Introduction
Quiet, well-lit personal learning spaces such as those pictured form part of many educational institutions. The use and useability of these spaces is dependant upon the design, empathising with and meeting the needs of the end-user, (Seidel & Fixson, 2013).
Unfortunately, the space pictured fails to meet the needs of the end-user in several ways, including:
- Inconsistent lighting.
- Poor noise reduction capability.
- Space allocation per cubicle.
- Too many cubicles per square metre.
- Drab, inconsistent colouring.
As a member of the leadership group responsible for approving the concept space, I acknowledge its agreed purpose was to fill a need for a campus with high-growth in internal student numbers.
The benefit of design thinking
The hastily approved and subsequent implementation of the concept, while required to meet a pressing need, failed to implement a rigorous need-finding process and apply design thinking, (Seidel & Fixson, 2013). The misconception design would slow the innovation and implementation process led to the less than ideal situation of a single-person designing the space (Kuratko, Goldsworthy, & Hornsby). These circumstances led to an area design based on the number of students accommodated rather than the needs of the end-user group (McKinley, 2016).
Issues with useability are evident in the student utilisation rate of approximately 30% or less daily. Students socially distance to almost COVID-19 requirements naturally with others preferring to sit elsewhere rather than crowd between those already using the space.
Engaging a multidisciplinary stakeholder group, including the end-user, within the design process has the advantage of taking a divergent approach to redefine the problem and create choices within the solution models (Brown, 2009; Kuratko et al.).
While a less than successful design is in place, taking an iterative approach and considering all good design is redesign, application of these design thinking principles can still produce a successful human-centred personal learning space model, (Klooker et al., 2016; Kuratko et al.; Leifer, Plattner, & Meinel, 2013).
Taking a ‘designing for education’ focus and considering the current build a prototype in need of modification, along with the involvement of a multidisciplinary end-user group has the potential of creating a design appropriate to the regional area in which its situated (McKinley, 2016; Pilloton, 2010).
The resulting design process would have the potential to solve the wicked problem of competing interests of space limitations, end-user needs, budget restrictions to produce a contextually and culturally appropriate outcome(Buchanan, 1992; Cooper, 1997).
What would I change?
Inconsistent lighting
Provide an adjustable, individual cubicle lighting source with control given to the end-user. Ideally, this will be adjustable in angle, colour and intensity.
Poor noise reduction capability.
Change the configuration of the space to provide a noise block between the open area and the quiet study hub cubicles. The inclusion of ceiling and wall-mounted noise reduction panels may also be required.
Space allocation per cubicle.
Reconfigure the partitioning between cubicles to provide an adjustable form of segregation between the adjoining spaces.
Too many cubicles per square metre.
Again, reconfiguring the space by repositioning the centre partition to form a noise-blocking wall and removing one wall of cubicles reduces the number per square metre and provides flexibility to the area.
Drab, inconsistent colouring.
Without total redesign, the introduction of coloured noise reduction panels and colourful motivational posters could provide low-cost options to hide the drab colour scheme.
Conclusion
While the above are low-cost iterations based on one person’s opinion on redesigning a prototype space, achievement of the best results is by implementing a design thinking approach outlined in the second section of this post.
References
Brown, T. (2009). Designers – think big. TEDGlobal 2009. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/tim_brown_designers_think_big
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5-21. doi:10.2307/1511637
Cooper, R. (1997). Design research comes of age. 1(sup1), 1-1.
Klooker, M., Nicolai, C., Matzdorf, S., Trost, A., von Schmieden, K., Böttcher, L., & Weinberg, U. (2016). On creating workspaces for a team of teams: Learnings from a case study. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design Thinking Research: Taking Breakthrough Innovation Home (pp. 67-84). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Kuratko, D., Goldsworthy, M., & Hornsby, G. The design-thinking process.
Leifer, L., Plattner, H., & Meinel, C. (2013). Design thinking research : Building innovation eco-systems. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
McKinley, T. (2016). Learning design thinking: Lead change in your organization. Carpenteria, CA: lynda.com.
Pilloton, E. (2010). Teaching design for change. TEDGlobal 2010. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/emily_pilloton_teaching_design_for_change
Seidel, V. P., & Fixson, S. K. (2013). Adopting design thinking in novice multidisciplinary teams: The application and limits of design methods and reflexive practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 19-33. doi:10.1111/jpim.12061
Hi Paul,
I used to work in an open plan space that had cubicles exactly like these. It was a terrible experience for all of the reasons you listed above. We had panels that we were able to configure so ended up removing half of them so we could at least speak to colleagues over the top of the partition rather than feeling like no one was around you.
I like your mention of the inconsistent lighting because that was something I had never considered before and it made me realise where most of my headaches were probably coming from!
The recommendations you have made are a good start to making it a more welcoming space. The importance of colour in a learning space is so important and I like that you have provided a simple low cost solutions that can be quick fixes until a more suitable re-design can take place.
Linda
Hi Paul,
I have also worked in a space which was very similar to what you have presented. There are so many limitations and disadvantages to working in such an environment, in particular the lack of eye-contact is a huge limitation as there are very few collaborative style conversations and even less structured collaborations that ultimately engage key stakeholders cultivating personal and collective ownership.
I loved the images and look forward to seeing where you will head with the reshaping, redesigning and recreating that better meets the learning/working needs of those who are the end users of this environment.
Great references also that add value and further insights to your blog.
Thank you again for sharing
Tania 🙂
An excellent investigation of a learning space that doesn’t quite meet the needs intended. Lighting is a critical one, as you have indicated, influencing not just eye strain but the ability to concentrate and/or engage with learning in a relaxed way. Your suggestions are sensible, relevant, and extremely helpful. There are so many small things to consider – a great example of placing a critical eye on existing spaces and past decisions. I hope that you can influence some positive change.
Hi Paul,
The space seems so typical of common learning spaces here in Ontario, Canada. The lack of natural light, the absence of flow and the colour schemes forces an institutional feeling onto anyone entering the space. While some may find comfort in that feeling, or even feel called to study, I value how you referenced Kuratko et al.; Leifer, Plattner, & Meinel, and are trying to “produce a successful human-centred personal learning space model”. This kind of space values learners as individuals, and honours the humanness in all of us. Thanks for sharing your insights.
Shelly
Thanks for sharing this learning space and your practical ideas, Paul.
My first thoughts when I saw the photo was that I would have to be completely desperate for space in order to use these cubicles! You’re right in describing them as dull and drab.
Although it is important to have spaces where students can use for individual work and relfection, they also need to be inviting! I would be interested to see what the students as the predominent users of the space would to have included here. I think many would agree with your suggestions!