12.06.2026

Soundproofing in Preschools: Importance and Applications Explained Simply

Building design

Close-up of a black-and-white textile with strong contrast – Photo: yogidan2012

Kindergartens are high-traffic environments: Dozens of children move around, play, sing, shout, and laugh all at once in rooms that must be built to accommodate this activity. Soundproofing in kindergartens is therefore not a matter of comfort, but a structural, educational, and health necessity. Anyone who understands how sound is generated, propagates, and can be attenuated in such buildings will recognize why acoustic design in childcare facilities is one of the most challenging tasks in educational construction.

What soundproofing in a kindergarten entails and why it differs from other building types
What physical principles govern sound transmission, sound absorption, and reverberation time
What normative requirements and regulations apply to childcare facilities
How airborne and structure-borne sound are generated in kindergarten buildings and how they can be structurally controlled
Which materials and components are suitable for effective room acoustics and sound insulation
How room geometry, floor plan organization, and zoning influence acoustics
What errors in planning and construction occur particularly frequently
How sound insulation in kindergartens affects health, language development, and educational quality

Soundproofing in Preschools: Definition, Unique Features, and Relevance

Soundproofing in kindergartens refers to the totality of all architectural, structural, and room acoustics measures designed to prevent disruptive sound transmission between rooms and to improve audibility within rooms. The term encompasses two fundamentally different areas of focus: structural sound insulation, which deals with sound insulation between rooms and building components, and room acoustics, which describes and optimizes the sound field within a single room. Both areas are closely interlinked in kindergartens and must be planned together.

What distinguishes childcare centers from office buildings, residential buildings, or schools is the exceptional intensity and simultaneity of the sound sources. Preschool-aged children generate sound levels while playing and communicating that regularly reach values between 75 and 85 decibels (dB(A)) in group rooms. This level is roughly equivalent to the noise of a busy street. When multiple groups are active at the same time and the room acoustics are poor, the levels can be significantly higher. Educators who work for hours every day in such rooms are exposed to constant stress, which can lead to voice damage, hearing loss, and mental exhaustion in the long term.

For the children themselves, poor room acoustics are no less problematic. Speech comprehension requires that the direct speech signal be sufficiently loud and clear relative to background noise. Children up to about the age of eight are much more dependent on favorable acoustic conditions for speech processing than adults, because their cognitive filtering mechanisms are not yet fully developed. An excessively long reverberation time—that is, the lingering of sound in a room after the sound source has fallen silent—significantly impairs speech intelligibility and makes language acquisition more difficult. Soundproofing in preschools is therefore directly linked to the promotion of language development.

Physical Principles: Sound, Insulation, and Absorption

Sound is a mechanical vibration that propagates as a pressure wave in elastic media. In buildings, there are two distinct transmission paths: airborne sound is caused by vibrations in the air—such as speech, music, or children’s noise—and is transmitted through walls, ceilings, and doors into adjacent rooms. Structure-borne sound is caused by direct mechanical excitation of building components—for example, by footsteps, the scraping of chairs, or toys hitting the floor—and propagates as a vibration within the component itself before being radiated elsewhere as airborne sound.

The sound insulation index (R, measured in decibels) describes how well a building component prevents the transmission of airborne sound. The higher the sound insulation index, the less sound passes through the component. Of practical relevance are the rated sound insulation index Rw, which condenses the measurement into a single-digit comparative value, and the resulting sound insulation index R’w, which describes the actual situation when the component is installed, taking flanking transmission into account. Edge transmission refers to the propagation of sound through adjacent building elements, such as side walls or ceilings, that are connected to the partition wall and can allow sound to travel around them.

Room acoustics are primarily described by the reverberation time T (in seconds). It indicates how long it takes for the sound level in a room to drop by 60 decibels after a sound source is turned off. A short reverberation time means that sound is absorbed quickly and the room sounds “dry”; a long reverberation time produces reverberation and interference effects that make speech unintelligible. The reverberation time depends on the room volume and the total area of all sound-absorbing surfaces in the room. This relationship is described by the Sabine formula, named after the American physicist Wallace Clement Sabine, who laid the foundations of room acoustics at the turn of the 20th century. The sound absorption coefficient and the room volume together determine whether a room is acoustically suitable or not.

Sound Absorption and Sound Reflection in Group Rooms

Sound-absorbing materials absorb sound energy and convert it into heat rather than reflecting it. Porous materials such as acoustic plaster, mineral wool ceiling panels, textile wall coverings, or carpeting are particularly effective at absorbing mid- and high-frequency sounds. Low frequencies, on the other hand—which are generated by children’s noise from shouting and stomping—require resonance-absorbing structures or panel absorbers that absorb sound in the low-frequency range through the flexural vibration of a thin panel in front of an air gap. Balanced room acoustics take all frequency ranges into account, not just the midrange, which is most noticeable to the ear.

Hard, smooth surfaces such as concrete ceilings, tile floors, and glass surfaces reflect sound almost completely. In a group room—which is often equipped with such materials for reasons of hygiene and ease of cleaning—an acoustically unfavorable situation arises without targeted countermeasures. The solution is not to forego the hard floors required for hygiene, but to compensate for the lack of absorption with other building elements: suspended acoustic ceilings, wall-mounted absorber panels, or sound-absorbing furniture elements can reduce the reverberation time to the required level even in rooms with hard floors.

Normative Requirements: What DIN 18041 and Other Regulations Prescribe

The central standard for room acoustics in educational and community buildings in Germany is DIN 18041, “Audibility in Rooms.” It defines usage categories and assigns corresponding requirements for reverberation time to them. Childcare facilities generally fall into category A3 (communication for children) or A4 (communication with increased requirements), for which particularly short reverberation times are mandated because the users are still in the process of language development. The standard specifies target values for reverberation time in these categories based on room volume and describes how the required absorption area must be calculated.

For structural sound insulation—that is, sound insulation between rooms—DIN 4109 “Sound Insulation in Building Construction” is the authoritative standard in Germany. It establishes minimum requirements for the rated sound insulation index of partition walls, ceilings, and doors, differentiated by building type and use. Higher requirements apply to child care facilities because the sound sources are more intense than in residential buildings and because quiet rooms, sleeping areas for toddlers, and group rooms are often located directly next to one another. The standard distinguishes between minimum requirements that must be met and enhanced requirements that are recommended and should often be considered planning objectives in practice for child care facilities.

In addition to DIN 4109 and DIN 18041, there are recommendations from the German Social Accident Insurance (DGUV) as well as guidelines from individual federal states, some of which go beyond the national standards. DGUV Information 215-443, “Acoustics in the Office,” is not directly applicable to kindergartens but contains methodological principles that specialist planners can apply to similar situations. Some federal states have incorporated explicit requirements for room acoustics into their kindergarten laws or implementing regulations. Planners should therefore always review the state-specific regulations before relying solely on the standards applicable nationwide.

Structural Measures: How to Implement Soundproofing in a Preschool

Effective sound insulation in kindergartens begins with the floor plan layout. Noisy areas such as group rooms, activity rooms, and entrance areas should be separated from quiet areas such as sleeping rooms, quiet corners, and offices by buffer zones, hallways, or adjacent rooms. This zoning is the simplest and most effective measure because it lengthens the sound transmission path and reduces the requirements for partition elements. A sleeping room that directly adjoins a group room requires a solid partition wall with a high sound insulation rating; if there is a hallway between the two rooms, the requirements for the individual partition elements are significantly lower.

Partition walls between group rooms must be sufficiently heavy and rigid to effectively insulate against airborne sound. A wall’s sound insulation index depends largely on its mass per unit area: Heavier walls provide better insulation. Solid walls made of masonry or reinforced concrete generally meet the requirements reliably, provided they are constructed without joints or penetrations. Lightweight walls made of gypsum board stud frames can also achieve high sound insulation indices through a multi-layer construction with insulation inserts and decoupled stud profiles, but they are more sensitive to construction errors. Any penetration, any electrical outlet, or any access panel that is not carefully sealed can significantly impair a wall’s sound insulation.

Ceilings in kindergartens are particularly critical from an acoustic standpoint because they must simultaneously dampen impact sound from above, limit airborne sound between floors, and act as an absorptive surface for room acoustics. Floating screeds, in which the wear layer rests on an elastic impact sound insulation layer and has no rigid connections to the subfloor, significantly reduce structure-borne sound transmission. This decoupling must be consistently extended all the way to the walls; a screed that abuts the wall transmits structure-borne sound directly into the wall structure and bypasses the insulating effect of the elastic intermediate layer. Suspended ceilings made of acoustic panels simultaneously fulfill the function of room acoustics and, when properly constructed, can also contribute to airborne sound insulation between floors.

Doors, Windows, and Ventilation Openings as Acoustic Weak Points

Doors are generally the weakest components in a partition wall. A simple interior door achieves a rated sound insulation index of about 20 to 25 dB, while a well-constructed solid wall achieves values of 50 dB and higher. For doors between noisy group rooms and quiet areas, sound-insulating doors with all-around seals and sufficient door panel mass are therefore required. Double doors with a soundproof vestibule (airlock) offer the best solution when space permits. Windows in partition walls between rooms should generally be avoided for soundproofing reasons or constructed with laminated glass and airtight frames.

Ventilation openings and ducts are often underestimated pathways for sound transmission. Sound can be transmitted from one room to another through ventilation ducts, even if the partition wall itself provides excellent sound insulation. Sound attenuators in ventilation ducts—which dissipate sound energy within the duct via absorbent lining—are therefore indispensable in controlled ventilation systems in kindergartens. Service shafts connecting multiple rooms must also be acoustically decoupled and sealed.

Room Acoustics Design: Materials, Surfaces, and Furniture

The choice of surfaces and materials in group rooms plays a decisive role in determining the achievable reverberation time. Acoustic ceilings made of mineral fiber boards or perforated gypsum boards with an insulating layer behind them are the most commonly used solutions because they provide large surfaces with a high absorption coefficient and can be designed to be hygienic, easy to clean, and fire-resistant. The absorption coefficient of such systems varies considerably depending on frequency and product; planners should carefully review the manufacturer’s specifications and look for building acoustics test certificates.

Wall absorbers made of acoustic foam, felt panels, or fabric coverings complement ceiling absorption and are particularly effective when installed at the same height as the sound sources—that is, between one and two meters above the floor. In kindergartens, combined solutions are ideal, where absorber panels also serve as bulletin boards, design elements, or shelf backs. Furniture, curtains, carpets, and upholstered furniture also contribute to sound absorption, but their effectiveness is harder to quantify and can be lost through rearranging furniture or redecorating. Fixed structural absorption surfaces should therefore always form the basis of acoustic planning.

For sleeping areas in daycare centers and kindergartens, particularly strict requirements apply to reverberation time, because quiet, subdued acoustics directly influence the children’s sleep quality. At the same time, these rooms must be easy to clean. Acoustic plasters, which are applied directly to the base coat and form a porous, sound-absorbing surface, are a hygienically suitable solution that has no joints or cavities and can be easily wiped clean. Their absorption capacity is lower than that of mineral fiber boards, but this can be compensated for by using sufficiently large surfaces.

Health, Education, and the Consequences of Poor Room Acoustics

The effects of poor room acoustics on staff in child care centers are well documented. Educators respond to high ambient noise levels by unconsciously raising their voices—the so-called Lombard effect: the louder the environment, the louder one speaks, which further raises the overall noise level and leads to a self-reinforcing cycle. Chronic vocal strain is one of the most common occupational illnesses in the field of early childhood education. Good soundproofing in preschools is therefore also a matter of occupational safety and contributes to staff health and a reduction in sick leave.

For children, room acoustics have effects that go beyond immediate well-being. Language development requires that children be able to perceive speech sounds clearly and distinctly. In rooms with a long reverberation time, direct and reflected sound waves overlap, causing consonants—which are particularly important for distinguishing between sounds—to become muddled and unintelligible. Children with speech development delays, hearing impairments, or German as a second language are particularly affected by this issue. Good room acoustics are not only more comfortable for them but also a prerequisite for their equal participation in educational programs.

Noise causes stress. Chronically elevated sound levels activate the sympathetic nervous system, raise cortisol levels, and impair concentration, memory, and emotional regulation. For children, who have even lower stress resilience than adults, these effects can have a lasting impact on learning behavior and social interaction. Studies in the field of environmental psychology consistently show that children in acoustically favorable rooms behave in a calmer, more focused, and more cooperative manner. Soundproofing in preschools thus contributes to educational quality, a factor that is reflected in the design of the space.

Common Design Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

One of the most common mistakes in the design of childcare facilities is underestimating flanking transmission. A partition wall that appears to have a high sound insulation rating on paper may perform significantly worse once installed if adjacent building components allow sound to travel around the wall. Particularly problematic are continuous concrete slabs that connect both rooms and act as sound bridges. Structural decoupling—such as using elastic mountings for the partition wall on the ceiling or interrupting the ceiling slab—is complex but necessary when high sound insulation values are required.

Another common mistake is neglecting room acoustics in favor of structural sound insulation—or vice versa. Both areas are equally important and must be considered together from the very beginning of the planning process. A room that is well shielded from outside noise but has a reverberation time of two seconds is acoustically unusable for children. Conversely, perfectly tuned room acoustics are of little use if noise from the neighboring room penetrates unimpeded.

Finally, the importance of the quality of workmanship is regularly underestimated. Sound insulation is a discipline in which small errors have a major impact. A single unsealed joint, a forgotten edge strip in the screed, or an incorrectly installed door seal can reduce the sound insulation of a building component by ten decibels or more—which is equivalent to doubling the perceived volume. Supervision by a specialist acoustician during construction, measurements after completion, and a thorough inspection are therefore not optional extras in kindergarten projects, but rather part of responsible planning.

Soundproofing in Kindergartens as an Integral Planning Task

Sound insulation in kindergartens is not a retroactive optimization that can be addressed simply by installing acoustic panels on the ceiling. It is an integral part of the planning process that permeates all planning disciplines, from the initial floor plan concept through to the final inspection of the completed building. Architects, structural engineers, building services engineers, and specialist acousticians must coordinate their requirements early on, because many decisions affecting acoustics can hardly be corrected later in the planning process.

Investing in good sound insulation pays off in multiple ways: it protects the health of educators and children, improves the quality of education, increases the facility’s appeal to families and staff, and reduces long-term follow-up costs associated with sick leave and the need for renovations. Buildings that are well-designed acoustically are perceived by their users as more pleasant, quieter, and more professional—even if the users themselves are unable to identify the architectural acoustic reasons behind this impression.

Standards and regulations set the minimum requirements, but good acoustics in preschools go beyond what is required by these standards. They stem from an understanding of how children hear, learn, and communicate, and from a willingness to incorporate this understanding into every planning decision. Those who view soundproofing in kindergartens as a natural component of a high-quality educational infrastructure not only design better buildings but also make a concrete contribution to equal opportunity and the health of the next generation.

22.01.2025

Project

Co-creation instead of participation

Building design

Management

Participation versus co-creation: Would the Superkilen work better today if citizens had been integrated into the process from the outset?

Superkilen in Copenhagen has failed. The citizens as a whole use the square more as a place to pass through than to linger, even though they were integrated into the planning process through participation – according to a long-term analysis by students at the Danish Institute for Study Abroad. During the design and development process, the Superkilen planners asked citizens to suggest artifacts from their countries of origin for the new city square. Holistic planning with co-creation and prototypes would have been one way of increasing acceptance of the square.

Co-creation

Co-creation originally comes from the business world, which began to involve consumers in the product development process in the 1990s. The Leading Cities research group defines co-creation in urban development as “the active flow of ideas and information between five sectors: government, business, academia, non-profit organizations and citizens that promotes participation, engagement and development.”

What is the difference to citizen participation? Public participation is a means for planners to learn more about the attitudes and opinions of local residents and to develop new ideas. They increase acceptance for a project. Co-creation, on the other hand, involves the most important sectors of society on an equal footing from the outset.

It therefore offers citizens and citizens’ organizations a better opportunity to be truly heard and gain more influence in planning processes. Co-creation views users as proactive citizens rather than consumers, and focuses on long-term cultural change and the whole community rather than individual user groups. Where citizen participation seeks to integrate citizens’ opinions into an already prescribed program, co-creation helps future users to shape and enforce their own decisions. Co-creation is an endless process in the best sense of the word, with regular exchanges taking place between those involved.

Co-creation has a number of advantages. The public provides input and feels equal, citizens feel they are taken seriously. They become much more aware of their living environment. In return, the government has to be much more responsive and responsive to citizens and other sectors. In return, however, it saves costs because only what is actually needed and used is implemented and the risk of a new project is correspondingly low.

Prototypes

In large design projects such as Superkilen, it is extremely important to test ideas in advance before they become a permanent part of the landscape or city. It is a long way from the abstract idea, analysis and public participation to the concrete installation. The prototype should be seen as a learning tool that can be optimized and changed in the next step. Prototypes are a democratic way of dealing with public space, they also reduce the risk of a failed project and unnecessary expenditure.

The holistic approach

Combining co-creation with the prototyping approach makes it easier to explore the potential of a space. This holistic approach leads to more sustainable and vibrant places in the city. However, the Superkilen started with an assumption that co-creation and prototyping would have led to a different design. Users would accept the space better and make it more their own. Perhaps a more critical examination of the initial idea would also have been achieved.

You can read Bianca Hermannsen’s current analysis of the square here.
Robert Schäfer visited Superkilen in 2012, directly after the opening. You can read his review of the new city square in Copenhagen here.
Watch the video here to see how BIG travels with local residents to their countries of origin to select artifacts for Superkilen.

19.12.2024

Design

Heavyweight with a message

Building design

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work by stone sculptor Marc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains what message he wants to convey with his sculpture, why he only uses white marble and […]

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work bystone sculptorMarc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains the message hewants to conveywith hissculpture, why he only works with white stone and why he launched an appeal to collect eggshells before the opening.

Marc Reist: It’s a logical consequence of my artistic work and how I reflect on my surroundings by observing them. I notice how certain rules and mechanisms are similar on both a small and large scale. I never consciously came up with the topic, it just developed. I think it started in 2005.

The Globo Uovo symbolizes the world and the origin of life. Was there a specific reason for this idea?

Yes, that was in 2011. I was invited by a newspaper in Switzerland to write a few columns. I started to write about resources and food in these texts and about what bothers me: the way we deal with food, the way we deal with our environment. And during this phase, I designed the globe and then the egg. The eggs actually always resonate with me. Regularly for my wife – I only mention this in passing – for her birthday, for Mother’s Day, there are always drawings of chicken and egg. I either start with the chicken or the egg, but the egg always resonates.

Do the many openings in the sculpture also have a meaning?

The openings were created by the lines of longitude and latitude. And I found them very special as soon as I was able to work in the egg. There is a feeling of protection when you are in your human egg and you can see the outside world through these openings. At the same time, it could also be a prison. These feelings arose in me when I was working in the egg.

From a professional point of view – I trained as a stone sculptor and also took the master craftsman’s examination – I know almost all the materials. But even so, I used to only work with black stone for my shapes. And now, for years, I’ve only been working in white. For the small sculptures I make, I use a bright white marble. There is no other solution for me and for my forms. I have never used any materials with textures. They are beautiful, but not for my shapes.

But the marble for the egg has a certain texture. Was a block of 55 tons in pure white not available?

For the Globo Uovo, the stone is a little more marbled. Because this size in pure white – that would have been almost impossible and would have meant such a long wait. And the egg in this size in pure white would almost be a little too beautiful(laughs), almost baroque. That’s impossible. Visually too, it’s almost not rock anymore.

So the egg also looks much more “alive”.

Exactly, that’s what I mean. This methamorphosis of the rock, this mountain, that has to resonate.

How did the change from black to white rock come about?

That’s an interesting question. I have to go back to that. I wanted to make a really big sculpture in the 1990s. I chose a large block in Carrara without knowing what I was going to do with it. I wanted to be inspired by the material, by the block. I normally proceed differently. I have a drawing or a model and then work on the stone. But now I wanted to be influenced by the block. At the time, it was 20 tons in size. And that put an enormous strain on me(laughs). I suddenly realized that the further north the block was transported from Italy, the greater the strain in my head became. I was very blocked! And suddenly I found the solution. I then worked out a light cloth from this block. That was probably my solution, to release this heaviness in me in relation to the block. And since then I’ve only worked with white stone.

Are there purely visual reasons why you like to work with marble a lot, or is it also because of its properties?

Both, actually. My sculptures are also a matter of light. Not only with the large egg, but also with the other sculptures. The way the light passes through the opening and the edges is what makes it so good. And the properties for working are a pleasant side effect. It is easy to work with because it is so even, so homogeneous. But I mainly use marble because light and shadow are important for my sculptures.

You also want to send out a message with your art objects.

Yes, absolutely. I think that’s the greatest task of an artist. That his work is seen and heard, as the case may be. Communication is important. It makes no sense at all if I make an egg like this just to have another beautiful sculpture in a park somewhere. That wouldn’t be enough. It needs a message.

What message is that?

We have great difficulties with resources in general. This is most sensitive when it comes to food. And I really want to draw attention to the fact that people need to deal with the issue of food and resources. That a small train of thought changes.

Your sculpture is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. Before the exhibition began, you launched an appeal to collect eggshells. What was the reason?

We had planned a performance with a dancer for the vernissage. I needed a lot of eggshells for that. Over the course of a year, people collected around 35,000 eggshells, washed them and brought them to me. Something you would normally throw away. For the exhibition opening, we laid them out on the floor of the museum and cleared paths, like a labyrinth. The dancer danced her way through it. But every now and then she made missteps on the eggshells, causing them to crack. And at the same time, with every misstep, a part of her body died. Because the shells represent our resources and if they are destroyed, the person dies too. And so she danced through the labyrinth and gradually died a dramatic death after three or four missteps.

Find out more about the project and the natural stone work in the February issue of STEIN. You can also find more information at www.stein-magazin.de/skulptur-des-monats-globo-uovo.