Referenced Article: Preston, “Eight Classrooms of the Future Finalists,” Jetson Green, August 5, 2009. Accessed November 6, 2011.
After looking at various technologies such as laptops and their roles in future classrooms, I have decided to take a broader approach to my blog and look at the technology of a physical classroom itself. Most of the time, classroom technology is seen as cell phones or computer-related media. These physical items affect learning because of how they shape a school’s curriculum and encourage students to learn in different ways. When looking at technology in this respect, the school building and its individual classrooms do not play a role in student learning. In today’s article, Preston reports on the “Classrooms of the Future” competition in which eight international architects designed physical classrooms that, through technology alone, would have increased “feasibility, sustainability, innovation in design, and overall design quality.” Preston elaborates on the eight finalists’ works and how each proposed classroom would improve learning based on the structure’s own architectural technology.
The first finalist’s classroom was the “Teksing Bamboowood School” in Nepal, a school designed to consist entirely of open, bamboo walls and natural materials from the local community. Using this open-walled technology would allow students to learn without power sources and encourage local businesses to supply the building materials. Another finalist classroom in an Indian saltpan community was designed to sit at the top of a dune, partially submerged in the sand to provide thermal heat as needed. A third architect designed “Adaptable Hillside Classrooms” so that countries like Uganda could use slanted, translucent classroom roofs for light and heat; these roofs would also rest on timber panels to eliminate the noise of rainfall that previously distracted students under traditional tin roofs. The “House in the Wood” design focused on furniture design for lower-income schools, in which the desks, chairs, and furniture doubled as movable, foldable storage containers and even additional tables. Other proposed technologies included terrace classrooms to add space for small school buildings, and the “Blurred Classroom” in which corridors literally passed through classrooms to encourage constant learning.
What do these architectural proposals mean for the future of the classroom? Each of them uses technology to improve the environment of learning as opposed to changing the school’s curriculum. Using natural, sustainable materials and focusing classroom design on the needs of students and their communities helps to improve learning environments worldwide. Bamboo walls, translucent roofs, and other technologies limit distractions and help students focus on their schoolwork. These technologies are even cost efficient, helping schools to save money for their classroom supplies and teacher salaries. Ultimately, classrooms are physical structures that cannot lead to successful learning without devoted teachers and students; however, an efficient and technologically advanced classroom can truly help students at disadvantages to study with equal opportunity to other students around the world.
The most important part of this “Classrooms of the Future” challenge is the message that classroom technology is not necessarily dependent on the financial situation of a school or its students. Technology as simple as the timber panels under Ugandan roofs can significantly improve a student’s chance to learn effectively without requiring extra cost or financial burden for the students or the school. Changing classrooms through new technology to better suit the needs of their students is an incredibly important step toward positively integrating technology into the classroom.
It's commonly forgotten that technology just means a man-made tool that makes everyday life easier. Usually, technology works best when it simplifies simply, and these eco-friendly, energy-efficient changes are perfect examples.
ReplyDeleteI always get very excited to hear about adjustments for sustainability. But just the word is enough to scare some people who see it as expensive, unnecessary (e.g. "the buildings we have work just fine" argument), and threatening to some jobs. The reality, though, is that sustainable materials are practical, saving both on the transportation and production cost fronts.
I'm delighted to see such small adjustments as reducing the noise in a classroom in the rain making big differences in education.