EDUCATIONAL FACILITY DESIGN FEATURES IN GEORGIAíS SCHOOLS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS............................................................................................................... v

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1

Purpose of Study................................................................................................ 6

Research Questions............................................................................................ 7

Setting................................................................................................................. 7

Significance of Study.......................................................................................... 7

Assumptions...................................................................................................... 9

Limitations of Study........................................................................................... 9

Definitions.......................................................................................................... 9

Organization of Study........................................................................................ 9

2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE...................................................................................... 11

Energy Efficient, Flexible and Sustained Designs............................................. 13

Aesthetics......................................................................................................... 18

Safety and Security........................................................................................... 20

Collaboration.................................................................................................... 21

Discussion........................................................................................................ 24

Classroom Space and Furnishings.................................................................... 25

Technology...................................................................................................... 26

Organization of Classroom and Administrative Offices................................... 27

Student Communal Spaces and School Grounds.............................................. 28

Teacher Facilities.............................................................................................. 30

Functional Use: Instructional Strategies and Instructional Opportunities....... 31

Functional Use: Community and Social Use.................................................... 34

Discussion........................................................................................................ 36

3 METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................... 37

Research Questions.......................................................................................... 37

Population and Sample..................................................................................... 37

Methods........................................................................................................... 38

Data Collection and Analysis........................................................................... 38

4 FINDINGS.................................................................................................................. 40

Introduction...................................................................................................... 40

Demographics................................................................................................... 42

Energy Efficient, Flexible and Sustained Designs............................................. 42

Aesthetics......................................................................................................... 44

Safety and Security........................................................................................... 45

Collaboration.................................................................................................... 48

Classroom Space and Furnishings.................................................................... 52

Technology....................................................................................................... 54

Organization of Classrooms and Offices......................................................... 57

Student Communal Spaces............................................................................... 58

School Grounds............................................................................................... 60

Teacher Facilities.............................................................................................. 61

Instructional/Social Program Services and Opportunities................................ 62

Classroom Instructional Opportunities............................................................ 64

Instructional Opportunities and Educational Programs................................... 68

Organization of Instruction.............................................................................. 69

Social and Community Use.............................................................................. 71

Open-Ended Questions.................................................................................... 73

5 SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS........................... 76

Summary of Findings........................................................................................ 76

Discussion........................................................................................................ 85

Recommendations............................................................................................. 85

Implications for Further Research.................................................................... 87

REFERENCES Truncated ............................................................................................................ 88

APPENDICES............................................................................................................................... 93

A SURVEY FOR GEORGIA...................................................................................... 93

B VIRGINIA FINDINGS.......................................................................................... 105

C OPEN-ENDED QUESTION RESPONSES IN ORIGINAL TEXT..................... 106

D OPEN-ENDED DATA SUMMARY................................................................... 121

E PERMISSION GRANTED FOR VIRGINIA SURVEY....................................... 128

F VIRGINIA SURVEY.............................................................................................. 129

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: Demographics.................................................................................................................. 42

Table 2: Energy Efficient, Flexible and Sustained Designs............................................................ 43

Table 3: Aesthetics........................................................................................................................ 45

Table 4: Safety and Security.......................................................................................................... 47

Table 5: Funding and Collaboration............................................................................................... 49

Table 6: Classroom Space and Furnishings................................................................................... 51

Table 7: Technology-Collaboration............................................................................................... 51

Table 8: Classroom, Space and Furnishings.................................................................................. 53

Table 9: Technology...................................................................................................................... 56

Table 10: Organization of Classrooms and Offices....................................................................... 58

Table 11: Student Communal Space.............................................................................................. 59

Table 12: School Grounds............................................................................................................. 60

Table 13: Teacher Facilities........................................................................................................... 61

Table 14: Instructional/Social Program Services and Opportunities............................................. 63

Table 15: Technology and Communal Use ................................................................................... 66

Table 16: Instructional Classroom Programs Opportunities......................................................... 66

Table 17: Instructional Opportunities and Educational Programs................................................ 69

Table 18: Organization of Instruction........................................................................................... 70

Table 19: Social and Community Use........................................................................................... 72

Table 20: Trends of Georgiaís Schools.......................................................................................... 77

Table 21: Comparison of Similar Trends Surveyed for Georgia and Virginia................................ 80

Table 22: Non-comparable Trends................................................................................................ 81

Table 23: Comparable Trends Not Occurring for Both Georgia and Virginia............................... 83

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Studies have proven significant correlations to school facilities and student outcomes, including student achievement and student behavior, as facilities assist with shaping the educational environment and in many instances its process or function: Lighting (Mahone 2002; Kuller and Lindsten 1992); Indoor Air Quality (Wargo and Wargo 2002; Daisey and Angell 1998); Acoustics (Maxwell and Evans 1999; Mills 1975); Color (Sinofsky and Knirck 1981); Ergonomics (Marschall at al. 1995); and State of Repair (Berner 1993; Bowers and Burkett 1989). The most effective design features used and the extent school facilities influence student outcomes are educational interests continually sought by educators and facility builders. Interests in design features occur at various levels and sects. Those interested in physical characteristics aim to understand the effectiveness of maintenance and operations, while those directly involved with curricula are likely to be concerned with the function of the building and its use for the learning processes. The popularity of both continues to increase, while seeking to understand the connection of facilities to student learning. As a result of inevitable influences on educational change, trends begin to emerge in educational design and further shape the learning environment and experiences.

The influences of school design contributing to such trends in school features are significant in number and are attributed to universal and local interests, change, and advancements. Furthermore, technology has initiated change in which communication has drastically changed the entire world, creating trends for schools to react to societyís interests (Beaudlin, Merritt, Oja, & Sells, 2004; McCain, 1996; Sanoff, 1994). When communication and technology have made it possible to have a business meeting on one continent and dinner that same night on another, change is inevitable in education. Not only has it impacted the physical design of schools through the installation of features such as computers and technical equipment, but the access and resources offered have a direct influence on the functional uses, resulting in curriculum and knowledge prioritization (Beaudlin, Merritt, Oja, & Sells, 2004; McCain, 1996; Sanoff, 1994). Technological advancements alter learning methods as learning styles can be more easily adapted than before in classrooms. Given the variability and individuality technology offers, demand is created for flexibility. Making the school design flexible and adaptable is a compelling issue for facility builders, given the on-going influences.

Although not significantly affecting functional features, another universal influence on facility building directly impacting the physical design features is energy:

Energy should be considered the architect.... Aside from the pressing social responsibilities to conserve fuels, educational planners need to consider the financial stress aggravated by energy scarcities. In 1970, school districts across the country spent $26.70 per pupil for energy. Projections indicate tripling of energy costs by 1885 and quadrupling by 1992. (Wilson, 1981, p. 93)

Recent emphasis has been placed on ìgreen buildingî to make efforts to conserve resources.

While technology and energy globally influence school design, other factors influence the design of schools at a micro-society, community level and are specific to educational facilities. ìAmong the most important issues and trends relevant to school design are the following: enrollment trends, program requirements, conditions of existing facilities, schools as community centers and changes in school utilizationî (Kliment, 2001, p. 92). Society and government make efforts to reform education often simultaneously with leader and community beliefs contributing their own educational objectives and goals. Schools and educational progress are central concerns, especially in an era of federal policies such as No Child Left Behind (U.S. Department of Education, 2001), increased accountability, and expectancy for standardized scores to increase for all students. The definition of student achievement is often referred to as student outcome, since definitions of student achievement and student success have begun to differ. ìAt the same time that thereís this push toward standardized curricula and standardized testing...thereís a movement in what seems to be the opposite direction: toward highly exploratory, individualized (and individually directed) learningî (Beaudlin, Merritt, Oja, & Sells, 2004, p. xvii).

Regarding the physical environment, how renovations and growth populations are viewed may or may not be referred to as an influence on school design features, but they are definitely considerations, since they influence the demand to build or re-design. Knowing that school facilities have a profound effect on the learning process, health and curricula are serious concerns regarding school facilities. Students cannot learn in areas with poor ventilation and health hazards. Building-related illnesses, resulting from ineffective indoor environmental quality management is conducive to student absences and results in students not performing well. Such results could be attributed to respiratory problems or allergies caused from poor building conditions (EPA, 2000, para 6). Aside from health, outdated equipment and dilapidation hinders learning for the desired student outcome. The average age of school buildings is approximately 42 years old (National Center for Educational Statistics, 1999). Given these facts and trends it is expected that schools already in existence will have to be maintained by upgrading and replacing equipment as well as renovated to meet current educational practices.

In the first part of the 19^th century the industrial expansion ìmade it necessary to take new, comprehensive measures and build an increasing number of schoolsî (Roth, 1950, p. 24). Today, ìA 60 million enrollment is expected by 2030î (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Public Affairs, 2000), efforts are going to have to be made to accommodate growing student populations with additional schools. Enrollments for public and private schools peaked in 2001, and although not projected to grow at the same rate, enrollment will continue to grow in both public and private schools. Factors influencing enrollment include migration, birth rate levels in the 1990's, and changing state and local policies leading to higher enrollments through additional programs (National Center for Education Statistics, 2005).

As with the industrial expansion, additional social influences affect school design from social, family constructs. Whether by necessity or choice, familiesí status (both parents working, single parent homes), youth pregnancies, work ethics, educational experiences, and socio-economic status are constructs contributing to changes in school design. School features are designed to compliment or compensate for changes in families and society. In many instances, school facilities are designed and prepared to accommodate traditional needs of the home and offer opportunities for students and their families not otherwise accessible. These needs also bring about additional costs and are increasing in number and variability. Whether the increases are attributed to actual changes in society or recent awareness thus creating an interest to react, they have become a part of many schoolsí functions.

As a result of the many influences on school design ranging from global to local interests, efforts to create sustainable, efficient, and flexible schools are becoming emerging aspects of school facilities. European studies on infrastructure design, resulting from in depth qualitative studies of quantitative findings suggest ìstudent academic achievement improves with improved building conditions. Individual factors, such as lighting levels, air quality, temperature, and acoustics, have an effect on student behavior and outcomesî (Fisher, 2002, p.5). Given that studies have linked school facilities, student achievement, and student outcomes, knowing and understanding the recent designs existing and available is important for improving design features to maximize educational opportunities. What kinds of school designs are being created to support these reforms? Are buildings representative of minimal standards and specifications as outlined by legislation, or do they go beyond expected minimums? Are they prototypes or expanded structures reflecting the desires of individual systems and communities from which they are initiated? Are schools being designed as traditional structures for teacher lead-instruction with limited mobility or flexibility? Are philosophies taking a more practical or Deweyan approach than ever before to accommodate aesthetics and a learner -centered approach; or are they designed progressively, reflective of the work ethic and economic influence on education? These questions are already a part of the philosophies shaping school planning as additional trends are emerging in school design as part of the 21^st Century. Most importantly, do the answers to these questions regarding school design exemplify the research for helping students learn and reflect the desires of all those who contribute to the educational environment and use it?

Awareness of design options are a very important part of improving and evaluating educational settings; therefore, as efforts are made to build or renovate schools and educational facilities, urgency is created regarding understanding designs that represent the most effective learning environment (Schneider, 2002). Educators and students ideally benefit from an educational design that is functional and serves the goals and desires for educational outcomes. Designs not planned carefully in schools cannot only be costly and wasteful, but in certain instances bring about continual frustration for the classroom environment when teacher, administrative, and community pedagogical preferences and practical functionalities are not considered. Buildings and classrooms where teachers cannot use appropriate equipment and where students are not comfortable and safe are not conducive to increasing student achievement. When educational facilities are planned to support learning, instruction can be facilitated more effectively through the physical and functional environment. According to Lackney, ìThe schools we build now will be with us for the next 50 yearsî (Rivero, 2004, p. 24); however, ìthe challenge is to create schools that will serve students well into the coming decades, yet remain within budgetî (Tucker & Zahn, 1997, p. 1). Research of existing features in schools, revealing whether design features are no longer applicable to the environment and to determine emergent features resulting from educational influences, contributes valuable knowledge to facility design planning.

Purpose of Study

Since educational studies have proven facilities have an effect on educational environments and student achievement, educational design should be further studied to continue to meet societal and educational goals as they currently exist and emerge. Bradley and Protheroe cite several studies of facilities affecting studentsí attitudes, achievement, health, and behavior: Lighting (Mahone 2002; Kuller and Lindsten 1992); Indoor Air Quality (Wargo and Wargo 2002; Daisey and Angell 1998); Acoustics (Maxwell and Evans 1999; Mills 1975); Color (Sinofsky and Knirck 1981); Ergonomics (Marschall at al. 1995); and State of Repair (Berner 1993; Bowers and Burkett 1989). Further studies on types and variations of design trends are valuable for continuing to make educational progress. Such research assists for determining how educational spaces are designed most effectively for providing optimum learning experiences, while maintaining healthy, safe learning environments.

The purpose of this study was to describe the design features found in Georgiaís schools and to determine the features existing, since they become outdated with educational change and new educational influences. Another focus of this study was to establish a benchmark for further studies regarding facilities and their connection to student achievement, student outcomes, and the educational environment. Specifically, this study reviewed schools built in Georgia to determine existing design features. The physical and functional environment of school design was studied to determine the features used most frequently in school designs. Once these characteristics were found, they were compared to findings from a similar study completed in Virginia (New Design Features, 1998-99). The Virginia study was used as a bench mark for comparison of findings.

Research Questions

1. What are the existing educational facility design features in Georgiaís schools?

2. How do these features and trends compare with those found in the Virginia study?

Setting

The setting consisted of over 2,000 schools in Georgia, both public and private. Both urban and rural districts were included. Local school administrators were asked to participate in surveys.

Significance of the Study

Georgiaís capital outlay for school facilities was approximately two million dollars as represented in the 2004 Governorís recommended budget (Georgia Department of Education, 2004). Population growth is presenting facility builders with projections they must take care of immediately. From fall of 2001 through fall of 2013 Georgia is expected to be one of the fifteen states with the largest projected enrollment increase in public elementary and secondary schools (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2005). As constructions and renovations continue to increase, facility planning, the earliest phase in facility building is becoming a more valuable component to the planners and their stakeholders for proactive efforts in school facilities. It is vital for these groups to be aware of various designs and features available and to gain as much understanding as possible of the influence of features used in schools. In order to inform school planners and all persons with the intent to improve schools, it is important to identify the features of existing schools and trends.

Teacher and student classroom instruction directly impact learning, and school facilities directly contribute and influence learning in the educational environment through their physical and functional features. School design can facilitate or restrict educational philosophies representative of traditional, progressive, or pragmatic approaches (Beaudlin, Merritt, Oja, & Sells, 2004; McCain, 1996; Sanoff, 1994; Ledford, 1981). The extent to which the environment is flexible, the extent to which spaces are designed for cooperative learning, how many student centers are established, and further areas for exploration directly influencing student achievement can all be reflected in school design. Designs can also be reflective of potential relationships and connections to community and parents. School design is ever changing with society and its progress. ìForward-thinking communities are taking a hard look at learning environments and applying the results to school design. Architects are beginning to use these new ideas in buildings they designî (Cunningham, 2002, p. 1). Since research has already directly linked facilities and student achievement, further studies on types, variations, and age of design trends are valuable for continuing to make educational progress.

Assumptions

1. The sample of participants who volunteered to respond was representative of Georgia.

2. Survey questionnaire and responses provide a valid measure of the building facilities.

Limitations of the Study

1. The schools were provided with e-mail invitations and not all requests to participate reached individuals due to server filters and incorrect or outdated e-mail addresses.

2. The administrators participating were volunteers.

Definitions

1. Physical Environment: Any physical feature of the building design such as safety mechanisms, classroom space, furnishings, technology, and similar physical features of design.

2. Functional Environment: The special programs or types of instruction that ìfunctionî or take place in the physical environment. Examples include preschool or high school programs, instructional scheduling, and instructional styles, such as team teaching.

3. Trend: a) As discussed in literature review, a general tendency or movement; a current style or liking; emphasis in design. b) As discussed in results, a feature occurring in at least 50% of schools surveyed.

4. Feature: Any physical or functional component of educational design.

Organization of Study

Chapter 1: This chapter consists of an introduction, which discusses examples of influences on school design and provides reference to the importance of further studying existing and emerging design features. Also included are the following research topics: problem, purpose, research questions, setting, and significance of study, assumptions, limitations, and definitions of terms.

Chapter 2: This chapter includes the review of literature as it relates to the physical and functional environment and discusses universal trends to consider regarding design features and considerations: sustainability, efficiency, aesthetics, safety and security, technology, and collaboration. The review of literature then follows these considerations by discussing the remaining individual or categorical features aligned to the survey while supporting the premise that features are emerging global interests. Examples are provided from various countries of schools built for the 21^st Century in addition to the United States. The literature review consists of the following outline: Energy Efficient, Flexible, and Sustained Designs; Aesthetics; Safety and Security; Collaboration; Classroom Space and Furnishings; Technology; Organization of Classroom and Administrative Offices; Student Communal Spaces and School Grounds; Teacher Facilities; Instructional Strategies and Instructional Opportunities; and Social and Community Use.

Chapter 3: Methodology, research questions, population and sample, methods, data collection and analysis

Chapter 4: Findings

Chapter 5: Summary of findings, recommendations, and implications for further research

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

As existing schools wear out and are renovated, or replaced, certain changes occur in school designs that might impact student outcomes. These changes and perhaps trends include features having never been a part of school design, or features included in school designs previously, but currently having a significant emphasis. For example, communities have always been a part of education and schools, but recently they have emerged as an intricate part of school design and the planning process. These emergent and emphasized designs exemplify, and in many instances, redefine educational environments.