How a school's outside appearance affects student and
public perception of that school
By
July 12, 2006
Schools have been designed for many years to provide an
area that could be used for education.
For the most part, these buildings were not "special" in any
educational sense. Most were dull,
egg crate or barn style usually copied from some other district's latest
building project, therefore saving money on the architect fees. Others described schools as ugly,
predictable rectangles that were structurally unprepared for the test of
several decades (Sommerhoff,
2002). Most schools
could have been used for many other purposes, and once their educational life
has ended many have been converted into offices, storage facilities, and even
apartments. While they have not
been special in their design, the schools have also not been very special in
their affect on student or public perception. For the most part, schools have been rather uninviting
structures, especially to students.
The quality of the physical environment has a great deal to do with how
a building is perceived and used (Ciardullo, 2001).
Student perception of a
school influences several aspects of their educational experience. Building age, general appearance, and
student friendly aspects influence the perception of those attending that
school. Research has shown that a
link exists between student achievement and behavior on the one hand, and the
overall condition of school buildings on the other. For example, in a study of all of the primary schools in
Georgia, fourth grade students in non-modernized buildings recorded poorer
results in basic skills assessment than those in modernized or new buildings
(Plumley, 1978). Similarly eighth grade students scored consistently higher in
mathematics and vocabulary assessment if accommodated in new or modernized
buildings. This was repeated in a study of 10 elementary schools where teacher
attitudes to school buildings were significantly improved in new and modernized
buildings (Chan, 1979). A further
study demonstrated an improvement in student achievement scores in newer
facilities especially in sixth grade mathematic (Phillips, 1997).
However, there is not
total agreement on all of these findings. For example, in one study a strong
inverse relationship was found between student behavior and building age, that
is, the older the buildings were, the better the behavior of the students
(Ikpa, 1992). It has been
speculated that this conflicting finding may be the result of negative student
reaction to greater supervision and disciplinary measures in the newer
facilities. From personal
experience in teaching in a new facility with cameras in the halls and
lunchroom, the feeling is widespread among students that they are being watched
constantly, with some even comparing the new school to a jail.
The following chart gives structural and cosmetic factors
that influence learning.
Structural factors
|
Cosmetic factors |
|
Building age Windows Flooring Heating Air-conditioning Roof leaks Adjacent facilities Locker conditions Ceiling material Science laboratory equipment Science laboratory age Lighting Color Noise Student density Site
acreage |
Interior painting Exterior painting Interior painting cycle Exterior painting cycle Floors swept Floors mopped Graffiti Graffiti removal Furniture School grounds Landscaping |
While this chart includes
points other than outside appearances, it does provide a good list of areas
that are viewable from that standpoint (Fisher, 2005).
Aside from the aspects of
age and condition of a building, schools must be student friendly to inspire
their learning, especially in the elementary and middle grades. As learned through visiting St. Simon's
Elementary School, every aspect of a student's environment must be colorful,
inviting, and "sized" appropriately. Spaces should be designed to provide a spark for a child's
imagination.
Parent and other adults
often perceive a building on a much more utilitarian level. Much of their emphasis is placed on
initial construction expense, cost of maintenance, and safety. The median costs per square foot for
elementary, middle, or high school facility construction in 2004 was $124
(American School, 2005). Major expenditures are made to construct
schools, which the public is very much aware. This seems to decrease the desire of those spending the
money to allow designers much leeway from a conservative, economical approach. Some architects indicate that parents
define a good design in humble terms.
Stating that, "it can be whimsical, it can be a fun place, but we
don't want to go overboard" (Sturgeon, 2004).
The cost of maintaining a
structure influences the perception that the public will have upon a
school. Structures that are built
from materials that require less up-keep are viewed more favorably than those
that require constant work to maintain their appearance. The perception of those working in
custodial positions has a great influence on the general public. When they feel that the building is
easy to work in, they will convey these feelings to others.
Student safety is a big
concern for adults. Most would
rather have a safe school than one with curb appeal. Schools that are designed with safety in mind utilize three
critical design principles. These
include access control, natural surveillance, and definition of territory. Access control uses doors, shrubs,
fences, gates and other physical design elements to discourage access to an
area by all but its intended users. Natural surveillance assures that offenders
and intruders will be observed. It increases the likelihood that individuals
who care but are not officially responsible for regulating the use of space
will observe these individuals and either challenges their behavior or reports
it to someone who is officially responsible. Locate administrative areas directly adjacent to the main
entrance to the school. Territorial reinforcement suggests that physical design
can contribute to a sphere of influence so that users develop a sense of
"ownership" that is perceived by offenders. Sidewalks, landscaping, porches and other elements that
establish the boundaries between public and private areas define territory
(Lackney, 2003).
Overall, the perception from the student and public point of view can vary considerably. Student perception will influence their achievement and behavior. Public perception will be one that is based upon costs and safety. While these perceptions are wide ranging, both views must be used in preparing school design.
More information on school
design and student outcomes may be found in Educational Facilities Planning.
References
American School and University's 31st Annual Official
Education Construction
Report, May 2005. http://asumag.com/mag/university_mixed_results/index.html
Chan, T. (1979). The Impact of School Building Age on
Pupil Achievement. Greenville
County, US Department of Health Education and Welfare,
National Institute of
Education.
Ciardullo, John. (2001). Creating a welcome message in the physical environment. The School Administrator Web Edition. From http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetail.
cfm?ItemNumber=3605&snItemNumber=950&tnItemNumber=951
Fisher, Ken. (2005). Buidling better outcomes: The impact
of school infrasctructure on student outcomes and behavior. The Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and
Youth Affairs. From
http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/school_education/publications
_resources/schooling_issues_digest/schooling_issues_digest_building.htm
Ikpa, V. (1992). The Norfolk Decision: The Effects of
Converting from a Unitary
Educational System to a Dual System on Academic
Achievement. Norfolk, Virginia.
Abstract obtained from Building Better Outcomes: The
Impact of School Infrastructure
on Student Outcomes and Behaviour, 2005.
Lackney, Jeffery A. (2003). 33
principles of educational design.
American School and
University's 31st Annual
Official Education Construction Report, May 2005. From
http://schoolstudio.engr.wisc.edu/33principles.html
Phillips, R. (1997). Educational Facility Age and the
Academic Achievement of Upper
Elementary School Students. D.Ed. Dissertation. Athens,
University of Georgia: 1128. Abstract obtained from Building Better Outcomes:
The Impact of School Infrastructure
on Student Outcomes and Behaviour, 2005.
Plumley, J. (1978). The Impact of School Building Age on
the Academic Achievement of Selected Fourth Grade Pupils in the State of
Georgia. D.Ed. Dissertation, Athens, Georgia, University of Georgia. Abstract obtained from Building Better
Outcomes: The Impact of School Infrastructure on Student Outcomes and
Behaviour, 2005.
Sommerhoff, Emilie Worthen. (2002). The school design confronts three f's. Facilities
Design & Management; Jun2002, Vol. 21(6), p30-34.
Sturgeon, Julie. (2004). Curb
appeal. District Administration. From
http://www.districtadministration.com/page.cfm?p=834.