Gerald Ajam

What the research supports about classrooms, and how strongly

Twenty-three things people say about learning spaces, each rated for how well the evidence holds up, with what was found and the condition that has to hold. Most of what gets said is stronger than what has been shown.

Status Position

Published September 2026

Learning spaces

Claims about classrooms travel faster than the studies behind them. This is my reading of what the research supports and how strongly. Each rating is in words. Two rows are my own observation, marked as practice, not research. The ledger only helps if its last column gets read: most findings hold under conditions, and the conditions are where schools go wrong.

Moderate to strong
Several studies, large samples, consistent direction
Moderate
Good studies, but fewer, or in narrower settings
Emerging
One or two careful studies; promising, not settled
Weak
The evidence mostly points the other way
Not established
Claimed often, shown rarely
Practice-derived
My observation from consults, not a study

The ledger

Twenty-three claims

Showing 23 of 23 claims

Claims about learning spaces and the evidence for each
#The claimEvidenceWhat was foundIt holds when
01The physical classroom affects how much pupils progress.Moderate to strongAbout 16% of the variation in a year’s learning progress across 153 UK primary classrooms was linked to classroom design factors. (Barrett et al., 2015)Primary settings; correlational at scale; later studies have not overturned it.
02Light, air and temperature matter most among design factors.Moderate to strong“Naturalness” (light, temperature, air quality) carried about half the design effect; ventilation improvements are linked to better task performance. (Barrett et al., 2015; Wargocki & Wyon, 2013)Effects depend on starting conditions; badly ventilated rooms gain most.
03Stuffy, poorly ventilated classrooms slow pupils down.Moderate to strongAcross published studies, cutting classroom CO₂ from about 2,100 to 900 ppm made school tasks about 12% faster and 2% more accurate; better ventilation also went with better attendance. (Wargocki et al., 2020)Ventilation rising from very low rates (about 2 to 10 L/s per person); there are no data above that.
04Cooler classrooms improve performance.ModeratePerformance on school tasks improves as classrooms are cooled from warm temperatures toward about 20–22°C. (Wargocki et al., 2019)Mostly temperate-climate studies; tropical, naturally ventilated classrooms are under-studied.
05Noise harms attainment.ModerateHigher classroom and external noise levels are associated with lower attainment in primary pupils. (Shield & Dockrell, 2008)Associations; effects vary by task and pupil.
06Echoey classrooms make lessons harder to follow.ModerateClassroom noise and reverberation go with poorer performance on verbal tasks, more so for young children, second-language learners and pupils with language or attention difficulties. (Klatte et al., 2013)Listening and verbal tasks; the effects are usually small, and not every study controlled for confounds.
07Open-plan classrooms are better for young children’s learning.WeakIn Kindergarten classrooms, the more open the room, the noisier it was, and the worse children did on a speech-perception test. (Mealings et al., 2015; Shield et al., 2010)Holds unless the open space is designed acoustically and listening work is kept away from noisy neighbours.
08A view of greenery helps pupils recover their attention.EmergingHigh-school students in classrooms with green views did better on attention tests and recovered from stress faster; a wider review gave only partial support to nature restoring attention. (Li & Sullivan, 2016; Ohly et al., 2016)Short breaks with a real window view; which kinds of attention benefit is still uncertain.
09Plants in the classroom improve attention and wellbeing.EmergingAcross three field experiments, classrooms with plants were rated more favourably and secondary pupils reported better attention; there was no clear effect on wellbeing or health. (van den Bogerd et al., 2020)How pupils see the room and self-reported attention, after a single lesson; not wellbeing.
10Heavily decorated walls distract young children.EmergingKindergarteners spent more time off task and learned less in a heavily decorated classroom than a sparse one. (Fisher et al., 2014)One well-designed study in young children; do not generalise to older students without care.
11A moderate level of visual stimulation is best.EmergingClassrooms with a middle level of colour and complexity were associated with better progress than very bland or very busy ones. (Barrett et al., 2015)Part of a larger model; “moderate” is not precisely defined.
12Painting a classroom blue calms pupils, and red energises them.WeakResearch on colour and psychological functioning is at an early stage and methodologically weak, and the leading review warns against applying it in real settings. (Elliot, 2015)The review is general, not about classrooms; specific colour prescriptions go beyond the evidence.
13What is on the walls signals who belongs.EmergingObjects and images can signal belonging or exclusion, affecting interest and performance for some groups. (Cheryan et al., 2014)Mostly lab and higher-education evidence; apply thoughtfully.
14Individualisation and ownership help.ModerateClassrooms that pupils could personalise and that suited their age were associated with better progress. (Barrett et al., 2015)Correlational; ownership is partly a teacher practice, not a design.
15Rows are old-fashioned; group tables are always better.WeakA review of eight studies found no single best layout: pupils behave better during individual work in rows, and disruptive pupils gain most. (Wannarka & Ruhl, 2008)Match the layout to the task: rows for independent work, groups for interaction.
16Flexible spaces increase interaction and collaboration.ModerateSecondary students in flexible spaces spent more time interacting and collaborating and less in didactic instruction. (Kariippanon et al., 2019)Changes in interaction, not demonstrated changes in attainment.
17Standing desks improve pupils’ focus and attainment.WeakStanding desks reliably cut sitting time; their effect on learning is untested, and most studies were pilots. (Minges et al., 2016)A health measure, not an academic one.
18Stability balls and wobble seats help children concentrate.WeakA review of low- to moderate-quality studies found some benefit for pupils with attention difficulties; in a later classroom study, pupils were on task less often on balls. (Rollo et al., 2019; Hulac et al., 2022)If at all, for some pupils with attention difficulties, not for whole classes.
19Classrooms should have zones for visual, auditory and kinaesthetic learners.Not establishedThere is virtually no evidence that matching teaching to a learner’s supposed style improves learning, and several good studies contradict it. (Pashler et al., 2008)The review is about teaching, not rooms; applying it to zones is my step. Pupils have preferences, but matching to them has not been shown to help.
20Teachers’ spatial skill can be developed.EmergingTeacher spatial competency is teachable, including in Singapore professional learning; teacher positioning can be mapped. (Mahat & Loh, 2024; Yan et al., 2022)Early evidence; mostly perception and descriptive data.
21Redesigns show early gains that fade.Practice-derivedNovelty inflates first-term results; few studies report year-two effects.Seen across the redesigns I have worked on; not measured.
22Flexible spaces raise long-term attainment.Not establishedLong-term behavioural and attainment effects in secondary schools remain unestablished. (Kariippanon et al., 2019)Treat such claims as hypotheses.
23Removing the teacher’s desk changes teacher behaviour.Practice-derivedIn consults, teachers with small mobile desks and wireless projection moved more and taught less from the front.Observational, not measured.

Sources

References

  1. Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils' learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013
  2. Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Plaut, V. C., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2014). Designing classrooms to maximize student achievement. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214548677
  3. Elliot, A. J. (2015). Color and psychological functioning: A review of theoretical and empirical work. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 368. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00368
  4. Fisher, A. V., Godwin, K. E., & Seltman, H. (2014). Visual environment, attention allocation, and learning in young children: When too much of a good thing may be bad. Psychological Science, 25(7), 1362–1370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614533801
  5. Hulac, D. M., Mickelson, L. R., Briesch, A. M., Maroeca, H., Hartjes, C., Anderson, K., & Ederveen, K. (2022). Stability balls and student on-task behavior. Journal of Behavioral Education, 31(3), 543–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09412-3
  6. Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Lancaster, S. J., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A.-M. (2019). Flexible learning spaces facilitate interaction, collaboration and behavioural engagement in secondary school. PLoS ONE, 14(10), e0223607. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223607
  7. Klatte, M., Bergström, K., & Lachmann, T. (2013). Does noise affect learning? A short review on noise effects on cognitive performance in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 578. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00578
  8. Li, D., & Sullivan, W. C. (2016). Impact of views to school landscapes on recovery from stress and mental fatigue. Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.12.015
  9. Mahat, M., & Loh, C. E. (2024). Teachers' changing perspectives of their spatial competencies: A case study of professional learning in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 152, Article 104797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104797
  10. Mealings, K. T., Demuth, K., Buchholz, J. M., & Dillon, H. (2015). The effect of different open plan and enclosed classroom acoustic conditions on speech perception in Kindergarten children. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(4), 2458–2469. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4931903
  11. Minges, K. E., Chao, A. M., Irwin, M. L., Owen, N., Park, C., Whittemore, R., & Salmon, J. (2016). Classroom standing desks and sedentary behavior: A systematic review. Pediatrics, 137(2), e20153087. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-3087
  12. Ohly, H., White, M. P., Wheeler, B. W., Bethel, A., Ukoumunne, O. C., Nikolaou, V., & Garside, R. (2016). Attention restoration theory: A systematic review of the attention restoration potential of exposure to natural environments. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 19(7), 305–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2016.1196155
  13. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
  14. Rollo, S., Crutchlow, L., Nagpal, T. S., Sui, W., & Prapavessis, H. (2019). The effects of classroom-based dynamic seating interventions on academic outcomes in youth: A systematic review. Learning Environments Research, 22(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-018-9271-3
  15. Shield, B. M., & Dockrell, J. E. (2008). The effects of environmental and classroom noise on the academic attainments of primary school children. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(1), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2812596
  16. Shield, B., Greenland, E., & Dockrell, J. (2010). Noise in open plan classrooms in primary schools: A review. Noise and Health, 12(49), 225–234. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.70501
  17. van den Bogerd, N., Dijkstra, S. C., Tanja-Dijkstra, K., de Boer, M. R., Seidell, J. C., Koole, S. L., & Maas, J. (2020). Greening the classroom: Three field experiments on the effects of indoor nature on students' attention, well-being, and perceived environmental quality. Building and Environment, 171, 106675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106675
  18. Wannarka, R., & Ruhl, K. (2008). Seating arrangements that promote positive academic and behavioural outcomes: A review of empirical research. Support for Learning, 23(2), 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2008.00375.x
  19. Wargocki, P., & Wyon, D. P. (2013). Providing better thermal and air quality conditions in school classrooms would be cost-effective. Building and Environment, 59, 581–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.10.007
  20. Wargocki, P., Porras-Salazar, J. A., & Contreras-Espinoza, S. (2019). The relationship between classroom temperature and children's performance in school. Building and Environment, 157, 197–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.04.046
  21. Wargocki, P., Porras-Salazar, J. A., Contreras-Espinoza, S., & Bahnfleth, W. (2020). The relationships between classroom air quality and children's performance in school. Building and Environment, 173, 106749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106749
  22. Yan, L., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Zhao, L., Deppeler, J., Corrigan, D., & Gašević, D. (2022). How do teachers use open learning spaces? Mapping from teachers' socio-spatial data to spatial pedagogy. In LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (pp. 87–97). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506872
Singapore