A state-wide survey of South Australian secondary schools to determine the current emphasis on ergonomics and computer use.
Sawyer, Janet ; Penman, Joy
INTRODUCTION
Today's information and communication technologies (ICT) have
been shown to enhance the quality of teaching and allow students greater
accessibility to information, flexibility and interaction with other
students. The use of computers has revolutionised how students learn and
communicate. Society today has become computerised and all students are
increasingly pressured to become computer literate and take up the
technology to their advantage.
However, it is generally acknowledged that computer use for
prolonged periods of time may result in visual, musculoskeletal and
psychological problems. The application of principles of ergonomics to
computer work can reduce these health risks and increase productivity.
In a world of computerisation, the awareness, knowledge and priority
given to this important technological consideration will prove
advantageous for the schools and the students. The secondary students
need to learn the principles of ergonomic early on to prevent future
health problems. Current literature indicates that the application of
the principles of ergonomics in the computer use of secondary students
has not been given much emphasis in schools and that many high schools
do not include healthy computing as a topic within their curriculum.
This study investigated the emphasis given to the application of
principles of ergonomics to the use of computers by students within
metropolitan and rural high schools in South Australia. The term rural
has conjured many definitions. Rural suggests pastoral landscapes,
unique demographic structures, isolation, remoteness, low population
density and distinct sociocultural milieu (Hart, Larson & Lishner
2005). There is a substantial difference in composition of people: rural
populations have on the average relatively more elderly people and
children, higher unemployment and underemployment rates and higher
percentages of poor, uninsured and underinsured residents. However,
these stereotypes fail to completely define rurality within Australia
because rural cultures may exist in urban places and hence the struggle
in clarifying the term. Despite the absence of a definition, the concept
is useful for the purpose of targeting resources to underserved rural
populations. The majority of rural areas lack adequate services,
including health promotion initiatives, such as those relating to the
use of principles of ergonomics and computer use.
A survey using a 17-item questionnaire was sent to a selection of
secondary schools (refer Appendix 1). The questionnaire covered the
position of the survey participant in the school (Question 1), awareness
of the principles of ergonomics (Question 2), written policy on
procedures relating to ergonomics and computer use (Question 3),
inclusion of content in relation to ergonomics (Question 4 and 5), time
spent delivering the content (Question 6), position of person delivering
the content (Question 7), year levels content is delivered to (Question
8), whether touch typing is taught (Question 9), person delegated the
responsibility for ensuring recommendations are followed (Question 10),
application of ergonomics in computer pool (Question 11), use of
ergonomic tools (Question 12), importance placed on ergonomics in
relation to computer use for students (Question 13 and 14), reports of
computer-related complaints (Question 15), how the school might be
supported in providing information on ergonomics (Question 16), and
interest in training on ergonomics and computer use (Question 17).
BACKGROUND
The use of computer technology by high school students continues to
increase both at school and at home as students prepare their
assignments and take advantage of the vast amount of information and
social networking opportunities provided by the world-wide web. It is
important that this use is optimised in terms of health and safety. The
introduction of computers in schools and the promotion of the use of the
internet in school environments should be given more careful
consideration however. It is crucial, according to Saito, Sotoyama,
Jonai, Akutsu, Yatani and Marumoto (2000) that guidelines for the
ergonomic use of computers in schools be developed to address the
prevailing physical and social needs.
It is generally acknowledged that frequent and prolonged periods of
computer use can result in musculoskeletal discomfort, pain and visual
problems. Improper posture at computer workstations is a widespread
global problem, according to Epstein, Loye, Walsh, Colford and Epstein
(2011) and Breen, Pyper, Rusk and Dockrell (2007). The repercussions of
computer-related activities have been recently reported by various
authors. For instance, Smith, Louw, Crous and Grimmer- Somers (2009)
reported a high prevalence rate of headaches and neck pain among
adolescents for sitting for lengthy periods in fixed postures like
computer terminals. Their cross-sectional study collected data from
1,073 high-school students found a concerning association between neck
pain and excessive hours of computing for school students. In a separate
study, Siu, Tse, Yu and Griffiths (2009) investigated the pattern of
computer related activities among Hong Kong adolescents and children and
the prevalence of musculoskeletal discomfort. Their study of Year 1 to 7
students in six local high schools (N = 3,191) revealed high prevalence
(68.3%) of musculoskeletal discomfort related to using computer.
Shoulder (37.7%) and neck (35.0%) were most frequently involved.
Moreover, a Scandinavian study was conducted linking computer use
with neck and upper-extremity symptoms, headache, and eyestrain in upper
secondary school students (Palm, Risberg, Mortimer, Pamerud, Toomingas
& Tornqvist, 2007). Using a questionnaire, 1,575 female and 1,251
male students were surveyed. Results found computer use was reported to
be 31 hours/week by the male students and 19 hours/week by the females.
Most computer use took place outside school and used mainly for
entertainment. Headache was reported by 51% and 24%, and neck or
shoulder symptoms by 31% and 15%, of the females and males,
respectively. More than 50% of the females with health complaints
indicated that they experienced sleep disturbances and had to take
painkillers. Between 10% and 43% linked their health complaints to
computer use.
More recently, the use of laptop computers is increasing, but there
is limited research on the physical consequences of laptop use by adults
or children. Harris and Straker (2000) determined these issues by
studying children aged 10 to 17 year at schools in Western Australia.
Data collected included locations and postures adopted for laptop use;
time on task and consequences of both using and carrying laptops. This
study found 60% of students reported discomfort with laptop use and 61%
of participants reported discomfort with carrying their laptop.
These discomforts raised legitimate concerns about the health of
students and associated computer use exposure. Korkmaz and Sommerich
(2010) attributed these discomforts in part due to lack of training from
schools and/or lack of healthy computing habits. If schools are to
prevent future health problems and improve the health of students, it is
important to introduce and educate students to the concepts and
principles of healthy computing (Smith et al., 2009).
However, it appears from the literature that many high schools do
not include healthy computing in their curriculum. In fact, Sotoyama,
Bergqvist, Jonai and Saito (2002) noted in their research that most
schools are slow to develop instructive programs from the environmental
or ergonomic point of view. This conclusion was drawn from their
research involving elementary, junior high and high schools in Yokohama
and Kawasaki cities regarding the use of personal computers by students.
The survey included questions that asked how often and in what
environment computers are used, whether instructions are given as to
their use, children's posture, and the effect on health.
The above finding from Japan is supported by a recent study
conducted within secondary schools in New Zealand to survey the extent
to which they provide an ergonomic learning environment in ICT
classrooms. Grant (2008) found a general lack of awareness of guidelines
on ergonomics and computer use and cautioned on the resulting potential
problems for students. Siu, Tse, Yu and Griffiths (2009) argued an
urgent need in healthy computing environment for Hong Kong adolescents
because despite their young age, the students were not protected from
computer-related health complaints. Providing adolescents with
information about proper computer ergonomics may help prevent such
health problem, according to Palm et al. (2007).
An effective way to anticipate the problem is to provide young
students with adequate knowledge of ergonomics and computer use and
environmental design, and now there is an urgent need for specific
guidelines to protect school students. A number of initiatives have been
reported such as: the knowledge discovery process and participatory
approach in facilitating student learning about ergonomics, the use of
continuous posture feedback for the computer users, and assessing
children's computing posture. These initiatives are briefly
described below.
A strategy adopted by Korkmaz and Sommerich (2009, 2010) was to
recruit a small group of students to learn, in a participatory fashion,
about healthy computing and then to assist them to develop means for
effectively conveying their knowledge to other students. Sawyer and
Penman (2011) conducted educational sessions with year 10 students that
included information on disorders associated with computer use, the
warning signs to look for, principles of ergonomics to apply, software
available to remind, with demonstration and return demonstration. Their
goal was to promote awareness of the principles of ergonomics relating
to computer use and provide guidelines for healthy computing in an
effort to improve comfort and efficiency. The use of the "Posture
Pad", developed to provide continuous posture feedback to the user,
has been shown to significantly improve posture 95% of the time (Epstein
et al., 2011). There is also available the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment
(RULA) that is used to assess posture amongst children while using
computers (Dockrell, O'Grady, Bennett, Mullarkey, Mc Connell,
Ruddy, Twomey & Flannery, 2012).
The learning environment is also a focus in the literature. The
electronic classroom containing a computer-controlled system integrated
in a room designed with strict attention given to ergonomics and
environmental conditions was reported by Coppola and Thomas (2002).
Zandvliet and Straker (2001) evaluated the physical and psychosocial
environments in computerised school settings performed through a
combination of questionnaires. Data were obtained from a series of
physical evaluations of 43 settings in 24 school locations in British
Columbia, Canada and Western Australia. The authors concluded that
potential deficiencies in the physical environment of these locations
included problems with individual workspaces, lighting and air quality,
and that deficiencies in the psychosocial environment were confined to
the dimension of autonomy. Their results underscored that guidelines on
ergonomics used in the implementation of information technology in
classrooms may impact positively on the learning environment.
METHODOLOGY
A 17-item survey instrument was prepared. It was designed to
investigate whether principles of ergonomics related to computer use
were being taught to secondary school students and the importance placed
on healthy computer use within South Australian secondary schools. It
also sought to determine how schools might be supported in providing
information on ergonomics and computer use to students.
Regional and city-based secondary schools were recruited for the
study. A list of government high schools in South Australia was printed
from the list provided on the World Wide Web and a selection of 15
regional and 15 city/metropolitan schools made from this list. The
selection criteria were that it was a public secondary school located
within South Australia. Purposive sampling was used to select
participants for the study to ensure coverage throughout South
Australia. A sample of 30 secondary schools was deemed adequate for the
study. Prior to commencing data collection approval was gained from the
University of South Australia's Human Research Ethics Committee and
from the Department for Education and Child Development (DECD)'s
Research Unit. An email was sent to each selected school requesting
participation in the research. Attached to the email was a Letter of
introduction, a Participant Information Sheet, a Consent Form, and the
Questionnaire. The schools were assured that participation was voluntary
and the information provided would remain confidential and only be used
for the purpose of the study.
One completed questionnaire was received promptly. A further email
forwarded to the other schools the following month yielded no other
responses. Two months on a personal follow-up telephone call was made to
each of the schools. In most cases the questionnaire was administered at
that time over the telephone; if not, the documentation was emailed to
the school's nominated person. A total of 15 responses were
received, giving a response rate of 50%.
The data collected were summarised and analysed by sorting the data
into files and tables and counting frequency of responses.
FINDINGS
Responses were received from ten (67%) regional and five (33%)
city/metropolitan secondary schools. The profile of the respondents is
given in Table 1.
The respondents were asked if they were aware of the principles of
ergonomics that relate to the use of computers. All except one said that
they were (93%) which is very favourable. Next, they were asked whether
their school had a written policy on procedures related to ergonomics
and computer use. Most (73%) said their school did not; 20% of
respondents were unsure (refer Table 2). The one respondent who answered
that there was a policy added the comment that "the furniture
supplied precludes full compliance with occupational health and safety
principles".
As shown in Table 3, most schools (60%) replied that their
curriculum did include content in relation to ergonomics and computer
use.
This content included "how to set up a work station",
"how best to sit at a computer", and the need for rest breaks.
In some schools it was covered as a "passing mention as part of
other subjects", "not a lot, just a bit of a topic". One
school, where all students use laptops, reported that material on
ergonomics was used in each subject and reminders of "how to sit,
heights, lighting etc." was embedded in day to day routine. For
many schools the content was included as part of a Certificate 1 or
Certificate 2 course that had an occupational health, safety and welfare
unit that was reported to cover "chairs and eye care". In some
schools a basic introduction was provided to year 8 level students, who
were then required to design a poster on the topic which was displayed
in the classroom. At higher year levels the students were required to
undertake research into the problems associated with computer use and
prepare a report. Responses relating to the time spent on delivering the
material ranged from 30 minutes to one lesson "never to be spoken
of again", to two weeks and "ongoing as incorporated into all
lessons".
Most schools (80%) reported that they did not have a person who had
been delegated the responsibility for ensuring that students followed
recommended principles of ergonomics for their computer use (Table 4).
However, one commented that they had an occupational health, safety and
welfare officer who oversees all staff and student "safe use of
anything".
Table 5 indicates that 67% of respondents reported that principles
of ergonomics were taken into consideration in their school's
computer pool set up.
Interestingly, for one school this question was considered no
longer relevant as their students used laptops in their normal
classroom. When asked to elaborate on how ergonomics was taken into
consideration, the respondents mentioned the design and layout of the
room with thought given to leg room when planning seating spaces and
having height adjustable chairs that gave back support. Benches and
chairs were planned around the heights of their students and glare
reduction considered in the placement of computers in relation to
windows. Consideration was also given to having chairs with wheels if
used on carpet flooring or with a flat surface if to be used on a vinyl
floor. Relevant posters reinforcing principles of ergonomics were
displayed in the room. However, the provision of ergonomically styled
chairs and table heights were not generally regarded as being consistent
within a school. Limitations imposed by costs and existing
infrastructure and window placement often meant it was not possible to
have benches and screens at the ideal position and height for the
students. Budget issues and the perceived lack of desire to spend money
to support occupational health and safety were mentioned.
A separate question in the survey instrument asked whether tools
such as document holders and adjustable chairs were provided. It was
found that generally only adjustable chairs were available and that 33%
of the schools did not provide either (Table 6).
While these schools may have used adjustable chairs in the past,
often students "played with" and damaged gas-lift chairs so
that they did not last. Gas-lift adjustable chairs were considered an
expensive item that the schools could not afford to keep replacing.
Plastic chairs were now provided due to vandalism. One respondent
indicated that adjustable chairs were not required as the students were
"only at the computer for short periods of time". Document
holders were seldom used and were generally regarded as no longer
relevant because "the students do not need them as they are looking
at the screen". Also, students tended to break document holders. It
was noted by one respondent that while adjustable chairs were provided
for students in the computer labs, they were not available when the
students used laptop computers.
A question in relation to whether touch typing was taught in
secondary schools was specifically included in the survey instrument as
in discussions at a recent Conference of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society of Australia this was queried with the underlying
perception that not being able to touch type was inconsistent with
healthy computer use for students. As shown in Table 7, three schools
taught 'touch typing' but most (80%) did not. Some schools
"used to, but not anymore".
When asked the level of priority they believed their school placed
on the importance of ergonomics in relation to computer use for
students, most respondents said it was given 'Low' priority.
The responses are summarised in Table 8.
Most respondents (66%) thought ergonomic principles relating to
computer use were not being given sufficient priority in their school
(refer Table 9). An added comment was "but it competes with other
priorities". One respondent said "it isn't much but is
sufficient given students spend relatively small amounts of time in
computer rooms and have regular breaks'. One school reported that
it does assess the situation regularly recognising that if the students
are not comfortable they will be less productive.
Few schools had received any reports of computer-related complaints
of pain or discomfort from students (refer Table 10). Reports that had
been received generally related to the chairs. Some students complained
of "sore butts" as the chair seats were hard plastic. In other
cases where the chairs were old and the seats "wobbly" the
students' sitting position was on an uncomfortable angle with the
buttocks not level.
The schools were asked how they might be supported in providing
information on ergonomics and computer use to students. Resources in the
form of "documentation prepared for our industry" were
requested--interesting lesson material, worksheets, software,
videos--using simple language at the student level. Appropriate posters
that could be displayed in each computer room and referred to by
teachers and an information pack as part of occupational health safety
and welfare training were other suggestions. "Getting it into
focus" by providing more emphasis on healthy computing, and
reminding teachers, was mentioned. One respondent reported how everyone
at their school was now "hunched over laptops". All staff and
students had a laptop computer leading to an additional problem for
staff who needed to hunch over the laptops to review the students'
work as the limited viewing angles of the laptop computer together with
reflections made it difficult for teachers to see and check screen work.
The respondent commented that the tendency within the school to replace
desktop computers with laptops was causing a "host of issues"
for teachers.
The final question asked if training was available on ergonomics
and computer use whether the school would be interested in taking
advantage of it. While some said 'Yes', most were unsure or
replied 'No' (60%) (Table 11).
The reasons included that the training would be competing with
other huge demands on staff time; depended upon the location of the
training as would not travel to the city; that they were aware; the
information was already included in the Certificate 1 and 2 courses
covered with the students; and "we feel it isn't an area we
would need specific training in, more the intent to ensure it is taught
to students".
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The poor participation in the study is indicative of the low level
of priority given by the schools to this topic. This is evidenced by the
finding that 66% of respondents believed the application of principles
of ergonomic to computer use was not given sufficient priority within
their school. The majority of the interviewees were aware of the
principles of ergonomics related to computer use and most schools
included the topic in their curriculum, but there was lack of written
policy on procedures, personnel delegated responsibility to monitor or
follow through, and little interest in training should it be available.
It appears that the serious repercussions of computer-related
activities, including musculoskeletal discomfort, shoulder and neck
pain, headaches, and visual problems as discussed by Epstein et al.
(2011), Siu et al. (2009), Smith et al. (2009), Breen et al. (2007) and
Palm et al. (2007), are not being given adequate attention and
consideration by the schools.
Professionals working in the field of ergonomics would argue that
specialist knowledge is required by people teaching material in this
area. It is pleasing to find that many schools do include content in
relation to ergonomics and computer use in their school's
curriculum. While many pieces of information relating to ergonomics such
as how to sit at the computer, allowing sufficient leg room, using back
support, eye care, taking rests, placement of computers to avoid glare,
were mentioned it is noted that other important factors were not
specifically identified. Information such as:
* positioning of keyboard and arms;
* that hands and wrists should be kept level in a neutral position;
* elbows kept relaxed in at the sides of the body;
* how to adjust the chair backrest so that it fits into the small
of the back to support the spine, yet gives clearance for the buttocks
and the shoulder blades;
* the recommended viewing distance to the screen;
* the recommendation to keep the feet flat on the floor and avoid
crossing the legs and ankles as this can inhibit circulation;
* how to safely use the mouse;
* the need for long-distance viewing to refocus and relax the eyes;
* to get up out of the seat and walk regularly to relieve the
muscles in lower back from the added pressure caused by sitting;
* the recommendation to perform gentle stretches while sitting at
the computer, during rest periods and after work, to counter potential
strain of the neck, back and wrists, and reduce tension and fatigue; and
* the need to be aware of possible additional risk where
out-of-school activities involve using the same muscles and tendons that
are used during computer use.
A key point is the need for schools to take into consideration the
anticipated overall computer use of students each day and therefore the
importance for students to know and apply the principles of ergonomics.
It may be that students do not use computers for extended times while at
school, but many do so after school hours. Palm et al. (2007) estimated
that approximately 90% of computer use was undertaken outside of school
for entertainment purposes.
The overall low priority given to ensuring the application of
ergonomics by students to their computer work appears to be due to a
number of factors: Not recognising the importance of the matter and
potential health problems that may arise, competing priorities, and
resource limitations. The findings of this study indicate that
occupational health and safety is often being compromised by lack of
money and budget issues. These factors, however, are not sending the
correct message to young students. In order for them to observe the
principles of ergonomics in computer use, they must see the same from
their role models. While there were minimal (20%) reports received of
computer-related complaints of pain or discomfort, the problems that
were highlighted must be addressed to protect the health of the
students.
Two-thirds of the schools did take ergonomics into consideration in
setting-up their computer pools--one-third did not. Interestingly, it
appears that computer pools are being replaced by the issue of laptop
computers to individual students with little consideration given to
their safe use. There also appears to be a changing use of the computer
technology leading to the reported redundancy of document holders as
students work mainly on-screen as they prepare material on the computer.
When comparing responses on a rural/urban basis, it was shown that
rural schools were more likely to include content on ergonomics and
computer use within their curriculum and take principles of ergonomics
into consideration in setting up their computer pools. It can be assumed
that because of this, they also had received fewer computer-related
complaints of pain or discomfort from students than the urban schools.
However, the rural schools were less likely to have a written policy
related to ergonomics and computer use and to have a person delegated
responsibility for ensuring the application of ergonomic principles by
students. They generally did not teach touch typing. A greater
percentage of rural schools believed ergonomics and computer use were
given low and insufficient priority.
When asked how the schools might be supported in providing
information on ergonomics and computer use to students, various
suggestions were received: simple lesson material, worksheets, software,
and videos, that used language the students could relate to. This
research has highlighted a need for suitable material on ergonomics and
computer use specifically prepared for use with school students.
This study, undertaken by two regional university staff,
investigated the teaching of healthy computing skills to high school
students in rural and urban South Australia. While the sample size was
small, and there may be a need for more research in the regional context
given there may less health promotion in rural areas due to lack of
availability of expertise and resources, this study promotes awareness
of the issues related to safe computer use and may contribute to the
greater application of ergonomics in schools and prevention of future
injuries related to computer misuse.
Appendix 1
A state-wide survey of South Australian secondary schools to
determine the current emphasis on ergonomics and computer use
Please encircle your answer and/or provide your response in the
space provided.
1 What is your position in the school?
2 Are you aware of the principles of ergonomics that relate to the
use of computers?
Yes No
3 Does your school have a written policy on procedures related to
ergonomics and computer use?
Yes No
4 Does your school curriculum include content in relation to
ergonomics and computer use?
Yes No
If yes, (If no, please go to question 9)
5 What content does your school curriculum include in relation to
ergonomics and computer use?
6 How much time is spent on delivering this content?
7 What is the position of the person delivering the content?
8 What year level(s) it is delivered to?
9 Does your school teach touch typing?
Yes No
10 Is there a person in your school who has been delegated the
responsibility for ensuring that students follow recommended principles
of ergonomics for their computer use?
Yes No
11 Are principles of ergonomics taken into consideration in your
school's computer pool set up?
Yes No
Please elaborate:
12 Are tools such as document holders and adjustable chairs
provided?
Yes No
13 On what scale of priority do you think your school places the
importance of ergonomics in relation to computer use for students?
High Medium Low
14 Do you believe the principles of ergonomics relating to computer
use are being given sufficient priority in your school?
Yes No
15 Have you or your staff received reports of computer-related
complaints of pain or discomfort from students?
Yes No
If yes, please elaborate
16 How might your school be supported in providing information on
ergonomics and computer use to students?
17 If training was available on ergonomics and computer use would
your school be interested in taking advantage of it?
Yes No
REFERENCES
Breen, R., Pyper, S., Rusk, Y., Dockrell, S. (2007). An
investigation of children's posture and discomfort during computer
use. Ergonomics, 50(10), 1582-1592.
Coppola, J.F., Thomas, B.A. (2002). Does the integration of
technology in a smart E- classroom support the acquisition of critical
thinking skills? Proceedings-- Frontiers in Education Conference,3,
S1B/7.
Dockrell, S., O'Grady, E., Bennett, K., Mullarkey, C., Mc
Connell, R., Ruddy, R., Twomey, S., Flannery, C. (2012). An
investigation of the reliability of Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA)
as a method of assessment of children's computing posture. Applied
Ergonomics, 43(3), 632-636.
Grant, A.M. (2008). The ergonomic learning environment:
deliberately planned or anything goes? Computers in NZ Schools, 28-38.
Harris, C., Straker, L. (2000). Survey of physical ergonomics
issues associated with school childrens' use of laptop computers.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26(3), 337-346.
Hart, L.G., Larson, E.H., Lishner, D.M. (2005). Rural definitions
for health policy and research. Amercian Journal of Public Health,
95(7), 1149-1155.
Korkmaz, S.V., Sommerich, C.M. (2009). Facilitating student
learning about ergonomics and healthy computing skills via participatory
ergonomics. Work, 34(4),439-448.
Korkmaz, S.V., Sommerich, C.M. (2010). Teaching healthy computing
skills to high school students via participatory ergonomics. Proceedings
of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1, 672-676.
Palm, P., Risberg, E.H., Mortimer, M., Pamerud, G., Toomingas, A.,
Tornqvist, E.W. (2007). Computer use, neck and upper-extremity symptoms,
eyestrain and headache among female and male upper secondary school
students. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health,
Supplement, 33(3), 33-41.
Saito, S., Sotoyama, M., Jonai, H., Akutsu, M., Yatani, M.,
Marumoto, T. (2000). Research activities on the Ergonomics of computers
in schools in Japan, Proceedings of the XIVth Triennial Congress of the
International Ergonomics Association and 44th Annual Meeting of the
Human Factors and Ergonomics Association, 'Ergonomics for the New
Millennium', 658.
Sawyer, J., Penman, J. (2011). Ergonomics and computer use:
Increasing the awareness of rural secondary school students, Human
Factors and Ergonomics Society of Australia 47th Annual Conference,
Synergy in Sydney ...creating and maintaining partnerships, Sydney, 7-9
November.
Siu, D.C.H., Tse, L.A., Yu, I.T.S., Griffiths, S.M. (2009).
Computer products usage and prevalence of computer related
musculoskeletal discomfort among adolescents. Work, 34(4), 449-454.
Smith, L., Louw, Q., Crous, L., Grimmer-Somers, K. (2009).
Prevalence of neck pain and headaches: Impact of computer use and other
associative factors. Cephalalgia, 29(2), 250-257.
Sotoyama, M., Bergqvist, U., Jonai, H., Saito, S. (2002). An
ergonomic questionnaire survey on the use of computers in schools.
Industrial Health, 40(2), 135-141.
Zandvliet, D.B., Straker, L.M. (2001). Physical and psychosocial
aspects of the learning environment in information technology rich
classrooms. Ergonomics, 44(9), 838-857.
Janet Sawyer
Business and Regional Enterprise Unit
Centre for Regional Engagement
Joy Penman
Nursing and Rural Health Unit
Centre for Regional Engagement
(University of South Australia)
Table 1 Number and Percentage of Respondents
by Position within School
Position N Percentage
Year level coordinator 1 7
Senior Leader 2 1 7
Quality Assurance
IT Coordinator/Teacher 8 53
Deputy Principal 4 27
Business Manager 1 7
Table 2 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether the School has a Policy on Ergonomics and Computer
Use
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 0 1 0 7 1 7
No 8 3 53 20 11 73
Unsure 2 1 13 7 3 20
Total 10 5 66 34 15 100
Table 3 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether the School curricula included content on Ergonomics
and Computer Use
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 6 3 40 20 9 60
No 4 2 27 13 6 40
Total 10 5 67 33 15 100
Table 4 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether the School had a Person Delegated Responsibility
for ensuring practice of Ergonomics
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 1 2 7 13 3 20
No 9 3 60 20 12 80
Total 10 5 67 33 15 100
Table 5 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether Ergonomics taken into consideration in computer
pool set up
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 8 2 53 13 10 67
No 2 3 13 20 5 33
Total 10 5 66 33 15 100
Table 6 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether the School provided ergonomic tools
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 7 3 47 20 10 67
No 3 2 20 13 5 33
Total 10 5 67 33 15 100
Table 7 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether the School taught Touch Typing
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 2 1 13 7 3 20
No 8 4 53 27 12 80
Total 10 5 63 34 15 100
Table 8 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting the
Priority they Believe is placed on Ergonomics and Computer Use
by the School
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
High Priority 0 1 0 7 1 7
Medium Priority 2 2 13 13 4 27
Low Priority 8 2 53 13 10 66
Total 10 5 66 33 15 100
Table 9 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting whether
they believe ergonomic principles relating to computer use are
given sufficient priority in their School
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 2 2 13 13 4 27
No 7 3 47 20 10 66
Unsure 1 0 7 0 1 7
Total 10 5 67 33 15 100
Table 10 Number and Percentage of Respondents having received
reports of Computer-related complaints of Pain from Students
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 2 1 13 7 3 20
No 7 4 47 27 11 73
Unsure 1 0 7 0 1 7
Total 10 5 67 34 15 100
Table 11 Number and Percentage of Respondents reporting
whether School would be interested in training
Response N Percentage Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban N Per Cent
Yes 3 3 20 20 6 40
No 2 0 13 0 2 13
Unsure 5 2 33 13 7 47
Total 10 5 66 33 15 100
