AN INVESTIGATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC AIR CONTAMINANTS IN THE INDOOR MANUFACTURED HOUSING ENVIRONMENT (TEXAS)

Manufactured housing has been found to have substantial levels of formaldehyde in the indoor air. Because mobile homes are more affordable than conventional housing, there has been a large increase in their use in the U.S. This increase in mobile home use has been substantial in the sunbelt regions such as Texas, where high temperatures and humidities may enhance out-gassing of formaldehyde and other volatile organic compounds from construction and furnishing materials and increase any potential health hazards.^ The influences of environmental, architectural and temporal factors on the presence of indoor formaldehyde and other organic compounds were investigated in conjunction with the Texas Indoor Air Quality Study of manufactured housing. A matched pair of mobile homes, one with electric heating and cooking utilities and the other with propane gas utilities, were used for a series of controlled experiments over a fourteen month period from October, 1982 through November, 1983.^ Over this fourteen month period formaldehyde levels decreased approximately 33%. Daily fluctuations of 20% to 40% were observed even with a constant indoor temperature. An increase in indoor temperature of 8(DEGREES)C doubled the measured formaldehyde concentration. Opening windows resulted in decreases of indoor formaldehyde levels of up to 50%. Studies of the impact of propane as a cooking source showed no increase in formaldehyde levels with stove use.^ The presence and concentration of selected volatile organic compounds is influenced greatest by occupancy. Occupants continually open and close windows and doors, vary the operation and settings (temperature) of air control systems, and vary in their selection of furnishings and use of consumer products, which may act as sources of indoor air contaminants. ^

Commentary on "Alternative Strategies for Identifying High-Performing Charter Schools in Texas"

In the last few years policy makers and practitioners nationally have shown much interest in identifying, recognizing, and replicating successful charter schools, many of which are showing that they can educate low-income and otherwise at-risk students remarkably well. However past efforts to identify high performing schools have been problematic. Using these systematic, rigorous value-added methods, the authors identify 44 Open Enrollment charter schools that merit a “high-performer” rating. Nearly all of those campuses identified serve a disadvantaged student population. The article also finds that most of those high performers are highly cost-effective, earning high ratings on the cost-efficiency measures. The authors argue for more widespread use of value-added modeling in the state accountability system. The approach taken to identifying high-performers is sensible and fair, but any formulaic approach to school labels comes with some limitations.