Page 20 - School Planning & Management, September 2017

Design Does Matter
PHOTO © ALISTAIR TUTTON PHOTOGRAPHY
School districts around the globe face challenges every day — not just to keep kids in school, but also to keep their attention
for eight or more hours at a time. Years of experience serving school districts and local communities have shown me this is no easy task. Throughout my design career, my observations have led me to conclude today’s students need a different environment to remain engaged and excited about learning. They want more than previous generations, and are leading an evolution that’s changing the way we design schools. School districts in turn are taking notice, and are now seek- ing “proof” that these new school designs have a positive impact on learning.
Early research from pioneering Environment-Behavior Psychologists like Robert Sommer (1969) and Edward T. Hall (1966) determined that the built environ- ment impacts human behavior. Their
work spawned a continuous study of the interaction between humans and the places in which they live and work. Newer interests for researchers focus on where people learn; as an educational designer, I am particularly interested in this research. Clients ask us
for this type of information every day. They want to understand what effect our designs have on a student’s learning experience, as Jonathon Guthrie, principal of Bentonville West High School (BWHS) explains.
“I am interested to see the link between building design and student engagement. At BWHS, we are always looking for ways to engage students. If our building design enhances engagement, that’s a plus for everyone,” said Guthrie.
DLR Group’s Global K-12 Education Studio has a responsibility to provide school district clients with the proof they want — evidence that innovative design solutions work to advance learning spaces and contribute to student success. To that end, our firm has embarked on a journey of exploration to help us better understand the true impact of the buildings we design.
Student Engagement Index
Partnering with consultant Dr. Len-
nie Scott-Webber of INSYNC: Education Research + Design, DLR Group began devel- oping our research strategy and agenda. Ac- cording to findings from the 2013 National Survey of Student Engagement, student engagement is a high predictor of academic, social, emotional, and behavioral success, which is why our first step was to create a Student Engagement Index (SEI) survey that could measure indexes for both students and educators. The SEI posits this research question: “Can we demonstrate a connection between the design of the physical envi- ronment of a school building and student academic engagement?” Our ultimate goal was to generate empirical evidence to embed into future design solutions.
“Some of us have been researching the design of education environments for many years, but this field of research is still very young. Empirical, or primary research is very important to the academic community. Proof goes a long way in supporting critical decision-making when clients are asked to trust their architectural design leads,” said Scott-Webber, explaining the importance of collecting and analyzing this kind of data.
The Alpha Test
We completed an Alpha pilot of the
SEI survey and data analysis in March 2017. The convenience sample consisted of one 9-12 grade high school in the central Midwest, where we collected 102 usable student and 77 usable educator surveys. Multiple statistical analysis techniques de- termined reliability, validity, and findings. The survey questions were divided into
two categories to reflect the distinct areas in question: overall, referring to the macro environment, and classroom, referring to the micro environment.
Two surveys were administered to educator and student user groups. Two base-line questions addressed pedagogy and location. Pedagogy refers to the amount of lecturing versus alternate teaching practices such as small group work, hands-on activi- ties, and team projects, while location refers to where teaching took place. We wanted to know whether educators were using build- ing features designed for alternate teaching methods, an approach believed to promote student engagement. Some of these “beyond the classroom” features included breakout/ collaborative spaces, open cafeteria/meeting areas, and outdoor learning spaces. Re- sponses from both students and educators showed the perceived dominant teaching method was lecture conducted almost exclu- sively in the classroom.
A few sample questions include:
Micro Environment: For you to be deeply engaged in your learning in the classroom, how important is it for you to...
• Transition in and out of small group work
and other teaching practices?
• Move about to learn?
• Experience hands-on learning?
• Use vertical wall space to work on projects? • Experience projects that are “real world”? • Choose different parts of the room to
connect with peers?
• Take part in collaborative learning projects? • Have my brain challenged?
Macro Environment: Now, think about the design of the building OVERALL. How would you rate your school building’s design OVER- ALL on the following design attributes?
• Noise level
• Lighting level
• Temperature comfort
• Access to natural lighting • Feeling safe
• Comfortable furnishings • Inviting spaces
• Air flow
20 WEBSPM.COM / 9.17