ERGONOMICS HAZARDS IN LECTURE HALLS AND SEMINAR ROOMS AT CENTRAL OF TEACHING FACILITIES (CTFs), UNIMAS

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

Ergonomics is a field that brings completely new transformations in

designing area. The focus of the design elements nowadays is based on human

activities and environment. Therefore, ergonomics approach is necessary in order

to maintain human comfort, safety and health.

The awareness of ergonomics is indeed crucial within today’s society, not

only within the industrial field, but also within the academic environment (Abdul

Halim, 2009). The design of the lecture hall and seminar rooms shall follow the

rules of ergonomics to attain the good safety and health of the user, in particular

toward the students and the lecturers.

2

1.1 Background of study

1.1.1 Ergonomics Hazards

Ergonomics hazards can be referred to as physical environment that could

cause strain and danger toward human body. Ergonomics hazards occur when the

physical tools or apparatus are poorly design and do not fulfilled the proper safety

and ergonomics design (Agboola, 2011). Meanwhile, exposing ourselves to the

poorly design equipment might cause some sore-muscle at the beginning of the

day or the following days. However, a long-term exposure may cause some

serious injuries.

The intervention of the human factor is hardly to be practice within school

environment. Indeed, the awareness of the incorporation of human factor is a bit

late in term of designing the school furniture (Chery and Dian, 2003).

The exposure of danger and insecurity of students and lecturers safety is

high before the intervention of human factors. Students and lecturers usually

complain about the eyes discomfort due to the position of the computer and the

space between the screen on the wall and height of the seat (William & Zingler,

1999).

Ergo-safe lecture halls environment is necessary in order to supply the best

teaching and learning aids towards the students and the lecturers besides having a

comfortable and nice academic environment. Therefore, the lecture halls and

seminar rooms of Central of Teaching Facilities (CTFs) shall have this element to

create a zero tolerant toward the ergonomics hazards.

3

1.1.2 Central of Teaching Facilities (CTFs)

Figure 1.1 Map of the west campus and position of each CTFs

i. CTF1- The position of this CTF is located alongside the Faculty of

Engineering (FENG). Most of the students from the Faculty of Computer

Science and Information Technology (FCSIT), Faculty of Resource

Science and Technology (FRST) and Faculty of Engineering (FENG) will

used CTF1 as their other alternative venue for academic studies.

ii. CTF2- The location of this CTF is simply surrounded by the Faculty of

Cognitive Sciences and Human Development (FCSHD) and the Faculty of

Economics and Business (FEB).

iii. CTF3 and CTF 4- Both of the CTFs are officially incorporated during the

opening batch of 2011/2012. It is situated between the Cempaka

residential college and the Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB).

Both CTFs are only equipped with seminar rooms and no lecture halls

were present within the facility.

UNIMAS ‘s WEST

CAMPUS CTF 3 & CTF 4

CTF 2

CTF 1

4

1.2 Background of Organization

Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS) is Malaysia’s 8th

public university

and was the first to be aspired under the Wawasan 2020. UNIMAS also become

the first university established in Sarawak. UNIMAS was built on the 1st October

1992 and officially incorporated on 24th

December 1992, meanwhile Professor

Dato’ Zawawi Ismail was appointed as the first Vice Chancellor of UNIMAS by

YB Datuk Amar Dr. Sulaiman Hj. Daud, Malaysia’s former Minister of

Education. On 8th

August 1993, 118 students registered under two establish

faculties, Faculty of Social Sciences (FSS) and Faculty of Resource Science and

Technology (FRST).

On the following year, another four faculties were built, denoted as Faculty

of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development (FCSHD), Faculty of Applied

and Creative Arts (FACA), Faculty of Engineering (FENG) and Faculty of

Computer Science and Information Technology (FCSIT).

On 1st April 1994, Sarawak’s former Chief Minister, TYT Tun Datuk

Patinggi (Dr) Ahmad Zaidi Adruce bin Mohammed Noor was appointed as the

first Chancellor of UNIMAS. The period between 1995 until the end of December

1996 saw another future in establishing UNIMAS as one of the suitable venue for

further study, as another two faculties was officially received the students’ entry

from the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences (FMHS-1995) and Faculty of

Economics and Business (FEB-1996). Altogether there are eight faculties

according to the original plan. UNIMAS also consists by five institutes and eight

centers including the language studies launched by the year 2012.

UNIMAS also comprise with the enrolment of the pre-university students

that is allocated at the east campus. Undergraduates and postgraduates are

allocated at the west campus. Meanwhile, Faculty of Medicine and Health

Sciences is located nearby Sarawak General Hospital. UNIMAS is certified with

the prestigious MS ISO 9001:2000 due to the excellence core management

processes of student entries and certification of the graduates. UNIMAS has

achieved many prestigious awards and acknowledge researches by peers in at least

5

three areas; biotechnological researches, ICT and biodiversity. UNIMAS

continues its legacy by allowing more entries of students, maintaining and

upgrading the management quality for future reference.

1.3 Problem Statement

Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS) has four (4) Central of Teaching

Facilities (CTFs). Each of CTF 1 and CTF 2 has six seminar rooms and a lecture

hall. Meanwhile, CTF 3 and CTF 4 have 6 six seminar rooms. UNIMAS Official

Portal (2012) has mentioned that a total of 4,142 students has enrolled for the

September intake 2012/2013 and recorded as the highest enrolment of fresh

undergraduate students so far in UNIMAS history.

Therefore, the demand of using lecture halls, tutorial rooms and other

facilities seem to be increase. In fact, the design of the rooms should be

comfortable and able to compensate any of the mislead environments such as:

i. Poor design of the chairs

ii. Inappropriate height or size of the tables

iii. Space for table and chair

iv. Quality of visual display that is projected on the projection screen

v. Ventilation systems

vi. The natural light illumination of the room and light intensity of the

projector

The issues that were appointed above are important before designing the

appropriate lecture halls and other rooms. Ergonomics hazards will exist in

correspondence to the tools that are poorly designed, thus might lead to the

musculoskeletal injuries such as neck, back pain, eyestrain or headache.

6

1.4 Objective of the Study

This research has two objectives categories, denoted as general objective

and specific objective.

1.4.1 General Objective

To study the ergonomics hazards in lecture halls and seminar rooms at

Central of Teaching Facilities (CTFs) in Universiti Malaysia Sarawak.

1.4.2 Specific Objective

i. To identify the level of exposure regarding ergonomics hazards among

UNIMAS students

ii. To determine the differences between the comfort of the table and the

chair towards the weight and the height among UNIMAS students

iii. To determine the relationship between ergonomics hazards and its

effects

iv. To suggests the appropriate solutions to overcome the ergonomics

hazards in the CTFs

1.5 Null Hypotheses

i. H01: There is no significant difference among students’ height toward the

comfort of the table

ii. H02: There is no significant difference among students’ height toward the

comfort of the chair

iii. H03: There is no significant difference among students’ weight toward the

comfort of the chair

7

iv. H04: There is no significant relationship between the design of the chair

and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of

CTFs as their learning venues and facilities

v. H05: There is no significant relationship between the design of the table

and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of

CTFs as their learning venues and facilities.

vi. H06: There is no significant relationship between the space for table and

chair and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities

vii. H07: There is no significant relationship between the design of projector

screen and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities.

viii. H08: There is no significant relationship between the lighting condition and

its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of


ix. H09: There is no significant relationship between the ventilation system

condition and its effect toward students that used lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities

x. H010: There is no significant relationship between the design of the chair

and its effect on the respondents’ neck

xi. H011: There is no significant relationship between the design of the chair

and its effect on the respondents’ shoulder

xii. H012: There is no significant relationship between the design of the chair

and its effect on the respondents’ upper back body

xiii. H013: There is no significant relationship between the design of the table

and its effect on the respondents’ elbow

xiv. H014: There is no significant relationship between the space for table and

chair and its effect on the respondents’ lower back body

xv. H015: There is no significant relationship between the design of the

projector screen and the effect of headache

xvi. H016: There is no significant relationship between the design of the

projector screen and the effect of blurred near vision

8

xvii. H017: There is no significant relationship between the design of the

projector screen and the effect of eyestrain

xviii. H018: There is no significant relationship between the ventilation system

condition and the effect of cold hands and feet

xix. H019: There is no significant relationship between the ventilation system

condition and the effect of palpitation in the chest

xx. H020: There is no significant relationship between the ventilation system

condition and the effect of anxiety

1.6 Conceptual Framework

1.7 The Scope of Study

The study is carry out in Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS). The

focus of this study is to identify the ergonomics hazards in lecture halls and

seminar rooms at Central of Teaching Facilities (CTFs), which are located at the

west campus. The study does not include the participations from the Faculty of

Medicine and Health Science, which was situated at the center hall of Kuching,

Sarawak. Respondents are UNIMAS students that used the lecture halls and

seminar rooms as their academic venue. The 150 students will be chosen

randomly by the researcher.

Independent variable

The weight and the height of the

respondents

The design of the chair, table,

space for table and chair,

projector screen, lighting

condition and ventilation system

condition in lecture halls and

seminar rooms

Dependent variable

The comfort of the table and the

chair

The existence of ergonomics

hazards (effect of

musculoskeletal pains, visual

and lighting impairment and the

symptoms associated with

dysfunctional breathing

patterns).

9

1.8 Significance of Study

The essential of the study is to provide knowledge and share information

within the UNIMAS community about the important issue of ergonomics hazards

in the lecture halls, seminar rooms and its facilities. In addition, the community

should be aware about the design of the lecture halls and seminar rooms. Human

need the proper comfort, therefore the awareness on the design of lecture halls and

seminar room are indeed crucial. This will determine on how far does the design

suit user in term of ergonomics aspect. This study can become an additional

resource and reference.

1.9 Limitation of Study

Limitation is obviously due to the focus group element. Some of the

students might not use lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs for each of the

subjects taken and the same room for every semester. Besides that, the data

collections are based on the usage of the lecture halls and seminar rooms during

semester II (2012/2013). Thus, only students of the second (2nd) year and above

are qualified to answer the questionnaire.

On the other hand, lecture halls and seminar rooms that has non-adjustable

chair are the main venue of the research. Seminar room 4 and seminar room 6 of

CTF 3 and CTF4 does not has the n0n-adjustable chair, thus the research does not

involve both of these seminar rooms. Other than CTFs, students are also provided

with other facilities such as tutorial rooms, experimental laboratory and studio.

The availability of any kind of these facilities is according to each of the faculty

respectively. The 150 respondents do not reflect the true population of UNIMAS

student community. Thus the data collected will not reflect the UNIMAS

population in general.

10

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEWS

2.0 Chapter Overview

In this chapter, previous research literatures are viewed in order to attain a

better understanding and assist the underlying component of this research. The

components are including ergonomics, ergonomics hazards in the classroom,

musculoskeletal disorders and its relation with the lecture hall environment.

11

2.1 Ergonomics

Ergonomics is also known as human factors, which is the study of how

system component or physical jobs are fit into human specialty, comfort and

limitation. Ergonomics is indeed an important element that should be considered

within the designing process of any product.

Preece et. al (1994) has mentioned that ergonomics concept can measure the

problem within the product according to these factors:

i. People vary in may appearances

ii. People vary in shapes and sizes

iii. People vary in culture perspective

iv. People have different thoughts and point of views

v. People come from different specialties and professions

2.2. Ergonomics Hazards in The Classroom

Abdul Halim (2009) had mentioned that the application of ergonomics

aspect is being less appreciated in educational institutes but actively applied in the

workplaces area. Classrooms or lecture halls are another place that can be

considered as actively accompanied by the students and the educators. It is the

place where the students and the respective lecturers doing some educational

interaction. The facilities within the rooms are used according to its function,

however if the facilities’ design or the function face the lack of ergonomics

intervention, this could lead into the development of ergonomics hazards within

the rooms (Syazwan Aizat et. al, 2009).

12

2.2.1 Chair and Table

Syazwan Aizat et. al (2010) had evaluated the ergonomics intervention in

reducing the ergonomics risk factors of musculoskeletal disorder among children.

During the classroom’s lessons, the children will experience bad posture of sitting

where the head, back and neck rotate and flex for a long duration of times.

Syazwan Aizat et. al (2010) also mention that children spend 30% of their class

hours with sitting posture and their musculoskeletal system could be affected by a

bad and awkward posture.

The intervention desk and chair is use by the 2nd

grade (8 year old) and 5th

grade (11 year old) which are develop based on the previous study of

anthropometry data collection (Nurul et. al, 2009). The desk is equipped with the

personal drawer so that the children do not have to bring the same textbook

repetitively. While the curve of the chair backrest and desk with the slanted tops

are develop according to the previous study by Mandal (1982) which suggests that

the curve of the backrest design is to support the reflexes of the back skeletal. The

children will lean on the backrest as their listening to the lesson, whereas sits

forward to the slanted top desk when they are about to do work.

Figure 2.1 Furniture’s ergonomics design (chair on the left, desk on the right)

13

Mandal (1982) also suggest that the chair must have 900 idea for sitting

support, 600

on the hip joint flexion, while 300 at the lumbar spinal. This will

avoid hazards and help to persevere children to sit 4-5 hours per day in school.

The space between slanted top desk and the chair indeed another point that should

be considered as people are come with different size (Preece et. al, 1994).

Atherton (2010) stated that traditional row arrangement classroom layout

will allow eye-contact among lecturers and students during teaching-learning

process but it may distract others if space provided is limited. This is due the fact

that when a person asked permission to go outside from the row, it indeed

distracts other attention. Nevertheless, arrangement between presentation screen

and seats in lecture halls also should be taken into consideration. Designing a

class with a lot of seats without slightly aware of having this inappropriate

whiteboard or display area position arrangement will makes students undergo the

neck aches, glare effect and eyestrain which could threaten their health in future

due to the long-term exposure. BRANZ Ltd (n.d) declared that the extreme

viewing angle cause the neck and eye discomfort due to the over focusing on the

screen or the whiteboard.

Grimes and Legg (2004) proposed the study on the extension

musculoskeletal disorder for school days until the working life due to the fact of

lacking ergonomics intervention towards the school chair and desk. During the

school period, most of the students are exposed to the poor posture of sitting thus

will cause the significance neck and back discomfort in adult’s working life. The

awareness of the ergonomics is being less concern in the classroom’s environment

however it is highly practice at the adult’s workplace. Therefore, the theory of

having the initial pit of musculoskeletal disorder could be related to the neck and

back pain during adolescent.

14

2.2.2 Lighting and Visibility of Display Area

In advance rooms such as the auditorium or seminar rooms, it is essential to

have the capability to adjust the light of the main stage and that light must be

independent light compare to the light above the students so that the stray light

can be avoided on the display area (Støfringsdal, 2010). If the room is equipped

by the distant learning, it is necessary to install the combination of incandescent

bulb and halogen bulb above the stage plus ascending seat. Støfringsdal (2010)

also state that the direct and indirect light should be install about the stage. While

vertical and horizontal light component will able to strike off the shadow onto the

lecturer’s face and at the same time guaranteed good rendering of the projected

screen.

Støfringsdal (2010) added in his description of having all fixtures within the

rooms except either the blackboard or the display area needs to have individual

dimming function. The light above the blackboard or display area should be able

to be turn on or off and its function is independent compare to the other lighting.

Indeed, it must be separated in zones so it can be control behind the powered

screens. Direct light toward the screen should be control easily by the lecturer in

order to reduce the stray light that came from the direct light. The control switch

could be placed separated which enable the lecturer to dim the direct light when

projector is in used.

2.2.3 Ventilation System

There would be four basic factors of temperature that will greatly affect

body temperature; air temperature, radiant temperature, humidity and air

movement (Sleeman & Rockwell, 1981). Nowadays, every classroom or lecture

hall is installed with air-conditioning system. Student studied in a comfortable

environment with the availability of this system, however it may bring such a vice

versa result if the system is malfunction and need a few days for maintenance.

15

BRANZ Ltd (2007) state that 18oC- 20

oC is the ideal temperature for any

type of classroom. Within this range of temperature, the temperature of the

external environment and the classroom environment is being exchanged. In

addition, the temperature of the classroom may become hot due to the fact that

human release heat from their body. Thus, having numerous of people within the

small rooms altogether with malfunction ventilation system might cause some

difficulty of air flows within the rooms.

Harmon (1953) suggested that 18oC to 20

oC is a good temperature for

classroom. The set button temperature is designed slightly to enable the students

or the educators of the classroom to control the humidity as well as to keep the

ventilation airflow. Unwanted odor can be reduce and at the same time allowing

the air exchange involving carbon dioxide and oxygen.

2.3 Anthropometry

Daneshmandi et. al (2008) pointed out that anthropometric measurement

such as popliteal height (distance from the underside of the foot to the underside

of the thigh at the knees), knee height, buttock-popliteal length and elbow height

should be considered before designing any classroom furniture. This measurement

will decide the proper measurement of furniture dimension thus allowing the

comfort and correct sitting posture (Knight & Noyes, 1999).

Table 2.1 The definitions of dimensions used in segment proportions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thigh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knees

16

Chery and Dian (2003) revealed that the application of human factors and

its implementation in designing the school furniture is rarely to be incorporated by

tradition. However, the awareness started when people realize that children should

have proper posture at the young age because during that period, young children

will inhabit their own sitting pattern, which would determine whether the sitting is

appropriate with the children’s body dimension while using the chair. Yeats

(1997) believe that as these children grow up, the sitting will always stays on its

own pattern and the possibility to change its pattern seem to be redundant in term

of familiarization and habit.

2.4 Musculoskeletal

2.4.1 Musculoskeletal Disorder

Chaiklieng, Suggaravetsiri and Boonprakob (2010) stated that ergonomics

hazards closely related with the increase effect of the musculoskeletal pain. A

persevere musculoskeletal pain is common in today’s society, where its attack

people for at least on the average of 70% - 85% of low back pain in one lifespan.

The theories that assume to contribute to this disorder are:

i. Individual factor (specialties and limitation)

ii. Anthropometric (body size and physical abilities)

iii. Ergonomics factor (workstation and instrument such as lifting,

repetitive work)

iv. Physical factor (the extend of sitting and awkward body posture)

v. Psychosocial factor (stress and muscle tension)

17

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY


In this section, the description includes the research instrument, research

design, research location, population sample, reliability, research procedure data

collection and data analysis.

18

3.1 Research Design

Predicted hypotheses will be tested according to the data collection using

questionnaire survey. The research is focusing on the quantitative method as the

main component to measure the data. Questionnaire will help to prove and

validate the relationship between two variables.

3.2 Research Instrument

The instruments of this research involve the use of questionnaire survey

technique. Questionnaire survey technique is a quantitative method. The

questionnaire is adapted from the modification of four different existing

questionnaires:

• Office Ergonomics Hazards Identification Checklist (ESA) (2011)

• Nordiq Body Map Questionnaire (2009)

• Computer Vision Questionnaire(2009)

• The Nijmegen Questionnaire (2004)

The purpose of the modification is to adapt the CTFs’ lecture halls and

seminar rooms’ environment, thus allowing the identification of ergonomics

hazards and its effect toward students’ health and safety.

The questionnaire technique consists of two categories of questions, “close-

ended” and “open-ended”. “Close-ended” questions are structured questions and

Likert scale is used to show a multiple of choices. The respondents must only

choose one answer for one typical question. Five multiple of choices are denoted

as:

19

1 – Strongly Disagree

2 – Disagree

3 – Neutral

4 – Agree

5 – Strongly Agree

An “Open-ended” question is an unstructured question. Respondents are

free to give their thoughts and opinions without any limitation. However, the

answer description given by the respondents might be too abstract and difficult to

be explained in appropriate definitions. In addition, “open-ended” question is a

common part of questionnaire technique that was left without any answer given

by most of the respondents.

The questionnaire consists of four sections:

1. Section A – demographic question (respondent’s background)

2. Section B – questions related to identification of ergonomics

hazards within lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs

3. Section C – questions related to the identification of injuries while

interact with the facilities and other components in lecture halls

and seminar rooms of CTFs

4. Section D – the respondents’ thoughts or opinions about the whole

component of lecture halls and seminar rooms and their

suggestions for future improvement of lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs

In section B, the questionnaire consist of 23 questions which involve the

division questions for chair, table, space for table and chair, visual display

projected to projected screen, lightning and ventilation system respectively.

20

In section C, it has 3 part sub-questions:

Question C (1) is the effect of musculoskeletal pains. It will be

related with the design of the table, design of the chair and space

for table and chair.

Question C (2) is the effect of the visual projected on the projector

screen and the lighting factor.

Question C (3) is the effect of the ventilation system condition

which may have the symptoms associated with dysfunctional

breathing patterns.

3.3 Research Location

The research is carried out at the west campus of Universiti Malaysia

Sarawak (UNIMAS). The main focus location is at Central of Teaching Facilities

(CTFs).

3.4 Population Sample

In this research, stratified random sampling is used. This type of sampling is

used to target the right students to response toward the questionnaire. The target

population are students of UNIMAS’s west campus which used the Central of

Teaching Facilities (CTFs) as their academic venue. Besides that, the students

must have the experience of using the lecture halls and seminar rooms during

semester II (2012/2013). Therefore, only students of the second (2nd) year and

above are qualified to answer the questionnaire.

On the other hand, lecture halls and seminar rooms that has non-adjustable

chair become the main venue of this research. Seminar room 4 and seminar room

6 of CTF 3 and CTF4 do not have non-adjustable chair. Thus, students that are

experienced in using seminar room 4 or seminar room 6 are disqualified to answer

the questionnaire.

21

Consequently, these students are already differentiated by the strata or a

small group according to their academic venue status. The sample size of this

research is 150 students which randomly chosen by the researcher. Students from

the Faculty of Medicine and Health Science are excluded from the research

population due to its external location, which is allocated outside the UNIMAS’s

main campus.

3.5 Reliability and Validity

3.5.1 Pilot Test

In the pilot test, 10 students are chosen randomly to answer the

questionnaire. The pilot test is crucial to be executed before performing the real

test. The validity of the questionnaire might be still redundant due to fact of its

modification from four different existing questionnaires. The pilot test will allow

the confirmation of the relevant and the validity of the questions. In addition, it is

also allow the researcher to test whether the respondent are really satisfied and

understand each of the questions presented in the questionnaire.

Indeed, Office Ergonomics Hazard Identification Checklist (ESA) is

originated from the United Kingdom. Therefore, it is clearly clarified that the

questionnaire is catered towards the western community. In other words, their

community expectation and body range is different from the community in

Malaysia. For that reason, the questionnaire is modified based on the body range

of Malaysia community and thus allowing the validity for this research.

Reliability measurement will base on the consistency of the score produce.

In the pilot test, reliability measurement must meet the consistency of the

reliability score. The reliability of the questionnaire is measure using Statistical

Package for Social Science (SPSS).

22

3.6 Data Collection

The diagram below shows the five major steps which is guided by Health

and Safe executive (HSE) on how to conduct the questionnaire:

For the first step, all data regarding the ergonomics hazards in lecture halls

and seminar rooms at CTFs are being collected.

Second step is to decide if the respondent is being harmed and how does it

occur. The respondents in this research referred as the students, the one that

become the user of lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs.

Then, evaluate on the effect of the ergonomics hazards on student safety and

health. Ergonomics hazards in classroom occur due to the fact the lack of

ergonomics intervention which may lead to injuries toward its user such as having

any pain or discomfort after using the facilities.

3.7 Data Analysis

Data that have been collected in questionnaire technique will be analysed

using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software. Descriptive statistic

was used to interpret the frequency of the demographic data and level of exposure

regarding ergonomics hazards among UNIMAS students. The inferential analysis

of ANOVA and Pearson Correlation of the ergonomics hazards (design of table,

design of chair, space for table and chair, design of the projector screen, lighting

condition and ventilation system condition) and its effect (musculoskeletal pains,

visual and lighting impairment, symptoms associated with dysfunctional breathing

patterns) also being interpreted.

Identify the hazard

Decide who might be harm

and how Evaluate the risk

Record findings and implement

them

23

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS


Chapter four presents details of analyses and discussions of gathered data.

The results were both examined in both descriptive and inferential analysis; each

was divided into sequential order in answering and interpreting the questions and

data. From the analysis, discussions of findings were described later in the

discussion section.

24

4.1 Descriptive Analysis

4.1.1 Demographic Information

Graph 4.1 Frequency of the respondents’ year of study status

Graph 4.1 shows the frequency of the respondents’ participation in this

research. Due to the fact that data collection are based on the semester II

(2012/2013), so only respondents that are in second (2nd) year and above are

qualified to answer the questionnaire. There are about 59 respondents from second

(2nd) year students. Meanwhile, 53 respondents and 38 respondents are from third

(3rd) year and fourth (4th) year respectively.

Graph 4.2 shows the frequency of respondents’ gender which clearly

illustrated that the dominant respondents that responded in this research are

females. Only 53 male respondents participated thus making them the least

respondents compare to the 97 female respondents that took part in this research.

59

53

38

25

Graph 4.2 Frequency of the respondents’ gender

Graph 4.3 shows the frequency of respondents’ faculty status. Among all

respondents from seven participated faculties, the least respondents that responded

toward the questionnaire are from the Faculty of Social Sciences (FSS) and the

Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB) with both represented by 12

respondents. Meanwhile, the highest 32 respondents that participated are

originated from the Faculty of Applied and Creative Arts (FACA), whereas the

Faculty of Engineering (FENG), the Faculty of Resource Science and Technology

(FRST), the Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development (FCSHD)

and the Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology (FCSIT)

represented by 30, 13, 28 and 23 respondents respectively.

53

97

26

c

//////////////////////////////////////////;

Graph 4.3 Frequency of the respondents’ faculty status

Graph 4.4 Frequency of the respondents’ weight (kg) status

Graph 4.4 shows the frequency of five (5) categories ranges of respondents’

weight. The weight range of 46-55 kg has the highest number of 66 respondents

followed by 56 respondents that has the weight range of 56-65 kg. There were

30

12 12 13

32

28

23

22

56

66

3 3

27

only 3 respondents’ whom falls on both weight ranges of 66-75kg and 76-85kg

respectively. Meanwhile, <45kg weight range category consist by 22 respondents.

Graph 4.5 Frequency of the respondents’ height (cm) status

Graphs 4.5 determine the frequency of the height of the respondents. Most

of the respondents lie on the range of 151-160cm with a major participation of 78

respondents followed by 50 respondents which has the height range of 161-

170cm. On the other hand, 12 respondents have height range of 171-180cm. The

least respondents are from <150cm height range category with only 10

respondents that responded to the questionnaire.

10

50

78

12

28

4.1.2 Level of Exposure

Chair Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

1. The chair have

adequate and

comfortable

lumbar support

backrest

13

8.7

53

35.3

24

16.0

57

38.0

3

2.0

2. Seat pan (surface

to sit on) is well

design and

comfortable

4

2.7

59

39.3

31

20.7

50

33.3

6

4.0

3. While seated, feet

resting firmly and

flat on the floor

11

7.3

20

13.3

45

30.0

68

45.3

6

4.0

4. While seated,

knees slightly

lower than hips

5

3.3

14

9.3

68

45.3

58

38.7

5

3.3

5. While seated,

back is pressed

firmly up against

backrest

13

8.7

53

35.3

32

21.3

51

34.0

1

0.7

6. While seated,

head/neck relaxed

and upright

16

10.7

67

44.7

29

19.3

37

24.7

1

0.7

Table 4.1 Frequency (N) and percentage (%) of the respondents’ level of

exposure toward the design of the chair

Table 4.1 shows the frequency (N) and the percentage (%) of the

respondents’ level of exposure toward the design of the chair. Majority of the

respondents viewed the positive design of the chair in terms of the chair has

adequate and comfortable lumbar support backrest (N=57, 38.0%) although there

is nearly dominant respondents (N=53, 35.3%) that disagreed on that question.

Meanwhile, the respondents majorly agreed that their feet can rest firmly on the

floor while sitting on the chair (N=68, 45.3%).

29

However, the majority of the respondents has the negative view on the

design of the chair in term of seat pan is well design and comfortable (N=59,

39.3%). Furthermore, they did disagreed about the fact that while seated their

head or neck relaxed in the upright position (N=67, 44.7%).

Their also majorly disagreed (N=53, 35.3%) that their back body is pressed

firmly against the chair’s backrest while seated on the chair. Yet, there was a

slight matchup between the respondents that acts both disagree and agree on this

question, whereas 34% (N=51) respondents answered agree, thus denoting that

there is a slight difference between both of the answer categories.

On the other hand, nearly half of the respondents (N=68, 45.3%) are not

really sure if their knee are slightly lower than their hips thus majorly preferred to

choose the neutral as their answer option. In contrast, 38.7 % (N=58) respondents

view themselves of agreeing the fact that their knee are slightly lower than their

hips while seated on the non-adjustable chair.

Mean and Standard Deviation of the

respondents’ level of exposure toward

the design of the chair

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

2.9722

Standard Deviation 0.70033

Table 4.2 Mean and standard deviation of the respondents’ level of exposure

toward the design of the chair

Table 4.2 shows the mean and standard deviation of the respondents’ level

of exposure toward the design of the chair. The overall question regarding the

design of the chair being evaluate through SPSS, thus the result show that the

mean=2.9722 while the standard deviation=0.70033. The mean determine that

majority of the respondents answered regarding the design of the chair and it is all

lies between disagree and neutral category, but it leans more towards the neutral

category.

30

Table Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

7. The work surface

of the table is

adequate for all

activities (the

table is not too

small for writing,

reading, drawing

or any activities

related to

learning)

44

29.3

56

37.3

25

16.7

23

15.3

2

1.3

8. The height of the

table is

appropriate and

comfortable

23

15.3

50

33.3

19

12.7

57

38.0

1

0.7


exposure toward the design of the table

Table 4.3 shows the frequency (N) and percentage (%) of the respondents’

level of exposure toward the design of the table. The majority of 37.3% (N=56)

respondents disagreed on the width size of the table. They do distress about the

fact that the work surface of the table is not adequate for all activities, which

denoted that it is too small or writing, reading, drawing or any activities related

during the learning session.

Meanwhile, the second dominant respondents (N=44, 29.3%) also

responded towards the questions and did answered strongly disagree as their

answered option. It is clearly illustrated that most of the respondents has a

negative view regarding the table’s surface design. Only a very minority of the

respondents agree that the table has the adequate design.

Nevertheless, regarding to the respondents view on the height of the table,

they dominantly agree (N=57, 38%) about the fact that the height of the table is

appropriate and comfortable while 33.3 % (N=50) respondents have a vice versa

31

thought on that question. 12.7 % (N=19) respondents stick on the neutral level and

differ not to be on agree or disagree level. There is only 1 respondent (0.7%) that

truly felt that the height of the table fulfilled the non-adjustable table height’s

standard.



the design of the table

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

2.4867



toward the design of the table


of exposure toward the design of the table. The result show that the mean=2.4867

while the standard deviation=0.96403. The mean determine that majority of the

respondents answered lies between disagree and neutral level, however it leans

more on the disagree level.

Space for Table and

Chair Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

9. While doing work

on the table, it is

reachable

0

0

14

9.3

56

37.3

72

48.0

8

5.3

10. While seated, a

slight reclined

posture toward the

front table is

comfortable

24

16.0

59

39.3

20

13.3

46

30.7

1

0.7


exposure toward the space for table and chair

Space for table and chair in this study refers to as the space in-between the

tabloid chair and slanted desk on the top. Table 4.5 shows the frequency (N) and

percentage (%) of the respondents’ level of exposure toward the space for table

32

and chair. The majority of 48% (N=72) respondents agreed that while doing work

on the table, it is reachable. They felt that the space in-between the table and chair

is adequate thus it is easy to do work on the table. However, the second dominant

respondents (N=56, 37.3%) has a different opinion as they are not sure if they

agree or disagree and preferred to be at the neutral level.

In a meantime, 59 (39.3%) respondents majorly disagree on the fact that

they are comfortable when they have to slightly incline toward the front table

while seated on the chair. In contrast, about 46 (30.7%) respondents agree that

they indeed felt comfortable and 20 (13.3%) respondents are not sure if they felt

comfortable enough when slouching toward the table.

On the other hand, 24 (16%) respondents strong disagree and felt absolutely

uncomfortable. The slouching posture toward the table does distress them during

learning session. However, only 1 (0.7%) respondent strongly agree that the

inclined posture toward the table absolutely does not affect the comfort of the

respondent body posture.



the space for table and chair

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

3.0500



toward the space for table and chair


of exposure toward the space for table and chair. The result show that the

mean=3.0500 while the standard deviation=0.72062. The mean shows that

majority of the respondents answered lies on the neutral level. The respondents

are not sure if they should be agreeing or disagreeing in term of their view on the

space for table and chair.

33

Projector Screen Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

11. The projector display

maximum width of

visual toward the

projection screen

1

0.7

21

14.0

63

42.0

61

40.7

4

2.7

12. The projected screen

is situated directly

straight in front

3

2.0

27

18.0

48

32.0

64

42.7

8

5.3

13. While seated at the

chair at edge position

of lecture halls or

seminar rooms, it is

hard to see the

contain that are

projected on

projection screen

0

0

44

29.3

50

33.3

44

29.3

12

8.0

14. While sitting on the

front seat level,

student have to sit

relaxed to the back

rest with upright

posture to look at the

screen

5

3.3

30

20.0

25

16.7

64

42.7

26

17.3

15. The projection screen

is free from obvious

glare and reflections

0

0

25

16.7

45

30.0

70

46.7

10

6.7

16. The projection screen

show clear and easy

to see/readable

information and icon

0

0

38

25.3

53

35.3

57

38.0

2

1.3


exposure toward the design of projector screen


respondents’ level of exposure towards the design of the projector screen.

Majority of the respondents viewed the positive design of the projector screen in

34

terms of the projector screen is being situated directly straight in front (N=64,

42.7%) of lecture halls and seminar rooms.

Meanwhile, the respondents majorly agreed that they have to be seated

relaxed onto the backrest with upright posture to look at the screen while sitting

on the front seat level (N=64, 42.7%). Indeed, 57 (38%) respondents agreed that

the projector screen show clear and readable information or icon although the

second dominant respondents (N=53, 35.3%) that disagreed on that question.

Nearly half of the respondents (N=70, 46.7%) has a positive view towards

the fact that the projector screen is free from obvious glare and reflections. In

contrast, only 25 (16.7%) respondents give responds and against the 70

respondents’ agreed thought regarding this question.

On the other hand, some respondents respond on the neutral level on the

certain questions regarding the design of the projector screen. The majority of the

respondents (N=63, 42%) are not really sure if the projector display maximum

width of visual on the projector screen, while the second dominant respondents

(N=61, 40.7%) agreed on that question.

In addition, the respondents (N=50, 33.3%) are not sure if sitting on the

chair at the edge of the position of the lecture halls and seminar rooms will give a

clear contain or visual on the projector screen. However, the respondents do

respond equivalently (N=44, 29.3%) on giving those agreed and disagreed thought

regarding this matter.



the design of the projector screen

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

3.3122



toward the design of the projector screen


of exposure toward the design of the projector screen. The result show that the

35


majority of the respondents answered lies on the neutral level. The respondents

are not sure if they should be agreeing or disagreeing in term of their view on the

design of the projector screen.

Lighting Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

17. The light of the

lecture halls and

seminar rooms is

adequate

1

0.7

24

16.0

43

28.7

76

50.7

6

4.0

18. The light of the

projector is adjust

according to the

light intensity of

the lecture halls

and seminar

rooms

5

3.3

52

34.7

41

27.3

49

32.7

3

2.0

19. The

glare/reflection/bl

ur visual display

on the projection

screen occur when

there is overhead

lighting

0

0

24

16.0

75

50.0

48

32.0

3

2.0

20. You have the

access to control

the brightness

light level of the

lecture halls and

seminar rooms.

11

7.3

51

34.0

47

31.3

38

25.3

3

2.0


exposure toward the lighting condition


respondents’ level of exposure toward the lighting condition. Majority of the

36

respondents viewed the positive lighting condition in terms the light is adequate

(N=76, 50.7%). More than half of the respondents agree that lighting condition

provided in the lecture halls and seminar rooms fulfilled their satisfaction and

sufficient. While, the second dominant respondents (N=43, 28.7%) unsure if the

lighting condition is adequate or vice versa. In addition, the exact half of the

respondents (N=75, 50%) also responded on the neutral level regarding their

opinion on the glare, reflection or blur effect on the projector screen. The

respondents are not sure if there is any glare, reflection or blur visual display

viewed on the projected screen due to the overhead lighting. While, 32% (N=48)

respondents positively felt that these effect are eventually occurred although 16%

(N=24) respondents responded disagree on that point.

However, the respondents (N=52, 34.7%) mostly felt that the light of the

projector is not adjusted according to the light intensity of the lecture halls and

seminar rooms. In contrast, the second dominant respondents (N=49, 32.7%) has a

different thought and agreed about the fact that the both of the light intensity can

be adjusted. There is only minority respondents that responded on both strongly

disagree (N=5, 3.3%) and strongly agree (N=3, 2%) on this matter.

Meanwhile, majority of the respondents (N=51, 34%) having a negative

view on the lighting’s access control ability. They thought that the lecture halls

and seminar rooms have insufficient lighting’s access control in term of

controlling the brightness lighting level. At the same time, a few respondents

(N=47, 31.3%) act on the neutral level while 25.3% (N=38) respondents

responded on the positive side regarding this question. Only minority that

answered both strongly disagree (N=11, 7.3%) and strongly agree (N=3, 2%).



the lighting condition

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

3.0933



toward the lighting condition

37


of exposure toward the lighting condition. The result show that the mean=3.0933

while the standard deviation=0.52340. The mean determine majority of the

respondents answered lies on the neutral level. The respondents are not sure if

they should be agreeing or disagreeing in term of their view on the lighting

condition in lecture halls and seminar rooms.

Ventilation System

Condition Items

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly

Agree

N % N % N % N % N %

21. The lecture hall

and seminar

rooms have

natural ventilation

5

3.3

52

34.7

41

27.3

49

32.7

3

2.0

22. A reasonable

room temperature

can be maintain

during the use of

lecture halls and

seminar rooms

0

0

24

16.0

75

50.0

48

32.0

3

2.0

23. The ventilation is

well function thus

no strange odour

take place

11

7.3

51

34.0

47

31.3

38

25.3

3

2.0


exposure toward the ventilation system condition


respondents’ level of exposure toward the ventilation system condition. Majority

of the respondents viewed the negative ventilation system condition in terms

natural ventilation (N=52, 34.7%). The respondents disagreed about the fact that

the lecture halls and seminar rooms provide natural ventilation, which allow the

natural air exchange between the air- indoor quality and the external environment.

On the other hand, 49 (32.7%) respondents have contradictory response with the

major respondents, which denoted that they do agree that the ventilation in lecture

halls and seminar rooms is sufficient in term of its natural ventilated.

38

In addition, the majority of the respondents (N=51, 34%) disagree regarding

the ventilation’s well function system. The respondents do not feel that the

ventilation is functioned very well, thus this could bring some strange smelly

odour within the lecture halls and seminar rooms. While, 47 (31.3%) respondents

lies on the neutral level and 38 (25.3%) respondents agree on this question.

Meanwhile, half of the respondents (N=75, 50%) are not really sure if a

reasonable temperature can be maintain while using the lecture halls and seminar

rooms. However, 48 (32%) respondents are confident that the temperature can be

controlled if the indoor environment starts to feels too hot or too cold. Only

minority of 3 (2%) respondents strongly agree toward each of the 3 items of this

questionnaire.



the ventilation system condition

Frequency (N) 150

Missing 0

Mean

2.7178



toward the ventilation system condition


of exposure toward the ventilation system condition. The result show that the


majority of the respondents answered lies on disagree and neutral level, but lean

more towards the neutral level. The respondents are not sure if they should be

agreeing or disagreeing in terms of their view on the ventilation system condition

in lecture halls and seminar rooms.

39

4.2 Inferential Analysis

4.2.1 The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Hypothesis 01: There is no significant difference between students’ height toward

the comfort of the table

Table 4.13 ANOVA result for H01

A one-way ANOVA was calculated on the students’ height and the comfort

of the table. The abbreviation df is defined as degree of freedom meanwhile the

abbreviation of F is define as variance of the group means or mean of the within

group variances. From the Table 4.13, the ANOVA result (F (3, 146) = 1.830, p-

value = 0.144) which indicated that the p-value was larger than the level of

significance, α (p > 0.05).

The value of F critical = 2.667, which clearly denoted that the F student’s height and

the comfort of the table = 1.830 < F critical. In addition, the p-value = 0.144 (p > 0.05).

Therefore, the null hypothesis is failed to be rejected. There is no significant

difference between students’ height and the comfort of the table

ANOVA

Sum of

Squares df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Between

Groups

5.017 3 1.672 1.830 .144

Student’s height and

the comfort of the

table

Within

Groups

133.456 146 .914

Total 138.473 149

40

Hypothesis 02: There is no significant difference between students’ height toward

the comfort of the chair


A one-way ANOVA was calculated on the students’ height and the comfort

of the chair. The value of degree of freedom (df) = (3, 146) meanwhile the value

of variance of the group (F) = 6.026. As concluded, the ANOVA result (F (3, 146)

= 6.026, p-value = 0.001) which indicated that the p-value was smaller than the

level of significance, α (p < 0.05).

The value of F critical = 2.667, which clearly denoted that the F student’s height and

the comfort of the chair = 6.026 > F critical. In addition, the p-value = 0.001 (p < 0.05).

Therefore, the null hypothesis rejected. There is a significant difference between

students’ height and the comfort of the chair.

ANOVA

Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Between

Groups

7.958 3 2.653 6.026 .001

Students’ height

and the comfort of

the chair

Within

Groups

64.266 146 .440

Total 72.224 149

41

Hypothesis 03: There is no significant difference between students’ weight toward

the comfort of the chair


A one-way ANOVA was calculated on the students’ weight and the comfort

of the chair. The value of degree of freedom (df) = (4, 145) meanwhile the value

of variance of the group (F) = 1.064. As concluded, the ANOVA result (F (4, 145)

= 1.064, p-value = 0.377) which indicated that the p-value was higher than the

level of significance, α (p > 0.05).

The value of F critical = 2.434, which clearly denoted that the F student’s weight and

the comfort of the chair = 1.064 < F critical. In addition, the p-value = 0.377 (p > 0.05).

Therefore, the null hypothesis is failed to be rejected. There is no significant

difference between students’ weight toward the comfort of the chair.

4.2.2 The Correlation Between Ergonomics Hazards and Its Effects

A Pearson Correlation analysis, r, is used to find the degree of relationship

between ergonomics hazards and its effects. The Davis’ index is used to

determine the level of significance between two variables [significant at the 0.01

and 0.05 level (2-tailed)] as stated;

ANOVA

Sum of

Squares Df

Mean

Square F Sig.

Between

Groups

2.059 4 .515 1.064 .377

Students’ weight and

the comfort of the

chair

Within

Groups

70.165 145 .484

Total 72.224 149

42

Coefficient of Correlation, r Relationship Explanation

0.70 or more Very strong

0.50 – 0.69 Strong

0.30 – 0.49 Moderate

0.10 – 0.29 Weak

0.01 – 1.09 Ignore

Table 4.16 Davis’s index table

Hypothesis 04: There is no significant relationship between the design of the chair

and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs

as their learning venues and facilities.

Pearson Correlation

Chair

Chair’s ergonomics

effect

Chair Pearson Correlation 1 .155

Sig. (2-tailed)

.057

N 150 150

Chair’s ergonomics

Effect

Pearson Correlation .155 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .057

N 150 150

Table 4.17 Pearson Correlation result for H04

Table 4.17 shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the chair

and its effects toward the students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of

CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate that the p-value

=0.057 was higher than the level of significance, α (p > 0.05) at significant 2-

tailed.

43

The Pearson correlation value, r = 0.155 lies on the range 0.10 – 0.29 of

correlation. Since the p-value = 0.057 (p > 0.05), therefore, the null hypothesis is

failed to be rejected. There is no significant relationship between the design of the

chair and its effects toward the students that use CTFs.

Hypothesis 05: There is no significant relationship between the design of the table




Table 4.18 shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the table


CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate that the

significant 2-tailed p-value =0.156 was absolutely higher than the level of


Meanwhile, the Pearson correlation value, r = 0.116 lies on the range 0.10 –

0.29 of correlation. Since the p-value = 0.156 (p > 0.05), therefore, the null

hypothesis is failed to be rejected. There is no significant relationship between the

design of the table and its effects toward the students that use CTFs.

Pearson Correlation

Table

Table’s ergonomics

effect

Table Pearson Correlation 1 .116

Sig. (2-tailed)

.156

N 150 150

Table’s ergonomics

effect



N 150 150

44

Hypothesis 06: There is no significant relationship between the space for table

and chair and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms

of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities.


Table 4.19 shows the Pearson correlation between space for table and chair


CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate that the





hypothesis is failed to be rejected. There is no significant relationship between

space for table and chair and its effects toward the students that use CTFs.

Pearson Correlation

Space for table

and chair

Space for table and

chair’s ergonomics

effect

Space for table and

chair

Pearson Correlation 1 .094

Sig. (2-tailed)

.251

N 150 150

Space for table and

chair’s ergonomics

effect



N 150 150

45

Hypothesis 07: There is no significant relationship between the design of projector

screen and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of



Table 4.20 shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the

projector screen and its effects toward the students that used lecture halls and

seminar rooms of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate

that the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.380 was absolutely higher than the level of


Meanwhile, the Pearson correlation value, r = -0.072 lies on the range 0.01 –



design of the projector screen and its effects toward the students that use CTFs.

Pearson Correlation

Projector

screen

Projector screen’s

ergonomics effect

Projector screen Pearson Correlation 1 -.072

Sig. (2-tailed)

.380

N 150 150

Projector screen’s

ergonomics effect

Pearson Correlation -.072 1


N 150 150

46

Hypothesis 08: There is no significant relationship between the lighting condition



**Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).


Table 4.21 shows the Pearson correlation between the lighting condition and

its effects toward the students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs

as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate that the significant 2-

tailed p-value =0.025 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.05). At

the significant level of 0.05, the finding indicates that the lighting condition is

significantly related with its effects toward students. It shows that there is a

positive relationship between these two variables (r = 0.483(**), p-value < 0.05).

According to the Davis’s index table (Table 4.16), the relationship of the

correlation is moderate. The r-value = 0.483 lies on the range 0.30 – 0.49 of

correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables are moderately

correlated. Since the p-value = 0.025 (p < 0.05), therefore, the null hypothesis is

rejected. There is a significant relationship between the lighting condition and its

effects toward students that use CTFs.

Pearson Correlation

Lighting Lighting’s ergonomics effect

Lighting Pearson Correlation 1 .483**

Sig. (2-tailed)

.025

N 150 150

Lighting’s

ergonomics effect

Pearson Correlation .483**

1


N 150 150

47

Hypothesis 09: There is no significant relationship between the ventilation system

condition and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms

of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities.

Pearson Correlation

Ventilation

system

Ventilation system’s

ergonomics effect

Ventilation system Pearson Correlation 1 .103

Sig. (2-tailed)

.209

N 150 150

Ventilation system’s

ergonomics effect



N 150 150


Table 4.22 shows the Pearson correlation between the ventilation system

condition and its effects toward the students that used lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. The results indicate that the






ventilation system condition and its effects toward students that use CTFs.

48

Hypothesis 010: There is no significant relationship between the design of the

chair and its effect on the respondents’ neck

Pearson Correlation

Chair Effect on the neck

Chair Pearson Correlation 1 .443**


N 150 150

Effect on the

neck


1


N 150 150



Shah et. al (2013) conducted the previous research and found that neck

injuries can be occur due to the improper chair height. Table 4.23 shows the

Pearson correlation between the design of the chair and its effect on the

respondents’ neck. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.000

was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.01).

At the significant level of 0.01, the finding indicates that the design of the

chair is significantly related with its effects on the respondents’ neck. It shows

that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r = 0.443(**), p-

value < 0.01).

Indeed, according to the Davis’s index table (Table 4.16), the relationship of

the correlation is on the moderate level. The r-value = 0.443 lies on the range 0.30

– 0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables spot on the

intermediate correlated. Since the p-value = 0.000 (p < 0.01), therefore, the null

hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the design of the

chair and its effect on the respondents’ neck.

49


chair and its effect on the respondents’ shoulder

Pearson Correlation

Chair Effect on the shoulder



N 150 150

Effect on the

shoulder


1


N 150 150



Shah et. al (2013) also supported that shoulder injuries can be occur due to

the improper chair height. Table 4.24 shows the Pearson correlation between the

design of the chair and its effect on the respondents’ shoulder. The results indicate

that the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.000 was smaller than the level of

significance, α (p < 0.01).


chair is significantly related with its effects on the respondents’ shoulder. It shows


value < 0.01).



– 0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables spot on the



chair and its effect on the respondents’ shoulder.

50


chair and its effect on the respondents’ upper back body

Pearson Correlation

Chair Effect on the upper back body



N 150 150

Effect on the upper

back body


1


N 150 150



Upper back body’s injuries can be happen if the improper chair’s backrest

angle does not undergo some modification (Shah et. al, 2013). Table 4.25 shows

the Pearson correlation between the design of the chair and its effect on the

respondents’ upper back body. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-

value =0.000 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.01). At the

significant level of 0.01, the finding indicates that the design of the chair is

significantly related with its effects on the respondents’ upper back body. It shows


value < 0.01).


correlation is on the moderate level. The r-value = 0.332 lies on the range 0.30 –

0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables spot on the


51


chair and its effect on the respondents’ upper back body.


table and its effect on the respondents’ elbow

Pearson Correlation

Table Effect on the elbow

Table Pearson Correlation 1 .320**


N 150 150

Effect on the elbow Pearson Correlation .320** 1


N 150 150



The improper table’s height and size can lead to the elbow pain which may

cause injuries for time being (Shah et. al, 2013). Therefore, Table 4.26 shows the

Pearson correlation between the design of the table and its effect on the

respondents’ elbow. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value

=0.019 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.05).


table is significantly related with its effects on the respondents’ elbow. It shows

that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r = - 0.320(**), p-

value < 0.05).

52


the correlation is moderate. The r-value = 0.320 lies on the range 0.30 – 0.49 of


correlated. Since the p-value = 0.019 (p < 0.05), therefore, the null hypothesis is

rejected. There is a significant relationship between the design of the table and its

effect on the respondents’ elbow.

Hypothesis 014: There is no significant relationship between the space for table

and chair and its effect on the respondents’ lower back body


Sumalee et. al (2011) had modified the lecture table height and size, at the

same indirectly affect the size in-between the space of the chair and the table.

Thus, Table 4.27 shows the Pearson correlation between the space for table and

chair and its effect on the respondents’ lower back body. The results indicate that

the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.034 was smaller than the level of significance,

α (p < 0.05).

At the significant level of 0.05, the finding indicates that the space for table

and chair is significantly related with its effects on the respondents’ lower back

Pearson Correlation

Space for table

and chair

Effect on the lower

back body

Space for table

and chair

Pearson Correlation 1 .302**


N 150 150

Effect on the

lower back body

Pearson Correlation .302** 1


N 150 150

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

53

body. It shows that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r

= 0.302(**), p-value < 0.05).




correlated. Since the p-value = 0.034 where (p < 0.05), therefore, the null

hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the space for

table and chair and its effect on the respondents’ lower back body.


projector screen and the effect of headache

Pearson Correlation

Projector screen Effect of headache

Projector screen Pearson Correlation 1 .406**


N 150 150

Effect of headache Pearson Correlation .406**

1


N 150 150



Watching the screen for a long time being may cause a slight headache and

can be worse if it cannot be prevented (Palm et. al, 2007). Therefore, Table 4.28

shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the projector screen and the

effect of headache. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.007

was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.01).

54


projector screen is significantly related with the effects of headache. It shows that

there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r = 0.406(**), p-value

< 0.01).






projector screen and the effect of headache.


projector screen and the effect of blurred near vision



The light of the main stage must be independent light compare to the light

above the student so that the stray light can be avoid on the display area

(Støfringsdal, 2010). This may reduce the effect of blurred near vision. Thus,

Table 4.29 shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the projector

Pearson Correlation

Projector screen

Effect of blurred near

vision



N 150 150

Effect of blurred

near vision



N 150 150

55

screen and the effect of blurred near vision. The results indicate that the

significant 2-tailed p-value =0.012 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p

< 0.05).


projector screen is significantly related with the effects of blurred near vision. It

shows that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r =

0.363(**), p-value < 0.05).






projector screen and the effect of blurred near vision.


projector screen and the effect of eyestrain

Pearson Correlation

Projector screen Effect of eyestrain



N 150 150

Effect of

eyestrain



N 150 150



56

Palm et. Al (2007) also mentioned that watching the screen for a long time

period of time may eventually lead toward the eyestrain symptom. Thus, Table

4.30 shows the Pearson correlation between the design of the projector screen and

the effect of eyestrain. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value

=0.042 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.05).At the significant

level of 0.05, the finding indicates that the design of the projector screen is

significantly related with the effects of eyestrain. It shows that there is a positive

relationship between these two variables (r = 0.356(**), p-value < 0.05).

On the other hand, according to the Davis’s index table (Table 4.16), the

relationship of the correlation is moderate. The r-value = 0.356 lies on the range

0.30 – 0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables are

moderately correlated. Since the p-value = 0.042 where (p < 0.05), therefore, the

null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the design

of the projector screen and the effect of eyestrain.


condition and the effect of cold hands and feet

Pearson Correlation

Ventilation system

condition

Effect of cold hands

and feet

Ventilation system

condition



N 150 150

Effect of cold

hands and feet



N 150 150



57

Branz Ltd (2007) says that because of high used rate in the classrooms, it

needed at least 10 times higher fresh air than a house. In other words, classrooms

need much more humidity in order to preserve some indoor air quality. This

environment may lead toward the extreme of temperature, which may cause the

air indoor environment become too cold or too hot if the ventilation is

malfunctioned.

Table 4.31 shows the Pearson correlation between the ventilation system

condition and the effect of cold hands and feet. The results indicate that the

significant 2-tailed p-value =0.001 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p

< 0.01). At the significant level of 0.01, the finding indicates that the ventilation

system condition is significantly related with the effects of cold hands and feet. It

shows that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r =

0.532(**), p-value < 0.01).


correlation is strong. The r-value = 0.532 lies on the range 0.50 – 0.69 of

correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables are strongly


hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the ventilation

system condition and the effect of cold hands and feet.

58


condition and the effect of palpitation in the chest

Pearson Correlation

Ventilation system

condition

Effect of palpilation

in the chest

Ventilation system

condition



N 150 150

Effect of palpilation

in the chest


1


N 150 150



Allen and Hessick (2011) say that humidity may cause fungi and mold

development. Indeed, this can harm students in terms of breathing and indirectly

can cause some breathing pattern’s problem. In addition, it is possible that the

students may experience the palpitation on the chest. Table 4.32 shows the

Pearson correlation between the ventilation system condition and the effect of

palpitation on the chest. The results indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value

=0.000 was smaller than the level of significance, α (p < 0.01).

At the significant level of 0.01, the finding indicates that the ventilation

system condition is significantly related with the effects of palpitation on the

chest. It shows that there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r

= 0.352(*), p-value < 0.01).


correlation is on the moderate level. The r-value = 0.352 lies on the range 0.30 –

0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables are moderately


59

hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the ventilation

system condition and the effect of palpitation in the chest.


condition and the effect of anxiety

Pearson Correlation

Ventilation system

condition Effect of anxiety

Ventilation

system condition



N 150 150

Effect of anxiety Pearson Correlation .305**

1


N 150 150



If humidity may cause fungi and mold development, so it may lead to the

breathing pattern’s problem (Allen & Hessick, 2011). Anxiety symptom could be

possibly happen due to this factor. Table 4.33 shows the Pearson correlation

between the ventilation system condition and the effect of anxiety. The results

indicate that the significant 2-tailed p-value =0.003 was smaller than the level of

significance, α (p < 0.01).

At the significant level of 0.01, the finding indicates that the ventilation

system condition is significantly related with the effects of anxiety. It shows that

there is a positive relationship between these two variables (r = 0.305(**), p-value

< 0.01).

60

While, according to the Davis’s index table (Table 4.16), the relationship of


– 0.49 of correlation. It can be concluded that both of these variables are

moderately correlated. Since the p-value = 0.003 where (p < 0.01), therefore, the

null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the

ventilation system condition and the effect of anxiety.

4.3 Discussions

4.3.1 Chair

a. Height Versus The Comfort of The Chair, Weight Versus The

Comfort of The Chair

The findings show that the height and weight of the respondents does not

affect the comfort of the chair. The most dominant respondents’ responds toward

the questionnaire are from the height range of 151-160cm followed by 161-

170cm. Meanwhile, most of the respondents have the weight of 46-55kg followed

by 56-65kg.

Figure 4.1 Design of chair at all seminar rooms of CTF 1 and 2

61

Figure 4.1 show that the design of the chair has a free seat pan width and

has a long curve backrest. This will make sure the students that have varied in

sizes and heights able to suit with the design of the chair.

Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3: Design of chair in lecture hall of CTF 1 and CTF

2 (fig. 4.2) and seminar rooms 1, 2 and 3 of CTF 3 and CTF 4 (fig.4.3)

Figure 4.4 Design of chair in seminar rooms 5 of CTF 3 and CTF 4

Figure 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 shows that the chair has soft cushion seat pan, which

can help to absorb students’ weight and will reduce the discomfort hours of sitting

(Parcells, Stommel & Hubbard, 1999). All these 4 figures of chair shows the

design of the chair may suit the Asian anthropometric body measurement and

respondents that dominantly has the height of 151-160cm and weight 46-55kg has

no problem to enjoy the comfort of the chair.

62

b. Chair and Its Musculoskeletal Effect

To determine if the design of the chair might contribute to the existence of

the musculoskeletal pain, both means of chair and musculoskeletal effect were

compared using SPSS. The result shows that there is no relationship between the

design of the chair and the effect of musculoskeletal pain.

However, sitting for hours on chair obviously may give some initial pain or

discomfort that may the affect learning session. This lead to the post result, which

is to identify if the design of the chair might affect students’ neck, shoulder and

upper back body. All these 3 brings a new result, which denoted that the design of

the chair affect the neck, shoulder and upper back body of the students. According

to the previous research conducted by Shah et. al (2013), the neck, shoulder and

upper back body pain occur due to the improper chair height and back rest angle.

Figure 4.5 and figure 4.6 shows sitting posture on both of tab chairs at

different venues. The height of the backrest curve angle and the overall height of

the chair are suitable for the student in the figure. The thighs are flatted on the seat

pan and knees are not slightly lower or higher than the hips. However, the chair

will cause someone to have neck, shoulder and upper back body for someone that

Figure 4.5 Sitting posture at

lecture hall of CTF 1 and CTF 2

Figure 4.6 Sitting posture at seminar

room 5 of CTF 3 and CTF 4

63

has a taller height. This pain could be extended especially sitting for a long period

of time.

4.3.2 Table

a. Height Versus The Comfort of The Table

The result shows that the height of the students does not affect the comfort

of the table. Due to the fact that majority of the respondents that participated with

this research are eventually has the height of 151-160cm, so their body mass may

suit according to the height design of the table.

Figure 4.7 and figure 4.8 show both students that have the same height. But

each table has different height. Student at figure 4.8 have to slouch a little bit

more in order to use the table. But, it might be difficult for someone that has taller

stature to use the table as in figure 5.8 because he or she might has to extremely

slouch toward the table and affect his or her body posture. However, according to

the data collection, there is only minority group of students that has taller height

and does not really give the effect of the relationship of the height and the comfort

of the table.

Figure 4.7 Slouching posture on the

table of seminar rooms of CTF1 and

CTF 2

Figure 4.8 Slouching posture on

the table of seminar rooms 1, 2, 3

of CTF3 and CTF 4

64

b. Table and Its Musculoskeletal Effect

The result shows that there is no relationship between the design of the

table and its effects toward students that used lecture halls and seminar rooms of

CTFs as their learning venues and facilities. However, by extracting any certain

significant musculoskeletal pain that can be related to the design of the table, thus

the result shows that the design of the table eventually can affect the elbow part of

the body.

Shah et. al (2013) concluded that the frequency of pain felt on hand by users

while writing depends on the height and table size. In their research, about 111

users sometimes feel the pain if sitting for a long time and does not feel any pain

if the time is shorter. It shows that the size of the table need be widen which is

basically not too small to do any writing activities.

Figure 4.9, figure 4.10 and figure 4.11 shows the design of the table in each

of the lecture halls and seminar rooms of CTFs respectively. It is clearly

illustrated that the width of the table is too small to do the writing activities

especially when there is a lot of writing activities that needed to be done. If a

single lecture prolong for more than 2 hours and students need to take notes, it

will initially cause a slight pain at the hands area. Besides that, students might

have two or three lectures per day, and each lecture might take 2 minimum hours.

So this would simply affect students to have the tendency of being affected by the

pain on the elbows area.

65

4.3.3 Space For Table and Chair

The space for table and chair here refer to the space in-between the tabloid

and slanted desk on the top. The space for table and chair does not affect the

overall musculoskeletal pains. There are 9 musculoskeletal pains in this research:

pain on the neck, shoulder, upper back body, elbow, wrist, lower back body,

hip/thigh, knees and ankles. According to the results, lower back body was

eventually affected by the space of table and chair.

.

Figure 4.9 Design of

the table in all

seminar rooms of

CTF 1 and CTF 2


the table in lecture

halls of CTF 1 and

CTF 2

Figure 4.12 Space for table and chair (viewed from the top)

The space

in-between

is refer as

space for

table and

chair


the table in seminar

rooms 1, 2 and 3 of

CTF 3 and CTF 4

66

Students are varies in size and height. If the space for table and chair has

limited space, students that have large body build might have the tendency to have

the difficulty to be sitting and using the table at the same time. It would become

worse if the chair equipped with the arm chair thus making the space become very

limited.

The curve of the chair backrest and the desk with the slanted tops are

develop according to the previous study by Mandal (1982) which suggest that the

curve of the backrest design is to support the reflexes of back skeletal. The

children will lean on the backrest as their listening to the lesson, whereas sits

forward to the slanted top desk to do work. Thus would give low tendency to get

back pain and other musculoskeletal disorder.

However, if the students that have bigger stature and the space are limited,

the students will have to sit in straight sitting posture for another couple of hours.

This will lead to the pain at the lower back body.

4.3.4 Projector Screen and Lighting

The lighting condition and the design of the projector screen are eventually

related. The light of the main stage must be independent light compare to the light

above the student so that the stray light can be avoided on the display area

(Støfringsdal, 2010). The design of the projector screen does not related with the

overall of the visual symptom. Somehow according to the result, the design of the

projector screen can cause headache, blurred near vision and eyestrain.

Meanwhile, the overall visual symptoms occurred due to the lighting factor.

According to Winterbottom & Wilkins (2009), inefficient of florescent

lighting may cause headaches and impair visual performance. Additionally, the

excessive lighting level and glare from the screen may reduce the performance of

the students and reduce eye comfort. Palm et. al (2007) mention that watching the

screen for a long period of time may cause an eyestrain and the headache.

67

Figure 4.14 show that the light of the main stage are being turn off.

However the light from the projector screen has high brightness. If students stared

at the projector screen for a long period of time, this can cause the effect of glare

sensitivity. Besides that, this will cause blurred near and distant vision. Figure

4.13 shows the light of the main stage are turned off, however the light after the

main stage is on in order to obtained good rendering images on projector screen.

4.3.5 Ventilation System Condition

Figure 4.13 Projector screen viewed

from the back of the seminar rooms

of CTF 1 and CTF 2

Figure 4.14 Projector screen

viewed from the back of the lecture

halls of CTF 1 and CTF 2

Figure 4.15 Natural ventilation

systems of CTF 1 and CTF 2

Figure 4.16 Natural ventilation systems

on the ceiling of CTF 3 and CTF 4

68

The initial result has no relationship between ventilation system condition

and a broad view of symptoms associated with dysfunctional breathing patterns.

However, in the specific analysis, ventilation system condition has a significant

relationship with the effect of cold hands and feet, palpitation on the chest and the

anxiety.

As reported in Branz Ltd (2007), because of high used rate in the

classrooms, it needed at least 10 times higher fresh air than a house. Students will

spend their time in the class for at least 1 hour and in addition the class will be

continuously used from morning until evening. Therefore, the volume of the CO2

in the class will be increase with time. By referring figure 4.15 and figure 4.16,

the designer has already set the class with the ventilation system in order to

improve the indoor air quality.

However, too much humidity can cause harm towards students’ health.

Allen and Hessick (2011) stated that too high humidity level may contribute to

mold and fungi development. The mold and fungi development may affect

students’ health especially for those that have allergies. This will automatically

affected students’ breathing and could cause palpitation on the chest or somehow

might having the anxiety. Besides that, it is mention that the air indoor quality

must be higher at least 10 times more that the air indoor of a house. Thus, it is

clearly explained that lecture halls and seminar rooms has the tendency to have

excessive humidity and could cause the effect of cold hands and feet.

69

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION


This chapter will conclude the suggestion from respondents. From this

conclusion, we will outline the recommendation for further action for the

implementation of inclusive education reforms in UNIMAS in order to improve

the lecture halls and seminar rooms at Central of Teaching Facilities (CTFs),

UNIMAS.

70

5.1 Suggestions from The Respondents

Section D of the questionnaire is an open-ended questionnaire that asks for

the opinions about the facilities provided within the lecture halls and seminar

rooms of CTFs. Respondents also gave any suggestions for further improvement

or solutions to upgrade the facilities that exist within the CTFs. The opinions and

suggestions are listed as below:

Table 5.1 Opinions and suggestions from the respondents for further

improvement of lecture halls and seminar rooms’ facilities

Widening the space for table and chair is one of the suggestions that get the

highest number of response. Students might feel that the limited space for table

and chair just kept bothering them and felt uncomfortable. Some of them might be

Opinions and suggestions Responses

Increase the height of the chair 2

Widen the size of the table 4

Widen the space for table and chair 6

Widen the projector screen 2

Improvement on the lighting condition 2

Do maintenances on ventilation system 6

Use some better materials for the table’s design 1

Use some better materials for the chair’s design 5

Do maintenances on speaker 1

Do maintenances on the plug-in electricity at the corner of the

stair

2

Do maintenances on the stair's sidewalk 1

71

unable to move freely especially for someone that has big body stature. Do some

maintenance of the ventilation system also get the highest respond due to the

extreme cold air-indoor quality.

Meanwhile, 5 respondents suggested that the chair’s design should be build

using some of the better materials. The chair in the seminar rooms of CTF 1 and

CTF 2 are made up from wooden material, while in lecture halls of CTF 1 and

CTF 2 and seminar rooms of CTF 3 and CTF 4 are made up from soft cushion

materials. So, most of the respondents’ suggest the wooden material should be

replaced with the soft cushion because the respondents felt that wooden chair is

unsuitable for sitting for a long period of time.

Figure 5.1 Chair in seminar rooms of

CTF 1 and CTF 2 is made up from

wooden material

Figure 5.2 Chair in lecture halls of CTF

1 and CTF 2 is made up from soft

cushion material

Figure 5.3 Chair in seminar rooms of CTF 3 and

CTF 4 is made up from soft cushion material

72

On the other hands, 4 respondents suggested that the size of the table should

be widen for further improvement. The previous discussion regarding the table

tells that the size of the table can cause pain at the hands area. While, 2

respondents suggested that the height of the chair should be increase, improve on

the lighting condition, increase the width of the projector screen and do some

maintenance on the plug-in-electricity at the corner of the stair. The very least

suggestions are to build the table using some better materials, do some

maintenance on the speaker and on the sidewalk of the stair. In order to have a

proper learning environment, all condition of the lecture halls and seminar rooms

shall be equipped within a good condition.

Figure 5.4 Fixed switches and

plug socket not in a good

condition

Figure 5.6 Improper stairs’

maintenance at CTF 2

Figure 5.7 Improper stairs’

maintenance at CTF 4

Figure 5.5 Missing speaker was

spotted at seminar room of

CTF 2

73

5.2 Recommendation

a. Chair, Table, Space for Table and Chair

Students need a good design of the chair and the table in order to have a

comfort learning environment, especially when it involve a non-adjustable chair

and table. All human being vary in sizes, so the design of the furniture should able

to fit most type of sizes. The term was call universal design. Students should be

able to change their table height depends on their height and comfort.

Figure 5.8 Lecture chair before

improvement based on previous

research conducted by Sumalee et. al

(2011)

Figure 5.9 Lecture chair after

improvement based on previous

research conducted by Sumalee et.

al (2011)

Figure 5.10 People with different sizes can occupied the lecture chair

after improvement based on previous research conducted by Sumalee

et. al (2011)

74

Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.9 shows before and after of the improvement lecture

chair made by Sumalee et. al (2011). The aim of the chair improvement is to

make sure that people of different size and weight can used the chair. Figure 5.10

shows that people that have different size can occupy the improved chair and

table.

b. Projector Screen, Lighting and Ventilation System Condition

Nowadays, all the classrooms are equipped with e-learning concept. Figure

5.11 shows how the projector and the screen supposed to be located if the

classrooms installed with the electronic equipment. Both lights on the projector

screen and the lighting of the room shall be in contrast. This will result into better

rendered images on the projector screen.

Jacobs and Knoll (2009) said that the lecture halls and seminar rooms shall

have multiple pathway of diffusion because each of the rooms will be occupied by

a lot of students. In order to preserve good breathing patterns, the rooms shall able

to diffuse as much as carbon dioxides and oxygen from the internal and the

external environments. The rooms also should have some alternative switch knob

in order to make sure the students or the educators able to fix the temperature of

the ventilation if it goes too cold or too hot.

Figure 5.11 Recommendation position of projector screen in classroom

75

5.3 Conclusion

As the conclusion, contractors or classroom designers or any person in

charge should be aware that the lecture halls or seminar rooms is like a second

home. Students spend half of their days in the classroom to earn their education.

Indeed, the classroom shall have high quality fittings and fixtures as well as the

furniture shall fulfil the universal design. To spend a lot of money in developing

high quality classrooms at the beginning of construction is even better rather than

spending a lot of money to support maintenance cost. Maintenance cost

sometimes is even much expensive compare to the cost of building the highest

quality design because it will remain much longer than low quality design.

Therefore, this study can be used as a module to recognize some aspect in

term of deficiencies in the lecture halls or seminar rooms that need to be

improved. This study has already revealed some aspects which need to be taken in

consideration and need some proper action for maintenances.

Documents

ERGONOMICS HAZARDS IN LECTURE HALLS AND SEMINAR ROOMS AT CENTRAL OF TEACHING FACILITIES (CTFs), UNIMAS