Interface between Educational Facilities and Learning Climate in Three Northern Alabama K-2 ...

353 Pages·2012·3.09 MB·English

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 472 268
EF 006 230
Yielding, A.C.
AUTHOR
Interface between Educational Facilities and Learning Climate
TITLE
in Three Northern Alabama K-2 Elementary Schools.
1993-00-00
PUB DATE
351p.; Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Alabama.
NOTE
Dissertations/Theses
Doctoral Dissertations (041)
PUB TYPE
Research (143)
Reports
EDRS Price MFO1 /PC15 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Building Design; *Educational Environment; *Educational
DESCRIPTORS
Facilities Design; Elementary Education; School Safety;
School Space; *Space Utilization; Teacher Attitudes
Alabama
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
This study was designed to observe, record, and describe the
interface between educational facilities and learning climate in three
elementary schools, comparing the results with results from a 1990 study.
Data came from taped informal interviews, videotape recordings, observations,
and conversations with parents, teachers, and administrators. Study
instruments included the Classroom Spatial Utilization and Migration
Observation Form and the Teachers' Educational Facility Perception
Questionnaire. Data analysis indicated that school facility had a definite
impact on total learning climate. Specific physical features (space,
equipment, maintenance, appearance, comfort, and general physical
arrangement) had the ability to positively or negatively impact learning
climate. Teachers had specific preferences regarding safety, aesthetic,
instructional, and equipment features of their classroom. Results found that
architectural features and general schematic arrangements relative to the
physical location of the school could affect the learning climate in the area
of safety and aesthetics. The open space (pod) design negatively impacted the
learning climate in the area of comfort and space. Student movement in the
classroom and school was affected by available space, learning centers,
equipment, and other materials. Space outside the building' had to be properly
allocated for the ingress and ingress of vehicles and loading and unloading
of students to ensure safety at all times.
(SM)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the ori inal document.
INTERFACE BETWEEN EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES AND LEARNING
CLIMATE IN THREE NORTHERN ALABAMA
K-2 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
by
A. C. YIELDING
A DISSERTATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
BEEN GRANTED BY
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced
as
received from the person or organization
Mrs. A.C. Yielding
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction qualify.
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
Points of view or opinions stated in this
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
document do not necessarily represent
1
official OERI position or policy.
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of
Education in the Area of
Professional Studies in the
Graduate School of
The University of Alabama
TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA
1993
LE
EST COPY AVAIL(
?'
2
12
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my sincere appreciation to those
persons who made possible the completion of my research.
Deepest appreciation is given to Dr. Harold Bishop, my
doctoral committee chairperson, for his patience, guidance,
Sincere
assistance, and understanding through this study.
appreciation and gratitude are also extended to the other
members of the dissertation committee, Dr. Jerry J. Herman,
Dr. Robert Leigh, Dr. Marcia O'Neal, Dr. Jerry M. Lowe, and
Dr. Albert Miles, for the invaluable assistance and support
they provided.
Appreciation is also expressed to the teachers,
principals, and support personnel of each school that
To the former chairperson of my
participated in the study.
committee, Dr. Jerry Herman, I owe great appreciation for
his continual faith and support in me.
I also wish to thank Sherri and Andy Edwards for their
extra efforts and assistance throughout the doctoral
program.
To Marilyn McCracken, secretary in the Area of
Educational Administration and Leadership, who always
displayed confidence in me,
I wish to express sincere
appreciation.
This study is dedicated to my wife Geray; my children,
Billie Rachell, Aaron C., Jeanette, Janelle, Richard, and
iii
t
3
Tami.
I also dedicate this study to my sons-in-law, Danny
Brown and Douglass Summers for their understanding and
support throughout my years of graduate work.
iv
4
7
Weinstein (1979) reported that in spite of the large
body of research on the influence of the physical
environment on students, the "solid proof" does not exist as
The role of the school facility
yet of that relationship.
on the educational process is beginning to be better
defined, but more research needs to take place to bring this
relationship into focus.
Statement of the Problem
Recent studies have been completed which analyzed the
interface between educational facilities and learning
climate; however, no such studies have been conducted in the
state of Alabama or in an Alabama school district.
Present-day schools, many of which were built between
1900 and 1930, are in need of facelifts, new furniture, new
systems and designs, upgraded classrooms, outdoor ecological
landscapes for learning, technology zones, spaces for art
and design to occur, hallways as art galleries, places for
hands-on studio design and building experiences:
areas
where children can contribute to or create a sense of
ownership and participation (Taylor & Gousie, 1988).
It is
in this context that active research needs to be
accomplished into the interface between educational
facilities and learning climate.
The need to understand
more accurately that school buildings may do more than
simply house the instructional program should exist
among
educators.
6
task force was to translate the theoretical learning
concepts into actual practice (Jolivet, 1988).
The Interface Profile (Hawkins & Overbaugh, 1988)
presents six major areas of interface between facility and
Each of the interface areas, evolving from the
learning.
input from the two forces, focuses on features that
strengthen the educational soundness and learning climate of
The profile indicates that student
a school building.
learning and positive climate are enhanced when the
facility:
Is an integral part of the community reflecting-
1.
community pride; community involvement; and broad
utilization.
Is adaptable to the users' needs through--a
2.
controllable physical environment; provision for
varied and ample storage; flexible instructional
space for teaching and learning styles; walls,
floor, fenestration serving and learning process.
Permits teachers to function as professionals
3.
with--reasonable control of the learning
environment; space which permits related dialogue;
appropriate space for preparation for instruction;
motivational environment conducive to
professionalism.
Fosters communication--through the appropriate use
4.
of technology; through the use of "learning
surfaces"; about the school ,at points of entry;
that emphasizes students achievement; that is
demonstrated as important to students.
Creates an appropriate behavior settingwith
5.
emphasis on aesthetics; which encourages student
interaction; which provides a stimulating
atmosphere for learning; that is a comprehensive
laboratory for learning.
Accommodates a variety of learning styles--through
6.
hands-on experiences resulting from building
design; which fosters fine arts appreciation;
resulting from student interaction; through well
designed and equipped space; related to individual
needs and interest.
(p. 7)
BIEST COPY AVAIELA
1::
5
The Interface Project called
design, and sociology.
attention to the need to study in depth the relationship
between school facilities and student learning, to examine
the interface between the school facility and the learning
process (Jolivet, 1988; Viadero, 1990).
An educational facility (Knezevich, 1984) may be
perceived as a controlled environment that enhances the
teaching-learning process while it protects the physical
Caudill (1954) suggested that
well-being of occupants.
school planning starts and ends with the pupil and that the
building should be designed to satisfy the pupils' physical
Physical needs are met by insuring a
and emotional needs.
safe structure, adequate sanitary facilities, a balanced
visual environment, an appropriate thermal environment, a
satisfactory acoustical environment, and sufficient shelter
Emotional needs are met by
space for work and play.
creating pleasant surroundings, a friendly atmosphere, and
an inspiring environment.
This humanistic, pupil-oriented
approach to school planning and construction views design
and equipment as a means of enhancing the pupil's learning
and comfort (Knezevich, 1984).
In December 1987, a second task force met with the
Texas A & M Interface Task Force.
It was identified as the
National Interface Task Force.
This group consisted of more
than a dozen professional educational facility planners from
the United States and Canada.
The responsibility of this
4
physical environment and student interest, performance, and
learning (Jolivet, 1988).
Taylor and Gousie (1988) wrote that in its present
state, the architecture and physical setting of most schools
in the United States are in a deplorable condition, often
outmoded and based on designs and philosophies of
Even new schools, though updated, are still
yesteryear.
being designed in an outmoded format repeating the egg
crate, closed classroom design of 200 years ago.
As such,
the American school, an environment in which children spend
a large share of their time, leaves little room for self-
expression and sense of ownership or involvement.
"There
cannot be separation between the learning process and the
physical environment--they are integral parts of each other"
(p. 23).
The Interface Project was initiated by Harold Hawkins
of Texas A & M University following a review of the
literature on the research that had been conducted on the
relationship between school facilities and student learning.
During 1987, an interdisciplinary group of university
faculty from Texas A & M University identified the learning
theory relevant to the study of the interface between the
school facility and the learning process.
Known as the
Texas A & M Interface Task Force, it consisted of
representatives from educational administration, educational
psychology, curriculum and instruction, environmental
3
some degree affects one's daily activity or routine" (p.
13), became the focal point for initiating the group's
Lowe (1992) defined the term "learning climate"
research.
as variables found within educational environments that
effectively or ineffectively accommodate positive teaching
These variables may be physical as well as
and learning.
psychological and tend to be associated with the feelings
and perceptions of all member stakeholders.
In the past, the term "school climate" was associated
with organizational climate or organizational environment
that concerned itself with the professional aspects and
Today,
social relationships among the faculty and staff.
more writers are using the terms "school climate" and
"learning climate" to be associated with the learning and
achievement of students rather than interaction between
teachers and supervisors.
During this decade there have been critical reviews of
One that generated much discussion
the nation's schools.
was "A Nation at Risk" (1983).
The Governors' Report on
Education (emanating from "Action for Excellence" 1983) also
Governors of some
addressed several categories of concern.
states have initiated reforms in response to various
elements in the report.
With this resurgence of interest in
education and the recognition of a need to build more
classrooms and schools, it is perceived that there has been
inadequate attention given to the relationship between the
2
Certainly, it is not the most important
toward school.
It is, however, a factor that those who are
factor.
influential in the design and maintenance of school
It makes sense, therefore, to make
facilities can control.
physical
a more concerted effort to identify the
characteristics that have a positive effect on the learning
Schools should then be designed according to
environment.
Such positive influences on the
these characteristics.
cognitive or the affective domain of the learning
environment can be a factor in promoting a positive attitude
It may thus be considered to have an
toward school.
indirect motivational effect on learning and, consequently,
on achievement.
Halpin and Croft (1962) conducted a study on
They dealt with the
"organizational climate" in schools.
Hoyle
"social component" of the organizational climate.
(1977) conducted a study titled "Organizational and Spatial
In this
Characteristics of Urban Learning Environments."
study, Hoyle used the terms "learning climate," "learning
environments," "classroom climate," and "school climate."
Baskerville (1981) wrote that recently a study group at the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln was formed for the purpose of
defining "climate" and the role it plays in the lives of
educational administrators, professional educators, and
"Room temperature" and "seasonal weather" were
students.
by-passed as inadequate for the study.
"Conditions which to