The following brief discussion is part of a rationale for developing specific, formal training for educators in the complex field of educational facilities planning.
“Many people know how to build a public school. Using a combination of local and state funds, land is purchased, an architect is hired to draw the plans and a general contractor is engaged to build the desired facility. Those steps plus a hundred others will result in a school building. Unfortunately, although many people think they know how to build a school, they may get halfway through the project before they discover that something was left out of the plans, or that at this late date, a better procedure could have been used to accomplish the task. If people ask the right questions before they get too far into a building project, they could avoid unnecessary frustration, expense, and wasted time” (MacKenzie, 1989, p. 15).
For example, according to Tanner and Lackney (2006), a good discussion of educational philosophy and learning theory early in the planning process could prevent an embarrassing situation later when the question might be asked whether or not the school design will facilitate a certain teaching/learning opportunity. Acknowledging the existence of numerous educational philosophies and learning theories, MacKenzie offered four educational philosophies as examples for discussion: perennialism, essentialism, progressivism, and existentialism. These were tied to the philosophies of life – idealism to pernnialism, realism to essentialism, pragmatism to progressivism, and existentialism.
McKenzie viewed these philosophies on a continuum – idealism to realism to pragmatism to existentialism. Furthermore, he asserted that public school teaching fell within the essentialism and progressive areas while defending the exclusion of the other two as follows: “Pernnialism, with its reliance on the Great Books series and church dogma, is seldom found in public school organizations today. The same can be said for existentialism. Existentialism is relatively new, and its emphasis on individual judgment would make it difficult to implement in public school organizations where emphasis is also placed on group conformity” (MacKenzie, 1980, p. 18).
MacKenzie, D. C. (1989). Planning Educational Facilities. New York: University Press of America.
Tanner, C. K., & Lackney, J. A. (2006). Educational Facilities Planning: Leadership, Architecture, and Management. New York: Allyn and Bacon.
The philosophies and learning theories really should play a role in the planning process. The administration and stakeholders should educate themselves in these areas before the planning process. Many times what looks good on paper is not in reality what will work best in practice. The architect should also understand what the school is attempting to reproduce in a blue print and building project. Contractors who order the materials should also understand the premise/purpose behind the district's construction project; therefore, avoiding the unnecessary expenses and time when specific details must be redone.
ReplyDeleteB. Irick (TSU)
I like how the author encourages a discussion of learning theory and philosophy as part of the building planning process. That speaks to visionary leadership which understands form should follow function.
ReplyDelete(C. Scott - TSU)
I appreciate the insight that realizes that decisions rise from beliefs. How a school is built and the nuts and bolts of it all stem from the belief systems on which the initial decisions are made. Stakeholders can most effectively make informed decisions about what they want when they understand the choices and the belief systems behind those options. Nicely articulated.
ReplyDelete