Climate, Classrooms, and Children: A Systematic Review of Temperature‐Related Impacts on Academic Performance

ABSTRACT

Background

Climate change is increasing children's exposure to extreme temperatures, yet evidence on how both hot and cold temperatures affect academic outcomes in school‐aged populations remains limited. This review synthesized studies of temperature and academic performance in primary and secondary school students.

Methods

This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for English‐language, peer‐reviewed observational studies published from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2025. The Climate Health ANalysis Grading Evaluation tool was used for quality appraisal.

Findings

Fourteen studies (one global, four USA, two Australia, seven other countries) met inclusion criteria. Across indoor and outdoor studies, hotter temperatures were generally associated with poorer academic outcomes. Limited evidence also suggested adverse effects of colder temperatures. Several studies identified greater vulnerability among students from lower‐income communities and racially marginalized groups.

Implications for School Health Policy, Practice, and Equity

Schools should invest in climate‐resilient infrastructure, including cooling, ventilation, and insulation, and prioritize adaptation resources.

Conclusion

Temperature‐related school environmental conditions are an important and potentially modifiable influence on academic performance and may contribute to educational inequities, underscoring the need for climate‐adaptive learning environments.

Climate change is one of the most urgent challenges of the 21st century [1, 2]. While often characterized by shifts in weather patterns, rising sea levels, and declines in biodiversity, the impact of climate change extends far beyond the environment to influence human well‐being. One of the most significant outcomes of climate change is the rise in global temperatures, with global average surface temperatures increasing more than 1°C since the pre‐industrial era [3]. This warming trend is associated with more frequent and intense extreme temperature events, which pose significant risks to vulnerable populations, including children. Among these risks is the underexplored yet crucial area of how temperature fluctuations influence learning environments and academic performance in children.

As climate change continues to reshape environmental conditions, it is essential to examine how these changes directly influence cognitive function and academic performance. The relationship between temperature and human performance has been well‐documented, particularly in adults, where studies have shown that heat stress can impair cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and decision‐making [4, 5, 6, 7]. However, relatively less research has focused on children and adolescents, whose developing brains and bodies make them particularly susceptible to environmental stressors. Compared to adults, children have higher breathing rates, greater outdoor activity, and greater water consumption rates for their body size [8]. These factors may increase their vulnerability to climate‐related hazards, such as poor air quality and extreme temperatures [9]. Furthermore, while the detrimental effects of extreme temperatures on physical health, including heat‐related illnesses and respiratory conditions [10, 11], are well‐known, its impacts on academic outcomes, a critical determinant of lifelong health and wellbeing, remain underexplored. There is a pressing need to bridge this knowledge gap, especially given the heightened vulnerability of children in educational settings.

A child's learning environment, including the classroom, is critical in shaping their academic performance [12]. The school environment is characterized not only by the crucial social relationships between students and teachers but also by the physical environment. The classroom physical environment at a school can affect both the physical and mental health of students [13]. For example, while natural light can improve mood and concentration in the room, excessive noise can negatively affect the retention of the material taught to the students and also increase stress [14, 15]. Temperature is no exception when it comes to affecting students' ability to learn in school as high indoor temperatures, exacerbated by poor ventilation or inadequate cooling systems, can lead to discomfort and reduced focus, negatively impacting students' performance [16].

Temperature‐related disruptions not only hinder immediate learning but may also have consequences for educational attainment and long‐term outcomes. Children's academics and behavior during schooling years are crucial for long‐term success [17, 18, 19]. A strong foundation, set by positive academic performance and behavior patterns, can guide future employment opportunities and social relationships as an adult [20]. Further, success in a school classroom often lends way to greater self‐esteem and motivation, both of which can be linked to healthier lifestyle choices and lower‐risk behaviors in adulthood [21, 22]. In contrast, academic challenges can lead to excessive stress and potentially negative health behaviors and outcomes into young adulthood [23]. Hence, educational achievement and behavioral development in childhood and adolescence may be important predictors of quality of life and health status later in life.

Despite growing awareness of climate change's far‐reaching impacts, research on its implications for children's educational outcomes remains limited. Prior review studies suggest that temperature and environmental conditions influence academic performance, but important gaps remain for younger students and across the full range of temperature exposures. Reviews on climate change and education consistently link heat to poorer test performance and disrupted learning, yet they often examine temperature alongside other climate hazards and do not clearly distinguish indoor from outdoor exposure [24, 25, 26]. Reviews from higher education samples also suggest that cooler, thermally comfortable environments support learning and that long‐term exposure to higher ambient temperatures may reduce cumulative learning [27, 28]. However, these studies often focus on postsecondary populations, outdoor temperature only, or multiple climate stressors rather than temperature as the primary exposure. Meta‐analytic evidence further shows that lower classroom temperatures are associated with better performance, although this work has focused only on indoor classroom conditions [29]. The current systematic review builds on this literature by providing a qualitative synthesis of evidence on temperatures and academic outcomes among individuals aged 18 years and younger, with attention to the full range of temperature conditions rather than heat alone. By distinguishing between indoor and outdoor temperature measures and excluding college and university populations, this review clarifies how temperature relates to academic outcomes in primary and secondary school settings. In doing so, it identifies key trends and research gaps to inform the development of climate‐adaptive learning environments.

1. Methods

1.1. Search Strategy

This systematic review was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42024586458) database. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting systematic reviews [30]. The research question, search strategy, terms, and database selection were developed in consultation with a health sciences librarian, using the PICOT (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Time) framework. The PubMed, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsycINFO, CINAHL, EconLit, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify peer‐reviewed articles published between January 1, 2007 (the release year of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report) and December 31, 2025. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report was a key milestone in highlighting health, including children's health risks, as a policy‐relevant part of the climate change evidence base. The search strategy included keywords targeting ambient temperature and academic performance, with detailed strategies provided in Supplementary Table 1.

1.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The eligibility criteria for this review included English‐language, peer‐reviewed observational studies involving primary or secondary school students aged 18 years or younger. Eligible studies could employ quantitative, qualitative, or mixed‐methods designs, with no restrictions on geographic region or sample size.

Studies were excluded if they were published before 2007 or after 2025, not written in English, focused on individuals outside primary or secondary school, or were related to COVID‐19. We excluded COVID‐19‐related studies because pandemic‐related disruptions to schooling may have introduced time‐specific confounding and reduced comparability with studies conducted under typical educational conditions. Additional exclusions included conference abstracts, protocols/frameworks, commentaries, media articles, editorials, literature reviews lacking a search strategy, letters to the editor, author replies, and errata. Non‐peer‐reviewed studies were also excluded.

1.3. Screening and Selection

Screening and selection of studies were conducted independently by four coauthors using the Covidence tool, which facilitates systematic reviews by streamlining the screening and review processes. Abstracts were initially screened to identify relevant studies. Discrepancies or disagreements during this phase were resolved through discussion. After screening, a full‐text review was conducted to confirm eligibility for data extraction.

1.4. Data Extraction and Synthesis

The data extraction process was performed by four coauthors, capturing key details such as reference, author, publication year, country, city/region, study design (quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods), study period, participant age range, school grade, gender distribution, temperature assessment(s), outcome assessment or data collection method, performance outcomes, results or conclusions, and sample size.

A detailed table was created to synthesize the data, with rows representing individual studies and columns presenting the study variables. Given the methodological and analytical diversity of the selected studies, a qualitative overview of the results describing the impact of temperature on performance for school‐age children is provided in the results section.

1.5. Quality Appraisal

The quality of quantitative studies was appraised using the CHANGE (Climate Health ANalysis Grading Evaluation) tool, which is designed specifically for evaluating evidence related to climate change and health [3, 21]. This tool assesses studies across 13 criteria, addressing potential biases in areas such as transparency, selection bias, and the accuracy of exposure, outcome, and confounder measurements. Each criterion was scored on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 indicated high scientific rigor, 4 indicated poor scientific rigor, and a score of 5 was used when a domain was not applicable. The methodological quality assessment of all included papers was conducted independently by four coauthors.

2. Findings

Details of the article selection process are provided in Figure 1. A total of 1419 peer‐reviewed articles were identified through the database search. After reviewing abstracts, 52 articles were deemed relevant for further review, of which 14 met the inclusion criteria and were eligible for data extraction.

FIGURE 1.

PRISMA flow diagram.

2.1. Characteristics of Included Studies

Table 1 presents the characteristics of the 14 studies that met the inclusion criteria. There was one global study, four studies were based in the United States of America (USA) [35, 37, 39, 40], two studies in Australia [36, 41], and one study each in China [34], Costa Rica [2], Finland [42], India [33], the Philippines [31], South Korea [32], and Vietnam [43]. Most studies focused on primary school students (n = 8), four studies focused exclusively on high school students [32, 34, 37, 39], and two studies did not report the grades of participants but stated the students were 18 years of age or younger [33, 43]. Study sample sizes ranged from 30 students to approximately 27 million students. All studies employed quantitative methods. Outdoor temperature was the most common exposure measure, while four studies examined classroom or indoor temperature. Academic achievement was assessed using test scores, including state or national standardized assessments in eight studies.

TABLE 1.

Characteristics of studies that met inclusion criteria.

Author	Study location	Study period	Study design	Sample size	Age range	Grade level(s)	Temperature assessment	Performance outcome	Outcome assessment
Bigueja et al. [31]	Bicol Region, Philippines	October to March (year unknown)	Quantitative	30	11–12 years	Grade 5	Atmospheric thermometer aided with Google reports recorded every 10 min	Science Test Scores	Standardized exam
Cho, [32]	South Korea	2009–2013	Quantitative	∼1.3 million	NR	Grade 12	City‐level daily outdoor air temperature from Korea Meteorological Administration	Reading test scores Mathematics test scores English test scores	Standardized national exam
Garg et al. [33]	India	2002–2011	Quantitative	> 4.5 million	5–16 years	NR	ERA‐Interim daily outdoor air temperature averaged over 1° × 1° grid	Reading test scores Mathematics test scores	Math and reading tests administered in children's homes Standardized national exam
Graff Zivin et al. [34]	China	2005–2011	Quantitative	14,042,417	NR	Grade 12	China Meteorological Data Service Center; NOAA visibility	Chinese test scores Mathematics test scores Foreign language test scores	Standardized national exam
Haverinen‐Shaughnessy and Shaughnessy [35]	Southwestern United States of America	2008–2009	Quantitative	3109	NR	Grade 5	Indoor Air temperature measured by monitor	Mathematics test scores Reading test scores Science test scores	Standardized state exam
Johnston et al. [36]	Australia	2010–2018	Quantitative	2,470,799	8–15NR years	Grades 3, 5, 7 and 9	Australian Bureau of Meteorology outdoor air temperature from stations within 20 km of school	Reading Writing Conventions of language Numeracy	Standardized national exam
Park [37]	United States of America	1998–2011	Quantitative	999,582	NR	Grades 9–12	NOAA daily outdoor air temperature	English language test scores Mathematics test scores Science tests scores History test scores	Standardized state exam
Park et al. [38]	59 countries, including United States of America	Worldwide: 1995–2015; USA: 2015	Quantitative	500,000	8–15 years	Grades 3–8 (USA)	NOAA daily outdoor air temperature from a network of more than 100,000 stations	Mathematics test scores Reading test scores English language test scores Science test scores	Worldwide: Program for International Student Assessment USA: Standardized national exam
Park et al. [39]	United States of America	2001–2014	Quantitative	27,023,119	NR	Grades 9–12	NOAA daily outdoor air temperature	Mathematics test scores Reading test scores	Standardized national college entrance exam
Porras‐Salazar [2]	North‐Western Region, Costa Rica	February 2017; March 2017	Quantitative	37	11 years	Grade 5	Indoor air temperature measured by data logger	Multiplication speed and accuracy Reading and comprehension speed and accuracy Grammatical reasoning and accuracy	Tasks in multiplication, reading comprehension, grammatical reasoning
Roach and Whitney [40]	United States of America	2009–2015	Quantitative	673,495	NR	Grades 3–8	NOAA global monitoring system; average maximum temperature readings from all outdoor stations within 20 km radial distance from the center of county	English/Language Arts test scores Mathematics test scores	Standardized state exam
Srivastava et al. [41]	Australia	2014–2019	Quantitative	∼1 million	NR	Grades 3, 5, 7, and 9	Australian Bureau of Meteorology outdoor air temperature from weather station closest to school	Reading Writing Conventions of language Numeracy	Standardized national exam
Toyinbo et al. [42]	Finland	Spring 2007 and summer 2007	Quantitative	4248	11–13 years	Grade 6	Indoor air temperature measured by data logger	Mathematics test scores	Standardized national exam
Vu [43]	Vietnam	July 4, 2009; July 9, 2009; July 15, 2009	Quantitative	779,123	17–18 years	NR	Average outdoor temperature on testing day	Mathematics test scores	Standardized national college and university mathematics test entrance exam

Abbreviation: NR = Not Reported.

2.2. Classroom Temperatures and Academic Performance

Four studies examined classroom temperature and academic performance. Indoor exposure was assessed using data loggers, monitors, thermometers, or classroom temperature reductions [31, 35, 42], with one study also incorporating outdoor temperature measures [2]. Academic performance was measured using standardized tests or task‐based assessments across mathematics, science, reading, comprehension, and grammatical reasoning.

Findings from classroom‐temperature studies were mixed but generally suggested that hotter or thermally uncomfortable classrooms may impair performance. Toyinbo et al. reported no direct association between measured classroom temperature and Finnish national mathematics test scores; however, students who perceived classrooms as too hot had lower mathematics scores, and perceived heat was more common in inadequately ventilated classrooms [42]. Haverinen‐Shaughnessy and Shaughnessy observed that lower classroom temperatures were associated with higher mathematics scores among fifth‐grade students in the Southwestern United States [35]. Porras‐Salazar found that reducing classroom temperature from 30°C to 25°C was associated with improved performance on several task‐based measures, particularly those involving logical thinking and language [2]. These classroom studies suggest that subjective thermal discomfort and classroom conditions may matter alongside temperature itself. They also indicate that the association between classroom temperature and academic performance may differ by performance domain, with impacts most commonly reported in mathematics.

2.3. Outdoor Temperatures and Academic Performance

The majority of included studies examined outdoor temperature using meteorological datasets. Exposure windows ranged from exam‐day conditions to cumulative school‐year or multi‐month temperature exposure, and most outdoor studies used quasi‐experimental or longitudinal approaches to estimate the effect of temperature on performance.

Overall, outdoor studies showed a consistent pattern in which hotter temperatures were associated with poorer academic performance. In Vietnam, higher exam‐day temperature was associated with lower mathematics entrance examination scores, with stronger effects among female students and those from rural areas and townships [43]. In India, both cumulative exposure to hot days and higher test‐day temperatures were associated with lower mathematics and reading performance, with larger effects observed for mathematics [33].

Evidence from large‐scale, high‐stakes testing settings also showed acute heat‐related performance losses. In China, hotter temperatures during the national college entrance examination were associated with lower total scores and a reduced likelihood of qualifying for top‐tier universities [34]. In New York State, higher temperatures on Regents exam days were associated with lower probabilities of passing [37]. In South Korea, very hot days were associated with lower mathematics and English scores, while no clear association was observed for reading; effects were larger in cooler cities than in already hot cities, suggesting partial adaptation [32].

Several studies also suggested that temperature effects extend beyond single test days. In the United States, higher average maximum temperature over the school year was associated with lower mathematics and English/language arts scores, with mathematics appearing more sensitive to temperature variation [40]. In Australia, both colder and hotter temperatures were associated with poorer academic performance, indicating that the relationship may not be limited to heat alone. One Australian study found that additional moderately cold school days reduced same‐year and subsequent‐year performance [36], especially among boys and older students, while another found that both cold and hot days reduced numeracy performance, with stronger effects among boys and public school students [41].

Multi‐country evidence further suggested that cumulative heat exposure may widen educational inequities. In a large analysis of U.S. PSAT retesting in the U.S., hotter school days during the prior year were associated with reduced learning, with substantially larger losses among Black and Hispanic students and much smaller effects in fully air‐conditioned schools [38]. Similarly, cross‐national evidence from 58 countries showed that more hot school days were associated with lower test scores, with stronger adverse effects in lower‐income countries and among disadvantaged students in the United States [38]. These analyses also suggested that mathematics may be more temperature‐sensitive than language‐based outcomes and that younger students may be particularly vulnerable.

2.4. Quality Appraisal

Figure 2 and Supplementary Table 2 present the quality appraisal results for each study. The average review score of the 14 included studies was 2.0, which is considered moderately high quality (Figure 2). Selective Reporting Bias was the strongest domain, while Transparency and Covariate Variable Selection were rated as moderate quality. All studies reported outcomes aligned with their research aims, but three studies failed to adequately assess confounding using valid and reliable measures. One small classroom‐based study received the lowest quality rating because of a statistical error involving interpretation of a p‐value [31].

FIGURE 2.

Heat map of quality scores across included studies. Scores were categorized from 1 to 5, where 1 indicated high scientific rigor, 4 indicated poor scientific rigor, and a score of 5 was used when a domain was not applicable.

3. Discussion

This systematic review aimed to synthesize existing research on the relationship between air temperature and academic performance in primary and secondary school settings. Our analysis synthesized evidence from 14 studies. We found evidence that, across both indoor and outdoor exposure studies, hotter conditions were generally associated with poorer academic outcomes, while the limited evidence on colder conditions suggests that cold may also adversely affect performance in some settings.

Temperature can affect academic outcomes through several interrelated pathways, including effects on physiological strain, cognition, sleep, school attendance, and the quality of the learning environment. Among the reviewed studies, results suggest an inverted‐U relationship between classroom temperature and performance, with students tending to perform best within a moderate thermal range and worse as conditions become either too hot or too cold. Thermal discomfort, associated with both hotter and colder conditions, can potentially impair learning‐related processes [29, 35, 44]. For hot temperatures, one plausible mechanism is direct impairment of cognitive functioning through increased physiological burden and perceived fatigue [45, 46, 47], both of which may reduce attention. Heat may also influence academic outcomes indirectly through sleep, as warm temperatures can impair sleep duration and sleep quality [48], which in turn can reduce classroom concentration and engagement. At the school level, overheated classrooms may worsen absenteeism [49, 50], especially in buildings with poor cooling or heat mitigation infrastructure.

In colder classrooms or during cold weather, students may also experience thermal discomfort, sleep disruption, and discomfort‐related absenteeism. One South African study of school absenteeism found the highest absenteeism at lower indoor classroom temperatures [49], while broader evidence indicates that cold exposure can reduce cognitive performance, possibly through physiological stress [51]. In the current systematic review, we were able to identify only two studies that examined the effects of cold outdoor temperatures on student performance. These Australian‐based studies found that experiencing cooler temperatures significantly worsened academic outcomes [36, 41]. These findings suggest the importance of considering the full spectrum of temperature variations, rather than focusing solely on heat, in future research efforts.

3.1. Impact of Temperature on Academic Performance

Mathematics and reading‐related tasks were the most commonly reported outcomes, with findings suggesting important similarities and differences between the two outcomes. Mathematics findings were consistent across both indoor and outdoor studies. Indoor studies reported improved mathematics performance at lower classroom temperatures in some settings, although not all math‐related findings were statistically significant [35, 42]. One Finnish study evaluated perceived thermal comfort and noted that students who perceived their classrooms as too hot performed worse on mathematics assessments [42]. This suggests that, in addition to objective temperature measures, students' subjective comfort levels may play a critical role in mediating the effects of temperature on academic performance. Outdoor studies in India, South Korea, the United States, and multi‐country analyses similarly suggested that heat exposure was associated with poorer mathematics performance or learning losses [32, 33, 38, 40, 41].

Compared to the mathematics findings, the pattern across reading and language‐related outcomes was less uniform [38, 40]. Some studies reported decrements in reading, English, literacy, or language‐related tasks under high temperatures [32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 40], while the South Korean study found no detectable reading effect even when math and English scores declined [32]. In the Costa Rica study, cooler indoor conditions improved reading speed but not reading accuracy, suggesting that task characteristics may matter [2]. Few studies have reported on both mathematics‐ and reading‐related outcomes; the emerging evidence in the current review suggests that mathematics may be more sensitive to temperature, particularly heat exposure, while reading and language tasks are also adversely affected in more domain‐specific ways, depending on whether the outcome emphasizes speed, comprehension, or broader literacy performance.

3.2. Disparities in Temperature‐Related Learning Loss

Several studies identified disparities in temperature‐related learning loss across different student populations. A global study found that disadvantaged students, including racial/ethnic minorities and those from lower‐income districts, experienced greater declines in academic performance due to heat exposure [38]. Similarly, a U.S.‐based study revealed that Black and Hispanic students suffered three times the learning loss of their White counterparts when exposed to high temperatures [39]. A Vietnamese study identified disparate gender and regional impacts, demonstrating that female students and those from rural areas were the most vulnerable to heat‐related declines in mathematics test scores [43].

Our findings highlight the potential importance of addressing equity in temperature adaptation strategies. For instance, the U.S.‐based study by Park et al. demonstrated that school air conditioning can mitigate the negative effects of heat on learning, with fully air‐conditioned schools experiencing only one‐fifth of the learning loss compared to schools without air conditioning [38]. However, access to air conditioning is often unevenly distributed, with schools in low‐income areas and developing countries being less likely to have adequate cooling systems. In the U.S., many low‐income communities are energy insecure and may face challenges due to insufficient funds, poor infrastructure, and variability in weather patterns attributed to climate change [52, 53, 54, 55]. This disparity underscores the need for targeted investments in school infrastructure to ensure that all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, can learn in comfortable and safe environments.

3.3. Methodological Considerations

While this systematic review provides valuable insights into the relationship between temperature and academic performance, it is important to acknowledge several methodological limitations. First, the number of eligible studies was small, with only 14 studies meeting inclusion criteria despite a broad database search. Second, exposure assessment varied considerably across studies. Some studies relied on indoor monitoring, others used outdoor weather station data, and exposure windows ranged from same‐day test conditions to cumulative school‐year heat or cold exposure. This heterogeneity complicates direct comparison across studies and may partly explain inconsistencies in findings. Third, although the average study quality was moderately high, quality concerns were present. In particular, one study received the lowest quality rating and was downgraded because of a basic statistical error involving interpretation of a p‐value greater than 1 [31]. Further, although some studies controlled for confounding variables, others did not adequately account for factors such as humidity, ventilation rates, socioeconomic status, school resources, student health, all of which may influence both temperature exposure and academic outcomes. Fourth, although the review used a librarian‐informed search strategy, multiple databases, and PRISMA‐aligned procedures, the possibility of missing relevant studies remains. Restriction to English‐language, peer‐reviewed publications may have excluded relevant evidence published in other languages or in the gray literature. Finally, the geographic scope of the reviewed studies was limited, with a majority focusing on the U.S. and other high‐income countries. While the global study by Park et al. included data from 58 countries [39], more research is needed in low‐ and middle‐income countries, where the impacts of climate change are often most severe and resources for adaptation are limited. Expanding the geographic scope of future studies will provide a more comprehensive understanding of how temperature fluctuations affect academic performance worldwide.

Improved temperature exposure measurement should be a priority of future research. Studies should more precisely characterize both indoor and outdoor temperatures, distinguish acute from cumulative exposure windows, and, where possible, account for related indoor environmental conditions such as ventilation, humidity, and building characteristics. Future work should also consider the full temperature spectrum, including both heat and cold, rather than focusing exclusively on high temperatures. Stronger study designs are also needed, including longitudinal and quasi‐experimental approaches that better support causal inference, repeated measures of academic outcomes, and more careful examination of effect modification by age, socioeconomic position, race/ethnicity, school resources, and adaptation measures such as air conditioning. Finally, transparent reporting must improve. More rigorous and standardized reporting would strengthen comparability across studies and improve the utility of this literature for evidence synthesis and policy translation.

3.4. Implications for School Health Policy, Practice, and Equity

The findings of this review have implications for educators, policymakers, and public health professionals. First, the available evidence suggests that there is a clear need for investments in school infrastructure to create climate‐resilient learning environments. This includes installing air conditioning systems, improving ventilation, and ensuring adequate insulation to maintain comfortable indoor temperatures. Such measures are particularly critical in regions experiencing rising temperatures due to climate change. Second, schools should implement adaptive strategies to minimize the impact of temperature fluctuations on learning. For example, scheduling outdoor activities during cooler parts of the day and incorporating heat stress education into the curriculum can help students cope with hot temperatures. Second, the evidence suggests that attention should extend beyond extreme heat days alone. Policies that address routine indoor thermal comfort, seasonal cold exposure, and cumulative school‐year temperature burden may be especially important. Third, findings that exam‐day and cumulative school‐year temperatures affect high‐stakes test outcomes and long‐run learning trajectories suggest that education authorities should consider climate‐related adjustment factors in accountability systems, scheduling of high‐stakes exams, and academic support programming, so that temperature‐driven performance penalties do not exacerbate existing educational inequities. Finally, it is essential to ensure that all students have access to safe and supportive learning environments. Policymakers should prioritize investments in low‐income and marginalized communities, where the impacts of temperature fluctuations are often most severe. This includes funding for school infrastructure improvements, as well as broader initiatives to address the social determinants of health and education.

4. Conclusions

This systematic review adds to prior narrative and non‐systematic reviews by focusing specifically on children and adolescents in primary and secondary school settings, explicitly distinguishing indoor from outdoor temperature exposures, and synthesizing evidence across the full temperature range, including both heat and cold. By applying a climate‐specific quality appraisal tool, incorporating recent large‐scale administrative studies, and examining heterogeneity by academic domain, this review provides a more comprehensive and policy‐relevant understanding of how temperature shapes learning. Findings indicate that temperature is an important determinant of academic performance, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to mitigate the adverse effects of temperature on learning, particularly for vulnerable student populations.

Ethics Statement

Preparation of this paper did not involve primary research or data collection involving human subjects, and therefore no institutional review board examination or approval was required.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Table S1: Search strategies.

Table S2: Critical appraisal of studies that met inclusion criteria.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.