Design for learning spaces
Why education needs to embrace new design patterns for learning spaces
Times are changing — and in some places around the world one can se shifts occurring when it comes to the design of classrooms. In 1993 the science fiction author William Gibson said “The future is already here — it’s just not very evenly distributed”. To me this is just the case when looking at the design of learning spaces and the classroom. Mostly, where ever one looks, thins are all the same. But in some places, theres inspiration to be found.
I cant count the amount of classrooms I have been in over the years, they seem to blend together into one, a stereotypical, mother-of-all classrooms. Its the one which I believe most of us picture in our minds. The rectangular classroom, whiteboard, teachers desk in front. Chairs and tables in neat and orderly rows. Designed for one teacher and around twenty five or perhaps thirty five pupils. Perhaps some more than that. Maybe theres some bookshelves. A cupboard. Large windows to one side with curtains that point to when the latest renovation of the school took place. Curtains that should have been taken down at least a decade ago.
If one looks at the classroom from a design perspective, some things are directly evident. It is clear that the design of the classroom is that of a learning space. But what learning does the classical classroom imply? What kind of activities does the learning space support? Who is the room designed for? What type of tools are the room designed to support the use of? When is the activity supposed to be carried out in the room? Who should be active, and who should be passive within the space?
Most classrooms are designed to be single function rooms. A room in which one teacher leads a classical lesson for a larger group. Even if it is possible to re-arrange tables and chairs so support perhaps group discussion, these are most often not designed to be moved, and cause a screeching or scratching noise when moved. If thirty are moved simultaneously the sound that is produced is nearly unbearable. So the effect is that things isn't moved around all that much.
In many schools where technology has entered the classroom, it is used to support the single function model. Examples of such technology are smartboards or projectors. Even if these tools might be used to enhance and support other learning methodologies, they are rarely used to this purpose due to the natural order of the classical classroom.
There are many structural reasons behind the lack of development of the physical structures of the classroom. Despite the ongoing change in learning tools and materials - such as the computer - the walls and equipment of the classroom seem to remain the same. The change in tools hasn't changed the function of the classroom or methodologies used within them all that much either. That in turn seems to be one reason that educational technology doesn't impact learning to any greater extent.
Some examples of structural reasons for the lack of development of formal educational learning spaces seem to be found in many different educational systems and countries around the world.
One being the division of responsibility. The owner of the school (state, province, municipality or other) sees the physical buildings as any public building, not as a learning space. This means that decision making about the physical space is not one of pedagogy, but of maintenance. Here the solution must be to invite all stakeholders into a discussion of change, so that those who actually holds power over the space is part of the solution and not the problem.
Another structural reason is that many school buildings where designed for state-of-the-art learning in 1850 or 1900. And despite what people say, knowledge about learning has increased a lot since that time. These buildnings might be beautiful but utterly impractical. In this case change might be hard as one might not be able to actually change building, but needs to work with what is at hand. Having key comptences in change and design thinking might be one way to push forward in such a case.
A third and final example of structural hinders for change might be the particular culture of the learning environment. Even if it might be possible to change and adapt and create more flexible, learner centered spaces, all stakeholders might not be interested in such a change. The reasons might vary, but whenever structural change is at hand, risk will increase. And an increase in risk might lead to more innovation, but also to more uneasiness and anxiety. Managing risk and anxiety in larger physical projects is of great importance, and a way to actually do this, and in the same time creating better and more grounded results, is by inviting all stakeholders in the process of change itself.
Learning spaces needs to be designed using patterns based on the learning activities that takes place within them. Not the patterns of learning from the time of the building of the school.
So where does one look for inspiration and change, and what is the answer to the questions of a modern, functional, learning space?
Let me see your classroom and I will tell you something about what happens there. The choices made about the design of a learning space are important aspects of the learning process and strongly influence methodology as well as outcome to some degree. There are many ways to organize and structure a learning space, and it is easy to re-design a space into a new single function room, but with another function.
The good old lecture is, despite all critique against it, still a very potent and powerful tool for learning. Its just not the only method.
As the particular needs of a given learning situation is what should be the primary driver of a learning space, it seems evident that one should design learning spaces with flexibility in mind. Often a learning space is shared between different learning groups and different teachers or lecturers. Most likely they are going to use the space in order to get different outcome, using different tools, with a different learning approach. The space should be able to easily adapt to fulfill the function of both situations.
Flexibility means that many learning spaces within a school should be set up in such a way that they can be quickly modified and adapted to the particular needs by a specific group at a given time. In order to achieve this the space will need to be designed specifically with this in mind. Furniture should be easily re-arranged, or taken away completely for that matter. Preferably some rooms in a school should be completely empty, with an option to fill it with the particular furniture or tools that you need in a given situation. In such a case, the furniture would need to be on wheels, for quick re-arrangement. Everything from whiteboards, chairs, tables, sofas, projectors and sideboards would have to be on wheels. Easlily re-arranged, stowed away and structured in a space next to the learning space. The room would need to be emptied when a particular activity ends. “Please leave the room as you found it” would be an apt guideline for such a space.
Spaces such as this can be found in some educational environments, but to my mind far to few. In my home town Göteborg, our Makerspace — Collaboratory — is designed in such a way, as to be easily re-arranged to fit particular needs at a given situation. Another place which strongly influences me is d school at Stanford, as well as Chalmers environment Kuggen, which houses the Master Programme in Interaction Design as well as my workplace, the Göteborg Studio of Interactive Institute Swedish ICT. Another interesting place that I come to think of, that really has broadened my mind of what a learning space can be, is the Future Schools Trust in the United Kingdom. Yet another school would be the Makoko Floating School in Nigeria. Both well worth a visit.
When having spaces with a high degree of flexibility, it might also be possible to have some spaces with a more narrow use case, targeted specifically towards the needs of the users of those spaces. What such spaces might be like should be decided upon through addressing the needs of the actual users. In formal educational contexts one needs to take into concideration the curricula, which means that some spaces will inevitably be catered towards specific needs. One will need lab environments, workshops and the like. But here too, there is room for innovation. The re-design of traditional workshops and labs, into proper maker spaces is one interesting path. Another is looking at informal areas, corridors, hallways and such. How can they be designed to cater towards meetings, informal learning and dialogue?
So when designing learning spaces — why not take into consideration what might actually happen in the space, rather than what one perceives might happen? Why not engage the students, pupils, teachers, administrative staff and others into the design process?
Starting out with the questions at hand might be a good first step.
What kind of activities does the learning space support?
Who is the room designed for?
What type of tools are the room designed to support the use of?
When is the activity supposed to be carried out in the room?
Who should be active, and who should be passive within the space?
Who are the experts of our learning environments? Who do I ask for advice?
