Schools must be better designed for learning

As B.C. student enrolment numbers stabilize, aging school buildings are being challenged by progress in the way public education can be delivered.

Innovations in school and classroom design will, over the next 10 to 20 years, assume a much more significant role in teaching and learning success.

When Douglas Cardinal, Canada’s eminent architect, best known for his design of the Canadian Museum of History in Gatineau, Que., spoke to a conference of architects and educators in Vancouver in the early 1990s, he began by saying: “Buildings speak to people.” He meant that the building, its design and the functional relationships of its components deliver a powerful message to those who occupy it.

Cardinal went on to explain that the first step in creating a school building is to begin with a vision that clearly states a building’s purposes, intentions and goals. Once that vision has been articulated, there exists the possibility that the vision might be realized.

In the absence of this kind of thinking, other, perhaps more pragmatic, if less ideal, considerations will tend to drive the design, he said.

For architects of school buildings then, the vision of what a building “says” assumes a clear understanding of and a vision for what the occupants of the building might be doing and are motivated to achieve.

Unfortunately, the design of most traditional school buildings delivers a message that is contrary to what current research into excellence in teaching and learning demands.

The majority of traditionally designed buildings speak to the necessity for strict external control of the teacher and learner. Long corridors are designed to permit movement only to and from classrooms in which it is assumed groups of children will be taught, as if there is no difference between them, and they will all learn in the same way and at the same pace.

The design of the building will also emphasize an unavoidable message about who “owns” the building and what is allowed to happen inside it.

In a traditionally designed school, teachers own the classrooms, the librarian owns the library, the principal owns the office and the custodian owns the hallways. Student “ownership” is not a feature of traditional design. Student control of or responsibility for anything is at a minimum.

Phillip C. Schlecty, a leader in school reform, once suggested that: “Contemporary schools are places where the somewhat younger go to watch the somewhat older work.”

Schlecty suggested that the truly innovative school is one that will be transformed into a learning organization that can provide the opposite experience. He also suggested that traditionally schools are physically organized as bureaucracies that provide teachers with a platform for instruction rather than providing students with a platform for learning.

Schools are designed, he said, to push information at students rather than encouraging students to assume some responsibility for pulling out information as they need it to accomplish a learning goal.

In Cardinal’s terms, the building needs to say to students: “We know you want to learn, we want this to be a place where you enjoy learning — this is your building.”

It is an optimistic view of students, rather than a “we know you don’t want to learn,” pessimistic assumption.

Innovative architectural design based on and driven by current research and understanding about teaching and learning can support and drive educational innovation. Anything less will result in another school for the 1950s.

The National Summit on School Design conducted by the American Architectural Foundation concluded that, among other design areas influencing educational progress, the “technology in schools” issue is becoming less about infrastructure (e.g. wiring) and more about integrating technology into a flexible learning environment.

As one example, class-response systems such as IClicker have been found to have positive impacts on classroom participation, where students and teachers can monitor progress at several times during a lesson.

With IClicker, students use a device like a wireless TV remote control at each classroom desk and a large TV screen at the front of the room. IClicker enables every student to respond to a multiple-choice question( press button a,b,c,d) at several points during the lesson.

The class response is graphed out on the screen, and not only can students see immediately if they are on track, but the teacher can see if it is necessary to stop and revise.

Teachers in B.C. who are moving ahead with technology know that school and classroom design that supports optimistic assumptions about students is the gateway to superior learning opportunities for B.C. kids. It is overdue.

Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools. He wrote this for the Victoria Times Colonist.