Andrew Sugamele remembers the difference as soon as he stepped into a classroom. “It hit me like a train,” he said, recalling the shift in temperature when walking from the hallways into certain learning spaces at Cal Poly.
Now a master’s student in mechanical engineering, Sugamele often noticed how his classmates, distracted and drowsy, perceived the air as stagnant and overly warm. “Everyone subconsciously thinks about the temperature,” he said. “They’re not focused on learning; they’re focused on being too hot.”
His firsthand experience made Sugamele uniquely suited to investigate the issue. As part of mechanical engineering Professor Jennifer Mott’s research team, he joined a universitywide effort to explore how classroom conditions influence student comfort and success.
Over two quarters, Sugamele and about 15 other students collected hundreds of surveys, asking students about their perceptions of thermal comfort while also measuring air temperatures, humidity and airflow patterns in some of Cal Poly’s oldest and busiest buildings.
One engineering class in Building 13 stood out in the results: a single-door room with no windows, crowded with students working on laptops. Many described the air as stuffy and uncomfortable, making it hard to focus on their work.
The research, part of Mott’s broader study on thermal comfort and energy efficiency, revealed a troubling disconnect: classrooms designed to meet building standards often didn’t meet students’ needs. And as Sugamele observed, the consequences extended beyond physical discomfort — affecting students’ ability to focus, participate and thrive academically.
• • •
For Mott, the question was clear: Why are students uncomfortable in classrooms designed to meet modern standards for indoor environmental quality?
Since launching her research in 2020, Mott has focused on uncovering the factors that influence thermal comfort in educational spaces. Her work began with an ambitious effort to gather firsthand data from students, distributing more than 5,000 surveys across dozens of classrooms. These surveys explored not just physical conditions like temperature and airflow but also psychological factors — how clothing, activities and expectations shaped students’ perceptions.
“Our rooms should be comfortable, but that’s not how students experience them,” Mott said. “We wanted to understand why.”
To complement the surveys, Mott’s team deployed precision instruments to monitor real-time conditions, tracking variables like air temperature and humidity to carbon dioxide levels. The data revealed recurring patterns of discomfort tied to specific building designs and ventilation strategies.
“In some classrooms, students expect to be uncomfortable before they even walk in,” Mott said, emphasizing the psychological impact of outdated infrastructure and poor ventilation.
She also noted measurable differences tied to seasonal conditions, with students in older buildings performing better during cooler winter months than in the warmer spring or fall terms.
Balancing improved classroom comfort with energy efficiency has been central to Mott’s work. Her team is exploring solutions such as precooling classrooms at night or optimizing natural ventilation to make older spaces more comfortable without increasing energy costs.
“We’re fortunate to have such amazing weather here,” Mott added, “and we should be taking full advantage of it.”
• • •
Sugamele’s master’s thesis builds on his research in Building 20, where he and a team of four undergraduate students are modeling two classrooms and two labs to better understand thermal comfort and ventilation.
Their work involves placing devices to measure temperature, relative humidity and carbon dioxide levels, and assessing airflow and ventilation systems. “We can help by strategically opening windows to cool down a room or recommending ways to naturally heat it,” Sugamele said. “If ventilation is not up to code, we can let the university know.”
The team has expanded their efforts to include four additional classrooms, aiming to validate their methods and ensure consistent results. By comparing classrooms with different levels of usage — spaces occupied for six to seven hours daily versus those used for only two hours — they hope to pinpoint how activity levels influence environmental conditions.
Preparing classrooms for accurate testing requires thoughtful coordination. The team puts up signs reminding occupants not to adjust thermostats and arranges for windows to be opened or closed after classes, depending on the testing needs. However, window placement and accessibility vary significantly between buildings. “Depending on the building, the windows might be too high to easily adjust,” Sugamele explained.
Despite these logistical challenges, Sugamele sees the work as a crucial foundation for future improvements across campus. “This research can serve as a baseline for modeling other buildings,” he said, emphasizing the potential for long-term impact.
He and Mott share a common goal: to use these findings to develop practical, energy-efficient solutions that improve classroom comfort, ultimately fostering better learning environments for Cal Poly students.
By Emily Slater
