An analytical perspective on primary school design as architectural synthesis towards the development of needs-centred

guidelines
Ronald de Vrieze &Henri C. Moll
ABSTRACT
Primary school design is balancing between end-user needs and societal interests, and between traditional and innovative
approaches. In current approaches, an unbalance affects end-users’ performances and obstructs innovative school-building
design. The institutional system of design should not only be more aware of adjusting the quality design indicators to end-
users, but they should actually do it in combination with the increasing need for more innovation in school-building designs.
Present guidelines emphasize objective rational societal and traditional interests but underestimate the subjective essences
of individual end-user needs and the abilities of intelligent school buildings to meet important requirements for present and
future learning environments. Based on universal human needs and dynamic mechanisms relationships, this article
addresses a number of reasons that cause these mismatches. We present a theoretical analysis to establish Needs Centred
Guidelines for primary school design as a methodological tool to improve the balance between the societal and end-users’
needs, and to give more insight into underlying patterns in design processes. The guidelines are based on a variety of end-
user psychological, physiological and bio-physical needs. This article explains how this analytic approach contributes to the
attention for end-user physical learning environment needs and to innovate school design.

Notes on contributors
Ronald de Vrieze is lecturer at the School of Architecture, Built Environment and Civil Engineering at the Hanze University of
Applied Sciences of Groningen since 2006. The combination of social and natural studies inspired him to research their value
from an interdisciplinary approach. He started a Ph.D. research in healthy sustainable primary schools. Since 2013 he
collaborates with external institutions, companies, scientists of social and natural science studies, and students in (school)
building construction innovation programs. During the period 1990–2006 he was involved as a technical policy employee
and head of the built environment department at a Dutch municipality.

Henri C. Moll is Professor in management of natural resources for sustainable production and consumption at the University
of Groningen. He obtained a Master's degree in physics and a Ph.D. in energy and environmental sciences. Since 1981 he has
been involved in research about environmentally responsible and sustainable lifestyles, energy systems, transport systems
and building practices. His research attitude is to integrate scientific disciplines to solve complex social and environmental
problems. In his research, he has collaborated structurally with social scientists, economists and spatial scientists.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crisis in Dutch primary school-building design solved by paradigm shift?

Ronald de Vrieze &Henri C. Moll
Abstract
There is an ongoing social debate concerning Dutch primary school design related to persistent physical environmental
problems such as poor indoor quality and inflexible spatial elements. Increasing complexity and building construction
process failures, as well as inexperienced school principals, also seem to be important impact factors. This analysis employed
a multi-level model which reflects the interrelationship between needs, interests and views, which are in turn responsible
for physiological, psychological and biophysical problems in the school-building design process. It shows that antagonistic
interests seem to impede rational innovative pathways which could be used to enhance synergetic solutions. These interests
impact on the process by affecting the objective decision-making process adversely, making the problems faced
unnecessarily complex due to competing subjective desires. The new approach proposed here increases awareness by
mirroring actors’ behaviour and their most important needs, possibly leading to a decrease in school-building design
problems. By means of introducing a positive psychological approach and viewing these profound human needs as a social
fractal, it is possible to create a new paradigm which might solve the school-design crisis. As a lever for changing the current
processes, new tangible school-building design parameters also might become available. The aim of this study was to
analyse the current problem patterns and assess the possibility of producing more synergetic solution patterns. On this
basis, we developed a needs-centred guideline for primary schools.

Designing for adaptation: the school as socio-spatial assemblage

Kim Dovey &Kenn Fisher
Abstract
Over the last century we have seen a slow transformation of the architecture of school classrooms in response to changing
pedagogical theory and practice. A shift from teacher-centred to student-centred learning is accompanied by the move
towards a more ‘open’ plan with new spatial types, interconnections and modes of adaptation. This paper seeks to
understand this linkage of plans to pedagogies in the case of the middle school. Using an analytic framework of assemblage
theory, clusters of learning spaces from a range of recent innovative school plans are analysed in terms of capacity for socio-
spatial interconnection and adaptation. Five primary plan types are identified, ranging from the traditional classroom
through various degrees of convertibility to permanently open plans. Patterns of spatial structure and segmentarity emerge
to enable new forms of teaching and learning on the one hand, but also to camouflage a conservative pedagogy on the
other. If traditional classrooms with their corridors and doors can be understood in terms of Foucaultian disciplinary
technology, the new learning clusters suggest a use of Deleuzian social theory to understand an architecture of connectivity
and flow. Through an analysis that is intended to reveal rather than eliminate ambiguities, architectural capacities for
‘convertibility’ from one pedagogy to another are distinguished from properties of ‘agility’ or ‘fluidity’ that enable
continuous adaptation between learning activities. We find that the most popular types have high levels of convertibility and
reveal conflicting desires for both discipline and empowerment. We also suggest that the most open of plans, while cheaper
to build, are not the most agile or fluid.

The Influence of School Architecture and Design on the Outdoor Play Experience within the Primary School
Marc Armitage
Abstract
Since the very earliest times, schools have provided a place (the playground) and a time (playtimes) in which children can
have time away from the direct involvement of adults and formal learning. Although the basic design of school grounds has
changed in a number of ways over the years, from the subtle to the more direct, what effect these changes have had on the
overall education of the child is less clear. Research has identified a number of positive effects on leaning that playtimes and
the informal use of school grounds provides, yet it is also clear that schools themselves often greatly under‐use this
potential, or even actively restrict access to it, as a counter to what is often seen as the ‘problem’ of playtime. This paper will
draw on recent research into ‘what’ happens on school playgrounds and ‘where’ it happens, using visual examples from the
UK. The findings from this research will explore the direct links that have been found between school building design and
children’s use of the outdoor environment for play.

Continuity and conflict in school design: a case study from Building Schools for the Future
Abstract
In a bid to understand the relationship between school design and pedagogic practices, this article – which forms part of a
larger project aimed at exploring students', teachers' and parents' perceptions of school spaces – focuses on how the design
of a school funded as part of the Labour Government's Building Schools for the Future Programme (DfES 2003, 2004) came
to fruition. We focus on how the strategic educational vision for this particular school was developed and how this vision
was embedded in the final design. The analysis conducted allowed us to explore the process of design across different time
periods. We found that motives can change depending on the aims and objectives at a particular point in time and that
when the motives of different professional groupings differ at particular stages, this can cause tensions. This analysis has
provided us with a stage model which we will use for analysing how educational visions were developed and how these
were translated into material spaces in four other newly designed schools. The purpose of this is to provide a holistic
understanding of how design processes impact on end-users' experiences of schooling.

Anthropometric evaluation for primary school furniture design

Joanne W. Y. Chung &Thomas K. S. Wong
Abstract
Musculoskeletal symptoms are one of the top ten health problems among schoolchildren in Hong Kong. Whether or not
these symptoms are related to school furniture has yet to be determined and published data on furniture size are lacking.
The purpose of the study was to determine whether the design of furniture in schools is appropriate for children's
anthropometry. A total of 214 volunteer subjects were recruited. This constituted 90% of the total number of primary 5 and
6 students in the studied school (i.e. those aged 10 and 13 years). The data collected included demographic information,
data on perceived health and posture and body and furniture measurements. The girls' BMI was lower than that of the boys.
The girls had longer lower limbs and wider hip breadth measurements in the standing position. This was similar in the sitting
position. Almost none of the subjects had a chair with an appropriate seat height. Seat depth was found appropriate for
large groups of students whether or not a large or small chair was used. Recommendations on the sizes of chairs and desks
for boys and girls are discussed.

Putting “structure within the space”: spatially un/responsive pedagogic practices in open-plan learning environments
Sue Saltmarsh,Amy Chapman,Matthew Campbell &Christopher Drew
Select Language▼
Translator disclaimer
Abstract
Non-traditional open-plan schools and classrooms are currently enjoying a resurgence in Australia, with proponents arguing
for the necessity of educational spaces that more readily accommodate the needs of twenty-first century learners. However,
these learning environments can pose considerable pedagogic challenges for teachers who must balance the ethos of spaces
designed to facilitate autonomous and flexible student learning, while simultaneously managing the complexities of shared
space and resources, decreased staff–student ratios, and highly variable student responses to learning in open-plan settings.
This paper draws on observational and interview data from an Australian study of three primary schools operating in open-
plan spaces. Informed by cultural theories of spatial practice, we argue that the ways in which teachers conceptualize and
operationalize notions of “structure” is pivotal to the responsiveness of pedagogic approaches within open-plan spaces.

How Classroom Design Affects Learning

For people in the education field, student outcomes are the most important indicator of success. Practically
everything revolves around boosting student learning achievements, including funding, professional
development for teachers, the implementation of standardized tests and enrichment or remediation
opportunities for students.

Unfortunately, classroom design—which has a significant impact on learning outcomes—is often an

afterthought. Luckily, attitudes around classroom design are shifting, and educators are making an effort to
create ideal learning environments for diverse groups of students.
The traditional arrangement of row after row of desks is on the way out. Industrial, cookie-cutter furniture is
being replaced by flexible seating options that are intentionally selected to empower students.

The most important—and most worthy—goal of educators is to give students the best education possible.
Doing so extends beyond the curriculum to the very environment in which children learn.

Does classroom design affect learning? Yes!

The connection between classroom design and learning outcomes is more than simple conjecture. Recent
scientific research backs this up.

A 2015 study published in the journal Building and Environment found that changing some core elements of
classroom design can increase student learning outcomes by 16 percent.
According to the study, factors such as air quality, lighting and students’ sense of ownership of their
classroom all affected the students’ ability to learn.

Old vs. New Design: Is there really a difference?

The stereotypical classroom has had the same design for decades. Think back to some of the classrooms
you occupied as a student or the way classes are portrayed in movies. You’re likely visualizing the oversized
teacher’s desk set up in a corner, along with student desks organized in neat rows.

Research by Steelcase shows that rearranging the rows of desks into grouped configurations improves all of
the following aspects of learning:
 Ability to engage in preferred learning methods

 Active involvement
 Collaboration
 Creation of an enriching experience
 Feeling comfortable to participate
 Focus
 In-class feedback
 Opportunity to engage
 Physical movement
 Real-life scenarios
 Repeated exposure to the material through multiple means
 Stimulation
Educators embracing new classroom design realize that the teacher-centered furniture arrangement isolates
students and limits their learning—not to mention makes the teacher’s job more difficult. Teachers are
designing classrooms that look like a “Starbucks for kids” or college apartments. As a result, their students are
thriving.

What are the implications of classroom design for students?

Classroom design has the power to impact students’ well-being and motivation, either for better or for worse.

As students have to spend large chunks of time in school, classrooms should be welcoming and warm to
boost student morale. Additionally, classroom design can facilitate the learning experiences of students with
special needs, including ADD, ADHD and specific learning disabilities.

Educators can provide various types of workspaces to maximize the classroom’s potential for students who
learn in different ways. Those workspaces may include:

 A classroom library sectioned off with shelves and comfy chairs for reading
 A common area, maybe on a large rug or around a large table, for class discussions
 A research center with a computer workstation
 Desk or room dividers or study carousels for independent, focused work
 Tables and chairs for small group collaborative work

Which details of classroom design make a difference?

The short answer is that all aspects of classroom design make a difference to the space’s ambiance and the
learning environment students walk into each day. However, particular design details have the strongest
impact and can yield the best results without a complete overhaul of existing furniture and fixtures in a
classroom.

Air Quality
According to the Building and Environment study, good air quality and comfortable room temperatures
improved student progress by 28%.

Teachers can decorate their classrooms with plants to improve the air quality and brighten up the room. In
rooms without local control of the thermostat, fans or space heaters can help regulate the temperature.

Choice
Student choice is a major factor in creating an ideal learning environment. Letting students choose how they
learn gives them a feeling of ownership and creates a sense of community in the classroom.
Educators can accomplish this by providing flexible seating options and allowing students to decide where
they’ll do their best work. Flexible seating options can include:

 Bean bag chairs

 Individual workstations
 Mats or cushions
 Sofas and couches
 Standing desks or tables
 Tables and chairs
Complexity
The overall layout and interior design aspects of the classroom—including the use of color—create an
environment that is either stimulating or not. The Building and Environment study shows that a balanced
layout with wall displays and perhaps an accent wall can increase student progress by 23%.

Desk Arrangement
How desks or seating options are arranged has a significant influence on student engagement and the
prevalence of active learning. In the Steelcase study, both students and faculty experienced over 30% more
engagement in classrooms with new desk configurations over the old standard of traditional rows.

The most impactful desk arrangements are designed with collaboration and flexibility in mind. Desks and
chairs should be easily moveable—consider options with wheels on the bottom—to accommodate any given
learning scenario, from small group collaboration to larger group learning labs or independent work.

Light
Industrial-style fluorescent lights are unattractive and, worse, may interfere with student learning. In particular,
students with autism or sensitive hearing might find the buzzing of fluorescents distracting.

Natural light is ideal for classroom environments. In fact, students in classrooms with big windows and
daylight achieve 20% faster progress in reading and math, according to a Heschong Mahone study cited
in ScienceDirect.
Teachers whose classrooms don’t have windows can use lamps with natural light bulbs to create a similar
effect.

What’s the importance of seeing the classroom from a student’s

perspective?

Students don’t see the world through the same lens as adults. That’s especially true for young students,
whose physical smallness means they experience the spaces around them from an entirely different
perspective than tall “grown-ups.”

Educators should spend time in their classrooms looking at each aspect of design from a student’s point of
view. What’s it like to sit where students sit and work for extended periods of time? Can students see what
they need to from where they’re seated? What distractions are around? Does the room look too busy? Too
dull?

In addition to this exercise, teachers can also get students directly involved in classroom design. Ask
students’ opinions and get them to help rearrange and redesign the classroom.