Realizing Smart Environments: An IoT Platform for Dynamic Monitoring and Control of Indoor Environmental Quality for Temperature, Humidity and Light

IJEP 46(10): 977-985 : Vol. 46 Issue 10 (October 2026)

Full Text

St. Fatimang1*, Gufran Darma Dirawan2 and Syahrul1

1. Universitas Negeri Makassar, Department of Vocational and Technical Education, Makassar, South Sulawesi – 90222, Indonesia
2. Universitas Negeri Makassar, Department of Environmental Education, Makassar, South Sulawesi – 90222, Indonesia

Abstract

Indoor environmental quality (IEQ) significantly influences health, comfort and learning performance. The internet of things (IoT) offers great potential for real-time monitoring and dynamic control systems. However, implementation remains limited to the laboratory scale and often faces scalability and interoperability issues. This study aims to develop and evaluate a prototype adaptive IoT platform for managing IEQ, focusing on temperature, humidity and light intensity. A quasi-experimental one-group pre-test and post-test design was employed using an ESP32-based IoT trainer/dashboard. Research instruments included expert validation sheets, practicality questionnaires, cognitive tests and psychomotor rubrics. Data analysis covered validity (Aiken’s V), reliability (Cronbach’s alpha), learning effectiveness (N-Gain) and statistical tests (paired t-test/Wilcoxon). The prototype integrated MLX90614, AM2301/DHT21 and BH1750 sensors with a real-time web dashboard. Expert validation confirmed high validity (Aiken’s V ³ 0.86), strong reliability (a= 0.83–0.91) and high practicality. Cognitive scores increased from 55.2 to 78.1 (N-Gain=0.51, moderate category). Stable temperature (34–36°C) and humidity (55–57%) supported baseline comfort, while fluctuating light levels (70–140 lux) emerged as main challenge to learning performance. The IoT platform effectively enhanced learning outcomes while providing practical insights into real-time IEQ monitoring and control. Nevertheless, lighting optimization remains necessary. The findings emphasize integrating high-quality instructional design with adaptive IEQ management to create healthy, comfortable and sustainable learning environments.

Keywords

Platform, Dynamic control, Internet of things dashboard, Real-time monitoring, Scalability

References

  1. Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aled-hari, M. and Ayyash, M. 2015. Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols and applications. IEEE Commun. Survey Tutorials. 17 (4): 2347–2376. DOI: 10.1109/COMST.2015.244 4095.
  2. Alsafery, W., Rana, O. and Perera, C. 2023. Sensing within smart buildings: A survey. ACM Comput. Survey. 55 (13s): 1–35. DOI: 10.1145/3596600.
  3. Sayed, A., Himeur, Y., Bensaali, F. and Amira, A. 2022. Artificial intelligence with IOT for energy efficiency in buildings. in Emerging real-world applications of internet of things. CRC Press. pp 233–252. DOI: 10.1201/9781003304203-12.
  4. Park, J.Y. and Nagy, Z. 2018. Data on the interaction between thermal comfort and building control research. Data Brief. 17: 529–532. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2018.01.033.
  5. Hasrul, M.R., Rahman, M.J., Helmy, A.R.A.P., Cheng, A.Y. and Ahsan, M. 2023. Exploring research trends and themes in intelligent transportation systems in the last 10 years (2014 – 2023). Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 5 (3): 141–153. DOI: 10.5 5151/ijeedu.v5i3.90.
  6. Amangeldy, B., Tasmurzayev, N., Imankulov, T., Imanbek, B., Wójcik, W. and Nurakhov, Y. 2025. A hybrid machine learning approach for high-accuracy energy consumption prediction using indoor environmental quality sensors. Energies. 18 (15): 4164. DOI: 10.3390/en18154164.
  7. Biemann, M., Scheller, F., Liu, X. and Huang, L. 2021. Experimental evaluation of model-free reinforcement learning algorithms for continuous HVAC control. Appl. Energy. 298: 117164. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117164.
  8. Anand, P., Cheong, D. and Sekhar, C. 2022. A review of occupancy-based building energy and IEQ controls and its future post-Covid. Sci. Total Env., 804: 150249. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv. 2021.150 249.
  9. Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y. and Barrett, L. 2015. The impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Build. Env., 89: 118–133. DOI: 10.1016/j. buildenv.2015.02.013.
  10. Fathahillah, Zain, S.G., Setialaksana, W. and Asriadi, M. 2022. Development of internet of things (IoT) based electric equipment control. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 4 (2): 60–65. DOI: 10.55151/ ijeedu.v4i2.71.
  11. Fitria, F., Ruslan, R. and Mappeasse, M.Y. 2021. Application of e-learning based on enriched virtual model in the subject database. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 3 (1): 32–40. DOI: 10.55151/ ijeedu.v3i1.47.
  12. Ouf, M.M. and Issa, M.H. 2017. Energy consumption analysis of school buildings in Manitoba, Canada. Int. J. Sustain. Built Env., 6 (2): 359–371. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.05.003.
  13. Marques, G. and Pitarma, R. 2019. An internet of things-based environmental quality management system to supervise the indoor laboratory conditions. Appl. Sci., 9 (3): 438. DOI: 10.3390/app 9030438.
  14. Lanfranchi, G., Crupi, A. and Cesaroni, F. 2025. Internet of things (IoT) and the environmental sustainability: A literature review and recommendations for future research. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Env. Manage., 32(6): 7648-7670. DOI: 10.1002/csr.70098.
  15. Risal, A.A.N., Fathahillah, F. and Sulaiman, D.R.A. 2023. Classification of sentiment analysis and community opinion modelling topics for application of ict in government operations. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 5 (1): 35–44. DOI: 10.55151/ijeedu.v5i1.99.
  16. Parkinson, T., Parkinson, A. and De Dear, R. 2019. Continuous IEQ monitoring system: Context and development. Build. Env., 149: 15–25. DOI: 10.10 16/j.buildenv.2018.12.010.
  17. Sicari, S., Rizzardi, A., Grieco, L.A. and Coen-Porisini, A. 2015. Security, privacy and trust in internet of things: The road ahead. Comput. networks. 76: 146–164. DOI: 10.1016/j.comnet.20 14.11.008.
  18. Fitria, F., Yahya, M., Ali, M.I., Purnamawati, P. and Mappalotteng, A.M. 2024. The impact of system quality and user satisfaction: The mediating role of ease of use and usefulness in e-learning systems. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 6 (2): 119–131. DOI: 10.5 5151/ijeedu.v6i2.134.
  19. Broday, E.E. and Gameiro da Silva, M.C. 2023. The role of internet of things (IoT) in the assessment and communication of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in buildings: a review. Smart Sustain. Built Env., 12 (3): 584–606. DOI: 10.1108/SASBE-10-2021-0185.
  20. Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D. 2017. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th edn). Sage publications.
  21. Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N.E. and Hyun, H.H. 1993. How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  22. Bates, A.T. 2015. Teaching in a digital age. Tony Bates Associates Ltd.
  23. Ahmed, M.R. and Sidiq, M.A. 2023. Evaluating online assessment strategies: A systematic review of reliability and validity in e-learning environments. North American Acad. Res., 6 (12): 1–18. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10407361.
  24. Krzywinski, M. and Altman, N. 2014. Visualizing samples with box plots. Nature Methods. 11(2): 119–120.
  25. McGill, R., Tukey, J.W. and Larsen, W.A. 1978. Variations of box plots. American Stat., 32 (1): 12–16. DOI: 10.2307/2683468.
  26. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. and Wenderoth, M.P. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering and mathematics. Proceedings National Academy Sci., 111(23): 8410-8415. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.131 9030111.
  27. Hake, R.R. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American J. Phys., 66 (1): 64–74. DOI: 10.1119/1.18809.
  28. Hattie, J. 2008. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. routledge.
  29. Prince, M. 2004. Does active learning work? A review of the research. J. Eng. Educ., 93 (3): 223–231. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x.
  30. Frontczak, M. and Wargocki, P. 2011. Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Build. Env., 46 (4): 922–937. DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2010. 10.021.
  31. ASHRAE. 2023. ANSI/ASHRAE standard 55: Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy.
  32. Seppanen, O., Fisk, W.J. and Lei, Q.H. 2006. Effect of temperature on task performance in office environment. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
  33. Lan, L., Lian, Z. and Pan, L. 2010. The effects of air temperature on office workers’ well-being, workload and productivity-evaluated with subjective ratings. Appl. Ergon., 42 (1): 29–36. DOI: 10. 1016/j.apergo.2010.04.003.
  34. Parkinson, T. and De Dear, R. 2015. Thermal pleasure in built environments: Physiology of allies-thesia. Build. Res. Inf., 43 (3): 288–301. DOI: 10. 1080/09613218.2015.989662.
  35. Karlen, M., Spangler, C. and Benya, J.R. 2017. Lighting design basics. John Wiley and Sons.
  36. Smolders, K.C.H.J. and De Kort, Y.A.W. 2014. Bright light and mental fatigue: Effects on alertness, vitality, performance and physiological arousal. J. Env. Psychol., 39: 77–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp. 2013.12.010.
  37. Park, J., Loftness, V. and Aziz, A. 2018. Post-occupancy evaluation and IEQ measurements from 64 office buildings: Critical factors and thresholds for user satisfaction on thermal quality. Build., 8 (11): 156. DOI: 10.3390/buildings8110156.
  38. Heschong, L. 2002. Daylighting and human performance. ASHRAE J., 44 (6): 65–67.
  39. Henrietta, H.M. 2023. A comprehensive review on human health, promoting the well-being of teaching professionals. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 5 (2): 79–86. DOI: 10.55151/ijeedu.v5i2.113.
  40. CIE. 2018. CIE system for metrology of optical radiation for iPRGC-influenced responses to light. CIE S 026/E:2018. International Commission on Illumination.
  41. Sweller, J. and Paas, F. 2017. Should self-regulated learning be integrated with cognitive load theory? A commentary. Learn. Instr., 51: 85–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.05.005.
  42. Biggs, J. and Tang, C. 2003. Teaching for quality learning. Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, Buckingham.
  43. Choi, J.H., Beltran, L.O. and Kim, H.S. 2012. Impacts of indoor daylight environments on patient average length of stay (ALOS) in a healthcare facility. Build. Env., 50: 65–75.
  44. Bakó-Biró, Z., Clements-Croome, D.J., Kochhar, N., Awbi, H.B. and Williams, M.J. 2012. Ventilation rates in schools and pupils’ performance. Build. Env., 48: 215–223.
  45. Ucheje, O.O. and Balafama, I.W. 2025. The impact of environmental hazards on the academic performance of public secondary school students. Int. J. Env. Eng. Educ., 7 (1):13–24. DOI: 10.55151/ijeedu.v7i1.177.
  46. Shield, B.M. and Dockrell, J.E. 2003. The effects of noise on children at school: A review. Build. Acoust., 10 (2): 97–116. DOI: 10.1260/13510 1003768965960.