1. The comfort dimension when evaluating the discrepancy
between predicted and actual energy performance in new
school buildings
Dr Andrea Wheeler, Dr Masoud Malekzadeh and Professor Dino Bouchlaghem
Loughborough University, School of Civil and Building Engineering, email: a.s.wheeler@lboro.ac.uk
1. Introduction 3. Results No because it’s bigger... There’s more computers, projectors,
interactive whiteboards... (But on the other hand you have better
Why do modern building designed for energy efficiency, using Our nascent approach to post-occupancy assessment windows that keep heat in?) But you can’t open them and you get
modern simulation prediction tools, frequently fail to perform as research provided essential clues to the factors contributing too hot... But then you have air conditioning. But you only have it
intended? Why is the difference between predicted and actual to the difference between the actual and predicted in ICT but when you do it’s nice and cool and then it gets too cold
energy use of schools so high? The object of the PostOPE performance of new buildings. Feedback methods are, by [different voice]. In normal classrooms you have this thing that
research project this poster describes was to, not only brings air in form outside, but if it’s hot outside it’s just bringing in
their very nature, ways to continuously learn about the
understand this difference, but determine a way to assess this hot air.
energy performance of buildings and to understand people’s
difference. Our emergent POE approach combined different behaviours in relationship to those buildings. Just by virtue of Sometimes they [the classrooms] are really warm and the
assessment methods and included methods used for their new environments different ideas towards energy windows don’t open. None of the windows open. Only the
researching with children. efficiency will emerge and it is important that schools can act lower ones. In the summer it’s really hot” (Year 7 pupil.)
Early on in the research to reinforce emerging lifestyles. Researcher 1: “Are there things you think the architect could
it was recognized that have done better?” “Just the windows.” (final session)
achieving this aim The dialogue of children and other users of the building
meant ensuring the provided clues to the factors contributing to the difference The project aimed to
perspectives of all users between the actual and predicted performance of new inform design practice of
of the buildings – buildings. Whilst more and more buildings are achieving relevance to architects,
including children – were higher energy efficiency ratings, efficiency improvements are engineering consultants,
involved. It was expected to be offset by lifestyle factors. builders, contractors, and
understood that the operators/owners of
standard POE methods Many of the themes emerging related to this uncomfortable buildings at the same
would not elicit sufficient relationship between the PFI company, the local authority time as helping
information and would and the school leadership team. simulation tool
be needed to be developers to improve
adapted for use with The PFI arrangement was a constant source of complaint and extend the scope of
children. Whilst standard from teachers, school managers and has even been their tools. Early on in
methods allow communicated to children. One pupil described the school’s the research it was
comparison of data policy that prohibited drawings to be attached to the walls, as recognized that achieving
across all building types like a rented house where you were not allowed to decorate. this aim meant ensuring
for this project the aim Prohibitions extended to toilets being closed and only one the perspectives of all
was to explore how girls and one boys’ toilet open in a school with 1300 pupils to users of buildings were
different users avoid the potential for vandalism which would be charged as involved,. It was
contributed to the an additional repair cost to the school by the company. understood that the
energy use in the Moreover, corridors and play areas were commonly closed to standard post occupancy
buildings and how this students during break times to avoid littering. evaluation (POE)
contribution might methods would not elicit
influence energy sufficient information.
prediction. This required
all the users of the
building. 4. Summary
PostOPE combined different assessment methods – users 1. Contradictions between what adults say and what they tell
surveys, review of historical records, monitoring of the building children to do. A mismatch between designers intention and
performance (see chart) along with methods adopted from teachers ability to manage the behaviours of pupils – (many
research with children including a participatory “walk-through” examples – dining biggest issue)
2. Poorly functioning building features (windows, heating and
using video, art based methods (drawings) and designing
ventilation systems, circulation, dining spaces) and either over
“improvements” to the energy efficiency of the school (which
provision or under provision of space and facilities, together
often also included design improvements ). Analysis took the
with teachers prohibiting use of facilities (toilets locked, .
form of a simple content analysis but the use of broadly action 3. Lack of ownership of PFI buildings
based research methods meant that the transformative aspect of 4. Lack of understanding of the ‘sustainable’ design features of
the research project and recording the impact of the research the new school building – solar heating panels
activities on school communities also played an important part. 5. Convoluted facilities management procedures where
prohibitions did nothing towards children establishing their own
“authentic” relationship to the environment and a deep or
lasting critical perspective on the problems of sustainable
2. Methods development.
Whilst the Building Schools for the Future programme has now
been discontinued, and it seems unlikely that new schools will be 5. Conclusion
built on anything like the scale intended by the previous
Government, there is still a significant requirement to be able to The project took the opportunity to set about making a real
assess existing newly-built schools for energy performance and impact on the school communities and to motivate action to
improve the energy performance. The adapted POE methods
improve new and retro-fitted school buildings to actually reduce
provided opportunities for children (and for some children these
energy consumption. If anything, POE methods are becoming
were the only opportunities they had had) to examine the social
more important. Moreover, the broadly art-based participatory
and cultural factors impeding the reduction of energy demand.
research methods developed provided means to examine the Very little is known about children’s everyday experience of the
problem of building sustainable schools from more integrated built environment of schools (especially the more energy efficient
perspectives: behavioural, and educational. new schools) or of the diversity and range of young people’s
Our method was used to facilitate a deeply context based experiences of their own comfort. These issues are rarely taken
interaction with building users. Watson and Thomson described seriously. What emerged were pupil communities competent and
a participatory “walk-through” POE method, which they opted willing to take energy efficiency seriously.
for in the context of school buildings (Watson and Thomson,
Introducing the school through the students’ stories presents
2005). We adopted this approach alongside more open
discussions and allowed children to use a video camera to
a dramatic picture, (perhaps a little over dramatic when taken
out of the context of the three weeks of workshops). However,
References
show to researchers the places within the school they liked and
encouraging the telling of stories had a purpose: it allowed
disliked and describe how well or poorly they functioned. We dialogue to develop and encouraged children to enter into Askins, Kye and Pain, Rachel (2011) “Contact zones,
attached particular importance to stories told by the children explaining both failures and successes of the school from participation, materiality and the messiness of interaction”
about their new school environment throughout the sessions, as their own perspectives. The Table demonstrates these Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. (Preview
we saw this as a first crucial step in providing ways to conversations and hence the depth of information that can be http://www.envplan.com/epd/fulltext/dforth/d11109.pdf)
productively engage with the issues and concerns of gained using these methods.
sustainability, and to be able to determine why there was an Sanoff H, 2001, School Building Assessment Methods NCEF,
excessive use of energy in the case study schools. We also Comfort played an important part in the dialogues, for Washington, D.C. edfacilities.org/pubs/sanoffassess.pdf, 3
employed visual research methods asking children to draw or example:
list positive and negative aspects of the school day and the Watson, C. & Thomson, K., 2005. “Bringing Post-Occupancy
building and as a group we asked them to devise solutions to Researchers: Do you think the bills for the school are lower in Evaluation to Schools in Scotland”. Evaluating Quality in
improve the school. Conversations during all activities, whether this school? Are you are paying less for electricity and gas? Educational Facilities. OECD Available online at:
‘walk-throughs’ or during the drawing/design task, were http://www.oecd.org
recorded, and selected dialogues transcribed.