The impact of fluorescent and led lighting on students attitudes and behavior in the classroom

Transcription

1 Th impact of fluorscnt and ld lighting on studnts attituds and bhavior in th classroom Brnda L. Morrow, Shirn M. Kanakri * Collg of Architctur and Planning, Ball Stat Univrsity, USA Abstract Introduction: This study xamind mpirical rsarch on th ffcts of high corrlatd color tmpratur light-mitting diods (LED) and fluorscnt lighting on studnts in th classroom. LED is bcoming th most rcnt lighting option for optimal nrgy fficincy ovr fluorscnt tchnology. Background: A rviw of th litratur indicats corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) of lighting has nonvisual ffcts on studnts, with highr CCT positivly impacting attituds and bhavior. Th rviw also rvald currnt studis rgarding dynamic or tunabl lighting that adjusts CCT basd on dsird activity and mood. Data from an original survy analyzd tachr insights and prcptions rgarding studnt attituds and bhaviors associatd with xisting classroom lighting and th impact of highr color tmpratur LED. Mthods: Participants wr pr-k through high school qualifid tachrs from thr schools and/or prsonal contacts of th principal invstigator. Svnty-fiv tachrs rspondd to th onlin qustionnair. Th survy data suggsts tachrs prciv highr color tmpratur lighting positivly impacts studnt alrtnss, attitud, and nrgy lvl; and adjusting light lvls throughout a school day positivly impacts studnt ngagmnt. Rsults and conclusion: Rsults supportd th prcption of highr corrlatd color tmpratur lighting positivly impacting alrtnss, attitud, and nrgy lvl. Findings also supportd th ability to chang light lvls throughout th school day to positivly impact studnt ngagmnt and mood. Thr wr mixd rsults rgarding highr corrlatd color tmpratur impacting attntion and on-task/off- task bhaviors. Rsults rgarding th impact of sound and flickring from fluorscnt lights wr not significant. Citation: Morrow BL, Kanakri SM (218) Th impact of fluorscnt and ld lighting on studnts attituds and bhavior in th classroom. Adv Pdiatr Rs 5:15. doi:1.2415/apr Rcivd: August 28, 218; Accptd: Sptmbr 21, 218; Publishd: Sptmbr 26, 218 Copyright: 218 Morrow t al. This is an opn accss articl distributd undr th trms of th Crativ Commons Attribution Licns, which prmits unrstrictd us, distribution, and rproduction in any mdium, providd th original work is proprly citd. Compting intrsts: Th authors do not hav any compting intrsts. Sourcs of funding: No sourc of funding * smkanakri@bsu.du Introduction Lighting within th built nvironmnt is an important factor on human dvlopmnt and functioning. Rsarch has shown that daylight can impact human mood, prformanc, and wll- bing; including childrn and schools. Light is th most important nvironmntal input, aftr food and watr, in controlling bodily functions [1]. Howvr, daylight must b supplmntd with artificial lighting and today s socity is xposd to mor artificial light than daylight [2]. For many yars fluorscnt lighting has bn th solution to provid nrgy fficincy and high illuminanc for school nvironmnts, and hav volvd to includ full-spctrum lamps that simulat daylight. Rcntly, LED (light-mitting diods) has com to th forfront du to thir fficincy, longvity, and ability to provid a full, smooth, unbrokn spctrum. Studis hav shown a major incras in positiv prcptions and bhavior within th work and classroom nvironmnt whn incorporating LED Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 1 Morrow t al : 15

2 fixturs with highr corrlatd color tmpraturs (CCT); spcifically, positiv ngagmnt and incras in on-task bhaviors [3]. Th implmntation and ffcts of dynamic and tunabl lighting is still bing studid as to its long- trm implications, howvr, whn xamining focus and concntration, Mott t al. and Slgrs t al. [4-6] support th thory that high klvin LED lamps can hav a positiv ffct. Grangaard t al. [7-1] all implmntd laboratory studis with rsults supporting th thory that high corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) has positiv ffcts on cognitiv prformanc and on-task/off-task bhaviors. Haws t al. [1] spcifically compard fluorscnt and LED lamps which indicatd bttr prcivd prformanc and arousal stats with high CCT LED lamps. Childrn ar xpctd to attnd school to larn and prform at optimum lvls. It s imprativ to provid artificial lighting that nhancs th classroom xprinc for childrn and tachrs, nabls strong cognitiv function, and supports positiv bhavior. Statmnt of th problm Providing lighting that supports th various nds within a classroom continus to b a struggl and studis show that studnt bhaviors and prformanc ar impactd by classroom lighting. Fluorscnt lamps hav bn th standard choic for school systms to provid fficint, quality lighting; howvr, LED lamps with highr corrlatd color tmpraturs (CCT) ar th most rcnt high fficincy lamps to b intgratd into th built nvironmnt and mor studis ar valuating thir positiv impacts. Th goal of this study is to provid insights for dsigning classroom lighting that positivly impacts studnt attituds and bhavior. Purpos Th purpos of this study is to xamin insights and prcptions rgarding attituds and bhaviors associatd with classroom lighting, spcifically th impact of fluorscnt vrsus LED high corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) lighting on studnts. Th larning objcts includ tachr prcptions rgarding: 1) impact on positiv mood, attituds, and alrtnss of studnts, 2) impact on studnt ngagmnt and on-task/off-task bhaviors and 3) impact on studnt wll-bing. Rsarch qustion Findings from xisting litratur suggst that lighting intrvntions within th built nvironmnt can affct bhaviors, prformanc, and wll-bing of humans. It is hypothsizd that highr color tmpratur LED lighting within a classroom positivly impacts prcivd attituds and on-task bhaviors of studnts. Rational This study aims to obtain tachr insights and prcptions of classroom lighting basd on thir xisting classroom situation and xprinc. Data from an original survy will xamin prcptions of tachrs and how lighting in th classroom impacts studnt attituds and bhaviors. It is xpctd that th survy data will support th thory that high corrlatd color tmpratur lighting positivly impacts studnt on-task bhavior and attituds. Additionally it is xpctd that th survy data will support th nd for furthr rsarch within a controlld nvironmnt xamining th impact of fluorscnt lighting vrsus LED on studnts. Assumptions Th qustionnair was implmntd via Qualtrics and it is assumd all rspondnts mt th introductory listd participation rquirmnts, wr truthful, and intrprtd th dirctions and qustions similarly. For qustions that includd imags of classrooms, it is assumd th rspondnt focusd on th light sourc illustratd rathr than architctural dsign and/or finishs. Litratur rviw Th following litratur rviw valuats fluorscnt lighting and LED with rgards to thir impact on nrgy fficincy, halth and wll-bing, and human bhaviors and attituds. Fluorscnt and LED ar th industry standard lighting solution usd within school nvironmnts. Rsarch continus to work to undrstand how ths lamps affct humans and th built nvironmnt (Appndix C). Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 2 Morrow t al : 15

3 Fluorscnt, LED, and corrlatd color tmpratur ovrviw Though th visual light mittd from LEDs and florscnt lamps hav th sam visual apparanc, LEDs mit mor non-visual light within th blu spctrum (45 nm) compard with fluorscnts with th sam CCT lvl [11]. Fluorscnt and LED both hav th capability of mting th various light out-put and coloring nds, howvr, fluorscnt lamps us phosphor coatings to improv color prcption, such as full-spctrum fluorscnt, which mulats daylight and diffus UV radiation. Fluorscnt lamps contain mrcury which can b toxic and nd to b disposd of appropriatly so not to induc halth risks [12]. LEDs can produc mor light pr watt than many fluorscnts lamps, thrfor having a highr fficincy thy radiat vry littl hat. LEDs typically hav a longr usful lif; us phosphor coatings to convrt colors to whit light; and do not contain gasous toxins. Although LEDs ar still pricd highr than fluorscnts, this is slowly changing du to nw dvlopmnts and lif cycl cost analyss [13]. On study found that switching to LEDs could rduc nrgy usag by 3%-5% for lighting and 1%-2% for cooling [14]. It is rportd that public schools in th Unitd Stats spnd ovr $8 billion annually on nrgy; thrfor, saving on nrgy xpnss and dvloping fficincis is xcdingly important [15]. Bhavioral catgoris Rducing nrgy output is an important factor for both nvironmntal and conomic rasons though som studis hav found that nrgy savings was small du to high parasitic losss [11]. Thus, lighting tchnology nds to b valuatd on its bnfits and xpctations byond/in addition to rduction of nrgy supply and costs. Ths nonvisual ffcts includ: 1) Attainmnt: improvmnts in curriculum; 2) Engagmnt: improvmnts in lvls of attntion, mor on-task bhaviors obsrvd, dcras in distractd or disruptiv bhavior; 3) Affct: improvmnts in slf-stm for tachrs and larnrs, incrasd acadmic slfconcpt, improvmnts in mood and motivation; 4) Attndanc: fwr instancs of latnss or absntism; 5) Halth or Wll-bing: impacts on th physical slf, rlating to discomfort as wll as minor ailmnts [16]. Non-visual ffcts: Halth Rsarch supports that lighting systms can hav non-visual ffcts on humans such as psychological stability [14], a 1992 study found thr to b lss dntal dcay, gratr hight and wight gains, and bttr attndanc and acadmic achivmnt for studnts rciving UV light supplmnts vrsus thos who wr in th non-uv group. Groups undr sodium vapor lighting had th slowst and lowst rats in all catgoris [17]. Othr halth risks continuing to b rsarchd ar radio frquncy radiation and ultraviolt radiation of compact fluorscnts (CFL) and tub fluorscnt (T8 and T12). A survy indicatd slf-proclaimd lctro-hyprsnsitivity (modrat to xtrmly snsitiv) to b highst for hadachs whn xposd to both tub and compact fluorscnt and lowst with LED [12]. Lastly, many studis hav found that normally functioning fluorscnts can b a sourc of flickr and hav biological ffcts such as a gnral fling of discomfort, illnss, hadachs, y strain [18] and rducd spd of visual sarch and prformanc [19]. Non-visual ffcts: Bhavior and prformanc Lighting and th non-visual ffcts on bhavior, and prformanc hav bn studid in rlation but not limitd to hypractiv bhavior [2] color rndring, mood, focus, cognitiv prformanc, alrtnss, and visual acuity. Color can produc both physical and psychological rsponss, and rsarch has shown that colord lighting can hav a positiv influnc on bhavior and popl s ability to concntrat [3]. On study indicatd that th color tmpratur and illuminanc inducd a positiv mood-nhancd prformanc in problm solving and fr rcall tasks. Th subjcts mood and thir cognitiv prformanc varid significantly btwn gndrs, indicating that gndrs motionally had diffrnt ractions to th color tmpratur (Exprimnt 1) and combinations of color tmpratur and illuminanc (Exprimnt 2) at diffrnt CRIs [8]. Anothr study lookd at th ffcts of corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) on alrtnss and vitality in th morning vs aftrnoon [21]. Th findings highlight that a prson s currnt psychological stat of fatigu may play a rol in how thy rspond to bright light during th day and that furthr rsarch Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 3 Morrow t al : 15

4 and dvlopmnt of dynamic and prsonalizd lighting systms may assist with alrtnss and mntal wll-bing. Non-visual ffcts: Studis using LED vrsus fluorscnt Th ffcts of lighting on humans hav focusd on fluorscnt lamps, howvr, mor rcnt studis ar xamining LEDs and thir ffcts on th work and classroom nvironmnts, including dynamic or tunabl lighting. Tunabl lighting is a nwr concpt that allows th usr to adjust th color tmpratur and illuminanc via diffrnt lighting sttings throughout th day. Tunabl lighting has bn shown to bnfit th larning nvironmnt. Thr ar typically four sttings: standard (whit), nrgy, concntration (blu), and rst (yllow) [14,22]. Thr studis that valuatd dynamic lighting within childrn s classrooms had mixd rsults basd on concntration prformanc of gndr [6]. A study s rsults rsarching th ffcts of LED light sourcs on participant prformanc of visual spatial abilitis and xcutiv functions suggstd that coolr light xposur improvs cognitiv abilitis to dal with multipl tasks or task switching [23]. Anothr study rsarchd LED vrsus fluorscnt and thir ffcts on workr prformanc and indicatd that LED at highr color tmpraturs supports positiv mood, wakfulnss, and spd in prformanc of visual prcption and cognitiv tasks rlativ to traditional fluorscnt at lowr color tmpratur [1]. Othrs studid th ffcts of high intnsity, glar fr lighting (rfrrd to as focus light stting). This typ of lighting incrasd third grad studnt s oral rading fluncy. Th rsults found no ffcts of lighting on motivation, howvr, focus lighting of 6K ld to a highr prcntag incras in oral rading fluncy prformancs vrsus th control lighting [4]. LED lighting in school facilitis crats a productiv larning nvironmnt [14]. Various studis hav xamind how th built nvironmnt can affct childrn in th classroom such as mpirical rsarch rgarding th impact of nois on childrn with Autism Spctrum Disordr (ASD) [24]. Th rsults indicatd a significant improvmnt of unwantd bhaviors with th intrvntion nvironmnt of LED lamps. Anothr study found that studnts displayd mor ngagd bhaviors undr LED lighting with studnts with dvlopmntal disabilitis showing th most chang in ngagmnt bhaviors [15]. Mthods Th study sought insights from tachrs rgarding th impact of fluorscnt vrsus LED high color corrlatd tmpratur (CCT) lighting on studnt motions, attituds, and bhaviors in th classroom. Tachr populations wr rcruitd through public and privat schools as wll as acquaintancs of th principal invstigator. Participants wr rquird to b 18 yars of ag or oldr, hav a minimum of 12 wks taching xprinc in th classroom, tach btwn lvls Pr-K through 12, and b a full-tim tachr, practicum tachr, tachr aid or full-tim building substitut tachr. Sampl siz On hundrd-tn tachrs, lvls Pr-K through 12, wr providd an onlin Qualtrics survy. Thr was a 68% rspons rat with 75 rsponss rcivd, stablishing a 95% lvl of confidnc and a 6.5% margin of rror. Instrumntation Survy rsarch was implmntd using an original qustionnair (Appndix B). Qustions and trms wr gnratd as th rsult of sourcs from th litratur rviw, spcifically a qustionnair dvlopd for tachr insights rgarding acoustics and lighting for childrn with autism [25], and bhavior and lighting trms usd in othr analyss [4,6]. Th Qualtrics qustionnair consistd of twntythr qustions and was basd in affctiv tsting using attitud, Likrt, smantic diffrntial, and rating scals. Imags of school classrooms assssd tachr insights and prcptions of studnt ngagmnt, affct, and wll-bing. Ths wr clustrd and analyzd for highr rliability. Qustions includd multipl choic, 5-point Likrt, opn-ndd, and imags of classrooms with fluorscnt lighting and LED ranging from 3 65K. Tachrs wr askd to provid dmographic information rgarding gndr, numbr of yars taching, whthr taching in public or privat Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 4 Morrow t al : 15

5 school stting, and lngth of tim taching in currnt classroom. Thy also wr askd to complt multipl-choic qustions rgarding th typ(s) of lighting and fixturs currntly in thir classroom (i.., ovrhad fluorscnt or LED, windows, skylights, dsk lamps, tc.) and idntifying th lns covr typs via imags and dscriptions. Multipl-choic qustions wr utilizd to obtain data rgarding how and whn tachrs adjustd th light lvl within thir classroom (.g. tim of day, activity). Multipl-choic 5-point Likrt qustions addrssd prcivd issus with light glar, flashing, flickr, brightnss, and prcivd studnt bhavioral rsponss to lighting rgarding attntion, focus, and mood. A 1-point slidr scal valuatd tachr insight and prcptions rgarding studnt bhavioral rspons to light fixtur humming, intnsity, brightnss, and glar. Th qustionnair also addrssd tachr s prcptions of imags illustrating th sam classroom implmntd with fluorscnt vrsus LED and lowr vrsus highr klvin tmpratur lighting. Tachrs wr askd to slct btwn two imags as to which classroom thy prcivd bst for bhaviors of ngagmnt and affct. (i.., nhancd alrtnss, positiv mood, ncourags focus and staying on-task). Additional multipl-choic qustions also addrssd tachr prcption of studnt ngagmnt and affct in a classroom with 65K, 42K and 35K LED lighting with choics of 1) sit and listn; 2) mov and intract; 3) rlax and rst; 4) non of th abov. A final opn-ndd qustion was providd to allow for any additional commnts and insights. Dsign and procdur Th qustionnair was implmntd in Qualtrics and distributd onlin. An introductory statmnt rgarding th purpos of th survy, th IRB approval numbr, and participant qualifying factors wr includd. Th survy was dsignd to b compltd in an avrag of tn minuts to incras th potntial of a high rspons rat. Two of thr schools providd Lttrs of Support which rsultd in high rspons rats. Th principal invstigator also distributd th survy via mail to forty-ight prsonal contacts who wr indpndnt of th rcruitd school organizations with various rspons rats (Tabl 1). All data was collctd and stord on Ball Stat Univrsity s Qualtrics sit, scurd with a password, and only availabl to th principal invstigator and faculty advisor. Participant idntitis wr kpt anonymous and raw final data was scurly maintaind on a flash driv for analysis and support of futur studis. Tabl 1. Prcntag of tachr rspons rat to survy rqust Contacts % Ball Stat Univrsity 73 Th Eman School North Ridg Dallas Cntr-Grims 1 Prsonal contacts Data analysis Dscriptiv statistics wr usd to organiz survy data in tabls and graphs via Qualtrics and Excl. Total scors, distribution of prcntags, man and standard dviation wr analyzd. Infrntial statistics usd sampls of th data to stablish gnral statmnts and conclusions rgarding participants thoughts, prcptions, and insights. IRB approval Th Institutional Rviw Board (IRB) rviwd th study rsarch protocols, dtrmining it to b xmpt from furthr rviw basd on Exmpt Catgory 2 (Appndix A). Th study was approvd and assignd IRB protocol # Rsults This study sought insights from tachrs rgarding th impact of lighting on prcivd studnt motions, attituds, and bhaviors in th classroom, spcifically th impact of fluorscnt vrsus LED high corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) lighting on studnts. Th larning objctivs includd: 1) impact on positiv mood, attituds, and alrtnss of studnts, 2) impact on studnt ngagmnt and ontask/off-task bhaviors, and 3) impact on studnt wll-bing. Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 5 Morrow t al : 15

6 Participant dmographics Th survy was distributd to on hundrd-tn tachrs, lvls pr-k through 12. Thr was a 68% rspons rat with 75 rsponss. Th gndr of ratrs was significantly highr for fmal vrsus mal with a quantity of 65 fmals (86.67%) and 1 mals (13.33%). Forty-on (54.67%) of th 75 rspondnts indicatd having 11 or mor yars of taching xprinc. Fourtn (18.67%) indicatd having 6-1 yars of xprinc; 13 (17.33%) had 1-5 yars; and 7 (9.33%) had undr 1 yar of xprinc (Figur 1). 6.% 5.% rs c h 4.% T a f o3.% g ta n2.% rc P1.%.% 9.33% YEARS OF EXPERIENCE TEACHING 17.33% 18.67% 54.67% undr 1 yar 1-5 yars 6-1 yars 11+ yars Yars Figur 1. Yar(s) of tachr xprinc in classroom Tachrs wr rcruitd from public and privat schools with 46 out of 75 taching in public schools and 27 in privat schools. Two rspondnts answrd othr with on spcifying a lab school and th scond ministry (Figur 2). SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT CURRENTLY TEACH Othr 3% School (8%) had th lowst numbr of rspondnts; Pr-K had a quantity of 12 (16%) (Figur 3). LEVEL OF STUDENT CURRENTLY TEACHES rs 21 c h a f T o tity n a 12 u Q d n a g 6 ta 4 n rc 16.% 5.33% 28.% 21.33% 21.33% P 8.% Pr-K Kindrgartn Lowr Elmntary Uppr Elmntary Middl School High School Figur 3. Prcntag and quantity of tachrs and lvl currntly taching Existing classroom lighting Rsponss indicatd substantially mor fluorscnt lighting (62 of 75), and 2 indicatd having LED in thir classroom. Eight rspondnts did not know thir classroom lighting typ (Figur 4) rs 3 c h T a 25 f o 2 tity n a 15 u Q 1 5 TYPE OF LIGHT FIXTURE LENS Acrylic Parabolic Troffr prismatic I don't know Othr Figur 4. Tachr rspons numbr and typ of ovrhad lighting in currnt classrooms Privat school 36% Public school Privat school Othr Public school 61% Figur 2. Prcntag of tachrs and typ of school whr thy currntly tach Th rcruitd population tach: Lowr Elmntary (28%); Uppr Elmntary (21.33%) and Middl School (21.33%). Kindrgartn (5.33%) and High 4 35 rs 3 c h T a 25 f o 2 tity n a 15 u Q 1 5 TYPE OF LIGHT FIXTURE LENS Acrylic Parabolic Troffr prismatic I don't know Othr Figur 5. Typ of light fixtur lns in currnt classrooms of tachr rspondnts Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 6 Morrow t al : 15

7 Most rspondnts, 37 of 75 (5%), indicatd that acrylic lnss wr usd in thir currnt classroom. Troffr prismatic wr th nxt highst quantity at 16 (21.6%), and parabolic at a quantity of 1 (13.51%) (Figur 5). Sixty-four classrooms had windows (62.75%), according to th rspondnts. Fourtn of th rspondnts rportd us of dsk lamps (13.73%). Lighting and affct: attitud, mood and alrtnss Studis illustratd motional/mood rsponss basd on diffrnt klvin tmpratur, with blur/highr klvin tmpraturs moting alrtnss, focus, and arousal; and lowr klvin for calmnss (Figur 6) [4,6]. This survy askd tachrs to slct imags of classrooms that thy prcivd bst for nhancing studnt alrtnss (Tabl 2); ncouraging nrgy/ arousal or moving and intracting (Tabl 3); and ncouraging calmnss (Tabl 4). Thr additional classroom imags illustrating diffrnt CCT; 42K, 35K and 65K rspctivly had mixd rsults, suggsting no significanc (Tabl 5). Tabl 2. Prcntag of tachrs slcting LED 42K classroom imag vrsus fluorscnt 32K for nhancing alrtnss Answr % LED 42K Fluorscnt Nithr, plas xplain 9.72 Total 1 Tabl 3. Prcntag of tachrs slcting 42K classroom imag for ncouraging alrtnss- mov/intract Answr % Focus: Sit and listn Alrtnss: Mov and intract 5.68 Calm: Rlax and rst 4.11 Non of th abov 1.96 Othr, plas spcify 5.48 Total 1 Tabl 4. Prcntag of tachrs slcting 3K classroom imag vrsus 5K for nhancing calmnss Answr % LED 3K LED 5K 31.8 Nithr, plas xplain 6.76 Total 1 Tabl 5. Shows mixd rsults for tachr slction of affct or ngagmnt for 35K classroom Answr % Focus: Sit and listn 3.56 Alrtnss: Mov and intract 3.56 Calm: Rlax and rst Non of th abov 4.17 Othr, plas spcify 1.39 Total 1 Tabl 6. Prcntag of tachrs slcting 65K classroom imag vrsus 5K for nhancing focus during tsting Answr % 5K K Nithr, plas xplain 6.85 Total 1 Tabl 7. Prcntag of tachrs slcting 35K classroom imag vrsus 5K for ncouraging on-task bhaviour Answr % 35K K Nithr, plas xplain 1.96 Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 7 Morrow t al : 15

8 Total 1 Tabl 8. Prcntag of tachrs slcting 65K classroom imag for ncouraging focus Answr % Focus: Sit and listn Alrtnss: Mov and intract Calm: Rlax and rst 2.82 Non of th abov 14.8 Othr, plas spcify 5.63 Total 1 ncouraging on-task bhavior of sit and listn (Tabl 8). 5.% 4.% 3.% 2.% 1.%.% OFF-TASK BEHAVIORS OBSERVED BY TEACHER PERCEIVED AS ASSOCIATED WITH CURRENT CLASSROOM LIGHTING Nvr Rarly Somtims Oftn Always Fidgt in sat, unabl to sit still Appar tird and/or lthargic Ovrtly act out, not attnding to lsson Not involvd, appar to b daydraming Bcom agitatd or frustratd Figur 7. Prcntag of tachrs who prciv currnt classroom lighting impacts obsrvd off- task bhaviors of studnts Lighting and halth and wll-bing: sounds and flickr 6.% 5.% 4.% 3.% 2.% 1.% TEACHER OBSERVED PROBLEMS WITH CLASSROOM CURRENT LIGHTING Figur 6. LED Lighting Klvin Color Tmpratur Scal Chart, Sourc (LED Corporations, 212) Lighting and ngagmnt: attntion and on-task bhavior Svral qustions addrssd ngagmnt and ontask/off-task bhaviors by using classroom imags with diffrnt klvin tmpraturs (Figurs 7-9). Th off-task bhaviors includd: 1) fidgt in sat, unabl to sit still; 2) not involvd, appar to b daydraming; 3) appar tird or lthargic; 4) bcom agitatd or frustratd; 5) ovrtly act out, not attnding to lsson. Whn askd to slct btwn a 5K and 65K-lit classroom, th 65K lighting was prcivd as bst for focusing during tsting by 4 of 73 rspondnts (54.79%), whil th 5K classroom was slctd by 28 of 73 rspondnts (38.36%) (Tabls 6 and 7). Singl imags of classrooms illustrating 42K, 35K and 65K rspctivly rsultd in th imag illustrating 65K to b slctd by 52.11% for.% Strongly disagr Somwhat disagr Nithr agr nor disagr Somwhat agr Strongly agr Light glars off objcts Lights flash Lights flickr Lighting is unusually bright Figur 8. Prcntag of tachrs obsrving ngativ issus with xisting classroom lighting Tachrs wr askd if thy prcivd ngativ issus with xisting lighting in thir classroom rgarding 1) light glars off objcts, 2) lights flash, 3) lights flickr, 4) lighting is unusually bright. Thr wasn t a significant rspons of agrmnt rgarding a prcivd issu with lights flashing or flickring. Light glar and unusual brightnss of lighting did hav a highr rspons of agrmnt and significanc with a quantity of 1 (13.51%) Strongly agr and 35 (47.3%) Somwhat agr. Tachrs ratd th issu of lighting bing unusually bright with a quantity of 12 (16.44%) Strongly agr and 22 (3.14%) Somwhat agr (Figur 8). Tachrs wr also askd to rat what xtnt thy prciv th following lighting issus impact studnts: 1) notic th hum of lctronic nois from Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 8 Morrow t al : 15

9 th light fixturs; 2) ar bothrd by th hum of th lights; 3) prciv th intnsity or brightnss of lights; 4) ar bothrd by th intnsity or brightnss of th lights; 5) prciv th glar of th lights; 6) ar bothrd by th glar of th lights. Findings suggst no significanc of prcivd studnt impact (Figur 9). Studnts ar bothrd by th intnsity or brightnss of th lights Studnts notic th hum or lctronic nois from th light fixturs LIGHTING ISSUES PERCEIVED TO IMPACT STUDENTS Studnts ar bothrd by th glar of th lights Studnts prciv th glar of th lights Studnts prciv th intnsity or brightnss of lights Studnts ar bothrd by th hum of th lights Man Maximum Minimum Figur 9. Summary of th man valus of lighting issus and tachr prcivd impact on studnts Light lvls and bhavior Rsarch has shown that adjusting light lvls within a classroom can affct childrn s bhavior [14,22]. Tachrs wr askd if thy adjust th light lvl in thir classroom to nhanc th nvironmnt for studnts. Significantly, 81.8% rspondd ys, with a quantity of 6 out of 74 rsponss. A quantity of 5 (6.75%) rspondd no, and 9 (12.16%) indicatd thy do not hav th ability to adjust th light lvl (Figur 1). 9.% 8.% 7.% 6.% 5.% 4.% 3.% 2.% 1.%.% PERCENTAGE OF TEACHERS THAT ADJUST LIGHT LEVELS IN CLASSROOM TO ENHANCE ENVIRONMENT FOR STUDENTS 81.8% 6.76% 12.16% Ys No Do not hav th ability Figur 1. Prcntag of tachr that adjust classroom light lvl to nhanc nvironmnt Tachrs wr askd during what tims of day thy adjust light lvls in thir classroom with a quantity of 43 (33.86%) rsponding during morning hours and a quantity of 35 (27.56%) during aftrnoon hours (Figur 11). Fifty-fiv (31.98%) adjust light lvls during viwing of digital display and a quantity of 41 (23.84%) adjust light lvls during quit tim (Figur 12) % 35.% 3.% 25.% 2.% 15.% 1.% 5.%.% PERCENT OF TEACHERS AND TIME OF DAY ADJUST LIGHT LEVELS 33.86% during morning hours 27.56% during aftrnoon hours 4.72% aftr outdoor rcss 11.2% aftr high nrgy activitis 9.45% aftr lunch 7.87% Do not hav th ability to adjust light lvls 5.51% Othr, plas spcify Figur 11. Prcntag of tachrs adjusting classroom light lvls during school day 35.% 3.% 25.% 2.% 15.% 1.% 5.%.% PERCENT OF TEACHERS AND ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH ADJUSTING LIGHT LEVELS 31.98% 23.84% 3.49% 8.14% 9.88% 1.47% 5.81% 5.81% Figur 12. Prcntag of tachrs adjusting classroom lighting associatd with activitis Summary Significant and mixd rsults from th tachr survy wr found rgarding th impact of lighting on mood, attitud, and ngagmnt. Thr was also mixd support for th hypothsis that highr corrlatd color tmpratur LED lighting vrsus fluorscnt lighting within a classroom positivly impacts prcivd attituds and bhaviors. Th most significant outcoms ar: Impact on positiv mood, alrtnss, and nrgy: Most tachrs slctd classroom imags with highr klvin tmpratur as ncouraging positiv affct, alrtnss, and nrgy. Impact on calm and rstful mood: Most tachrs slctd th classroom imag with lowr klvin tmpratur as ncouraging calm: 3K lighting was slctd by 62.16% of rspondnts Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 9 Morrow t al : 15

10 Ovr th sam classroom imag with 5K. A sparat individual classroom imag at 35K rcivd mixd rsults with only 33.33% rspons as ncouraging rlaxation and rst, and 3.56% rsponding as ncouraging ngagmnt or nrgy. This suggsts that th diffrnc of 5K may impact prcivd mood, howvr, ths rsults cannot b considrd significant. Impact on studnt ngagmnt and on-task/offtask bhaviors: Mixd rsults wr found rgarding focus and ontask bhaviors. Howvr, tachr rsponss to prcivd studnt off-task bhaviors du to lighting issus wr not significant. Impact on halth and wll-bing: A quantity of 3 out of 19 tachrs providd commnts addrssing concrns and insights rgarding lighting and wll-bing. Impact of adjusting light lvls in classroom: Most tachrs, 81.8%, indicatd thy adjust light lvls within thir classroom to impact mood, attntion, and ngagmnt rgarding spcific activitis and tims of day. Thirtn of th 19, 68.4%, rsponss addrssd th importanc of adjusting light lvls to ncourag ngagmnt, positiv mood, and wll-bing. Discussion Th purpos of this study was to xamin insights and prcptions rgarding attituds and bhaviors associatd with classroom lighting, spcifically th impact of fluorscnt vrsus LED high corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) lighting on studnts. Impact on positiv mood, attituds, and alrtnss of studnts Much thortical rsarch has focusd on our body s natural clock, or circadian rhythm, which rgulats our slp/wak cycl; indicating our body rsponds/awakns to bluish light as xprincd in morning hours, and warmr light causs th brain to rlas mlatonin which prompts us to rlax and prpar our bodis to slp [26,27]. Aptly put by th dirctor of th Division of Slp Mdicin at Harvard Mdical School Charls A. Czislr: Light affcts our circadian rhythms mor powrfully than any drug [14]. Studis illustratd motional/mood rsponss basd on diffrnt klvin tmpratur, with blur/highr klvin tmpraturs moting alrtnss, focus, and arousal; and lowr warmr klvin for calmnss [4,6,14]. Most tachrs slctd classroom imags with highr klvin tmpratur as ncouraging positiv attitud, alrtnss, and nrgy. With 61.11% slcting 42K for alrtnss ovr 32K, and 5.68% slcting 42K for activity of movmnt and intraction. Survy rsults wr mixd rgarding impact of klvin tmpratur on ncouraging calm. Th classroom illustrating 3K was slctd by most tachrs (62.16%) for nhancing calmnss ovr th classroom using 5K. Anothr imag illustrating 35K had mixd rsults with th largst prcntag (33.33%) idntifying this classroom lighting bst for ncouraging rstfulnss (rlax and rst), 3.56% idntifid it bst for both activnss/ arousal (mov and intract) and focus (sit and listn). Ths rsults may support th findings that klvin tmpratur 3 and lowr can induc calmnss [4,6]; and that th diffrnc of 5K is prcivd as coolr and whitr, and not as calming. Howvr, ths rsults cannot b considrd significant. Impact on studnt ngagmnt and on-task/offtask bhaviors Studis [6,1] found that LED lighting at a highr corrlatd color tmpratur has a prcivd positiv impact on bhaviors during activitis that rquir focus such as taking a tst. Anothr study [28] dmonstratd that 65K compard to 4K nhancd lvls of attntion and concntration [1]. Most tachrs slctd th LED 65K classroom for on-task bhaviors and ngagmnt. With 54.79% slcting 65K ovr 5K for ncouraging focus during tsting, and 52.11% slctd a sparat imag illustrating 65K as bst for ncouraging on-task bhavior of sitting and listning. Howvr, a third imag with a lowr color tmpratur imag of 35K was slctd by most for ncouraging on-task bhaviors ovr th 5K imag, suggsting no significanc was found. Th rsults rgarding tachr prcptions of how lighting impacts studnt off-task bhaviors also did not provid significant findings. A 212 Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 1 Morrow t al : 15

11 study found on avrag that studnt concntration incrasd with 65K, but findings also indicatd improvd concntration may b basd on grad lvl, with grad 4 studnts mor affctd than grad 6 [6]. Impact on halth and wll-bing Most tachrs, 82.67%, rspondd as currntly having fluorscnt lighting within thir classroom. Many studis hav found that normally functioning fluorscnts can b a sourc of flickr and hav biological ffcts such as a gnral fling of discomfort, illnss, hadachs, y strain [18] and rducd spd of visual sarch and prformanc [19]. Th prcivd impact of sounds and flickring on studnt comfort and wll-bing wr mixd and not significant. Th glar of lighting off objcts was ratd highst as a prcivd problm, with 47.3% rating as somwhat agr and only 13.51% as strongly agr. Th nxt highst ratd problm was lighting is unusually bright with a rspons rat of 3.14% somwhat agr and 16.44% as strongly agr. Impact of adjusting light lvls for ngagmnt, affct and wll-bing Most tachrs, 81.8%, indicatd thy adjust light lvls within thir classroom to impact mood, attntion, and ngagmnt rgarding spcific activitis and tims of day. A quantity of 19 additional commnts was rcivd rgarding tachr insights and prcptions of th impact of classroom lighting. Thirtn of th 19 rsponss (68.4%), addrssd th importanc of adjusting light lvls to ncourag ngagmnt, positiv mood, and wll-bing. Ths rsults support findings [4,6,1] that dynamic or tunabl lighting within th classroom may bnfit childrn s bhaviors and prformanc. This concpt would nd to b furthr studid as to whthr it is th amount of light or th corrlatd color tmpratur that affcts prcivd attitud and bhavior. Conclusion, limitations, and rcommndations Th purpos of this study was to xamin prcptions, attituds and bhaviors associatd with classroom lighting, spcifically th impact of fluorscnt vrsus LED high corrlatd color tmpratur (CCT) lighting on studnts. Lighting within th built nvironmnt can hav an impact on th wll-bing, bhavior, and prformanc of humans [21]. Many studis hav xamind fluorscnt and LED lighting at various corrlatd color tmpraturs within work nvironmnts and classrooms. Survy data basd on tachr insights and prcptions supportd th prcption of highr corrlatd color tmpratur lighting positivly impacting alrtnss, attitud, and nrgy lvl. Findings also supportd th ability to chang light lvls throughout th school day to positivly impact studnt ngagmnt and mood. Thr wr mixd rsults rgarding highr corrlatd color tmpratur impacting attntion and on-task/offtask bhaviors. Rsults rgarding th impact of sound and flickring from fluorscnt lights wr not significant. Th issu of lights glaring off objcts was slctd as somwhat agr by th highst prcntag survyd. Th study prsnts limitations du to th subjctiv mannr implicit in tachr rviws and in slfrportd insights and prcptions. Classroom imags utilizd may b subjctiv du to th inability to control consistncy of computr monitor color displays usd by participants. Additionally, sampl sizs wr too small to run significant rsults thus a lack of statistical significanc throughout. It is suggstd that furthr rsarch and othr mthodologis occur to bttr undrstand th impact of highr corrlatd color tmpratur LED vrsus fluorscnt lighting on studnts in th classroom. Mthodologis should includ controlld laboratory and classroom sttings with monitord obsrvation, dirctly masuring bhaviors and attituds. Th concpt of dynamic or tunabl lighting has limitd mpirical rsarch and nds to b furthr studid basd on its impact in th classroom as wll as stablishing guidlins for us. Undrstanding th impact of classroom lighting on studnt bhavior, attituds and ngagmnt is important for nsuring studnt acadmic succss, as wll as physical, motional, and cognitiv wll-bing. Acknowldgmnts I would lik to thank Dr. Shirn M. Kanakri for hr support and providing insight and xprtis Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 11 Morrow t al : 15

12 throughout th rsarch procss. I am also gratful to North Ridg Dallas Cntr- Grims Elmntary School, Ball Stat Univrsity Child Study Cntr, and Th Eman School for providing Lttrs of Support and distribution of th tachr survy. Rfrncs 1. Wurtman RJ. JSTOR: Th ffcts of light on th human body. Sci Am. 1975;233(1): Vitch JA. Rvisiting th prformanc and mood ffcts of information about lighting and fluorscnt lamp typ. J Environ Psychol. 1997;17: Impact of Light on Bhavior. Dydll Mott MS, Robinson DH, Waldn A, Burntt J, Ruthrford AS. Illuminating th ffcts of dynamic lighting on studnt larning. SAGE Opn Mott MS, Robinson DH, Williams-Black TH, McCllland SS. Th supporting ffcts of high luminous conditions on grad 3 oral rading fluncy scors. Springr Plus. 214;3: Slgrs PJC, Moolnaar NM, Galtzka M, Pruyn A, Sarroukh BE. van dr Zand B. Lighting affcts studnts concntration positivly: Findings from thr Dutch studis. Lighting Rsarch and Tchnology. 213;45: Grangaard EM. Color and light ffcts on larning. fils.ric.d.gov/fulltxt/ed pdf 8. Knz I. Effcts of indoor lighting on mood and cognition. J Environ Psychol. 1995;15: Smoldrs KCHJ, d Kort YAW. Invstigating daytim ffcts of corrlatd colour tmpratur on xprincs, prformanc, and arousal. J Environ Psychol. 217;5: Haws BK, Brunyé TT, Mahony CR, Sullivan JM, Aall CD. Effcts of four workplac lighting tchnologis on prcption, cognition and affctiv stat. Int J Ind Ergon. 211;42: Gntil N, Govn T, Laik T, Sjobrg K. A fild study of fluorscnt and LED classroom lighting. Lighting Rsarch & Tchnology. (218);5(4): Havas M. Halth concrns associatd with nrgy fficint lighting and thir lctromagntic missions. SCENIHR & Light Snsitivity Cowan KR, Daim TU. Undrstanding adoption of nrgy fficincy tchnologis: Applying bhavioral thoris of tchnology accptanc & us to undrstand th cas of LED lighting for commrcial, rsidntial, and industrial nd-usrs. Dpartmnt of nginring and tchnology managmnt, portland stat univrsity, Portland, USA /11. IEEE Th Bnfits of LED Lighting in School Facilitis and its Impact on Studnt Bhavior and Productivity. Tchnical Consumr Products (TCP), Inc Pulay A, Williamson A. A cas study comparing th influnc of LED and fluorscnt lighting on arly childhood studnt ngagmnt in a classroom stting. Larning Environmnts Rsarch, pp: Woolnr P, Hall E, Higgins S, McCaughy C, Wall K. A sound foundation? What w know about th impact of nvironmnts on larning and th implications for Building Schools for th Futur. Oxford Rviw of Education. 27;33(1): Hathaway WE. Effcts of school lighting on physical dvlopmnt of school. Prformanc. Th Journal of Educational Rsarch. Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 1995;88(4): IEEE Standard, A rviw of th litratur on light flickr: Ergonomics, biological attributs, potntial halth ffcts, and mthods in which som LED lighting may flickr. IEEE Standard P Vitch JA, McColl SL. A critical xamination of prcptual and cognitiv ffcts attributd to fullspctrum fluorscnt lighting. Ergonomics. 21;44(3): O Lary KD, Rosnbaum A, Hughs PC. Fluorscnt lighting: A purportd sourc of hypractiv bhavior. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1978;6(3): Smoldrs KCHJ, d Kort YAW. Bright light and mntal fatigu: Effcts on alrtnss, vitality, prformanc and physiological arousal. J Env Psychol. 214;39: Scinc. Light affcts studnt concntration Frlazzo F, Piccardi L, Burattini C, Barbalac M, Giannini AM, Bisgna F. Effcts of nw light sourcs on task switching and mntal rotation prformanc. J Env Psychol. 214;39: Kanakri SM, Shply M, Varni JW, Tassinary LG, Fawaz HM. An obsrvational study of classroom acoustical dsign and rptitiv bhaviors in childrn with autism. SAGE Journals. Environ Bhav. 218; Kanakri SM, Shply M, Varni JW, Tassinary LG. Nois and autism spctrum disordr in childrn: An xploratory survy. Rsarch in Dvlopmntal Disabilitis. 217;63: Govén T, Laik T, Raynham P, Sansal E. Th influnc of ambint lighting on pupils in in classrooms: Adjunct procdings of xprincing light, intrnational confrnc on th ffcts of light on wllbing. 29; Küllr R, Ballal S, Laik T, Mikllids B, Tonllo G. Th impact of light and colour on psychological mood: a cross-cultural study of indoor work nvironmnts. Ergonomics. 26;49(14): Hoffmann G, Guflr V, Grismachr A, Bartnbach C, Canazi M, Staggl S, t al. Effcts of variabl lighting intnsitis and colour tmpraturs on sulphatoxymlatonin and subjctiv mood in an xprimntal offic workplac. Applid Ergonomics. 28;39: Advancs in Pdiatric Rsarch 12 Morrow t al : 15