Nataša Rizman Herga Samo Fošnarič Coordination of School Science Classroom Furnishings with Anthropometric Parameters for 11-12 Year-Old Children Original scientific article UDK: 37.091.64:616-071.3 ABSTRACT The aim of the research was to explore the size suitability of school furnishings with the help of anthropometric measurements established on 11 - 12 year-old pupils. These pupils who have switched from single classroom teaching to teaching by subject and have lessons in specialized classrooms that are designed for a specific school subject. We were interested in the discrepancies between pupils' anthropometric dimensions and the size of school furniture in science classrooms. The study included 192 pupils (N = 192) in the 695% or <88% of the popliteal height. Buttock-popliteal length and seat depth In order to be able to use the backrest of the seat to support the lumbar spine without compression, the match criterion was defined according to the equation (Parcells et al., 1999; Castellucci et al., 2010; Panagiotopoulou et al., 2004; Cotton et al., 2002) 0.80 BPL < SD < 0.95 BPL (1) Hip width against seat width To properly fit in the seat, the HW should be narrower than the SW. The match criterion is when the: HW < SW (2) Thigh thickness and seat-to-desk clearance Parcells (1999) proposed that the desk clearance should be 2 cm higher than knee height. The match criterion was defined according to the equation (Castellucci et al., 2010): TT + 2 < SDC (3) Elbow height sitting against seat-to-desk height This match criterion was defined with a modified equation (Castellucci et al., 2010) that accepts the EHS as the minimum height of SDH, in order to provide a significant reduction on spinal loading and considering that the maximum height of SdH should not be greater than 5 cm above the EHS: EHS < SDH < EHS + 5 (4) Subscapular height and upper edge of backrest To be able to move the trunk and the arms correctly, the SUH should be higher than the UEB. The match criterion was defined according to the equation (Castellucci et al., 2010): SUH > UEB (5) Because this was a preliminary study, we chose the most commonly used and recommended relationships in the literature, which are those in Equations (1)-(5). The relationships used in this research are not the only ones available, but were considered most appropriate for our research. Statistical analysis The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows 16.0 statistical program was used for evaluation of the research data. In order to classify the data, frequency and percentage values were calculated. The arithmetic mean was calculated to identify the mean of the anthropometric measures. Standard deviation was calculated to identify the distance of the values in the distribution to the arithmetic mean. An independent t-test (with 95% confidence interval) was performed to examine the differences in measurements between 6th and 7th grade. For the analysis of the match between classroom furniture and proposed furniture, the c 2 - test was used. Results of research Dimensions of classroom furniture We measured the dimensions of school furniture in four primary schools in Slovenia. Measurements were performed in those classrooms adapted for the teaching of science subjects. The acquired measurements of science classroom school furniture are presented in Table 1 The measurements show that the dimensions of the chairs manufactured according to standard ISO 5970 in schools 1, 2 and 3 correspond to size 6 (for heights between 173 and 184 cm), in school 4 to size 7 (for body height above 185 cm). The school desks used for teaching science in all schools correspond to size 6. As shown in Table 1, we see a difference in the length of desks: 65 cm for a single desk and 130 cm for a double desk. The figures also reflect differences in the depth of desks, which does not affect the size according to the ISO standard, but the functionality of the usable surface. Desk width and depth are related to functional criteria such as the need for available surface, and not to any particular anthropometric measurement. In this case no criteria were defined to compare with anthropometric measurements. Table 1. Dimensions offurniture (cm) in each school FURNITURE DIMENSIONS School 1 School 2 School 3 School 4 SH 46 45 44.5 50 SD 40 40 39 40 SW 38.5 38 38 38 SDH 31 31 30 26 SDC 12 11 28 12 UEB 40 40 40 40 DW 130 65 130 130 DD 60 50 50 50 DH 76 77 76 76 Legend: SH - Seat Height, SD - Seat Depth, SW - Seat Width, SDH - Seat-to-Desk Height, SDC - Seat-to-Desk Clearance, UEB - Upper Edge of Backrest, DW - Desk Width, DD - Desk Depth, DH - Desk Height Anthropometric measurements of the pupils The descriptive statistics for the seven anthropometric dimensions of the pupils are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 gives a summary of pupils' anthropometric measurements, and Table 3 shows the mean and standard deviation values for each class separately. As the data show, means and medians for most measures were almost identical, indicating highly symmetrical distributions. An Independent t-test (with a 95% confidence interval) was performed to examine the differences in measurements between 6th and 7th grade (pupils have science class in the same classroom and use the same furniture). The results show that there is a significant difference between 6th and 7th grade in Stature (t = -7.132; p = 0.000), Popliteal Height (t = -6.035; p = 0.000), Buttock-Popliteal Length (t = -4.030; p = 0.000), Hip Width (t = -4.215; p = 0.000), Thigh Thickness (t = -2.712; p = 0.007) and Subscapular Height (t = -5.321; p = 0.000), but there isn't a significant difference in Elbow Height (t = -0.057; p = 0.9555). These results show that there is a difference between statures when considering different grades in primary school. Table 2. Anthropometric measurements (cm) PUPIL MEASUREMENTS (cm) n Mean SD Minimum Maximum Median S 192 155.50 8.40 133 176.5 155.50 PH 192 42.17 2.07 37 52 42.00 BPL 192 43.48 3.38 34 53 43.00 EHS 192 18.97 2.66 12 27 18.50 HW 192 33.51 3.27 25 43 34.00 TT 192 13.09 2.09 9.5 20 13.00 SUH 192 35.89 2.54 29.5 44 36.00 Legend: S - Stature, PH - Popliteal Height, BPL - Buttock-Popliteal Length, EHS - Elbow Height Sitting, SUH -Subscapular Height, TT - Thigh Thickness, HW - Hip Width Table 3 shows a consistent increase in mean by grade group. However, the standard deviations are almost the same, which isn't indicative of the greater variability that occurs as age increases. There are two reasons, the first of which concerns the school system, where a 12-year-old pupil may be in the 6th or 7th grade. If these pupils are divided, instead of by grade, into age groups, the standard deviation increases. Thus, the average height of an 11-year-old pupil is 150.17 cm (SD = 7.18); the average height of a 12-year-old pupil is 157.47 cm (SD = 7.36). Since these are pupils in the period of early adolescence, which is characterized by accelerated physical growth, we found statistically significant differences in Stature between boys and girls. The girls sooner encounter the period of adolescence, and during this period they are taller than their male representatives. With 11-year-old pupils, we found a statistically significant difference in body height (t = -2.086, p = 0.040). Girls (159.01 cm) are taller than boys in this age group (155.87 cm). The difference according to gender is statistically significant for pupils in the 7th grade (t = -2.170; p = 0.033). Girls (161.26 cm) are taller than boys (158.01 cm). Table 3. Anthropometric measurements between 6th- and 7h-grade pupils (cm) 6th GRADE (n = 102) 7th GRADE (n = 90) Mean SD Mean SD S 151.88 7.68 159.6 725 PH 41.39 2.08 43.05 1.68 BPL 42.59 3.35 44.48 3.13 EHS 18.96 2.71 18.98 2.63 HW 32.63 3.52 34.51 2.67 TT 12.71 2.07 13.52 2.04 SUH 35.03 2.24 36.86 2.51 Legend: S - Stature, PH - Popliteal Height, BPL - Buttock-Popliteal Length, EHS - Elbow Height Sitting, SUH -Subscapular Height, TT - Thigh Thickness, HW - Hip Width Comparison between pupil body dimensions and classroom furniture Graph 1 shows the percentage of pupils whose measurements matched or did not match the dimensions of the school furniture. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% ■ Mismatch Match SeatHeight Seat Depth Seatwidth Upper Edge of Seat to Desk SeattoDesk Backrest Height Clearance Graph 1: Percentages of pupils by match / mismatch level for the one-way criteria It is obvious that the furniture used by pupils in science classes is too large and does not correspond to their anthropometric dimensions. The seat height is suitable for only one pupil (0.5%); for all other pupils, it is too big. The depth of the chair is suitable for 61.4% of the pupils, the width of the chair for 91.1% of the pupils. This information should not mislead us because the criterion that determines the appropriateness of the width of the chair is one-way. Insofar as the width of the chair is larger than the Hip Width, we are talking about the consistency of furniture. From the data above on the height and the depth of the chair, we can determine that the chairs used by pupils in the classroom are too large. Therefore, in the majority of cases we satisfied the criteria on the width of the chair and the Hip Width. In the case of the armchair height, desk height and leg clearance under the table, we find a predominance of mismatches (over 90%) between the dimensions of the furniture and the anthropometric dimensions of the pupils who use this furniture. In Table 4, three categories were defined in the case of the two-way equations: a "Match" level when the anthropometric measurement falls between the limits; a "Too big" level when the minimum limit of the criterion equation is greater than the anthropometric measurement, and a "Too small" level when the maximum limit of the criterion equation is lower than the anthropometric measurement. The seat is too high for as many as 191 pupils (99.5%). The depth of the chair is too great for 71 (37%) pupils, while, for three pupils (1.6%), the depth of the chair, according to their anthropometric dimensions, is too small. Because of one-way criteria, the width of the chair may be appropriate or too small. In our case the width of the chairs (because they are too big) in most cases (91.1%) is appropriate. Table 4 shows that the height of the Backrest is too high for most pupils, as well as the Desk Height. When talking about the mismatch of school furniture, we find that in most cases it is simply too big. What surprises us is the information that the leg clearance under the table is inappropriate for most pupils (96.4%): it is too small. Table 4. Dimensions offurniture design and match percentages Mismatch Design parameter Dimension Match Too big Too small (cm) Seat Height 46 1 191 0 0.5% 99.5% 0% Seat Depth 40 118 71 3 61.4% 37% 1.6% Seat Width 38 175 0 17 91.1% 0% 8.9% Upper Edge of Backrest 40 15 177 0 78% 92.2% 0% Seat-to-Desk Height 30 4 188 0 2.1% 979% Seat-to-Desk 12 7 0 185 Clearance 3.6% 0% 96.4% Figures 2 and 3 illustrate how the dimensions of school furniture correspond to the anthropometric dimensions of pupils by age. We showed the consistency of two chair dimensions: the depth of the chair and Backrest height. In both cases we see that the suitability of the furniture increases with the pupils' age. This confirms our previous findings that the furniture used by pupils in science classes is too big and does not correspond with their anthropometric dimensions. Research has shown that the school furniture used by pupils in science classes is inappropriate to their anthropometric dimensions. For their size, more appropriate furniture would be items in accordance with ISO standard size 4; this is for pupils that are between 143 and 157 cm tall. We have portrayed it in the table with the mark NEW 4. Or size 5 furniture would correspond; this furniture is intended for pupils that are between 158 cm and 172 cm tall, and we indicate it in the table with the mark NEW 5. Table 5 shows the consistency of old furniture dimensions with anthropometric measurements and the consistency of the proposed furniture for this population of pupils. The c 2 - test, proved a statistically significant difference in the case of Seat Height suitability (c 2 = 148.606, p = 0.000), where new furniture with a seat size of 4 would be adequate for more than half the pupils. It also showed a statistically significant difference in compliance between caudal thigh length and the depth of the seat (c 2 = 11.063, p = 0.001); a new set of seats in size 5 would fit 77.6% of the pupils. There would also be a greater difference in the number of pupils who would fit the previously mentioned new set of seats in terms of the height of the armchair (52.1%) in comparison with the existing set of furniture. There is a statistically significant difference (c 2 = 87.587, p = 0.000). With a new set of desks and chairs in size 4, compliance of Seat-to -Desk Height with Elbow Height Sitting would increase. The compliance level of the proposed set would be 24%, which compared with the existing furniture (2.1%), also shows a statistically significant difference (c 2 = 40.561, p = 0.000). In the case of the width of the chair, there is no statistically significant difference (c 2=3.491, p = 0.062). More pupils would fit this width of chair than is true for the present set of chair seats. Table 5. Classroom furniture and proposed furniture design and match percentages and c2- test Design parameter Match Mismatch n X2-test P Seat Height OLD 1 0.5% 191 99.5% 192 148.606 0.000 NEW 4 109 56.8% 83 43.2% 192 Seat Depth OLD 118 61.5% 74 38.5% 192 11.063 0.001 NEW 5 149 77.6% 43 22.4% 192 Seat-to- Desk Height OLD 4 2.1% 188 9779% 192 40.561 0.000 NEW 4 46 24.0% 146 76.0% 192 Seat Width OLD 175 91.1% 17 8.9% 192 3.491 0.062 NEW 5 162 84.4% 30 15.6% 192 Upper Edge of Backrest OLD 15 78% 177 92.2% 192 87.587 0.000 NEW 5 99 52.1% 93 479% 192 Discussion The results indicate a mismatch between the body dimensions of pupils participating in this study and the school furniture available in science classrooms. Our school furniture measurements showed that the dimensions of desks designed according to ISO 5970 correspond to size 6 (for heights between 173 and 184 cm). Results of the anthropometric measurements showed that 6th-grade pupils are on average 152 cm tall, 7th-grade pupils 160 cm tall. The dimensions of the school desks used in science classes are inappropriate according to their body height. Desk height is suitable for only 2.1% of these pupils. Similarly, a complete mismatch was also found by Castellucci (2010) in Chilean children, where Seat-to-Desk Height was too high, and there was a mismatch for 99% of the pupils. The mismatch in desk height was also proven for 99% of Gaza Strip students (Agha, 2007). Although pupils are using desks that are too high for them, the survey showed that the space clearance under the desk is inadequate, because it is too small. The cause of the mismatch between the under-desk clearance and the thickness of the thigh lies in the shelving or wire racks that are located under the desk and to serve for storage and retrieval of school supplies. Seat-to-Desk Clearance showed a mismatch for 96% of the pupils. This situation of mismatch produces mobility constraint because of contact between the thighs and the desk. Other studies from Parcells (1999) and Gouvali and Boudolos (2006) show 0% and 5.8% of pupils with desk clearance problems; this difference could be due to extra shelving and wire racks under the desks of Slovenian pupils. Seat Height, which is the starting point for the design of classroom furniture and also the measurement used for prescription of a set size, was not appropriate for this population of pupils. An example of a clear mismatch between the seat height and popliteal height is presented in Figure 4. These pupils (99.5%) were using a higher seat that is appropriate for pupils with heights between 173 and 184 cm, so they would be unable to support their feet on the floor, and that increases tissue pressure on the posterior surface of the knee. So, we can talk about chairs that are too high or a height mismatch. These results are similar to those from a study done on Hong Kong school children aged 10-13, where 93% of pupils have chairs that are too high (Chung & Wong, 2007). Over-sized chairs are also characteristic of pupils in Chile, where the mismatch was ranged between 72% and 86%, depending on the set of chairs (Castellucci et al., 2010). The majority of Greek pupils are sitting on chairs that are too high for them (Panagiotopoulou et al., 2004). Since the chairs used by pupils are too big, most of them have no problems with seat width, which complies in 91.1% of the pupils. Correlation between caudal thigh length and the depth of the chair is 61.4%. For more than a third of pupils, a chair of these dimensions is inadequate. Since the chairs used by pupils are too big and too high, they tend to place their buttocks forward on the edge of the seat, especially while reading and writing. The lack of back support in this position causes a slumped, kyphotic posture. Research studies (Wilke et al., 2001) have shown that in sitting with the torso bent forward, the burden on the spine increases even more than if the pupils were standing. The height of the backrest is suitable for only 7.8% of the pupils. Wilke (2001) demonstrated that the use of a backrest reduces pressure on the intervertebral spinal discs. In our case, where the height of the backrest is inappropriate for the pupils and there are no height-adjustable seats, this could be a major problem and the cause of subsequent back problems. Figure 3: A clear mismatch between popliteal and seat height. Feet are not on the floor. Since the dimensions of the desks and chairs used by pupils in the classroom are too big and because the independent t-test showed statistically significant differences in anthropometric measurements among 6th- and 7th-grade pupils, we can conclude that furniture suitable for 6th-grade pupils is inappropriate for 7th-graders. We have also demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the existing and proposed set of furniture in favour of the proposed set. It is unacceptable that pupils who differ in height (from 133 cm to 176.5 cm) have furniture of the same size. The consequences of the inadequacy of school furniture can include negative effects on their development, particularly on children during the early adolescent period of rapid growth. In the SIST EN 1729-1:2006 standard, those product dimensions are particularly specified that are important both forergonomic compliance with the user's height and for theirmutual coherence. School furniture is divided into eight size categories, but the Slovenian schools are equipped with school furniture of only four different size dimensions. Classrooms are generally equipped with one size of school furniture, regardless of the variability in pupils' height. In an ideal world, every pupil should have a height-adjustable, ergonomic chair and desk, but for very low costs we could improve the situation by installing furniture of various sizes in the existing classrooms. The aim of the research was not to demonstrate the mismatch between school furniture and the anthropometric dimensions of pupils, but to highlight the problem when the younger pupils, physically vulnerable early adolescents, attend lessons in subject-specific classrooms (such as the science classroom), aimed at the older, larger children. We believe that, with the exception of this particular problem, that there does not exist a large mismatch in Slovenia between school furniture dimensions and anthropometric measurements of the pupils. For various reasons, we are increasingly becoming a sedentary population. Our children spend on average 9 hours a day seated in school and doing their homework during the week. It is necessary to reduce the daily physical demands on schoolchildren by changing the traditional mode of teaching for the dynamic method of teaching involving the movement of children. Research by Cardon (2004) evaluating the differences in classroom sitting habits during the "Moving School" project and in traditional schools showed that pupils in traditional schools spend 97% of classes being static. We can ask ourselves what may be the health consequences if pupils in these classes also have inadequate furniture. Purchasing ergonomic furniture represents for schools a major financial undertaking. It is also necessary to consider the structural and organizational resources that would make classes more dynamic through pupil mobility. Conclusion and teaching implications Research has shown that the school furniture used by Slovenian 6th- and 7th-grade pupils in science classrooms does not accord with their anthropometric dimensions. The furniture is inappropriate because science instruction takes place in classrooms specially set aside for biology, chemistry and physics, in classrooms that are designed and equipped for older pupils. Thus, the school furniture that pupils use is too large. As we found in the survey, pupils at this age vary greatly in their anthropometric dimensions, so it is unacceptable to use one-size furniture that does not match their anthropometric dimensions. Inadequacy in school furniture can result in back problems and poor posture and can have negative consequences on children's development. The mismatch between pupils' anthropometric characteristics and the dimensions of school furniture would be eliminated or at least reduced by installing furniture in various sizes. This would reduce the physical burden in the school environment. Teachers need to be educated to identify pupils in obviously ill-fitting school furniture and facilitate assignment to more appropriate seating whenever possible. It would be necessary to respect the basic principle that says that it is necessary to adapt the workplace to the human being and not vice versa. We could also reduce the burden on children by choosing appropriate or changed pedagogical methods of work that would balance the traditional form of school learning with dynamic posture and dynamic sitting. Children's need for movement must be met, so we should direct the teaching process so that we reduce static sitting and increase the methods of work that involve movement, walking around the classroom, learning to stand and dynamic sitting on and at height-adjustable chairs and desks. A classroom should be based on a specific design that respects the ergonomic features adjusted to the anthropometric dimensions of pupils and fulfils the needs for active, dynamic and physical behaviour. Only in this way will we ensure the healthy physical, mental and emotional development of children. Limitations This research was carried out in 2012. Anthropometric measurements were made at various schools in the northeast of Slovenia. Anthropometric measurements can vary according to geographical region and year. Consequently, the fact that the sampling group constitutes only a small sample is a limitation of the study. Acknowledgement This research is supported by the Dr. Anton TrstenjakFoundation, Slovenia. REFERENCES Agha, S. R. (2010). School furniture match to students' anthropometry in the Gaza Strip. Ergonomics, 53(3), 344-354. doi: 10.1080/00140130903398366 Cardon, G., De clercq, D., De bourdeaudhuij, I., & Breithecker, D. (2004). Sitting habits in elementary schoolchildren: a traditional versus a "moving school". Patient Education and Counselling, 54, 133-142. Castellucci, H. I., Arezes, P. M., & Viviani, C. A. (2009). Mismatch between classroom furniture and anthropometric measures in Chilean schools. Applied Ergonomics, 41(4), 563-568. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.12.001. Chung, J. W. Y., & Wong, T. K. S. (2007). Anthropometric evaluation for primary school furniture design. Ergonomics, 50(3), 323-334. Cotton, L. M., O'Connell, D. G., Palmer, P. P., & Rutland, M. D. (2002). Mismatch of school desks and chairs by ethnicity and grade level in middle school. Work, 18(3), 269-280. Domljan, D., Grbac, I., & Hadina, J. (2008). Classroom furniture design—correlation of pupil and chair dimensions. Collegium Antropologicum, 32, 257-265. Fošnarič, S. (2001). Učenci in šolsko delovno okolje: nekateri uporabni vidiki ergonomije v vzgoji in izobraževanju. Maribor: Pedagoška fakulteta. Fošnarič, S., & Delčnjak Smrečnik, I. (2009). Teža šolskih torbic kot obremenilen dejavnik težav s hrbtenico. Pedagoška obzorja, 24(1), 123-133. Gouvali, M. K., & Boudolos, K. (2006). Match between school furniture dimensions and children's anthropometry. Applied Ergonomics, 37(6), 765-773. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2005.11.009 Health Statistics Yearbook. (2010). Ljubljana: Inštitut za varovanje zdravja Republike Slovenije. Retrieved from: http://ivz.si/Mp.aspx?ni=0&pi=7&_7_id=1339&_7_PageI ndex=0&_7_ groupId=228&_7_newsCategory=&_7_action=ShowNewsFull&pl=0-70. -Lueder, R., & Berg Rice, V. J. (2008). Ergonomics for Children: Designing products and places for toddlers to teens. New York: Taylor & Francis. Novak, H., Žagar, D., Strel, D., Štihec, J., Pisanki, M., & Juričič, M. (1995). Obremenitve osnovnošolcev:posledice in vzroki. Radovljica: Didakta. Obran, M., & Fošnarič, S. (2010). Šolsko pohištvo kot zdravstveni problem v obdobju odraščanja 10-11 letnih otrok. Educa, 19(5), 25-31. Panagiotopoulou, G., Christoulas, K., Papanckolaou, A., & Mandroukas, K. (2004). Classroom furniture dimensions and anthropometric measures in primary school. Applied Ergonomics, 35(2), 121-128. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2003.11.002 Panero, J., & Zelnik, M. (1979). Human Dimension & Interior Space: A source book of design reference standards. New York: Whitney Library of Design. Parcells, C., Stommel, M., & Hubbard, R. P. (1999). Mismatch of classroom furniture and student body dimensions: empirical findings and health implications. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24(4), 265-273. doi: 10.1016/s1054-139x(98)00113-x Pheasant, J. (2003). Bodyspace. London: Taylor & Francis. Saarni, L., Nygard, C. H., Kaukiainen, A., & Rimpela, A. (2007). Are the desks and chairs at school appropriate? Ergonomics, 50(10), 1561-1570. Savanur, C. S., & Altekar, C. R. (2007). Lack of conformity between Indian classroom furniture and student dimensions: proposed future seat/table dimensions. Ergonomics, 50(10), 16121625. SIST EN 1729-1:2 0 0 6, Furniture; Chairs and tables for educational institutions, Part 1, Functional dimensions. Ljubljana: Slovenian Standards Institute. SIST ISO 5970:1996, Furniture - Chairs and tables for educational institutions - Functional sizes. Ljubljana: Slovenian Standards Institute. Spear, B. A. (2002). Adolescent growth and development. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102(3), 23-29. Šterlek, A., & Fošnarič, S. (2008). Obremenjenost učencev zaradi neprimernega šolskega pohištva v prvem vzgojno-izobraževalnem obdobju osnovne šole. Revija za elementarno izobraževanje, 1(1/2), 15-24. Wilke, H., Neef, P., Hinz, B., Seidel, H., & Claes, L. (2001). Intradiscal pressure together with anthropometric data--a data set for the validation of models. Clinical Biomechanics, 16(1), 111126. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(00)00103-0 Dr. Nataša Rizman Herga, Ormož Elementary School, natasa_herga@yahoo.com Dr. Samo Fošnarič, Faculty of Education, University of Maribor, samo.fosnaric@um.si