Positive Impact of Flexible Learning Spaces

Recorded Webinar Presentation by: 
Sinan Kerimofski, Principal at Vasse Primary School, Vasse, Western Australia

Principal and international speaker Sinan Kerimofski takes participants on a journey detailing the shift from traditional learning environments to flexible learning spaces and the positive impact on students and educators. 

Based in Australia, Sinan has been using his leadership role in multiple schools to transform pedagogy and the spaces in which learning takes place. Most recently he has initiated the transformation of a heritage school building into a contemporary learning space to foster 21st-century skills. The result has been increased engagement from students; empowered educators; and a flourishing wider community.


"We try to focus mainly on our positives on the walls. We don’t want it smattered with what’s coming up here or there or anything like that, or promotional material. We keep it for some functional, operational type stuff," says Sinan.

You can receive continuing education credit by submitting your AIA number via email to customerservice@edmarket.org for one AIA LU, applicable to this webinar.
 

QUESTIONS?

Call: Customer Service 800.395.5550, option 6
Click: www.EDmarket.org/webinars
Email: edmarket@edmarket.org

F3 – Fixed, Flexible & Fluid Learning Spaces

Photo credit: DLR Group

 by Dr. Lennie Scott-Webber, NCIDQ, AIA Affiliate 

It is argued here that flexibility is just one component of designing to support intended behaviors, and the design community perhaps interprets the word differently than the education community. 

Designing for flexibility is often the ‘go to’ for classroom solutions. A general understanding is that a flexible design “adapts to new situations,” and when incorporating it one is attempting to have a one-size-fits all solution set up for a variety of teaching practices. It suggests if a flexible solution is used, all design issues are solved, and teaching practices are made easy no matter how one delivers one’s practice. Design solutions must support the users’ needs and intended behaviors —that’s a given. But do designers and educators speak the same language and have the same inference regarding terms? Let’s examine the design and teaching practices continuums along with what we know about how we learn, and then provide some linkages in terms of language and solutions.

How we learn is being studied ever more intensely by brain scientists than ever before. We know so much more about how we learn, what it takes to stay focused and why engagement in one’s learning is key to overall student success according to research findings[1]^,[2],[3]. That evidence indicates sitting still is not conducive to learning. We need to move to learn and we need to stand to stay focused longer. Research further argues it is OK for the mind to drift; in fact it must, as focusing for too long is just not possible. Our brains can truly focus for about 10-15 minutes and then need a break. Postural change helps us all particularly when we are working on computers and focusing or working on a particular problem; standing up, sitting down and lying down should all be considered.

And the more we can connect students emotionally to the learning tasks/problems kinesthetically [through our senses] the more information is retained. As advanced learning designs supporting active learning increase and classrooms are replaced with ‘learning suites and maker spaces,’ we have the opportunity to challenge and invent a new language, bridging the perceived gap between design’s language and the educator’s. Thus, this article presents the 3 F’s, or F³ – Fixed, Flexible and Fluid. The information shared here is an attempt to bridge a perceived gap in language between a design language and a teaching practice language. F³’s are explained first from a design solution perspective and then from a teaching strategy one.

This article suggests design solutions work within a continuum of F³ – Fixed, Flexible and Fluid. It is this continuum that needs further explanation and understanding.

FIXED represents all of those items physically built into the infrastructure of a building. In other words, if you turned a building upside down those items would not fall out. Examples include cabinetry, bolted down seating, and of course the building’s entire structure and infrastructure.

FLEXIBLE may translate into several design opportunities. Solutions are often categories as items with castors, fairly lightweight tables easily moved, and items that are ‘wrenchable,’ but all with predictable and set patterns for alteration. An example of wrenchable might be an open office cubicle situation. It can be moved, but not easily, but it is not built into the building. The challenge with ‘flexible’ is that most often furnishings are heavy, or awkward and thus not easily reconfigured. So, guess what? They don’t get reconfigured. In fact, these flexible places become more fixed just for the fact that items are not easy to move.

FLUID in the design sense might translate to a swivel seat on a chair, a clicker that allows for a digital screen to be changed, and lights/temperature changed with the flick of a control — perhaps like a Google home devise. Little movement or rearrangement is required in a fluid situation, and all are not predictable. Where students choose to move in a chair with wheels is not necessarily in a specific pattern. If these examples illustrate a ‘design language’ for educators to interpret, how might designers interpret the educators’ needs with a variety of teaching practices?

Teaching practices have a continuum of sorts as well from the very traditional lecture to a simultaneous, multi-modal strategy, to a fully operational tinker/maker/production space as some of the most creative. Each of these practices elicits strategies and places that must support them. Types of strategies might also include problem-based, project-based, inquiry-based, etc. approaches to deliver content. A lecture as we have come to understand it is teacher-centric. The teacher comes in prepared to share knowledge and may utilize a projector and screen to support a visual connection to the content accompanying the verbal one. Often we think of the design solutions as fixed seating, or tiered lecture halls. Here students should be in active listening mode, perhaps taking notes, but nothing more is typically expected.

In the second practice described, it could be likened to a one-room schoolhouse, or more student-focused. Thus, in a simultaneous, multi-modal strategy, multiple learning activity situations, and content delivery approaches are going on at the same time and in fact some students may be leading certain components while the educator leads others. One-to-one, peer-to-peer and small group to whole group situations strategies are incorporated. Here the educator is more of the ‘guide on the side’ acting as a facilitator allowing students to discover on their own in a pre-planned and purposeful strategy(ies). Multiple types of postures, equipment, technologies and places within a room(s) are needed to orchestrate these situations successfully — a fluid solution is best here. For example, the simplest and most impactful furniture solution for fluid connection is a swivel chair. The individual does not have to reconfigure anything and can simply and easily move slightly or swivel entirely without getting out of one’s seat. He/she can connect to others, or see content wherever it might be presented.

The third scenario, or a creative space, acts in much the same way as the multimodal ones, is still student-centric, however depending upon the type and more importantly the equipment required; a balance must be struck between students being on their own and the educator directing their discovery. This type of pedagogical practice is more likened to an apprentice / master one. As equipment and access to tools are most often needed, this type of space may be designed supporting a fixed to flexible solutions.

This article has explored the language given to F³, or fixed, flexible and fluid, in an attempt to align design language to the language of teaching strategies. The bottom line is both design and pedagogy solutions need all three F’s; essential for appropriate advanced learning solutions. However, we seem to have a design predisposition to the fixed and the flexible ones. It is further argued here to be truly active as an educator and to have students actively engage in their learning processes, we need to push the boundaries of fluid. Easy access and ability to follow content wherever it may be displayed, shared, talked about could be a new driver. As active learning practices increase in more advanced learning places, it is ever more important to allow for fluid and quick transitions from individual work to small group work and back again.

 About the Author:

“Dr. Lennie” is a leading thinker on the evolution of what we know about learning, the learner and the learning place has pioneered research strategies addressing how the built environment impacts student engagement factors and learner success, and has designed future-focused, evidence-based design applications for 20+ years. Currently, she is the Owner / Principal of INSYNC: Education Research + Design. She is also acting as the Education Research Leader for DLR Group’s K12 Education Practice. She was formerly the founding Director of Education Environments Globally for Steelcase Education; tenured, full-professor and chair of two design schools; Director of the iLAB Research Center, Radford University; professional interior designer, author, published researcher, national and international speaker.

---

[1]Scott-Webber, L., Konyndyk, R., French, R., Lembke, J., & Kinney, T. (2017). Spatial design makes a difference in student academic engagement levels: A pilot study for grades 9-12. European Scientific Journal. 13(16), ISSN: 1857-7881 Doi: 10.19044/esj.2017.v13n16p5.

[2] Kilbourne, J., Scott-Webber, L., & Kapitula, L.R. (2017). An activity-permissible classroom: Impacts of an evidence-based design solution on student engagement and movement in an elementary school classroom. Children, Youth and Environments 27(1): 112-134.

[3] Nissim, Y., Weissblueth, E., Scott-Webber, L. & Amar, S. (2016). The effect of a new stimulating learning environment on pre-service teachers’ motivation and 21^st century skills. Journal of Education and Learning: Vol. 5, No. 3. pp. 29-39. Doi:10.5539/jel.v5n3p29.

Designing Classrooms for Students with EMDs

By Christopher L. Daikos MiT, MEd, EdS

One of the greatest social justice challenges facing educators today is how to best serve children with Emotional Behavioral Disabilities (EBD). Many students come to school with entrenched emotional and/or behavioral difficulties that impede their and other students’ ability to access their education. External behaviors typically associated with these students exhibit a range of social, emotional, and behavioral problems, including physical aggression, school refusal, bullying, and defiance towards authority.

The Department of Education’s 36^th Annual Report on Individuals with Disabilities Act indicated that students who have been identified as EBD represent 6.2% of the student population, a subset population within Special Education that has consistently increased annually. Nationally students with disabilities have a graduation rate of 63% (Department of Education 2015), yet students with EBD have a national graduation well below 50%. With the current model of training, facilities and services in place we see results in which students with EBD are arrested at a rate of 60% prior to leaving school and 40% are on probation prior to leaving school. The data clearly indicates, nationally, the services we provide students with EBD result in the strongest conduit in the school to prison pipeline. This is a national crisis that few are paying attention to. Those involved in designing and outfitting educational spaces can help right this wrong.

How Did We Get Here?

To qualify for special education services for EBD, schools must first attempt two evidence-based interventions to address behaviors of concern. If the interventions fail, students are assessed based on the following criteria set by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which defines EBD as meeting one or more of the following criteria:

• An inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors.
• An ina­bility to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers.
• Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances.
• A general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression.
• A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school problems.

The challenges presented by students with EBD cuts across disciplinary, instructional, and interpersonal domains, which frequently results in chaotic school and classroom environments. The characteristics of students with EBD can overwhelm the ability and capacity of schools and staff to effectively accommodate their instructional and social-emotional needs. Consequently, more than any other group, students with EBD are placed and educated in restrictive educational settings sequestered from their peers. Such spaces tend to be located in areas that have the least impact on others when students in EBD classes have emotional outbursts. It is not uncommon to find EBD classes in portables or in remote locations within the building. 

Historically such restrictive spaces were used as a dystopian daycare for some of our neediest students. Restrictive educational settings with no standardized approach towards student intervention have been troubling when considering the results of the poor services and outcomes for these students. The need to provide intentionally designed spaces to provide evidenced-based interventions for students with EBD is paramount and could result in the greatest impact on school wide discipline and improve the life outcomes of some our neediest students.

What Can We Do?

Meeting the unique needs of students with EBD and simultaneously maintaining a safe and orderly school environment that is conducive to learning places a tremendous amount of stress on educators. Historically school design has been a one size fits all approach. When designing spaces to serve children with EBD, before the first architectural design is drawn educators and architects need to work together to account for a safe and secure space for counseling and therapy, private meeting space for small group and individual interventions, safety exits for students and staff, restorative space, just to name a few.

Incorporating the above elements I worked with Architect Daniel Gero of Integrus Architecture in Seattle and generated the following design. The space below incorporates two classrooms providing all the elements needed for a successful EBD classroom. With consideration that the typical EBD class has 9 to 11 students with 1 teacher and 2 support staff we decided to remove a wall and replace it with a retractable divider. This means that educators can team 18-22 students with 2 teachers and 4 support staff. 

Larger Design Elements

A school psychologist should have access to a private space within the class or close to it to allow consistent communication among the education staff. The intent on such communication is to make certain interventions are informed with the students needs and that they are done with fidelity. Too often children with EBD receive counseling outside of the school with no control of quality and evidence-based counseling practices. An additional beneficial factor is the opportunity for family members to be onsite when attending family counseling sessions, which are an integral component to cognitive behavior therapy.

Our design provides a space for restorative practices. This space is referred to as the Boring Room, situated between the counseling room and the teachers’ office. The intent of this space is for students to have a quiet area to reflect on inappropriate behaviors through a restorative exercise. 

Conclusion

The above design is our first attempt to support a population who represent some of the neediest students in our schools. In general, current practices in EBD classes continue to result in more negative life outcomes than not. We encourage other educators, manufacturers, designers and architects to take on one the greatest social justice challenges that we face in our communities today. In a society that provides compensatory education we must be aware that all students enter our schools with some unique needs, some more acute than others. It is our responsibility to meet those needs and provide the appropriate space that facilitates all services and interventions needed to support children with EBD.

About the Author:

Christopher Daikos is an Educational/Psychological Consultant at Continua Group in Seattle, WA. He works with school district administration and staff for the design and implementation of special education interventions. Chris holds master’s degrees in special education and educational leadership and policies, and is pursuing a PhD in education psychology from the University of Washington.

How to Get Started with a School Maker Space

by Mark Hubbard, Paragon Furniture

Looking to inspire the next generation of tinkerers and innovators, a growing number of schools are creating maker spaces equipped with everything from popsicle sticks and glue guns to electronics kits and 3D printers.

When educators encourage students to learn by creating, they inspire students to take ownership of their learning. Students become highly engaged and invested in their education.

In the process, students can learn not only key STEM concepts (like how an electronic circuit works or what the engineering design process entails), but also 21st-century skills such as problem-solving, teamwork, critical thinking, creativity, and perseverance.

Creating a maker space for your schools might seem like a daunting task. But it doesn’t have to be. The first step is to articulate your vision for the space and outline the goals you hope to accomplish. Your vision and goals will help you answer other critical questions, such as what the space should look like, how it will be equipped, and so on.

Here are four key questions to guide your initial planning. 

1. Who will use the space? 

When you’re deciding who your maker space is intended for, consider which grade levels or age ranges you want to target. Are you building a space for students in grades K-2? Grades three to five? Six to eight? High school? Will the space serve multiple age ranges?

Also, which classes or academic disciplines will use the space? Is it meant only for certain subject areas, or for all academic subjects? Finally, will you open your maker space to members of the public, such as adults for night classes or students from other schools?

2. How, and when, will students use the space?

It’s also important to understand how—and when—you plan to use the space. Will it be used for formal, structured learning activities led by a teacher? Informal, student-directed learning and exploration? Or both? Will students use the space during school hours? Before or after school? Or both?

3. What are your instructional goals?

You’ve addressed the “who,” “how,” and “when.” Before you go any further, you also have to answer “why”.  What are your learning goals in creating a maker space for your school? Are you hoping students will learn core academic skills, 21st century skills, or both?

If core academic learning is your target, how do your intended learning activities align with state instructional standards, Next Generation Science Standards, or other curriculum goals? And if 21st skills are your desired outcome, which specific skills are you hoping students will acquire? How will the activities completed in the space lead to the development of these skills? 

4. How will you measure success? 

Finally, what methods will you use to evaluate the success of your maker space initiative? Will you use formal measurements of the skills students gain, informal observation and reflection, or both?

If you’re measuring the skills that students gain, what types of assessments will you use? How will you put these together? If you’re using informal observation and reflection, how will you collect this information? Will you use teacher observation forms, post-program surveys of students, or some other method?

Once you have a plan for how your maker space will be used, you can design the actual space itself. When you are designing a maker space, you’ll want to make sure the space promotes creativity and collaboration. You can encourage both of those traits through the design of the space itself. Here are some ideas to guide you.

• Ask students what they want. Giving students a voice in the design of the space can inspire their ingenuity.
• Build flexibility into the design of the space. Use furniture that can be arranged easily in many different configurations to promote different kinds of student groupings and activities.
• Take inspiration from the “stations” approach to classroom design that is common in elementary schools. Consider creating separate areas for different kinds of activities, and equip each area as appropriate.
• Include open, informal spaces for students to gather together, brainstorm and bounce ideas off one other. Soft seating options can make the space comfortable and inviting for students to congregate.

When students are given the chance to create, anything is possible.  Students become excited and engaged, and real learning occurs.  

About the Author:

Mark Hubbard is president of Paragon Furniture. Mark frequently interacts with dealers, architects, designers, owner representatives and end-users in order to better understand how the instructional tools of education are transforming learning environments and the furnishings within.  Download a free copy of “How to Create a Maker Space in your school – A step-by-step guide to unleashing student’s creativity”.

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.