Design As a Social Practice

  • Harry DanielsEmail author
  • Hau Ming Tse
Part of the Educational Governance Research book series (EGTU, volume 9)


In this chapter we present the findings of an investigation into the ways in which the discourses and practices of school design produce educational spaces which influence the discourses and practices of teaching and learning when the building is occupied. This investigation involved the development of a methodology for systematically analysing the relationship of school space to the experiences of students, teachers and parents. It expands notions of post occupancy evaluation (POE) research by exploring how the motives of an educational vision which informed an initial school design, those of the final building and those of the people who occupy that building interact in a way which influences experiences of the end users. In this way we sought to understand more about the extent to which a building regulates or governs the behaviour of those who occupy it. Through our approach to multi-professional pedagogic post occupancy evaluation, we came to the view that a building may be understood as a tool which may be used to facilitate change rather than as an instrument of change.


School design Building schools for the future Design and practice Architecture Collaboration 


  1. Burke, C., & Grosvenor, I. (2008). School. London: Reaktion Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-based policy: A practical guide to doing it better. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark, A. (2010). Young children as protagonists and the role of participatory, visual methods in engaging multiple perspectives. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46, 115–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark, A., & Moss, P. (2005). Spaces to play: More listening to young children using the mosaic approach. London: National Children’s Bureau.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, I. (1981). The politics of education and architectural design: The instructive example of British primary education. British Educational Research Journal, 7(2), 125–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cooper, I. (1985). Teachers’ assessments of primary school buildings: The role of the physical environment in education. British Educational Research Journal, 11(3), 253–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. County Council. (2005). Template: Schools for the future. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.Google Scholar
  8. DfES. (2003). Building schools for the future: Consultation on a new approach to capital investment. London: DfES.Google Scholar
  9. DfES. (2004). Building schools for the future: A new approach to capital investment. London: DfES.Google Scholar
  10. Edwards, A., Daniels, H., Gallagher, T., Leadbetter, J., & Warmington, P. (2009). Improving inter-professional collaborations: Multi-agency working for children’s well being. Oxford: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard, & U. J. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 345–374). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Escolano, A. (2003). The school in the city: School architecture as discourse and as text. Pedagogica Historica, 39(1–2).Google Scholar
  13. Galasiu, A. D., & Veitch, J. A. (2006). Occupant preferences and satisfaction with the luminous environment and control systems in day lit offices: A literature review. Energy and Buildings, 38, 728–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greene, J. C. (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hygge, S. (2003). Classroom experiments on the effects of different noise sources and sound levels on long-term recall and recognition in children. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 895–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. James, S. (2011). Review of education capital. London: DfE.Google Scholar
  17. Leiringer, R., & Cardellino, P. (2011). Schools for the twenty-first century: School design and educational transformation. British Educational Research Journal, 37(6), 915–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. National Audit Office. (2009). The building schools for the future programme: Renewing the secondary school estate. Report HC 135 Session 2008–2009.Google Scholar
  20. Price, I., Clark, E., Holland, M., Emerton, C., & Wolstenholme, C. (2009). Condition matters: Pupil voices on the design and condition of secondary schools, Research report. Reading: CfBT Education Trust.Google Scholar
  21. Prosser, J. (2007). Visual methods and the visual culture of schools. Visual Studies, 22(1), 13–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shaughnessy, R. J., Haverinen-Shaughnessy, U., Nevalainen, A., & Moschandreas, D. (2006). A preliminary study on the association between ventilation rates in classrooms and student performance. Indoor Air, 16(6), 465–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tse, H. M., Learoyd-Smith, S., Stables, A., & Daniels, H. (2014). Continuity and conflict in school design: A case study from building schools for the future. Intelligent Buildings International, 7(2–3), 64–82. Scholar
  24. Victor, B., & Boynton, A. (1998). Invented here: Maximizing your organization’s internal growth and profitability. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  25. Winterbottom, M., & Wilkins, A. (2009). Lighting and discomfort in the classroom. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 63–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Woolner, P., Hall, E., Wall, K., Higgins, S., Blake, A., & McCaughey, C. (2005). School building programmes: Motivations, consequences and implications, Research report. Reading: CfBT.Google Scholar
  27. Woolner, P., Hall, E., Higgins, S., McCaughy, C., & Wall, K. (2007). A sound foundation? What we know about the impact of environments on learning and the implications for building schools for the future. Oxford Review of Education, 33(1), 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationOxford UniversityOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations