Developments in the Design of Science Accommodation

Andy Piggott

July 2007

Design – Teaching and Learning

Does the design of a learning space affect the quality of teaching and learning?

(In Science?)

If it does, why are science advisers / inspectors / consultants / ITT tutors / ASTs / lead teachers not an automatic part of the process?

Involved?

Architects / Designers

Space Guidelines –

DfES, BB98

Science Teachers + Technicians

Headteachers

PFI / PPP

Academies

Science Advisers / Inspectors / Consultants ??!!

Local Authorities

Building Schools for the Future

Partnerships for Schools

Tensions -- 1

Teachers …..Architects are ignorant of what we do and are forever wanting to create fancy designs that do not work. We keep trying to tell them what we want, but they ignore us. They have left out ………; the ….. / ….. / ….. doesn’t work; we can’t do …….., because …….; etc; etc. What is the point?

Architects …..Science teachers are dinosaurs, wanting traditional designs that do not reflect the modern world, let alone the exciting, ever-changing natures of their own subject area. They don’t even know what styles of teaching they use, nor what is needed for these styles. We’ll ignore them.

Tensions -- 2

Pupils Face Front at all times

Teacher at the Front at all timesLaboratories need to look good in order to advertise the school

Science accommodation should operate well to support teaching and learning

Science – Teaching and Learning

Range of T&L styles, includes:

….. Practical work?

How much practical work?

Support areas for practical work?

Views on Practical Work

Architects / Local Authorities / Headteachers

Practical work takes up only 20% of time – therefore we need only 1/5th of the number of labs.

Convenient – because finance, area guidelines, staffing and timetables squeeze space and time allowances for science

National science guidance – QCA, ASE, Ofsted

Practical work should take place in up to 75% of science lessons and access to practical areas is needed at any time so that teachers can tailor T&L to pupils learning needs as they progress.

The position of Practical Work in Science

Work being done nationally at

STEM Higher Level Planning Group

and

DfES School Science Board

Looking at:

What is meant by practical work

How practical work enhances learning

Barriers to raising the quality of practical work

Design of Science Accommodation…for….

• DfES – Building Bulletin 80, 2004

• CLEAPSS, Guide L14

• Laboratory Design for Teaching and Learning project www.ase.org.uk/ldtl/documents.html

• Labs for Learning course, National Science Learning Centre(+ spaces needed for experiments – later slides)

Design of Science Accommodation…against….?

• Partnerships for Schools (Building Schools for the Future)

Advises ‘Follow ASE / CLEAPSS’, but also produces guidance pushing perimeter-only services

• PPP / PFIEiS, April 2007, article, page 20:

‘Are laboratories with peripheral benching safe and fit for the purpose?’

Although:

Perimeter can become Peninsula

‘Face the Front’

Means you can NOT see all the pupils

LDTL images

Experiment – area required 1

NSLC

Experiment – area required 2

NSLC

Experiment – area required 3

NSLC

Best design happens when:

Architects, science teachers and technicians talk together – and

- both sides are knowledgeable about national advice on lab design – and

- whole-school leadership and management is in accord with departmental ideas – and

- ‘Clients’ – ie the money – allows for good standards of design and the time to make this happen.

DSCF (ex DfES)

Background Drivers

• Improve attainment levels in science;

• Encourage more young people to take science at higher levels;

• Encourage more graduates to take up science teaching.

What is project Faraday

• exemplar designs for science labs to inspire and encourage;

• designs for interactive experiments;

• demonstration projects in every Government region.

Project Faraday designs will

• inspire learners and teachers;

• fully reflect the requirements of the new science curriculum;

• enable innovative and interactive methods of teaching science;

Project Faraday

Preliminary feedback suggests excellent joint working with schools – with-

- some schools developing their ideas on T&L very well in advance and as part of the design – and -

- others learning a great deal from the experience of working with their team of designers.

Project FaradayIssues the design teams were asked to look at:

• Effective spaces for science T&L, including practical work

• Full exploitation of computer technology• Alternative or multifunctional learning spaces

(eg lecture theatres, drama studios)• The building itself as a teaching tool• School grounds for support and variety• Latest technologies from other disciplines

(eg museums)• Interactive displays / experiments, maybe ‘built-in’

Project Faraday

The brief therefore:- does not admit of the traditional science

department where there is 1 laboratory for each science teacher

- assumes that something ‘jazzy’ is required to make science more appealing to pupils (and teachers?) than just the science itself

- insists that science moves out to link to other areas of the school

Preliminary ideas

Assembly space

Lightly serviced space

Highly serviced space

from GovEd Consortium

Preliminary ideas

Practical and theory laboratories

from GovEd Consortium

Super Lab

Prep room and staff area – possibility of combining these two?

Prep room between the two Labs allows for easy access into both

Folding wall between will allow for these to be opened up into one space

Locate these closest to non-science areas, easier access for other subjects

shorter travel distance; direct access; clearer sight lines

56sqm56sqm

90sqm

90sqm24sqm

90sqm

78sqm

90sqm

Possible giant suspended projection screen suspended from ceiling

Focus of the space

Vertical connection with D&T exhibition space

provides opportunity for long-term suspension

exhibits

Spaces becomes more specialised the further away they are located

from the rest of the school Preliminary ideas

DEGW Consortium

Science demonstration area: layout options

Half year demonstration Non computer based group work in both spaces

Mix of non- and computer-based group work

Individual computer work (laptops and desk tops)

Whole class teaching and computer-based group work (groups of 3 around laptops)

Non computer-based group work

Non computer-based group work

DEGW Consortium

Preliminary ideas

Separate Prep and Staff RoomsPreliminary ideas

DEGW Consortium

ZoningDirect access to outside settings

Serviced classrooms provide extra wet spaces for science area and whole school; movable wall separating both allows for creation of one large studio

Extension of work area provides more group work opportunities

60sqm

134sqm

Informal individual study settings or one-to-ones

Messaging and views along the circulation path

90sqm

Separate area for possible whole class activity

30sqm

30sqm

78sqm

78sqm47sqm

48sqm

26sqm

Highly serviced, movable bench height tables, lab stools

work area to flow into glazed link between the buildings

Staff area adjoining prep room improves opportunities for synergies between all science staff

60sqm

Preliminary ideas

DEGW Consortium

Smaller demonstration group (60 seats) allows for further learning settings such as laptop enabled group tables

Whole class teaching space - each of the six snug seats five people

Demonstration podium

Fixed PC for individual or paired work

soft seating and movable whiteboards to enable discussions on thoughts generated within

Immersive thinking space with completely writable whitewalls within

Science work areaPreliminary ideas

DEGW Consortium

The Faraday teams

1. DEGW (concept designs)

2. White Design (architectural design)

3. Alligan – GovEd Communications

Allocation of Faraday teams to school renewals:

Faraday Team Local Authority School

White Design Devon Bideford College

White Design York Joseph Rowntree School

DEGW Barnet East Barnet School,

DEGW Wigan Abraham Guest Specialist

Alligan &GovEd

Gloucestershire Rednock School

Alligan &GovEd

Plymouth   Estover Community

Additional Demonstration Projects

refurbishments: Region LA School

East Peterborough Kings School

West Midlands

Shropshire Mary Webb school & science college

SE Medway Rinham Mark Grammar

SE Reading Kendrick School

SE Surrey Weydon School

NE Northumberland Cramlington High School

East Midlands

Lincolnshire The Priory LSST

CPDWe (the DCSF) are currently

investigating a CPD model for teachers:

• to help schools

develop a better

educational brief

for their designers• to help teachers

use the new

environments

effectively.

Programme & Key Milestones• Summer 2007 – designs

proposals

• Autumn 2007 - An inspirational publication showing the exemplar designs

• Autumn 2007 - Inform our capital programmes

• From 2008 - Seven school refurbishments

• From 2009 - Six whole school-renewals

Advantages of team work“We’re tremendously excited and overwhelmed by what

you’ve shown us. But we want to take it further. At present the labs are too traditional. Some thoughts…

• There is no need for a demo area for teacher in the lab, we will demo in the Work Area, the labs are for students to work. If we need to show something we can always use a students desk.

• The teacher needs a small area for personal belongings/laptop dock.

• The teacher area should be in a corner.• All benching to be removed from side and back.• We really don’t want the benches in rows facing the front,

the teacher won’t be there!”

DEGW Consortium

Teaching & Learning organisation drives the brief for the types of spaces you need

Centricity

Model

Student Grouping

Teacher Org

Student Org

Time Structure

Learning locations

High Teacher

Traditional

25-30

Solo

Classes

45-60 mins

Learning on site

High Learner

Personalised

75-100

Large Teams

Home Base

0.5-1 day

Anywhere, any time

Medium Learner

Project Based

3-7

Small Teams

Team Space

1 hr to 0.5 day

Physical core, virtual anywhere

High number of separate teaching spaces

High number of learning settings

DEGW Consortium

Flexibility

Maximum teacher flexibility:

1 teacher, 1 group of pupils, 1 lab with all facilities

Large number of labs – with duplication of facilities

Easiest to timetable

Teachers can be independent of each other – can make support of weak teachers difficult

Maximum space flexibility:

Different spaces for different learning needs – less labs

Range of different facilities – possibly wider range

Different sized groups of pupils – mass audiences, down to individual learning

Needs whole-school support to timetable and manage

Teachers must work in teams – weak members can be trained / or be a drag on others

Flexibility

King Charles I High SchoolDr Nigel Collins

Use as lecture theatre

Adaptable spacesServices around perimeter only, or disconnectable so that everything can be cleared away and the space used for other purposes

Lab with disconnectable bollards / gallery for storing bollards under

Flexibility -- Other

Flexibility -- OtherEasy change over time

Keep services out of the way

Make walls non-load bearing

Install cheap quality furniture

leading to……

Review use after five years and

refit for another purpose, or

refit to develop in light of Curriculum, T&L or ICT advances

Does rather assume that finance will be forthcoming every 5 years!

Architects help with ….(and are constrained by …..)

• Building Regulations 2007

• Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 CDM

(Be aware …. teacher = ‘Designer’ – has Duties)

• Disability Discrimination Act DDA

• Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999

• Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method

BREEAM

Teacher support …….

Knowledge and experience of Teaching and Learning

How this is affected by design of accommodation

Background in / from ……

• Science Accommodation in Secondary Schools, DfES BB80, 2004

• Designing an Planning Laboratories, CLEAPSS L14, 2000

• Laboratory Design for Teaching and Learning project

www.ase.org.uk/ldlt

introductions, further guidance, case studies + software

• Labs for Learning course, NAT25, NSLC

next course - 10th-12th December 2007

www.sciencelearningcentres.org.uk

Future developments ?• Project Faraday – publication of designs and website

• CPD programme – working from Project Faraday

• Labs for Learning – advisers / consultants invited

• Labs for Learning – possible course(s) for architects

• LDTL website – continuing update

• Practical work – report from SSB / STEM HL Group

• Research into space needed for different experiments

• What constitutes GOOD science accommodation