The body
of knowledge concerning well-designed learning environments is contained in the
following 31 global school design principles that appear to have currency in
todayıs school planning and design. These principles are derived from a variety
of sources: from the reflective practice of educators and design professionals
to the empirical research of environmental psychologists and educational
researchers. Each school design principle takes as an underlying premise that
all learning environments should be learner-centered, developmentally- and
age-appropriate, safe, comfortable, accessible, flexible, and equitable in
addition to being cost effective. These premises run through all principles and
should be understood to moderate the appropriateness of each principle in
practice. The school design principles are presented here as an extended
checklist format that can be used at a guide for a school design visioning
process.
No single
school building process will be able to address and implement all of these
principles; some may not apply to the situation, others might not be
appropriate because of budgetary limitations. Certainly, if school size
research suggests learner groupings of one hundred, building a school this small
may not be cost effective other principles may need to be employed in
combination to meet this principle, such as the principle of creating schools
within schools, although we do not recommend this as a solution to poor
planning and designs of the past.
The
chapter is divided into principles for site and building organization,
principles for primary educational space, principles for shared school and
community facilities, community spaces, principles related to the character of
all spaces, and principles related to site design and outdoor learning spaces.
The potential exists to transform the traditional school
building into a community-learning center that serves the educational needs of
the entire population in the community. Typically, a community-learning center
can be created by interlacing residential neighborhoods, various existing
community and school organizations, functions and facilities (Bingler et al, 2003; Decker &
Romney, 1994, August; US Dept of Ed., 1999, April; OECD, 1996). The community
school most often functions as a cohesive facility or network of closely
adjacent facilities (Hodgin, 1998, January; Fanning/Howey Associates, 1995).
Locating the community-learning center in neighborhoods will provide a symbolic
identity for that community. Facilities that are close to the neighborhoods of
the children they serve provide opportunities for children to walk and bike
with the added public health benefit of increasing their physical activity,
rather than relying on more costly modes of transportation. Community schools
often will provide a variety of services, at flexible schedules, accessible by
people of different backgrounds. By providing facilities accessible for the
entire community, the center will create increased involvement and awareness of
the value of education (Warner & Curry, 1997). School facilities that act
as true community centers serve the broader societal goals of providing the
setting for meaningful civic participation and engagement at the local level.
2.
Plan for Learning to Take Place Directly in the Community
A variety of social and economic factors have created an
environment in which many educators recognize that learning happens all the
time and in many different places (Duke, 1999, February). The school building
is just one place learning takes occurs. While the school building is often
perceived as a community center, the idea of embracing the whole community as a
learning environment has evolved in a complementary fashion. Educational
programs can, and are taking advantage of educational resources in urban,
suburban and rural settings alike. Formal educational program partnerships have
been established with museums, zoos, libraries, other public institutions, as
well as local business workplace settings (Bingler et al, 2003; Fielding,
1999).
In addition, increasing costs of public spending for education
has encouraged the sharing of school and community facilities that prevent cost
duplication of similar facilities such as gymnasiums, auditoriums, performance
spaces, and conferencing facilities (Fanning/Howey Associates, 1995; OECD,
1995, 1996). Sharing facilities can also realize long-term maintenance and
operating cost savings over the life of the building. Sharing school facilities
with a variety of community organizations may foster meaningful
inter-organizational partnerships that can strengthen educational opportunities
for learners.
Barker and Gump (1964) in their classic book ³Big School,
Small School² demonstrated through their research that small schools (100-150),
in comparison with large schools (over 2,000) offer students greater opportunities
to participate in extracurricular activities and to exercise leadership roles.
In particular, they found that participation in school activities; student
satisfaction, number of classes taken, community employment, and participation
in social organizations have all been found to be greater in small schools
relative to large schools. Garbarino (1980) later found that, small schools, on
the order of 500 or less, have lower incidence of crime levels and less serious
student misconduct. Subsequent research by others suggests a negative
relationship between mathematics and verbal ability tests and elementary school
size controlling for socio-economic differences (Fowler, 1992; Howley, 1994, June). Additionally, the same research
indicates that smaller elementary schools particularly benefit African-American
studentsı achievement.
For educational planners and architects the research on
small schools suggests that the size of learner groupings should be roughly
between 60-75 students in pre-school, 200-400 students in elementary school,
400-600 in middle school and not more than 600-800 students in secondary school
(Raywid, 1996, 1999; Lashway, 1998-99, Winter; Irmsher, 1997). If a community
learning center must house more than 75 preschoolers, 400 elementary or
middle-school students, or more than 800 high-school students, it is often
recommended that the facility be decentralized not just in the size of student
body, but also curriculum, administration and architecture. Architectural forms
of these smaller units may include a village, campus, or multi-faceted building
comprised of a series of interconnected schools-within-a-school for a maximum
of 400 students. Another strategy for reducing the scale of educational
facilities is to distribute and network various school and community functions
throughout the neighborhood in both new and existing sites.
4.
Respect Contextual Compatibility While Providing Design Diversity
As real estate development sprawl has expanded, the principle of
creating well-defined neighborhoods has been ignored in urban planning. While a
strong neighborhood may not directly influence educational performance, the
sense of cohesion experienced by community members may help increase parental
involvement in neighborhood schools. Research has shown that parental
involvement in the school is critical to a learnerıs success. By creating a
contextually compatible school, people may feel that the school is part of the
neighborhood, and in turn, part of them. While maintaining a sense of continuity
through contextual design, creating diversely designed environments that have
their own identity is equally important in enabling community members to
recognize the school as a symbol of their community (Moore & Lackney,
1994).
Well-defined neighborhoods blend schools into the pattern and
character of the local, surrounding community. In a complementary fashion, one
might create differently styled schools with for example, variations on the
overall design theme, to respond to the need for community identity and as a
response to active parental, children, teachers, administration, and community
participation (OECD, 1996).
5.
Consider Home as a Template for School
The transition from the home setting to institutional settings
such as the school environment can be stressful, especially for younger
children in childcare settings. Experience tells us that building in physical
and social home-like characteristics may reduce anxiety on the part of both
parent and child, help children feel more comfortable and enable the student to
concentrate on learning (Moore et. al., 1979).
Use friendly, "home-like" elements and materials in
the design of the school at all scales when appropriate and possible
(Crumpacker, 1995). Home-like characteristics might include: creating smaller
groupings of students often called ³families² in the middle school philosophy,
designing appropriately-scaled elements, locating restrooms near instructional
areas, providing friendly and welcoming entry sequences, creating residentially
sloping roofs, and creating enclosed back-yardsı (Moore et. al., 1979). Use
familiar and meaningful elements from the surrounding residential neighborhood
as the "template" for the imagery of the new school.
If you have an interest in school design, you
are invited to click
here to experience a comprehensive treatment of this important subject.