norms and standards of education facilities; 1992

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION I UNDPI UNESCO

EDUCATION SECTOR STUDY PROJECT

(MYA / 90 / 0041

• •No. 5.4

Norms and Standards

of Education Facilities

by

U Nyi Hla Nga.

Daw Win Win Maw

and U Tet Tun

DUIMyanmar Education Re.l.rch Buruu

YongonFebruory • '992

Norms and Standards

of Education Facilities

by

U Nyi Hla Nge (Yangon Institute of Technology),

Daw Win Win Maw (Institute of Medicine 1),

and U Tet Tun (Ministry of Construction)

Acknowledgement: This paper is the outcome of the collaborative effort of ESS Working Group No. 5(Education Infrastructure). The working group, chaired by U Nyi Hla Nge (Yangon Institute of Technology)included the following members: U Sein Myint (OBE), U Nyunt Hlalng (Ministry of No. 1 Industry).U Tet Tun (Ministry of Construction). U Saw Wynn (OBE), Oaw Naw Joy Loo (Institute of Medicine 1) andOaw Win Win Maw (Institute of MediCine 1).

ABSTRACT

This paper reviews the eXisting national norms and makes compansons with International standardsand values. Consideration is also given to the implications on major issues concerning norms andstandards of facilities. There is a need to conduct research on education facIlities design, as wellas space requirements. There is also an urgent need to rationalise existing standard designs basedon cost effectiveness and convenience in use.

..PREFACE

The Ministry of Education, UNDP and UNESCO are engaged in a joint effort to review the presentstate of education and manpower training in the Union of Myanmar, This review is being carriedout under the Education Sector Study project, which began in mid-1990. The objective of theproject is to help improving Myanmar's education system so it can make contribute moreeffectively to the country's social and economic development. The first phase of the EducationSector Study (ESS). a detailed diagnosis and analysis of the needs of the education sector, is nowcompleted. A synthesis of the main findings has been issued in a separate report,

This paper is one of a series of working papers produced by Myanmar ESS participants. The seriescovers various important aspects of education, such as quality and efficiency, linkages betweeneducation and employment, costs and financing, school facilities, and sector organization andmanagement. The ESS Working Papers series addres,ses itself to all professional staff in theeducation sector, as well as to interested researchers. It is hoped that these papers will contributeto stimulate a national discussion on ways and means to improve Myanmar's education system.

Dr. Khin Maung KyweNational Project Director

Antoine SchwartzChief Technical Adviser

ARISBRDBEDHEDTAVEESSFIDMERBTUR

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Asian Regional Institute for School Building ResearchDepartment of Basic EducationDepartment of Higher EducationDepartment of Technical, Agricultural and Vocational EducationEducation Sector StudyFurniture Factory (under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests)Myanmar Education Research BureauTime Utilisation Rate

..TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. INTRODUCTION .

11. BASIC EDUCATION: NORMS AND STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2

Ill. HIGHER EDUCATION: NORMS AND STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9

IV. CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11

1234567891011

12

13141516171819202122

23

24

LIST OF TABLES

Campus Area: 1982 DBE Proposed Minimum and Currently-in-use ValuesCampus Area: Existing Mean ValuesCampus Area: International ValuesSchool Capacity: 1982 DBE Proposed ValuesSchool Size (number of pupils): Existing ConditionsSchool Size (number of pupils): International ValuesClassroom Area and Gross Area (sq ft/pupil): Existing ConditionsClassroom Area (sq ft/pupil): International StandardsClassroom Area and Gross Area: International ValuesHeadmaster's Office and Teachers' Room Area: International ValuesScience Laboratory (sq ft/place): International Standards (based on a capacity of40 pupils)Science Laboratory (sq ft/place): International Values (based on a capacity of 40pupils)Domestic Science Laboratory (sq ft/place): International StandardsDomestic Science Laboratory (sq ft/place): International ValuesTechnical/Agricultural Workshop: International ValuesLibrary Area (sq ft/place): International ValuesToilet Facility: UNESCO RecommendationsToilet Facility: International StandardsPlayground Area (sq ft/pupil): International ValuesGarden Area (sq ft/pupil): International ValuesIllumination Level: International Values for a Range of FunctionsMaximum Number of Students in a Lecture Class: Opinions (based on a survey of310 teachers)Maximum Number of Students in a Tutorial Class: Opinions (based on a survey of310 teachers)Density in Academic Areas: International Standards

Page

13131414151515161617

18

18181919202021212222

23

2424

..

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A school is expected to provide its pupils with appropriate facilities in anenvironment conducive to effective learning and healthy development. In preparing appropriateschool designs, there is a basic need to provide buildings which are simple and functional, capableof adaptation to meet the changes in education. In developing countries, where funds are limited,minimum space requirements at relatively low cost are particularly relevant. It is important toprovide functional, adaptable and economical facilities. The aim must be to rationalise designs inorder to obtain the maximum value without increasing costs. Every country attempts to providestandardised facilities based on established norms for furniture, classroom size, school size, spacerequirements and building designs. In so doing, facilities should optimally serve the changinglearning/teaching process in each particular type of school. Hence, the norms and standardsadopted for the design of school facilities need to be kept flexible and updated from time to timeas deemed necessary.

In Myanmar, norms and standards on a few aspects of infrastructure have been inexistence and in use over a number of years. The Education Sector Study (ESS) is dealing with thereview of existing norms and standards, as well as the establishment of new ones, throughfeedback, further research and comparisons with international developments. It is hoped that asa result of examining the issues relating to facilities, in future phases of ~SS, a comprehensivestudy can be conducted on norms and standards for education infrastructure.

This paper reviews the existing national norms as well as the existing values asindicated by sample surveys (see also Paper 5.2) and makes comparisons with internationalstandards and values. Consideration is also given to the implications on major issues concerningnorms of standards of facilities. This approach will enable those taking part in future phases of theESS to establish criteria for the minimum requirements in the provision of a manual on appropriatenorms and standards.

CHAPTER 1I

BASIC EDUCATION: NORMS AND STANDARDS

Campus Area

National: According to the Department of Basic Education (DBE) 1982 proposals, theminimum campus area requirements are 3 acres for primary, 6 acres for middle and 7.5 acres forhigh schools (with primary level included), or 6.5 acres (without primary level). Table 1 providesproposed values by the DBE (1982) and those currently In use. The current areas are somewhathigher than the corresponding proposed values. It should be noted that campus area requirementsas specified in both 1982 OBE proposals and current practice do not depend on the size of theschool, nor is there a distinction between urban and rural schools. Sample surveys undertaken forthis study (see also Paper 5.2) indicate mean campus areas as 2 acres for primary, 5.4 acres formiddle and 10.3 acres for high schools. Moreover, the existing value of 293.4 sq ft per pupil forhigh schools is well below the specified norm values (see also Table 21.

International: The campus area values from 11 countries are listed in Table 3. Primary school areasrange from 0.25 to 9.9 acres. Areas for secondary schools range from 2 to 15 acres. Areas perpupil range from 54 sq ft (Pakistan) to 2,777 sq ft (Thailand). International values show a widediscrepancy and are based on a variety of conditions.

Implications: Consideration should be given to adapting values for schools which are based onthe size of the school and its location (for example, rural or urban) and on levels of schooling(primary, middle and high).

School Size

National: The 1982 DBE proposals are based on three sets of sizes (Table 4). For primaryschools three capacities are proposed (200, 400 and 600 pupils); middle schools correspond to520, 680 and 840 pupils; for high schools, four capacities are proposed (880 and 1,040 pupilswith pnmary level attached, and 800 and 1080 without primary level). Mean values from thesample survey correspond to 166 pupils In primary, 605 pupils In middle and 1,362 pupils in highschools (Table 51.

International: Table 6 shows average values of school size from seven countries. Primary schoolsrange from 40 to 730 pupils, lower secondary schools from 156 to 1,007 pupils and uppersecondary schools from 300 to 3,732 pupils School sizes in rural areas are distinctly lower thanthose located In urban areas

Implications: The 1982 DBE proposals do not Include recommendations for schools with lessthan 200 pupils for pnmary, 520 pupils for middle and 800 pupils for high Yet, In accordance withcurrent practice, schools opening at a new level (whether primary, middle or high) need a minimumenrolment of 50 pupils Under special Circumstances, It may be even less than 50. Moreover, thesurvey indicates that 25 per cent of pflmary schools have enrolments of 80 pupils or less. Thissuggests that new schools with 80 pupils or less should be considered In classifying school size.Some 8 per cent of middle schools have between 81 and 240 pupils while 52 per cent haveenrolments between 241 and 560 pupils. These findings indicate that there is a need to considera middle school size smaller than the 520 minimum required in the 1982 DBE proposals. About 22

..

3

per cent of high schools surveyed have between 400 and 880 pupils. Similarly, some 41 per centof such schools have between 1,041 and 2,000 pupils. A significant proportion (22 per cent) showcapacities of greater than 2,000. However, discussions with head teachers during the field surveyreveal that for administrative reasons, there should be a limit to the maximum school size (between1,200 and 1,500). For these reasons, high schools with capacities of less than 800 pupils shouldbe considered (including middle level with or without primary level). Maximum enrolments shouldbe limited to about 1,500 pupils.

The survey also revealed that many parents want their children at primary level togo to a middle school, or preferably to a high school,rather than to a self-contained primary school.This is because they believe that facilities are better in middle and high schools than in primary;and children need not change schools as they progress from one level to the next. In addition,young children who go to the same schools as their elder brothers and sisters can be looked after,thus relieving part of the burden on parents. In reality, only a small number of pupils can beadmitted to middle and high schools, thus creating competition among parents. However, it isnoted that for various reasons, performance of primary school pupils in middle and high schoolsis lower than that in self-contained primary schools.

Classroom Area and Gross Area

National: The 1981 OBE proposals specify a 30 ft x 22 ft classroom for a standard class of40 pupils (or 16.5 sq ft per pupil). In 1982, the OBE proposed a classroom size of 30 ft x 24 ft for40 pupils (or 18 sq ft per pupil). This value, not founded on research or any detailed study is stillin use today. The sample survey indicates averages of 12.5, 14.7 and 15.8 sq ft per pupil inprimary, middle and high schools, respectively. In contrast, gross area standards (which includeclassroom and specialised, administrative and circulation areas) has not as yet been established inMyanmar. The sample survey indicates gross areas of 16.9 sq ft per pupil in primary, 19.8 sq ftper pupil in middle and 22.9 sq ft per pupil in high schools (see also Table 7).

International: The' Asian Regional Institute for School Building Research (ARISBR) recommends13 SQ ft per pupil for all schools, while in Bangladesh a standard of 10 SQ ft per pupil is followedfor primary schools (Table 8). Information gathered from 14 countries is shown in Table 9. Onaverage, values for classrooms are 12.3 sq ft per pupil in primary, 13.1 SQ ft per pupil in lowersecondary and 13.6 sq ft per pupil in upper secondary schools. Mean values expressed for grossvalues are 24.6 SQ ft per pupil for primary, 57.5 SQ ft per pupil for middle and 58.0 sq ft per pupilfor high schools. However, if the high values of Australia, New Zealand and Singapore are ignored,the mean values for gross area are reduced to 14.7 sq ft per pupil for primary, 32.4 sq ft per pupilfor lower secondary and 33.0 sq ft tor upper secondary. These appear to be realistic for conditionsin Myanmar.

Implications: The optimum classroom size should:

• accommodate adequately the specified number of students and furniture;

• provide adequate acoustics and proper sight distance;

• take account of cost effectiveness;

• relate to international standards (close to ARISBR recommendations)

4

Headmaster's Office and Teachers' Room

National: The 1982 OBE proposals state that the headmaster's office should be combinedwith the teaching staff room for primary schools of 200 pupils. For primary schools of 400 and600 pupils and for middle and high schools, the headmaster's room is to serve also as the schooloffice, but should be separate from the teaching staff room. However, actual sites for these roomsare not given in the 1982 OBE proposals. The sample survey indicates mean values foradministrative areas as 1.6 SQ ft per pupil in primary schools, 2.0 SQ ft per pupil in middle and 2.4SQ ft per pupil in high schools. However, values for administrative areas also include library, toiletand store rooms.

International: A number of values have been gathered from a variety of sources, as shown inTable 10. In Bhutan, an average value of 0.86 SQ ft per pupil in primary schools applies to theheadmaster's and assistant headmaster's office and store area. Average values for the teachers'room in primary schools in Bhutan and the Maldives are between 0.75 and 1.08 SQ ft per pupil.In Nepal, the staff room area is 0.70 SQ ft per pupil for a primary, 0.70 sQ ft per pupil for a lowersecondary and 1.08 SQ ft per pupil for an upper secondary school.

Implications: Consideration should be given to using partitions to create separate areas withina standard sized room. In the case of primary schools it may be possible to also use tl:le staff roomas a library.

Scie'"!ce LaboratorY.

National: The 1981 OBE proposals specify the size of a science laboratory to be 30 ft x 80ft for physics, chemistry and biology. The current practice recommends 24 ft x 30 ft laboratoryfor 40 pupils for all high schools. However, sample survey indicates that only about 70 per centof high schools are actually provided with laboratory areas (although actual sizes have not beenrecorded).

International: UNESCO and ARISBR recommendations for Chemistry, Physics, Biology and multipurpose laboratories are given in Table 11. Mean values are 33.0 sq ft per place for Chemistry,32.2 sq ft for Physics, 37.4 sq ft for Biology and 31.0 SQ ft for multi-purpose laboratories basedon a capacity of 40 pupils. Table 12 also provides international values for laboratories based ona capacity of 40 pupils. Values range between 13.4 to 36.6 SQ ft per place.

Implications: To provide specialised or separate science laboratories for chemistry, physics andbiology in each high school would be an ambitious task under the country's present financialcircumstances. A more suitable approach would be to consider standards for multi-purpose sciencelaboratories. Such standards would need to be related to the number of science pupils in the schooland the frequency of laboratory work required to be performed in each subject.

5

Domestic Science laboratory

National: In accordance with the 1982 OBE proposals, every middle and high school is to beprovided with one domestic science laboratory 24 ft x 30 ft. However, the sample survey indicatesthat only about 4 per cent of middle and 22 per cent of high schools have such facilities (althoughthe actual area provided is not reported).

InterncWonal: UNESCO recommends 29.9 SQ ft per place for secondary schools in Asia, while theARISBR suggested 35 SQ ft per place. These and other international values are given in Tables 13and 14. The values range from 23.7 to 43.7 sq ft per place.

Impljcation~: The number of rooms required will depend on the female enrolments at secondarylevels and the frequency of laboratory work. Assuming a low frequency of laboratory work, a roomlarge enough for groups of 15 pupils would be appropriate.

Technical/Agricultural Workshop

National: According to the 1982 OBE proposals, every middle and high school is to beprovided with a 24 ft x 30 ft technical/agricultural workshop. In reality, none of the middle schoolsand only about 12 per cent of the high schools in the sample survey have such workshops.

International: UNESCO recommends woodwork workshops to be 50.6 SQ ft per pupil. Otherinternational values are given in Table 15 ranging from 23.7 to 101.0 SQ ft per pupil.

Implications: The number of rooms required will depend on enrolments of (male) pupils and thefrequency of workshop time. Assuming a low frequency, a ropm large enough for 15 would beappropriate.

Libra~

National: ' According to the 1982 OBE proposals, the staff room in primary schools can doubleup as a library. In middle and high schools, a separate room, measuring 30 ft x 24 ft is to beprovided as the'library. The sample survey indicated that only 4 per cent of the primary and 27 percent of the middle schools have libraries. Some 76 per cent of the high schools are also providedwith libraries.

International: The ARISBR recommends a library to be provided for 7 per cent of the enrolment,corresponding to 24 SQ ft per place. International values for school library areas are given in Table16, ranging for a total enrolment between 0.70 to 2.70 SQ ft per pupil for primary and 0.70 to6.24 sq ft per pupil for secondary schools.

Implications: An appropriate approach to primary school needs would be to consider joint use ofthe staff room as a library. For middle and high schools provision should be made for separatelibrary facilities.

6

Sports Hall, Assembly Hall and Sports Room

National: The 1982 DBE proposals recommend for all primary, midale and high schools asports hall which can also function as an assembly hall. For a high school, the assembly hall shouldhave a capacity of 500 pupils.

International: UNESCO design guidelines recommend that the length of the hall should be from1.25 to 1.50 times the width. The guidelines also recommend an average 8.6 sq ft per place. Thearea of the assembly hall should also include 323 sq ft as a raised platform. Where a full-scalegymnasium is required, it should be 59 ft x 29.5 ft. The Maldives guidelines recommend that thehall should seat half of the student body and have a covered access from the main schoolbuildings.

Implications: In many instances such as annual events, it may be possible to convert a classroomblock (with internal movable partitions) into a hall large enough to accommodate all the pupils ofthe school. To avoid unnecessary construction costs, many of the sports and assembly activitiescan take place outdoors, except in the rainy season. Nevertheless, consideration should be givento the provision of a room for indoor sports activities (such as table-tennis and chess) for middleand high schools. It should be noted that sports teachers are now appointed in many schools.Where a sports hall is provided, it should be large enough to accommodate badminton, volley-ballor basket-ball courts. Limited budgets and low time utilisation rates make the provision of suchaccommodation unlikely in the foreseeable future.

Toilet Facility

National: The 1982 DBE proposals specify 50 pupils per toilet (to be fly-proof) in all primary,middle and high schools. Standards for the provision of toilets for teachers have not been set. Thesample survey indicates that the number of pupils per toilet is about 68 pupils per toilet in primary,87 in middle and 130 for high schools.

International: UNESCO guidelines for Asia are given in Table 17 with respect to urinals and closettoilets for pupils and teachers. The standards for toilet facilities in the Maldives, Nepal andAustralia are given in Table 18. Requirements for boys range from 30 to 50 pupils per toilet; andfor girls from 15 to 50 pupils per toilet. Requirements for male teachers range from 5 to 7 pertoilet; and for female teachers from 2 to 7 per toilet.

Implications: Compared to international standards, the current conditions for pupils in middle andhigh schools in Myanmar are inadequate, Consideration should be given to reducing the numberof pupils per toilet by providing more facilities. It is more important to provide adequate urinals.

Store Room

National and International: The 1982 DBE proposals recommend a store for each middle andhigh school (although actual sizes are not provided). A stationery store space in Maldives schoolsis recommended as 116 sq ft for a minimum of 150 pupils and 400 sq ft for a maximum of 1,000pupils.

7

Playground

National: The OBE proposals recommend a "mini" playground for each primary school; a"mini" and a "junior" playgrounds for each middle school; a "mini" and a "senior" playground foreach high school (with primary level attached); and a "senior" playground for each high school(without primary levell. Actual sizes of playground are not provided in these proposals.

International: UNESCO guidelines recommend for secondary schools 301 sq ft per pupil or aplayground space of 4.45 acres for secondary schools in rural areas. Table 19 providesinternational standards based on total enrolments, ranging from 20.5 to 35.5 sq ft per pupil inprimary, from 29.1 to 51.7 sq ft per pupil in secondary schools.

ImplicatIons: Consideration should be given to the provision of playground space in schools. Inrural areas, where space is likely to be ample, larger areas are possible, compared with urbanschool locations.

School Garden

National and International: The 1982 OBE proposals recommend a garden for all middle andhigh schools (although actual sizes are not provided). UNESCO guidelines recommend schoolgardens for growing of crops at the rate of 10.8 sq ft per pupil. Table 20 provides standards forgarden areas in Nepal and Thailand.

Illumination level

National and International: Norms regarding illumination levels have not been set for schoolsin Myanmar. International levels range from a minimum of 215 lux to 1604 lux (with advantagesto children at the higher level). UNESCO recommends 160 lux in classrooms. Table 21 showsrecommended levels in a number of countries for a variety of activities.

Time Utilisation Rate (TUR)

National and International: The time utilisation rate is obtained by dividing the number ofperiods a room is in use during a week by the number of periods in a week, multiplied by 100, .expressed as a percentage. National standards have not been provided to date for the TUR. Thesample survey indicates TUR values for classrooms as 101.4 per cent for primary, 101.6 per centfor middle and 105.6 per cent for high. It indicates that classrooms at all school levels are usedconstantly during the 25 hours a week allotted for regular teaching. UNESCO recommends the TURto be not less than 90 per cent for classrooms and not less than 75 per cent for special rooms. Inthe guidelines for schools in the Maldives, 90 per cent is recommended for ordinary teaching roomsand 80 per cent for subjects which require special rooms.

Furniture

National and International: Schools in Myanmar are required to use furniture (or furniture madeto the specifications) provided by the Furniture Factory (known as FIO) under the Ministry of

8

Agriculture and Forests. These appear to be inflexible in design, taking little account of scale,comfort and appearance. UNESCO and the ARISBR, both recommend furniture designs for a varietyof scales and sizes.

Implications: The main objectives in designing school furniture are to:

• comply with the body structure of the relevant age group and provide comfort tousers;

• help effective learning/teaching;

• be simple in design, strong and durable in construction and maintenance;

• be reasonable in cost, taking account of locally available materials and labour.

Considerable research and analysis is required to determine appropriate furnitureand teaching aids for a variety of pupil sizes. Design and construction should also take account ofappropriate materials in terms of affordability and maintenance.

CHAPTER III

HIGHER EDUCATION: NORMS AND STANDARDS

Class Size

National:coileges.

The 1981 DHE proposals specify the following class sizes in universities and

••••

Lecture Class

Tutorial Class

Practical Class:

Office Area

100 students (at 16 SO FT/STUDENT)



100 SO FT/TEACHER

A survey of seven universities and professional institutes undertaken by theInfrastructure Group as part of ESS received information from 310 experienced teachers (as shownin Tables 22 and 23). According to this survey, teachers recommend that a level type lecture roomshould not accommodate more than 71 to 98 students, depending on the availability of overheadprojector, or an amplifier. Similarly a theatre type lecture room should not accommodate more than97-170 students (depending on the availability of the above teaching aids) (see also Table 22).Tutorial rooms should not accommodate more than 35 students (without overhead projector, noramplifier) (see also Table 23).

International: Table 24 provides norms for student density in academic areas based onthe UNESCO planning standards. The density depends on the plot ratio (defined as the ratio of totalbuilt area on all floors to the site area). For example, assuming a plot ratio of 0.5, for arts basedsubjects and science and technology subjects, the densities in academic areas are 138 and 77students per acre respectively. Analysis of data reported by 53 liberal arts colleges in the northcentral region of USA reveals that the instructional space available in general classrooms rangesfrom 6.7 to 60.5 sq ft per full time student, with an average value of 19.1 sq ft per student. Inaccordance with UNESCO standards, the number of seats required in classrooms can be estimatedby multiplying the total number of students by 0.5. It was assumed that there are 8 hours oflectures in a notional 30 hour week. The frequency factor is assumed to be 2/3 (20 hourstimetabled out of 30 hours) and the occupancy factor 3/4 (average proportion of seats filled).Then, seats required

number of students x 8/30 x 3/2 x 4/3

number of students x 0.5 (approximately)

The University Grants Committee (UGC), UK, regards the following as a feasibleworking scale for library spaces:

• Reader places at 1 : 5 for all arts students and

10

1 : 7 for all science students. Provision for academic staff andpostgraduates (PG) are included in these scales, but if space is not claimedin departmental buildings, the study space for PG research students maybe added to library areas.

• Book storage space required is about 62.75 sq ft per 1,000 volumes ofbooks and bound journals.

• Administration and other support facilities can be provided within an areaof 18 per cent of the sum of a) and b) above (excluding additionalpostgraduate space from departmental areas).

CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION

Government plans envisage the opening of 25 new high schools, 70 middle schoolsand 2,000 primary schools annually. The Government does not provide the school facilities for allthese schools. In practice, the Government takes the responsibility of providing the buildings andfurniture for only about half the number of middle and high schools and none of the primaryschools. The primary schools are constructed on self-help basis by the community and thus thequallly or standard of the facilities depends on the economic status and level of development ofthe community. Only a small amount of intermittent support is received by each school from theGovernment for maintenance. Particularly in rural areas, most primary schools remain withoutgovernment support, buildings are shabby and furniture is inadequate and inappropriate. Moreover,school services remain poor and in some instances, particularly in the central part of the country,children have to bring their own drinking water.

Significant savings in cost can be achieved by modifying the eXisting buildingdesigns, in terms of layout and construction. By improving the design criteria, it is possible toachieve more appropriate school facilities than at present, Without additional costs.

Building designs should take account of local conditions, in terms of construction,orientation, sun control and ventilation, in order to achieve economy and convenience in use.

There is considerable difference in the standard of facilities provided between aprimary school on its own and the primary level in a middle or high school. The former has minimalfacilities to offer, although performance appears to be high. Parents have shown preference fortheir children to attend the primary level in a middle or a high school. They believe that suchschools provide higher standards of facilities (such as buildings, furniture, teaching aids andamenities). Parents are also aware that their children can rise from one level to the next within thesame middle or high school.

The standard classroom currently used in basic education is not rationally plannedand requires review and development as part of an appropriate learning environment. Moreover,school furniture currently in use is inappropriately designed and requires major modification.

There is a need to conduct research on education facilities design, includingfurniture, illumination levels, acoustics and ventilation, as well as space requirements. In particular,there is an urgent need to rationalize existing standard designs (with particular reference toclassrooms) based on cost effectiveness and convenience in use. Consideration shouldalso be given to the needs of higher education institutions, with respect to appropriate teaching

aids and facilities based on criteria for minimum requirements.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

DBE, MOE. Proposals for establishing norms for primarv. middle and high schools (in Myanmarl.Department of Basic Education; Ministry of Education. Yangon, 1982.

DBE, MOE. Plan for Classroom Extension in Basic Education Schools 1981 (in Myanmar). Departmentof Basic Education; Ministry of Education, Yangon, 1981.

De Spiegeleer, J. Primary school buildings: Standards. norms and design. UNESCO, Bangkok, 1986.

DHE, MOE. Plan for Standardization of Class Sizes in Universities and Colleges 1981. Department of,Higher Education; Ministry of Education, Yangon, 1981.

Khin Maung Kyi, U. _Assessment on the required buildings and furniture in Yangon division for theopening of eleventh standard high schools. M. Ed. Thesis, Myanmar, 1983.

Kyaw Win, Maung. Technical High School, Monywa. B. Arch. Thesis. Yangon Institute of Technology,Yangon, 1977.

No. (1) Furniture Factory, Myanmar Timber Enterprise. Ministry of Agriculture and Forests. Price list ofproducts 1989. Yangon, 1989.

Rafeeq, I; Naseem, I. Guideline for physical facilities for education in Maldives. UNESCO, Bangkok1986.

Saw Wynn, U;, DBE. Norms in use for schools under DBE, Discussion Notes. Department of BasicEducation, Yangon. 1991.

Sein Myint, U; Nyi Hla Nge, U; Naw Joy Loo, Daw; Win Win Myint, Daw; Win Win Maw, Daw; SawWynn, U. Education Facilhies. Education Sector Study Project, Working Paper 5.2,MERB, Ministry of Education, Yangon 1991.

Soriano, D. Primary school buildings in Asia. Administration facilities and programme. UNESCO,Bangkok, 1966.

Tet Tun, U;' Nyi Hla Nge, U; Naw Joy Loo, Daw. The Construction Sector. Education Sector StudyProject, Working Paper 5.1, MERB, Ministry of Education, Yangon, 1991.

UNESCO. Alternative building designs for Universal primary education in Bangladesh. Bangkok, 1981.

UNESCO. Burma primary school improvement programme. Bangkok, 1984.

UNESCO. Educational building and facilities in the Asian region. Bulletin of the UNESCO Regional Officefor Education in Asia 1976.

UNESCO. Innovation in construction of small secondary schools in Thailand 1990. Bangkok, 1990.

UNESCO. Planning Standards for Higher Education Facilities, Examples from National Practice. Paris,1979.

Virochsiri, X. Design guide for secondary schools in Asia. UNESCO, Bangkok, 1977.

Ye Aung, Dr; Tun, U; Khin Maung Aye, U; San Maung, U. An anthropometric study of Burmese childrenfor the introduction of new school furniture. MERB, Yangon, 1976.

Table 1Campus Area: 1982 OBE Proposed Minimum and Currently-in-use Values

Campus AreaType of Capacity

(SO FT/PUPIL)School (Acre)

1982 Current 1982 Current

Primary 200 3 5 653 1,089400 3 5 327 545600 3 5 218 363

Middle 520 6 7 503 586680 6 7 384 448840 6 7 311 363

High 880 7.5 10 371 4951,040 7.5 10 314 419

800 6.5 10 354 5451,080 6.5 10 262 403

Sources: See Refs 1 and 2

Table 2Campus Area: Existing Mean Values

Campus AreaType of School

(Acre) (SO FT/PUPIL)

Primary 2 511.2Middle 5.4 620.8High 10.3 293.4

Source: See Ref 18

Table 3Campus Area: International Values

Country (Acre) (SO FT/PUPIL)

P L-S U-S P L-S U-S

Sri Lanka 0.4-1 (U) - - <-- 75 - 291 (U) -->2-4 (R)

Malaysia 3-8 (U) - - <--97-958(U) & 377-1916(R)-->1-8 (R)

Pakistan - - - <--54(U) & 75 (R)

Philippines 2.5-9.9(U) - - <--1076-1345(U) & 1076-2691 (R)-->1.2-9.9(R)

Afghanistan 1-2(U) - - - - -

Thailand 1.98(U) 7.9(U) 7.9(UI <--495-1184(UI & 1227-2777(R)-->3.95(R) 13.8(R) 13.8(R)

Australia 8 <-- 15 --> - - -

Bangladesh 0.25(U) 2 3 - - -0.33(R)

Tamil Nadu 1(U) 3 5 - - -(India) 1(R)

Nepal - - - 75.3 107.6 107.6

Singapore 3.5 <-- 7.5 -- > - - -

P = Primary; L-S = Lower Secondary; U-S = Upper Secondary;U = Urban; R = RuralSources: See Refs 8, 11 and 12

Table 4School Capacity: 1982 OBE Proposed Values

Type of No. of Classes Total No. of Capacity ofSchool Class- rooms School

Primary Middle High

Primary 5 x 1 = 5 - - 5 2005 x 2 = 10 - - 10 4005x3=15 - - 15 600

Middle 5 x 1 = 5 4 x 2 = 8 - 13 5205 x 1 = 5 4x3 =12 - 17 6805 x 1 = 5 4x4 =16 - 21 840

High 5 x 1 = 5 4 x 2 = 8 3 x 3 = 9 22 8805 x 1 = 5 4x3 =12 3 x 3 = 9 26 1,040

- 4 x 2 = 8 3x4 =12 20 800- 4x3 =12 3x5 =15 27 1,080


Table 5School Size (number of pupils): Existing Conditions

Type of Percentage of Schools by No. of Pupils Mean No. ofSchool Pupils per School

<80 or Bl· 241- 401- 561- 721- BB1- 1041- >2000~80 240 400 560 720 BBO 1040 2000

P 25 59 10 3 2 - - - - 166

M - 8 23 29 10 15 4 12 - 605

H - - - 6 10 6 8 48 22 1362

Source: See Ref 18

Table 6School Size (number of pupils): International Values

Country Type of School

P L-S L-S

Bangladesh 300(U) 400{U) 400(U)200(R) 225(R) 300(R)

Tamil {India} 205(U} - -142{R) - -

Japan 410 438 868

Malaysia 730(U} 1007{U) -277(R) 518(R) -

Nepal 100(U) 240{U) 600(U)40 {R} 156(R} 300{R}

New Zealand 210 210 530

Mainland China 568{U} 730(U) 3732198{R) 456{R} -

P=PrimaryU = UrbanSource: See Ref 12

L - S = Lower SecondaryR = Rural

U - S = Upper Secondary

Table 7Classroom Area and Gross Area (sq ft/pupil): Existing Conditions

Type of School Classroom Area Gross Area

Primary 12.5 16.85Middle 14.7 19.9High 15.8 22.9

Source: Ref 18

Table 8Classroom Area (sq ft/pupil): International Standards

Country Classroom Area Remarks

A.R.I.S.B.R. 13 For Asian region

Bangladesh 10 For Primary schools

Sources: Refs 3 and 6

Table 9Classroom Area and Gross Area: International Values

Country Classroom Area/Pupil Gross Area/Pupil(SO FT) (SO FT)

P L-S U-S P L-S U-S

Bhutan 10.25 - - - - -

Bangladesh 7.5 9.7 11.8 9.7 11.8 15.1

Thailand 16.1 16.1 16.1 30.2 37.4 37.4

Maldives 10 13.1 - - -India 9.7 9.7 11.3 11.73 17.11

Australia 19.4 16.7 31.65 98.17

Nepal 8.1 9.1 9.1 10.1 11.6 14.1

Singapore 17.2 17.2 17.2 84.71 185.89

Srilanka . - - - 16.90 57.37

Pakistan - - - 9.15 59.20

New Zealand - - - 37.24 114.85

Malaysia - - - - 46.28

Afghanistan - - - 15.28 19.91

S. Korea - - - 14.10 30.57

Mean (All) 12.3 13.1 13.6 24.60 57.50 58.00

Mean, without Australia, New Zealand and Singapore 14.65 2.40 33.00

Sources: See Rafs 7,9,10 and 12

\

/'j

Table 10Headmaster's Office and Teachers' Room Area: International Values

A: BHUTAN

Primary SchoolsHeadmaster's + Store = 205 - 280 SO FT (200 - 300 Pupils)Headmaster's + Assistantrrypist + Store = 280·345 SO FT

(300 - 450 Pupils)Headmaster's + Assistantrryp;st + Store = 345 - 474 SO FT

(450 - 600 Pupils)Average Value = 0.86 SO FT/PUPILHeadmaster's + Staffroom combined « 200 Pupils)Teacher's + Resource Room = 258 SO FT (200·300 Pupils)Teacher's + Resource Room = 345 SO FT (300 - 500 Pupils)Teacher's + Resource Room = 431 SO FT (> 500 Pupils)Average value = 0.753· 1.08 SO FT/PUPIL

B: MALDIVES

Primary SchoolsHeadmaster's = 119 SO FTAssistant's = 89 SO FTTypist or Clerk's = 55 - 87 SO FTStationery Store = 116 - 400 SO FTTeachers' = 258 SO FT (200 . 300 Pupils)Teachers' = 344 SO FT (300 - 500 Pupils)Teachers' = 431 SO FT (> 500 Pupils)Average Value = 0.753 - 1.08 SO FT/PUPIL

Secondary SchoolsProvide places for 60 per cent of the total number of teachers in one shift. Half will be given individualstudy places, another half as places in the adjoining relaxing rooms.Study Room is 18.0 FT x 22.8 FT; Relaxing Room is 11.5 FT x 22.8 FT

C:NEPAL

Staff Room Area, Primary = 0.7 SO FT/PUPILStaff Room Area, Lower Secof1!lary = 0.7 SO FT/PUPILStaff Room Area, Upper Secondary = 1.08 SO FT/PUPIL

Sources: See Refs 7,10 and 12

Table 11Science laboratory (sq ft/place): International Standards (based on a capacity of 40 pupils)

Country Chemistry Physics Biology Multipurpose

UNESCO 28.0 28.3 24.8 28

ARISBR. 38 36 50 34

MEAN 33.0 32.2 37.4 31


Table 12Science laboratory (sq ft/place): International Values (based on a capacity of 40 pupils)

Country Chemistry Physics Biology Multi-purpose

Maldives 25.2 26.2 24.2 -

Australia - - - 7.5 •Bangladesh - - - 13.4(L-SI

17.2(U-SlNepal - - - 14.0(U-SISingapore - - - 36.6{L-Sl

36.6(U-S)Thailand - - - 18.3(P)

23.7(L-S)23.7(U-S)

• Based on total enrolmentSources: See Refs 10 and 12

Table 13Domestic Science laboratory (sq ft/place): International Standards

Organisation Area required Remarks

UNESCO 29.9 For Secondary Schools in Asia

A.R.I.S.B.R. 35 For Schools in Asian Region


N

Table 14Domestic Science Laboratory (sq ft/place): International Values

Country Area Provided Remarks

Australia 3.8' For All Secondary LevelsNepal 29.1 For Upper Secondary LevelSingapore 43.7 For All Secondary LevelsThailand 23.7 For Primary Level

34.4 For All Secondary LevelsMaldives 29.9

, Based on total enrolmentSources: See Refs 10 and 12

Table 15Technical/Agricultural Workshop: International Values


Maldives 37.7 For Multi-purpose WorkshopAustralia 4." -

Nepal 29.1 For Upper Secondary LevelSingapore '01 For All Secondary Levels (Woodwork) For PrimaryThailand 23.7 Level

40.9 For All Secondary Levels

, Based on total enrolment

Table 16library Area (sq ft/place): International Values


India 19.7 Based on 42 Places32.3 Based on 50 Places and 6000 books

Maldives 32.3 Based on 40 Places(Primary, Urban)

14.5 Based on 40 Places(Primary, Rural)

21.5 Based on 40 Places (Secondary)Australia 2.7' Primary

6.24' SecondaryNepal 0.7' Primary

0.7' Lower Secondary1.08' Upper Secondary

Thailand 2.30' Upper Secondary

Based on total enrolmentSources: See Refs 8, 9, 10 and 12

Table 17Toilet Facility: UNESCO Recommendations

Uril1'al: Boys:

Girls:

Teachers;(Male)

Closet: Boys:

Girls:

Teachers:

1 Urinal/20-30 Pupils, or5' 1" of Trough Urinal/lOO Pupils

use the same type of squatting pan for defecating

1 Urinal/ 1 - 15

2 Urinals/16 - 35

3 Urinals/35 - 55

2-3 Seats / 100, or

1 Seat / 40 or 1 Class

3 Seats / First and Second 50

4 Seats / Each Subsequent 100 (or)

Seat / per 25 (or) 0.5 Class

Seat / per 5 Male or, 2 Female

Sources: See Refs, 8, 10 and 12

A: MAlDIVESClosets:

Table 18Toilet Facility: International Standards

Students': 1 Seat / 50 StudentsNet Area = 13.5 SO FT/PLACE

Teachers': 1 Seat / 7 PersonsNet Area = 16.1 SO FT/PLACE

Source: See Ref 10.

B:NEPAl

M/F Closets Urinals Wash Basin

Male 1 per 48 1 per 32 1 per 32Female 1 per 24 1 per 48

Source: See Ref 12

c: AUSTRALIA

Boys <15 16-30 31-50 51-75 76-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300

Closets 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 6

Urinals 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Girls <15 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 76-100 101-130 131-160 161-190

Closets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Source: See Ref 12

Table 19Playground Area (sq ftlpupil): International Values

Country Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary

S.Korea 0.803-2.41' 0.77-2.30' 1.03-2.05'Acre (36-C1ass-room .School)

Nepal 32.3 43.1 43.1Singapore 35.5 51.7 51.7Thailand 20.5 29.1 29.1

acreNote: Based on total enrolmentSource : See Ref 12

Table 20Garden Area (sq ftlpupil): International Values

Country Primary Lower Secondary Upper Secondary

Nepal 21.5 32.3 32.3Thailand 8.6 16.1 16.1

Source: See Ref 8

Table 21Illumination Level: International Values for a Range of Functions

Function Required Illumination Level in Lux' in Different Countries

(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) Mean

Classroom Desk 753 215 300 200 215 337Board 1,604 215 400 500 215 587

Laboratories 1,076 215 400 200 215 421

Embroidery & Sewing 1,604 323 600 1,000 323 527Rooms

Art Rooms 753 323 600 500 323 500

Metal Rough 1,076 - 200 - 108 461Workshop Med. 1,076 215 400 - 215 476

Fine 1,076 323 900 900 323 640

Woodwork Sawing 1,076 215 200 - 215 426Nailing 1,076 323 400 500 323 452

Library Stal.k 323 - - 200 - 261reading 753 323 600 200 215 418

Offices 753 215 400 10O 215 337

Staff Room 108 108 200 10O - 129

Stairs & Lavatories 215 108 10O 50 32 101

• Lux (The average illumination on an area) lumens/m2

(1) USA (N) (2) USA (S) (3) UK (4) JAPAN (5) AFRICA (ME)

Source: See Ref 5, 6 and 8

11

Table 22Maximum Number of Students in a lecture Class: Opinions

(based on a survey of 310 teachers)

University/ Institute I 11 III IV V VI VII VIII

Arts & Science 99 114 92 163 94 115 110 171Economics 77 90 79 145 90 97 93 155Agriculture 59 89 80 125 69 89 93 136Technology 52 90 57 114 51 83 82 140Medicine (1) 85 105 105 156 80 113 112 276Veterinary 68 98 98 148 80 108 106 165Education 60 93 75 132 66 101 93 149

Mean for All 71 97 84 140 76 101 98 170

KEY:

Condition Level Room Theatre Type Room

Overhead Amplifier Overhead AmplifierProjector Projector

I X X - -

11 - - X XIII X / - -

IV - - X /V / X - -VI - - / XVII / / - -VIII - - / /

/ = The facility is present;X = The facility is not present;- = Not relevantSource: Field survey

Table 23Maximum Number of Students in a Tutorial Class: Opinions (based on a

survey of 310 teachers)

University /Institute Mean Value of Maximum Number ofStudents in Tutorial Class

Arts & Science 53Economics 34Agriculture 43Technology 25Medicine (I) 27Veterinary 23Education 41

Mean 35

Source: Field Survey

Table 24Density in Academic Areas: International Standards

Plot Ratio Students Per Acre

Arts Based Science and Technology

0.5 : 1.0 138 771.0 : 1.0 277 1561.5 : 1.0 415 2332.0: 1.0 554 3122.5 : 1.0 692 389

Note: Plot Ratio = the total of built areas on all floors divided by site areaSource: See Ref 19

LIST OF WORKING PAPER SERIES

1. Education Data Review and Analysis

1 .1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

Performance Indicators in Basic Educationby U Saw Win (Institute of Economics).

Performance Indicators in Higher Educationby U Thein Htay (DHE).

Performance Indicators in Technical, Agricultural and Vocational Educationby U Myat Naing (MERB) and U Nyunt Maung (DTAVE).

Quantitative Review of Education Staffby U Tun Hla and U Myint Thein (DBE).

Population Projections (1983-2013) by U Nyan Myint (Institute of Economics).

2. The Quality of Education

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

Teacher Quality by Daw 00 Khin Hla (Institute of Education).

Pedagogy by Oaw Nu Nu Win (Institute of Education).

Curriculum by U Myint Han (MERB).

Student Evaluation by Dr. Khin Saw Naing (Institute of Medicine 2).

Student Characteristics by U Maung Maung Myint (DBE).

3. Education and Employment

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

Manpower Demand and Employment Patterns in a Changing Economyby Dr. Thet Lwin (Institute of Economics).

A Tracer Study of Recent Graduates: Implications for Education and ManpowerPlanning by U Kyaw Kyaw (Department of Labour).

Linkages between Training Institutions and Employersby U Tun Aye (Ministry of NO.l Industry), Daw Myint Myint Yi (Institute ofEconomics) and U Yan Naing (OBE).

Education and Work Performance lA Survey of Employers' Perceptions) by DawHla Myint (Institute of Economics).

Non-Formal Education in Myanmar by Daw Win Win Myint (Institute ofEconomics) and Daw Lai Lai Yu (MERB).

Labour Market Institutions in Myanmar by U Kyaw Kyaw (Department of Labour).

4. Costs and Financing of Education

4.1

4.2

4.3

Management and Administration of the Education Budget by Or. Khin Ohn Thant(Ministry of Planning and Finance).

Government Expenditure on Education by Oaw Soe Soe Aung (Institute ofEconomics) .

Non-Government Expenditure on Education by U Saw Gibson (Yangon University).

5. Education Infrastructure

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

The Construction Sector by U Tet Tun (Ministry of Construction), U Nyi Hla Nge(Yangon Institute of Technology), Oaw Naw Joy Loo (Institute of Medicine') andOaw Win Win Maw (Institute of Medicine ').

A Comprehensive Survey of Education Facilities by U Sein Myint (OBE), U NyiHla Nge (Yangon Institute of Technology), Oaw Win Win Myint (Institute ofEconomics), Oaw Naw Joy Loo (Institute of Medicine 1), U Saw Wynn (OBE) andOaw Win Win Maw (Institute of Medicine '). .

The Provision of Infrastructure by U Nyi Hla Nge (Yangon Institute ofTechnology), U Nyunt Hlaing (Ministry of No.' Industry), U Tet Tun (Ministry ofConstruction) and U Sein Myint (OBE).

Norms and Standards for Education Facilities by U Nyi Hla Nge (Yangon Instituteof Technology), Oaw Win Win Maw (Institute of Medicine 1), and U Tet Tun(Ministry of Construction).

6. Organization and Management of the Education System

6.1

6.2

6.3

Organization and Management of Basic Education by Oaw Hla Kyu (OBE) and UMyint Thein (OBE).

The Cluster System for Primary Schools by U Myint Han (MERB).

Organization and Management of Universities and Colleges by U Saw Gibson(Yangon University) and U Thein Htay (OHE).

7. Special Studies

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.4

Economics and Business Education by Oaw Cho Cho Thein (OBE).

The Teaching of Science and Technology by U Khin Maung Kyi (OBE).

The Teaching of English by Or. Myo Myint (Yangon University).

Higher Education by U Myo Nyunt (Institute of Education)

, ,

norms and standards of education facilities; 1992

Documents