Committee on Architecture for Education

At risk for being outpaced by foreign educational systems, today's American schools face increasing pressure to produce high-achieving students who are prepared for college and who contribute to an ideal modern workforce. This pressure has prompted initiatives such as Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for Language Arts and Mathematics as well as Next Generation Science Standards, which emphasize the cultivation of skills tied to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. In addition to these curriculum-focused strategies, schools have also increased their efforts in fostering more productive learning environments, which includes inculcating prosocial attitudes and behaviors in their students. In fact, Elias (2014) argues that providing students with social-emotional skills, including relationship skills and social awareness, will facilitate common core implementation and higher achievement. The role of schools in shaping the social and moral fiber of America’s rising generation is not necessarily a new concept, however, as the following excerpt from a 19th century educator illustrates: 

“Every school-house should be a temple, consecrated in prayer to the physical, intellectual, and moral culture of every child in the community, and be associated in every heart with the earliest and strongest impressions of truth, justice, patriotism, and religion” (Barnard, 1850).

This sentiment exemplifies how the goal of schooling is much more than transferring knowledge, and it lives on today in various forms such as anti-bullying campaigns and school-wide positive behavior support systems. Programs such as these provide a crucial contribution towards what is termed school climate, or the overall “quality and character of school life” (National School Climate Center, 2014). 

In attempting to foster positive school climate and student attitudes, educators have tried many things, but one factor that may deserve more consideration is the architectural design of school facilities. A White Paper published in 1998 by Daniel Duke commented that “pride of place” associated with a school’s unique architecture has the potential to minimize negative social interactions among students; Duke also calls for more research concerning the impact of school design on broad student outcomes. One study that responded to this call found that a school’s open plan layout contributed positively to social climate, and students reported feeling more socially connected than at other schools they had attended (Gislason, 2009). Notably, a study by Uline & Tschannen-Moran (2008) suggested that appealing, well-designed schools indeed contributed to healthier school climates, which in turn promoted higher academic achievement.
 
Perhaps the most promising data on the influence of facilities on academic achievement comes from Peter Barrett and colleagues at the University of Salford. After measuring many schools on various design variables and collecting data for six consecutive years, Barrett, Davies, Zhang, and Barrett (2015) have found that 16% of the variance in student achievement scores was explained by 3 design variables with 9 sub factors. The 9 factors that had the greatest impact on grades were Lighting, Air Quality, Sound, Temperature, Links to Nature, Ownership, Flexibility, Connection, Complexity, and Color. These compelling statistical results suggest that substantial gains in student achievement could occur through innovative school facilities that adhere to these 9 factors. 

By advocating for empirically supported design elements, facilities planners have the potential to greatly improve student chances of success, but it will require increasing strides to use multi-discplinary teams in the design of schools, including the utilization of individuals trained in research analysis and translation. By bringing in professionals with knowledge of evidence-based design, school facilities designers will be able to create more buy in with school boards and project stakeholders by presenting hard data on the effectiveness of their design philosophies. More importantly, however, the ones who will benefit most from evidence-based design are the students, and that alone should be reason enough.

References:

Barnard, Henry. School Architecture; or Contributions to the Improvement of School-Houses in the United States. Cincinnati: A.S. Barnes & Co, 1850. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2027/loc.ark:/13960/t8mc9rk7w