Talking spaces

Just back from the Learning Landscapes conference at Queen Mary's College London, which was to launch their final HEFCE-funded report and tools. I gave a paper (called "where is the theory?") and also listened to an interesting and varied range of other speakers. Very full day - 10 speakers in total - so not much audience participation possible, but good in that the speakers were selected to open up debate, rather than merely describe the project report.

Left with a mixture of optimism about the vital potential of bringing together estate managers, architects and educationalists perspectives on learning spaces; and frustrated that we still have - despite the work of the groups like Learning Landscapes at the University of Lincoln - very few approaches or methods which offer a firm purchase on relationships between architectural design, teaching and learning encounters, and space/resource development and management. Or rather we have several, but which are being generated piecemeal across the sector, from across both academic and commercial locations.

So we are left to choose between - if we can even find the work - say, the LL approach based on a better understanding of the history of universities as a building type, or (from the Institute of Education in London) Paul Temple's ideas about thinking 'place' rather than 'space'; or even my own argument which is that we need to build better conceptual frameworks and research methods, preferrably on the best contemporary theoretical work across architecture, education and the social sciences.... the core argument behind the Towards Creative Learning Spaces book.

Learning through appropriating space?

Was at the second University of the Arts London conference yesterday. Called Making Space a lot of the presentations and discussions this time around were about the creative potential of found or 'non-spaces' for art and design education. Rather than the "whatever we do, lets make it flexible" approach or the corporate/office feel of the bland building-with-an-atrium, many speakers hankered after the special pleasures of appropriating existing spaces and the learning potential in creatively occupying and/or transforming them. Here, the model was more the city (Sunand Prasad - "The city before us is a fantastic teacher; its functions call out for appropriate form and for us to appropriate it"; David Porter - "The studio is a city in miniature."). Ben Evans talked about 'pop-up' spaces and site-specific work, the creativity engendered by such temporary engagements.

There was a real feeling of a shift (maybe because of a strong architectural presence) towards trying to make learning spaces which can release the best energies of their occupants - something just focusing on functional quality can sometimes negate. This doesn't mean we can get away from the importance (particularly in art and design subjects) of spaces with certain technical specifications, only that the alternative should not be merely undifferentiated 'flexible' space.

Image of Catherine Yass project High Wire (2008) http://www.artangel.org.uk/projects/2008/high_wire

What is the difference between an office and an educational building?

Just back from a very brief trip to Belfast, where I was taken around the new(ish) Faculty of Art and Design building at the University of Ulster. Here is another project with a very clear underlying diagram (see previous comments on Telford College, Edinburgh). It is a series of open floor planes around two atria, like a huge number 8. At first glance it seems to be based on the layout and language of a shared coporate office space, with cafes and display space on the ground floor and then a variety of sizes of glazed-in an open 'boxes' above, providing offices, seminar and studio spaces.

But the difference lies in how the spaces are connected. There are many varieties of relationship, mostly emphasising openness. So staff offices are glazed, to overlook one of the voids down to the returns desk of the library. Others have no windows, others have few walls. Many walls finish just above head level, and some overlooked rooms have no ceilings.

In some spaces, these varations seem to work together, particularly the top floor spaces of the under-graduate architecture school (at least at this moment when it is being used for exhibition.)

But overall, it is as if there has been no real engagement in the specific characteristics of education, particularly art and design education. There is no acknowledgement of the complexities of sharing, ownership, belonging, security and privacy at different scales/different locations/times for both staff and students. The IMAGE of openness is lovely, the realities much more less successful. Sound travels everywhere, uncontrolled. If stuff is left out its messiness is on show to the world (and easy to steal), but there is no way to hide it away/store it appropriately.

Education is not an office, nor merely a more flexibly and artistically arranged version of one.

And then there is Second Life..

Went to the reLIVE conference at the Open University last week, and got my first proper introduction to Second Life, in the company of people who spend as much time there as the real world. For anyone interested in 'space' - and our everyday social and spatial interactions - Second Life is an extraordinary place. It is huge, an enormous world of islands, events and networks. It seems to be a complex mixture which both replicates real world social relationships/spaces and enables surreal, parallel and re-invented ones. So the basic landscapes conform to gravity and people tend to make their avatars face each other at an 'appropriate' social distance when text-talking. But then these figures might have bushy tails, or be dressed in extraordinary costumes, or (if you building skills are good enough) are in the shape of something else like crows or fish. It is quite strange to have a conversation with a fish rotating around your stomach.

With nearly 50 million people globally who are SL members, it feels like we should be understanding what is going on. For people interested in learning in Second Life, the key explorations currently seem to be around simulations (disaster scenarios, historical enactments) and 3D social networking/informal learning. But I think what stunned me the most was the huge amount of creativity going into making artefacts, spaces and developing social (including sexual) connections. From choosing, finding or designing clothes; to creating buildings; to generating events or objects to sell; to playing a game based on having a child and it growing up; personal, social and commercial creatvity is central. And I don't even know how to begin mapping or analysing what is going on.

image from Lars Wieneke workshop entitled 'cultural tinkering', reLIVE conference workshop. OU, 20th Nov 2008

Another day, another building...

Another day, another building visit - this time to Telford College in Edinburgh. This design (the subject of many case studies) is interesting because it offers a very clear 'diagram' of how educational spaces could change as information and communication technologies (ICT) become ubiquitous to learning. 

Telford College (by HOK architects) is formed around a large atrium which combines a cafe with informal learning spaces and wireless connection to the university portal. This high, light and top-lit space is surrounded by several floors of classrooms all linked by spines of 'learning streets' - extra wide double-height corridors. These colour-coded learning streets contain rows of open access computers, together with alcoves at various intervals (and used for various things) and are supported by a help-desk in each spine.

Staff accommodation is also different to most universities and colleges - everyone put together into one 3,000 sqm open plan office, with 85% hot-desking supported by a variety of informal and formal social and group spaces.

Interestingly, I combined this visit with going to the launch of the Explore It toolkit at the University of Dundee. Designed by DEGW, together with the University of Strathclyde, the toolkit is crucially about helping  those participating in new buildings or adaptations to imagine the possibilities; through a series of diagrammatic and inter-changeable building plan drawings. 

The Explore It toolkit focusses on academic workplaces, suggesting a series of different core arrangements (called Studies, Quarters, Clusters, Hubs and Clubs) with different implications for staff activities and relationships.  The bottom line is, of course, how to reduce the amount of space most universities allocate to academics and the perceived under-occupation of this space. From this website, you can also download the background research paper entitled "The changing academic workplace" by Andrew Harrison and Antonia Cairns from DEGW - all part of the Effective Spaces for Working in Higher and Further Education project funded by the Scottish  Funding Council.

The value of metaphor?

Went to visit the Public Gallery recently in West Bromwich, both to see the fully interactive exhibition areas and the - as yet undesigned - new Learning Space. The interior is an extraordinary layering of open pods linked via a ramp (you go to the top and then circulate down), interweaved with a Ben Kelly designed set of tree structures with giant computer screen leaves. Visitors to the gallery accumulate personalised data as they journey through the spaces (on an interactive tag they carry), finishing up with the opportunity to translate their collected images into a self-created souvenir. It is not all up and running yet, so still too early to say what kind of impact this environment is going to make on its participants. In the meantime the gallery is exploring what kind of learning space would support and develop its activities.

Zoe Partington-Sollinger, Head of Learning and Tom Hamilton (from InQbate) have together been developing ideas through a workshop, now being discussed with the architect and others. At this stage metaphors seem key - ideas around 'camping' currently to the fore. Other participatory processes, such as the work Woods Bagot did with the University of Melbourne earlier this year, also seem to find metaphors useful - there ideas about cafes, sandpits and gardens. What is nice about these notions is they can help to break away from functional or behaviourist analyses of space; but what is problematic is how they actually translate into spaces that support creative learning.