Since 2000 Glasgow City Council have undertaken a major building project (Project2002) to refurbish or rebuild all of the secondary schools in the city under its authority. In total 29 schools in the city have been involved, however, the actual type of building work undertaken has varied across the schools. Eleven of the schools have been demolished and completely rebuilt, fifteen schools have undergone major refurbishment and the remaining three schools have undergone major refurbishment whilst adding a new building. With the support of the City Council, the Psychology division at the University of Paisley have undertaken an evaluation study of these new learning environments and their impact on users. Although much is already known about ‘good’ design in learning environments (e.g. Sanoff 1994) little is known about how users perceptions are influenced by the type of building work their school has undergone. Previous research has suggested that newer schools are viewed in a more positive light by teaching staff (BPRU 1972). The purpose of this paper was to investigate whether staff and pupil perceptions of these new schools differed and whether this was related to the type of building project undertaken i.e. new school, refurbished school or refurbished school plus an extension (combination). The research investigation was based on questionnaire surveys conducted with six sample groups, namely pupils and teaching staff within each of the three types of ‘new’ schools i.e. new school, refurbished school and combination school. The questionnaire was designed as part of a larger evaluation study of how the new learning environments were perceived by 1st year pupils, 4th year pupils and all staff. For the purposes of this paper, the subjects comprised 4th year pupils who had been at the ‘old’ school and the ‘new’ school (these children are in the age range 15-16 yrs) and teaching staff that had taught at both the ‘old’ and ‘new’ schools. The pupils were sampled within one of their regular classes and the researchers were present throughout the data collection procedure. The staff were sampled by distributing the questionnaire through the internal mail system; staff completed this in their own time and returned this directly to the researchers using stamp addressed envelopes. The sample size consisted of 433 respondents (322 Pupils and 111 staff). For the purposes of this paper the analysis focused on responses to twelve aspects of the learning environment e.g. aesthetic appearance (external and internal), noise levels, security, etc. Within each type of school pupil ratings of the new environment were generally more positive than staff ratings. For the refurbished school, pupils indicated that the new environment was a significant improvement on all twelve aspects (compared with only four out of twelve for staff). For the combination school, pupils indicated a significant improvement in eleven of the twelve aspects (compared with two out of twelve for staff). For the new school, pupils again pupils indicated a significant improvement in eleven of the twelve aspects (compared with seven out of twelve for staff plus two aspects where there had been a significant deterioration). Finally, the ratings of all three schools by both pupils and staff suggested that the highest rated school was the new build school and the lowest rated school was the refurbished school. The researchers have suggested a number of explanations for the above findings including (i) the different experiences of pupils and staff during the building work, depending on school type, and (ii) the relationship (mismatch) between the new learning environments and important work-related behaviours that teaching staff need to carry out.