I am thinking about your recent postings. What may be a good classroom
architecture? My guess, and I'm far from being expert or even educated on
this issue (thanks to Jan Nespor for providing apparently wonderful
bibliography on this topic!), is that the classroom should "afford" (using
Gibson's term) for an organizational diversity that can support teacher
with various educational philosophies and pedagogical styles. Of course,
as any constraints, the classroom architecture should have its boundary and
form. I do not know how this flexible architecture can look like. Do you?
Eugene Matusov
At 11:44 AM 9/24/97 -0400, you wrote:
>At 6:57 PM -0600 9/23/97, Phillip Allen White wrote:
>>On Tue, 23 Sep 1997, Deborah A. Jimenez wrote:
>>>
>>> we can not continue to ignore such an absence of architecture in
>>>education...
>>> how many of you had studied it beyond this building is blank and built by
>>> blank???
>>
>>
>> Deborah, I have for the last near thirty years marveled at how
>>dreadful buildings for education have been as expressed in the modern
>>vernacular. It's often difficult to tell a public school from a public
>>jail. Or a factory.
>
>phillip...i could not agree more with you !!! and i am so amused at times
>when i hear of people decorating their rooms...and using pretty paint to
>"fix" the problem of the "cold"...sterile classroom...while i appreciate
>their attempts...i do believe they are superficial...
>
>institutional architecture is really complex in how it functions...how
>decisions are made about buildings and designs...who makes the decision...
>for who are they making it...with what criteria... on what basis...etc..etc
>
>i also have experience with residential architecture...and even there...i
>witness such strange logic for what was "wanted"...why??? and
>misconceptions of relationships between what they thought...what they
>envisioned and what they were able communicate... they lacked so much
>information, vocabulary, meaning and really could only enter in the
>dialogue
>superficially...
>
>i hope, phillip, you did not take offense to my final question...let me
>reword it...i am sure all of us at sometime or other have thought about
>these issue...but would it not be beneficial...wow i think crucial!!!...for
>us to talk more in depth about architecture...should it not be addressed,
>studied, integrated into our formal gen ed schooling...we all encounter it
>...our lives are so intertwined with it it!!! it IS a form of literacy...
>and i would not underestimate its importance... it is alarming the rampant
>existence of this form of iliteracy !!!
>
>i just can not see how we can begin to change or impact our built
>environments if we do not undertand the discourse!!!
>
>there are so many examples...the american "mall", supermarkets,
>homes..(from the hollywood mansion...to track homes...to public housing),
>parks..(amusement and recreation)...ok you get the point...all of these
>examples lie under a very complex structure that is often obfuscated... we
>need to look at this in formal as well as informal educational setttings!!!
>
>that is my plea and it is never too late!!! i appreciate your response
>phillip! sincerely deborah
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------------------------
Eugene Matusov
Willard Hall Educational Bldg., Room 206G
Department of Educational Studies
University of Delaware
Newark, DE 19716-2920
Phone: (302) 831-1266
Fax: (302) 831-4445
e-mail: ematusov who-is-at udel.edu
http://www.ematusov.com
------------------------------------------------