facilities-Management-Educational-Facilities-News--9072

Healthy Schools Network. (1999). Neglected Buildings, Damaged Health:  A ‘Snapshot” of New York City Public School Environmental Conditions. Downloaded January 19, 2016 from http://www.healthyschools.org/clearinghouse.html

HR Exchange. (2013, February). National Teacher Absence Data Shines Light on the High Costs of Missed Days.  Downloaded on January 19, 2016 from https://www.tasb.org/Services/HR-Services/Hrexchange/2013/February-2013/B-Absences-Costly.aspx

International Sanitary Supply Association. (2016).  How Dirty Is Your Child’s School?  Downloaded January 19, 2016 from http://www.issa.com/video#113

Joseph, N., Waymack, N., & Zielaski, D. (2014, June). Roll Call:  The Importance of Teacher Attendance. Downloaded on January 19, 2016 from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/RollCall_TeacherAttendance

Phillip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies. (2009, December 3).  The critical connection between student health and academic achievement:  How schools and policy makers can achieve a positive impact.  A Brief. California Education Supports Project.

Linda Lemasters, Director, Education Facilities Clearinghouse

Linda is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Education and Human Development of The George Washington University.  Her areas of expertise and research include educational planning, facilities management, and women CEOs.  She actively conducts research concerning the effects of the facility on the student and teacher, publishes within her field, and has written or edited numerous books including School Maintenance & Renovation:  Administrator Policies, Practices, and Economics and book chapters including a recent chapter, Places Where Children Play, published July, 2014 in Marketing the Green School:  Form, Function, and the Future.

Thorton, 2006

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between building conditions and student achievement of students identified in the subgroups of poverty and minority in high schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The targeted population was identified by using the study conducted by Crook (2006) which included information obtained from seventy-two high schools across the Commonwealth of Virginia. Building conditions used in the study were based upon the responses received from principals on the Commonwealth Assessment of Physical Environment (CAPE) form.

The scaled scores of economically disadvantaged students and minority students on the Standards of Learning tests administered in grades nine through eleven during the 2004-2005 school year were used to measure student achievement. The status of economically disadvantaged students was controlled by the classification of a student receiving free and reduced-priced lunch during the 2004-2005 school year. The status of minority students was controlled by ethnicity as reported by the individual schools to the Virginia Department of Education for the 2004-2005 school year.

View Dissertation

Stevenson, 2001

This research project sought to determine if a relationship exists between school academic outcomes and school facilities characteristics. To address this issue, data were gathered from a variety of sources including research literature, state data files, principal questionnaires, and focus groups.

View Dissertation

Sheets, M., 2009

If the condition of facilities in some schools is such that the schools cannot provide a quality education for its students equal to that of other schools, then equal educational opportunity may not be available for all children. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the condition of rural public high school facilities in Texas and student achievement, student attendance, and teacher turnover, while controlling for the effects of student wealth level, school district wealth level, and percent minority students. The measures for the condition of facilities variables used in this study were obtained from the 2006 Texas Comptroller's Facility Survey of the 1,037 public school districts in Texas. The participants for this study were the 72 rural public high schools out of the 309 total responses to the survey from all district types. Multiple regression analyses were utilized to examine which selected condition of facilities variables and demographic variables best predicted certain educational outcomes. This study found that the student wealth level contributed most to the variance in student achievement. However, the condition of school facilities has a measurable effect over and above socioeconomic conditions on student achievement and teacher turnover, particularly when found in rural schools made up of primarily low-income students. Significant findings with regard to condition of school facilities included: 1. Rural public high schools with a large percentage of portable classrooms have lower student achievement and higher teacher turnover. 2. Rural public high schools with a large percentage of deferred maintenance in their facilities have lower student achievement. School leaders are not able to control the socioeconomic conditions of the students they serve. The do, however, have some control over the quality of their school facilities. Excellent facilities for children who need them the least and inadequate facilities for the ones who need them the most violates the principal of equal educational opportunity for all children.

View Dissertation

NCES, 2006

During the last decade, the U.S. Department of Education has released reports describing and evaluating the physical condition of schools (Lewis et al. 2000; U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO] 1995). According to a 1995 report from the General Accounting Office, this nation has invested hundreds of billions of dollars on school infrastructure so that children are properly educated and prepared for the future in school facilities that are well-maintained, clean, safe, and secure (U.S. GAO 1995).

Decent, safe, and secure facilities are essential to successful educational programs. Creating a safe school environment is necessary in order for teachers to teach effectively and for students to be receptive to learning. While typical thinking regarding “safe school” environments often involves a school that is free of weapons, illegal drugs, student intimidation, and theft, other factors regarding the physical condition and appearance of school facilities, such as noise levels and cleanliness are important to consider as well.

View Report

O'Sullivan, 2006

This study investigated the relationship between school building conditions and student academic achievement in Pennsylvania’s high schools. Research questions analyzed by step-wise multiple regression were: (a) Is there a relationship between overall school building conditions and student academic achievement in Pennsylvania’s high schools when socio-economic status (SES) is held constant?; (b) Is there a relationship between the cosmetic conditions of school facilities and student academic achievement in Pennsylvania’s high schools when socio-economic status (SES) is held constant?; and (c) Is there a relationship between the structural conditions of school facilities and student academic achievement in Pennsylvania’s high schools when socio-economic status (SES) is held constant?

View Dissertation

In 2007 the Provincial Executive had proposed in the Annual Action Plan a research study aimed at verifying the importance and value of using board employed staff in providing student services, namely the professional student service personnel. The resulting report, Enhancing Services, Enhancing Success, was used to help establish outside agency protocols around the province and assist in protecting important support service jobs.

The 2013–2014 Annual Action Plan included a research project that examines the relationship between school cleanliness/maintenance and student performance. The study was to clearly demonstrate the importance of adequate funding for the maintenance of current structures and could be used to demonstrate that improving the overall building condition is a cost effective way to achieve measurable improvements in student performance.

The next step in this process will be to develop lobby materials based on the report for use by local Bargaining Units and Districts.

View - school-environment-impact-research-study-2014

Lyons, 2001

This paper reviews research that correlates student achievement and the condition and utility of school facilities. The discussion focuses on the influence of various facility conditions on students, including building age, temperature and ventilation, acoustics, lighting, curriculum development, and school size. Research shows that older buildings may pose a variety of negative consequences for the learning process, while safe and modern schools with controlled environments enhance learning. More specifically, students who attend better buildings have test scores ranging from 5 to 17 percentile points higher than students in substandard facilities. The paper concludes by quoting a recent report suggesting that a school's condition may have a stronger influence on student performance and achievement than the combined influences of family background, socio-economic status, school attendance, and behavior.

View Paper

McGowan, 2007

The purpose of this study was to explore the possible relationship between school facility conditions and school outcomes such as student academic achievement, attendance, discipline, completion rate and teacher turnover rate.

School facility condition for the participating schools was determined by the Total Learning Environment Assessment (TLEA) as completed by the principal or principal’s designee on high school campuses in Texas with enrollments between 1,000 and 2000 and economically disadvantaged enrollments less than 40%. Each school in the study population was organized by grades nine through twelve. Data for achievement, attendance, discipline, completion rate and teacher turnover rate were collected through the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) managed by the Texas Education Agency.

View Dissertation