p. 170
What can be seen in these HDR images and FCLMs is that scenario B1 with only active light tiles results in a rather uniform appearance of the entire space; both across the main horizonal and vertical surfaces there is very little contrast. Whereas active pendants, with or without light tiles in scenarios B2 and B3, create a greater diversity in brightness throughout the space. These variations are clearly evident across the horizontal working plane, with clearly visible hotspots of light directly underneath the pendants. Another effect of active pendants is the appearance of shadows, which adds to the contrast diversity. The entire field of view therefore becomes richer in contrast.
6.3
The Experiment’s Research Protocol
The Experimental Context, Setup and Design
This experimental field study’s key ambition is to assess if the different artificial lighting patterns affect pupils’ behaviour and learning. But because these are abstract terminologies, they have been made operational by employing three related variables that were proven by previous research measurable or observable for change: Study (I) – noise during class; Study (II) – observable disruptive pupil behaviour; and Study (III) – cognitive performance (see section 5.3) These three studies were conducted in two separate time intervals in 2017. Study I and II took place simultaneously during spring 2017. This period is referred to as the: Spring experiment. Study III was conducted during the autumn of 2017; is and referred to as the: Autumn experiment. Both experiments followed their own research protocols with specific data collection activities and timing thereof. The experiments had in common that they share the same underlying crossover research design *.
6.3.1
Spring Experiment – Study I + II
Study I was set up to measure noise levels during class, while Study II was designed to observe pupil behaviour. Several potential intervening variables were monitored during these studies.
Crossover Research Design These two studies ran simultaneously, and both adhered to the same crossover research design. This type of design meant that each of the ten pupil groups experienced both lighting situation A and B, but the order of exposure varied. These two situations were always opposing per learning space pair. For example, when L1.01 was hosting situation A, L1.02 was hosting situation B, and vice versa. The same applies for the pair on the second floor, L2.03 and L2.04. As a result, the spring experiment was split into two consecutive phases of three weeks each, that would see the same situation in each room. The schedule of exposure per learning space and phase is presented in Table 6.5. * The experiments also required consent from the parents or guardians of the pupils. The school administration helped collecting the written consent.
