06 SES 16, The Tried and Trusted or Designing for Innovation? Risks, Benefits and Participation in Developing Innovative + Flexible Educational Facilities Part 1
Symposium to be continued in 06 SES 17
This paper presents a comparative study to identify how the concept of risk can be construed in terms of disruption in school design. We do this through the analysis of two case studies of designing educational facilities that intentionally disrupt existing educational provision. The cases are in dynamic countries located in the Middle East and South America respectively, that have a vision for their new schools that draw on contemporary pedagogical concepts (Halpin, 2007). The case studies analysed draw on current design processes (2018-19) for a new school in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and for a preschool in Montevideo, Uruguay. For the school in Riyadh the data collection involved interviews with key school leadership and teaching staff. The interviews were conducted by an educator and an architect, to capture dual language, symbols, concepts and perspectives through both a design and education lens. For the preschool in Montevideo, data was collected through staff focus groups centred on visual activities and discussions, walks through the existing facility with staff and students and workshops with teachers and teacher assistants to identify their perspectives. Meetings with the architect, the head and key school leadership were also held to capture the educational framework to match the school design. In both case studies the analysis focused on the integration of education and design concepts, leading to identification of a framework that influenced the final school design and use. The comparative analysis focuses on disruption as a key concept. When applied to school design this construct includes two mutually dependent ideas: the school must be contextually and academically viable; and it should disrupt current education provision. The necessary conditions for disruption are the introduction of new pedagogy already in use outside the current system, including personal, experiential and self-directed learning; and where school communities are unable to access these disruptive ideas from current educational providers (Christensen, 1997; Christensen, Raynor, & McDonald, 2015). The main comparative analytical themes are: the alignment of education and design concepts with the local (Saudi and Uruguayan) context, while also considering the applicability of global educational theoretical concepts; identifying pragmatic design considerations and criteria for success; and identifying the relationships between cultural traditions and socio-economic drivers of change (Rißler, Bossen, & Blasse, 2014).
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovators dilemma. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2015). What is disruptive innovation? Harvard Business Review, 93(12), 44-53. Halpin, D. (2007). Utopian spaces of "robust hope": The architecture and nature of progressive learning environments. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(3), 243-255. Rißler, G., Bossen, A., & Blasse, N. (2014). School as space: Spatial alterations, teaching, social motives, and practices. Studia Paedagogica, 19(4), 145
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- 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.