Design Proposal |
|
This conceptual design proposal has been collated and prepared for the College Board and for the College Management Team (CMT), consisting of the Principal, Head of Campus-Primary, Head of Campus-Secondary, Business Manager, and Marketing Manager. These two groups are ultimately responsible for establishing the direction of the College and managing the College finances.
Background
With the recent move to the new campus for our Year 6 to 12 students, the existing building which was designed for Secondary classes is now the home of the Upper Primary (Years 4 and 5). Due to the nature of Primary teaching, withdrawal spaces for working with children, along with preparation and storage areas for resources, are required. This consideration was not in place when the building was originally designed. The old science preparation room, now known as ‘The Hub’, should be just that – a hub of activity, a space that inspires creativity and serves a variety of purposes. Currently, this space is non-inspiring, overcrowded and poorly designed for the purpose in which it now needs to serve.
This proposal looks to re-purpose this space and establish it as a collaborative, engaging and inspiring space for students, staff and community helpers. There is a need to define zones clearly within the space whilst considering flexibility to allow for easy reconfiguration or re-purposing in the future.
This proposal looks to re-purpose this space and establish it as a collaborative, engaging and inspiring space for students, staff and community helpers. There is a need to define zones clearly within the space whilst considering flexibility to allow for easy reconfiguration or re-purposing in the future.
Charrette Process and Outcomes
‘Change in education is easy to propose, hard to implement and extraordinarily difficult to sustain’ (Hargreaves & Fink, 2006, p. 17). A design charrette engages a co-design process whereby stakeholders collaborate together to share solutions to a design problem (Howard & Somerville, 2014). In order to create an effective design solution for ‘The Hub’ it was important for the stakeholders needs to be considered and understood (La Marca, 2010).
As defined by Lackney (2000), the Educational Design Principle No. 1 ‘Maximise collaboration in school planning and design’, states that the primary focus of a participatory design process ‘should be to obtain multiple perspectives while exploring all potential problems and opportunities’. With this in mind, a mini-charrette was conducted over three sessions, including representatives of all stakeholders. The stakeholders were briefed prior to the charrette meeting on the design problem of ‘no defined spaces for stakeholders and the space being unwelcoming’, allowing them to come pre-prepared with their positive thoughts about the space and proposed solutions to perceived problems. Together they collaborated and shared ideas on how the space could be redesigned to meet everyone’s mixed needs.
Challenging and robust discussions were had and ideas were considered and discussed before either removing or including them in the final design proposal. The consensus solutions of the group included:
As defined by Lackney (2000), the Educational Design Principle No. 1 ‘Maximise collaboration in school planning and design’, states that the primary focus of a participatory design process ‘should be to obtain multiple perspectives while exploring all potential problems and opportunities’. With this in mind, a mini-charrette was conducted over three sessions, including representatives of all stakeholders. The stakeholders were briefed prior to the charrette meeting on the design problem of ‘no defined spaces for stakeholders and the space being unwelcoming’, allowing them to come pre-prepared with their positive thoughts about the space and proposed solutions to perceived problems. Together they collaborated and shared ideas on how the space could be redesigned to meet everyone’s mixed needs.
Challenging and robust discussions were had and ideas were considered and discussed before either removing or including them in the final design proposal. The consensus solutions of the group included:
- Flexible and movable furniture to allow for different uses within the space,
- Opening up the space to serve multiple purposes,
- Adding inviting colours to the walls and furniture choices,
- Creating a sense of visual flow from one end of the space to the other,
- Creating small zones within the space, and
- Incorporating use of technology.
Design Solution
The proposed changes to ‘The Hub’ learning space enable all stakeholders to function independently, but are flexible enough to allow for reconfiguration depending on the learning needs at the time. Mobile furniture and fittings have been included, along with privacy and noise preventative measures. These proposals have been considered carefully to allow for future re-purposing of the space should the need arise.
The proposal is to divide the space into three different zones:
Zone 1 – A group work space for students that also allows for the inclusion and integration of technology within the space. This zone provides opportunity to invite the parent community into the space to work with children and support their learning. Booths are used to separate group-working zones, each with its own wall-mounted screen for collaborative work incorporating 21st century learning pedagogy.
Zone 2 – A staff collaboration and communication space that is flexible to allow for small or medium groups of staff to gather together. The design also has a large wall mounted screen to allow for collaborative work that is visual to all participants. This flexible space can also be reconfigured for student groups as well, catering for slightly larger groups of students (approximately 10-15 students). Zones 1 and 2 would be separated by a glass concertina wall that provide a writable surface to allow for collaboration but maintain visual flow from one space to the other enhancing supervision as well as natural light flow throughout the space.
Zone 3 – A resource preparation and community involvement space. This zone serves to involve the community and provide defined spaces for resource preparation and storage. A half solid – half glass wall and sliding cavity door separates Zones 2 and 3. This still allows for visual flow throughout the space whilst still limiting noise and enhancing supervision throughout the space.
The following project timeline makes recommendations for the completion of the project once a final design proposal is agreed.
The proposal is to divide the space into three different zones:
Zone 1 – A group work space for students that also allows for the inclusion and integration of technology within the space. This zone provides opportunity to invite the parent community into the space to work with children and support their learning. Booths are used to separate group-working zones, each with its own wall-mounted screen for collaborative work incorporating 21st century learning pedagogy.
Zone 2 – A staff collaboration and communication space that is flexible to allow for small or medium groups of staff to gather together. The design also has a large wall mounted screen to allow for collaborative work that is visual to all participants. This flexible space can also be reconfigured for student groups as well, catering for slightly larger groups of students (approximately 10-15 students). Zones 1 and 2 would be separated by a glass concertina wall that provide a writable surface to allow for collaboration but maintain visual flow from one space to the other enhancing supervision as well as natural light flow throughout the space.
Zone 3 – A resource preparation and community involvement space. This zone serves to involve the community and provide defined spaces for resource preparation and storage. A half solid – half glass wall and sliding cavity door separates Zones 2 and 3. This still allows for visual flow throughout the space whilst still limiting noise and enhancing supervision throughout the space.
The following project timeline makes recommendations for the completion of the project once a final design proposal is agreed.
Justification
The ultimate purpose of this design is to create an environment where all stakeholders feel valued and are equipped with the space and resources they need to maximise their learning journey. The space is designed to encourage collaboration and engagement in a ‘learner-driven’ and ‘human-centred’ flexible environment by all users (La Marca, 2010).
Education Policy and Influences
The ‘Australian Professional Standards for Teachers,’ Standards 1.5, 3.7, 4.1, 6.3 and 7.3 (AITSL, 2011) have been considered in this design proposal. ‘The Hub’, having multiple uses (student groups, teacher collaboration and community involvement), provided challenges when reshaping the space. The three zones as mentioned above serve to address all three of these uses. The zones create a sense of purpose within the overall space whilst still providing the opportunity to create new configurations for a variety of purposes.
Engaging parents and the community (Standard 3.7 (AITSL, 2011)) in children’s education is beneficial and a common practice in most schools (Barnard, 2004; Ferguson, 2001; Pushor & Ruitenberg, 2005). Differentiation for students (Standard 1.5 (AITSL, 2011)) is vital to ‘enable’ rather than ‘label’ (Anstee, 2011). By providing zones that allow for additional support (e.g. booths) in this design, it empowers teachers to be able to provide this support more readily and provides a new space for students to learn.
The flexible nature of the layout and furniture in Zones 1 and 2 address Standard 4.1 (AITSL, 2011) by increasing engagement and providing opportunities for inclusive and supportive spaces. This design allows students to be active learners in various collaborative settings within the zones as well as providing opportunities for parents and teacher assistants to support learners in small groups. Standard 6.3 (AITSL, 2011) specifically refers to the engagement between colleagues to improve practice. Zone 2 within this design provides a quiet and purposeful space for teachers to engage with each other and work collaboratively when needed. The inclusion of flexible furniture allows teachers to remodel the space depending on the needs of their collaboration e.g. planning, moderation meetings etc.
AITSL Standard 7.3 (AITSL, 2011) calls for ‘Engagement with parents/carers’. When involving parents within the school environment, confidentiality is extremely important (Bernard, 1990). Through the provision of a wall between Zone 3 and Zone 2 maintains confidentiality between volunteers and students. This design proposal addresses the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2011) and encourages collaboration, flexibility and community building.
Values and Needs of Users
‘The Hub’ creates a multipurpose educational context, with teachers, students and the wider community all using the space. The differing and competing functions of each zone are diverse and therefore the following considerations were taken into account to create an environment where all stakeholder’s values and needs were met (La Marca, 2010).
Francis-Jones (2014) suggests that spaces should interlock to allow for personal space, collaboration and the building of community. Through the creation of flexible zones in ‘The Hub’ this notion is achieved. The inclusion of glass walls allow for natural light flow (La Marca, 2010; Lackney, 2000; Sullivan, 2015) from one end of the space to the other, whilst still maintaining respect for the separation of each zone. Furthermore, the inclusion of the glass allows for noise limitation between zones which is important for children’s learning (Sullivan, 2015).
Vibrant and varied colour choices have been employed in the design to create a stimulating environment conducive for learning. Bold bright colours have been used in the student space to encourage lively discussion, whereas softer tones of blues and purples have been proposed for the teacher and community spaces with the furniture and fittings providing more bold colour choices (La Marca, 2010; Sullivan, 2015).
A combination of flexible and fixed furniture has been selected to make effective use of a small space due to ‘The Hub’s’ high traffic flow between zones. The installation of fixed cupboards in Zone 3 and movable furniture in Zone 2 allows for a thoroughfare to be created without regular reconfiguration of furniture. This thoroughfare is also essential in maintaining fire exit safety (La Marca, 2010).
Universal Design Principles
Equitable use for all user is a major consideration in the design proposal for this space. The ‘Seven Principles of Universal Design’ (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) have been considered and incorporated. The flow of the space with a maintained thoroughfare, easy access to booths and the use of flexible furniture all meet principles six and seven (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) regarding access and low physical effort. Furthermore, safety was considered in the design ensuring disability fire exit access (thoroughfare). Visual supervision across the space is maintained by the use of glass walls creating a sense of privacy yet openness. The inclusion of flexible and varied furniture choices supports principles one and two (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) by allowing equitable access and flexible choices for students. This design choice meets various learning needs and enables all users to access all spaces in spite of physical challenges. Within the community involvement zone, flexible and movable furniture have catered to a variety of users and allowed for the space to be repurposed should the need arise.
This design proposal also considered the ’33 Educational Design Principles’ of Lackney (2000). Principles 10, 12 and 14 (Lackney, 2000) centre around creating defined and a variety of learning areas to cater for different users. All three zones in this proposal meet these principles in providing different uses for different groups of people. Principle seven (Lackney, 2000) suggests using home as a template for design. The incorporation of brighter colours and soft and flexible furniture creates an inviting learning space. Including a collaboration and communication zone for teachers supports Principle 17 (Lackney, 2000) by valuing teachers as professionals and their need to have a space to grow together.
Future-focused
Whilst the proposed design of ‘The Hub’ has been created with current needs in mind, it has also considered the need to allow for reconfiguration as educational trends shift in the future. The flexibility in the design allows for integration of technology as the school makes decisions on how to incorporate new devices and move into a 21st century learning pedagogy. Mobile devices can be easily incorporated into this space (Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2013). Movable walls and furniture also enable the space to be re-purposed easily. The space has been designed to enhance collaboration and to stimulate thinking in group scenarios, empowering all learners within the space to think ‘outside the box’ and drive the learning themselves becoming 21st century learners.
Education Policy and Influences
The ‘Australian Professional Standards for Teachers,’ Standards 1.5, 3.7, 4.1, 6.3 and 7.3 (AITSL, 2011) have been considered in this design proposal. ‘The Hub’, having multiple uses (student groups, teacher collaboration and community involvement), provided challenges when reshaping the space. The three zones as mentioned above serve to address all three of these uses. The zones create a sense of purpose within the overall space whilst still providing the opportunity to create new configurations for a variety of purposes.
Engaging parents and the community (Standard 3.7 (AITSL, 2011)) in children’s education is beneficial and a common practice in most schools (Barnard, 2004; Ferguson, 2001; Pushor & Ruitenberg, 2005). Differentiation for students (Standard 1.5 (AITSL, 2011)) is vital to ‘enable’ rather than ‘label’ (Anstee, 2011). By providing zones that allow for additional support (e.g. booths) in this design, it empowers teachers to be able to provide this support more readily and provides a new space for students to learn.
The flexible nature of the layout and furniture in Zones 1 and 2 address Standard 4.1 (AITSL, 2011) by increasing engagement and providing opportunities for inclusive and supportive spaces. This design allows students to be active learners in various collaborative settings within the zones as well as providing opportunities for parents and teacher assistants to support learners in small groups. Standard 6.3 (AITSL, 2011) specifically refers to the engagement between colleagues to improve practice. Zone 2 within this design provides a quiet and purposeful space for teachers to engage with each other and work collaboratively when needed. The inclusion of flexible furniture allows teachers to remodel the space depending on the needs of their collaboration e.g. planning, moderation meetings etc.
AITSL Standard 7.3 (AITSL, 2011) calls for ‘Engagement with parents/carers’. When involving parents within the school environment, confidentiality is extremely important (Bernard, 1990). Through the provision of a wall between Zone 3 and Zone 2 maintains confidentiality between volunteers and students. This design proposal addresses the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2011) and encourages collaboration, flexibility and community building.
Values and Needs of Users
‘The Hub’ creates a multipurpose educational context, with teachers, students and the wider community all using the space. The differing and competing functions of each zone are diverse and therefore the following considerations were taken into account to create an environment where all stakeholder’s values and needs were met (La Marca, 2010).
Francis-Jones (2014) suggests that spaces should interlock to allow for personal space, collaboration and the building of community. Through the creation of flexible zones in ‘The Hub’ this notion is achieved. The inclusion of glass walls allow for natural light flow (La Marca, 2010; Lackney, 2000; Sullivan, 2015) from one end of the space to the other, whilst still maintaining respect for the separation of each zone. Furthermore, the inclusion of the glass allows for noise limitation between zones which is important for children’s learning (Sullivan, 2015).
Vibrant and varied colour choices have been employed in the design to create a stimulating environment conducive for learning. Bold bright colours have been used in the student space to encourage lively discussion, whereas softer tones of blues and purples have been proposed for the teacher and community spaces with the furniture and fittings providing more bold colour choices (La Marca, 2010; Sullivan, 2015).
A combination of flexible and fixed furniture has been selected to make effective use of a small space due to ‘The Hub’s’ high traffic flow between zones. The installation of fixed cupboards in Zone 3 and movable furniture in Zone 2 allows for a thoroughfare to be created without regular reconfiguration of furniture. This thoroughfare is also essential in maintaining fire exit safety (La Marca, 2010).
Universal Design Principles
Equitable use for all user is a major consideration in the design proposal for this space. The ‘Seven Principles of Universal Design’ (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) have been considered and incorporated. The flow of the space with a maintained thoroughfare, easy access to booths and the use of flexible furniture all meet principles six and seven (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) regarding access and low physical effort. Furthermore, safety was considered in the design ensuring disability fire exit access (thoroughfare). Visual supervision across the space is maintained by the use of glass walls creating a sense of privacy yet openness. The inclusion of flexible and varied furniture choices supports principles one and two (RL Mace Centre for Universal Design, 2015) by allowing equitable access and flexible choices for students. This design choice meets various learning needs and enables all users to access all spaces in spite of physical challenges. Within the community involvement zone, flexible and movable furniture have catered to a variety of users and allowed for the space to be repurposed should the need arise.
This design proposal also considered the ’33 Educational Design Principles’ of Lackney (2000). Principles 10, 12 and 14 (Lackney, 2000) centre around creating defined and a variety of learning areas to cater for different users. All three zones in this proposal meet these principles in providing different uses for different groups of people. Principle seven (Lackney, 2000) suggests using home as a template for design. The incorporation of brighter colours and soft and flexible furniture creates an inviting learning space. Including a collaboration and communication zone for teachers supports Principle 17 (Lackney, 2000) by valuing teachers as professionals and their need to have a space to grow together.
Future-focused
Whilst the proposed design of ‘The Hub’ has been created with current needs in mind, it has also considered the need to allow for reconfiguration as educational trends shift in the future. The flexibility in the design allows for integration of technology as the school makes decisions on how to incorporate new devices and move into a 21st century learning pedagogy. Mobile devices can be easily incorporated into this space (Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2013). Movable walls and furniture also enable the space to be re-purposed easily. The space has been designed to enhance collaboration and to stimulate thinking in group scenarios, empowering all learners within the space to think ‘outside the box’ and drive the learning themselves becoming 21st century learners.
Recommendation
Orr (1993) sums it up well when he suggests that curriculum is hidden in spaces that are created:
The College’s vision is to be the ‘preferred place of learning’. It is recommended that this design proposal be presented to staff, College Management Team and the College Board for consideration and consultation in order to bring further recommendation and modifications to the design. This space will become one that inspires collaboration, community and relationships between students, staff and the parent body if we commit to making ‘The Hub’ live up to its name.
Thank you for your consideration.
- To be flexible,
- To unlock the potential in a space, and
- To allow for reconfiguration to suit multiple learning scenarios.
The College’s vision is to be the ‘preferred place of learning’. It is recommended that this design proposal be presented to staff, College Management Team and the College Board for consideration and consultation in order to bring further recommendation and modifications to the design. This space will become one that inspires collaboration, community and relationships between students, staff and the parent body if we commit to making ‘The Hub’ live up to its name.
Thank you for your consideration.
References
AITSL. (2011). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Melbourne: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.
Anstee, P. (2011). Differentiation Pocketbook. Alresford: Teachers' Pocketbooks.
Barnard, W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment. Children and youth services review, 26 (1), 39-62.
Bernard, M. (1990). Volunteers in public schools. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
Ferguson, D. L. (2001). Designing personalized learning for every student. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Howard, Z., & Somerville, M. M. (2014). A comparative study of two design charrettes: implications for codesign and participatory action research. CoDesign, 10(1), 46-62.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2013). Design principles for mobile learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing for 21st century learning (pp. 244-257). New York Routledge.
La Marca, S. (2010). Designing the learning environment. Camberwell, Vic: ACER Press.
Lackney, J. A. (2000). Thirty-Three Educational Design Principles for Schools & Community Learning Centers.
Orr, D. W. (1993). Architecture as pedagogy. Conservation Biology, 7(2), 226-228.
Pushor, D., & Ruitenberg, C. (2005). Parent engagement and leadership: Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching.
RL Mace Centre for Universal Design. (2015). Principles of Universal Design. Retrieved November 4, 2017 from http://udinstitute.org/principles.php
Sullivan, M. L. (2015). High impact school library spaces: envisioning new school library concepts. Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.
Anstee, P. (2011). Differentiation Pocketbook. Alresford: Teachers' Pocketbooks.
Barnard, W. M. (2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment. Children and youth services review, 26 (1), 39-62.
Bernard, M. (1990). Volunteers in public schools. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
Ferguson, D. L. (2001). Designing personalized learning for every student. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2006). Sustainable leadership (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Howard, Z., & Somerville, M. M. (2014). A comparative study of two design charrettes: implications for codesign and participatory action research. CoDesign, 10(1), 46-62.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2013). Design principles for mobile learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing for 21st century learning (pp. 244-257). New York Routledge.
La Marca, S. (2010). Designing the learning environment. Camberwell, Vic: ACER Press.
Lackney, J. A. (2000). Thirty-Three Educational Design Principles for Schools & Community Learning Centers.
Orr, D. W. (1993). Architecture as pedagogy. Conservation Biology, 7(2), 226-228.
Pushor, D., & Ruitenberg, C. (2005). Parent engagement and leadership: Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for Research into Teaching.
RL Mace Centre for Universal Design. (2015). Principles of Universal Design. Retrieved November 4, 2017 from http://udinstitute.org/principles.php
Sullivan, M. L. (2015). High impact school library spaces: envisioning new school library concepts. Santa Barbara, California: Libraries Unlimited.