Ending Disciplinary Architecture in America's Public Schools

1968 the student population of school age
children rose by 2.3 million students, leaving
school districts scrambling to construct
schools for their ever-increasing enrollments.
The solution was to standardize school
construction and management in order to
make construction both fast and cheap. New
school buildings of this era were no longer
Colonial or reminiscent of Gothic or Georgian
architecture. Instead schools were one-story,
flat-roofed and enclosed with lighter and
simpler building materials such as aluminum
windows frames and concrete masonry
units. It was during this building boom that
the concept of the “finger-planned” school
gained popularity. In this arrangement,
corridors are spread out across the site
forming fingers off of which each classroom
is aligned. The need for rapid construction
methods have gone on to characterize a
building style that now accounts for 40% of
American public schools. 11
Despite spurts of innovation, less than 10%
of all schools in the United States were built
since 1965. Even relatively contemporary
school buildings are still being constructed
using the design principles of the 50s and
60s; rendering these buildings outdated from
the moment they open. In current times, we
are forced to acknowledge the increasingly
prevalent influence of technology on society,
leaving us with a new imperative for school
design and questioning the requirements of a
21st century learning environment. This thesis
offers an antidote to antiquated models,
presented on a sustainable platform that will
remain viable and relevant for decades to
come. While no one can reasonably predict
what schools will look like 50 years from now,
we must learn from the failures of past systems
to create new, flexible micro-environments
in order to accommodate multiple learning
models throughout a variety of landscapes.
21 ST CENTURY LEARNING
Traditional schools were designed in order
to supply a workforce for an industrious
economy, and the singular mechanism
by which to do this was the classroom.
Within this isolated room the teacher is the
authority figure who mechanically transfers
knowledge to students as they are seated
in rigid rows. Classrooms therefore operate
on the assumption that all students can
passively absorb information in the same
format at the same time. Learning became
unidirectional and prepared students via rote
memorization and menial tasks rather than
active learning and deep comprehension. This
model requires assimilation on the part of
the students, paying no mind to the fact that
the classroom should deliver a multitude of
learning modalities as diverse as the students
who occupy it. What has become clear in
recent decades is that this style of learning is
no longer equipping students with the support
needed to flourish in modern-day society.
Competencies needed for the 21st century
look vastly different than they did for
twentieth century students. Equipped with
well-backed research, modern pedagogical
theories veer away from the prevailing
teacher-centric model and toward studentcentered
learning models. In student-centered
learning, students are praised individuals who
are active in their own education. Instead
of passively taking in information, learning
is activated by encouraging students to be
in control of their own curiosities. Research
shows that “the student-centered model is
more effective for deep understanding (as
opposed to rote memorization) because
it connects the learner with a wider range
of experience than just listening.” 12 New
methods require an individualized learning
approach that can only be implemented by
removing the teacher from the grandstand.
Instead of designing for mono-functionality
and efficiency, a 21st century school must be
designed for learning.
THE STATE OF OUR NATION’S SCHOOL
FACILITIES
The United States has over $2 trillion of net
worth tied up in school facilities. This year,
our public schools will host 50.7 million
students, and yet more than half (53%) of
these public schools need to make investments
for repairs, renovations, and modernizations
to be considered in “good” condition. 13
In 1995 the U.S. Government Accounting
Office published School Facilities: Condition
of America’s Schools — the last truly
comprehensive federal review of our nation’s
school infrastructure. The report found that
half of all schools had problems linked to
indoor air quality and an estimated 15,000
schools were circulating air deemed unfit to
breathe. 14 Next to highways, K–12 public
school facilities are the nation’s largest public
building sector, accounting for about onequarter
of all state and local infrastructure
capital projects. Even with these investments
in place, estimates show that there remains
a deficit of $46B on school construction and
maintenance necessary to ensure a safe and
healthy school building. 15
Most schools across the U.S. are between
30-50 years old and are simply not outfitted
to provide modern standards of teaching.
Some would argue these outdated structures
prevent the application of modern pedagogy
altogether. How can we expect high
achieving students when they are placed in
substandard environments? Even in instances
where renovations or new school construction
takes place, it is often the re-creation of the
same school buildings we have seen for the
past 100 years. As a nation, we continue to
invest a vast amount of resources to maintain
outdated structures that do a poor job of
equipping our students with a 21st century
education.
THE CASE FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE
Despite the pervasive issues within the
realm of public education, at the center lies
a unique design solution called Adaptive
Reuse. Adaptive Reuse is the act of taking a
previously constructed building and through
the deployment of spatial interventions the
building is re-purposed for a new program
and user(s). When designing for a 21st
century learning environment, adaptive reuse
offers many benefits. Foremost is that it can
be a financially viable solution. When the
average cost of a new school build is over
$40 million dollars 17 , adaptive reuse can
counter the high financial burdens few school
districts can bear.
By identifying an underutilized site in which
designers see inherent value where others
previously have not, adapting an existing
building can be a cost-effective method for
creating modernized school facilities. More
and more school districts, in particular charter
schools who are largely responsible for
securing and funding their own facilities, are
turning to existing building stock in an attempt
to keep construction costs low. It should be
noted that the financial benefits of adaptive
reuse are very much site specific and are
driven by many factors.
“It’s important to understand both
the dynamics of obsolescence –
why buildings are empty – and the
relative suitability of revitalizing
and repurposing these buildings for
school communities. Like most things
in real estate, location is at least part
of both considerations. Supply and
demand play a part as well, as do
the condition, features, and size of
a property – the real costs and the
perception of value.” 16
34
35