European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
10.5281/zenodo.213935
Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
B. Ece Şahin1i, Neslihan Dostoğlu2
Faculty of Architecture, Department of Architecture,
1
Uludağ University, Turkey
. Faculty of Architecture, Department of Architecture,
2
İstanbul K(lt(r University, Turkey
Abstract:
In school design studying spatial qualities, which are in harmony with the education
programmes’ goals, is important for creating physical conditions that support
associated education process. In new learning approaches it is emphasized that there is
no single learning method, that it is necessary to find different methods for learning in
schools, and that there is a need to search for new education environments for learning.
In this respect this study aims to examine new architectural examples, which are in
harmony with the goals of contemporary education approaches, and to shed light on
designing new educational buildings as a result. In the scope of this work the approach
to schools and opinions that are effective on learning are mentioned briefly,
expectations from school architecture are defined, and examples from innovative
education environments, which are made to give necessary usage capabilities required
by new education approaches, are presented. When the examples are examined its can
be seen that flexibility is the primary design criteria and the second important criteria is
related to the contribution of the building to awareness on sustainability.
Keywords: modern education, open plan, learning studio, advisory based plan, small
learning community, mobile classroom
Introduction
Education is the cornerstone of social development; which is why new education
approaches are questioned and considered in order to improve qualifications of
education at all stages. An important factor in the success of education programs is that
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved
Published by Open Access Publishing Group ©2015.
190
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
physical environment should respond to requirements of those programs. That
condition also requires the search for spatial qualifications proper to the purposes of
education programs in schools. In recent years, lots of educators study on the subject of
how children can learn in the best way in new learning approaches and define the
preconditions to accomplish that which are validated from very beginning of preschool
education until different phases of elementary and secondary education.
The best learning methods in such studies are;
Learning from different people (team work, collaboration),
environment),
Learning with different ways (project base),
Learning with different age groups,
Learning in different places (utilizing the whole society as a learning
Learning different things (distinguishing),
Learning at different times (block time)
In that context, it is accepted that new spatial organizations based on serial of
new learning values and new models are required. The significant emphasis in new
learning approaches is that there is not an only single learning way. For instance,
Prakash and Fielding (2007) define 20 different learning styles which some of them are
independent study, naturalist/outdoor learning, social/emotional learning, art-based
learning, and design-based learning . It is not a necessity to put together all the learning
styles under one roof of education space; however, new learning environments should
be developed to answer such diversity (Lackney, 2009a; Prakash and Fielding, 2007;
Nair, 2014).
As literature is analyzed, flexible plan-based school design approaches are seen
which enable different learning environments to exist at the same time. Despite of such
approaches, usually designs of elementary and secondary structures are still based on
traditional learning approach. It is accepted that reconstructing the present structures in
accordance with the changing learning approaches is not easy due to economic
conditions. In that context, as a solution; different small-scale spatial solutions are
joined to school structures so that the structures can respond partially to the
requirements of modern education process.
Both approaches; searching for new school models and developing small-scale
additions, are adopted in order to create physical environment that responds to new
education approaches which are valid at the present time. In that regard, as the subject
is considered specific to Turkey, it can be said that although new methods are
considered in education, there is not enough innovation research in terms of physical
environment. The purpose of that study is to present samples of new architecture
applications which are produced regarding the goal of improving education process
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
191
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
and make contribution for constructing different organizations in that area. In this
study, primarily the opinions regarding the approach to schools and learning process of
nowadays are summarized; then the expectations from school architecture are
explained and the examples of education environment which are designed for the
spatial requirements of new learning approaches are presented.
Intellectual Changes on School and Learning Perspective in the Beginning of 21st
Century
21st century is defined as an informatics century, the impacts of science and
technological developments on the purpose of educations and function of schools are
analyzed. Studies are made on the notion that each institutions need to become a
learning institution and extending the learning capacity of such institutions are aimed
(Özden, 2002). In that respect, an environment is described that is a learning school, the
children are active, the importance is on learning instead of teaching, the learning with
collaboration and team work are encouraged (Töremen, 2003). It is also believed that
learning school shall be replaced by learning networks in the future. So, it is considered
that strict lines among teacher, student, parent, education and life; and lines among
school and society shall become blurred (Tekeli, 2003). An important concept of the
present days is globalization. In that context, the need to raise a person who can be
successful in different cultures and geographics is emphasized. In order to accomplish
such perspective, a new school definition that accepts the whole environment as a
learning space is required. Lifelong education understanding can be adopted only if the
idea that the information cannot be acquired only by teachers in schools; hence, means
and methods should be different from traditional ways. In multi-channel education,
school is not accepted as the only place to acquire the knowledge (Oktay, 2001).
In modern education, an approach that adopts learning and learner instead of
teaching is considered. Active learning and doing during learning process, learning by
living are considered as important; a student growing with research, observation,
interpretation and implementation skills, and transferring the learning process across
the school boards are required in that regard (Oktay, 2001). An importance is attributed
to students learning to be respectful to diversities and personal rights during education
process; and in that frame, democracy education becomes a requirement. Educators
make emphasis on the importance that democracy should become a life value and on
the focus of moving away from individual-consciousness to us- consciousness “ydın,
Çağlar,
. The concept of accessibility is significant in terms of everybody
being able to reach educational opportunities. Thus, no limitation shall be accepted
before freedom of access the knowledge.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
192
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Another significant subject in that regard to raise successful individuals in new
century is the development of talents. An emphasis is made to individuals to gain
communication,
collaboration,
research,
healthy
life
style,
production
and
consumption competence skills. In that respect, intellectual, individual and social
qualifications which are considered in individuals are clarified. Accordingly, an
individual should have
analysis synthesis, creativity, problem solving, developing
constructive criticism skills in terms of intellectual qualifications
self-esteem, self-
motivation in terms of individual qualifications and positive communication ability,
being open to collaboration in terms of social qualifications “ydın,
Çağlar,
2001). The most important skill regarding intellectual qualifications is creativity. As it is
considered that creativity is a natural-born ability, a child should be able to live in an
appropriate environment in order to explore and develop such ability; and also a child
should be provided with the opportunities to be able to try authentic ways so to
develop expected behaviors and skills Oktay,
Toğrul,
.
Theory of Multiple Intelligence of Howard Gardner who argues that individuals
have different abilities brings new perspective to education process and is accepted in
that field. Gardner argues based on his first study made in 1983 that there are seven
types of intelligences which are differently strong in individuals. Linguistic, LogicalMathematical, Bodily-Kinesthetic, Spatial, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal are first
seven types of intelligences which later Gardner added Naturalist intelligence to the
list. He continues his study on the ninth intelligence, which is Existential intelligence (It
is accepted that skills can be recognized, knowledge that is expected from children to
have and the abilities can be promoted if team works in classrooms essentially are
based on skills as the reflection of the theory. Gardner’s theory argues that educators
are moving away from conventional learning and teaching methods, and turn for lots of
new searches in the classrooms (Pound, 2006; Gardner, 2004, Prakash and Fielding 2007;
Taylor, 2009).
Creativity and intelligence are not accepted as the same by Gardner. He argues
that people have one or two dominant skill; and a total creativity is not possible. The
practice of that approach was realized lengthily in Project Zero or Project Spectrum
by lots of academicians. In the study, it was accepted that every child has a specific
profile with different abilities or has multi-intelligence; hence, education environment
should be enriched by generous sensual materials and activities (Pound, 2006).
Gardner’s theory has its reflection on education process in terms of supporting child
development at all aspects (Wortham 2002). It is important to create functional diversity
required for development of different intelligence stated in the theory. As Theory of
Multiple Intelligence is applied in schools, the opportunities shall arise to understand
direction of children interests and empower their intelligence areas. In that respect, for
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
193
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
example a student (using cognitive intelligence) who has difficulties to learn something
in conventional classroom can easily learn the same thing by a performance
(bodily/kinesthetic, spatial/musical intellectual) (Prakash and Fielding, 2007). Hence, it
is expected from schools to have physical opportunities providing functional
diversities.
School Architecture: Comply with Change
Learning and teaching environments in the traditional education process, need a
uniform spatial organization. Teacher was transferring information to students in a
linear structured classroom in conventional teaching methods used in the past. The
school structure of that complies with such system is defined as Ford Model and it is
accepted as the basic design of a classroom. Classrooms are located next to each other
on a long hallway; so that children could pass in short amount of time among
classrooms as considering 45 minutes of lectures of a day. As a result, the search for
different spatial needs did not arise within such system. (Lackney, 2009a). Most of
schools at present are structured in the direction of that system. However, a hallway
loaded from both sides of 20th Century is not valid for schools of 21st Century. Prakash
and Fielding (2007), define classrooms as the most visible symbol of education
philosophy. In each study which argues about school designs of future focuses on
classroom design as the most related subject within the argument. A spatiality where
students can study individually and can direct their own learnings is sought in school
designs regarding new education approach. Required forms for new spaces where
children can study in collaboration can be realized by creating changeable size space
and arranging the same space for various learning activities (Wolff, 2001). The search
for flexibility becomes an important condition for designing new education
environment.
Education in
’s and
’s was defined as progressive era. In that era,
educators and psychologists suggested teaching methods for preschool and elementary
schools; studies which are more child-centered and promote meaningful education style
were published. In these studies, subjects like establishing a bond and collaboration
with community in learning process for children to be able to realize their real potential
in schools, reflecting diversities of the real world and enriched education programme,
and existence of different functionalities were questioned (Dudek, 2002; Wortham,
2002). Contrary to traditional education, Dewey’s new education approach
Progressive Education Theory started to become important during
’s and
’s.
The foundations of the approach are expression and development of individuality,
freedom of act, learning through experiences, developing skills directly by relating,
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
194
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
getting the most out of the opportunities of present day other than making preparations
for far future and also acquainting the changing world (Dewey, 2007; Wortham, 2002).
It is expected from nowadays schools to promote learning activities in inner and
outer space by interaction of teacher and student with each other; which is totally
against to traditional learning system where children are listening teachers in stable
position. As it is mentioned before, that is why flexibility in schools becomes an
important criteria. It is adopted that flow of information in modern education system
can be realized by different means like project management, independent learning,
field works as sensual methods, role plays, scenario methods and workshops . Using
such creative and open learning forms makes compulsory for school to have different
spatial conditions and implementations (Walden, 2009).
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligence has its impact as a necessity on school
architecture; meaning that, different intelligence areas should find its reflection on
spatial reactions. For instance, drama classes and multimedia communication centers
are must to reflect linguistic intelligence in schools; for bodily/kinesthetic intelligence,
playfields, dance studios and spaces for physical activities that enable healthy physical
development are required. Taylor also states that schools must have team-work areas,
big horizontal study desks instead of personal ones, movable and rechangable
furnitures, meeting points inside and outside and conference rooms for students with
spatial intelligence; schools also must provide acoustic rooms where musical activities
can be performed to realize musical/rhythmic intelligence (Taylor, 2009).
Innovative Approaches in Education Environments
As it was mentioned above, one of the important conditions to realize modern
education approaches is to create physical environment which can respond to different
needs during education process. In this chapter, the search for contemporary education
environments in literature is studied. In that regard, spatial resolutions and mobilemovable proposals such as open plan, learning studios, learning suit, small learning
communities, advisory based planning are analyzed.
Open Plan School Design
Open plan school design is one of the first examples of new searches against
conventional education. The plan system rose from the criticisms against US“’s
traditional education understanding in middle of
’s by “merican educators and the
adoption of informal education understanding of England. Open education approach
advocates more educational options for children, independency and autonomy for
children by directing to do their own studies, less teacher guidance and more student
self-responsibility. In that respect, open plan school understanding was determinant in
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
195
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
design of most schools from
’s until the beginning of
’s. Large, open and
flexible spaces of those schools were appropriate for team works, small group studies
and individual studies. However, such solutions also brought criticisms as well.
Educators’ biggest critics were the visual distraction and noise. Yet, the studies showed
that there was another big mistake regarding the critics. It was seen that teachers were
not educated with required learning skills and so conventional learning methods were
still being used in that process. To say, the problem of open plan design actually was
that open education was not comprehended enough by educators (Lackney, 2009b). In
recent years, open plan spatial organizations are used for creating different types of
education environments successfully. The samples are presented in pictures below (1, 2)
that show the implementation of open plan system with flexible usage of education
environment.
Picture 1: Ørestad College (left), open plan spatial organization
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6130/5948300714_7522bff05e_b.jpg, 2016)
Picture 2: Hellerup School
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/94/13/97/9413974aa141e9f87d83e24532fcc398.jpg, 2016)
Proposals from various studies argue that it is necessary to have flexible solutions in
education environments. According to Jilk (2005), the most significant subject in
designing physical environment for education places is to have the option that teachers
and students can create their own learning environment instead pre-defining
everything for them. An environment design without contribution of students is not
completed in that sense. Hence, as considering the option to have creative participation,
he proposed a school order where all the main spaces are fictionalized as persistent but
at the same time unfinished as an alternative approach (Picture 3). In that design, he
developed a school model that is adaptable to four different learning options with
flexible and served spaces design concept for stable service zones and multiple various
utilization configurations (Jilk, 2005).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
196
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Picture 3: Flexible and participative school model proposal (Jilk, 2005)
Advisory Model Planning
Advise based planning or advisory model is formed by combination of class concept
and learning studio concept that enables different study options. Classrooms and group
rooms of advisory model are designed as learning places for one group of children. An
advisory model school design is presented in picture below (Picture 4) that was formed
with classrooms, group rooms and learning suits (Prakash and Fielding, 2007).
Picture 4: Advisory based planning
(http://www.designshare.com/Research/Nair/Plan_txt_440px.gif, 2016)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
197
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Small Learning Communities
In
’s, the tendency to build new small schools and reorganize large schools as
school within school
was started to seen regarding the need of new education
environments. The drives of the tendency were that small schools participate more in
school events during education studies than large schools, organize different activities
from program in addition, students are more satisfied, have more social commitment
and work with society; moreover, such schools confront less disciplinary problems like
vandalism and drug use than large schools. Large scale structures are designed as social
network groups where 100 -120 students can be educated and those groups are defined
as learning communities . It is seen in various school designs that architects promote
individualism in their structures. Places that are designed flexible and changeable, as
individual study areas helping to develop feeling of ownage and responsibility,
enabling to learn alone are used in that respect; moreover, areas where teachers can
prepare team work and collaboration materials and held meetings are designed. Those
schools have functional spaces proper to learn in collaboration; also presentation areas,
galleries, areas for using technology, various socialization areas that support creative
thinking and problem solving are formed in designing these schools. It is important that
these schools can benefit from other opportunities in learning process by getting in
contact with functions of the environment (Lackney, 2009b).
Most of large schools try to create small learning communities (SLC) in order to
have smaller communities in large school campuses. Also, other than implementations
of large school campuses, small learning community (SCL) model helps to create small
learning communities within itself via using learning studios together with some
mutual spaces of schools. Such implementations are based on learning studios. An
example of that approach is Djidi Djidi “boriginal School (Picture 5). Small Learning
Community (SCL) has a simple organization form constituted by learning studios
connected with small group rooms, cafe and project areas. The main idea behind the
approach is to make small grouping so that every person shall know each other
(Prakash and Fielding, 2007).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
198
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Picture 5 Small learning community SLC in Djidi Djidi “boriginal School
(http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3056, 2015;
http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3057, 2015;
http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3061, 2015)
Learning Studio
Generally, learning studio definition is used to describe L-shaped classrooms. One of
the first learning studio examples based on the idea was L-shaped classrooms of Crow
Island School designed in 1940, Illinois. Redesigning the classrooms as learning studio
was the very first implementation of that approach (Picture 6, 7).
Picture 6: Crow Island School (left), classroom (Lackney, 2009b), Picture 7: Crow Island School, classroom
interior (http://peterbrown.typepad.com/.a/6a00e55113a79188330134897cf2b9970c-pi, 2016)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
199
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
The basic idea behind learning studio is creating a space that responds to different
learning types with different regions and flexible learning zones. Classrooms defined as
learning studio are superior to conventional classrooms regarding multiple intelligence
(Prakash and Fielding, 2007; Lackney, 2009a). A learning studio example that responds
to different group studies is shown in picture (8) below. The studio is designed with
service areas as toilet, kitchen niche, mechanic niche and a terrace for outer space
activities.
Picture 8: An example of learning studio
(http://www.designshare.com/images/name/lippman/lshape/10a_800px.gif, 2016)
Another example for learning studio is the independent classrooms project which is
named Classrooms of Future . The project was made in
new pilot schools in
,
England, based on the themes nature and technology . One of the classrooms was
designed by a company called
Future Systems . The design was an independent
classroom which was started to be used in
and named Mobile Classroom . The
shape of the classroom was curvilinear shell and its structure was made by balsa tree
with fiberglass top cover. The studio has also its private toilet and an independent
heating system like the other example (Chiles, 2005; Kronenburg, 2007). The purpose of
this project is to make children feel comfortable and enable to learn on their own ways.
Two separate schools used such implementation. A broad terrace was designed in front
of the classrooms and inner space was structured for 30 students on 100m2 area. That
dimension is quite more than the area for a student within classrooms in general.
Another purpose of shell structure is to create different exhibition surface to students
with its top surface (Picture 9). It is considered that creating a place where students can
exhibit their art works shall contribute children to feel ownage against their new
environment (Mostaedi, 2006).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
200
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Picture 9: An example of Classrooms of Future project
(https://undiaunaarquitecta.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/future-systems.jpg?w=580, 2016;
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01192/arts-graphics-slid_1192883a.jpg, 2016;
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wicciHNvHag/SOq453LfksI/AAAAAAAAAX8/3PDkiGLEmZU/s400/mobile+cl
ass+2.jpg, 2016).
The other example for learning studio as an independent education area is named
Cutting-edge Cardboard which is designed by Cottrell & Vermeulen “rchitecture in
2000, Essex, England. The total space is built on around 90m2 and is designed as a
classroom of the school; also, it was aimed to create flexible usage area. Paper tubes
were used in the structure and composite panel system cardboard was used for
cladding (Picture 10). The reason for using paper as a construction material was to raise
awareness of sustainability to children. The intends of the project were both to inform
children about sustainability and to develop feeling of ownage and proud by making
them to collect construction materials and participate in building process. It is stated
that the project reached its desired objectives at the end (Richardson, 2008).
Picture 10: Learning studio named Cutting-edge cardboard
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
Richardson,
201
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Learning Suit
“n education environment constituted by two learning studios is defined as learning
suit . Two learning studios are designed as one learning suit. It is sated that when
learning studios are reunited as a learning studio, learning and teaching options shall
be expanded. That model provides possibility to teach as a team and also to study
outside of the studio as required which is seen as positive in terms of having possible
options (Lackney, 2009a; Prakash and Fielding, 2007). In graphical expression shown
below, there is a learning suit reunited by two learning studios. Separators like mobile
walls, screen, and closet are used in between two studios. A suit can be converted to
one unit place and each studio has its own entrance and terrace (Picture 11).
Picture 11: Arranging the learning suit (Prakash and Fielding, 2007)
Separation between learning studios are realized by mobile walls and furnitures; so,
examples for different preferences can be realized in that way. For instance, Tajimi
Junior High School, Japan, is seen to prefer mobile furnitures in order to reunite and
rearrange easily the classrooms everyday as required (Picture 12). Other example is
mobile walls of East Side High School. It is stated that the separation created with
mobile furnitures in Tajimi helps to experience the learning suit as a friendlier place. On
the other hand, mobile walls as a separator are lead to feel more the separation created
in between two studios. Since a model based on furnitures is more flexible, generally it
should be preferred when teachers of two studios want to work in more close relation.
Yet, acoustic separation is possible with movable walls and it does not cause a problem
during different study times. Hence, children speak at their daily voice level used
within the family. It is possible to have so many different learning activities since there
are two divided space (Prakash and Fielding, 2007).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
202
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Picture 12. Furniture based learning suit model in Tajimi Junior High School
(http://www.designshare.com/Awards/2004/submittal/project_image.asp?image=4&project=453, 2016)
Mobile and Movable Solutions
Education environments are designed as mobile can be demonstrated as an example for
implementation where singular and small scale structure of learning studio is
addressed from different perspective. An ecological laboratory named Eco-Lab is the
implementation in that scope (Picture 13). Eco-lab was designed by an architect Jennifer
Siegal (OMD: Office of Mobile Design) in Los Angeles, California. It is a mobile
classroom design built by recyclable materials and the importance of environment and
sustainability are explained through multimedia programs in this lab (Kronenburg,
2003). The classroom visits different schools and attracts children attention a lot. That
attention is also emphasized by Siegal, the designer of the classroom; the mobile
classroom becomes a place for interaction with children, discovery and entertainment
right after it enters school yard, opens its entrance and is started to be used (Siegal,
2002).
Picture 13: Mobile ecology laboratory Eco-Lab
(http://www.designmobile.com/ecolab.html, 2016)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
203
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Mobile solutions are preferred because they can serve the same options for different
groups. “n education center named Portable Construction Training Center-PCTC
was designed in the line of the approach. The unit was designed specifically to serve
lower income groups to have their own place to live (Picture 14). Mobile classroom
works as a center where techniques of construction are explained. Based on the idea to
be a model structure, all the materials used in the construction of it are recycling
materials (Kronenburg, 2003).
Picture 14: Mobile education center
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3344/3333809477_85f352ea39.jpg, 2016; Kronenburg, 2007)
Another solution that was presented under the project Classrooms of Future is to prefer
movable structurality for education space which also can be identified as a classroom or
learning suit. “ design named
Trailer Tricks
was planned by Gollifer Langston
Architects in London (Picture 15). The classroom was designed as a movable product
with 2.5m x 4.5m dimensions. Considering the dimensions of it and the general
appearance, it is assimilated to a capsule. In addition, those features enable to expand
the education area through opening its one direction (Richardson, 2009).
Picture 15 Movable classroom Trailer Tricks
http://cubeme.com/classroom-of-the-future-by-gollifer-
langston-architects/, 2016; http://archinhome.com/architecture/classroom-of-the-future-mobile-classroomby-gollifer-langston-architects/, 2016)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
204
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Evaluation
When literature is analyzed as the follower of modern education approach, physical
environment also should be able to respond to the needs of education program; hence,
it is seen that new researches are required in the field and lots of innovative design
examples are realized in that regard. Flexibility is preliminary criteria in suggestions of
new school design and implementations developed as independent units. Flexibility in
open plan solutions, learning studios and suites are considered as creating spatial
divisions in education environment that are convenient to different learning necessities,
leaving the usage relations of divisions to the users’ preference and having reshape
potentials of space according to changing needs. In addition, mobile and movable
solutions serve to the idea that flexibility criteria can be considered in a wider scope
when such solutions can be used to shape education environment in needed time and
so meet desired requirements. Sustainability is the second dimension that its
importance is emphasized in the examples. It can be understood from the examples that
it is important for education environment to be a model as a learning mean by its
physical construction in order to raise awareness of sustainability on children in early
ages.
When an evaluation is made specific to Turkey, these spatial approachs can be
seen in two samples. Although the primary purpose is not to respond modern
education approaches, those spatial solutions are made to increase number of children
benefitting from preschool education opportunities. Mobile Preschool Project is an
implementation that is created as a mobile education space where different groups can
benefit from its opportunities and preferred due to its economic advantages (Picture
16). An ordinary bus was transformed into a classroom so that children of lower income
families can benefit from preschool education opportunities. Mobile Preschool Project
was first created in 2004 by the protocol among Ministry of National Education General
Directorate of Preschool Education, Governorships, Mayorships and universities
İnanlı,
.
Picture 16: Mobile Preschool (www.ooegm.meb.gov.tr/13projeler_mobil_okul.asp, 2010)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
205
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Another spatial study that was suggested on the line of articulation to school structure
is Prefabricate Preschool Project (Picture 17). Project was developed in 2011 when
Ministry of National Education made decision that preschool education shall gradually
become obligatory across Turkey. The purpose of the project was to give the chance to
elementary schools which do not have the opportunity to create preschool within itself
(Anonym, 2011).
Picture 17: Prefabricate Preschool Project (Anonym, 2011)
Both solutions have similarities based on using an articulated structure and preferring
mobile solutions with other examples explained in chapter where innovative
approaches in education environment were analyzed; however, there are completely
different in terms of their contents. The presented examples are lack of designs criterias
like the flexibility search, sustainability message of structure and suggestions to create
feeling of ownage to children. In that respect, the aim of implementations should be to
progress more in research studies. Another important subject for creating an
environment appropriate to education program is participation. A designer has to know
education process; thus, it is important to communicate with educators and students for
get information.
A significant principle of modern education is the transformation of knowledge
during designing an education environment. In that process, architect, educators and
students should collaborate together in order to fulfill information gaps of architectural
design (Dudek, 2002). Leaving the standard approach of school design that is in line
with conventional education methods and having appropriate solutions for new
requirements of modern education approaches, is possible only by the adaption of
participation in all stages of school designs.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
206
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
About the authors
B. Ece Şahin is a assistant professor of “rchitecture at Uludağ University. Her interest
areas are learning spaces, design for children and kindergarten design.
Neslihan Dostoğlu is a professor of “rchitecture at İstanbul K(lt(r University. Her
interest areas are architectural design, environment and behavior, and architectural
education.
References
1. Anonim, (2011). Büyüyorum. ”ursa ME” Okul 5ncesi Şubesi Yayını, Vol. .
2. “ydın, ”.
(Eds.). In
. ”ireysel 5zg(rl(k ve Erdem. H. “yhan, O. Oğuz, “. Oktay
. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Türk Eğitim Sistemi (pp. 95-
. İstanbul Sedar
Yayıncılık.
3. Candan, T. K.
. Çocuk ve Mimarlık Çocuklarla Yeni ”ir Gelecek,
Yaşanabilir bir Kent Kurgulamak. Mimarist, 2008/2, 55-59.
4. Chiles, P. (2005). The Classroom as an Evolving Landscape. M. Dudek (Ed.). In
Children’s Spaces (pp.101-113). Oxford: Architectural Press..
5. Çağlar, “.
.
. Y(zyılda Okulun Değişen Rol( ve Yeni Eğilimlere İlişkin
İyimser ”azı 5ngör(ler. H. “yhan, O. Oğuz, “. Oktay Eds.
Eğitim ve Türk Eğitim Sistemi (pp. 81-
In
. Yüzyılda
. İstanbul Sedar Yayıncılık.
6. Day, C. (2007). Environment and Children: Passive Lessons from the Everyday
Environment. Oxford: Elsevier.
7. Dewey, J. (2007). Deneyim ve Eğitim. “nkara ODTÜ Yayıncılık.
8. Dudek, M. (2002). Architecture of Schools: The New Learning Environments. Oxford:
Architecture Press.
9. Gardner, H. (2004). Zihin Çerçeveleri Çoklu Zeka Kuramı. İstanbul “lfa Yayınları.
10. İnanlı, R.
.
“çılış Konuşmaları.Okul öncesi Eğitimi ve Öğretmen Eğitimi
Sempozyum Kitabı (pp.11-
. İstanbul T(rkiye 5zel Okullar ”irliği.
11. Jilk, B. A. (2005). Place Making and Change in Learning Environments. M.
Dudek (Ed.). In Children’s Spaces (pp.30-42). Oxford: Architectural Press.
12. Kronenburg, R. (2003). Portable Architecture. Oxford: Architectural Press.
13. Kronenburg, R. (2007). Flexible: Architecture that Responds to Change. London:
Laurence King Publishing.
14. Lackney, J. A. (2009a). A Design Language for Schools and Learning
Communities. R. Walden (Ed.). In Schools for the Future, Design Proposals from
Architectural Psychology (pp.155-168). Cambridge: Hogrefe.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
207
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
15. Lackney, J. A. (2009b). History of Schoolhouse in the USA. R. Walden (Ed.). In
Schools for the Future, Design Proposals from Architectural Psychology (pp. 19-34).
Cambridge: Hogrefe.
16. Mostaedi, A. (2006). Preschool & Kindergarten Architecture. Barcelona: Carlos
Broto.
17. Nair, P. (2014). Blueprint for Tomorrow, Redesigning Schools for Student-Centered
Learning. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.
18. Oktay, “.
.
Oktay (Eds.). In
. Y(zyılda Yeni Eğilimler ve Eğitim. H. “yhan, O. Oğuz, “.
. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Türk Eğitim Sistemi (pp. 15-
. İstanbul
Sedar Yayıncılık.
19. Oktay, “.
. Okulöncesi Eğitimde Temel Kavramlar, “maçlar ve Eğitim
İlkeleri. M. Sağlam Ed. . In Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri (pp. 1-
. Eskişehir
“nadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.
20. Özden, Y. (2002). Eğitimde Dönüşüm; Eğitimde Yeni Değerler. Ankara: Pegem
Yayıncılık.
21. Prakash, N., Fielding, R. (2007). The Language of School Design, Design Patterns for
21st Century Schools. Minneapolis: Designshare.
22. Pound, L. (2006). How Children Learn. London: Practical Preschool Books.
23. Richardson, P. (2008). XS: Green, Big Ideas Small Buildings. London: Thames &
Hudson.
24. Richardson, P. (2009). XS: Extreme, Big Ideas Small Buildings. London: Thames &
Hudson.
25. Siegal, J. (2002). Mobile: the Art of the Portable Architecture. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.
26. Şahin, ”. E.
. Participation of Children in Design During Preschool Education:
An Independent Atelier Model. Doctoral Dissertation, Uludağ University Graduate
School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Architecture.
27. Taylor, A. (2009). Linking Architecture and Education, Sustainable Design of the
Learning Environments. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
28. Tekeli, İ.
). Eğitim Üzerine Düşünmek. Ankara: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi
Yayınları.
29. Toğrul, ”.
. Okulöncesi Eğitimde Kullanılan Yöntem ve Teknikler.
M.Sağlam Ed. . In Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri (pp. 75-
. Eskişehir “nadolu
Üniversitesi Yayınları.
30. Töremen, F. (2001). Öğrenen Okul. “nkara Nobel Yayıncılık.
31. Walden, R. (2009). The School of the Future: Conditions and ProcessesContrubutions of Architectural Psychology. R. Walden (Ed.). In Schools for the
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
208
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Future, Design Proposals from Architectural Psychology (pp.75-113). Cambridge:
Hogrefe.
32. Wortham, S. C. (2002). Early Childhood Curriculum, Developmental Bases for
Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
33. Wolff, S. J. (2001). Sustaining Systems of Relationships: The Essence of the Physical
Learning Environment that Supports and Enhances Collaborative, Project-Based
Learning at the Community College Level, Doctoral Dissertation, Oregon State
University.
34. https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6130/5948300714_7522bff05e_b.jpg, 2016
35. https://s-media-cacheak0.pinimg.com/originals/94/13/97/9413974aa141e9f87d83e24532fcc398.jpg, 2016
36. http://www.designshare.com/Research/Nair/Plan_txt_440px.gif, 2016
37. http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3056, 2016
38. http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3057, 2016
39. http://www.designshare.com/index.php/projects/djidi-djidi/images@3061, 2016
40. http://peterbrown.typepad.com/.a/6a00e55113a79188330134897cf2b9970c-pi, 2016
41. http://www.designshare.com/images/name/lippman/lshape/10a_800px.gif, 2016
42. https://undiaunaarquitecta.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/futuresystems.jpg?w=580, 2016
43. http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01192/arts-graphicsslid_1192883a.jpg, 2016
44. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wicciHNvHag/SOq453LfksI/AAAAAAAAAX8/3PDki
GLEmZU/s400/mobile+class+2.jpg, 2016
45. http://www.designshare.com/Awards/2004/submittal/project_image.asp?image=
4&project=453, 2016
46. http://www.designmobile.com/ecolab.html, 2016
47. https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3344/3333809477_85f352ea39.jpg, 2016
48. http://cubeme.com/classroom-of-the-future-by-gollifer-langston-architects, 2016
49. http://archinhome.com/architecture/classroom-of-the-future-mobile-classroomby-gollifer-langston-architects, 2016
50. www.ooegm.meb.gov.tr/13projeler_mobil_okul.asp, 2010
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
209
B. Ece Şahin, Neslihan Dostoğlu SEARCH OF INNOVATION IN EDUCATION ENVIRONMENTS
Creative Commons licensing terms
Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 2│Issue 11│2016
210