Review by: Gilbert, Dan (2004-11-04)

Arizona State Univ. Assistant Professor Torin Monahan argues that architects and learning space designers must apply flexible design criteria to technology-rich learning environments to support multiple types of learning. The term flexibility describes both physical properties and social events that happen within those same spaces. Monahan subdivides flexibility into fluidity, versatility, convertibility, scalability, and modifiability. Monahan’s article is based on his ethnographic research in a large public school system that is facing the challenge of integrating spatial deficiencies with mandates for technology usage in schools.

The crux of Monahan’s argument is that classroom architects need to apply the same concepts of flexible design to technological spaces that they do when considering other spatial configurations. Monahan asks, “If spatial configurations can contain values such as discipline or freedom, why can’t the same be said of technological spaces?” Monahan cites several works arguing that so far, planners have felt that technology should be seen only as neutral or as a tool set. Classroom design must now take into account electronic infrastructure as well as teaching practice. The growth of wireless technologies can increase flexibility by eliminating cables, and when used in conjunction with laptops do not physically limit fluidity. Designers should be aware however that introducing wireless enabled laptops raises a new set of logistical issues about managing their support, batteries, and replacement costs. Monahan points out that the accompanying social, political, and practical elements that influence technology usage must be considered in the design process.

Monahan uses the term ‘built pedagogy’ to describe “architectural embodiments of educational philosophies”. He suggests that the spaces themselves contain values that fall on a spectrum from discipline to autonomy, and that while spaces can always be reconfigured, overcoming physical and pedagogical barriers for changing the use of the space often requires significant energy from multiple actors. He cites examples of how learning space design decisions embody specific pedagogies (i. e. neat rows of desks means discipline and conformity). One suggestion he offers is for designers to create spaces that require reconfiguration so that students take an active role in designing their learning space. Educators could use simulations to show students possible configurations of a classroom. While this approach is engaging it would certainly require a confident instructor who can surrender some control to students and can quickly adapt his or her curricula to emerging designs of learning spaces.