Room Arrangements
This assignment would have been way more interesting in our old school. In January 2008, we moved into a brand new building (how many teachers get to say that in their career?). All of the furniture and fixtures were purchased new and all of the technology was wrapped into the cost of the new building.
The classroom design and purchase of furniture were supposedly well thought out by the architects and designers. There were some meetings with teachers, however, as one of those teachers, there is varying degrees of evidence of teacher input. Ultimately what it means is there is little opportunity for variation in room arrangement by the teachers because of the room configuration and furniture purchased.
All classrooms have Promethean Boards. The placement of the teachers’ desks is determined by the outlet/drop from the data projector and USB from the board for connection to the teacher’s computer. Hence, all teachers’ desks are to the side of the front of the room. (The exception would be Kindergarten where there was a huge mistake made in placing the drops and the boards on opposite sides of the room making the boards inoperable until an additional run was added from the board to the teachers computer. We still have issues with how the boards run in those rooms.) Naturally running an IWB, the computer needs to be close to the board, however, purchasing a computer table or stand, could have given teachers some options regarding placement of their desk, and seeing as the teacher would still need the computer for many other tasks, it would seem the desk placement is not really negotiable.
The decision was made to purchase tables for all rooms, so there is little opportunity for varying room arrangement. While I initially was in support of the tables, it leaves very few options for room arrangement because the rooms themselves were designed in an L configuration. Tables are either arranged close to the board leaving a gathering space on the floor to the side or back or a gathering space is left in front of the board with tables pushed further back. The lack of student desks means there is only one way to arrange student seating. While the tables lend themselves to cooperative groups, they leave little options for partnering students or providing space and distance for times when some students may need quiet work space. Teachers have secured a few desks but utilizing them tends to make a child stand out more. Some teachers are more adept at utilizing the furniture for learning spaces. Traditional teachers seem to have the hardest time with this.
The only real variances in room arrangement seems to be the number of tables, cubbies, writing centers, etc in each room. Some of these pieces were new items in our old school so teachers were given the option of bringing them along with them. The other variance is the amount of teacher “stuff”. The stuff factor either in additional furniture or various teaching materials is what contributes to traffic flow and ease of movement. As I push into every room with my cart and COW, I am often struck by how easy it is to access a space at the front of the room in some classrooms and how hard it is in others.
One of the reasons there was a need for a new building is that the old building was not handicap accessible, and there was no way to make the 90 year old main building and its additions compliant. We had a few students who had to attend other schools because they were wheelchair bound. Ironically, we have not had any students with mobility issues in our new building, which is completely handicap accessible. However, I noted several rooms where mobility would be an issue due to “teacher stuff”.
Interestingly, I did not make a clear connection between the type of teacher and the traffic flow patterns established. I have witnessed teachers who do move about their rooms quite a bit to work with students even though the amount of furniture, etc. makes it somewhat difficult. There are also teachers who keep a minimalist room and require students to come to their desk for assistance rather than moving throughout the room. In regards to those who are actually being hindered in their teaching by the room arrangement, I think this is an area that teachers need help in taking a critical eye to what is in the room and how it impacts their instruction.
All classrooms are equipped with 3-5 student laptops depending upon grade level. We also brought over some older computers that need to be hard wired so all rooms have a computer table with the hardwired laptops or desktops and charging space for the newer laptops. Most teachers use the wireless laptops at students’ desks and the computers at the table are used as well.
The L configuration was designed so that an inclusion model could be used with support and special ed teachers working in the rooms with teachers. While this theory was thought to work well, in practice it seems to be more difficult for our teachers. The room needs to be arranged in such a way that allows for teachers to be at either end of the L when there are two groups working in the room so as not to disturb each other and yet the teacher needs to take groups at the juncture of the L, where the whole room can be viewed, when she/he is working alone in the room. It’s doable but requires an organized teacher who can grab what they need easily and move to the appointed spot.
While there is little room for variation in room arrangement, that’s not to say there is little variation in rooms. There is a wealth of creativity in what teachers display on their walls and throughout their rooms in some rooms, and very little in others. There are displays of students’ work in some rooms and in others more commercial material or very few displays. We have a teacher who insists on having plants and now fish on the tables for students, but there seems to be little connection to the students’ learning or the distractibility these items may cause. I’ve noticed what I have dubbed, “paper trail teachers”. These teachers seem to require a great deal of paper and pencil tasks from students as the trail is evident in and on the students’ desks and on the teachers’ desks. I also notice “teacher tidy” rooms- those that look good but how much learning can really be going on if they look that neat?
What I find most unsettling after this review of classroom arrangements is that the school itself was designed and fitted to be a modern learning environment. It was equipped with technology, designed for inclusion, and furnished for cooperative learning experiences. However, the teachers were never equipped, designed or furnished for such things. Three years in, we are only now getting to consistent professional development on the Promethean boards and technology integration through the use of a coaching model. There has not been any training in the inclusion model, including any given to special ed teachers or their assistants even though our special ed students are placed in the regular ed classrooms. Many of these students are serviced by being pulled out to the sped teachers smaller offices. Support teachers are also pulling kids out rather than working in rooms. I believe this is due to a real low level of comfort on both the part of the classroom teacher and special education teacher on how best to service students in an inclusion model. There are some teachers who are working in classrooms but this is not the rule.
While teachers use small groups and learning centers for reading instruction, I would say the majority of teaching for many teachers in the other subjects is done through direct instruction. Our new math curriculum is also providing teachers with a new approach to teaching, having them guide students to prove their work. Most of our kindergarten teachers are quite comfortable with hands on, small group work and active teaching strategies. However, I often see many teachers using traditional teaching methods, which are difficult to use in this more modern teaching environment.
I can certainly see how a walkthrough to observe room arrangements can be very helpful for supervising staff. Classrooms display various aspects of teachers’ personalities and teaching styles. They also can be a tool to display the mission, vision, and goals of the school. An observant administrator could use information gained on walkthroughs to help guide teachers towards different instructional methods and strategies. We have been given walkthrough guidelines of what administrators will be looking for, however, I’m not sure these guidelines have actually been used by administrators to determine what teachers needs are. Certainly, no professional development has been planned utilizing what has not been seen during walkthroughs.
Teachers seem to be slowly learning from each other. The beginning of each year brings about a few new room arrangements. However, how a room works without students is very different than how one works with students. I think a really useful tool could be to provide staff with some information on room arrangement and classroom environments and ask them to begin to take a critical look at their teaching spaces, perhaps working with a colleague to look at each other’s spaces and even asking students to think about how their room works. Having teachers justify placement and what is in the room could also help to have teachers really look at their rooms critically to determine what is working for them. Unfortunately, I think many teachers just don’t have time to think about the room arrangement and its effect on their teaching once students are in the room.
