Re: Questioning the Institution of Learning.

diane celia hodges (dchodges who-is-at interchg.ubc.ca)
Fri, 7 Nov 1997 20:03:41 -0800

At 4:30 PM 11/6/97, Stephen Eric Van Hoose wrote:

Stephen, I must say it is a real treat to talk about this with someone
who is so voraciously interested... sometimes I think there
is such a lack of curiosity generated in educative contexts, that the
possibility of saying "I don't understand" or asking, "what do you mean?"
is utterly eclipsed...

>I'm not completely sure i understand the "spatial" space part

that's ok, a lot of times when I'm writing I have no idea what I'm getting at,
I just like the feel of the words in my thoughts... :-)

>but I do see
>what you are trying to get at. So, when you mention the environmental
>considerations, these are all based on how a teacher regulates their space;
>how closed off or open they want it to be? WHat i also get out of this is
>that the space should evolve around those people who inhabit it and use it.
>(?)

changeable space, I think, would be apropos. Not fixed space, but malleable
spaces - (and I don't mean partitions!) - structurally-speaking, organizing
space
presupposes its inhabitants:

I would think there might be use for a way
to conceptualize structural space which is more "ironic"; when is a room
not a room?
what is a corridor for?
whither doors in space?

or, more to the point, what you said, yes.: how might the
'users'/'dwellers' presuppose
their learning environment?

>Well, that's something they try and emphasize to us here at RPI. So from
>the environment evolves the structure. Would it make more sense to let the
>learning environment inspire the development of the enclosure and spatial
>arrangement to accomodate it? Do you or does everybody understand what I am
>trying to get at? I am starting to see an environment that has all these
>"discursive" or mediating spaces all interconnected with one another. Within
>the whole learning environment, there are a variety of macro and micro
>environments. How does this sound? is it looking good?

it sounds like you are thinking, which is such a pretty sound!! Music to my
ears.

>
>It really helps that I have a basic understanding of cooperative learning,
>distributed cognition and learning, specifically in children. I can really
>begin to see all this cooperation and distributed cogninition adding to the
>learning environment by happening at different micro and macro levels. But
>what about the engagement of the learners with new multimedia technologies
>becoming more and more a part of the learning environment? To what level does
>the technology become so much a part of learning and how would it affect the
>spatial considerations of the learning environment?

two thoughts: the notion that the space predetermines use is something
which needs to be 'queered', and it sounds like you are thinking in those
directions, which is marvelous, ...

technology: it is a part of culture, It is not something we add or subtract
to learning, but something which is 'always-already' there/here...
designing a spcae which specifically addresses technology runs the risk of
designating technology as distinct from the environment housing "it" -

by the time you are drawing, technologies will have evolved and transformed
beyond current conceptualizations of tools: personally, I'd say a sociocultural
architect would read technologies as historical; already there,
already preconfigured... not something which needs to be accommodated
in design,

but something which accommodates design.
Literal translation: do not design a computer room. Assume that in any 21st
century
learning environment, advanced technologies are already integrated

as cultural tools; like, remember the old school desks that had inkwell holes
long after ballpoint pens were invented?

remember those desks had a special sloop built in for our pencils/pens?
that's an example of design accommodating the tools: it presupposes a spatial
organization of those tools...

inversely, tech can be grasped as something which is already there/here -
...

>
>And diane, I totally agree with you when you say that by thinking about the
>learning environment, we are completely beginning to rethink the "structure"
>of schools. In fact, why should we even use school as the word for education
>anymore. Such an institutional word it is. Right?

yes I think the language is critical. Once you start speaking about it
differently, making use of different terms, you open possibilities for
reconceptualizing without necessarily reproducting... so yes. pardon my
profanity, but fuck the insitution. go spend some time in an old growth forest
and think about processes of regeneration and self-sustaining environments.
(o i am such a hippie!!!)

diane

"Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right."
Ani Difranco
*********************************
diane celia hodges
faculty of education
university of british columbia
vancouver, bc canada
tel: (604)-253-4807
email: dchodges who-is-at interchange.ubc.ca