Post on 17-Jan-2016
transcript
Current and future trends in the design of school buildings and
classroom environment in Iceland
Anna Kristín Sigurðardóttir, University of Iceland, aks@hi.is
Tartu City in EstoniaOctober 22, 2015
Agenda
• Background• Design of the school buildings – trends in
the 21st century• The link between pedagogy and design
(open plan schools and traditional schools)
• Pupils’ and staffs’ attitudes
Menntavísindasvið
Icelandic school system
Preschools 1 – 5 Municipalities
Compulsory schools
6 – 16 Municipalities
Upper secondary schools 16 – 19 State
Universities State / private
Individualised learning – and student collaboration- emphasised since 2000 in many policy documents
• to deal with different tasks that suit their learning ability, • increased responsibility for their own learning, • to make individual plans for their learning, • to work in active collaboration with their schoolmates,• different ways of working according to their own learning style
or interest.• to make decisions about their learning (such as choose of
tasks or ways of working)• and participate in decisions about the school work.
Measurement tool for individualised learning (2005). Reykjavik City Department of Education)
The study: Teaching and learning in Icelandic schools
Sample of 20 primary and lower secondary schools (6 – 16 years old).Six strands: student learning, teaching methods, physical learning environment, parents involvement, leadership and attitudes. Focus: Individualised learningMethods: • Observations on site including classroom observations in 1st–
10th grades (N=385); photographs, screening of drawings, open descriptions and quantitative data about teaching methods
• Electronic surveys among school staff (N=823), students (N=1824) and parents (3481). Statements about different aspects of practice and attitudes
• Interviews with leaders, teachers, IT staff, school librarians and students
Sigurðardóttir, A. K. and Hjartarson, T. (2011). Drawings: ARKÍS ehf
New wave of open plan schools
Designed for team-work, more open approach, transparency, flexibility and individualised learning.
• Open plan schools were built in many countries around the world, ca. 1965 – 1975/1980.
• They were changed into traditional arrangement rather quickly.
• Now is a new wave of open plan schools.
WHY?
What are the differences in pedagogy?
20th century school environment
A school with a cluster of classrooms
Home economics, natural sciences, languages, special needs, music
Social hallArt and crafts
Sport facilities
Teachers workroom is in each cluster in order to encourage collaboration.
Different colors are
used to separate the
clusters.
Cluster of classrooms
Layout of new school @ Studio Strik
Open school –Open learning spaces
@ VA- arkitektar
Social hall – Library - Canteen
Group 1
Group 3Group 2
Music and dramaEntrance
Administration
Sport
Ground floor
Menntavísindasvið
Menntavísindasvið
Schools in the centre of the community
Open ways of working by creating transparency
Open ways of working by creating transparency
Library and media centre inthe centre of the building
Library and media centre inthe centre of the building
Library and media centre inthe centre of the building
School design and pedagogy
• Based on descriptions from observation, the classrooms were categorises in open plan classrooms, traditional classrooms, team-teaching in traditional classroom layout and other. Comparison were made between the open plan classrooms and traditional classrooms.
• Comparison was made between those who claimed, in the survey, that they taught only or mostly in open plan classrooms and those who taught only or mostly in traditional classrooms.
Menntavísindasvið
Classroom arrangement by student level of age classroom
observation N = 383
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
49
27
13 11
61
1814
7
75
8 107
grades 1 - 4 (n= 162) grades 5 - 7 (n= 122)
grades 8 - 10 (n= 99)
%
I teach only or mostly in ….Teachers responses to a questionnaire N =
582
..traditional classroom ..open plan classroom equally in traditional and open
Not applicable0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
59
29
84
74
1510
1
85
94 2
grades 1 - 4
grades 5 - 7
grades 8 - 10
%
Independent groupwork
outdoor education
films
group discussion
independent wokr
project work
ICT programme
use of ICT
learning games
drama
experiments
writtenassignments
read together ..
groupwork
show how ...
worksheets
one-way instruction
direct instruction ..discussions
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
daily
weakly
monthly
rarely or never
How often do you use …?
Teaching methods
according to teachers‘
responds in twenty schools
Teachers working only or mostly in open plan classroom seem to use less direct instruction and more project work, drama and learning games.
Differences between open plan classrooms and traditional, based on
teachers responses (Spearman r)
Open plan vstraditional
Individualised learning4 items alpha = 0.79
Adapt towards student’ needs
6 items alpha = 0.84
Collaboration6 items alpha = 0.93
Satisfaction with student’ facilities
7 items alpha = 0.83
Teachers’ satisfaction 7 items alpha = 0.83
,324 **
,116*
ns
ns
,108 *
*p<0.01; **p<0.05
In open plan classrooms are more
developed individualisation, more teachers
collaboration and the teachers are more
satisfied with facilities for students.
Teachers are equally satisfied with the environment
and claim it is equally easy or difficult to adapt it
towards students needs.
Proportions of teachers who claimed it easy (totally, very or rather) to adapt different environment conditions towards individual students’ needs (n = 401 – 411).
%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
6157
36
57
46
36
62
7064
5247
37
Teach only or mostly in tratitional classroomsTeach only or mostly in open plan classrooms
How often or rarely are students in your class allowed to choose tasks/ subjects?
In every lesson Once a week Once or twice in a month
Once a term Almost never0
10
20
30
40
50
60
9
32
27
171413
49
20
8 9
Teach only or mostly in tradi-tional classroomTeach only or mostly in open classroom
%
Workstations in open plan classrooms “a carousel“
Pupils choice
In all schools a „carousel“ was used to increase variety in pupils tasks.
• T: It is the carousel that I called pupils‘ choice.• Q: Yes.• T: Which is of course no choice because they are not
choosing anything. • Q: No • T: They just go to the workstations in groups.• Q: Can they choose between tasks within the stations? • T: No, it is totally under our control.
(Teacher in grade 4 in school C)
I work with colleagues daily or many times per day about:
… lessons preparation
… classroom management
… teaching methods
… selection of textbooks
… overhaul of textbooks
… assessment0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
28
20
10 11 10
5
62
56
44
37
31
18
Teach only or mostly in traditional classroom
Teach only or mostly in open plan classroom
%
Those who agree to the statements
There are open discussions about different issues concerning
the school.
There are critical and objective discussions among staff.
There is a positive school ethos among staff
I participate in decision making on school‘s issues.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
55
48
73
44
34
30
61
29
Teach only or mostly in traditional classroom
Teach only or mostly in open plan classrooms
%
About team teaching
• We have been team teaching for about one year .. . I was sceptical in the beginning … but now I like it very much … easier, less stress and much more fun.
Teacher in grade 2 in school A
Teachers satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the acoustic in open plan classroom and traditional
classrooms. (χ2(1, N = 442) = 5,3, p < 0,05).
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
5
16
25 24
18
8
33
13
18
2629
9
3
Teach only or mostly in traditional classroomTeach only or mostly in open plan classrooms
%
How well does the current classroom environment, which you work in most of the
time, suit your ideal teaching methods?
Completely Very well Rather well Neither Rather badly
Very badly Not at all0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
6
25
46
12
7
30
9
30
39
10 11
20
Teach only or mostly in open plan classroomTeach only or mostly in traditional classroom
%
KLI
TORJ
NU
MBHDAGPCESF
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
7
12
13
17
27
28
30
31
32
33
36
39
42
55
56
57
77
82
86
School
Completely or very satisfied with the building
Pupils voice (grades 5 – 7)
Pupils are in general satisfied with the building.
Just, it is simple, easy to know where you are.
It is open but still closed. Also not too big. One can always get some peace but at the same time one can see everything. One can see if someone is there or there. Then it is also two floors.
Where is the best place to be? Pupils voice
• They liked most their (base) classrooms but the must fun was were their favorite subject was taught. They liked to be able to go to more peaceful and quiet spaces once in a while, warm and cozy with plants and sofas. They also wanted to be able to sometimes, choose how they work.
Menntavísindasvið
Second best (after the library) is the art room, so many items and it is good to think there, also colorful, but still clean.
Computers are rarely used in their study – pupils voice
The computers are extremely slow, it takes about half an hour to get in.
If we know nothing and the teacher do not know it, then we google it.
Students in upper secondary schools
(Anna Kristín Sigurðardóttir, 2015)
• Students value learning environment that gives them to some kind of flexibility. They like to sit in groups where they can choose to work or consult with other students or not. They also like environment as e.g. in libraries where they can expect a quiet area and various working conditions.
• They do not value rigid environment for learning, that is crowded, hot and lack flexibility, such as in computer rooms and in traditional classrooms where everyone sit in rows, facing same direction.
• There seems to be a big gap between student preferences for a good place for learning and existing environment in upper secondary schools.
Proportion of pupils (N = 1824), staff (N-823) and parents (N = 3481) that were totally, very or rather
satisfied with facilities for pupils.
Menntavísindasvið
In the classrooms
In art and craft
Outside the classroom
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
83
85
85
71
74
44
81
74
61
Parents Staff Pupils
Some final remarks
• Teachers working only or mostly in open plan classroom seem to use less direct instruction and more project work, drama and learning games.
• Students are allowed more choice in open plan classroom indicating higher level of individualised learning and also a promising conditions for student centred learning environment
• Teachers working in open plan classrooms do collaborate more than those working in traditional classrooms.
Physical design:Building design, technology and
other material elements.
Organisation: Structure of staff, schedule, and
administrative and district support
Educational culture: Assumptions and values regarding
educational goals and methods.
Student dynamics: Academic motivation and
focus, and behaviour.
School environment model Owens and Valesky (2007), adopted by Gislason (2010)
Thank you
Referneces• Gislason, N. (2010). Architectural design and the learning environment: A framework
for school design research. Learning Environment Research, 13, 127–145.• Land, S., Hannafin, M. J. & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centred learning environments:
Foundations, assumptions and design. Í Jonasson og Land (eds), Theoretical foundations of learning environments, (2.ed. , p. 3–25). New York: Routledge.
• Reykjavík City. 2005). Measurement tool for individualised learning (2005). Reykjavik City Department of Education)
• Sigurðardóttir, A. K. and Hjartarson, T. (2011). School buildings for the 21st century. Some features of new school buildings in Iceland. CEPS Journal, 1(2), 25–43.
• Sigurðardóttir, A.K. & Hjartarson, T. (in press). The idea and reality of an innovative school
From inventive design to established practice in a new school building.• Sigurðardóttir, A.K., Sigurgeirsson, I. & Sigþórsson, R. (in press). Teaching Practice in
Open Plan and Traditional Classrooms.