Holistic Interior Design of College Spaces for Developing Collaborative Learning Environments - Research Paper Example

Holistic Interior Design of College Spaces for Developing Collaborative Learning Environments: Perspectives from Designers, Teachers, and Students Framework: Definition of Holistic and Holistic Environments A holistic learning environment takes multiple factors into consideration and creates a space that supports students and faculty in their work. The space must be physically flexible to accommodate changing needs, and it must be aesthetically pleasing to support the spiritual and intellectual growth occurring in it. That is a tall order for university planners. Essentially, if planners view the campus as students do—as a place where learning, work and living combine and overlap—they can begin to understand how spaces are used by students, and what students need in order to satisfy their varying needs. University planners can no longer afford to ignore or put off renovating their spaces to reflect holistic design considerations. Now, the learning environment itself and the diverse needs of the students, both during formal classroom learning situations and during informal, outside-the-classroom collaborations, create a new paradigm for planners (Dittoe and Porter, 2007). The collaborative environment “occurs in a dynamic, social context offering a range of opportunities for students to learn according to their shifting needs and preferred learning styles” (Jamieson, 2009, p. 21). To an administrator or university planner, this sounds like a wonderful theory—but how do colleges implement collaborative learning spaces and still stick to their budgets? Educators must balance a variety of factors when considering learning environments: lighting, air quality, space, noise levels, total number of students, ergonomics, technology… the list goes on (Kennedy, 2008). The hard cost of designing outstanding learning environments (or redesigning existing ones) can be an immediate block to implementation of holistic design: it simply costs more money to build spacious classrooms with large windows for natural light or with cutting-edge artificial light, ergonomic chairs and tables instead of the usual tiny desks, and inspiring architectural or interior design components. The “soft” costs of student satisfaction and learning absorption are harder to measure and sometimes get left out of design considerations. Colleges are serving customers, however—the students and teachers. Creating ideal learning environments should be an important consideration for administrators. Considering the layout of the room, types and placements of furniture, and the smooth integration of technology shows these customers “that classrooms, offices and the spaces between them can include and engage students, faculty and administrators in a full and enriching range of activities… before, during and after class” (Steelcase, u.d.). By paying attention to details that influence the customers on psychosocial levels, colleges can create a sense of place (Jamieson, 2009; Eckman, 2007). The whole university campus is an integrated series of systems—both formal and informal—which contribute to the spiritual, intellectual, social and physical growth of the student. The campus becomes a community and has its own sense of place. The Collaborative Learning Environment: A “New” Paradigm It would seem that the idea of a “collaborative” or team-centered environment is filtering down from the world of work into college classrooms, then trickling more slowly into high school classrooms. Interestingly, the collaborative environment is often employed in the lower grades, especially in kindergarten where students interact with many projects throughout the day using every kind of learning style and are rarely lectured at—unless the teacher reading aloud to the students could be considered lecturing. Somewhere between kindergarten and adulthood the collaborative model gives way to the rows of tiny desks with an instructor behind a podium. There is a shift in thinking going on, however: instructors are no longer just teaching calculus and history, they are teaching students how to be lifelong learners (Steelcase, 2008). “Learning how to learn” is as important as absorbing facts long enough to remember them for tests. A classroom environment that supports different learning styles and group collaboration not only facilitates learning in the moment, it imitates the future work environment. Studio classrooms provide the right environment for collaborative learning (Dittoe and Porter, 2007; Steelcase, 2008). Fluid, open spaces, moveable furniture, and comfortable chairs allow the environment to change at a moment’s notice as the teaching methods change. Interactions and the ebb and flow of activities are enhanced when the environment adapts to the user rather than the other way around. Classrooms can be made temporarily bigger—or smaller—and students can work independently, in small groups, or as a large group when the environment is flexible. Besides flexible furniture and employing integrated technologies for sharing information, Steelcase indicates that allowing more space per student in the classroom (32 square feet versus 15 square feet in a traditional classroom) affects the students psychologically—so much so that retention rates climbed significantly. The Steelcase example of allowing more “real estate” per student is supported by studies which show learning and satisfaction are improved in spacious classrooms (Dittoe and Porter, 2007). Beyond Four Walls and a Desk: The Campus as Classroom Teachers and administrators view the collaborative classroom as the primary vehicle for delivering information to students, but students spend a majority of their learning time outside of classrooms preparing, working individually or collaboratively on assignments, and studying (Jamieson, 2009; Dittoe and Porter, 2007). These peer-to-peer social interactions are enhanced by excellent gathering spaces throughout the campus. The library, cafeteria, study nooks, and the student center all become places of learning used by students in an unpredictable variety of ways. Thus, each of these spaces has the potential to become a “learning environment” at a moment’s notice, pressed into use by student teams formally or informally working together outside the four walls of the classroom. Colleges must pay attention to these spaces as much as they do the actual classrooms where instructors deliver materials to students. The growing use of laptops and other wireless devices has prompted colleges to install wireless networks. This is a good advancement. However, colleges have not considered changing the environments in which students use their wireless devices, such as providing comfortable chairs, flat workspaces that can accommodate student teams, or even considering how students move around spaces while using them in a multiplicity of ways (Jamieson, 2009). The current generation of students also expects unprecedented flexibility in the campus environment not only for work spaces but in their living spaces as well (Dittoe and Porter, 2007; Kennedy, 2008). Inspiration: Other Researchers’ Studies on the Impact of Environment The shapes and colors of our environments affect how we go about the work of learning. Furniture that stresses the body through inappropriate physical alignment, colors and surfaces that are uninspiring and layouts that separate teacher from student have a very real effect on the success of learning. Several studies conducted by other researchers empirically support this intuitive assumption and give other researchers (and ultimately, architects and designers) direction for creating holistic learning environments. Technology rich classroom study. Zandvliet and Straker (2001) investigated the relationship between physical factors and psychosocial factors in a representative sample of forty-three Australian and Canadian IT classrooms. They found that following ergonomics rules had a positive effect on the more than 1,400 high school students who completed their questionnaire. Zandvliet and Straker measured the ergonomic environments using a Computerized Classroom Environment Inventory, which considered physical variables such as workspaces, computers used for learning, the visual and spatial environment of the classrooms, and air quality ratings. They found that while the actual computers used in these IT environments were generally excellent, the layouts of the IT rooms were less than ideal. Teachers indicated they preferred an arrangement where all the computers were along the peripheral walls of the classroom with the students facing away from the center so the teachers could monitor student screens. However, they rated the actual workspaces as inadequate because the stations did not provide enough room for students to do non-computer work, such as reading from textbooks or writing answers long-hand. This lack of space could arise from the notion that having more computers is more important than having fewer, high quality computers; the classrooms were in some cases jammed with machines under the misguided idea that each student should have access to a machine during learning. (This dovetails with Jamieson’s (2009) observations of college library IT spaces.) Fewer computers of higher quality with more space for other activities showed a positive correlation with learning satisfaction. The work stations also did not adequately adjust to accommodate the students physically (chairs, keyboard heights, position of the monitors, etc.). This was a pervasive problem across the sample studied and while students generally viewed their learning environment positively, they indicated that the physical parameters did not meet their needs. The authors conclude that there is an “ideal” IT classroom environment for high school students; they do not delve into the parameters, but make some interesting assumptions which could be studied further. International indoor lighting study. Kuller et. al. (2006) took a look at the impact of light and color on the moods of people working indoors. Their study is interesting because it looked at groups of people living at different latitudes during different seasons. Colleges become the home community of students from all over the world, and knowing how light and color influences students in their native environments can help college planners to enhance their new environments. The authors report that women respond negatively to very bright environments, and men respond negatively to very dim environments; the lighting conditions in most of the environments fell far below recommended light levels, yet 74 percent of respondents reported lighting conditions were “just right”; workers who reported “colorful” work environments showed better moods, with the caveat that too much color could be negative. These findings may show that indoor lighting recommendations are too high and that the use of color design throughout interior spaces should be handled carefully but applied generously. Other compiled studies. Hoffman (2007) cites several studies in support of his article about the “green” buildings for the Hudson River School District. He states that the EPA estimates the average worker spends 90 percent of his or her time indoors during the day, and poor quality buildings result in billions of dollars of productivity lost every year. The Heschong Mahone Daylighting study found that students progress in math and reading much more quickly when they learn in naturally-lit environments. The Cone Millennial Cause Study found that students respond to environmentally sensitive buildings and environments, and that four-fifths of young people place trust in organizations which honor the environment. And, Mortgage Lenders Network USA found that 94 percent of respondents to their poll prefer to work in ecologically sound and energy efficient settings. These are important considerations for college campus planners because these studies touch upon what the current—and near future—generation of college students find important. New Construction and Renovation: Creating the “Place” Dozens of award winning new structures employing holistic design spring up each year. Perhaps more interesting to college planners are the renovations of existing spaces. Budget money is always tight, and enhancing existing spaces to reflect new understanding of holistic design and students’ changing needs is more practical than creating entirely new spaces. New construction: River Crest Elementary School in Wisconsin. The River Crest Elementary School built in 2006 incorporates innovative use of windows to increase natural light in interior spaces and employs low-VOC paint, recycled materials, and open plan classrooms as just a handful of considerations in creating a “green” space for K-6 students in the district. Sustainable building methods save direct costs (the River Crest School came in at 23 percent under the normal per-square-foot cost for new school buildings) and indirect costs by improving the quality of the learning environment, thus decreasing absenteeism and health issues and increasing student retention. Renovation: Manhattan. When renovations of existing spaces are undertaken with the new paradigms firmly in mind, they can accomplish outstanding improvements. A $13 million renovation project in Manhattan (Cardno, 2008) removed much of the facades of the old buildings and replaced them with large windows (10 by 14 feet), allowing the interior spaces to blend with the exterior. The campus is in a busy city center, and now passers-by can get a behind-the-scenes look at campus life. Cutting-edge engineering combined with careful attention to detail (such as moving or hiding mechanical structures like ductwork and air exchangers, or strategically exposing beams and the building structures) brings this New York City campus into the new millennia. Renovation: Rock Valley College. A library renovation at Rock Valley College in Rockford, Illinois also displays interior activities to passers-by through a new glass-front entry to the library (American School and University, April 2008). A 20 by 20 foot skylight brings natural light into the interior study spaces, and the peripheral walls now contain windows with views of natural areas and other campus buildings. The library now boasts a coffee bar and lounge seating to reflect the changing ways students use the library as a gathering and collaborative spaces. Renovation: Mount Holyoke College. Sometimes renovations are absolutely vital to keep the infrastructure in proper repair (American School and University, August 2007). Mount Holyoke College renovated its Mead Hall residential space because the building was deteriorating, and by carefully considering design principles they not only matched the architecture of the original building but seamlessly incorporated new elements into the design. Unused spaces were opened to add ten more sleeping spaces for residents. Plumbing and wiring was updated for safety. The renovation cost the college $3.8 million, which will be recovered through increased residential occupancy and reduced maintenance costs. Concluding Remarks Creating a sense of place may seem like an esoteric activity with no measurable inputs or outcomes. Factors such as architecture, spaciousness or claustrophobia, ease of access, integration of technology, color, light, sound, art, and so on all contribute to creating a sense of place on a college campus (Eckman, 2007). Ultimately, the student and faculty users measure a college’s sense of place and either like it or they don’t. Educators must balance a variety of factors when considering learning environments: lighting, air quality, space, ergonomics, technology… the list goes on. One important factor, of course, is cost (Steelcase, 2008). When campuses create brand new learning environments, the cost factor of design considerations is insignificant because those ideas are incorporated from the start. Retrofitting existing classrooms can be more difficult, if not impossible. There is much that can be done to improve existing environments to reflect a new understanding of how students learn. The direct cost of improve environments is paid back through the indirect measures of student retention, student satisfaction, and overall higher quality learning. Costs can also be recovered by “going green” (Hoffman, 2009), the common-sense idea that creating spaces out of sustainable materials and methods leads to better physical and mental health. Holistic design considers physical and psychosocial factors in creating spaces which are more user-friendly. Designers cannot discount the impact of interiors on students and teachers and must understand that classrooms are no longer the traditional four walls—they have expanded to include any spaces available throughout the college campus. References American School and University. (2007, August). Interior renovation. American School and University 79(13): 103-114. American School and University (2008, April). Light-filled study. American School and University 80(8):12-12. Cardno, C. (2008, June). Structures: A new design for design school. Civil Engineering 78(6): 28-29. Dittoe, W. and Porter, N. (2007, October). Appealing spaces. American School and University 80(2): 26-32. Eckman, R. (2007, December). Creating campus appeal: architecture's effect on the message conveyed about an institution. University Business 10(12): 40-42. Hoffman, P. (2009, April). Making the change to sustainability: building green builds a better education. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers 84(4): 16-20. Jamieson, P. (2009, Jan-Mar). The serious matter of informal learning: from the development of learning spaces to a broader understanding of the entire campus as a learning space. Planning for Higher Education 37(2): 18-26. Kennedy, M. (2008, December). 10 steps to success. American School and University 81(4): 18-24. Kuller, R., Ballal, S., Laike, T., Mikellides, B., and Tonello, G. (2006, November 15). The impact of light and colour on psychological mood: a cross-cultural study of indoor work environments. Ergonomics 49(14): 1496-1507. Steelcase (u.d.). New research in learning and working: evolving educational environments. PDF file NewResearch.Steelcase.pdf. Electronic version available from http://www.steelcase.com. Steelcase (2008, October). Mid-term review: colleges put Steelcase LearnLab environments to the test. Electronic magazine available from http://www.360.steelcase.com. Zandvliet, D. and Straker, L. (2001, July 15). Physical and psychosocial aspects of the learning environment in information technology rich classrooms. Ergonomics 44(9): 838-857. Read More