Sustainable Built Environment in Tropical Hemisphere Countries
4. Findings and Discussion 1. Case of ST school
The questionnaire distributed to ST school includes 80 copies to teachers, 180 copies to students of 3 to 6 grades, and 50 copies to community residents (including school volunteers). The valid questionnaire are 58 copies from teachers with response rate of 72.5%, 124 copies from students with rate of 70.5%, and 48 copies from community residents with rate of 96.0%. The data are analyzed as follows:
1. POE survey from teachers
Table 1 POE survey from teachers from ST school (N=58) Dimensions
Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Toy library Toy plant
Senior learning center Art & culture place Physical fitness place Experience farm Butterfly & ecology garden
4.00 4.05
.84 .73 .57 1.06
.85 .58 .69
3.09 3.18
.93 .90 .72 .58 .83 .78 .66
3.53 3.71
.76 .61 .75 .85 .72 .70
3.31 3.34
.82 .85 .72 .89 .87 .73
3.62 3.58
.66 .86 .59 .83 .71 .69
3.94 3.95
.56 .57 .52 .77 .89 .56
3.59 3.89
.71 .69 .64 .73 .78 .61
4.30 4.10 3.85 4.10 4.15 4.20 4.10
3.50 3.66
3.79 3.89
3.37 3.61
2.86 3.36
3.74 3.24
3.29 3.53
3.47 3.66 4.50
4.26
3.92 3.95
3.96 3.96 3.82 4.18 4.20
3.82 .61 3.87 .70 3.79 .66 4.08 .63 4.00 .70 Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means.
In this study there are six dimensions to estimate degree of satisfaction on the reuse of school vacant spaces. Six dimensions are: accessibility, large spaces, full equipped, comfort, safety and maintainable. In the case of ST school, there are seven reuse forms of vitalized environments: toy library, toy plant, senior learning center, art and culture place, physical fitness place, experience farm, and butterfly & ecology garden. The mean scores, from high to low, of teacher’s satisfaction to the vitalized environments are: experience farm (M=4.20), senior learning center (M=4.10), butterfly & ecology (M=4.00), toy plant (M=3.89), physical fitness place (M=3.66), toy library (M=3.59) and art
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 73
&culture place (M=3.47).
2. POE survey from students
The mean scores, from high to low, of student’s satisfaction to the vitalized environments are: physical fitness place (M=4.28), toy plant (M=4.26), experience farm (M=4.22), butterfly & ecology (M=4.20), senior learning center (M=4.17), art &culture place (M=4.10), and toy library (M=4.08).
Table 2 POE survey from students from ST school (N=124) Dimensions
Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Toy library 3.75 1.21 4.06 .88 3.89 1.01 3.63 1.16 4.20 .90 4.24 .93 4.08 .90
Toy plant 3.65 1.22 3.89 1.15 4.12 .96 3.89 1.13 4.27 .85 4.33 .77 4.26 .91
Senior learning center 3.68 1.33 4.14 .93 4.16 .89 3.93 1.11 4.13 1.07 4.22 1.01 4.17 1.00 Art & culture place 3.40 1.22 4.14 .88 3.96 1.01 3.47 1.25 3.97 1.13 4.09 .90 4.10 1.02 Physical fitness place 3.67 1.22 4.32 .84 4.25 .88 3.51 1.23 3.96 .95 4.14 .93 4.28 .86 Experience farm 3.78 1.19 4.38 .82 4.16 .95 3.93 1.13 4.04 .97 4.16 .88 4.22 .91 Butterfly & ecology garden 3.78 1.20 4.23 .79 4.05 .89 4.06 .96 4.01 .98 4.18 .88 4.20 .96 Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means.
3. POE survey from community residents (school volunteers included)
The mean scores, from high to low, of student’s satisfaction to the vitalized environments are: toy library (M=4.11), experience farm (M=4.08), both toy plant and senior learning center (M=4.07), butterfly & ecology (M=3.89), physical fitness place (M=3.78), and art & culture place (M=3.73).
Table 3: POE survey from community residents from ST school (N=48) Dimensions
Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Toy library 4.15 .67 3.71 .65 3.68 .62 3.67 .81 3.87 .80 3.95 .66 4.11 .61
Toy plant 4.32 .56 3.88 .82 3.77 .72 3.51 .98 3.88 .82 4.02 .60 4.07 .59
Senior learning center 4.12 .54 4.02 .46 3.84 .57 3.81 .73 4.09 .57 4.12 .54 4.07 .55 Art & culture place 3.53 .83 3.58 .64 3.50 .91 3.24 .88 3.59 .76 3.73 .69 3.73 .73 Physical fitness place 3.46 .77 3.78 .42 3.78 .48 3.58 .81 3.72 .66 3.83 .61 3.78 .68
Experience farm 4.36 .54 4.08 .62 4.08 .62 3.85 .81 3.90 .79 4.03 .71 4.08 .66
Butterfly & ecology garden 4.00 .61 4.00 .51 3.84 .49 3.89 .69 3.89 .56 3.84 .55 3.89 .56 Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means.
4. Comparison of awareness from teachers and community residents (school volunteers included)
The vitalization of school vacant spaces is of great benefit to school sustainability and community relations. Can the occupants recognize these advantages/indicators? A comparison shows that there is no significant difference
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 74 between ST school teachers and community residents for their awareness of these advantages. After analysis all the mean scores are greater than 4 points from a 5-point scale, which suggests both school teachers and community residents possess positive perceptions to the vitalized school vacant spaces (Table 4).
Table 4: Comparison of awareness toward ST school sustainability and community relations Subjects
Advantages/indicators
Teachers Community residents
t-value
M SD M SD
School Sustainability
Innovate curriculum &teaching 4.17 .53 4.07 .62 .93
Facilitate school transformation 4.09 .60 4.11 .64 -1.8
Support school in sustainability 4.17 .57 4.17 .57 -0.1
Community Relations
enhance community residents
friendly relations 4.05 .63 4.09 .59 -.29
care the health of the senior 4.12 .62 4.11 .60 .10
strengthen the connection of
school-community 4.26 .58 4.24 .60 .18
assist in community management
4.14 .58 4.22 .59 .11
4.2. Case of KK school
The questionnaire distributed to KK school includes 73 copies to teachers, 156 copies to students of 3 to 6 grades, and 55 copies to community residents (school volunteers included). The valid questionnaire are 55 copies from teachers with response rate of 75.3%, 136 copies from students with rate of 87.2%, and 47 copies from community residents with rate of 85.5%. Data collected from KK school are analyzed as follows:
1. POE survey from teachers
Table 5: POE survey from teachers from KK school (N=55) Dimensions
Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Art gallery 4.30 .77 3.48 .91 3.52 .76 2.97 .88 3.79 .78 3.82 .85 3.73 .80
Story room 3.90 .57 4.20 .63 3.60 .70 3.70 .48 4.10 .57 3.90 .74 3.90 .74
English activity room 4.31 .48 4.23 .60 3.15 .90 3.85 .38 3.85 .55 3.62 .65 3.62 .51 Little lamb &
ecology park 3.53 .63 3.40 .67 3.23 .63 3.60 .81 3.17 .75 3.45 .57 3.50 .57 After school
classroom -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Room for continuing
education programs -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
English classroom
for community -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Local language
classroom -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means, and no number appearing signifies the environments that teachers did not use.
In the case of KK school, there are eight forms of reuse of its vacant spaces: art gallery, story room, English activity room, little lamb & ecology park, after school classroom, room for continuing education programs, English classroom for community, and local language classroom. However, the school teachers used only four of them. The teachers’ satisfaction to them with mean score from high to low are: story room (M=3.90), art gallery (M=3.73),
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 75 English activity room (M=3.62) and little lamb and ecology park (M=3.50) as on Table 5.
2. POE survey from students
There are six vitalized school vacant spaces used by the KK school students: art gallery, story room, English activity room, little lamb & ecology garden, after school classroom, and local language classroom. Table 6 shows the students’ satisfaction to the six vitalized environments with mean score from high to low: English activity room (M=4.51), story room (M=4.38), little lamb and ecology park (M=4.33), art gallery (M=4.28), after school classroom (M=4.20), local language classroom (M=4.16).
Table 6: POE survey from students from KK school (N=136) Dimensions
Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable Satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Art gallery 4.16 .96 4.23 .88 4.04 1.00 3.73 1.09 4.13 1.00 4.31 1.02 4.28 .93 Story room 4.07 1.08 4.28 .86 4.26 .91 4.22 .85 4.38 .79 4.33 .90 4.38 .82 English activity room 4.41 .82 4.53 .76 4.36 .90 4.02 .97 4.40 .88 4.47 .81 4.51 .82 Little lamb &
ecology park 3.90 1.23 4.05 1.07 4.01 1.08 3.78 1.22 4.05 1.12 4.13 1.09 4.33 .92 After school
classroom 4.33 .74 4.35 1.01 4.29 .96 4.26 1.01 4.23 .88 4.00 .94 4.20 .76 Local language
classroom 4.21 .98 4.11 1.20 4.16 1.12 3.95 1.08 4.21 1.03 4.32 1.11 4.16 1.12 Room for continuing
education programs -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
English classroom
for community -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means, and no number appearing signifies the environments that students did not use.
3. POE survey from community residents (school volunteers included) Table 7: POE survey from community residents near KK school (N=47)
Dimensions Forms of reuse
Accessibility Large spaces full equipped comfort safety maintainable Satisfaction
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Art gallery 3.59 .62 3.50 .63 3.50 .52 3.62 .77 3.71 .47 3.64 .50 3.88 .62
Story room 3.62 .87 3.58 .79 3.20 .63 3.36 .67 3.64 .81 3.33 .65 3.42 .79
English activity room 4.00 .82 4.00 .82 3.85 .90 3.62 .87 4.00 .88 3.92 .86 4.00 .91 Little lamb &
ecology park 3.27 1.10 3.36 1.12 3.30 .82 3.40 .70 3.70 .95 3.50 .71 3.30 .67 After school
classroom 3.92 .49 3.70 .82 3.56 .88 3.30 .82 3.45 .82 3.45 .69 3.45 .82
Room for continuing
education programs 4.78 .49 4.65 .66 4.65 .66 4.52 .77 4.63 .66 4.65 .66 4.68 .60 English classroom
for community 4.48 .75 4.57 .51 4.40 .68 4.35 .81 4.47 .61 4.40 .75 4.45 .69 Local language
classroom 3.92 .90 3.69 .63 3.85 .67 3.62 .65 3.75 .62 3.67 .89 3.58 .79
Note: numbers inside shades are higher means, numbers in bold font are lower means.
All the seven vitalized school vacant spaces were used by community residents, including school volunteers, near the KK school. Community residents’ satisfaction degrees, with mean scores from high to low, to the seven
environments are: room for continuing education programs (M=4.68), English classroom for community (M=4.45),
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 76 English activity room (M=4.00), art gallery (M=3.88), local language classroom (M=3.58), after school classroom (M=3.45), story room (M=3.42), and little lamb & ecology park (M=3.30) (Table 7).
4. Comparison of awareness between teachers and community residents (school volunteers included)
Comparing mean scores, it is found that there is significant difference between KK school teachers and community residents of the awareness of school sustainability and community relations. The mean scores obtained from community residents are significantly higher than that of school teachers (Table 8).
Table 8: Comparison of awareness toward KK school sustainability and community relations
Subjects Advantages/indicators
Teachers Community residents
t-value
M SD M SD
School Sustainability
Innovate curriculum &teaching 3.74 .86 4.12 .80 -2.22*
Facilitate school transformation 3.75 .92 4.17 .73 -2.37*
Support school in sustainability 3.79 .82 4.19 .74 -2.45*
Community Relations
enhance community residents
friendly relations 3.77 .85 4.21 .77 -2.61*
care the health of the senior 3.53 .87 4.20 .78 -3.86***
strengthen the connection of
school-community 3.81 .86 4.21 .77 -2.36*
assist in community management
3.79 .82 4.21 .77 -2.32*
Note: ***P＜.001，* P＜.05 4.3. General Discussion
From Table 4, the case of ST school, there is no significant difference between school teachers and community residents with regard to the awareness of school sustainability and community relations. But for the case of KK school (Table 8), it is found that the awareness from community residents is significantly higher than that from school teachers.
There are two possible explanations. First, owing to both school teachers and community residents of ST school possess positive perceptions of school sustainability and community relations, statistically there is no significant difference between them. The other possibility is that both school teachers and community residents can utilize all the seven vitalized school environments in the case of ST school, while teachers in the case of KK can only make use of four out of eight vitalized environments. Therefore, it requires further study to find out the difference.
5. Conclusion
5.1. Reuse of vacant spaces does assist school in a sustainable management
In ST school, both school teachers and community residents are aware of school vitalization would be of great help in school sustainability. The school sustainability indicators of “innovate curriculum & teaching,” “facilitate school transformation” and “support school in sustainability” are all scored with means above 4.0. As to the KK school, the mean scores from school teachers are between 3.74 to 3.79, and from community residents above 4.0. However, their perceptions toward school sustainability are positive.
5.2. Reuse of school vacant spaces can strengthen community relations
In the case of ST school, both school teachers and community residents are strongly believe that vitalized school environments will enhance their community relations, revealing in their awareness scores with all the means above 4.00. In the case of KK school, though the awareness mean scores to the school teachers are between 3.53 to 3.81, less
S u s ta iN 2 0 1 3
Page | 77 than that of community residents’, both of them have positive perception with regard to their community relations.
5.3 Users of the vitalized environments having higher awareness on school sustainability and community relations In the case of KK school, community residents’ awareness on school sustainability and community relations is higher than that of school teachers’. The t-test and significant testing (p value) of the comparison of these two are at significant levels.