« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
08 DISCUSSING THE SCHOOL IN THE COMMUNITY: SOME SIMPLE TOOLS
Fiona Duggan
Consultant
FiD Ltd
It has been established that, to provide the greatest benefit for their users, school buildings should reflect and support the curriculum. While this goal sounds straightforward on first reading, the issues involved are varied and complex. They can be difficult to grasp, particularly when discussed in a group situation, where different people have different priorities. In this context, and with the aim of assisting further discussion around these questions, some simple conceptual tools are identified below.
The Double-Axes Model
The double-axes model (Fig. 1) offers a simple method for honing in on specific areas of opportunity, or concern, in situations where a desire for 'both/and' may be hampered by conversations that tend to focus on 'either/or'. For example, a common dilemma often expressed by schools is that of wanting more collaboration and integration with the community, while trying to ensure that safety and security needs are appropriately met. The double-axes model can be used to locate each activity within the quadrant best suited to the activity's 'both/and' requirements.
These requirements, taken individually, lead us in very different directions for the school building and this in turn has an impact on the level of community/school collaboration there is, and the activities that children can undertake. The desire for greater community engagement might lead to an open school perimeter, community facilities on school premises, and a general blurring of boundaries. The desire to create a secure environment might lead to a focus on electronic security systems, fences and facilities with stringent health and safety requirements. The former results in community members entering the school regularly and pupils going out into the community; the latter can too easily result in segregation. By plotting these potentially opposing requirements upon this model, we can negotiate the way forward to success for both goals.
Similarly, the double-axes model can also be used to guide conversations that are both aspirational (what is our vision?) and opportunistic (what are the opportunities open to us?) (Fig. 2). By mapping out the potential wider resources available, schools may find they have access to more facilities than originally envisaged. This can then help focus discussions around future provision on facilities that can potentially serve both school and community.
The Learning Landscape Model
The learning landscape model (Fig. 3) takes this theme yet further. It aims to express the relationship between school and community in terms of the boundary between the two, redefining this and creating an in-between zone where community and school can engage in a number of collaborative and safe ways. The learning landscape model can be further enhanced by considering resources and opportunities in terms of people, technology and space.
Plotting this model with concepts allows discussion to be focused and clarifies priorities. It also allows us to perceive physical boundaries as actually defining the nature of human relationships. For example, in his article Figures, doors & passages, Robin Evans describes walls, doors and windows being "employed first to divide and then selectively reunite inhabited space". 1 Evans then goes on to explore the nature of what makes a room 'convenient'. He suggests that in a 16th Century Italian villa, a convenient room was one with several doors, creating a variety of different routes through the building, thus allowing occupants to create opportunities for encounters - and also avoid unwanted meetings! Conversely, in the 19th Century British home, a convenient room had one door off a corridor, used to keep rooms apart, thus minimising opportunities for accidental encounters, as such rooms were difficult to enter without a specific purpose in mind.
In this context, Evans makes a plea for an architecture that focuses on facilitating encounters rather than restricting them. Applying this to education, schools might make a similar plea for the creation of a new type of boundary that connects rather than separates, includes rather than excludes and allows it to engage with its community in a collaborative and safe way.
Participants generally felt that schools do indeed lie at the heart of communities
Fig. 1 THE DOUBLE-AXES MODEL
Fig. 2 ASPIRATION AND OPPORTUNITY
Fig. 3 THE LEARNING LANDSCAPE MODEL
Fig. 4 THE SCHOOL AND THE COMMUNITY: OUTCOMES FROM 22 MAY 2007
The Learning Landscape Model in practice
At the Building Excellence workshop on 22 May 2007, delegates used the learning landscape model to facilitate discussion on the relationship between school buildings and the curriculum. Starting from two of the key objectives of Curriculum for Excellence - a seamless education (progression through nursery, primary, secondary, college, university, training and work) and a holistic education (successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors) - delegates were asked how a school might:
- engage more fully with its community, while maintaining a safe and secure environment for children;
- maximise the resources available to it.
Delegates came to a range of conclusions, plotted on the learning landscape model (Fig. 4). In discussing use of existing resources within both school and community, they identified inflexible timetabling ( e.g. the 50 minute class) as a key constraint to more flexible use of facilities. They highlighted spaces such as dining and assembly areas that are often underused and suggested how they might be better used with better support from technology, flexible furniture systems and management. They questioned the 'one classroom = one teacher' principle, and again suggested ways in which a mixture of technology, furniture and timetabling management could provide considerably more flexibility for both teachers and pupils.
Similarly, there was much discussion around the ways in which community involvement could be tailored to the requirements, opportunities and constraints posed by each location. Small rural schools might serve many square miles, while some urban schools can dwarf shopping centres. Despite the difference in scale that might be involved, participants generally felt that schools do indeed lie at the heart of communities.
Conclusion
The school within the community needs to be owned by the community for it to work effectively. The models described here are intended to facilitate an inclusive briefing process to promote effective participation. Their starting point is a belief that community is strengthened by participants sharing aspirations, working together, agreeing priorities and making things happen. The aspiration is to extend Curriculum for Excellence beyond the school and into the community to provide a rich learning experience for everyone.
Fiona Duggan
FiD Ltd
fiona@fidspace.co.uk
Fiona works with individuals, groups and organisations undergoing change, exploring how space can support (or hinder) learning and working practices, and facilitate movement from 'the way we are now' to 'the way we believe we could be'.
CHOOSING THE BEST PRIMARY SCHOOL LAYOUT
Alan Russell, Education Officer, West Lothian Council
In West Lothian, there is a very wide range of primary school designs - open plan, semi-open plan and cellular - each with their own advocates. The authority is now aiming, in the light of projected requirements for additional provision, to identify the best layouts.
However, evaluating different designs throws up a problem; when teachers evaluate designs without having personal experience of different teaching area layouts, they tend to prefer what they have - but bigger, with better ventilation and more storage!
The authority will use a small group of primary head teachers and council officers to grade a limited range of optional teaching area layouts against an agreed set of weighted criteria. These criteria are based on requirements for Curriculum for Excellence, latest teaching methodologies, flexibility for the future, class size reduction, etc. From this process, the authority will develop a generic layout and a generic brief for teaching spaces in the new schools.
« Previous | Contents | Next »