Showing posts with label learning spaces. Show all posts
Showing posts with label learning spaces. Show all posts

26 October 2013

Making Learning Spaces: The Secondary Library

If our schools are filled with "teaching places" instead of "learning spaces," what are we doing to change that?

All of us. What are we doing? Because whether you are in a national government, or you're a school superintendent, or principal, or teacher, you can be changing things, if that's what you want to do.

I had to write about this because of what happened with a Tweet from my friend William Chamberlain:
Choices in seating, in seating height, in gathering or hiding, and yes, fireplaces,
all make the typical recent McDonald's interior a far better learning space than most classrooms.
"McDonald's has better learning spaces than most schools," Chamberlain wrote, and, of course, he is right. Dozens of teachers joined in and retweeted this which is good, except.. when we tried to shift the conversation to what teachers might do, there was far less uptake. Now, I'm all for complaining, I do plenty of it myself, but honestly, if your classroom sucks as a learning space... fix it.


Fixing it... third grade teacher Derk Oosting doesn't wait, he acts

"Fixing it" doesn't always require money or getting new things, it often requires more subtraction than addition, getting rid of desks and miserably uncomfortable classroom chairs. Kids prefer floors anyway, whether its kindergarten or university. "Fixing it" mostly requires a mindset built around the ideas of "Choice and Comfort" and "Instructional Tolerance" and "Universal Design."

We remove the cultural expectations which have nothing to do with how humans learn. We remove the cultural and religious expectations of discomfort as some sort of positive. We remove ourselves as arbiters of some sort of schoolhouse propriety. And in doing so, we enable our children to find their own paths to success in school and in life.

Interlude: the eyes of a designer

Click 53rd and Park, New York City to get to this intersection in Google Earth.
There is a problem here, of course, which lies with the way educators are educated. They are not, unless their career paths have taken them far from "education," trained in design vision or design thinking. Years ago I taught Intro to Architecture at the Pratt Manhattan Center in New York. By the third class session we'd go on a walking tour, and early in that tour we'd end up at the corner of East 53rd Street and Park Avenue. At that intersection stand three landmarked structures, Mies van der Rohe's Seagrams' Building, Gordon Bunshaft's Lever House, and Charles McKim's Racquet Club. On the fourth corner is 399 Park Ave, a building completed in 1961 for Citibank - or as it was then called - The First National City Bank of New York. This building is on no one's landmark list. Why?

The why? requires learning to use Design Vision and Design Thinking, and also requires that observers step away from "I" statements. What makes three of these buildings great and the fourth a mediocre pile of steel and glass is really not a question of personal preference, it is instead an understanding of humanity and how humans see and understand. There are lots of clues to the failures of 399 Park when it is compared to its neighbors, from window shapes which violate the Golden Mean to an entry that's somewhat unfindable to massing which fails to meet the ground - and pedestrians - with grace, but the untrained observer will not see them - or will not understand what is wrong - without help.

Who helps educators do this? When an educator looks at a classroom, or a corridor, or a library, or a playground, or the school's entry... what do they see? How do they understand what they see?

Libraries - the Learning Commons

Middle School Library gathering space, connectivity everywhere
In the school system in which I work we invest very heavily in libraries. This counters a US national trend towards abandoning libraries and laying off librarians, but we see our school libraries as the center of our transformation from a collection of "teaching places" to a community of "learning spaces."
In New York, as in districts across the country, many school officials said they had little choice but to eliminate librarians, having already reduced administrative staff, frozen wages, shed extracurricular activities and trimmed spending on supplies. Technological advances are also changing some officials’ view of librarians: as more classrooms are equipped with laptops, tablets or e-readers, [New York City Schools' city’s chief academic officer] Mr. Polakow-Suransky noted, students can often do research from their desks that previously might have required a library visit. 
Now, I think we're smarter than Mr. Polakow-Suransky, and we've alway assumed that our libraries are more than a place for students to use the World Book, but we also know that if libraries are to be the Learning Commons at the center of our schools they must be re-thought, re-imagined, and re-designed in ways are far beyond "tinkering." In a century where all the world's libraries are linked to our phones, where information and books are no longer scarce but somewhat overwhelming, and where curation has become a mass participation exercise, the function of libraries as learning spaces requires radical change, and we expect our school librarians to not just change and adapt, but to be the leaders in our school buildings.

HackerSpace in one of our high school libraries
seating choices from bean bags to pub-height bar, technologies, tools
What do we look for? We look for flexible, adaptive, multiple media learning and creation environments. We look for student comfort, student choice, student-centric spaces. We look for students dropping in - all day long, whether elementary or secondary - so we know this is not "just" a scheduled space. We look for flexibility of design and the ability of students to alter that design as they need to - what we call "Student-Crafted Learning Environments."

"Student-Crafted
Learning Environment"
We expect our libraries to be MakerSpaces. Our libraries have legos, music studios, construction areas, one has a Makerbot 2 replicator, which students - quite "casually" - come and use to prototype things they've designed.

Students come with lunch and snacks and drinks, move the furniture, grab technology or bring their own, settle in, and work in contemporary environments.

Our libraries are far more kitchens than supermarkets these days, which makes sense. Our information supermarkets now reside in our hands, our quiet study places now reside in our earbuds and headphones, but our gathering places, our "Learning Commons," the places where we come together, for communion and contagious creativity, those are often what we are missing.

We've done this with money - creating a "Glass Room" quieter space at one high school, buying shelves which roll in many elementary libraries - and we've done it without money - dumping old VHS tapes and magazines and other stored items, and eliminating librarian offices to create quieter spaces, music studios, and maker spaces in others.

We've done it buying new soft seating and we've done it with kids and volunteers padding windowside shelves and turning them into window seats. We've done it with commercial furniture from Bretford and Turnstone and we've done it with stuff from the seasonal clearance piles at Walmart and Target.

A hand-me-down created "quieter space" created from what was,
for ten or more years, storage.
We've cut down or eliminated space-hogging circulation desks and bought boxes of wet wipes to clean up food and drink spills. We've created open computer networks which let kids connect their own devices and we've built "tool cribs" of differing devices for our students to use.

Changing "Teaching Places" into "Learning Spaces" is
primarily about the attitudes we adopt.
The point is that the time for excuses and complaining is over. Whoever you are, wherever you are, outside of say, a KIPP school or maybe the city school districts of New York and Chicago (thanks to mayors Rahm Emanuel and Mike Bloomberg), you have the power to undo your teaching place and create a learning space in its stead. The trick is to begin.

- Ira Socol

30 May 2012

"Fried Chicken 'n Watermelon" at The New York Times

"As access to devices has spread, children in poorer families are spending considerably more time than children from more well-off families using their television and gadgets to watch shows and videos, play games and connect on social networking sites, studies show."
Both The New York Times and "reporter" Matt Richtel are at it again. The Times in their battle against technology in education, Richtel in his war against poor children. [see Class War at The New York Times]

Technology is "not a savior" says The New York Times... except for their own kids
The general idea is that while rich kids will use technology well, poor kids - a dangerous alien population - will not, so rich kids should be connected to the world and this century, while poor kids need to be carefully watched and trained to "be white."

Let us tear apart one key section of Richtel's reporting on this so-called "Digital Divide" crisis:
The study found that children of parents who do not have a college degree spend 11.5 hours each day exposed to media from a variety of sources, including television, computer and other gadgets. That is an increase of 4 hours and 40 minutes per day since 1999.
Children of more educated parents, generally understood as a proxy for higher socioeconomic status, also largely use their devices for entertainment. In families in which a parent has a college education or an advanced degree, Kaiser found, children use 10 hours of multimedia a day, a 3.5-hour jump since 1999. (Kaiser double counts time spent multitasking. If a child spends an hour simultaneously watching TV and surfing the Internet, the researchers counted two hours.) 
It doesn't take an "expert researcher" to see the nonsense in the above. First, the kid with the TV on and the mobile phone in hand is not spending 11 hours a day, but 5.5 hours doing... um, whatever they may be doing because these categories are absurdly broad. At the moment, in this hour, I am spending 3 hours "wasting time on media." The television is on - HGTV, I'm writing on my computer - this post, I'm tracking mail on my mobile. In just a few hours I'll have used up more than my full day, and jump right to tomorrow.

Second, the giant gap? It comes to 1.5 hours a day - which might actually be 45 minutes, or 30 minutes, or - to be honest - who the f--- knows? Richtel has built a career out of misusing third-rate statistical analysis (he has a Pulitzer Prize for "proving" what is provably untrue - that mobile phone use has made driving in America much more dangerous), and here we go again.

Then, using the "anecdote as fact" structure which has defined Richtel's education reporting, the "reporter" finds the most connected poor child in America:
Policy makers and researchers say the challenges are heightened for parents and children with fewer resources — the very people who were supposed to be helped by closing the digital divide.
The concerns are brought to life in families like those of Markiy Cook, a thoughtful 12-year-old in Oakland who loves technology.
At home, where money is tight, his family has two laptops [obviously with broadband - IS], an Xbox 360 and a Nintendo Wii, and he has his own phone. He uses them mostly for Facebook, YouTube, texting and playing games.
He particularly likes playing them on the weekends. 
Ummm, Matt? I've worked with a lot of poor kids, most are almost completely disconnected at home - except for their phone. When New Rochelle, NY began their 4G laptop initiative in their poor neighborhoods, they could barely find anyone with broadband, much less other laptops at home or connected video games. When I ask, whether in Michigan or Virginia, I find the poor with very little access, outside of the (often shared) smartphone. So Markiy is quite the "thoughtful" find for The Times, a find who makes "poor" parents look lazy, and poor kids - even those described as "thoughtful" poor kids - look irresponsible.  This is the - please excuse the racist expression here but I believe the connection is valid - "Lazy Darkie" theory, the idea, still expressed by the Republican Party in the United States, that African-Americans fail to succeed because they are only interested in "lazing around," dancing, and eating "fried chicken 'n watermelon" (which, honestly, has been expressed more, ahhh, bluntly in the circles of American power).

James Gee on how gaming supports learning
You know Markiy is irresponsible because he plays games on weekends and he isn't doing well in school. I could suggest reading James Geeto Matt Richtel, but information on how children develop and what they need in terms of interactive language, is not The Times goal here.

If it was, they might have reached back to their own paper two years ago:
James Paul Gee, a professor of literacy studies at Arizona State University who grew interested in video games when his son began playing them years ago, has written several seminal books on the power of video games to inspire learning. He says that in working through the levels of a complex game, a person is decoding its ‘‘internal design grammar’’ and that this is a form of critical thinking. ‘‘A game is nothing but a set of problems to solve,’’ Gee says. Its design often pushes players to explore, take risks, role-play and strategize — in other words putting a game’s informational content to use. Gee has advocated for years that our definition of ‘‘literacy’’ needs to be widened to better suit the times. Where a book provides knowledge, Gee says, a good game can provide a learner with knowledge and also experience solving problems using that knowledge.
Once again The New York Times could be looking at educational funding equity, or providing technology access in real ways, or about making schools function as relevant learning spaces instead of as worksheet factories... but they choose not too.  Once again they have turned their most anti-poor reporter loose on American schoolchildren and their parents, to degrade them, to attack them, and to help ensure that the legislators The Times influences will not give these "irresponsible" kids what they need.

Shame. Again.

- Ira Socol

14 January 2012

Changing Gears 2012: changing rooms

(1) ending required sameness     (2) rejecting the flipped classroom     (3) re-thinking rigor     (4) its not about 1:1      (5) start to dream again     (6) learning to be a society (again)     (7) reconsidering what literature means     (8) maths are creative, maths are not arithmetic     (10) undoing academic time     (11) social networks beyond Zuckerbergism     (12) knowing less about students, seeing more     (13) why we fight

Spaces matter. And I have come to understand that spaces matter much more than places.

"Place" is a physical construct, "space" a conceptual one, and somehow we need to begin to carve out a series of effective "learning spaces" in the "places" we call "school."

Yes, there is power in both, memory in both, opportunity in both. But "place" is both more tribal in nature, and even when sublimely lovely, much more constrictive by nature than "space," which is an ever-changing idea.

In one of those many "previous lives" I have had, I once was part of a production of David Storey's The Changing Room. Storey's play was about space, and the power of space. There is no actual plot, and the place hardly matters (no matter how apparent in expected accent and character descriptions), but Storey writes about how this conceptual space between a cruel society and a cruel game offers those within it something unparalleled elsewhere in their lives. The physical "changing room/locker room" is one thing, and it might look like anything and be anywhere, but here we are diving into something entirely different from the architectural.

Yet, the architectural always matters. Buildings matter. Landscapes matter. Views matter. Acoustics matter.
"The purpose of Why Architecture Mattersis to “come to grips with how things feel to us when we stand before them, with how architecture affects us emotionally as well as intellectually”—to show us how architecture affects our lives and to teach us how to understand the architecture that surrounds us every day. “Architecture begins to matter,” Paul Goldberger writes, “when it brings delight and sadness and perplexity and awe along with a roof over our heads.” He shows us how that works in examples ranging from a small Cape Cod cottage to the “vast, flowing” Prairie style houses of Frank Lloyd Wright, from the Lincoln Memorial to the highly sculptural Guggenheim Museum Bilbao and the Church of Sant’Ivo in Rome, where “simple geometries…create a work of architecture that embraces the deepest complexities of human imagination.”'
Of course architecture also matters when it does something opposite "bring[ing] delight and sadness and perplexity and awe along with a roof over our heads," whether that be the classic leaking roof in a rain storm or rectangular boxes which separate students into production cells.

Entering Trinity in Dublin, welcoming but safe,
many ways to gather, or not.
"Your architecture should ennoble all who pass through your design," a Pratt Institute professor once told a studio I was part of. I think it must ennoble and empower, engage and comfort, and the best designs I know, do that. Great learning spaces make things possible, this is true of Prospect Park, or the Temple of Dendur wing at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, or Trafalger Square, or Orestad College in Denmark, or the Bois de Boulogne, or the lawn at the University of Virginia, or Millennium Park in Chicago, or the Seattle Central Library, or many a great cathedral or city square ... theses spaces allow gathering and solitude, inspiration and reflection, communication and study, performance and observance, communion and acceptance.

This is true online as well. The QR Code Advent Calendar created by #ccGlobal kids last month allowed, inspired, and introduced so much. Twitter, and on a smaller level, TodaysMeet, are blank canvases which offer those opportunities, perfect spelling, grammar, complexity in language not required - but it's open to anyone and anyone can link to anything. Hybrid online spaces, say, Skype + TodaysMeet + Google Docs offer another "big opening" kind of space, as, I suspect, do Google + Hangouts with the ability to combine many tools.

Honestly, I looked for great classrooms, but... well, these are rarer, of course. Yet, not impossible to find. Not impossible at all...


 Without removing walls, without big money, we can go from teaching places
to learning spaces

Ewan Mcintosh has one great framework, his "Seven Spaces" which exist both in "reality" and "virtually" ...
In Mcintosh's beginning thoughts for those designing, planning, or furnishing "schools," he puts it simply, "There's a difference between: "What kind of building would help you teach and learn better?" and "What kind of teaching and learning would you like to do, and what things could we help with in making that happen?"
Which is the opposite of what we see in the TEDtalk below, where the goals are established from the top, and thus, no matter how "cute" the walls get, the computers and their student users still sit alone facing walls, and though drill and kill has moved outside, it has not changed.

Failed Space... the TED space, sage-on-stage + passive audience, rehearsed lecture + PowerPoint,
is - by design - a "limited to the elite" structure in which alternate expression is blocked.
(Admission: as with every TEDtalk I've tried to watch, it took me four sittings to get through this)

Step nine of Changing Gears 2012 is creating Learning Spaces which have choices, create opportunities, allow comforts, provide safety. We build these differently wherever we do them, but we craft these environments in a way which allows the maximum possibility for flexibility and continuous adaptability. Learning Spaces cannot be places which create continuous irrelevant discomfort: "'Who wants to be locked into a room with 30 people dressed just like them, to be startled by a bell every 35 minutes, to queue for lunch for 40 minutes and be made to stand outside in the cold twice a day?' says Jenn Ashworth in a Guardian piece on truancy titled "Why I refused to go to school." I have been in classrooms so visually chaotic - in every direction - that I could not last 5 minutes in them. I have been in classrooms so coldly sterile that I imagined someone was about to perform surgery on someone, which creates more tension than anyone should have to handle.

Learning Spaces must offer options which support every child. This is true whether learning is happening dominantly in-room or online. You can't just send kids off to their computers from their homes and call yourself an educator (you can, however, do this and call yourself a Republican governor).

Choice is one of the things which create learning spaces.


There is plenty of science here, although education invests less in research regarding space than almost any other industry (think restaurants, or retailing). "A common complaint in the classroom is eye fatigue and in order to relieve it, Engelbrecht suggests that the end wall of the classroom behind the teacher should be a different colour from the other walls," says one design study which also notes, "there are some suggestions that the colour of surroundings might have a distinct impact on mood and behaviour, perhaps sometimes, Sundstrom (1987) suggests, through changing perceptions of room temperature or size. Read et al (1999) consider that both colour and ceiling height affects children’s cooperative behaviour. Engelbrecht argues that the colour of walls in the classroom affects productivity and accuracy while Brubaker (1998) argues that cool colours permit concentration," but, indicates something a look at schools might make obvious, "that children thought colour was important and that they thought the colour of the walls in their school was uninviting and boring. However, in this study Maxwell also found that teachers and parents were not concerned by the colour of the walls."

Color is just one little part, to quote a student from one class where a teacher embraced a radical reshaping - of both room and assignments - based in choice and comfort, "we have freedom of choice in here-we are more creative-not having choice takes fun out of writing." In the same space another simply said, "I think better and work harder when I am comfortable."

Comfort, choice, pleasure, the ability to see outside and find momentary escapes, varieties of light,  transparency which allows learners to see the work of other learners (contagious creativity, contagious inquiry), multiple "entry points" for beginning an effort, and, of course, tool choice... Yu know I've written a lot about all of this:
old furniture, new uses.
learn to "alert" on discomfort
instead of movement
And I have because it matters. We need to get past that old Calvinist notion (more American Calvinist than Calvin, for those religious historians playing along at home) that misery and discomfort are important to learning. In fact, as Maslow suggests, the uncomfortable student cannot possibly focus on the higher-level learning skills, the brain simply doesn't allow that. Discomfort, a feeling of being unsafe, will always trump the more complex. Let me say it this way again: "In order to learn you must be cognitively uncomfortable, but you can't be cognitively uncomfortable if you are physically or psychologically uncomfortable."

Which brings us back to one of my other key arguments about educational spaces. While safety and comfort are vital, so is change, and these elements must co-exist. I am always stunned that so many educators seem to believe that the "school day" or a "learning experience" should begin with automaticity of operation - that is, without consciousness, without thought. Why would learning begin in an unconscious state? So, you need not shock your students - there's that safety thing - but you do need surprise and difference which gets the human brain operating, and, if your students get off a bus, go through the door, go down the corridor, and arrive at an assigned seat each morning, or follow completely predictable paths to an online experience, you have begun your interaction with your students by turning off their brains... Why do you think the world's simplest, and most successful, website loves to surprise its visitors?

Willing to completely distract our students on the way to their tasks?
Google's legendary Pac-Man doodle
Take the idea of "Learning Spaces" seriously this year, because they matter.

- Ira Socol
next: undoing academic time