Learning Environment and Classroom Configuration Impact on Student LearningBy Steve W. Martin, University of Southern California

Are Schools More Like Factories or Beehives?By Dr. Shelley Hasinoff

ENVIRONMENTS

ACCENTUATED LEARNING ENVIRONMENTSSTRATEGY

For the past one hundred years the school classroom has remained the same. Students have sat in identical desks that were neatly organized into rows. The teacher sat at the front of the class in order to keep a watchful eye over the students. The environment was based upon a hierarchal structure intended to promote authority, structure, and discipline. Meanwhile, the learning style of each individual student was ignored.

Today, there is a fundamental shift in the way classrooms are organized. The trend is moving to a classroom that is an open learning environment where there is no front or back of the room. Rather, students sit in areas that are conducive to their own style of learning. The rows of one-size fits all desks are being phased out in favor of dynamic learning zones consisting of different types of tables and chairs.

There are significant societal shifts behind the growth in popularity of the dynamic learning zone classroom configuration. In the past, student success was based mainly on the retention of facts they recited on tests. Today, it is students demonstrating they can apply knowledge and this typically takes collaboration with other students. Smart phones, social media, and texting have become a way of life for students and this has shortened student’s attention spans, thus requiring a new learning environment. In addition, the current generation of students are more independent and socially aware. They are less inclined to conform within the traditional institutional frameworks as past generations were. Finally, there is a new generation of technology savvy and socially conscious teachers. The teacher-centered approach where the teacher is the all-knowing main authority figure, is transitioning to a student-centered approach, with the emphasis on student participation, incorporating the use of computers and tablets.

Understanding Student Learning Styles

During the first five years of life, 90 percent of the brain’s growth and development occurrs.1 The mind evolves and learns as it interacts with the world around and records strange and exciting new experiences. For example, we learn to speak by mimicking the people around us, and the average five year old has a vocabulary of about twenty-five hundred words.2 Today, the average adult mind knows the meaning of about fifty thousand different words.3

Through our senses we represent our thoughts, experiences, and how we learn. The three communication channels we use are our sight, sound, touch, taste and smell. “Visual” refers to pictures and imagery, “auditory” to sounds, and “kinesthetic” refers to touch and feelings. Some students prefer to learn using the visual channel, some prefer the auditory channel and others the kinesthetic (also called tactile) channel.

Students who prefer the visual channel describe their experiences in visual terms. They are likely to say, “I see what you mean,” “Looks good to me,” or “Show me what to do.” Students who prefer the auditory channel based on sound will say, “Sounds great,” “Talk to you later,” or “Tell me what to do.” Students with a primary word catalog based on feeling might say, “I’ve got it handled,” “We’ll touch base later,” or “I don’t grasp what you mean.”

In addition, visual learners may be more impacted by elements of the classroom such as color and aesthetics (cluttered versus organized surroundings). Room temperature and smells may affect the kinesthetic learners while clarity of sound is important to the auditory learner.

Learning Environment and Classroom Configuration Impact on Student Learning By Steve W. Martin, University of Southern California

A student’s personality is also a significant learning style factor. Whether students are introverted, extroverted, or detail orientated, each is a function of their personality. A personality is a complex matrix of different traits. While everyone’s personality is as distinct as a fingerprint, some traits of behavior can be classified to help understand a student’s attitude, habits, and conduct.

There are many types of personality classifications. Some are based on some variation of Carl Jung’s philosophy of psychological types. For example, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) uses four measurements to classify a personality into one of sixteen different types. These measurements include your level of extraversion, whether you use intuition or physical observation to make decisions, how much you trust logic versus feelings, and finally, whether you perform detailed analysis or make instantaneous decisions.

These different personality classification types can also be applied to determine classroom configuration in terms of types of furniture used and their proximity to others. For example, some students get along better in groups than others. These students typically take input and seek the approval of classmates. Therefore, a collaborative group setting better suits their learning style. Conversely, other students are more independent. They desire to remain autonomous. A desk separated from classmates or an independent study carrel is more appropriate for their learning style.

The Classroom Environment Impact on Student Learning

Researchers Peter Barrett, Yufan Zhang, Joanne Moffat, and Khairy Kobbacy conducted a Building and Environment Study4 on seven-hundred and fifty-one primary students across thirty-four varied classrooms to understand the impact of school design on the learning rates.

Over the course of the year, each student’s level of reading, writing and mathematics proficiency were evaluated. In addition, classrooms were measured according to six environment design parameters including color, choice, connection, complexity, flexibility and light. The results prove that a well-designed classroom can improve student performance by 25 percent. According to the study, “All things being equal, the academic performance of a child in the best environment is expected to be 25 percent better than an equivalent child in the ‘poorest’ classroom environment.” The study identified key indicators which determine the well-designed learning environment.

• The quality and quantity of natural light the classroom can receive.

• The degree to which the lighting level can be controlled manually.

• The frequency of noise disturbance.

• The degree to which the pupils can hear clearly what the teachers say.

• The degree to which the pupils feel comfort in summer and winter and the stuffy feeling can be adjusted manually.

• The degree to which the distinct characteristics of the classroom allow students a sense of ownership.

• The degree to which the furniture, fixtures, and equipment are comfortable and familiar, supporting learning and teaching.

• The degree to which the pupils live together without crowding each other.

• The degree to which the room plan allows varied learning methods and activities.

• The degree to which the ‘color mood’ is appropriate for learning and teaching.

• The degree to which the views of nature through the window

The study results quantitatively validate what many seasoned educators already intuitively know – a well-designed and appropriately configured classroom environment positively impacts student learning.

Notes

1. First Steps, “Brain Development,” http://www.firststeps.us/ parents_braindevelopment.shtml.

2. Speech Therapy Information and Resources, “Vocabulary,”http://www.speech-therapyinformation-and-resources.com/vocabulary.html.

3. Kevin Lee, “Strategies to Improve Vocabulary,” http://www.ehow.com/info_7868824_strategies-improve-vocabulary.html.

4. Peter Barrett, Yufan Zhang, Joanne Moffat, and Khairy Kobbacy, “Building and Environment.” www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv.

Steve W. Martin teaches at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business and is a noted author of books about linguistics, psychology and the human nature of decision-making.

Schools as Factories

We often use metaphors as a convenient way to communicate quickly without thinking very hard about what they really mean. However, the metaphors we use form our perceptions and guide our behavior in ways that we may not even realize. Consider the common metaphor that schools are like factories. The perception that education is a form of production harkens back to the industrial revolution when public schools copied the structures and practices dedicated to efficiency and production. We can still see traces of factory life in many of today’s schools:

• The belief that knowledge resides in experts (teachers) who transmit it to novices (students).

• Fixed rows of desks arranged to receive information from a single source (teacher).

• An emphasis on following directions rather than on problem-solving.

• The use of testing and grading of performance for quality control.

• The steady progression of students through the system in age “batches.”

• A bell driven daily schedule organized around rest breaks.

• The maintenance of uniformity through government policies, standards tests, curriculum documents, and support materials.

However, the factory metaphor has simply not kept pace with changes in society, our knowledge about how the brain works, or our increasing understanding about the effects of learning environments. Recently, Fred Gage, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute in California, made this observation, “Changes in the environment change the brain, and therefore they change our behavior.” 1

Although it was long supposed that human brains and capacities were fixed at birth, Gage and his colleagues have determined that new neurons are still being produced and that the capacity to add new memories and learn new skills can continue to grow throughout our lives. Furthermore, how fast these cells are added seems directly influenced by the richness of our interactions with our environment. This means that knowledge can no longer be seen as wholly teacher-driven or even confined to schools or to school hours.

Indeed, we more appropriately characterize learning today as a life-long interactive process in which meaning is socially constructed. The factory metaphor also fails to account for the shift in the epicenter of education from teachers to students. Students now have access to a vast online storehouse of information and have the capacity to produce and share data instantly with others around the globe.

Schools as Beehives

When we observe active groups of students engaged in collaborative and purposeful work we are likely to describe them as being “as busy as bees.” The perception that students are productive and engaged problem-solvers like the self-regulated bees in a hive is far more consistent with our view of education than thinking of school as a factory where students are expected to master simple routines and have little, if any input, into their learning. The metaphor of the beehive is especially apt for describing healthy, sustainable learning environments.

Are Schools More Like Factories or Beehives? How Environments Affect How Students LearnBy Dr. Shelley Hasinoff

It is evident that our perceptions about schools and whether we see them as factories or beehives has an impact on how we organize and manage learning environments. Increasingly, schools are recognizing the need for balanced classrooms in which there are separate yet integrated spaces for the whole class, small groups, and individualized learning activities.

The beehive also provides us with an excellent model for the kinds of open communication and learning collaboration that students need to progress academically. Bees keep each other well informed; they perform elaborate coded dances to explain exactly where foragers can find nectar to make honey.

Experienced bees mentor those who need to learn a new task, often accompanying them until they are ready to work on their own. Similarly, we know that peer mentoring and guidance from older students and community members enable students to gradually take on increasing responsibility for their own learning. For example, teachers who provide students with timely descriptive feedback help them to substantially improve their learning outcomes.

The structure of the beehive is efficiently designed to serve a variety of purposes. Architects have long been fascinated with the structure and function of beehives.2 In fact, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a school in Japan with hexagonal shapes in recognition of the “perfect world of bees.” Architect Paul Hankin has taken a similar approach school design for a school in Uganda. This school will consist of twenty hexagonal pods that accommodate two-hundred and fifty students.3

School architects in Finland are also deliberately moving away from factory-style buildings and are designing facilities in clusters with multiple gathering spaces. PasI Sahlberg, Director General of the Center for International Mobility and Cooperation in the Ministry of Education, attributes at least part of his country’s academic success on achievement tests to the increased attention being paid to the effect of the learning environment on student learning.4

Practical Environmental Advice for Educators

Today, research is pinpointing which aspects of the learning environment specifically affect learning. In their report titled Optimal Learning Spaces, Professor Peter Barrett and Dr. Yufan Zhang identify three broad principles along with their design parameters for schools: naturalness (light, sound, temperature, and air quality), individualization (choice, flexibility, and connection), and level of stimulation (complexity, color, and texture).5 Although there is much we still need to learn about the effects of each of these design parameters on learning, we can draw on this research and the metaphor of the beehive for guidance in optimizing learning environments now:

1. Create rich, varied, and stimulating learning spaces.

2. Designate spaces for whole class instruction, small group discussion and collaboration, active learning centers, as well as spaces for quiet reflection to create a balanced classroom.

3. Encourage cooperative learning and academic conversations by flexibly arranging desks or interlocking tables into clusters.

4. Encourage physical movement and the increased use of outdoor spaces.

5. Integrate technology and other resources flexibly.

6. Invite older students and community members into the class to share their expertise as mentors.

7. Enable students to take increasing responsibility for their own learning by posting daily tasks, sharing expected learning outcomes, and creating activity or learning centers.

Accent Learning Environments

Canadian Offices• Winnipeg, Manitoba• Kitchener, Ontario

United States Offices• Pembina, North Dakota

Phone 800.665.9378Fax 866.296.4569info@accentenvironments.comwww.accentenvironments.com

8. Establish routines for storing materials, completed work, and classroom tools in clearly marked storage spaces to help students become more self-regulated.

9. Use classroom walls to display student work prominently along with posters that define spaces and clarify roles and expectations.

10. Allow natural light and the ability to look out of a window, wherever possible.

Notes

1. Gage, F. (2003). Neuroscience and architecture. Paper presented at AIA 2003 National Convention and Expo. Retrieved July 20, 2014 from http://www.anfarch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/2004-02-01-Fred-Gage-Lecture-AIA-03-compressed.pdf

2. Ramírez, J. A. (2000). The beehive metaphor: From Gaudí to Le Corbusier. London: Reaktion Books Ltd.

3. Hinkin, P. (2014). How a night at the 2degrees Awards is now helping to build a school in Uganda [Electronic Version]. 2degrees Community. Retrieved July 12, 2014 from https://www.2degreesnetwork.com/groups/2degrees-community/resources/how-night-at-2degrees-awards-now-helping-build-school-uganda/.

4. Sparkes, S. (2012). Finland rethinks factory-style school buildings [Electronic Version]. Education Week. Retrieved August 4, 2014 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/07/06/36finland.h31.html.

5. Barrett, P., & Zhang, Y. (2009). Optimal learning spaces: Design implications for primary schools. Salford, UK: University of Salford.

Shelley Hasinoff is an independent consultant who holds a Masters and a PhD in education, has taught at all levels from nursery school to university, and has published books and articles on education sociology and middle years teaching. She has been a principal and a government consultant and coordinator in the areas of assessment, school administration, and program evaluation.

About Accent Learning Environments

For over 20 years and in 29,000 classrooms, Accent Learning Environments has helped educators improve student learning outcomes by providing innovative classroom furnishings. Our Accentuated Learning Environment is an inclusive learning environment that balances the needs of each student’s personal learning style, recognizes individual communication styles, and supports flexible teaching styles for the educator.

www.accentenvironments.com