How the Agile Classroom Impacts Student Engagement

By Jolene Levin, Director, Norva Nivel, USA

Teachers are increasingly challenged to engage students. Traditional classrooms with rows of desks and chalkboards in the front of the room aren’t conducive to meeting students’ needs, particularly in our fast-paced society, where information, visuals and messages compete for their attention. The classroom of the past — too often today’s classroom —is a motionless venue that lacks inspiration and does not deliver the essentials for building an enthusiasm for learning.

A recent study conducted by MDR, a division of Dun & Bradstreet, and the Education Market Association, found that approximately 94% of the more than 1,600 teachers polled agreed that the design of a learning space impacts students’ success. The study highlighted the importance of flexibility and collaboration, technology integration and intentional design in modern classroom spaces. 

In 2010, we visited our first school. Listening to the school’s principal, teaching staff and students, we unearthed their challenges and needs. Their frustrations centered on the fact that most learning spaces aren’t customizable and do not accommodate a variety of learning styles. They do not address individual student needs and cannot adapt to varied subjects and teaching styles. The educators and administrators we’ve spoken with stress that the classroom needs to be relevant and vital, in keeping with ever-evolving technologies and what’s required to capture students’ attention.

We see the challenge surrounding engagement increasing exponentially over time. An assistant principal put it this way: “It doesn’t matter what quality of curriculum you deliver; if they’re not engaged in the practices that you’re delivering, it counts for nothing.” This is why we’ve developed an advanced and innovative version of the “agile classroom,” a learning environment designed to meet a complex variety of student, teacher and district needs.

The Agile Classroom

Some call it the future of education. Education experts call it the agile or flexible classroom. Based on its transformational attributes, we know it defines what’s possible in education today. George Lucas’s educational foundation, Edutopia, says this: “While a classroom is different from a [business] startup, certain mindsets and strategies translate well: vision, agility, the right tools, creative thinking, and recognizing individual strengths. An agile classroom is an environment in which students are motivated to do their best work and feel invested in the class as a whole.”

Engagement is one descriptor that repeatedly emerges when education experts describe this learning environment. It generates superior student outcomes, adapting to a diverse range of learners — from cognitive to hands on. This goes beyond how specific students learn best by offering accelerated growth regardless of learning style. This growth builds confidence and cognitive abilities in large part through the physical attributes of agile spaces. In our work transforming classrooms, libraries, collaborative learning spaces and presentation areas, we’ve heard countless teachers and school administrators affirm the efficacy of agile learning spaces.

They report student outcomes being impacted in tangible ways, such as:

-       An increased sense of ownership and pride by students in their learning spaces and educational process, plus the ability for teachers to more easily motivate them;

-       The benefits of movement as well as adaptability, which supports all teaching styles, learning styles and subjects;

-       The breakdown and removal of barriers to learning, based on varying student populations and individual needs, inclinations and tendencies.

Fostering The Ownership Mindset

Technology has demonstrably impacted society in several ways, learning being one. America’s classroom is one of the last holdouts and it’s in dire need of evolution. Transitioning from the acquisition of knowledge through instructional teaching, learners are now being encouraged to develop the 6 Cs, a set of skills transferable to any learning activity and ultimately any profession. With this shift, the need to change educational spaces is essential. The key is to create modern learning spaces, classrooms and environments that cater to students’ individual needs and learning styles. Then, to show educators successful methods for motivating and engaging students, which include getting students to embrace the ownership or accountability mindset.

The agile class gives students the power to decide how they learn and from whom; it offers more choice, promoting a sense of ownership, control and agency. Guided by their teachers, students are empowered to think and make smart choices. This empowerment nurtures a sense of proprietorship. We’ve seen these learning environments completely change the classroom dynamic. Teachers regularly comment on how their students are driven as never before and how their spaces capture kids’ attention, even high-energy learners.

Agile spaces help teachers motivate and engage students in a lasting way. And, because they can quickly and effortlessly be changed based on subject matter, class requirements, student needs and other factors, classrooms don’t become dated, stale or obsolete. Moreover, the flexible classroom teaches skills, not just knowledge —facilitated by the space itself and the relationship the learner has with it. Students are guided through strategic facilitation by the teacher but have an ownership stake in the learning environment and how it’s structured. They experience movement, diversity and choice in their relation to their classrooms.

Movement Matters

Studies show that movement in the classroom setting builds focus and improves learning outcomes. We’ve observed thousands of students acquire more balance, focus and accountability through the movement that agile spaces provide. Learners acquire transversal skills, those relevant to future jobs and occupations and lifelong learning. These skills can be acquired through education or training if the setting is right.

We believe that all truly flexible learning spaces should be able to be reconfigured in 60 seconds or less, by even the youngest of learners. With straightforward guidance from their teacher, learners can modify their environments quickly and intentionally. This requires concurrent physical and analytical engagement that students steer, helping them take charge of and responsibility for learning.

Another example of movement in a learning space is having tables at various heights in a classroom. Versus a series of static or even height-adjustable tables, this variety encourages students to freely move from one workspace to another. Standing height tables create the opportunity for movement and increased blood flow, with physical as well as cognitive benefits. At a standing height table, students can use a balance board, which we incorporate into our agile classrooms. In doing so, they fuse physical (body) control with concentration and focus (mind) requirements.

Removing Barriers to Learning

Whether they’re visual or hands-on learners, or those requiring additional support, every student must be involved so they can learn and thrive. Using agile furniture, such as moveable and multipurpose tables; storage that doubles as seating or work surfaces; a varied selection of workspaces; lightweight, movable seats and other adaptable features, each space has the flexibility to be quickly rearranged and transformed into a unique, subject-appropriate setting —one that’s visually appealing, smart and that involves the student at a deeper level.

In addition to creating spaces specific to an activity, flexible learning environments can be reconfigured according to student and teacher needs, breaking down obstacles to learning. Students can select their preferred workspace or create their own. When they are in a space where they feel more comfortable or safe, they are better able to retain information and are more engaged. In addition, to more effectively utilize the space and engage, our classroom furniture designs always include versatility. We make use of walls, floors and the entire room, enabling teachers to have kids stand during certain aspects of the lesson, sit during others and balance (seated or standing) for others. This exemplifies complete engagement and helps kids manage their energy levels.

We’ve had hundreds of teachers and school administrators tell us that the empowerment students acquire enables introverted learners to shine. One principal emailed us recently saying “Our best teachers are saying that with the agile classroom, kids are more likely to collaborate with students they would ordinarily not interact with. They are inspired, self-motivated and less likely to be intimidated by personal or environmental limitations.”

The Future is Now

The right lighting, comfort elements, technology and customization are essential but without agile features, today’s classroom is incomplete. The agile classroom offers immediate and complete customization; they are completely adaptive and modular. Today’s classroom cannot remain static. Our youth have a tremendous amount of energy that needs to be harnessed for absorbing and retaining information. An agile classroom combines physical and cognitive elements of learning that helps students acquire a true sense of ownership. It breaks down barriers in education and addresses a broader array of learning needs and styles.

The multifunctional and adaptive characteristics of the agile classroom help our educational system evolve in our fast-paced, ever-changing society to engage more students. In all classrooms, the role of the teacher cannot be underestimated. In agile environments, the teacher acts as a facilitator, nurturing a sense of proprietorship and deeper interest in learning. They guide kids through the decision-making process and make deeper engagement possible.

Undeniably, these flexible education spaces offer elements that adapt to the needs of teachers and students alike. Greater choice means kids are more actively engaged in the learning process, which inevitably produces better outcomes in all types of learners.

All educators we’ve conferred with agree: stagnancy hinders engagement and a lifelong passion for learning. To spark ownership, agency and empowerment, learning environments must be relevant today and remain that way well into the future. This is what the agile classroom delivers.

Jolene Levin is a director at NorvaNivel USA, designers and manufacturers of educational furniture and learning spaces, which are made in the U.S.  For more information, visit https://norvanivel.com/.

The Power is in the Process: University Planning & Development Via Community Engagement

By Dana Muller, AIA, LEED AP

Systemic change is hard — especially in education. In 2009, when Gensler began working with Lynn University to mesh their 2020 academic vision with a new master plan, we knew our approach had to be different. How could we plan for, support, and enable growth with so many diverse stakeholders at play? The answer was a unique strategy of community engagement. Here’s how we got it done.

What Community Engagement Means

The first step in engaging with the community is identifying stakeholders. Stakeholders are those people or entities who have a role to play in the success of your endeavor. Here, we knew our community ranged from long-tenured faculty and a growing population of students, to local zoning, traffic and neighborhood officials. Lynn and Gensler decided to face these challenges head-on and seek stakeholder input from the early stage of planning.

The next step was to begin the visioning process, in which we identify consistent messages, aspirations, and our constraints. Success in this area requires openness to other people’s ideas and the strength to do what’s best for the campus mission and community.

Some consistent themes that came out of our visioning process for the master plan at Lynn included:

• Fundraising and building a new student center at the heart of campus
• Building a new residence hall to keep students on campus in a pedestrian-centric environment
• Modernizing academic classroom
• Creating a more sustainable campus
• Resolving parking and traffic issues that were a concern to the city

Seeking stakeholder input can be scary, but it made a world of difference in our effort. When your team is heard it communicates that you care about what they think. While every verbalized concern, wish and dream cannot be accommodated, your team will be behind you if you have treated their concerns with the highest level of consideration.

Start with the board, the faculty, and the staff – but don’t leave out the students, the city, or the neighbors in the master planning process. With Lynn, we identified and met with 350 stakeholders. We held 29 individual interviews and involved hundreds of faculty, staff, and students in visioning sessions held over a period of many weeks. We made it clear we were interested in hearing what was important to them. We sought their buy-in and made sure they felt heard.

This process resulted in markers of success for our master plan that became our mission and goals:

• Foster chances for financial growth
• Develop physical character of the campus
• Integrate sustainability
• Fortify relations with the community
• Enhance the academic environment
• Design to improve campus life

How Community Engagement Supports Growth

This next step involved laying the groundwork for the growth the master plan envisioned. We began immediately on an infrastructure and academic curriculum assessment and established sustainable goals:

1) Vehicle circulation

We had to come up with a plan to gradually adjust vehicular traffic to campus perimeter. This was key to realizing the pedestrian-friendly campus that all stakeholders desired.

2) Pedestrian circulation

Gensler’s research on walkable cities tells us that a walkable distance is considered about 1,300 feet — roughly, a five-minute walk. To create the walkable campus that was a goal of the visioning process, the master plan located critical student services to the center of the campus within a walkable five minutes of each other.

3) Landscape approach

Achieving a more sustainable campus was not only a goal of the students and faculty, university leadership also recognized that it’s good business. We worked with Lynn and their landscape architect to develop a landscape master plan to return the plant material on campus to a native, low-maintenance solution and implement a 100% reclaimed water irrigation system using city reclaimed water. There were 90 million gallons of drinking water saved at the end of the first four years.

4) Renewable energy

We worked with Siemens to put a new chilled water plant on campus to serve future development and plan to implement other innovative renewable energy strategies in the future.

5) Storm water

Before we could proceed with any new development, a storm water infrastructure plan — “The Lakes Master plan” — had to be put in place. An unexpected result of improving these lakes was a significant savings in maintenance from turning them back to a more naturally maintained ecosystem.

Lynn also set some aggressive sustainability goals for themselves. We were inspired by their goals and encourage all our master planning clients to do the same. They set out to reduce energy consumption by 70% against a “business as usual” baseline, and to do the same in a reduction of potable water use and water used for irrigation by 50% and 70%, respectively. Likewise, Lynn aimed at reducing solid waste sent to the landfill by 20% while increasing the selection of native and adapted planting to a minimum of 30% of all plants.

Lynn’s success in measures of this nature were inspirational. Every year, the university diverts a total of 11% of campus waste through a growing recycling program. Their reduction in energy usage was so dramatic the month after replacing gymnasium lights with LED and adding occupancy sensors that the power company came out to see if something was wrong with the meter.

When it came to further improvements to physical infrastructure, Lynn immediately focused on adjusting storm water retention, energy usage, upgrading campus infrastructure and driving development and fundraising. 

One priority was the chilled water plant. Multi-colored pipes were used as a tool in educating students about sustainability. The chilled water infrastructure upgrade – along with updates to electrical infrastructure – saved four million kilowatts of energy in the first four years of operation. That is the equivalent of taking 589 cars off the road for one year and translates to an equivalent greenhouse gas reduction of 2,722 metric tons. 

The Outcomes: What Does Community Engagement Enable?

The last step is to achieve actual growth. We knew that development would be critical to any construction projects, so, arm in arm with Lynn, we sought to build with a mission and purpose. No construction was to occur unless is was to build nimble and flexible spaces that integrate long-term, sustainable strategies. We leveraged the master plan with stakeholders to improve buy-in, excite change and inspire new ideas.

Donors became invigorated when they saw Lynn’s commitment to bettering the campus and how invested the stakeholders were in the master plan’s forward motion. As the chilled water plant set the groundwork for growth, that investment by the University inspired the donation of a new athletic facility to support the National Champion Soccer and Lacrosse teams, a new Business School and a new housing building. We are now looking forward to celebrating the success of this master plan and the generous gift of another long time supporter of the University on February 7, 2019, when we complete the fifth new building and 11th project on campus, the University Center.

Every aspect of this initiative’s success is a testament to what community engagement can achieve. An approach like this combined with Lynn University’s open-minded, progressive leadership is an inspirational blueprint for how to design for education’s growth. 

Dana Muller, AIA, LEED AP is a Senior Associate at Gensler. She brings more than 15 years of experience in the design and execution of spaces for learning to her role as Education Practice Area leader in Gensler’s Tampa office.

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.