1. DOCTORAL FORUM
NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH
VOLUME 7, NUMBER 1, 2010
Greener Schools, Greater Learning,
and the LEED Value
Priscilla D. Johnson
PhD Student in Educational Leadership
Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Prairie View, Texas
William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor and Faculty Mentor
PhD Program in Educational Leadership
Whitlowe R. Green College of Education
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Prairie View, Texas
Hall of Honor (2008)
William H. Parker Leadership Academy, Graduate School
Prairie View A&M University
Member of the Texas A&M University System
Prairie View, Texas
Visiting Lecturer (2005)
Oxford Round Table
University of Oxford
Oxford, England
Distinguished Alumnus (2004)
College of Education and Professional Studies
Central Washington University
Ellensberg, Washington
ABSTRACT
Schools certified under the LEED certification support educational programs are the
beacons to sustain our Earth. Green schools are a mechanism for learning and their
existence is pure example for the future of school facility planning. The purpose of this
article is to discuss the various approaches used in green school designs and touches on
research that shows the benefits of these techniques that lead to Greener Schools, Greater
Learning and the LEED Value.
1

2. DOCTORAL FORUM
NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH
2_____________________________________________________________________________________
Across our country in almost 15 thousand schools, students, teachers, staff, and
administrators suffer because their air is unhealthy to breathe (Kats, 2006). This
dangerous epidemic appears in forms as headaches, fatigue, and sneezing (Kellum &
Olson, 2003). The “go green” movement has become increasingly favorable and of
concern across areas of our lives. “Going green” is defined by an entity’s sustainability
efforts, the material it uses in infrastructure, and endeavors, which consider the
environment in all facets of operations. For this research, we will discover the meaning
and benefits for “going green” in the k-12 educational setting. Green schools offer a
healthy, relaxed, and secure environment (Evans, 2008). Voluntarily certified under the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), green schools provide a
variety of benefits, with slightly higher costs to construct, which ultimately under
shadows its payback.
Purpose of the Article
The purpose of this article is to discuss the learning and health benefits of creating
a healthier school environment for all inhabitants. For school facility planners and
administrators, this information should to be incorporated in school policies and
practices, which influence remodeling or building of schools. In addition, this work will
explore historical accounts of the learning environment and enlighten facility planners on
the LEED certification.
Green Schools
According to Glenn Earthman (2009), until the late part of the twentieth century,
architects and designers failed to recognize the impact design and construction of schools
have on the physical learning environment. The cost for construction was the greatest
concern. As student population increased, so did the need for educational space.
Together, school boards and school administrators assumed cost effective school
construction meant more resources to erect additional buildings. Those decisions have
created an unprecedented amount of school facilities that are simply unfit for learning. In
addition, Kats (2006) noted, over 60 million students, faculty, and staff across our
country operate in unhealthy environments, which were not built to produce the best
overall value.
Earthman (2009) defined green schools as an energy and water conserving
mechanism, designed from material that is not harsh on the environment. Green schools
support their natural environment. In addition, the outside world is incorporated into the
building design. As one strides through the corridors, they feel as if nature was
responsible for the design. Green schools can also be identified as “sustainable or high
performing schools” (Kellum & Olson, 2003). “The U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC) defines a green school as a building that creates a healthy environment that is
conductive to learning while saving energy, resources, and money” (Earthman, 2009, p.
260). In essence, a green school becomes elemental to the learning and teaching process.
Schools using green designs become not a place for learning, but a tool for learning.

3. PRISCILLA D. JOHNSON AND WILLIAM ALLAN KRITSONIS
_____________________________________________________________________________________3
Historically, schools built prior to the “go green” evolution wiped out trees, were
composed of harsh material, and lacked the ability to foster a nurturing learning
environment. Yet, during the 1940’s, a man named William Caudell, author of Toward
Better School Design, started researching school designs. His book emphasized the
effectiveness of daylight combining specific window, overhangs, and skylight designs.
His designs did not add burdensome heat or glares on chalkboard or desks. In addition,
Caudell’s book demonstrated how to create natural ventilation in classrooms by locating
vents and windows in the most strategic locations. Ideally, Caudell set the standard in this
era and the future for school facility designs. Interestingly, in the 1960’s, the introduction
of air conditioning and fluorescent lights in the classroom led to the dismissal of creating
an environmentally friendly design for educational settings. The air conditioning and
fluorescent lighting were thought to be an improvement to the classroom. New schools
began to have smaller windows, which were criticized as being distracting to students
(Linn, 2008). The air conditioning and smaller windows led to bigger issues that are
widespread dilemmas in many schools today.
The Environmental Problem with Our Schools
Very few schools are designed to create the healthiest and most effective learning
environment for students and air quality is not consistently regulated or monitored. The
traditional air conditioner allows students to be cooler during hotter months. However, a
shortage of funds in some schools may indicate a lack of resources to service these
systems (Kats, 2006). In turn, inhabitants of the school could suffer from mold
contamination and poor air quality. These factors send many to the doctor each year,
raising out-of-pocket expense and health care costs. With students and teachers spending
nearly 85 to 90 percent of their time indoors, the effects of improper facility design is an
imperative issue. Inadequate school facilities not only have a detrimental effect on the
physical health of individuals, but their emotional health as well. Design features such as
lighting, materials and mechanical systems, and acoustics have behavioral effects on
students and teachers. To explain, insufficient lighting has the ability decrease student
academic performance. Low lighting and glares on a desk interferes with a student’s
ability to concentrate and achieve objectives. Bodies have the ability to adjust to certain
adverse situations and sometimes in the classroom; we find that students have adjusted to
an environment not supportive of learning. Lighting fixture location and the room’s color
affect light quality (brightness, width of spectrum, and glare). Classrooms without
windows leave a lackluster feeling in students and teachers. Until recently, school
administrators thought windowless classrooms would eliminate outside distractions and
save on cooling and heating costs. On the contrary, Dr. Paul Grocoff conducted a study to
determine whether kids behaved best under false lighting or under natural light. He found
that students felt “the worst” or behavior was not at “best” under traditional lighting. In
addition, students felt “at their best” and performed better under natural lighting, which
was found to be more comfortable (PPRC, 2004). Many studies surrounding school
design concentrate on student and teacher production. Kats (2006) emphasis how white-
collar and non-factory worker positions require just as much concentration, mental

4. DOCTORAL FORUM
NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH
4_____________________________________________________________________________________
capacity, and physical effort as in academic settings. The health effects for self-controlled
temperature settings and ventilation were studied in 107 “European” buildings housing
over 11,000 workers. This study found that when the individual had the ability to control
the room temperature and direction of airflow, their productivity increased. On the other
hand, workers who had little control over temperature were less productive. Likewise, in
classrooms, teachers and students suffer because they often do not have the ability to
control temperature in the classroom. Conventional (non-green schools) cost more to
operate than green schools. These schools lack the best r-value insulation; structures are
sometimes similar to prisons. These buildings also contain structural components that do
not support learning. In addition, these schools burn more energy, while being a
contributor to the release of fossil fuels and the global warming outcry. “Science
published a review of over 900 scientific studies on global warming…a consensus among
climate scientists that serious human induced global warming is happening…there can no
longer be genuine doubt that human-made gases are the dominant cause of global
warming” (Kats, 2006, p. 7). As schools, industrial plants, and automobiles were built;
few thoughts and action plans were developed to combat the harmful effects of fossil
fuels and energy consumption. The “go green” movement and its current endeavors
across all sectors have proven to be a significant piece of the solution to our global
warming crisis.
The Benefits of Green Schools
Green schools not only change the way buildings are constructed, designed, and
utilized, they have an impact on the way we view and respect our environment. Green
schools are constructed with the most valuable material whose waste has a lesser chance
of entering landfills. The construction of green schools takes an all around approach to
land and energy conservation. No shortcuts are taken and the idea of creating a product
friendly to our environment is constructed from the ground up. In addition, everyone
involved in the facilities planning process for green schools embrace the goal to create
the best eco-friendly environment possible. Administrators are aware green schools have
certain attributes, as described by the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative’s
definition of a “high-performance green school:”
1. It is less costly to operate than a conventional school building;
2. It is designed to enhance the learning and working environment for students
and teachers;
3. It conserves important resources such as energy and water. (Earthman, 2009, p.
260)
Kats (2006) explains how green schools not only provide the most efficient
learning environment, but also boosts the community’s image, have the ability to recruit
and retain teachers, reduce student absences, and increases student performance. These
benefits stem from the supportive learning environment green schools create. Their
modern designs, which incorporate the natural environment, make the local communities
superior among its constituents. In addition, Washington State reported a 5% decrease in

5. PRISCILLA D. JOHNSON AND WILLIAM ALLAN KRITSONIS
_____________________________________________________________________________________5
teacher turnover in their green schools. Furthermore, constructing green schools help
provide jobs for citizens. For instance, in New York, the City Council passed legislation
in 2005, to build “significant” constructions from green material in order to boost jobs
(Kats, 2006, p. 14). In evaluation of the complex procedures involved with creating green
schools, construction costs are higher than conventional schools. “Waste diversion,” is an
associated, yet beneficial cost in construction of green schools. Waste diversion decreases
the amount of recyclable material in landfills by sending it to recycling plants for
separation and further usage. Furthermore, a study found when the process for every
1,000 pounds of waste is disposed for no future use, only 2.5 jobs were created and 4.7
jobs were created for the same amount of waste being diverted to recycling plants.
Having greener schools is critical to the education of our children; we see the benefits in
the local community as well. To expound, Capital E’s report on Greening America’s
Schools, states that out of 30 green schools studied, 32% reported using less water than
schools built from non-sustainable material (Kats, 2006). This finding alone is an
important step to conserving our natural resources.
Although most of our world is made of water, most is unfit to drink, due to years
of pollution. Approaches that serve to conserve water include, “low-volume toilets, low-
flow faucets, and automatic shutoff valves” (Kennedy, 2007, p. 2). In addition, Kennedy
noted that schools could benefit from plants and vegetables that survive low rainfall
climates. These plants will also benefit from the usage and nourishment of rainwater
being caught in canisters and stored for later use (Kennedy, 2007). The go green
endeavors are seen in products and stores across our country. Many companies are
creating recyclable products in the form of pens, dish-scrubbing brushes, boxes, paper,
and tissue. Comparing, all these products can be used in a school setting, leading to a
holistic approach to a green school.
Green schools can be constructed in various, yet creative ways. Earthman (2009,
pp. 260-261) noted guidelines green designs and engineering criteria should include:
 Locating schools near public transportation to reduce pollution and land
development impacts;
 Placing a building on a site to minimize its environmental impact and optimize
daylight and solar grain;
 Designing irrigation systems and indoor plumbing systems to conserve water;
 Designing energy and lighting systems to conserve fossil fuels and maximize the
use of renewable resources;
 Selecting materials that are healthy, biodegradable, easily recycled, minimize the
impacts on landfill, and otherwise reduce waste; and
 Creating an indoor environmental quality that provides occupants with thermal
comfort, and acoustic, visual, and air quality.
In addition, Kennedy suggested that green school construction should support local
business by purchasing their resources and products. This effort plants money back in the
community while developing its local economy. Furthermore, facility planners and their
architects should research local contractors who specialize in sustainable building
construction. Some states are now offering incentives to build greener schools. For
example, the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative is providing a $15 billion grant to

6. DOCTORAL FORUM
NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH
6_____________________________________________________________________________________
schools that incorporate environmentally friendly systems and green designs in
construction of their schools (2007).
Green schools not only provide a comfortable, safe, and economical learning
environment, they also are tools for learning and teaching. Green designs create the
opportunity to teach about “ecology, resource management, and the effects of
construction and design decisions have on the environment” (Kennedy, 2007, p. 2). This
is a unique and self-fulfilling aspect of green schools because it allows students to see the
tangible results of using energy conserving mechanisms such as solar panels and
daylighting. Daylighting is a term to describe the use of natural lighting in designs. This
is accomplished by using windows that have the ability to adjust or dim light and are
placed in strategic locations throughout the building. Daylighting can decrease energy
consumption by thirty to seventy percent over time because this technique does not
depend on electricity (Kennedy, 2007). This energy conserving technique has been used
throughout homes and offices for a substantial time. This technique allows students to
concentrate and see better. According to the U.S. Green Building Council (2009, April),
students who were exposed to daylighting improved 26% faster on math tests than
students who received little or no daylighting. In some instances, students and teachers
can get a “break” from daily routines by a quick glance out the window. Some would also
argue that it accommodates those with disorders such as claustrophobia.
From this research, creating the most valuable educational environment for
students and teachers, while conserving our natural resources, are by products of greener
schools. Yet, not all school districts have adopted resolutions and endeavors to transform
to greener campuses. According to Kats (2006), many executives surveyed discourage
greener buildings due to higher construction costs, lack of awareness of benefits, and
difficulty validating benefits. Research shows high performing schools costs are
somewhat higher than conventional schools, but the benefits appear as better education of
students and improved environment quality. According to USGBC (2009, January),
nearly 10% of commercial construction projects in 2010 have construction goals to
sustain our environment. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
certification makes projects as this superior to construction projects built on conventional
school designs.
LEED Certification
This certification was developed but the U.S. Green Building Council with
guidelines for constructing greener schools. This certification classifies schools as green
or high performance. This certification supports a holistic approach to school buildings,
while giving attention to specific areas. The LEED certification has been around for over
a decade and recently developed guidelines for school systems. In 2007, six categories
were created to grade school systems. The categories include “Sustainable Sites, Water
Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, Indoor Environment
Quality, and Innovation and Design Process” (Earthman, 2009, p. 261). The USGBC
rates each school, by information from construction documentation, on a scale from 29-
79. After totaling scores, schools are classified as Platinum (which is the most regarded
rating) with a score if 58 - 79, Gold, Silver, or Certified (Earthman, 2009). This

7. PRISCILLA D. JOHNSON AND WILLIAM ALLAN KRITSONIS
_____________________________________________________________________________________7
certification is highly esteemed because its use worldwide. The recertification system is a
tool for schools to maintain building structures and systems. Most importantly, state
legislators have emerged as leaders in the green school movement. Currently, 32 states
have formed green school caucuses and groups, who will network, provide policy
interpretation, and costs/benefits of green infrastructure in schools (USGBC, 2010,
March). These events are important and open a threshold of possibility because most
monetary and policy decisions for schools are made on state levels.
The LEED certification has taken tremendous strides across our nation. So far,
there are 185 LEED Certified School Projects, 1,521 LEED Registered School Projects,
and 10 states that require green school construction (USGBC, 2009, September).
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the green approach to school construction provides remarkable
benefits including ranking as a mechanism for learning, a leader for sustainability, and
accommodating learning and teaching needs. Through time and research, we see the
catastrophic effects harmful emissions, waste, and misuses of natural resources have on
our environment. The LEED certification is a tool for school campuses, both K-12 and
colleges, to not only transform and create greener schools, but sets the stage and way of
thinking for creating a more sustainable future.
References
Earthman, G. (2009). Planning education facilities. USA: Rowman and Littlefield
Education.
Evans, D. (2008). Little green schoolhouses. Architectural Record: Schools of the 21st
Century, 2, 1-2. Retrieved from
http://archrecord.construction.com/schools/0701_greenFeature-2.asp
Kennedy, M. (2007, December). Go green. American School & University, 80(4), 22.
Retrieved from http://asumag.com/green/university_go_green/
Kats, G. (2006, October). Greening America’s schools: Costs and benefits. Capital E
Report. Retrieved from
http://www.cap-e.com/Capital-E/Resources_%26_Publications.htm
Kellum, S., & Olson, S. (2003, November, 24). The impact of sustainable buildings on
educational achievements in K-12. Retrieved from
http://www.leonardoacademy.org/recent-publications/reports/145-the-impact-of-
sustainable-buildings-on-educational-achievements-in-k-12-schools-a-leonardo-
academy-white-paper-.html
Linn, C. (2008). History lesson. Architectural Record: Schools of the 21st Century, 2, 1.
Retrieved from
http://archrecord.construction.com/schools/08_History_Lesson.asp
Pollution Prevention Resource Center (PPRC). (2004). Sustainable design for schools.
Retrieved from http://www.pprc.org/pubs/schools/design.cfm

8. DOCTORAL FORUM
NATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PUBLISHING AND MENTORING DOCTORAL STUDENT RESEARCH
8_____________________________________________________________________________________
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). (2009, January). Green building facts. Retrieved
from
http://www.usgbcaz.org/storage/usgbcaz/documents/USGBC_Publications/gbf_gr
een_building_by_the_numbers_2009.pdf
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). (2009, April). Green building facts. Retrieved
from www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=5961
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). (2009, September). K-12 schools update.
Retrieved from http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2082
U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). (2010, March). 50 for 50: State capitals make a
difference. Retrieved from
http://www.greenschoolbuildings.org/action/join/50_for_50.aspx