Connecting Furniture Planning and Student Engagement

by Gwen Morgan

Located in Detroit’s northern suburbs, Bloomfield Hills Schools is a district with a long history of forward-thinking educational instruction. As one of the top performing districts in the country, Bloomfield Hills Schools recognized more than a decade ago the need to redesign its facilities and re-imagine its programming to support the changing educational needs of 21st century students, preparing them for success in college and the workplace. 

Planning for the new Bloomfield Hills High School began with a year-long facilitation process, which was driven by the district’s Ten Guiding Principles of Teaching and Learning. Extensive community engagement led to the development of a concept that consolidated the two existing high schools – Andover and Lahser – into one state-of-the-art facility on the Andover site featuring small learning communities. 

Co-designed by Stantec’s Berkley, Mich. office and Fielding Nair International, the resulting 350,000-square-foot building opened in August 2015 and includes 233,000 square feet of new construction and 117,000 square feet of renovations made to the former Andover High School. 

The central design concept lies within nine learning communities, each of which integrate core classes in a collaborative, technology-rich learning environment to encourage collaboration, student directed learning, project-based learning and interdisciplinary instruction. 

Each learning community includes a wide variety of learning spaces – from small group rooms to larger break out spaces, to rooms for individual work – all of which are designed to meet the needs of different kinds of learners and different kinds of activities. The design of each community offers students and teachers the flexibility to ebb and flow from spaces, encouraging interdisciplinary instruction and a more collegiate-like experience.

Outfitting the Space

Designed to support pedagogy that places a greater focus on personalization and collaboration, the high school looks and functions unlike any other. Armed with this understanding, the district recognized early in the design process that they would need furniture solutions that would align with the instructional model.

A furniture pilot program conducted simultaneous to construction of the new school offered a unique opportunity for the district to embrace changes in pedagogy, understand new classroom environments, and evaluate the influence that furniture and technology has on the learning experience. 

As part of the pilot program, teachers and students in nine classrooms tested a variety of furniture solutions and evaluated it for its ability to transition from activity to activity, adapt from subject to subject, and encourage student engagement. At the end of the year-long study, the results directly influenced furniture selection for the new school.


Collecting the Data

The study began by gathering information from the 18 teachers slated to teach in the classrooms throughout the school year. This “pre-occupancy” survey focused on learning more about what types of furniture the teachers used in past classrooms, what kinds of furniture they thought would work well in the future, and how important they believed furniture solutions are to the learning environment. In their responses, teachers clearly expressed that type, comfort, flexibility, and variety of furniture has a significant impact on the both the teaching and learning experience.

Following furniture installation in the test classrooms, student surveys and onsite observations were conducted periodically each semester. In the surveys, students were asked to identify the courses they had taken in the test classrooms, their grade level, and which types of furniture they felt were most successful in supporting their learning. 

The survey results identified a number of student furniture preferences. For instance, students saw standing height tables and two-person tables with chairs as helpful for small group learning. Tablet arm chairs were popular for individual work, but were one of the least supportive solutions when it came to transitioning from activity to activity within a class period. For this mid-class period transition, larger tables to seat four to six people seemed to work better. Students consistently agreed on the positive impact that comfort and ergonomics had on their learning experience. 

The onsite observations consisted of two full days at the end of each semester, during which time observers rotated through the classrooms, taking note of how students used the furniture. Additionally, posters showing a variety of furniture layouts were placed in the classrooms and students were asked to select which furniture types they had used that day and what furniture type they thought might have worked better. The most popular selections were large project tables and standing-height tables, while tablet arm chairs and individual desks were the least popular.

A visual observation of the students using the furniture yielded additional trends. For instance, researchers found that incorporating a variety of furniture solutions within a room seemed to work well for both individual and group work. In addition, varying heights allowed strong visual connection between teachers and students. In smaller rooms, the furniture was moved less, due to lack of space, and was more likely to remain set up in rows for the duration of a period. Chairs on casters greatly eased movement between individual and group work. In many cases, storage was an issue, with backpacks taking up quite a bit of floor space.

Results

Armed with a year’s worth of research and study, the team compiled its findings as they set out to plan the furniture for the new school, focusing on the furniture’s ability to transition, adapt and promote student engagement.

Transition 

When it comes to transitioning from activity to activity, the researchers found that while teachers and students appreciated a variety of furniture to choose from, having too many options made the room feel chaotic. In order to achieve balance, findings suggested that classrooms should have enough space to move furniture in a way that best supports their current activity. Also, furniture should be intuitive in order to minimize the need for teacher training on how to take advantage of the different options.

Adaptability

The ability to adapt a room for different subjects, teaching styles, or uses was found to be critical to the new school’s learning community format. Results emphasized the importance of resetting the furniture between classes to a general function layout. In order to reduce the time spent moving the furniture, students needed to become familiar with the standard arrangements so they could adjust and adapt to their surroundings quickly. 

In addition, the study showed that the furniture needed to be able to adapt to technology. While the technology used for the study was not the same as what would be used in the new school, the main lesson remained the same: the overall design should be proactive and focus on how the furniture could best support the day’s activity, meaning accessibility to charging stations and power locations.

Student Engagement

Nearly across the board, students agreed that furniture has an impact on both their level of engagement and the way they learn throughout a class period. Furthermore, results asserted that students recognized the role the furniture plays in supporting collaborative activities like group work.

When it comes down to it, in order to engage students, comfort matters! Students reported furniture that allowed for posture change and choice helped make students “learning-ready.” Most preferred were two-person tables and standing height tables, while only a few students preferred ottomans. 

Students also noted that while ease of furniture rearrangement is important in supporting the way they learn, too much movement actually decreased student engagement, so strategies should be in place to manage this. Wheels on seating were much preferred over wheels on tables.

Implementing the Findings

When Bloomfield Hills High School opened in August 2015, it had an innovative pedagogy, and a cutting-edge furniture program to match. The majority of the enclosed student spaces are furnished with larger tables and chairs on casters, with a few standing height tables, as was preferred by staff and students in the study. Smaller learning studios contain single-person desks and chairs for more individual work. The project rooms feature larger tables for four to six people, but maintain the same mobility offered in the learning studios. The common areas offer a combination of tables and lounge furniture to complement the more formal learning areas.

The information gathered from the surveys, test classrooms, and observations collectively gave the design team a strong direction about what would work for the new Bloomfield Hills High School. Equally as important, the pilot program worked as a conduit for teachers and students to get a feel for how a new model of teaching and learning will occur in the new school. By applying the successful solutions of the pilot classrooms to the new furniture package, the district ended up with a tried-and-true solution from day one of class.           

GWEN MORGAN is an interior designer with significant experience in the design of educational facilities, both higher education and K-12 buildings, including LEED projects.  She has also managed numerous FF&E projects, from programming, budgeting, furniture and finish selection, to bid document preparation, installation coordination and supervision.  She currently leads Stantec’s Research and Benchmarking team for FF&E and Technology.

Reimagining 21st Century Learning Environments

by Helen Soulé and David Ross

INTRODUCTION

Perhaps the best way to think of 21st century learning environments is to view them as the support systems that organize the conditions in which humans learn best. These systems accommodate the unique needs of all and enhance the positive relationships so important to effective learning. Learning environments are the social and technical structures that inspire students and educators to attain the knowledge and skills the 21st century demands of us all.

Within today’s 24/7 learning cycle, the cumulative power of relationships among physical spaces, technology, time, culture, human networks, and policy deepen learning in significant ways. When these systems are intentionally integrated into a seamless whole each system reinforces the other.  These support systems are valuable not as ends, but as means to a greater goal — to helping children grow emotionally, socially, physically, and academically. 

P21’s Framework for 21st Century Learning outlines the multiple student outcomes that modern life demands. It was developed with input from teachers, education experts, and business leaders to define and illustrate the skills and knowledge students need to succeed in work, life and citizenship, as well as the support systems necessary to achieve these outcomes.  While the graphic represents each element distinctly for descriptive purposes, all the components should be seen as fully interconnected in the process of 21st century teaching and learning.

FEATURES OF 21ST CENTURY LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

The term “learning environment” covers not only place and space (e.g. a school, a classroom, a library, an online learning community, etc.) but also the relationships conducive to every learner’s development. 

In order to produce the outcomes we seek, 21st century learning environments must be reimagined as aligned and synergistic systems that:

1. Are driven by a vision of teaching and learning that supports the development of 21st century skills.
2. Provide flexible architectural designs for group, team, and individual learning.
3. Ensure equitable and ubiquitous access to a robust infrastructure and digital tools for learning.
4. Empower and support the “People Network” in learning environments, such as professional learning communities that enable educators to collaborate, share best practices, and integrate 21st century skills into classroom practice.

Such environments foster anytime, anyplace learning tailored to the needs and wants of individuals. The words “just in time” matter far more than “just in case.”

1. Establish a 21st century learning vision

Step one is to establish a vision of learning that includes 21st century skills. This vision encompasses learning environments that extend beyond brick and mortar buildings to virtual opportunities and beyond school programs. Building the collective vision requires input from all learning stakeholders. Once the vision is in place, policy can be developed and plans can be made to create the structures that support this vision. 

P21’s 21st Century Learning Exemplar Program includes Bate Middle School in Danville, Kentucky, which developed an Innovation Plan that redefined learning on the campus. The redesigned college and career curriculum, coupled with the adoption of project-based learning and performance assessments incorporated critical thinking, problem solving and communication skills into every student’s experience. 

2. Design educational structures for 21st century learning 

Physical learning spaces should be flexible and adaptable, enable collaboration, interaction and information sharing, and should be connected with the larger community that surrounds the school. Perhaps the most fundamental guideline is “design for flexibility.” Since no one can predict how educational technologies and teaching modalities will evolve, learning spaces must adapt to whatever changes the future may hold. To achieve this flexibility, architects are designing classrooms, or “learning studios,” with moveable furniture and walls that can easily be reconfigured for different class sizes and subjects. The school building itself should inspire intellectual curiosity and promote social interactions. 

In West Allis, Wisconsin, Walker Elementary School made creative use of existing space to accommodate personalized learning, facilitated by a 1-to-1 iPad implementation. Staff opened up three rooms to create multi-age classrooms in grades 1-3 and re-designed the cafetorium and library to accommodate the fourth and fifth grades.

 3. Ensure access to a robust infrastructure and digital tools for learning

Students, educators and administrators today need access to the digital tools and media-rich resources that will help them explore analog and virtual worlds, express themselves, analyze and shape data, and communicate across borders and cultures.  A robust infrastructure, designed for flexibility and growth, can facilitate these connections. The essential goal of technology, as it is with all systems for learning, is to support people’s relationships to each other and their work. 

A 21st century learning environment blends physical and digital infrastructures to seamlessly support learning. Melding face-to-face with online learning is essential for schools today, but wise educators know achieving such a goal takes careful planning. Perhaps the greatest challenge of educational technology is not finding time and money to obtain hardware or software, or even in anticipating future needs, but in finding ways to adequately support humans in using these tools. Schools such as New Technology High School in Napa, California, have established student “geek squads” to help provide technical support for their peers, as well as administrators and teachers. Co-ownership of the learning environment is a key feature of successful implementation.

4. Empower the “People Network” in learning environments. 

Now we come to the most essential element of all: the “people network.” This is the community of students, educators, parents, business and civic leaders, and policymakers that constitute the human capital of an educational system. 

Organizations, like individuals, need supports and challenges to thrive and grow — as well as the flexible spaces and opportunities that enable productive learning and shared work/play to happen. Research shows that an educational community imbued with a positive culture is more likely to foster innovation and excellence. There is no single culture that will fit all schools — each school must summon its own blend of teaching talents, instructional approaches, and effective leadership to meet the unique learning needs of its community.

Educational partnerships within the extended community are essential in creating links to the arenas that today’s youth will occupy tomorrow — the domains of higher education institutions, the work place, various cultural spheres, and civic life.  Local businesses and community groups are traditional sources of after-school internships and summer jobs, but they can also be important sources of expertise in areas such as media, the arts, science, and technology. Of course, businesses and NGOs can provide resources — financial, physical, and human — to help school stretch their always-limited budgets.   

CONCLUSION

Many schools today still reflect their Industrial Age origins with rigid schedules, inflexible facilities, and fixed boundaries between grades, disciplines, classrooms, and functional roles. The 21st century, though, requires a new conception of education — one that breaks through the silos that separated schools from the real world, educators from each other, and policymakers from the communities they are meant to serve.

The modern world demands learning environments that embrace the diverse world of people, places, and ideas, and are flexible in their arrangements of space, time, technology, and people. These connections will foster healthy cultures of mutual respect and support among students, educators, families, and neighborhoods, serving their lifelong learning and recreational needs, and uniting learners around the world in addressing global challenges and opportunities.

Helen Soulé is Executive Director at the Partnership for 21st Century Learning. At P21 Dr. Soulé has led the organization’s state recruitment and support effort, the Exemplars of 21st Century Learning program, and other initiatives. She is a lifelong educator with P-16 leadership experience at the local, state, and national level, and is the recipient of several awards including 30 "Shapers of the Future" award, E-School News "Impact 30 Award for Excellence", and the Mississippi Educational Computing Association’s Technology Educator of the Year award.

David Ross is Chief Strategy Officer at Partnership for 21st Century Learning. As P21’s CSO, David oversees all of P21’s programs, which span the entire 21st Century Learning Continuum, and its growing state support services. David created and managed the PBL world Conference, and co-authored the Project Based Learning Starter Kit, during his time at the Buck Institute for Education. 

Designing Schools that Keep Kids Safe

Perkins+Will, Dena'ina Elementary School, Wasilla, AK. Photo credit: Kevin G. Smith Photography

By Steve Turckes, Phil Santore and Rachael Dumas

On March 14, 2018, students across the United States staged a walkout to voice their objections to the normalcy of gun violence in our schools. Given the staggering statistics, their actions are understandable. According to CNN, there has been an average of one school shooting every single week in 2018.  An ongoing Washington Post analysis finds that more than 150,000 primary and secondary school students have experienced a campus shooting since the massacre at Columbine High School. The numbers continue to rise and have ignited student-led campaigns like the #NeverAgain movement and the “March for Our Lives” demonstration that took place on March 24.

The onslaught of these tragedies has school communities throughout the U.S. evaluating their safety protocols. The obvious goal: to keep our children safe and to minimize the chances that their school will be the next to receive national coverage for a violent, life-ending act. The debate on how to accomplish this rages on.  Some say we need to design fortress-like facilities with windowless cell-like classrooms. Others highlight that the generally accepted prioritized order of response — “run, hide, fight” — suggests a more transparent environment so that you can see and react to dangerous situations. Then there are those who promote the arming of teachers. 

One thing that should not be debated is the value of human life and that the primary function of our schools is to educate our children. Safety and security in learning environments is a complex issue and while we do not profess to have all of the answers, here we hope to provide rational and justifiable safety measures that can support educational missions and prevent or mitigate threats.

Research on ideal learning spaces calls for agility, student choice and collaborative environments where students and teachers easily move between classrooms and a variety of other flexible spaces. In these environments, transparency gives teachers visibility and puts learning on display. We understand that balancing school security with the innovative, future-ready learning environments our kids need is a complex challenge leading many to ask if it even is possible. We believe it is. 

As design professionals we strive to meet project goals and in the case of schools, the primary mission is to educate. As we work with clients to create safe, future-ready schools, we feel it is important to ask the following:

• How do we balance safety with the educational mission?

• Do we want our children to feel like they are entering a more institutional environment?

• Are we ready to look at physical, technical, and procedural alternatives to maintain the educational mission?

• Are we willing to review rational and justifiable mitigation strategies to meet students’ future needs?

Through our work on the new World Trade Center as well as the new Sandy Hook Elementary School we have learned a great deal, but most importantly we learned that we cannot plan for the irrational. And, if past is prologue, we should not have confidence in our current lawmakers to enact meaningful gun control legislation (although we are inspired by the promise of change resulting from the work of today’s student activists). This understanding leaves us with this: how can we protect students and staff in the immediate future? We recognize that there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. Our team encourages a participatory community dialogue to find a solution. That being said, we believe in a balanced and layered approach to campus security that begins at the perimeter of the site and integrates Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). Additionally, there are three areas that we focus on: architecture, technology, and operations.

ARCHITECTURE  

A balanced and layered approach to safety seeks to deter, detect and delay a threat by looking at three areas related to the built environment: campus perimeter, building perimeter and classroom or academic perimeter. The approaches outlined in the CPTED principles — natural surveillance, natural access control, territorial reinforcement, and maintenance — have proven effective in decreasing incidents of crime while improving the quality of space. Since, in emergencies, people follow people, we must always make accessible egress available with well-marked pathways. There are several points to keep in mind here:

Campus Perimeter

• Define the area and express ownership through signage, fencing, landscaping or other features.

• Maximize natural surveillance so one can see possible danger (and so that there is an awareness that someone is watching).

• Develop traffic patterns to help control parking, and separate vehicles from pedestrian walkways.

• Utilize video surveillance where natural surveillance is not possible.

• Manage landscaping as to support natural surveillance.

• Implement lighting programs supporting CPTED principles.

Building Perimeter

• Create an easily identified and secure single point of entry. 

• Discourage easy access.

• Layer the building from the front entry inward with secure zones that can be locked down when necessary. 

• Proactively manage visitors and how they access the building with their understanding that they may be momentarily inconvenienced with questions and perhaps a quick background check.

• Manage after school activities when multiple visitors are present on campus and in the school.

• Secure windows and doors knowing that a door left propped open will quickly undermine other security measures.

Classroom Perimeter

• Secure academic wings — strengthen and utilize smoke partition doors to create another interior layer of resistance. 

• Sight lines — like the exterior, maintaining interior sight lines can be critical to view potential threats. 

• Door Hardware — all door hardware should be a minimum “Grade 1” quality and should be properly installed and maintained.

• Doors and frames — inspect for proper alignment for closing and latching, and review door closers and hinges to ensure full functionality. 

• Enhance glazing with products such as School Guard Glass to delay a forced entry attack.

• Communication — the ability to call for help is the second most critical asset after the ability to secure the building perimeter and interior spaces; multiple means of communications should be available and regularly tested. 

TECHNOLOGY

In addition to the aforementioned architectural strategies, technology is also important. The ability to remotely monitor and control doors is paramount and predicated on knowledge of the incident. The use of well-designed video surveillance systems and other ancillary components provide the supporting data to effect actions of initiating a lock-down or other incident response procedure. When designing a technological system that supports safety measures it is important to remember several points. These include:

• Designing a security program first and then determining the technological tools that will best support that program.

• Use technology as a tool to help mitigate the campus risk profile.

• Understand the capabilities of the staff tasked with monitoring the technology put in place. 

• Organize and implement security technology so it can be used as a force multiplier.

OPERATIONS

Operations include communications, information sharing and situational awareness for everything related to campus activities. However, no amount of planning can prevent a threat if those within the school are not properly trained, empowered, and supported. When designing the operations plan there are several points to keep in mind: 

• Develop programs to increase awareness of the campus population including interactive sessions, technology-based reporting, and a means to report anonymously. 

• Ensure there are effective communications protocols to transmit information in a timely fashion. 

• Develop security staffing programs that are dedicated to campus or schools with specific duties. 

• Develop student participation programs that allow students to report in real time to security and/or administrative staff.

• Utilize “day time” alarm monitoring of emergency egress doors and other low traffic areas to provide security with the maximum time of intervention of a potential criminal act.

• Utilize hand-held technologies such as tablets and smartphones to provide security staff with real time video and alarm conditions.

• Develop communications and greeting procedures for first responders to provide response directions and access to areas as needed.

• Manage security review programs to ensure all physical security components are functioning. 

In addition to the potential threats that originate beyond the borders of the school campus, we need to recognize that many dangerous situations are caused by those on campus everyday — namely the students themselves. Fighting and bullying should be considered when organizing a comprehensive school safety plan. A recent study from the National Center for Education Statistics found that students age 12-18 reported most incidents of bullying take place in transitional areas between classrooms such as hallways and stairwells. In instances like these, transparent design that utilizes glass and clear lines of sight can help to diminish opportunities for bullying. 

While the physical environment and technological solutions are critical in security solutions, we cannot underestimate the incredible importance of human relationships. Our best school leaders understand the critical need for every student to have a meaningful relationship with at least one adult in the building. These relationships make it more likely that negative changes in behavior will be recognized early when interventions and additional help can prevent issues from spiraling out of control.

Our schools have a responsibility to keep our children safe, but they cannot do it alone. It needs to be done in concert with local first responders and the entire community where it is understood that safety is everyone’s responsibility. This is a complex issue, but we believe the balanced and layered approach that elevates the safety and security of our schools — while still prioritizing learning — is a sound approach when tackling the issue of school safety.

Steve Turckes, FAIA, ALEP, LEED AP, is the Global Practice Leader of the K-12 Educational Facilities Group of Perkins+Will, an international award-winning architectural firm specializing in the research-based planning and design of innovative and sustainable educational facilities. In Steve’s 30-year career his work has focused on the programming, master planning and implementation of over $2B award-winning K-12 projects across the nation and abroad. 

Phil Santore has over 39 years of experience in consulting and design engineering for numerous educational, cultural/historical, residential, commercial, and federal and high risk facilities. Phil was the Principal in Charge for the New Sandy Hook School as well as all five towers at the World Trade Center. He possesses extensive experience and knowledge in Threat and Risk Assessments and Security Program Development. Phil provides specialized security technology assessment, recommendations, and engineering strategies for all projects.

Rachael Dumas is the Research Knowledge Manager for Perkins+Will’s K-12 Education practice.  She holds a Master in Architectural Preservation from the School of the Art Institute of Chicago and a Bachelor in Consumer Communications from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is also an avid reader and lifelong learner, in addition to an explorer of the world’s cultural offerings.