What does the design of a learning space say to kids about the intent of the learning space?
The desks-in-rows arrangement says to kids “You are going to come in, sit down, and obey and listen to what you’re told”. Desks in rows screams passive learning. Many of the arrangements listed in the resources section still tend towards passive learning. With all due respect to the authors, just grouping kids or pairing kids up does not an active learning scenario make.
The design of a learning space informs its function. Take a look at this slidedeck, given by a colleague and dear friend of mine, David Jakes. Pay special attention to slides 27-31. Note that the tables are on wheels.
Learning spaces of the future must be flexible. To see a real-world example of this take a look at any Starbucks located near a high school or University during exams. Upon entering, you will see students all over the space having rearranged it to suit their needs. You might find a group of kids working together at a large table moved into a corner because that’s where the power outlet is located. Or you might find a few kids quietly reading and highlighting important passages all the while sprawled out on a comfortable chair. In this day and age, we can learn anywhere.
 |
| The way learners learn in Starbucks is not limited to the USA. http://www.flickr.com/photos/86354760@N00/6096918150 |
As I walked the halls looking into classrooms it hit me that we are telling our students here at my school that they need to be passive, obedient listeners and doers. We stifle creativity in part due to our space design. On the contrary, when I walk into the art room I see tables arranged in a U shape so the budding artists can all see expert demonstration. I also see those tables serving as a pottery surface and the teacher walking among the students guiding them when her demonstration is over. From there I walked into the Orchestra room and saw chairs and music stands arranged exactly like a professional orchestra would be. I saw the teacher acting as conductor and every student lending his or her “voice” to the beautiful mixture. Why are these classes the only ones where the learning space encourages student voices to be heard?
For the more traditional classrooms, traffic patterns were not observable because there was no “traffic”. Students sat and listened and worked on worksheets. This traditional model is rampant here.
As for technology, I feel this question is somewhat outdated. If we look beyond the surface of the question, we can see that the underlying supposition is that a classroom will have a certain number of computers and that the technology needs to fit into the space design. This is a problematic assumption in my opinion. With today’s availability of mobile technologies (e.g. laptops, Chromebooks, tablet devices, smart phones) the technology needs to become invisible and ubiquitous, like oxygen (paraphrasing my colleague and friend Chris Lehmann). We should no longer have to think about where to place computers in classrooms. We need to provide flexible options for students to learn in multiple spaces with ready access to a variety of technologies.
These same conclusions can be extrapolated for staff development. In my experience, most all staff development sessions are “top-down”. A few weeks ago I went to a staff development session presented by a nationwide “expert” and was forced to sit and listen for an hour. I’d argue that’s ineffective presentation skills, yet we so often do this exact same thing to our students. If our learners deserve flexible learning spaces and the pedagogical shift to accompany it, our faculty do too. Teachers are first and foremost learners.
In case you're curious, my own classroom design is modeled after a Black Box Theater, except it's not me in the center, it's them.
