Children's Relationships with Their

Children’s relationships with their physical school: Considerations of primary school architecture and furniture design in a social and cultural context A Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Robert Ian Cullis Faculty of Design, Media and Management Buckinghamshire New University Brunel University April 2010 This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author under the terms of the United Kingdom Copyright Acts. No quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. Abstract Children’s relationships with their physical school: Considerations of primary school architecture and furniture design in a social and cultural context By Robert Ian Cullis In recent years substantial investment has been made to replace or refurbish state schools in England and Wales and, although research has unsuccessfully sought to prove its contribution, the discipline of Design continues to be identified as a facilitator of educational transformation. Results to date, however, are mixed and there is an evident failing at the design briefing stage to understand how children interact with their educational settings and, notably, an avoidance of direct challenge to the primary school classroom and its practice. In response, this thesis asks how the social and cultural study of children’s relationships with their physical school can suggest a meaningful approach to primary school architecture and furniture design. A model of well-being is developed to clarify misused terminology and to present a realistic expectation of design in which the contradictory goals of inclusion and the development of the individual are appraised. Sitting within a diverse grounded methodology, the concept of belonging is then explored as a basis for evaluating the contribution of different aspects of the physical school to children’s well-being. The primary school environments studied were found to limit the possibilities of a child’s well- being. School architecture through to classroom wall displays were complicit in restricting physical and social expression in favour of school organisation and, furthermore, the central child-teacher relationship was found to be unnecessarily devalued by behavioural concerns derived from the setting. By ethically interpreting the rich variety of children’s voices, priorities for what is coined here as child-teacher centred design are established and a clear relationship between architecture and furniture is offered. The thesis recommends that architecture continues to perform a protective classroom role to support objectives of inclusion whilst school furniture supports more affective, individualistic goals through less prescriptive and more varied settings for learning. i Acknowledgements Fortunately, I have not been alone. I would like to thank Dr Lynn Jones, my first supervisor, for her ongoing support and understanding over the last few years and for encouraging me to embark on a PhD in the first place. Dr Christina Meredith, my second supervisor, has provided insight, intelligence and dedication which have proved invaluable to me. I am extremely grateful for this. I owe a great deal of gratitude to all three schools involved in my primary research. Reflecting now on the education of primary school children, it is a serious subject and this thesis has grown to represent that. Perhaps therefore it is not obvious in the writing but the research has been great fun and having the opportunity to discuss slimy bricks or poisonous ivy or even poorly grandparents with children was a privilege. Whenever I needed to remind myself of what organisation and efficiency was like I could always rely on Debra Harper at Buckinghamshire New University to provide this and, in the closing stages, appreciation is due to Dr William Lishman for guiding me in to land. Two organisations, Creative Partnerships and Hampshire County Council, have provided regular support and opportunities for essential and enlightening discussions at various points in the process. My family has continually supported and encouraged me and has resolutely avoided the, ‘So, have you finished it yet?’ question. This has helped enormously. As yet I am unaware of advice which suggests unplanned fatherhood contributes to the successful completion of a PhD. However, the richness this has added to my life and the motivation it has inspired mean that I would highly recommend it; I dedicate this thesis to my loves, Margot and Klara. ii Author’s declaration Unless otherwise stated in the text, the work submitted in this thesis is my own. I have necessarily referred to and fully acknowledged the work of others to inform the context and the arguments of this thesis. However, the evaluation of such work and its relevance is entirely my own. No part of the work presented has been submitted in support of a successful or pending application for any other degree or qualification of this or any other University or of any professional or learned body. I confirm that this is a true statement and that, subject to any comments above, the submission is my own original work. iii Table of contents page Chapter 1: Aspirations for a new generation of primary schools .................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1.1 My intentions .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2 Ambitions for a new era of school design ................................................................... 2 1.2 Child-centred schools – a 2010 perspective ....................................................................... 7 1.3 Interpreting well-being – developing a literature-based model ....................................... 12 1.3.1 Stage 1: Starting with the Government’s position .................................................... 14 1.3.2 Stage 2: An examination of self-esteem and its school relevance............................ 20 1.3.3 Stage 3: Longer term outcomes and the child’s societal context ............................. 24 1.3.4 Review ....................................................................................................................... 33 1.4 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 35 1.4.1 Assessment of related research methodologies ....................................................... 36 1.4.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 37 1.4.3 Thesis structure ......................................................................................................... 41 Chapter 2: The design of schools - A perspective on history ...................................... 43 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 43 2.1.1 1870-1902 - Victorian Board schools ........................................................................ 44 2.1.2 1902-1945 – Including open air schools ................................................................... 51 2.1.3 1945 onwards – Including open plan schools ........................................................... 58 2.1.4 A perspective on today’s new schools ...................................................................... 70 2.2 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 80 Chapter 3: Well-being at school - Children’s views ......................................................... 83 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 83 3.1.1 The schools involved ................................................................................................. 85 3.1.2 Ethics ......................................................................................................................... 85 iv 3.2 Study 1: Good day, bad day .............................................................................................. 86 3.2.1 Aim ............................................................................................................................ 86 3.2.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 87 3.2.3 Children’s responses ................................................................................................. 90 3.2.4 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 103 3.3 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 113 Chapter 4: Asking children directly about their physical school environment ...... 116 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 116 4.2 Study 2: Favourite and least favourite place or feature ................................................. 117 4.2.1 Methodology ..........................................................................................................

Load more