School spaces and identity processes of students.Relationship between students perception of use of spaces and views of some designer´s theories

Author(s):

Liliana Alves Couto(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2015

Network:

29. Research on Arts Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

29 SES 12 B, Experiencing arts education

Paper Session

Time:

2015-09-11

09:00-10:30

Room:

326.Oktatóterem [C]

Chair:

Rita Rainho

Contribution

The paper aims to know the relationship between school spaces and the students identity process. We adopt three different kinds of approaches: The first is theprogressive recognition of twentieth-century thought, about the role of spaces in the identity process of students; the other, the current state of recentresearch thatfocusesthe immaterialityof spacesand its purposesin that processof identityand finally the thoughtexpressed byyoung peopleconcerning their space’s perception ofuse.

The prevailingthoughtof the twentieth centuryshowsa growinginterest in the relationshipbetween architectureofschoolsin education.On history ofarchitecture,theschool buildingsare designed andplannedaccording to theeducational prevailing conceptsand most of thearchitecturalchangesare directly relatedto currentways of thinkingeducation. There is inschool architecturea goalto meet,a kind ofdiscourse thatestablishesits materialityanda system ofvalues such asorder,disciplineand surveillance.

From the middleof the past century,school´sspacesare consideredas key places of culturalinculcationandreproduction ofdifferentrolesof social dominationand social practices.The greatimperativeof modernity isthe survival ofpersonby his identity;the worldis entirely made ofdifferences, and eachone of us,to survive, mustforgeits identity.Authorsalso recognize that,despite being"unreal", identity isnecessary torecognize ourbelonging:whatwe are,what we havein common, how different we are from others andwe would like tobe.

The present centurybrings, in turn,two newconsiderations:the identityas “a reflectiveself-position"that brings a personalself-identityandthe conceptof bodyreality now considered an objectthat we all havethe privilege of livingor we arecondemned to live.So,our ounship corporal reality is asystem of action, apraxis,andits practicalimmersionin the interactionsof everyday lifeis an essentialpart of maintaininga coherentsense of self-identity.

Other authors,in turn,emphasize ourpersonal role in this issue:the identitieswill never have thestrength of arock,is notensured overthe whole life,depending on our own decisions,the way we conductour livesand thethe way we dooursocialpractices.

In conclusion,these considerationshave a common proposal - the understanding that identityis a process ofcontinuous andarticulatedown construction and aset where social relationships andpersonalstoriesare immersed.

Presently, thediscursiveand spatialbasisof identities has acontractual basis,remarkedbyphysical structures ofschools and issource ofvaried meanings,anchoredandalways presentoveridentity practices.So,those identitiesare based on young activities,historiesof life,futureideas, dreamsand fantasies,a process in whichthey gaintheir self-awareness.In same sense ispointedthe question thatidentity as transactional process,growsfrom a provisional,challenged,disputedandasense of conflictualconnotation thatmaketheidentityprocessin order tocontribute toa feeling ofidentity.

This means that the discussion ofidentity asdiscursive processis a problem that is not yet studied enough.Isan emergingissueof new researchers who have a new agenda for school spaces in the century XXI. They claim now for the immateriality of school spaces and its special culture that can be accessed by studying the speeches of young people, who may, in certain circumstances, be taken on a new dimension: the sensitivity and emotional role that are actually produced by designers with experiences of spaces.

Method

STUDENT´S PERCETION OF USE OF SCHOOL SPACES In order to know the perspective of young people in the initial phase of the work, we proceeded to an analysis of their speeches produced in the first meetings looking for expressions that reveal their point of view on the school premises of use. The result of this research we designate as “perceptions of use of school spaces”. This survey will cross their perspectives in two incisive moments to compare them: in a primary phase of research in the final phase of the project. By this analysis is our own propose, revel the evolution in discursive contents of young people, their new understanding of reality school space, and understand how these new speeches is relate to their identity, awareness and capacity to participate, i.e. making them able agents to discuss the projects of schools for the twenty-first century. Wishing to Know how young people impute meaning to the spaces in a first approach, we examined the discursive contents of our first meetings, recorded on video. The use of perceptions is the contents whose senses answer to this question: What are you doing in the outdoor areas of the school? The answers were not surprised and eventually describe, in a very real way, that use the space for what are the most basic activities of daily school life: Moving / Eating / Watching / Relating / Relaxing / Resting / Talking / Reading / Studying / Spending time / Sitting / Observe / Take refuge / Thinking / Flirting / Find friends / Call. In fact this terminology describes a very concrete way what students do, in their free time. The functionalist perspective of spaces is explicit, and four words indicate a tendency to clear places for relationships: to relate; talk; flirting; find friends, while two students say that use the spaces to take refuge, that is, to achieve some isolation from others. In reality there is no expression that links the feelings or emotions young people to the spaces. That revels a standardized way the look the function of spaces and a uniform and impersonal experience in school spaces. Students do not recognize the space as a dynamic and humane place. Spaces are as they are. Situations that they live daily, are waste and discomfort, not lead them to see that change as necessary and possible (Melatti, 2004).

Expected Outcomes

The result of these approaches enable us to understand there are um progressive recognizing about the confluences of the mean of spaces with young identity and a new sensitive connection between students identity and school spaces. This recognition fall into researchers that address their work and whose meaning is summarized as follows: “Spaces are themselves agents for change; Changed spaces will change practice”. Within this thought, are worthy of mention studies on “ hidden curriculum” [Prosser (2007) Krauss (2008); Burke (2003)] the “invisible pedagogies “ [Pardiñas & Mesías Lema (2011); Acaso (2012)] The studies about the “Sensitive-Culture schools : visibility and hiding” [Prosser (2007); Burke & Grosvenor (2003, 2008); Baillieu (2006); Benavente (1993)] and about “Visual Voice of space” [Burke (2007); Blackmore (2011)]. All these proposals are supported by a methodological change synthesized as “The narrative knowledge in emergency of critical thinking” (Perec, 1974; Prosser 2007); “sensory ethnografy” & “visual anthropology” of scholl life (Pink, 2006; 2009) and the Cultural|visual, affective (i)material and sensory turns. This means that there are new contributions of young people in building Schools. Their sensitive narratives can be considered as innovative solutions for a new approach and new qualities in the built school environment; the innovative solutions identified by the students, in fact, can set up a new kind of knowledge and a critical expression about School reality. We believe that the speeches of the young people are a symbolic and critical representation of this reality, becoming a new reality and produce a more critical knowledge about the whole school reality. This contribution focuses the approach of the students school spaces… problematizes the sensory/symbolic relationship with these spaces, exploring their potential in identity processes, learning and critical awareness of students.

References

Acaso, María (2012). Pedagogías invisibles. El espacio del aula como discurso. Madrid: Tapa Blanda. ISBN: 978-84-8319-733-2. Obtido em 8 Abril de 2013 de http://www.catarata.org/libro/mostrar/id/781 Baillieu, Amanda (25th May 2006). Senses of Place. Designing Scotland’s Future Schools. Glasgow: The Lighthouse. Editor, Building Design. (Obtido em 30 Janeiro de 2013 de http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/920/0049729.pdf) Benavente, Ana (1993). "Educação, participação e democracia: valores e práticas na instituição escolar". Análise Psicológica, n° 3, 1993, p. 331. Blackmore, Jill et al. (2011). ”Research into the connection between built learning spaces and students outcomes”. Literature Review, paper nº 22, june 2011, Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Deakin University. Melbourne Burke, Catherine & Grosvenor, Ian (2003). The School I´d Like. Children and Young people´s reflections on an education for the 21 st century . London and New York: Routledge Falmer. Burke, Catherine (2007).”The View of the Child: Releasing ‘‘visual voices’’ in the design of learning environments”. UK: University of Leeds. In Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, Vol. 28, No. 3, September 2007, pp.359-372. Krauss, Annette (2008). ‘Hidden Curriculum’, Annette Krauss’ project. Obtido em 24 Maio, 2013 de http://cascoprojects.org/?entryid=283 Melatti, Sheila P.P. C (2004). A arquitetura escolar e a prática pedagógica. Dissertação de mestrado EM EDUCAÇÃO E CULTURA. Joinville:UDESC/SOCIESC e CCT. Pardiñas, Maria Jesús Agra & Mesías Lema, José María (2011). “Questions before words ‘An Educational Space, a Stimulating Space?’”. In International Journal of Education through Art, Volume 7, Number [ETA 7 (1)], pp. 7–26. Intellect Limited Article 2011, English language. doi: 10.1386/eta.7.1.7_1 Parque Escolar EPE (2009). MANUAL DE PROJECTO: ARQUITECTURA, VERSÃO 2.1, EDIÇÃO AGOSTO ’09. Parque escolar: Programa de Modernização das Escolas do Ensino Secundário (PMEES). Obtido em 23 de Outubro de 2012 de http://www.espacosescolares.europanportugal.pt/pdf/MPA_v2_1.pdf Perec, Georges (1974). Species of Sapces and Other Sapces. Tradução de John Sturrock: Species of Sapces / Espèces d´espaces, for Pierre Getzler. Penguin: Selected Writings. ISBN: 0-14-018986-6 Pink, Sarah (2006). The future of visual anthropology: engaging the senses. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.ISBN10: 0-415-35764-0. Pink, Sarah (2009). Doing Sensory Ethnography. London: Sage Publications Ltd, Mixed Sources. ISBN: 978-1-4129-4802-9 Pinto, Jorge Cruz. (2005). “Espaço-Limite da Arquitetura” in RCL (2005) 34: 209-230. Prosser, Jon (2007). ”Visual methods and the visual culture of schools 27”. In Visual Studies, Vol. 22, No. 1, April 2007. ISSN 1472–5878 online/07/010013-18. International Visual Sociology Association. Routlege: Taylor & Francis Group. Obtido em 14 Janeiro de 2013 de http://publicsphere.narod.ru/VisCultSchools.pdf

Author Information

Liliana Alves Couto (presenting / submitting)

Faculdade de Belas Artes da Universidade do Porto

Educação Artistica (doutoramento)

Sanguedo- Santa Maria da Feira

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.