ANALYSIS
CONCLUSION
It was only last year that people understood that one design solution cannot be applied to support children with SEND, as every child is unique and there is a wide spectrum of special educational needs. Therefore the guidance to start consulting stakeholders from the beginning of the design process is still in its infancy, with the focus now on designing attractive school buildings.
Through three exemplar case studies I established some consistencies within the design of the school buildings. The following list summarises these into categories which are all present within existing design guidance, however it would appear that these case studies are exceptionally well-designed and a rarity within the UK:
Simple, legible structure
Accessible circulation routes
Space for small group/individual teaching
Flexible/moveable spaces
Practical sensory environments
Use of tactile materials
Natural light and ventilation
Close relationship with nature and the surrounding landscape
Enclosed outdoor spaces (Playgrounds and sensory gardens)
Incorporated technology as a learning platform
Community facilities
Security
A design evolved through dialogue and consultation with staff and pupils
"Only by talking to teachers, specialists, parents, carers and the children themselves – and incorporating their expertise and experience – can a good quality, detailed brief be developed, which will help turn bricks and mortar into an inspiring, ‘inclusive’ school environment that matches the needs of the community it serves." (Learning Spaces, 2014)
“Without such an understanding the danger is that wider policy imperatives will leave us with another generation of schools fit for the past, rather than the future”. (Higgins et al, 2005, p. 4)
“Designing for disabled children and children with SEN means putting these children right at the very heart of the design and build process, right from inception". (Learning Spaces, 2014)
Background Information & Case Studies
School designs began changing thirteen years ago when there was a realisation that school buildings were of a poor design and very dull and uniform in their style, and in order to raise attainment the design of these buildings needed to be addressed. It was also established at this time that boundaries between schools and the community should be blurred. Yet, it took a further two years to realise that people who use the spaces within the school environment should be at the heart of the design. The focus moved to designing schools to influence the children’s learning to help them improve. It became apparent that the science behind developing these designs was remarkably under-developed. 2008 and 2009 saw the introduction of designing inclusive environments and this became the focus for the design guidance and developed inclusion within education. It took until 2011 for flexibility and adaptability inside the classroom to be a focal point for the design guidance, offering suitability for a wide range of individual needs, shifting from being teacher-centred to learner-centred.
The current priority when designing classroom spaces is to focus on flexibility and adaptability, to allow for daily changes by the teachers in their approach and strategies, suitable for the range of needs of the pupils in their classroom. There has also been continued development in sensory awareness, including interactive communication and language techniques, and with technology constantly evolving it is important to consider when these can be incorporated in the classrooms to enhance children’s learning. Teachers should be able to adapt to the changing needs of their pupils, and be aware of new technology that could aid and assist their teaching methods.
Impact Of Design & Observations
Some of the children were able to communicate on a basic level and were able to tell me what they loved about their school, which were the outdoors, gardening, trips and the library. Outdoor spaces are very important for the children’s learning and small adjacent outdoor areas attached to each classroom are easily accessible, with the option to open up gates to join other classes. Sensory and tactile materials within the outdoor spaces are equally as important as the internal materials. Hydrotherapy sessions are also important, particularly for children with physical disabilities and limited mobility as they help provide therapeutic treatment, giving them the unique opportunity to move freely with whole body support.
I observed first-hand how children interact with space at both ‘School A’ and ‘School B’, and experienced how short their attention spans can be. As a result, the children spend a lot of time learning through sensory free play and the teacher encourages interaction through this play. I realised, through both observations and discussions with members of staff that you have to work towards progression at the children’s own pace and level. This proved how difficult it could be to design specific learning environments, without understanding the children and their individual needs through extensive observations and discussions.
School layouts can influence a child’s development by as much as 25%, both positively and negatively, over the course of the academic year, so it is vital to understand the pupils and their needs in order for designs to be fit for purpose. These designs should create the desired positive impact, incorporating all inclusive design principles and the learning environment criteria, whilst focusing on the six environmental factors which correlate directly with grade score.
Consultation/Briefing & Questionnaires & Interview
In 2005 it was established that staff, teachers, parents, social care and health care professionals should be involved in the design process.
Four years later, the design guidance was still pushing for the end users to be involved in the brief-building process.
The design guidance, including consultation processes, has been around for a very long time, through both the government and other influential sources, however this has not been put in to practice until very recently. Last year Learning Spaces (2014) summarised the process entirely in one quote:
Considering all the primary and secondary research, I strongly agree with Erchul and Sheridan (2014) that the progress in school consultation research tends to move slowly, producing small, yet noticeable changes. This process continues to be a very slow one, despite issues being identified a long time ago, yet unfortunately consultation does not seem to be making the impact or the difference that it should.
The Head teacher at ‘School A’ is in a unique position as the school has been granted permission for an extension at a separate site. This position has ensured that he can voice his opinions and reflect on all the design faults of the current school, adapting them to guarantee success in the new build. His main priorities involved minimising corridors, ensuring a rectangular atrium area with good accessibility to all classrooms and an alternative space for other activities and creating open classrooms without any fixed or immovable furniture. He stressed to me the importance of designing empty shells for the classroom bases.
Through questionnaire analysis there were numerous facilities that the teaching/non-teaching staff felt their school needed which included, an in-ground trampoline for rebound therapy, multi-functional rooms with pop up equipment, an area for parents and sensory relaxation/reflection facilities. The responses for desirable facilities were shared between all schools rather than individual ones, showing a consensus for sensory rooms, theatre/cinema for wheelchair access and complex needs and dedicated spaces for health care professionals. Across the board, all respondents were in agreement that hydrotherapy and outdoor play benefitted the children the most, closely followed by the classroom spaces and sensory rooms.
When requiring respondents to rank individual areas of their schools, it became apparent which areas were clearly well designed and which areas were subjected to personal opinion, due to the rankings matching or being at opposite ends of the spectrum. For example, at one school, the layout, corridors, classroom, and playground and hydrotherapy pool were all ranked the same with only one anomaly. However the massage facilities, medical room and ‘cool down’ space were interpreted differently by everyone in terms of function and design. The medical room is constantly interrupted, meaning confidentiality is compromised and the cool down area is too plain and not relaxing, meaning other areas are used more effectively as cool down spaces such as the playground, gardens, light rooms and soft play area. Also subjected to personal opinion was the order of importance of the same individual spaces.
Respondents also had varying levels of knowledge regarding the existing guidelines for designing special needs schools and provisions. Also established through questionnaire responses was that generally people agreed with, or remained indecisive, design guidance limiting and preventing potential input from expert knowledge. Furthermore, all respondents remained indecisive when choosing a response stating that design guidance had been dictated, but have not had the opportunity to provide input into the design process and development of special needs schools and permanent provisions.
Detailed design guidance is available and does allow the potential input from expert knowledge. However, the in-depth consultation processes have only started to become used in practical situations in the last year. According to the government design guidance, there is plenty of potential for consultation from teachers, parents, carers, health care and social care professionals at all stages of the design process, encouraging contact at the beginning of a project. On the other hand, these experts are lacking communication between themselves, architects and occasionally do not know about design guidance or the opportunities available should they wish to contribute.
There is strong evidence establishing the benefits of specific learning environments and the influences on the children’s learning, which could be strengthened further by consultation with professionals and parents, who are in the best possible position to provide expert knowledge and feedback on the design of spaces they occupy daily and on the specific individual needs of the pupils in their care. As stated previously, this consultation process is still in the early stages of practical application; therefore applying these benefits to the existing guidelines through consultation is the next step in designing for special needs schools.
Further research is needed to establish whether expert knowledge is currently being applied and if their views are being considered when designing school learning environments. Further research is also needed to discover whether schools, parents, health care and social care professionals are cohesive and working together to meet the current design guidance.
Limitations faced have remained the same throughout this research, as a handful of children could only communicate on a basic level. This project did not focus on the children, and further research and recommendations are needed to speak to vulnerable children with clearance and through regular contact.
The conclusion of my knowledge and findings that have been developed through this research project, will inform my design brief for my final project. This well-informed brief has allowed input from teachers, parents and users of the special needs schools and permanent provisions to be involved in the briefing process for my scheme.
BRIEF:
TO DESIGN A CENTRAL COMMUNITY HUB IN BOURNE, LINCOLNSHIRE FOR SURROUNDING SCHOOLS, SPECIFICALLY ONES THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO AND INFLUENCED MY RESEARCH, TO BUILD A NETWORK THAT CAN SHARE KNOWLEDGE, EXPERTISE AND ADVICE.
THIS COMMUNITY CENTRE WILL PROVIDE SPACES FOR CHILDREN, PARENTS, TEACHERS, HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL CARE PROFESSIONALS TO MEET, INCLUDING OUTDOOR SPACES, AFTER-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES AND EDUCATION/TRAINING FACILITIES.
Figure 6
Figure 6