The risks of standardised school building design: Beyond aligning the parts of a learning environment

Abstract

School design in any epoch reflects the collective values and attitudes of the time, and the political currents which shape perspectives. In this paper, we consider the risks associated with an English school’s rebuilding under the Priority School Building Programme, a standardised approach to school design, tending to result in ‘traditional’ instead of ‘innovative’ designs. At a micro scale, risk is affective, influencing educators’ ontological security. We also consider the macro-level risk of shaping citizens through education policy reflecting particular values. This case study, in a UK secondary school, explores theoretical frameworks that can be used to investigate risks involved in rebuilding projects. It is well established that misalignment between structural resources, approaches to pedagogy and social relations presents a significant risk for school redesign. Although the case study project was a relatively smooth transition at the local level, with alignment between set, epistemic and social design, we argue that there can be a philosophical risk associated with conservatism in schooling design and a focus on performativity and conformity. Giving consideration to policy-led schooling decisions, we argue for the importance of alignment between design elements in the context of wider consideration around the purposes of education.

The combined impact of school design and procurement on student wellbeing and educational outcomes

“…Pre-opening of schools, our study confirmed the findings of research such as Leat et al (2012) and Woolner et al (2021) that shows a relationship between the degree to which budget is constrained and cost driven (as opposed to educationally driven) and the tendency for this to drive a prescriptive rather than aspirational design approach. What our study also found from the experience of participant education officers, architects, teachers and principals and what has not been reported as demonstrably in other research is how prescriptive design impacts procurement similarly across PPP and D&C/DBB schools.…”

“…To mitigate financial risks the department of education implemented a prescriptive, formulaic design process across the board for the PPP and D&C/DBB case schools. From the experiences of the teachers, principals and architects involved in this study, it appears that this approach has in fact, as predicted by Woolner et al (2021), accentuated other risks where 21st century educational goals have been undermined and jeopardised, including the much-anticipated innovation of PPP procurement.…”

“…While both have not been without criticism (for example, James, 2011), recent research tends to favour more aspirational and flexible approaches. Drawing on the work of Leat et al (2012), Woolner et al (2021) highlights how approaches that are adopted to mitigate risks such as standardised school design can actually "accentuate others, perhaps undermining, or even jeopardising, conceptions of education that align with 21 st -century learning discourse" (p. 2). This they argue poses a greater risk and reflects a model of schooling that has not moved beyond archaic views of schooling that restrict the purpose of education to market driven agendas (p. 14).…”

“…When multi method qualitative studies are undertaken that consider ILEs within their sociocultural context rather than focussing on the physical environment exclusively, there is growing evidence of their effectiveness (Cleveland et al , 2018) and potential in supporting future-oriented learning aspirations (Woolner et al , 2021). This is even more apparent when there is recognition of the conditions that mediate relationships that can improve student learning (Barrett et al , 2015; Barrett, 2020; Blackmore et al , 2011) such as when well-being is considered both as a facilitator of student learning (Kariippanon et al , 2018) as well as an educational outcome.…”

“…Despite emerging research recognising the need and value of involving the educational community in the design process, there is a notable absence of research evaluating design and procurement performance in terms of broader educational goals and further to this of research focussing on the experiences of the key users of the designed and delivered school; experiences that would no doubt reveal environmental, epistemical and social misalignment (Woolner et al , 2021, p. 5).…”