Purposeful Design Impacts Student Engagement

by Dalane E. Bouillion, Ed.D., Yanira Oliveras-Ortiz, Ph.D., and Lizzy Asbury, Ed.D.

School architects indicate that their designs really impact the learning environment. But how do we know that they do? Does design improve learning, or do they merely impact the built environment? Sure, a beautiful new structure can provide a facelift in a community, but until recently the scholarly research was void of evidence that design actually impacted student engagement. A mixed-methods scholarly study was conducted, with the approval of The University of Texas at Tyler, to determine what impact two new schools, both designed by VLK Architects, had on student engagement.

A Unique Opportunity

VLK Architects had the unique opportunity to design two replacement elementary schools in the Houston area around the same time. Both schools were designed on the existing site, and the attendance boundaries of the schools remained intact. Therefore, the same staff, and the same students were moved from the existing school to the replacement school. Although the academic achievement levels in both schools were already high, the team wanted to study the impacts of the new designs on student engagement. In order to fully comprehend the impact of the new environments, the researchers gathered the perceptions of students via focus groups, and teachers, via an online survey. A conceptual framework of student engagement (Schlechty, 2001), with a deep understanding of the scholarly definition and engagement levels drove the protocols established for both student focus groups, and the teacher survey.

Methods

In order to produce a trustworthy study, precautions were taken to ensure reliability and validity. For the student focus groups, triangulation was achieved in a variety of ways. First, three researchers conducted the interviews in order to review and agree that patterns surfaced in the interviews. Additionally, multiple sources (students and teachers) were included in the study to establish various points of view; common themes presented by both types of participants comprise the conclusions of this study. Reflexivity was accomplished, as the biases of the researchers were identified, and the research team worked to keep them minimized. Rather than contradicting a participant, the team probed to understand more about a point of view when disagreement could have surfaced. Finally, negative case sampling techniques were used to determine additional perspectives that were not anticipated. Outlying responses that were infrequently gathered were studied to determine if they should be considered as an alternate point of view. The study resulted in conclusions that naturally presented themselves via grounded inferencing, rather than establishing a protocol of questions that led the participants in one direction.

Teachers’ perceptions of their students’ engagement were of interest. Teachers at both campuses were invited to complete an online survey to assist with balancing perceptions regarding the impact of the design on student engagement. Teachers volunteering to participate also completed an online consent form prior to accessing the survey. Teachers were able to complete the survey at their convenience within a two-week period. Given that teacher participation was voluntary, the goal was to have at least 50% participation; however, the researchers were pleased with the 77% participation rate. The researchers ensured that the teacher responses included in the data analysis only included those teachers who worked both in the old building as well as in the new replacement campus. 

Findings: Students’ Perceptions

Student focus groups yielded three significant themes:

(1)   the new spaces and the impact those have on their overall school experience, (2) the impact going to a new school has had on their engagement in learning, and (3) the changes in their teachers since moving to the replacement school” (Oliveras-Ortiz, Bouillion, & Asbury, 2017).

These three themes were then organized based on the students’ perceptions in the way that they articulated their beliefs.

            Students shared their strong beliefs about more “room to learn and explore” in the new schools citing feelings of “freedom and comfort” (Oliveras-Ortiz et al., 2017) due to the better circulation within the campus, the feelings of openness due to deliberate natural light, and the spaciousness of their new classrooms. Students now feel as if they can accommodate their materials in order to learn in a variety of spaces within the building. Specifically, they talked about the collaboration areas that extend their learning environment in a variety of ways, making them capable to working on group projects, or with partners in ample space.

            Students were acutely aware of their commitment to doing work, or their levels of increased engagement in the new schools. They reported that it was more fun to learn in the new buildings, could spread out their materials, and had connections to specialized spaces such as Makerspaces and Science labs, where content specific tasks specific helped them, and even made them feel special. Writeable magnetic white walls designed to allow students to use the classroom as an instructional tool were preferred by the students. They felt they supported their interest in assigned tasks, and allowed for maximized instructional time.

            Lastly, students reported that their teachers were happier since moving into the new buildings. They perceived teachers smiled more, and contributed much of this happiness to the teachers’ ability to better organize materials due to increased storage. They were also appreciative that all teachers has a room to call his or her own.

Findings: Teachers’ Perceptions

            Teacher surveys revealed their perceptions of students’ engagement levels and habits using a Likert scale. The top three statements with the most support of agreement are detailed below in a table. Teachers found that since moving to the new schools, students were “more engaged in learning”, “spend more time working collaboratively”, and “are prouder to be part of our school” (Oliveras-Ortiz et al., 2017).

Teachers’ Perceptions of Student Engagement

Statement	Percentage	Mean Score
“Since moving to the new building, our students are more engaged in learning”	75.5	2.98
“Since moving to the new building, our students spend more time working collaboratively”	89.7	3.20
“Since moving to the new building, our students are prouder to be part of our school”	93.8	3.31

Conclusions

This research indicates that design does positively impact student engagement in learning. Specifically, three main themes emerged that should function as critical attributes for designing replacement elementary schools. First, “purposefully designed learning space” (Oliveras-Ortiz et al., 2017) should scaffold the process with every space designed to be a learning space. Secondly, schools should be created with “spaces designed to foster student engagement” (Oliveras-Ortiz et al., 2017) which requires an understanding of teaching and learning, curricular intentions, and student preferences with regard to personalizing their learning. Lastly, architects should “design to support teaching and learning” which necessitates a deep understanding of curriculum and instruction, as well as child development and current teaching methodologies. This groundbreaking study is important to the future of education, as educators and architects should be working on a design team together, influencing one another. Our built environment has the potential to impact learning; therefore, engagement. “Without engagement…there is little likelihood that students will learn that which it is intended they learn (Schlechty, 2001, p. 64).

About the Authors

Dalane E. Bouillion, Ed.D. is the Principal│Educational Planner for VLK│Architects. Yanira Oliveras-Ortiz, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor at The University of Texas as Tyler. Lizzy Asbury, Ed.D. is the Chief Executive Officer of TransCend4.

References

Oliveras-Ortiz, Y., Bouillion, D., & Asbury, L. (2017). The impact of learning environments on student engagement. (Research Report). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uttyler.edu/edulead_fac/25/

Schlechty, P.C. (2001). Shaking up the schoolhouse: How to support and sustain educational innovation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Meet Greg Moore, 2019 EDmarket Chairman of the Board

EDMARKET MEMBER SPOTLIGHT

Name: Greg Moore

Company: Mooreco

Title: CEO, President and Co-Owner

Years in the education business: 29

When was your company founded and how (brief history)?

My mother, Lorraine Moore, a past president of EDmarket, founded our furniture division (previously called Balt) in 1985. She purchased BestRite, which was originally a division of American Desk in the 1950s. In 1990, we incorporated Vanerum into our Mooreco umbrella that today includes Mooreco essentials, Mooreco contract, and Vanerum North America.

How did you get started in the educational products business?

My mother began her work at Royal Seating, and she used me as a model for a new children’s chair, the Royal Prema chair, when I was 5. Sadly, I was not compensated for my work as a child model, despite the embarrassing sailor suit. Later I worked on the shop floor in production and shipping, earning my stripes of respect so to speak, and learning the business from the ground up. It was an invaluable educational experience.

I have been involved with the company “officially” since 1990 when I joined Bestrite after college. However, having grown up in the business, it has felt as if I have lived my whole life time within the educational industry. My mother brought her work home with her as literally her best friends were from the industry, so I grew up in education.

What makes your company unique?

While I am proud of many things that make up our company successful, I am proudest of our ability to continue the innovative culture that my mother founded the company upon years ago.

What do you like best about the educational products industry?

I have always loved the people in our industry, first and foremost. However, what I love intrinsically about what we do is we service children. We have an ability in our industry to impact the lives of children across America through educational environments. Having struggled in a non-progressive school setting myself as a student, makes our mission in this industry very personal for me.

What are you most proud of?

In terms of the association, I am incredibly proud to have been part of the group of industry leaders who created the EDspaces event as it exists today. There were a handful of us who really pressed for this event to change into what it is today, many of them friends of mine. While it ranks as a prime time event in its current form, there was a time where making this show what it is today was considered a high-risk investment.

As far as my career, I am most proud of providing a very profitable exit to my family from the family business, and then years later buying out my private equity partners. The ending of this story has yet to be written and I still have a tremendous amount of work to do before all is said and done.

How had EDmarket helped your business?

My career in this industry would not be what it has been without EDmarket. You can’t do business in education without knowing all of the right people, and you can’t know all of the right people unless you area member of the EDmarket association. Our association has always been the venue for maximizing potential in the educational market place. When it comes to EDspaces and environments there is no equal to what EDmarket can deliver.

What changes are you witnessing in the educational marketplace?

If you are a champion of change, these are the most exciting times we have ever experienced in the educational industry. Technology began this change, with the curriculum, products, and delivery methods used in schools requiring a different teaching approach. On top of this, a greater understanding of psychology around how humans learn differently as individuals is quickly changing the environments, tools, and furniture used to best achieve optional results in preparing children for their future careers. At the same time, we have seen schools shift from low cost procurement to quality, sensitive, better- built product, incorporating goal achievement in terms of student success allowing for more innovation in furniture focused on solution-driven environments.

How has your company adapted?

Mooreco is a company founded on innovation and embracing change. If you were to look at Mooreco from three years ago and then fast forward to today, we look nothing like we did then, and we will continue to remake ourselves going forward based upon our vision of the future. Change has always equaled opportunity at Mooreco. We are a very different company than the one my mother built, but the basics of our culture — have fun, make it personal, focus on the customer, and innovate for the future — still work, they just look very different than they did 20 years ago. One of the greatest compliments I receive from customers today who knew us in the past is “this sure is different business than your mother’s company.”

What one piece of advice would you give others in our industry?

Ship orders on time, under promise, and over deliver.  It sounds very simple but is easier said than done in an industry that requires 70 percent of its shipment revenue for the year over a 4-month time period. Besides that, follow the golden rules; Momma was right about all of them.

What are your top goals to accomplish as Chair of the Board?

1. Strengthen the balance sheet by eliminating distractions and focusing on our core. When my year as Chair ends, I hope to leave the balance sheet stronger than it is today.

2. Continue improvement on our best product, the EDspaces show, and leave it even stronger than it is today with constant expansion of exhibitors and attendees. 

3. Remain true to our mission of member participation in our leadership group. EDmarket has survived numerous years of upheaval in distribution only by the graces of leadership pushing us to change who we are. We do not exist today without our member leaders.

How can the membership assist you in reaching these goals?

I have worked on almost every committee that I could serve on over my last 30 years in our industry. In a year from now my time will be up. How can the membership help? Step up and volunteer!

Redesigning for Wellness: Case Study from Lindbergh School District (MO)

by Jana Parker Ed.D, Director of Innovation and Gifted                                                                   

In a typical day, students switch tasks every 3 minutes, get interrupted every 11 minutes and take 23 minutes to get back on task, (Steelcase). With those statistics, we cannot ignore the need for classroom learning space that reflect the demands of our generation z students. The students entering our classrooms today should expect a highly collaborative learning environment where creativity is encouraged, and their social, emotional well-being is recognized as a necessary component before any possibility of student outcomes are achieved. The well-being of any student should be our priority.

When individual student desks continue to be the norm and classrooms look the same as they did 20 years ago, we have done a disservice to our students and taken away their ability to have choice in how they learn best. Research commissioned by the New Zealand Ministry of Education on the impact of physical design on student outcomes supports the idea that space is as important as the learning taking place. “It suggests that the learning space must be explicitly considered as part of planning and delivery to leverage the full potential of its impact on student outcomes,” writes report author Dr. Gabrielle Wall. Inadequate learning spaces can have an adverse impact on student engagement and achievement. The two should always be mutually exclusive, especially as many school/ districts further transform their educational institutions into one that fosters blended and personalized learning.

As learning spaces continue to transform, so too does the focus on the whole child and their social emotional needs. All too often, we have seen much attention given to learning spaces that directly impact academics and little to those spaces that would directly affect their social means. We must shift our thinking and challenge the status quo. Through the case study below, you will see how one school transitioned away from the traditional counseling office.

During the 2017-2018 school year, the Lindbergh School District, a suburb of St. Louis, Missouri was in its 5th year of seeing significant increases in enrollment. Long Elementary, 1 of 5 at the time, had a total enrollment of over 670 students. A growth of 200 students in 5 years.  In a building that could adequately accommodate 550 students, every available space was being utilized, including custodial closets and stairwells. That August, a relief valve came, and a new elementary school opened that August.

When the new elementary opened, Long immediately lost almost 200 students to redistricting. This provided them a unique opportunity to not only redefine who they were as a school community, but also many of the spaces they had previously lost to student growth. This was not without challenge. There were significant budget constraints which meant outside funding sources would have to be found to assist with any major redesign. As luck would have it, a grant opportunity presented itself and in May of 2017, Long Elementary and their school counselor, Kim Maddock, became the recipient of a $5,000 ITEF grant. ITEF is the Innovation Technology Education Fund, a St. Louis foundation that empowers educators to embrace innovative learning projects and use technology in creative ways that promote excellence in education.

Traditionally, school counselors have a small room located near the main office. In this traditional space, because of the size, only a small group of students could meet at best. With an increase of students with significant social emotional needs and a desire to have a greater impact on students, a plan was developed that required moving to what had always been a grade level classroom. Maddock needed and wanted a space where students could find a sense of calm, focus and connection during their school day, and achieve a temporary escape from a world that has increasingly become more stimulating because of social and academic pressures. The sensory-based, responsive guidance room was a vision that quickly became reality.

Over the past several years, Maddock had noticed a sharp increase in the number of students who have trouble regulating their emotions appropriately, have shorter attention spans, have trouble in resolving conflict, self-harm, and were unable to successfully cope with classroom demands. Maddock and her staff had the belief those changes were due to higher levels of daily trauma and stress, as well as academic demands. The sensory and responsive guidance room was a huge addition to the school. It provided a space where students could learn to identify stress triggers, how the stress was affecting their body, and appropriate ways to release the stress.

“The goal of the new room is to create a simple space where students can allow their brains to just ‘be’,” Maddock said. “In a world where family makeup and stresses are different, and technology is constantly bombarding them with stimulation, it is important for young children to learn how to calm themselves appropriately in a supervised setting.”

Working with Rebecca Hare, co-author of The Space: A Guide for Educators, everything that went into the new room redesign had purpose and intent, in addition to utilizing student voice as a deciding factor on things. The result was a masterpiece. Within the room itself, several distinct areas were created to meet a variety of student needs. The design featured neutral colors — grey, white, and black — and minimal furniture. The ceiling went from white to black to help foster a sense of calm and warmth. Students were now able to practice yoga and mindfulness or escape all stimulation by taking a sensory break in a private curtained area. Students needing more activity could play in sand, swing on the indoor therapy gym, jump on a trampoline or leap into a safe crash pad. In addition, a large portion of the classroom was able to provide space for full group instruction to deliver classroom guidance lessons from the Missouri Guidance Program.

The room has now been recreated all over the St. Louis region as many have visited to learn, share in best practice, and become more informed as educators work collectively to do what is best for all students. As we continue to become more trauma informed and knowledgeable about toxic stress, the sensory-responsive guidance room must be a mainstay when learning spaces are discussed. All educators belong at the table.

Dr. Jana Parker serves as the Director of Innovation and Gifted in the Lindbergh School District. Jana also serves as a mentor for the Missouri Leadership Development System and is an adjunct professor at Lindenwood University. Prior to that appointment, she served as a principal for 6 years after teaching high school social studies for 12 years. During her teaching career, she spent a year in Ghana as part of a Fulbright Teacher Exchange and worked with teachers on professional development in Bangladesh as part of the Teaching Excellence and Achievement Program through the US State Department. Follow her on twitter @Jana Parker 

All the Things You Cannot See

by Shona O’Dea, Well AP, LEED AP BD+C, DLR Group Building Performance Analyst

Within the physical school environment, there is an entire world of things we cannot see that influences the human experience of a space and a student’s ability to perform. Pulling back the curtain on those elements equips everyone to better understand – and embrace – a more holistic approach to district planning.

A recent report from the World Green Building Council concludes that indoor environmental quality (IEQ) can have a profound impact on students’ cognitive function and performance, but optimizing the environmental quality of schools involves much more than air sensors. A holistic master planning process enables clients to think beyond a bare-bones conditions assessment approach by expanding into a comprehensive plan for optimal building performance, and one school district in Illinois agrees.

Barrington School District 220 in Barrington, Illinois, partnered with DLR Group to lead a district-wide facilities master plan to assess and improve learning environments for its students and staff. DLR Group’s team began the process by documenting 12 schools and an administrative building within the district to qualify and quantify holistic building performance. We translated our findings into a report card that measured energy performance, thermal comfort, indoor air quality, visual comfort, and acoustical satisfaction, a deliverable that is guiding future decisions related to facilities and capital investments throughout the district.

Baseline for Measurement

DLR Group used a two-pronged approach to gather qualitative and quantitative information related to IEQ at each building. To gather qualitative data, DLR Group issued a district-wide IEQ satisfaction survey to all employees (including teachers, administration, support, and maintenance), and collected 566 responses. These responses were categorized into four key comfort factors: acoustic, air, thermal, and visual to give the team a holistic understanding of the district’s capital assets.

For our quantitative efforts, the team placed IEQ equipment in representative classrooms from each building, allowing us to observe “point-in-time” spot measurements via monitors tracking temperature, relative humidity, CO2, PM2.5, and TVOC over a data collection period of 72 hours per room. Additional qualitative observations were recorded in workbooks, including:

• Do walls reach all the way up to the roof deck?
• What is the fraction of windows on the external walls?
•  Are there any window dressings?
•  Is the flooring material hard surface or soft surface?

DLR Group also engaged teachers and students by utilizing on-site data logging equipment throughout the process to create a personalized learning opportunity for Barrington students. We partnered with students at each facility to move data loggers between focus classrooms, following a defined schedule. Spot measurements also recorded light levels, VOCs, and background decibel levels in each focus classroom.

Once the survey, workbooks, spot measurements, and logging were complete, DLR Group compiled all data into a master grading tool or report card, along with the basic site measurements and resource consumption results. The grading tool algorithms, written for industry standard requirements, generated IEQ grades for acoustical satisfaction, indoor air quality, thermal comfort, and visual comfort.

Key Findings of the Four Core Components

Acoustics

The IEQ survey results identified a number of factors impacting acoustics, including fans, air conditioning equipment, and furniture. During our classroom observations at the high school, we noted teachers were limiting movement to avoid disruption in adjacent spaces. Students also indicated that teachers were not conducting classes as they desired due to concern that moving furniture would disrupt nearby classes. Further testing revealed that furniture was extremely heavy, and moving it caused the noise criteria inside that classroom and adjacent classrooms to almost triple. From these results, the district was able to demonstrate a need for new furniture that facilitates flexible teaching and learning spaces in the high school.

Air Quality

Carbon dioxide concentration often acts as a proxy for ventilation adequacy. The concentration of carbon dioxide in outside air is approximately 400 PPM, and industry standard internal thresholds recommend a maximum of 1200 PPM. Beyond these levels, the brain begins to go into sleep mode, which can have a profound impact on cognitive function.

The necessary mechanical systems were in place to ventilate classrooms adequately, and the air quality in this district received better-than-average results. Most occupants did not record strong satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their air quality, however stuffiness was the most popular complaint, especially in summer months. All buildings tested for volatile organic compounds were at negligible levels throughout. One building received an initially high reading but, on further analysis, we determined the readings were conducted during an art fair where the art supplies produced VOCs from off-gassing.

Our assessment uncovered three buildings at approximately 3000 PPM, which exceeds ASHRAE 62.1 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality Standards and specifies 800 PPM plus ambient. The district immediately instituted a no-cost solution by revising damper positions to ensure a CO2 level of no more than 1200 PPM at all buildings.

Daylighting

According to the report by the World Green Building Council, 27 percent of U.S. schools have inadequate lighting. Light levels at Barrington facilities were determined satisfactory, however some spaces generated higher light levels than required due to replacement of fluorescents with efficient LED bulbs.

Of the 80 percent of respondents who have access to daylight, 80 percent are satisfied with their visual environment. Areas with too much light are scheduled for de-lamping, which will involve removing some of the LED bulbs from light fixtures to return light levels to the illumination necessary for the task conducted in the space. This solution also will result in energy savings for Barrington.

Thermal

ASHRAE Standard 55 Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy recommends operative temperatures range between 60- 80°F depending on factors such as occupants’ activity and clothing levels. Barrington levels fell within industry standards, with an average setting at 68°F, however surveys results showed on average, 65 percent of occupants were dissatisfied with their thermal environments, with more complaints in winter months due to drafts and uneven temperatures.

The high school recorded a large range of variation in temperatures, initially attributed to a number of additions to this building, and ranging ages of HVAC systems. On further analysis, the HVAC systems were able to meet an optimal set point, however that occurred at the end of the school day as students were heading home for the evening. The district simply adjusted HVAC systems to warm up earlier in the morning to improve comfort level at the high school.

In other schools with a high number of thermal comfort complaints, temperature readings hit the recommended set points. However, numerous elements also affect thermal comfort, including humidity, air speed, and mean radiant temperature of surfaces. Thermal imaging identified areas of missing or damaged insulation causing temperature asymmetry; cold spots where moisture may have penetrated a wall; thermal bridging issues at doorframes; or insufficient seals causing air drafts. Long-term solutions for temperature asymmetry are being incorporated into the District’s future capital planning.

Towards Transparency

This comprehensive process helped Barrington officials make data-driven decisions on how to best use its maintenance budgets, and plan for future capital investments. Ultimately, while data, analysis, and recommendations play an important role in any holistic master plan, the greater value may be found in the deeper conversations that occur between agency and individual users. This level of transparency and communication contributes to a positive relationship between a school district and the local community it serves, and ultimately improves the educational experience for all learners of all ages.

Shona O’Dea, Well AP, LEED AP BD+C, DLR Group Building Performance Analyst. Shona’s focus on efficiency and indoor environmental quality is an important component of DLR Group’s Performance Design team, supporting the firm's pursuit of sustainable design and operation. Her primary goal is to challenge people to think differently about the way they design and operate buildings, advising teams from sustainable goal setting to efficient operations. She uses building simulation to help designers quantify energy savings and understand the interaction between building design, mechanical systems, and the environment.

Designing for the Spectrum: Autism-Friendly Educational Design

by David Leestma, AIA

According to the Center for Disease Control, the number of students with autism is growing rapidly. From 2000 to 2014 the prevalence of autism in children has gone up from 1 in 150 to 1 in 59 due to better recognition of the condition. However, the educational system for those with autism has not caught up to the growing population. The students are often overlooked by school districts and given classrooms that are detrimental to their senses. In order to serve the needs of autistic students, new facilities need to be built and current facilities need to be adapted in order to accommodate this growing population.

To understand the specific accommodations and requirements for an autistic user, it is imperative to understand what autism is. Autism is not a single disorder, but a spectrum of closely-related disorders albeit with a shared core of symptoms. Every individual on the autism spectrum has problems to some degree with social skills, empathy, communication, and flexible behaviors. The major symptoms of autism are social communication difficulties, language disabilities, and repetitive behaviors, with many related signs and symptoms including sensory perception problems, emotional difficulties and uneven cognitive abilities. The area where architects can make the biggest impact is in designing buildings that mitigate these sensory issues.

Sensory perception issues and autism

The sensory perception issues that affect autistic individuals have a direct impact on their performance in the classroom. They affect the way an autistic individual processes information and learns. With respect to how the brain of an autistic individual works in relation to learning, there are three basic categories in which those with autism can be grouped into in: sensory oversensitivity, perceptual problems, and difficulties organizing information.

Sensory oversensitivity varies from child to child.  It can range from mild (slight anxiety when the environment is too loud, too bright, or too chaotic) to severe, with an individual going into a screaming tantrum every time he or she is in a place such as a large, noisy supermarket. Some individuals on the spectrum are attracted to objects that move rapidly and others will avoid them. When senses are disordered, the attention and concentration that learning requires becomes difficult and in some cases, impossible. Children who spend their days fearful of people and places who, through past experience, have been overwhelmed by their senses, have little chance to relax enough to take notice of the learning opportunities being presented. This makes the teaching and learning process very difficult for the children because they have to be in an environment in which they feel safe and that they understand. 

Problems with perceptual issues often determine the style of learning that will be most effective. A child with poor auditory perception may hear sounds poorly and perceive the sounds coming in and out like poor phone reception. This child is more likely to learn best with visually presented information. On the other hand, a child with visual perception problems may learn best through the auditory channel as auditory information will be easier for them to process. Some nonverbal individuals have both visual and auditory processing problems. They may learn best through their sense of touch and smell. For instance, to learn to dress they may need to be hand-over-hand “walked” through putting on socks or pouring cereal. They may learn letters and numbers best when they can touch them, and trace their shape with their hands or fingers. Representative objects rather than visual charts can be useful in helping these individuals know when it is time to transition to a new activity.  Schools need to be adaptable in order to teach students with all degrees of perception issues and be able to adapt the environment to a student’s specific needs. 

Some individuals may be able to receive information, but have trouble organizing it or making sense of the information. Some individuals may be hearing words correctly, but not understanding them. Problems with organizing information affect a child’s ability to form categories that are the foundation for later concept formation. Difficulties that people on the spectrum have with multi-tasking would also fall into this category. These difficulties are highly variable and range from mild to severe depending on which brain circuits connected and which ones did not.

An autistic student's ability to learn in a traditional classroom is often compromised because of the difficulties previously described. The schools which are able to adapt to their students’ needs and offer flexible learning methods and learning environments are able to have a much greater influence on the lives of their students.

Principles of design

In order to design an appropriate learning environment for autistic students many factors need to be taken into consideration. Special attention needs to be placed on the stimulus level of spaces, when programing. Quiet spaces, such as classrooms, should be laid out far away from noisy areas such as the gym and cafeteria. By looking at common sensory problems, a series of principles can be made to use as the basis of design for an autism friendly school. These principles outline strategies to reduce distraction from excess stimuli, to determine how the building should be organized as a whole, and how the building itself should be constructed.

Acoustics

Parents and teachers ranked acoustics as the most influential feature of the sensory environment on autistic behavior. Loud noises and sounds from things such as movement and mechanical systems should be mitigated through design. In most cases the sense of calm that comes with quieter spaces encourages better behavior in students and allows them to focus on learning. Special attend should be paid to material selection to limit reflected noise. 

Lighting  

The use of direct fluorescent lighting should be avoided. Individuals with autism are very vulnerable to the sub-visible flicker, which can cause headaches, eyestrain, and increased repetitive behavior.  Lighting also needs to be controllable because different activities require different amounts of light. Natural light improves academic performance, relaxes students, permits better concentration, and reduces hyperactivity in children. However views to the outside and other distractions should also be controllable to prevent students from being distracted by what is happening outside, which can be done though clerestory windows or translucent glazing.

Colors and materiality

85% of autistic children see colors with far greater intensity than a neurotypical student. Because autistic individuals may have a significant increase in color differentiation, small changes in color can dramatically affect their behavior.  Grids and busy patterns should be minimized in areas that require student to focus, such as a classroom. Minimizing any offending stimuli can help improve autism spectrum students’ ability to perform successfully in the classroom.

Adaptability

Spaces should be created to permit change depending on the children’s needs and to allow the students and teachers to rearrange or subdivide the spaces as needed. Finishes, materials, and spatial organization should be able to be manipulated not only by the staff but also by students. An environment which is able to adapt and change to the user’s needs is able to perform more functionally than a room with a set purpose. The environment could also change stimulus level based on the activity, divide the space up into multiple small areas of activity, or exist as one large space. However, if the environment is too flexible an individual might live in constant fear that the environment will suddenly be changed.

Transitions

Spaces should flow as seamlessly as possible from one activity to the next and should be organized in accordance to their sensory quality rather than the typical architectural approach of functional zoning. For example instead of placing a school gym near the classrooms as they are closely related in their function and user, it would be better to place them in opposite areas with administration placed between them even though there is little programmatic relationship between those spaces. With transitions between areas of high stimulus to areas of low stimulus or from one activity space to the next, there should be a threshold space which allows the student to recalibrate their senses. Without the transition space, the shock of going from an area of low stimulus to high stimulus could trigger inappropriate or disruptive behavior from students. 

Predictability

Students with ASD will often feel nervous when navigating spaces that are unfamiliar to them so the arrangement of structures should made so that they are easily understood and encourage choices as well as problem solving and discovery. The importance of legibility, imaginability, and redundant cueing come into play when those with ASD are navigating buildings. Classrooms and schools should be easy to read with clear signage, numbering, and configuration. The environment must be memorable and describable in terms of specific landmarks to create a space for students to be able to recall.

Escape Spaces/Quiet rooms

Students need spaces that provide areas of respite from the over stimulation in their environments. Having such spaces in a school has been shown to have a huge positive effect on students in a learning environment because the class and other students can often overwhelm the sensory input of an autistic individual through the stimuli that accompanies a neurotypical classroom setting. Being able to experience an outdoor environment is also important as the fresh air and nature can have a calming effect on the students. Creative outdoor areas can provide students and adults with special needs the opportunity to explore social interactions, as well as provide places for tranquility.

Safety

Children with autism occasionally have an altered sense of spatial orientation, depth perception, and general proprioception, or the ability to sense stimuli arising within the body regarding position, motion, and equilibrium. The miscommunication within the sense makes individuals with autism prone to self-injury. They are also prone to displaying aggressive behaviors and tantrums making them dangerous to themselves and others. The high frequency of those with autism demonstrating self-injury due to being unfamiliar with their environment mean precautions need to be taken to ensure that the children are being constantly looked after.  Autistic individuals also have stronger reactions to dirt, germs, and toxins, so the materials selected within an environment need to take into consideration the chemicals used to create them.

Durability  

Emotional disturbance issues, such as intermittent explosive disorder or bipolar, frequently cohabitate with ASD. Due to this, there exists a need to use durable materials that not only resist the wear and tear of children, but are safe enough that they do not to cause injury to the students. The materials will also have to be easy to clean as children with ASD often have trouble with bathroom procedures and will sometimes soil themselves or vomit in class. 

Conclusion

Designing for autism seems to be an impossible task. How do you design for someone whose senses you cannot understand? How do you design for a student whose sensory perception can change throughout the day? How do you design for two students in the same room who perceive space differently from each other? These are all questions that need to be answered.

The principles outlined above are only a first step and merely an outline for a building. In order to make an effective learning environment the school as a whole, from the classroom to the curriculum, needs to adapt to the growing variable needs of the autistic population. Designers need to work directly with parents, teachers, and administrators to design schools that work with all parties. Schools designed specifically for students with autism have a beneficial impact not only on the students, but also on those who care for them. It is the role of the designer to balance both environmental and human factors to create spaces where students can have equal opportunities to learn, regardless of disabilities.

David Leestma, AIA is a practicing architect at Torti Gallas + Partners in Silver Spring, Maryland. He received his Master of Architecture from the University of Maryland in 2015. His research examines the impact that architecture can have on learning environments, with a specific focus on the sensory perception issues of autistic individuals. David has presented his work in multiple venues including the University of Maryland Disability Summit and the AIA | DC 3^rd Annual Thesis Showcase.

School of Dreams: Honoring the Future of Learning

By Danielle O’Grady, IIDA, TMP Architecture & Dr. Kadee Anstadt, Ed.D., Perrysburg Schools

When Perrysburg Schools initiated the planning for a cutting edge school building, we envisioned change. This community in northwest Ohio had always had a storied history of lifting up its educational establishments along with a reputation for award-winning schools. Again, district leadership chose to reach far into the future in creating its newest beacon for 21^st Century Teaching and Learning ideals. In order to do so Perrysburg Schools identified The Collaborative-TMP design team as the ideal partner in making our vision a reality.

We dreamed of a school designed to reinforce teaming; to be built utilizing dynamic, multi-purpose spaces facilitating richer interaction between students and teachers. A hub for learners to explore STEM curriculums through making and modeling, engaging in autonomous activities alongside various methods of individualized instruction, and the opportunity to take ownership over their own educational experience. Meaningful change does not come easily; but with enough hard work the project team knew that these dreams could be realized.

We embarked on a journey to catapult the district’s newest facility into the 21^st Century. To answer the question on everyone’s minds, “How can we make the greatest impact on the educational experience of our students?” we asked the community and staff for input. By engaging the community, we were able to focus the scope of the construction project and define the pillars of which the new school would architecturally represent. Guiding Principles were defined as follows:

• Flexible Learning Studios allowing for “hands on” project-based learning
• Individual and Group learning opportunities promoting collaboration
• Organized Learning Communities to encourage teaming
• Reinforce a sense of community by encouraging socialization and interaction
• Focus on the Arts by supporting their specific needs for instruction and performance
• Elevate circulation routes to encourage a “Learning happens EVERYWHERE!“ mentality
• Develop professional space for all staff that reinforces the collaborative nature of “school”
• Create a strong visual image that is progressive, inviting, innovative and “full of light”
• Focus on a timeless design aesthetic that reinforces sustainability
• Encourage positive outreach to the community

We explored existing projects that exuded similar guiding principles. We toured Mentor Public Schools (a K-12 at the forefront of the blended learning model), the Lenawee Intermediate School District Center for a Sustainable Future (the first Michigan K-12 school building with LEED Platinum certification in that state), La-Z-Boy’s corporate headquarters (touted for “out-Googling Google” with regards to facility planning and design), and Steelcase University Learning Center in Grand Rapids. Each of these organizations had experimented with a cultural shift through an evolution in their facilities. It was clear that establishing strategies in “change management” were just as important as any drawing detail or product specification.

In educational design we have all experienced the “if you build it, they will come” mentality.  However, we know this strategy could not be further from the truth. In fact, it is not about the building at all, but the experiences that occur inside the building. The oft sought bridge of transformation can only be built by the hands of educators one day, one lesson, one “ah-ha!” moment at a time. Metaphorically speaking, a modern “School of Dreams” abandons the walls completely; relying on technology and tools, curriculum, and community partnerships to foster the skills so desperately needed by our students. It seizes new opportunities to connect students to content through relationships built on a common quest for excellence in education.

Hull Prairie Intermediate School (HPI), as it would be named, was identified as a facility for 5^th and 6^th grade students only; an age group resilient  to diversity, aching for autonomy, but still moldable to a guiding hand. This would be the first time these collective classes would be together from across the district to celebrate the Jacket Way: “Be Respectful, Be Responsible, Be Ready.” As a design team we challenged ourselves to develop an interior that would expand upon our collective years of experience and recent investigations, but in a way that would be authentic and navigable.

This same sense of empathy is what led the administration to start ideating years in advance of opening day. How would we prepare teaching staff for such a radical change in environment? Professional development would have to lead the way, as it is critical to supporting best practices. Interviews were conducted of internal district staff, where attributes of open mindedness, courage, and positivity were sought from potential candidates. Positions were assigned, often adjusting areas of content and grade level in support for a long term vision of “looping” schedules and developing teams that students would be a part of for their tenure at HPI. Staff participated in a multi-day retreat aimed at cultivating connections between the staff, a Writers Workshop by Linda Rief, author of “Read, Write, Teach,” and Project Based Learning training from Dr. Jodi J. Haney of Xcite Learning.  Subject and grade level teacher teams met throughout the prior school year to plan common units of study. Three months before opening, all staff gathered again to return to exercises rooted in Team Building, the vein in which they started their journey towards transformational instruction. 

The design team drafted progressive configurations of space that could help facilitate collaboration, critical thinking, and communication. A core of common spaces was developed as the “trunk” of the facility where activities of socializing, meeting, and making would be held of the highest regard. A Multi-Purpose room housing dining, large group gathering, and presentations is the focal point. Soft seating, Parsons’ tables, and cozy Inglenooks scatter the landscape. Centralized STEM Labs are the hinges of the Academic Wings where process and exploration unapologetically spill out into circulation. 

Shared Collaboration Zones are comprised of Front Porches, Hearths, Enclaves, Learn Labs, and Small Group Rooms. As we were developing each space, we worked alongside faculty, who were simultaneously styling their instructional techniques intended for these specialized areas. We mitigated fears by thoughtfully addressing the following questions: “Where would we place writeable wall surfaces? Magnetic materials?  Electrical outlets? Interactive Monitors? Which walls would be totally transparent, how would we integrate signage and careful cues of color for building identity and dividing open space?”

Failure is a word that is not typically correlated with a successful education or a successful construction project. However, we turned that notion on its head. In order to fully develop these new curricular goals we had to accept the challenges that our staff and administration faced.  When faced with hardship, we hoped to teach our students to view failure as an opportunity to learn. By allowing our students to experiment, take risks, and fail multiple times before reaching a resolution; we are instilling a deep understanding of creativity and innovation. When our staff was exploring updated curricular program options and embracing change throughout our district, we implored them to focus on these same principles. How could we expect our students to embrace the change without fully adapting ourselves?

The students flourished under this mentality and we found ourselves unexpectedly learning from them in the process. Examples can be found from the fine arts suite to the outdoor learning pavilion to the STEM Labs where you will find students working out a variety of self-imposed “challenges.” A group of students were challenged to build a working Lego set using Tinkercad and 3-D Printers.  After trial and error, they would eventually present their final iteration to the School Board inscribed as “V8,” an idea of their own. It took seven failures to conquer the quest, but they persevered. 

In another case, students began taking ownership of their independent study opportunities. They noticed a fellow student sitting alone at lunch and it sparked a presentation arguing for a week long community building project. A visit from a chaperoned leader dog inspired students to ask, “How could we make this a project?” These catalysts encouraged our staff to issue greater autonomy to their student teams. And before you knew it, a new mindset at Perrysburg Schools radiated outward from the project address, uncontainable by any wall type.

It was not on the day the doors opened at Hull Prairie that we believed we had succeeded in our years’ long efforts to build a modern day “School of Dreams.” We began to feel an increasing sense of accomplishment with each new story or the reactions of visitors who came in expecting a traditional “school” and instead were able to visualize the shift in the teacher/student relationships. By thinking beyond the conventional constructs of what truly makes a school building a school building or a design process a design process, our project team was able to realize what we only imagined in our dreams…a place fit for the future of learning.

  

Danielle O’Grady has led the interior design efforts on many significant school projects for TMP Architecture. She holds her National Council for Interior Design Qualification certificate, and has completed over 350 projects for 40 clients. Danielle graduated Cum Laude from Lawrence Technological University in 2009. She holds degrees in both Architecture and Interior Design.

Dr. Kadee Anstadt is currently the Assistant Superintendent for Perrysburg Schools in Ohio. Her expertise has been instrumental in implementing project-based education, blended learning curriculum in the district. She leads with 21st century educational leadership practices and an innovative approach to curriculum development.