The TAFE Learning and Resource Centre (LARC) is intended to be a study space for Tertiary students. The LARC provides access to computers, printer/copier, kitchen facilities, desks and reading materials. The room is used for timetabled classes; private meetings; and individual study. The various purposes of the LARC are not well defined in the layout. The area for meetings and study is in the centre of the room within sight and earshot of classroom students on computers. A diverse mix of students and teachers wishing to use the LARC for differing purposes are essentially thrown together in a designer’s pea soup.

The physical layout is just one aspect of workspace design, with another crucial element being the social dynamic of the space (Klooker et al, 2016). By combining all of the facilities into the one room without proper design consideration of their concurrent functionality, user experience of the LARC varies greatly depending on the dominant social dynamic in the room. This does not have to be the case.

The LARC may not be serving its current purpose as well as it could, but with clever design, the space is capable of delivering its intended outcomes for students. “There is no area of contemporary life where design- the plan, project, or working hypothesis which constitutes the “intention” in intentional operations – is not a significant factor in shaping human experience” (Buchanan, 1992, p. 4). Through better design, the LARC could serve its separate functions better and improve the experience for all groups utilising the facilities.

“The best-designed products are desired by their customers, can be reasonably built, and make business sense for the company. This is attained by designing the product with the user in mind. The designer observes, researches, and interacts with the customer to attain a good idea of what the customer likes and responds positively to” (Kuratko, 2012, p. 6). By witnessing the disturbed reactions of current LARC users when the dynamics of the room shift it is apparent that a design overhaul could lead to a better experience. By analysing the intentions of the LARC compared to the reality of human experiences, the designer can comprehend the barriers to success, and pinpoint where to begin making changes. Providing the facilities is not enough to achieve the desired outcomes. The key to success is ensuring the design and layout leads to successful simultaneous experiences for all the various users of the LARC.

The LARC should be separated into designated spaces. Laminate flooring in the kitchen would delineate the space as a separate zone (Bennett, 2017, 04:36). Translucent dividers would break up the space from the rest of the room giving a sense of seclusion. The existing small tables with chairs would sit behind the divider for people to take meetings, or have their lunch while a bar and barstools at the windows would serve the same purpose with a natural outlook. Even on a rainy day people could look out at nature and feel a sense of escape during a study break.

The computer zone would be centralised, with more desks built-in opposite the existing ones so that a class can congregate in the middle of the room rather than reach all four corners of the LARC. Teachers can then direct their voice in one direction to a smaller area lessening the noise impacts on other LARC users.

By moving the copier/printer to a different corner of the room, a private study and chill zone can be established in the back corner and beneath the windows. The comfortable seating and desk space creates a sense of distance from classes that may enter the LARC.

References

Bennett, P. (2007, May 16). Design is in the details [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_bennett_design_is_in_the_details

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues. 8 (2). pp. 5-21. https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/stable/1511637

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). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40382-3_6

Kuratko, D., Goldsworthy, M., & Hornsby, G. (2012). The design-thinking process in innovation acceleration : Transforming organizational thinking. (pp.103-123). Boston : Pearson. https://www.csu.edu.au/division/library/ereserve/pdf/kuratko-d1.pdf

Perkin, E. (2020). Photos and Illustrations.