As schools get back to work following the Christmas break, some pupils are being asked to turn their minds to how their school buildings and classrooms can be improved under Building Schools for the Future – the national programme to rebuild or refurbish every school in England.
Much is expected of BSF. Can constructing a new physical and technological environment in education actually transform learning experiences for generations of pupils? The concerns come at a very sensitive moment when, in the face of mounting furore over public expenditure, BSF has received shelter and support, most notably with the allocation of additional funding and the transfer of all key responsibilities from the Department for Children, Schools and Families to Partnership for Schools, the quango tasked with managing and delivering the programme.
There is a simplistic belief running through the BSF programme so far that architectural and technological innovations will automatically trigger changes in teaching and learning, as well as lead to an improvements in environmental sustainability. This delusion ignores the fact that changes are always the result of complex behavioural dynamics: they are less about bricks, mortar, laptops and biomass fuel, and more about relationships and values. There is not a single moment when education and learning are not embedded in some sort of social relationship, to which accountability, motivation and meaning are related.
Research has suggested that the simple introduction of new technology in the classroom has a significant influence on classroom relationships. In one study, pupils preferred to use an automated tutoring system, not because it was perceived to be more effective than the teacher, but just to seek individual assistance in a more private and less embarrassing way. In another piece of research, students were reluctant to send simple enquiries by email to their lecturer due to the pressure of having to articulate their questions in the best possible manner. They wanted to avoid leaving a permanent record of their ‘lack of cleverness’.
These issues have always been at the core of Futurelab’s work on ‘learning spaces’. In particular, they underpin our long standing position on the importance of involving pupils, teachers and other users of new environments right from the start, listening to their views, experiences and ideas, and using this input as a catalyst for the BSF change process. These aspects are essential as they facilitate the development of a ‘common language’ about learning (or about environmental issues and sustainability), creating consensus and setting the right context for a shared understanding and, hopefully, for behavioural change.
For real change to take place, it needs to be rooted in specific concerns identified and articulated at a local level, and then it needs to become embedded in daily practices and relationships. For this reason, the route to a truly shared transformational vision, and then to achievable, measurable behavioural changes, can only be informed co-design. This type of co-design would draw on research and successful practice, while engaging users and designers in a critical and challenging dialogue without shying away from issues of feasibility and accountability. Most crucially, it would not only apply to the built environment, but also to what is meant to happen within it, mainly the curriculum and the emerging relationships between learners, practitioners and the local community. The whole educational experience could then become a constructive dialogue, constantly drawing on ideas and issues which are fully owned and understood, rather than imposed through convoluted procurement and design strategies detached from the end-users’ actions, choices and priorities.
Dr Carlo Perrotta is a learning researcher at Futurelab, an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to making teaching and learning more relevant and engaging
