ABSTRACT

An educational institution such as the Nueva Ecija University

of Science and Technology, where individuals are gathered
with pure passion to invest and spend their time to study,
learn, and explore without distractions. An environment where
they can expand their knowledge, academic performance and
capabilities. Wherein, the College of Architecture is one of
the learning environment that needs an improvement in their
facilities, equipment, surroundings, and other factors that
may affect its students. The importance of this study is to
comprehend what are the possible influences that the learning
environment may affect the studies of the architecture
student with an intention to comply with the set of standards.
The study aims to provide the information on how the learning
environment affects the students behavior, academic
performances, capabilities and development. The purpose of
this research is to know what are the possible solutions and
applicable techniques and methods on how to improve the
current environment of the architecture students of NEUST. In
order to gather the data, a set of questions are provided to
evaluate and assess the learning environment presented in a
quantitative method and used descriptive method to analyze
and interpret the collected data. Based on the
recommendations of the researchers, the learning environment
of the College of Architecture has still a lot of factors
that has to be improved for the sake of the students.

Key words: learning environment, affect, improve, influences,

behavior, development
Introduction
A proper and well-organized learning environment allows
students to focus and encourage them to study explore.
Learning environment refers to the diverse physical
locations, contexts, and cultures in which students learn
according to the Glossary of Education Reform. It involves
the social interaction between individuals whose goal is to
learn and develop their capabilities.
 Some factors such as acoustics, lighting, temperature,
color, seat arrangement and other factors that may contradict
the purpose of a classroom which is to focus and learn stated
by Lewinski (2015).
There are a lot of institutions whose goal is to give a
student a proper learning environment such as the NEUST or
Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology. It is
composed of different courses to master. One of them is the
College of Architecture. It is composed of individuals whose
specialty are creating and designing buildings and anything
related to it, and those individuals are the Architecture
students.
Therefore, the purpose of this research is to know what
are the positive and negative effects of the learning
environment to the architecture students. The aim of this
research is to provide the possible solutions and techniques
on how to improve the facilities and environment to help the
students’ progress or development in studies and
performances. Through a thorough evaluation of the College of
Architecture of its learning environment.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this research is to identify what are the
possible factors that might affect the learning capabilities
of the architecture students. This research aims to answer
the following factors that are related to it:
1. How can the respondents be described in terms of
year level, sex, and academic standing?
2. What are the existing facilities in College of
Architecture of NEUST?
3. What are the factors that may affect the studies of
the Architecture students? Such as the following:
a. Acoustics
b. Lighting
c. Temperature
d. Color
e. Classroom Arrangement
 f. Equipment and tools
g. Cleaning Services
4. What are the recommended possible solutions on how
to improve the facilities and environment of College of
Architecture?

Method of Research
This research study needs a quantitative method of
research. Thus, the researchers used descriptive method to
analyze and interpret the collected data. This method suits
in this research topic that tends to describe the
relationships between the students of College of Architecture
and the department itself. Descriptive research is designed
to do some inaccurate predictions, and do not determine cause
and effect relationship. One of the types of Descriptive
methods are the survey method because it served to answer the
questions and purposes of the study which is used by the
researchers.

The Research Locale

This study will be conducted at the College of
Architecture school of Nueva Ecija University of Science and
Technology (NEUST) located at Barangay Sumacab Este, city of
Cabanatuan, province of Nueva Ecija, Philippines.

Respondents of the Study

The target respondents for this study defined to include
the 1st year to 5th year students of College of Architecture
in Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology of Mid-
Year Class 2019 with total population of 74.

Research Instruments
1. Questionnaire.
The researchers designed a questionnaire (see Appendix
A) for the students as one of the sources of collecting data
or information for this study.
The questionnaire has three (3) parts:
Part I. Profile of the Respondents.
Considering the basic profile of the respondents
which is the Architecture students, like for example:
their name (optional), year level, sex, and academic
standing.
Part II. List of existing facilities.
This part is the enumerating of existing facilities
in College of Architecture. The following facilities
should be present in the said department:
a. Library/Learning Resource Center (LRC);
b. Studio/Laboratory rooms (e.g. design room);
c. Lecture rooms;
d. Consultation rooms;
e. Students’ Center;
f. Multi-purpose Laboratory (e.g. scale modeling,
utilities and building technology)
g. Computer Laboratory/CADD room;
h. Gallery;
i. Student’s Organization Office (ASC, UAPSA, PEER);
j. Student’s Publication Office (Papyrus);
k. Audio-Visual Room;
l. Guidance Office;
m. Dean’s Office;
n. Faculty Office;
o. Conference room’
p. Comfort rooms;
q. Waiting lounge/areas.
Part III. Evaluation of Architecture Students to the
Facilities and Environment of College of Architecture.
This part has eight sections from determined from
A to H. It was designed in “Closed Form” or “Restricted
Type” of questionnaire, on a 5-point scale, ranging
from “excellent”, through “very good”, “fair” to “poor”
and “no experience”.
a. Section “A” - is about the Acoustics of the
facilities of the College of Architecture;
b. Section “B” - is about the Lighting of the
facilities of the College of Architecture;
 c. Section “C” - is about the Temperature of the
facilities of the College of Architecture;
d. Section “D” - is about the Color of the facilities
of the College of Architecture;
e. Section “E” - is about the Classroom Arrangement
of the College of Architecture;
f. Section “F” - is about the Equipment and Tools of
the College of Architecture;
g. Section “G” - is about the Cleaning Services of
the College of Architecture;
PART IV. Suggestion and Recommendation of Architecture
Students.
This part identifies the suggestion and
recommendation of Architecture students for the
improvement of College of Architecture in NEUST.

2. Library.
The researchers’ primary sources of data are the
studies related to the focus of the topic: “Evaluation of
Architecture Students to the Facilities and Equipment of
College of Architecture”.
3. Website.
A collection of related network web resources that
is used by most of the students, researchers, educators, etc.
Website is a useful source of data or information related to
the topic that the researchers are studying.

Statistical Treatment of Data

In gathering the data, the main source are the students
of College of Architecture from First Year up to Fifth Year
(Mid-Year Class 2019) with total population of 416.

Slovin’s Formula
The researchers used this formula to determine the
acceptable minimum number of respondents on the topic.
 N where:
n = _________ N = number of population
1 + Ne² n = number of sample
e = error of tolerance (5%)
Purposive Sampling.
The researchers select based on their characteristics of
a population and the objective of the study. Participants are
selected based to the needs of the study and the ones that do
not meet the profile are rejected.

Percentage.
Percentage was used in order to identify the statistical
representation of the results in questionnaires.
f x 100 where:
P = __________ P = the frequency percentage
N F = the frequency
N = the number of respondents

Likert Scale. Percentage.

Likert scale measures the level of agreement or
disagreement of the respondents through questionnaires.
Table 2. Likert Scale
Verbal
Range Interpretation Meaning
(VB)
Extremely good or
4.2 – 5.0 Excellent(E)
outstanding
Very Good or
3.4 – 4.1 Very Good (VG)
outstanding
2.6 – 3.3 Fair (F) Good
1.8 – 2.5 Poor (P) No good
No involvement at
1.0 - 1.7 No Experience (NE)
all
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The findings were formulated through a thorough
investigation and collection of data.
Part I. Profile of the Respondents.
Year level

Relative
Frequency Percentag
Year Level Frequency
(F) e (%)
(RF)
1st Year - - -
2nd Year - - -
3rd Year 5 0.0793 7.93%
4th Year 38 0.6032 60.32%
5th Year 10 0.1587 15.87%
Others 10 0.1587 15.87%
TOTAL 63 1 100%

Sex.

Relative
Frequency Percentage
Sex Frequency
(F) (%)
(RF)
Female 37 0.587 59%
Male 26 0.412 41%
TOTAL 63 1.0 100%

Academic Standing.
Relative
Frequency Percentage
ACADEMIC STANDING Frequency
(F) (%)
(RF)
Regular - - -
Irregular 63 1.0 100%
TOTAL 63 1.0 100%
Part II. List of Facilities Required for College of
Architecture.
120%
97% 100% 100% 98% 97% 97% 98% 100% 98% 100% 97%
92% 92%
100% 89%
84%
80%
57%
60% 51%
49%
43%
40%
16%
20% 8% 8% 11%
3% 0 0 2% 3% 3% 2% 0 2% 0 3%
0%
Com
Mult Stud Stud
Stud pute Audi Wait
Cons i- ents’ ents’ Conf
io/La Lect Stud r o- Guid Dea Facu Com ing
ultat purp Orga Publi eren
bora ure ents’ Labo Gall Visu ance n’s lty fort Loun
LRC ion ose nizat catio ce
tory roo Cent rator ery. al Offic Offic Offic Roo ges/
roo Labo ion n Roo
roo ms. ers. y/CA Roo e. e. e. ms. Area
ms. rator Offic Offic m.
ms DD m. s.
y e e
ro…
EXISTING 92% 97% 100% 92% 100% 49% 98% 89% 97% 97% 98% 84% 100% 98% 57% 100% 97%
NOT EXISTING 8% 3% 0 8% 0 51% 2% 11% 3% 3% 2% 16% 0 2% 43% 0 3%

EXISTING NOT EXISTING

Part III. Evaluation of Architecture Students to the

Facilities and Environment of College of Architecture

1. Acoustics of the Facilities of the College of

Architecture.
Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience

A ACOUSTIC 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
I can peacefully enjoy the
1 LRC because of good sound 8 16 27 6 6 3.22 F
treatment.
I use design room in
2 harmony because of good 6 12 32 13 0 3.17 F
sound treatment.
I clearly hear my professor
3 8 22 27 5 1 3.49 VG
during discussion.
Consultation room has a
4 8 20 23 10 2 3.35 F
good sound treatment.
 The noise came from the
5 corridor distracts me from 11 19 27 6 0 3.56 VG
doing my plates.
The noise of other Classes
6 from the next room 4 13 29 13 4 3.00 F
distracts me from studying.
CADD room has a good sound
7 9 19 28 6 1 3.46 VG
treatment.
The sounds in gallery area
8 5 13 24 11 10 2.87 F
has a good sound treatment.
We clearly hear each other
9 in Students’ Organization 11 15 28 8 1 3.43 VG
Office.
The sounds from Audio
Visual Room (AVR) are
10 11 23 23 6 0 3.62 VG
understandably in any
corner of the room.
The noise coming from
11 vehicles outside loses my 6 9 24 14 10 2.79 F
focus on studying.
There’s no other noise
12 coming from outside of the 7 17 29 7 3 3.29 F
Dean’s Office.

2. Lighting of the Facilities of the College of Architecture

Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience

B LIGHTING 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
The lecture rooms have
1 enough lighting when doing 8 24 23 8 0 3.51 VG
plates.
Lecture rooms,
laboratories and other
2 11 24 26 2 0 3.70 VG
facilities have natural
lighting.
Insufficient lighting
3 5 24 26 6 2 3.38 F
affects my studies.
LRC provides sufficient
4 9 21 26 5 2 3.48 VG
lighting.
 Design rooms provide good
5 5 26 24 8 0 3.44 VG
lighting.
Consultation room has a
6 6 18 30 6 3 3.29 F
good lighting.
The students can use
student’s center at any
7 time because it provides 14 22 22 5 0 3.71 VG
sufficient lighting
equipment.
Multi-purpose laboratories
8 give enough lighting to 4 14 22 8 15 2.75 F
use by the students.
Sufficient lighting
9 5 25 25 5 3 3.38 F
equipment in CADD room.
Audio Visual Room has a
10 6 24 26 7 0 3.46 VG
good lighting equipment.

3. Temperature of the Facilities of the College of

Architecture.
Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience
`
C TEMPERATURE 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
Lecture rooms have enough
cooling equipment (e.g.
1 4 12 21 23 3 2.86 F
ceiling fans, air
condition).
I am comfortable with the
2 temperature of our 4 7 20 27 5 2.65 F
Classroom when drafting.
I can use LRC at ease
3 because of sufficient 6 10 29 12 6 2.97 F
cooling equipment.
The students are
comfortable of using
4 lecture rooms because it 5 11 20 24 3 2.86 F
provides proper cooling
equipment.
Consultation room provides
5 9 13 35 4 2 3.37 F
good temperature.
 Students’ center enjoy by
the Architecture students
6 7 14 32 9 1 3.27 F
because it has good
temperature.
Laboratories provide good
7 7 13 30 6 7 3.11 F
temperature.
CADD room has sufficient
8 15 21 22 5 0 3.73 VG
cooling equipment.
Audio-visual room provides
9 17 19 25 2 0 3.81 VG
a good cooling equipment.
The cooling equipment of
10 Faculty and Dean’s office 17 23 19 2 2 3.81 VG
makes me comfortable.

4. Color of the Facilities of the College of Architecture.

Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience
`
D COLOR 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
The color of lecture rooms
1 gives me productivity in 4 22 30 7 0 3.37 F
studying.
The color of Design room
2 improves my creativity in 6 16 29 12 0 3.25 F
designing.
The color of students’
3 center makes me feel cool 6 17 30 10 0 3.30 F
and comfortable.
The color of laboratories
4 enhances my learning 2 15 36 4 6 3.05 F
ability.
The color of AVR attracts
5 5 24 24 10 0 3.38 F
me from learning.
The color of consultation
6 room makes me focus on 3 18 32 9 1 3.21 F
study.
The color of CADD room
7 6 19 32 5 1 3.38 F
gives positive vibes.
 The color of exterior wall
8 of Architecture Building 7 26 23 7 0 3.52 VG
is good.
The color of LRC makes me
9 6 14 34 5 4 3.21 F
focus on reading.
The color of Faculty and
10 Dean’s office makes me 8 17 30 6 2 3.37 F
feel welcomed.
The color of the
11 Guidance’s Office makes me 8 18 32 3 2 3.43 VG
comfortable and welcomed.
The color of the gallery
12 4 20 28 6 5 3.19 F
makes me more creative.
The color of the Students’
13 Organization Office makes 8 15 34 4 2 3.37 F
me feel at ease.

5. Classroom Arrangement of the College of Architecture.

Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience
`
E CLASSROOM ARRANGEMENT 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
Arrangement of drafting
1 tables and stools are 1 19 31 12 0 3.14 F
well organized.
CADD room’s computer
2 arrangement are well 3 23 29 8 0 3.33 F
organized.
I have the opportunity to
use learning equipment
3 (e.g. white board, 3 28 29 3 0 3.49 VG
marker, projector, etc.)
in Classes.
Classroom arrangements
4 2 18 33 9 1 3.17 F
are well organized.
Drafting room
5 arrangements are well 2 17 32 12 0 3.14 F
organized.
The arrangement of Design
6 3 21 28 9 2 3.22 F
rooms’ drafting tables
 that facing each other
makes me comfortable in
designing.
The arrangement of Design
rooms’ drafting tables
7 5 22 32 4 0 3.44 VG
that facing the professor
or board are better.
The arrangement of
Lecture rooms’ chairs
8 that facing the professor 8 19 34 2 0 3.52 VG
or board makes me focus
on studying.
The arrangement of
Lecture rooms’ chairs
9 4 16 33 9 1 3.21 F
that facing each other
are comfortable.
I can easily find the
10 Classroom because it has 10 19 32 2 0 3.59 VG
a proper signage.

6. Equipment and Tools of the College of Architecture.

Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience
`
F EQUIPMENT AND TOOLS 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
LRC provides sufficient
books and researching
1 3 23 28 3 6 3.22 F
equipment for researching
or studying purposes.
All students have the
opportunity to use the
2 2 22 30 5 4 3.21 F
tools and equipment in
laboratory.
There are enough
3 necessary chairs and 5 13 30 14 1 3.11 F
tables for my studies.
Lecture rooms have enough
white board/blackboard
4 7 17 30 8 1 3.33 F
and markers /chalk for
discussion.
 Consultation room
5 provides enough equipment 4 18 31 8 2 3.22 F
and tools to use.
Students’ center provides
6 equipment for the 3 14 26 18 2 2.97 F
students.
Laboratories have the
important equipment and
7 3 19 29 7 5 3.13 F
tools for laboratory
purposes.
CADD room has a good
equipment to use and 1
8 21 27 5 0 3.57 VG
tools that is needed for 0
the computers.
Design rooms have enough
9 drafting tables and 6 16 31 9 1 3.27 F
stools for the students.
Audio-visual room have
sufficient equipment and
10 8 27 22 6 0 3.59 VG
tools (e.g. projector)
that is needed.
The Guidance’s Office
provides tools or
11 2 20 29 8 4 3.13 F
equipment for emotional
students.
Faculty Office provides
12 the needs of the students 7 24 24 7 1 3.46 VG
in terms or learning.

7. Cleaning Services of the College of Architecture.

Legend:
1 Highest Weighted Mean

11
Lowest Weighted Mean
11
1
5-Excellent 4–Very Good 3–Fair 2–Poor 1-No Experience
`
G CLEANING SERVICES 5 4 3 2 1 WM VI
Laboratories are always
1 clean and properly 4 21 25 10 3 3.21 F
maintained.
Comfort rooms are clean
2 3 14 22 23 1 2.92 F
and fresh.
 Audio-visual room
3 provides clean and 4 23 24 12 0 3.30 F
properly maintained room.
Sufficient trash bins
4 within the vicinity of 4 23 27 9 0 3.35 F
the department.
Library has trash bins to
5 use and cleaning 6 14 34 5 4 3.21 F
materials.
All lecture rooms provide
6 cleaning materials to 4 21 31 7 0 3.35 F
use.
Consultation room is
7 always clean and ready to 5 22 29 6 1 3.38 F
use.
Students’ centers are
8 4 17 28 13 1 3.16 F
tidy and pleasant.
Design rooms are always
clean and properly
9 2 14 33 12 2 3.03 F
maintained that results
to my good design.
Part IV. Suggestions and Recommendations of Architecture
Students.
Legend:
1 Highest Percentage
Lowest Percentage
11
11 NO
SUGGESTION AND YES YES NO YES NO
1 (F
RECOMMENDATION (F) (RF) (RF) (%) (%)
` )
Additional good lighting
1 in all rooms and 55 8 0.87 0.13 87% 13%
facilities.
Putting acoustic
treatment in all rooms
2 55 8 0.87 0.13 87% 13%
and facilities in order
to lessen noise
Additional ceiling
3 fans/air-conditioner in 57 6 0.90 0.10 90% 10%
all rooms and facilities.
Improve the color of each
4 rooms and facilities 51 12 0.81 0.19 81% 19%
according to area
 temperature.
Provide sufficient
equipment for lecture
5 55 8 0.87 0.13 87% 13%
rooms, laboratories, and
facilities.
Provide an improved
6 drafting tables and 89% 11%
stools. 56 7 0.89 0.11
Additional cleaning
7 materials in all rooms 58 5 0.92 0.08 92% 8%
and facilities.
A better arrangement of
drafting tables and
8 50 13 0.79 0.21 79% 21%
armchairs/chairs in all
rooms and
Provide laboratories for
scale modeling, building
9 57 6 0.90 0.10 90% 10%
utilities, building
technology, and others.
Additional learning
10 78% 22%
rooms and facilities. 49 14 0.78 0.22
A more comfortable
11 entrance in Guidance 78% 22%
office. 49 14 0.78 0.22
Additional fans or air-
12 conditioner in Students’ 50 13 0.79 0.21 79% 21%
Organizations Office.
Separated office for
13 43 20 0.68 0.32 68% 32%
College’s Dean’s Office.
Additional equipment and
14 cleaning materials in 56 7 0.89 0.11 89% 11%
comfort rooms.
A waiting area for
15 students or others in 51 12 0.81 0.19 81% 19%
Faculty Office.
Other Suggestions and Recommendations of the Students
According to the gathered data, the other suggestions
and recommendations of the respondents are the following:
1. Lighting control and heat control.
2. Especially in building B, the color and style of the
rooms is not conductive for learning. The professors
should further assess the color of rooms in accordance
to each room’s function.
3. Provide proper parking space for the students of College
of Architecture or put pavement to avoid dirt on floor.
4. Provide Drinking fountain.
5. Additional sun shading devices such as vertical or
horizontal fins for the building b which enables to block
excessive heat from the sun penetration, trees as well.
6. Comfort room must have adequate soap for hand-washing.
7. Additional projectors for PPT of the reporters.
8. Provide Air-condition in every drafting rooms.
9. A new building for the growing numbers of architecture
students in NEUST.
Conclusions
Based on the summary of findings, the researchers
conclude that:
1. Most of the respondents are from the 4th year level while
the least are from the year that are taking architecture
greater than 5 years. Majority of them are female and
all of them are irregular academic standing student.
2. There are facilities that are not existing such as the
Multi-Purpose Laboratory (e.g. scale modeling, utilities
and building technology) and Conference Room.
3. The factors of the College of Architecture such as:
a. In terms of the Acoustics of the facilities, it
should focus on improving the noise penetration
because most of the students are distracted from
the noise coming from the vehicles outside.
b. In terms of the Lighting of the facilities, it
should focus on providing Multi-Purpose
laboratories (e.g. scale modeling, utilities and
building technology) and improving the laboratories
(e.g. visual room) because it doesn’t provide
 enough lighting that should be used by the
students.
c. In terms of the Temperature of the facilities, it
should focus on providing cooling equipment (e.g.
air-conditioning systems, ceiling fans) to achieve
the thermal comfort that the student needs.
d. In terms of the Color of the facilities, it should
focus on enhancing the color of the laboratories to
motivate the students to study well.
e. In terms of the Classroom Arrangement, it should
focus on organizing the drafting rooms and also
improve the placement of the drafting tables and
stools inside the room.
f. In terms of the Equipment and tools, it should focus
on providing the equipment that is suited for the
Students’ centers.
g. In terms of the Cleaning Services, it should focus
on improving cleanliness and freshness factor of
the Comfort rooms.
4. The most suggested and recommended improvement for the
learning environment of the College of Architecture is
the additional cleaning materials that will maintain the
cleanliness of the environment.
5. Based on the observation of the researchers, that some
of the students are not aware of the existing and non-
existing facilities of the College of Architecture. They
should be informed by the facilitators that there are
existing facilities that they might not recognize
because there are facilities that are restricted to
limited people only.
6. According to the results on the findings through
questionnaires the researchers conclude that the effect
of learning environment in different factors was
affecting their academic performances resulting to a
distracted mood while studying or doing plates.
Recommendations
Based on the Conclusions, these are some recommendations
formulated by the researchers:
 For the future researchers, further research shall be
conducted to enhance the study.
 To help the students in learning, the learning facilities
should have a good acoustics that will not distract the
students from noise coming from the cars and other students
 To enlighten the mood of the students in learning, provide
enough lighting because it can also attract them to listen
to the professor.
 To have a good and fresh mind, provide enough cooling
equipment such as air-conditioning systems and ceiling
fans. Based from the suggestion and recommendation of the
respondents, provide sun shading devices because the
orientation of the buildings facing west which causes too
much heat that will cause discomfort for the students.
 To have a good circulation inside the facilities, it should
have a good desk, table and stools arrangements.
 To have a good and clean learning environment, provide
cleaning equipment and tools that will be used by the
students and the janitor.
 Based from the suggestion and recommendation of the
respondents, avoid distracting colors of paint and too much
decorations inside the facilities because it will catch
the attention of the students.
 Based from the suggestion and recommendation of the
respondents, provide drinking fountains, additional
parking spaces and projectors, and hand wash for the
Comfort rooms.
 REFERENCES

Alhussain, D., Loudon, G. and Wilgeroth, P. (2016)

'Creativity in Product Design Education: Understanding The
Learning Environment', In DS 83: Proceedings of the 18th
International Conference on Engineering and Product Design
Education (E&PDE16), Design Education: Collaboration and
Cross-Disciplinarity, Aalborg, Denmark, 8th-9th September
2016, pp. 102-107 http://hdl.handle.net/10369/9549
Apter, M. J. (1984). Reversal Theory and Personality: A
Review. J. Res. Pers. 18, 265–288. doi: 10.1016/0092-
6566(84)90013-8
Apter, M. J. (1989). Reversal Theory: Motivation, Emotion and
Personality. Florence, KY, US: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
Apter, M. J. (2014). Towards A Theory of Things: Reversal
Theory and Design. J. Motiv. Emot. Pers. 2, 3–11. doi:
10.12689/jmep.2014.302
Assessment of Student Learning. https://www.antioch.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2016/12/Policy-on-Assessment-of-Student-
Learning.pdf
Barrett, Peter, et al. "The Impact of Classroom Design on
Pupils' Learning: Final Results of A Holistic, Multi-Level
Analysis." Building and Environment 89 (2015): 118-133.
Biesta, G. (2011) From Learning Cultures to Educational
Cultures: Values and Judgements in Educational Research and
Educational Improvement, International Journal of Early
Childhood, 43(3), 199–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13158-
011-0042-x
Brooks, D. C. (2011), Space matters: The Impact of Formal
Learning Environments on Student Learning. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 42: 719-726. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8535.2010.01098.x
O'Neill, D. J., & Oates, A. D. (2001). The Impact of School
Facilities on Student Achievement, Behavior, Attendance, and
Teacher Turnover Rate in Central Texas Middle Schools.
Educational Facility Planner, 36(3), 14-22.
Byers, Terry, Wesley Imms, and Elizabeth Hartnell-Young.
"Making The Case for Space: The Effect of Learning Spaces on
Teaching and Learning." Curriculum and Teaching 29.1 (2014):
5-19.
Cheryan, Sapna, et al. "Designing Classrooms to Maximize
Student Achievement." Policy Insights from the Behavioral and
Brain Sciences 1.1 (2014): 4-12.
Chapman, A., Randell-Moon, H., Campbell, M., & Drew, C.,
(2014). Students in Space: Student Practices in Non-
Traditional Classrooms, doi.org/10.2304/gsch.2014.4.1.39
CHED Memorandum Order No. 61 Series of 2017. Policies,
Standards and Guidelines for the Bachelor of Science in
Architecture. https://ched.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2018/04/CMO-No.-61-Series-2017-Policies-
Standards-and-Guidelines-for-the-Bachelor-of-Science-in-
Architecture-BS-Archi.pdf
Crooks, T. J. (1998), The Impact of Classroom Evaluation
Practices on Students.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/00346543058004
438
Crossman, A. (2019), Understanding Purposive Sampling.
https://www.thoughtco.com/purposive-sampling-3026727
Douglas, D., and Gifford, R. (2001). Evaluation of the
Physical Classroom by Students and Professors: A Lens Model
Approach. Educ. Res. 43, 295–309. doi:
10.1080/00131880110081053
Dudek, M. (2000) Architecture of Schools: The New Learning
Environments. Oxford: Architectural Press.
http://architecturalnetworks.research.mcgill.ca/assets/arch
itecure-of-schools_the-new-learning--min.pdf
Dusitnanond, A. (2007), Developing a Method of Teaching
Architectural Project Design: A Case Study of Third Year
Studio Project, Faculty of Architecture, Sriburapha
University, Thailand
http://vuir.vu.edu.au/1571/1/Dusitnanond.pdf
Earthman G. I. (2002), School Facility Conditions and Student
Academic Achievement.
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5sw56439
Fareo, D. O. & Ojo O. O. (2012), Impact of Facilities On
Academic Performance of Students with Special Needs in
Mainstreamed Public Schools in Southwestern Nigeria.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01228.x
Faulkner, J., Bradley, K. D., and Lumpp, J. K., Broadening
The Roles of School Psychologists Through an Evaluation of
Learning Environments: A Pilot Study.
http://www.uky.edu/~kdbrad2/SchoolPsych.pdf
Figueroa, L., Lim, S., & Lee, J. (2016): Investigating the
Relationship Between School Facilities and Academic
Achievements Through Geographically Weighted Regression,
Annals of GIS, DOI: 10.1080/19475683.2016.
Fisher, K. (2005). Research into Identifying Effective
Learning Environments. Evaluating Qual. Educ. Facil. 9, 159–
167.
Gee, L., (2006), Human-Centered Design Guidelines.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/710b/d63721f4f089df1143752
b2b106238ff57fb.pdf
Great Schools Partnership (2013), The Glossary of Education
Reform. https://www.edglossary.org/learning-environment/
How Classroom Design Affects Learning? Connecting Elements
(2016), https://www.connectingelements.com/our-blog/how-
classroom-design-affects-learning
Jamie Hale, M.S, (2018), The Basic Types of Descriptive
Reserch Method. https://psychcentral.com/blog/the-3-basic-
types-of-descriptive-research-methods/
Lackney, J. A., & Picus, L. O. (2005), School Facilities:
Overview, Maintenance and Modernization of.
https://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2394/School-
Facilities.html
Learning Facilities, Bournemouth University (2019).
https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/facilitie
s/learning-facilities
Lewinski, P. (2015). Effects of Classrooms’ Architecture on
Academic Performance in View of Telic Versus Paratelic
Motivation: A Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, [746].
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00746
Limon, M. R. (2016), The Effect of the Adequacy of School
Facilities on Students’ Performance and Achievement in
Technology and Livelihood Education.
http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v5-i1/2058
Mcgowen, R. S. (2007), The Impact of School Facilities on
Student Achievement, Attendance, Behavior, Completion Rate
and Teacher Turnover Rate in Selected Texas High Schools.
http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ET
D-TAMU-2054/MCGOWEN-DISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=1
Morgatroyd, S., Rushton, C., Apter, M. & Ray, C. (1978) The
Development of the Telic Dominance Scale, Journal of
Personality Assessment, 42:5, 519-528, DOI:
10.1207/s15327752jpa4205_14
Olaleye, E. O., (2013), Classroom Design and Learning
Environment as Predictors of Pre-Service Teachers’
Performance in Fine and Applied Arts in Colleges of Education
in Southwestern Nigeria.
http://ir.library.ui.edu.ng/handle/123456789/3677
Philippine basic education: Adequacy of School Facilities in
Philippine Public Schools (2015).
http://erlinda0429.blogspot.com/
Quality on Vet-Schools, (2005), Student Satisfaction
Questionnaire Test Version.
https://www.oph.fi/download/133510_efqm_ssq_en.pdf
School Building Assessment Methods.
http://www.ncef.org/pubs/sanoffassess.pdf
Stone, N. (2001). Designing Effective Study Environments. J.
Environ. Psychol. 21, 179–190. doi: 10.1006/jevp.2000.0193
Temple, P., (2007). Learning Spaces for the 21st Century.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul_Temple2/publicati
on/237472897_Learning_spaces_for_the_21st_century_A_review_
of_the_literature/links/02e7e52ce7883a7ed3000000/Learning-
spaces-for-the-21st-century-A-review-of-the-literature.pdf
Urdan, T. & Schoenfelder, E. (2006), Classroom Effects On
Student Motivation: Goal Structures, Social Relationships,
And Competence Beliefs.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.003
Woolner, P., Hall, E., et al. (2007). A Sound Foundation?
What We Know About the Impact of Environments On Learning and
The Implications for Building Schools for the Future. Oxford
Review of Education, 33(1), 47-70.
World Bank Group. 2016. Building Better Learning Environments
in the Philippines. Philippines education note,no. 4;. World
Bank, Washington, DC. © World Bank.
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/24744
License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.
Yin Cheong Cheng (1994) Classroom Environment and Student
Affective Performance: An Effective Profile, The Journal of
Experimental Education, 62:3, 221-239, DOI:
10.1080/00220973.1994.9943842