Architecture and BSED by Preena Mistry

ARCHITECTURE AND BSED Designing Classrooms in Pupil Referral Units to improve the Concentration and Behaviour of pupils with Behavioural Social and Emotional Difficulty BY PREENA MISTRY

PREENA MISTRY 120236406 NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY 2014-2015 ARC3060 DISSERTATION IN ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank ADP Architects for their opinions on current government design regulations and supplying their design resources. A special thank you to Head Teacher Philip Hannah of Jesse Street PRU and now retired Head Teacher Dave Jones of Blueprint PRU for their time during interviews, driving enthusiasm and keen interest in the design of future PRUs. Finally, thank you to all staff and pupils at Jesse Street PRU, Blueprint PRU and Monkseaston High School for their time, cooperation and resources for the case studies written in this dissertation.

CONTENTS ABSTRACT 7 1.0 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 Aim 1.2 The Problem 1.3 Methodology 1.4 A Background of BSED and PRUs

2.0 EXISTING GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS 10 2.1 Sourcing of Regulations 2.2 A Critical Analysis of Current Government Design Regulations 2.3 The Key Areas to Research

CONTENTS

3.0 RESEARCH THROUGH LITERATURE REVIEW 14 3.1 Natural and Artificial Lighting 3.2 Interiors 3.2.1 Colour 3.2.2 Furnishings and Layout 3.2.3 Interior Walls 3.3 Form: The Design as a Volume 3.4 Thermal Comfort

4.0 TESTING THROUGH CASE STUDIES 25 4.1 Methodology of Research 4.2 JESSE STREET PRU 26 4.2.1 Natural Lighting 4.2.2 Form and Thermal Comfort 4.2.3. Furnishings and Layout 4.2.4 Interior Walls 4.3 BLUEPRINT PRU 29 4.3.1 Natural and Artificial Lighting 4.3.2 Form and Thermal Comfort 4.3.3 Furnishings and Layout 4.3.4 Colour 4.4 MONKSEATON HIGH SCHOOL 33 4.4.1. Joined Up Design For Schools 4.4.2. Natural and Artificial Lighting 4.4.3 Furnishings and Layout 4.4.4. Form and Thermal Comfort

5.0 RESULTS 5.1 PROPOSED DESIGN REGULATIONS 5.1.1 Natural and Artificial Lighting 5.1.2 Colour 5.1.3 Furnishings and Layout 5.1.4 Interior Walls 5.1.5 Form 5.1.6 Thermal Comfort

6.0 CONCLUSION

48 50 51

BIBLIOGRAPHY IMAGE INDEX APPENDICES

ABSTRACT Research into current design guidelines of PRUs showed that information on designing for the specific needs of pupils with BSED appeared to be lacking. This dissertation deconstructs existing government design guidelines of PRUs, identifying key areas of information on classroom design that could be expanded upon. The identified key areas of design are reviewed in relation to pupil behaviour through journals, articles and books and tested through case studies. The product is a proposal of design guidelines specifically for classrooms in PRUs for pupils with BSED, tailored to improving their concentration and behaviour.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 THE AIM To provide a specific set of professional guidelines for the design of classrooms in Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) for students with Behaviour Social and Emotional Difficulties (BSED). 1.2 THE PROBLEM Research in to the current design guidelines for classrooms in PRUs for pupils with a particular type of SEN, Behavioural Social Emotion Difficulty (BSED), showed a lack of specific information to aid designers in relation to their needs. Both research of documentation and an interview with ADP Architects1 lead to this declaration. Within the interview it was stated by architect Eleanor Sparrow that current regulations are of “Lowest possible adequacy” describing only basic requirements and “Not aspirational.” From this it was deduced that a set of detailed, aspirational design regulations that are specifically tailored to improve behaviour and concentration of BSED pupils are needed to complement existing regulations.

1.3 METHODOLOGY The research reviews current design guidelines provided by the government to identify what information is lacking on classroom design, highlighting key areas to research in the next phase of the dissertation. Using existing literary research on environmental psychology in association with classroom design, information on these key areas including theories and design proposals will be gathered to test on Case Studies. Analysis of case studies on existing classrooms in PRUs and the effect they have had on pupil behaviour will test the points made in the literature research. By combining conclusions found from this data, a set of design regulations will be proposed to complement the existing ones, based on the key areas originally found to be lacking. Success of the proposed guidelines will be reviewed by a local PRU.

Appendix I

1.4 A BACKGROUND OF PRUS AND BSED PRUs are mostly for 11-19 year olds with some accommodating for pupils as young as five. Since the opening of Pupil Referral Units in 1994; originally providing education for excluded pupils2, the number and type of PRUs and pupils attending have increased sevenfold. PRUs now provide education for anyone who cannot attend mainstream education due to illness, Special Educational Needs (SEN), Teenage Pregnancy or vulnerability3. The increasing demand for PRUs caused many buildings to be adapted instead of being purpose built. With the needs of pupils today being more specific, design regulations for building new PRUs must also become more specific. Some PRUs accommodate pupils long-term, providing education for several months or up to a year, whilst others provide temporary education for 8-10 weeks, with the aim to rehabilitate students and prepare for their return to a mainstream school environment. Pupils can be registered at their PRU and mainstream school simultaneously; making it simpler to transfer back. This dissertation reviews the design of temporary and permanent PRU classrooms in the form of case studies. The focus is on accommodation for pupils with BSED and how classroom design can minimise triggers that cause unwanted behaviour. BSED is a form of Special Education Needs (SEN). It can be described as “a condition in which behaviour or emotional responses of an individual are so different from generally accepted norms, that they adversely affect that child's performance.“4 Signs of BSED include a lack of concentration, disruptive and aggressive behaviour and difficulty in forming relationships. There are three types; Obsessive Compulsive, Anxiety and Adjustment disorders, all of which stem from different factors but display the same symptoms. This disorder affects the learning of the individual and those around them; thus the design of their learning environment must be carefully considered. Pupils with BSED will usually be accommodated separately from pupils who are vulnerable, minimising disruption. Under strategic planning in Government Regulations, it is stated that pupils with BSED should be within a unit away from pupils who are attending for other reasons. “Generally, those pupils who are active, boisterous or potentially aggressive and a risk to others should be accommodated separately from those are vulnerable.”5 This shows the need for the separation of BSED pupils from others and specific characteristics of the client. The latest government survey, updated in 2014 shows that the type of SEN affecting the highest percentage of pupils in secondary school was BSED6. Previous reports have shown a rise of 0.4% in the number of pupils diagnosed with BSED from 2004 to 20117, displaying the increasing importance of designing environments suitable for BSED sufferers.

Garner, Philip. "Pupil Referral Units: A Policy and Practice Paradox." ISEC 2000. Nottingham Trent Univeristy, 24 July 2000. Web. 07 Sept. 2014. <http://www.isec2000.org.uk/abstracts/papers_g/garner_1.htm>. 3Department for Education. "Pupil Referral Units." The National Archives. UK Government Web Archives, 18 July 12. Web. 7 Sept. 2014. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.education.gov.uk%2Fvocabularies%2Feducationtermsandtags%2F945>. 4 Douglas Silas Solicitors. "Emotional & Behavioural Difficulties (EBD)." Special Educational Needs, 2005. Web. 8 Sept. 2014. <http://www.specialeducationalneeds.co.uk/emotional--behavioural-difficulties-ebd.html>. 5 Department for Education and Skills, Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Norwich: TSO, 2007, 8, Print. 6Department for Education.”Statistical First release”Department for Education Sanctuary Buildings,30July13.Web.8Sept14 <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225699/SFR30-2013_Text.pdf > 7 < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/184078/DFE-RR218.pdf > Web.

2.0 EXISTING GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS 2.1 SOURCING REGULATIONS After researching existing government design regulations on PRUs and BSED only two documents referring to PRUs and BSED directly were found. Building Bulletin 1028, includes a small section outlining the needs of pupils with BSED; describing how children with BSED behave and a brief outline of how their learning environments should be adapted with a set of “design issues” that should be considered. The second document, “Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units”9 is now out of print and very difficult to obtain. This has general information on required equipment, subjects and floor space but little about their connection to concentration and behaviour of pupils. In both cases the documents tackle the design of whole schools, giving vague information on a broad scale as opposed to detailed specifications of each learning environment. For the purpose of this Chapter, Building Bulletin 102 will be referred to as Document A and “Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units” as Document B. Both Documents will be analysed to identify where regulations could be expanded upon, forming criteria to base the set of complementary regulations that will be proposed.

Building Bulletin 102: Department for Children, Schools and Families, Designing for Disabled Children and Children with Special Educational Needs: Guidance for Mainstream and Special Schools. Norwich: TSO, 2008. Web 9 Department for Education and Skills, Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Information for Local Authorities, Teachers-in-charge and Management Committees. Norwich: TSO, 2007, Print.

2.2 A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CURRENT GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS In Document A, a suggestions of a learning environment adaptation is to have “Structural learning environments, with clear boundaries for each activity.”10 There are no proposals on how to achieve this task; questions are immediately raised in the readers mind. For example, should furniture be adjustable? Should each “boundary” be a different classroom or simply signposted activities? It is unclear how the designer should use this suggestion. Providing extra space to keep “a comfortable distance from themselves and others” 11 is suggested. Although a useful point to make, the vagueness causes questions to arise in terms of specific dimensions and the context. Diagrams indicating seating layouts for pupils with an estimate of area would be beneficial. The back of the document contains an Annex with a table of design issues surrounding each type of SEN, shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Information on BSED in Building Bulletin 102 appears to be quite broad.

Although each point is practical, there is no mention of aspects such as light or colour; the emphasis is on security; “robust” and “tamperproof” materials create an institutional image. Suggestions on which materials to use are not given; an exploration of materials that are robust but not institutional could be researched further. The layout of tables is suggested vaguely with no clear furniture plan given. Document B discusses the design of PRUs in more depth than Document A, however similarly information can be unspecific. “There must be a sufficient number, type, size and variety of welldesigned spaces, suitably arranged, equipped and with effective storage to support the delivery of an effective curriculum.”12 A key area to be explored here is the interiors of the room, defining these “well designed spaces.” In addition examples of furniture layout, types of storage and ideas for the shape of the classroom could be researched further.

Department for Children, Schools and Families, Designing for Disabled Children and Children with Special Educational Needs: Guidance for Mainstream and Special Schools. Norwich: TSO, 2008, 12, Web. 11 Department for Children, Schools and Families, Designing for Disabled Children and Children with Special Educational Needs: Guidance for Mainstream and Special Schools. Norwich: TSO, 2008, 12, Web. 12 Department for Education and Skills, Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Information for Local Authorities, Teachers-in-charge and Management Committees. Norwich: TSO, 2007, 7, Print.

Unlike Document A, specific dimensions and areas are given for each room type in a “Project Planning” section at the end of Document B. The basic elements of classrooms are clearly stated throughout Document B. Multifunctional use of classrooms is emphasised, allowing for group and individual learning to occur. An area of 60m2 for 6-8 pupils is given for a multi-use classroom, but no comments on the form; the height or shape of the classroom with regards to learning are made. When discussing recommended atmosphere of classrooms, factors of colour and wall displays are mentioned but could be expanded upon; “A light and airy atmosphere, with an uplifting ambience, with appropriate use of colour, views out and display of pupil’s work.” Particular colour palettes, explaining where to place pupil’s work and examples of appropriate views out of a classroom in relation to BSED triggers could be proposed, providing refined details to aid the architect. Many complex aspects of design are summed up in one sentence; describing the desired design ideas with a single adjective. “A comfortable learning environment with suitable good quality natural and artificial lighting, acoustics, ventilation and heating.” The next two chapters will explore some of these aspects in more detail, defining what exactly makes the natural and artificial lighting and ventilation “good.” This includes finding what quantity of natural and artificial lighting would be best and to specifically recommend a form that aids natural ventilation and thus improve concentration and learning of pupils with BSED. As acoustics and heating are thoroughly described in Government’s Building Bulletins 93 and 101, they will not need expanding upon as this can be universally applied.

2.3 A SUMMARY OF KEY AREAS TO RESEARCH Overall the above sources summarise some needs of BSED pupils in a classroom of a PRU but as commented on by ADP Architects they are of “lowest possible adequacy”, providing bare minimum, non-aspirational requirements of the classroom. A more detailed, specific guideline aiding architects to design efficiently can be created by looking further into the psychological effects of design aspects. By critically analysing Government Regulations , the key areas the literature review will be focussed upon have been identified and grouped together; Natural and Artificial Lighting, Thermal Comfort, Interiors (Colour, Interior Walls and Furnishings) and Form. A summary of these key areas, how they have been chosen and what will be expanded upon is in Table 2.

CLASSROOM DESIGN ASPECT

EXPANSION NEEDED?

ACOUSTICS

Yes COLOUR Yes FORM: The Classroom as a Volume

No indication of layout or shape of desks. No mention of type of chairs to be used. No mention of this in relation to position of teacher.

Yes

Display of pupils work is mentioned but not specifically where; additional items such as notices and white boards are not mentioned. Although covered very well in Building Bulletin 90, certain points could be narrowed down further. Choice of artificial lighting needs to be narrowed down and updated. Lux levels are mentioned for the whole classroom rather than exploring varied lighting for different activities. Methods of preventing glare are mentioned but not with regards to modern day whiteboards and interactive boards.

Yes NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING

THERMAL COMFORT

WINDOW OPENINGS

Covered in great depth in Governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Building Bulletin 93: Acoustic Design of Schools13. The overall design purpose is the same in both mainstream and special education; using correct insulation to exclude and minimise intrusive and ambient noise to improve concentration of pupils and limit distractions. Therefore no expansion with regards to acoustics is needed in regulations specifically for pupils with BSED in PRUs. No specific colours mentioned; too vague. Nothing mentioned about the types of colour that affect behaviour. No reference given to the shape or height of classroom, in terms of plans and sections or how this can affect pupil behaviour.

Yes FURNISHINGS AND LAYOUT

INTERIOR WALL

REASON

Yes but With regards to form

Yes only in terms of views

Covered thoroughly in Building Bulletin 101 giving rates of air exchange (L/p/s) and various analysis of thermal comfort. No mention of ventilation with regards to the form of the classroom. Specific room temperatures not given. Sizing and colours of frame covered in good depth in Building Bulletin 90 but more specification of view out of classroom is needed.

POINTS TO BE DISCUSSED IN LITERATURE REVIEW AND CASE STUDIES None.

Giving specific colour palettes and describing psychological effects. Exploring room shape; ie. Rectangular, L shaped, Alcoves to see which suits pupils with BSED best. Choosing the best height to suit natural ventilation and the effects this has on learning and behaviour. Establishing how desks and chairs should be laid out, the shape and material of them. Whether or not they should be adjustable. Choosing where and what to display on each wall and whether or not this is needed. Establishing which Artificial Lighting devices would be best for concentration and reducing BSED triggers. Exploring how to create varied lighting and the best solar shading techniques. Research in to prevention of glare on white boards and interactive boards. Creating a space that encourages natural ventilation and showing how this would be controlled. Specify room temperature(s). Researching the best view to provide out of the classroom window to aid concentration. To be combined under Natural Lighting and Artificial Lighting.

Table 2: Summary of key points to research further and expand upon in Literature Review to aid the proposal of complimentary design regulations. 13

Department for Education and Skills. Building Bulletin 93 ACOUSTIC DESIGN OF SCHOOLS (n.d.): n. pag. Webarchive. London: The Stationary Office. Web. <http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/https:/www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOr deringDownload/BB93-Acoustic_Design.pdf>.

3.0 RESEARCH THROUGH LITERATURE REVIEW In the previous chapter, analysis of existing Government Design Regulations for PRUs led to the identification of design areas to be expanded on. In this chapter, literature is reviewed with regards to these areas. Research in to the effects of classroom design on behaviour will aid the expansion of current regulations. Several books, journals and articles will be reviewed under the headings of Natural and Artificial Lighting, Interiors, Form and Thermal Comfort. Conclusions from this will lead to the narrowing of specific design ideas to be assessed through Case Studies in the next chapter. 3.1 NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING Four matters associated with lighting will be discussed; the views framed out, prevention of glare, the amount of luminance (lux) needed dependent on activity and the type of artificial lighting used in classrooms. Many studies have reported on the psychological effects of light in classrooms. “The lighting conditions within a classroom can affect learning and behaviour, and are an important consideration when designing an educational environment.”14 The following text looks closely at the relationship between lighting and its effects on symptoms of BSED in order to propose the best lighting strategy and views to encourage concentration. It is difficult to balance allowing the correct amount of sunlight in yet avoiding distracting views for pupils inside. An extreme example of windowless classrooms in 1970, Germany was designed to completely eliminate distractions. “After one of year of using a windowless classroom, students’ opinions were against it.”15 Pupils scores increased by 26% once allowed to work in natural light again; although denying pupils of windows for views may be less distracting this also denies them of natural light; a human need. Studies have shown providing certain views can reduce stress and thus improve concentration. Research by West16 has shown views of natural landscapes had a positive effect on prisoners by reducing their stress levels. Ulrich17 studied this further with tests on urban dwellers. “One theory to explain the importance of views to nature suggests that natural elements trigger quick, positive emotions that help reduce physiological stress.”18 Reducing stress is a key factor in improving learning and concentration when designing for pupils with BSED. A resolution to preventing distraction when providing a view is to minimise activity within that view. This indicates providing views of nature in classrooms could retain BSED pupil concentration; an aspect to investigate later through case studies.

Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 227, Print. Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 83, Print. 16 West, M.J. Landscape and stress response in the prison environment. M.L.A. thesis. Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 1985, web. 17 Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. and Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11: 201-230. 18 Ulrich, R. S. Aesthetic and affective response to the natural environment. In I. Altman and J. F. Wohlwill, Eds. Human Behavior and Environment: Advances in Theory and Research, 6, 85-125. NY: Plenum, 1983, Web. 15

Windows provide a source of natural daylight, warmth and vitality. “Performance improves in the presence of daylight, and its positive effect is manifested in better social behaviour.”19 Allowing for maximum natural light in PRU classrooms could improve behaviour and therefore concentration. However, windows should be sized carefully to prevent glare; daylight should be distributed evenly throughout the classroom. Glare can have negative effects on the concentration of pupils, visual discomfort and headaches could trigger pupils with BSED to misbehave and lose concentration. To control the amount of sunlight entering the classroom, several mechanisms can be used; Longer roof hangings, Window Tinting, Retractable Awnings, Adjustable Blinds and Solar Shading.20 Blinds would be preferable in PRUs as other mechanisms are permanent and cannot be controlled in Winter. Studies have shown that venetian blinds cause pattern glare21, and thus visual stress - this would not be recommended in PRU classrooms. Alternatives to this such as rollerblinds could be tested in case studies later. Most classrooms today have interactive white boards, to reduce glare on the surface of the board research has shown a white matt surface should be used, which will reflect light in all directions, allowing visibility from all angles.22 Dry wipe boards should not be projected on to as this causes a spot of glare, shown in figure 2. Tilting the board away from the wall by 5-10˚ at the base increases light reflected to the ceiling, reducing glare. Studies have shown that many classrooms are over lit often due to an inefficient form of fluorescent lighting proven to cause headaches and impair visual performance.23 It is suggested instead that “newly built classrooms should have automatically dimming luminaries.”24 Figure 1 shows an example model. If not possible, teachers should have manual control over lighting, equipped to assess lux levels accurately with the aid of daylight sensors.

Fig. 1 Example of Lighting Control Model with Daylight sensors in classroom

Fig. 2 Matt Interactive White board above reflects light evenly. Shiny White board surface produces a spot of glare

Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 83, Print. Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 227, Print. 21 Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 22 Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 23 Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 24 Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 20

Providing optimum lighting for all pupils is difficult; pupils have individually preferred lighting conditions. Some prefer to work in dim light and this is where they excel.25 This indicates that pupils need some control over lighting or for an adjustable lighting system. Another option would be to provide personal lamps. In terms of their colour temperature it has been found that temperatures of 3500k cause least disturbance.26 A difference in preference of lighting in genders has been proven by Knez in 1995, showing that â&#x20AC;&#x153;cold light influences the mood of women negatively.â&#x20AC;?27 Although statistics show that a larger percentage of pupils in PRUs are male, a smaller yet recently increasing percentage is female28. Classrooms cannot be designed for just one gender, supporting the need for adjustable lighting systems. Different activities within the classroom need variant amounts of light; as supported by Engel and Dahlmann in 200129 and Walden30. The European Guidelines for lighting in schools contains lux levels for particular activities within the classroom, shown in Figure 3, however this could be updated more specifically towards BSED pupils. Research using various sources online lead to an updated table of figures shown in Table 3.

TASK

THE TEACHER

Writing on the Blackboard

Talking to the students

Showing a presentation (slides, powerpoint, television program etc.) Paying attention to working students Coaching Computer Activities

4 5

THE STUDENT Reading on the blackboard Paying attention to the teacher Looking on to the screen

Writing, reading, drawing etc. Looking to the computer screen and the paper

STANDARD ILLUMINANCE IN THE CLASS

IN GENERAL

500 LUX

200 LUX

300 LUX

300/10 LUX

10 LUX

300 LUX

50 LUX

300 LUX above computer

Fig. 3 Requirements of illuminance in schools according to European Norm AN 12464-1since 2003. Some activities could be updated for classrooms in PRUs.

Hedge, A, Where are we in understanding the effect of where we are? Ergonomics,(2000), 1019-1029. Web. Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 27 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 83, Print. 28 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/schools-pupils-and-their-characteristics-january-2011, SFR12/2011 table 1a. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/schools-pupils-and-their-characteristics-january-2013 SFR12/2013 table 1a. 29 Engle, O., & Dahlmann, J. Padagogische Architektur [Educational Architecture], Unpublished thesis submitted to the State Examination Office for State Examinations at Schools in Cologne as parts of the first state examination for special needs education. University of Cologne, Germany, 2001. 30 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 83, Print. 26

STUDENT TASK

STANDARD LUMINANCE NEEDED (LUX)

Reading White Board and looking at teacher

Studying at Desk

300-500 Lux31, preferably adjustable between this range. The higher end, to allow for pupils with BSED to maximum visual access with teacher. Children with hearing impairments will also find it easier to lip read the teacher in higher lux levels.32 The white board should have its own dedicated luminaire. 33 500 Lux34

Viewing Interactive Whiteboard

300 Lux35

Working on Computer Screen

30- 50 Lux36

Using Keyboard

300 Lux37

Table 3: Updated version of Lux levels required for various activities in Classroom. This uses newer sources and provides some elements more specifically for pupils with BSED.

From these observations it can be concluded that an adjustable lighting system, such as the use of automatic dimming luminaires and daylight sensors should be used to create varied lighting within classrooms. Control of lighting and types of artificial lighting should be assessed further in case studies.

Raynham, Peter. SLL Code for Lighting. S.l.: CIBSE, 2013. Print. Schools. "Brochure 5." Specifinder. Ridi Schools, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http://specifinder.com/brochures/5412_pdf32.pdf>. 33Theatres Trust. "Lighting Systems in Schools." The Theatres Trust. The Theatres Trust, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatrestrust.org.uk%2Fstore%2Fassets%2F0000%2F4241%2FDCSF_LightingSystemsinSchools_Sta ndardspecifications_4.>. 34Schoff, Larry. Light Levels in Schools Interior and Exterior (n.d.): n. pag. E2 Energy Solutions. E2 Energy Solutions. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. <http://www.e2energysolutions.com/Resources/Light%20levels%20in%20schools%20all%20interior%20and%20exterior% 20-%20USE.pdf>. 35 Glamox. "Classrooms." Glamox. Glamox Luxo Lighting, n.d. Web. 11 Jan. 2015. <http://glamox.com/uk/solutions/testsmall-class-room>. 36Schoff, Larry. Light Levels in Schools Interior and Exterior (n.d.): n. pag. E2 Energy Solutions. E2 Energy Solutions. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. 37Schoff, Larry. Light Levels in Schools Interior and Exterior (n.d.): n. pag. E2 Energy Solutions. E2 Energy Solutions. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. 32Riddi

3.2 INTERIORS 3.2.1 COLOUR

Research by Sinofsky and Knirck38 in 1981 has shown correlation between colour and behaviour in classrooms. “The use of colour within schools and other learning environments has been shown to influence student’s attitudes, behaviours and learning comprehension by affecting their level of attention.”39 Choosing a colour to please every individual is a difficult task as colour is subjective. According to Rittelmeyer’s investigations in 199440, “One child may experience pleasant feelings with a particular colour combination; it may make another student feel cramped or intimidated.”41 Generally, for pupils with BSED the focus will be to choose a colour that is calming to encourage positivity and reduce aggression; thus enhancing concentration. Colours chosen for classrooms should harmonise one another to create a comfortable environment. Strong contrasts between objects that pupils stare at such as the whiteboard and background can cause fatigue; it is best to paint the wall the whiteboard is placed on with a light colour. “Spaces that feel pleasant, radiating warmth and softness, where colours and forms are well co-ordinated, will have a strong, positive effect.”42 Colours should also co-ordinate with the form of the classroom and warmth could be created by material treatment, for example the use of timber ceilings. Kopec proposes using cool colours for pupils with behavioural problems in secondary schools, as they have a relaxing effect on pupils, which contradicts the idea of creating warmth as Walden mentioned earlier. “Soft greens, pale blues and creamy yellows have a soothing effect on people.”43 This chosen palette of cool colours also supports Engelbrecht44 and Brubaker’s45 research who found that adolescents prefer more subdued colours and that cool colours enhance concentration respectively. Kopec also adds that using midrange colours of a palette, rather than the lightest or darkest shades can minimise glare and brightness; helping to prevent pupils from the consequences of glare and thus improving concentration.

Fig. 4 Palettes of colours that incorporate research by Kopec, Engelbracht and Brubaker

Sinofsky, E.R. & Knirck, F.G. "Choose the Right Color for your Learning Style." Instructional Innovator, 1981,17-19, Web. Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 227, Print. 40 Rittelmeyer, C, Schulbaten positive gestalen: Wie Schuler Farben und Formen erleben. [Positive School Design: How pupils experience colour and form], Wiesbaden:Bauverlag, 1994, Print. 41 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 79, Print. 42 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 79, Print. 43 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 227, Print. 44 Engelbrecht, K. The impact of color on learning. Chicago, IL: Perkins & Will, 2003, Web. 45 Brubaker, C.W. Planning and designing schools. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998, Web. 39

3.2.2 INTERIOR WALLS

Not only the colour of walls but their display is fundamental for the learning and concentration of pupils in PRUs; pupils can spend four to five hours in one classroom per day. Creekmore’s research in 1987 has proved that “The design of walls and what is displayed on them will affect learning.”47 He proposes three categories of wall displays in the classroom, designed to aid pupil learning in a subconscious manner show in Table 4 and Figure 5 below. TYPE OF WALL

WALL PROPOSED

1. AQUISTION OF NEW KNOWLEDGE

Front Wall

2. MAINTENANCE OF NEW KNOWLEDGE

Side Walls

3. AN ANOUNCEMENT OR CELEBRATION

Back Wall

CONTENTS OF WALL: ANALYSIS AND REASONING The main focus of learning in a classroom should occur here; this is the direction pupils are sat facing. White boards should be placed here to promote space for learning new material, new ideas and concepts. To be easily referred to but not the focus of the room. These walls display references to material learned in the past for example; key words, definitions, maps, facts, articles and artefacts. This information acts as a reminder. To act as a reinforcement of what they have achieved and reference to future events. This would include examples and displays of students’ work, which also acts as a strategy to discourage vandalism. “This will lead to the children forming close relationships to their room, which in turn is the best way to prevent vandalism.”46 Pupils are less likely to destroy something they have created and are proud of. In addition announcements and notices of upcoming events can be placed here as a reminder or future reward.

Table 4: Summary of Creekmore’s proposal of Categories of Wall Display with explanation.

Using this model would be more effective in long terms PRUs as displays of work would need constant renewal. A similar difficulty arises with maintaining learned Knowledge; many subjects will be taught in one classroom and pupils will be present for varying amounts of time. To tackle this, fundamentals of the basic Maths, English and Science could be placed on the sidewalls. Fig. 5 Diagram showing Creekmore’s Categories of Wall Display in the classroom. 46

Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 90, Print. 47 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 225, Print.

3.2.3 FURNISHINGS AND LAYOUT

Pupils can spend up to 4-5 hours in one classroom; it is fundamental that furniture is of utmost comfort and arranged to maximise learning. Berquet beautifully states “The classroom chairs are our children’s tools for the school’s working day.”48 S.R. Henderson researched the flexibility and adaptability that classroom chairs should provide. He identified the two most common positions were for leaning back to listen or bending forward to study. “School furniture should allow for natural body positions.”49This suggests a chair with an adjustable backrest and height in order to sit comfortably at desk height. Children in secondary PRUs range from the ages of 11-19 and are therefore at varying heights; it would be difficult to find one chair to fit all. Research by Trousier et all and Knights and Noyes in 199950 supports this; uncomfortable seating lead to back pain when sat for hours at a time. Pain can lead to a lack of concentration, which when suffering from BSED can lead to disruptions. Providing adjustable chairs could be expensive, however most classrooms in PRUs have a maximum of 6 pupils per classroom, making this more feasible than in a mainstream school. However, providing adjustability could also provide opportunity for fidgeting; a system would be needed to ensure this would not occur. Comfort of pupils in classrooms was measured by Bullock and Foster Harrison in 1997; a direct correlation between the cushioning of chairs and pupil’s ability to concentrate was found. “Persons working on unpadded chairs are unable to sit still and concentrate for more than fifty minutes.”51 Providing padded chairs will provide pupils with BSED increased comfort, therefore better concentration. According to government regulations the size of average multi-subject classrooms in PRUs for 6 pupils should be 50-54m2 52, providing sufficient room for flexibility of desk layout. Teachers are encouraged to use a variety of teaching methods, setting up different activities, to avoid boredom and therefore lack of concentration in BSED pupils. This is supported by Buddensiek’s study in 200153 who explains furniture should aid group work not hinder it. Walden complements this, stating “Classrooms should facilitate quick and easy changes between very different instructional forms.”54 The furniture should be able to allow for flexibility to arrange for group work or individual work. Figure 6 shows various methods of creating both instructional and group working furniture layout forms in an average 54m2 classroom for 6 pupils.

Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 89, Print. Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 226, Print. 50Troussier, B., et al. Comparative Study of different kinds of furniture among children, Ergonomics, 1999. 51 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 90, Print. 52 Department for Education and Skills, Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Information for Local Authorities, Teachers-in-charge and Management Committees. Norwich: TSO, 2007, 36, Print. 53 Buddensiek, W. Schule Future Oriented learning in the houses of learning, Gottingen: Werstatt, 2001. 54 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 90, Print. 49

Fig. 6 Exploration of Optional seating arrangements within an average PRU Classroom. Shown with relation to Teacher Pupil interaction.

3.3 FORM DESIGN OF THE CLASSROOM AS A VOLUME

Research into the form of classrooms shows how differing the shape serves different purposes. The main aim of PRUs is to familiarise students with standard teaching methods in preparation for their return to mainstream education. Yet according to government regulations, pupils with BSED need extra space that pupils in mainstream schools would not need; showing an exploration of several types of forms is needed to decide upon a suitable shape. \Rittelmeyer’s research55 focussed on creating inviting spaces to learn in. His studies showed that if a space was “Varied and Stimulating, unconstrained and liberating or warm and soft”56 it was perceived as a pleasing space to learn in. Walden57 supports this finding, he believes a balance needs to be found between monotony and chaos; classrooms should be inspiring and evoke excitement with the use of irregularities to avoid boredom but not taken to such extent as to distract pupils. The use of symmetry creates balance and equilibrium and therefore calms the mind, aiding pupils with BSED to be as calm as possible. Rectangular classrooms are associated with teacher centred learning, providing the most flexibility of furniture layout, allowing for independent and group working. Herman Hertzberger states, “The unarticulated rectangular classroom lends itself best to instruction.”58 This statement is supported by McFarland’s research in 2001 “Classrooms that are designed to be teacher centred are often associated with fewer disruptions, but they have been criticized for limiting student engagement and overall educational quality.”59 Although the behaviour of students may improve with a classroom designed for teacher centred learning, it may decrease opportunity for independent learning.

Fig. 7 Herman Hertzberger’s Unarticulated Space Above and Articulated Space Below

The Articlated Space creates areas of independent learning but also places pupils could hide.

Fig. 8 The L Shaped Room creates opportunities for poor behaviour by decreasing visual contact between teacher and pupil.

Rittelmeyer, C, Positive School Design: How Pupils experience colour and form, Wiesbaden:Bauverlag, 1994, print. Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 82, Print. 57 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 82, Print. 58 Hertzberger, Herman. Space and Learning: Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2008, 24, Print. 59 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 224, Print. 56

PRUS are mostly for teenagers. Kopec explains how teenagers tend to work better in seclusion; sometimes achieved by inserting headphones. “Adolescents and early teens require less stimulation and more private spaces and a sense of personal control.”60 Providing areas that hold the feeling of privacy allows pupils to have control on where they sit, promoting independence and giving pupils the opportunity have their own agenda and style of working. Creating areas of varying privacy within one classroom is achieved by changing the shape. Lang suggests in 1996 that “L shaped rooms or rooms that have alcoves better accommodate privacy needs…”61 L shaped rooms divide the classroom in two, decreasing visual access between teachers and pupils- undesirable in PRUs giving pupils with BSED the opportunity to hide or misbehave. Alcoves provide privacy without necessarily dividing the classroom, but again allow the opportunity of hiding. Herman Hertzberger labels alcove rooms as “articulated spaces” which create more possibilities of differentiated learning. This idea is also suggested by Charleton and David “A structure that allows the teacher the flexibility to refer pupils to different areas and activities designed to meet specific needs at different types.”62 However, this strategy may be more favourable in mainstream classrooms where pupils are less likely to misbehave. From this it can be drawn that rectangular rooms facilitate instruction and discipline, whilst an articulated space can create areas of privacy, promoting independent learning. However, it must be argued whether independent learning is necessary in PRUs where pupils with BSED need constant attention. With regards to room height, Kopec suggests a model that integrates the visual relationship between pupil and teacher, as well as sound, light and temperature. “A ceiling that is higher in the front of the classroom and slopes gradually toward the back will not only reduce the teacher’s visual distraction but also increase the student’s perception of the space in front of the room while decreasing their feelings of overcrowding.”63 This design focuses the voice of the teacher towards the students and also allows heat produced by audio visual equipment and computers that would be placed at the front of the room to rise up and away from the teacher; creating a natural ventilation system.

Fig. 9 Kopecs model incorporating Acoustics, Ventilation and Visual Range.

1. Heat from occupants and electrical equipment rises up and away creating a constant fresh flow of air.

2. Speech from teacher is focussed down on to pupils.

3. Lowering towards the back of classroom creates less distraction for teacher and larger frame of view for pupils.

Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 225, Print. Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 224, Print. 62 Charlton, Tony, & Kenneth, David. Managing Misbehaviour: Strategies for Effective Management of Behaviour in Schools. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education, 1989, 102, Print 63 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 225, Print. 61

3.4 THERMAL COMFORT Experiments finding the best temperature for learning have shown slightly different results. Studies by Stuart and Curtis64 showed that the optimum temperature for learning is 72˚F, whilst Rohles65 in 1975 found that 70 ˚F was preferable. Rohles added that maintaining a constant temperature was unfavourable, in some cases it lead to fatigue. These results could conclude that a temperature that fluctuates slightly between 70-72˚F would be desirable in the classroom of PRUs. Studies conducted by Lang66 in 1996 showed lenience towards mechanical ventilation, he found better behaviour in pupils in classrooms with air conditioning. “Early studies of classroom temperature found that when learning environments included air conditioning, the incidences of classroom annoyances were reduced.”67 The climate of this country however means a focus would be on the heating of a classroom, particularly in winter. Thus generally, the means of ventilation would preferably be natural, and this is indicated in government regulations. Lang comments on who has control of temperature of the room. “To ensure the comfort of occupants, flexibility in manipulating this system is extremely important, and designers should consider including independent controls for each room that are simple to operate.”68 Temperature, like colour is subjective, however, if a certain temperature range can be given, with a way to maintain this temperature, it could improve concentration of pupils. One study found that naturally ventilated schools were more satisfied with being able to personally control the air change in the classroom with opening of windows. 69 However it must be considered that pupils with BSED will be likely to fidget with controls if given the opportunity.

Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 229, Print. Rohles, F.H. Humidity, human factors and the energy shortage. Ashrae Transactions, 1975, Web. 66 Lang, D, Essential criteria for an ideal learning environment. Center for Architecture and Education, 1996, Web. 67 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 229, Print. 68 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 229, Print. 69 Santamouris, M. "Experimental Investigation of the Air Flow and Indoor Carbon Dioxide Concentration in Classrooms with Intermittent Natural Ventilation." Energy and Buildings 40.10 (2008): 1883-843. Web. 65

4.0 TESTING THROUGH CASE STUDIES Theories questioned during the literature review about Natural and Artificial Lighting, Interiors, Thermal Comfort and Form of classrooms will be tested via three case studies on existing classrooms in two PRUs and one mainstream High School to see if they can aid learning and concentration of BSED sufferers. The concluding results will aid the proposal of the complimentary government regulations in the final chapter.

4.1 METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH Information for the Case studies was gathered through various methods. All three were initially found and researched online. Semi structured personal interviews including a series of open and closed questions with three members of staff took place at Jesse Street PRU. Feedback was taken from five pupils via closed answer questionnaires. Follow up questions were later answered via email. As it was the beginning of term fewer pupils were attending, creating difficulty in data collection. Semi Structured phone interviews were conducted with the Architects of Blueprint PRU, ADP Architects and the Headteacher of Blueprint PRU Dave Jones. Personal interviews could not be achieved due to an unmanageable distance. Questions for all interviews were prepared beforehand, additional questions and answers were noted down, and then later recorded. Transcripts to all interviews can be found in the Appendix. Both PRUs generally teach pupils for a short time so only short term effects of design could be assessed from a pupilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perspective; the teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; responses were more extensive. Thus the third case study was chosen to be a long term high school. Research for Monkseaton High School was taken from the book Joined Up Design for Schools and various websites and articles as contact with the school could not be arranged. Success of the designs of all three studies are analysed through Ofsted reports, quantitative and qualitative analysis of teacher and pupil feedback and reviews from articles and journals.

4.2 JESSE STREET PRU Purpose built ten years ago and designed by RBS Architects, Jesse Street PRU in Bradford is one of three units belonging to Bradford Central PRU. It is a relatively small PRU, allowing a maximum of 24 pupils. Local schools refer pupils when behaviour becomes uncontrollable or attendance is exceptionally low; the PRU mostly deals with BSED pupils but also facilitates for other Special Education Needs. Generally pupils stay no longer than eight to ten weeks; once behaving appropriately and attending regularly pupils are sent back to their original school. The ultimate focus of the PRU is to send pupils back to mainstream education, achieved through effective design of classrooms and curriculum. Lessons are timetabled similar to mainstream school; five hours of lessons per day, a break and lunch; but with less variety of subjects. Pupils usually remain in one classroom for the entire day; unless taught Design or Food Technology where facilitated classrooms are required. For security reasons, once pupils enter the building they are essentially locked in for the day. Breaks and Lunch are held inside the central atrium space of the building; the only opportunity to go outside is during sports lessons, instilling a disciplined routine throughout the day.

Ofsted reports from 2005 until 2012 have been consistently rated at grade 2 out of 4, which implies a â&#x20AC;&#x153;good standard.â&#x20AC;? Generally, reports show no indication or suggestion to environment or accommodation effecting curriculum, learning or behaviour.70 However after visiting the unit, it was found that some aspects of the classroom design such as thermal comfort could be improved and recent layout changes enhanced student concentration.

Fig. 10 Street View and Main Entrance

1. GENERAL TEACHING CLASSROOMS 2. READING ROOM 3. DESIGN TECHNOLOGY 4. FOOD TECHNOLOGY 5. ISOLATION ROOM

6. TOILETS 7. PLANT ROOM 8. INTERVIEW ROOM 9. RECEPTION 10. STAFF ROOM

Fig. 11 Diagrammatic Plan of PRU

Fig. 12 Central Communal Area

Ofsted. "School Inspection Report." Ofsted: Raising Standards Improving Live. Gov.uk, 2005-2012. Web. 8 Jan. 2015. <http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/ELS/133411>.

4.2.1 NATURAL LIGHTING Information from the questionnaire found the majority of pupils preferred working in natural light by the window, as opposed to directly under artificial lighting.71 40% of students reported that sitting by the window next to a busy road could be distracting72; showing that views and minimising activity outside the window should be considered. 4.2.2 FORM AND THERMAL COMFORT All four classrooms are identical, rectangular and flat ceilinged at 2.6m high. The ceiling does not aid natural ventilation and positioning of furnishing in the room has caused thermal discomfort in pupils. Six computers emitting heat line the back of the classroom, whilst the projector and interactive white board radiate at the front, causing an accumulation of warm air to sit in the middle of the classroom (see Figure 14). 7-8 people, including both teachers remain in a room 28m2 for up to 5 hours per day.

Fig. 13 General Teaching Classroom Singular Desk Arrangement

Fig. 14 Sectional Diagram showing accumulation of heat from pupils and electronic equipment

One teacher complained classroom temperature was too high even in winter, resulting in the window being open year round. Pupils were noted to become agitated in the warmth and â&#x20AC;&#x153;restless and tired.â&#x20AC;?73 This shows the negative effects of poor ventilation and importance of regulating temperature in classrooms, supporting studies by Rohles in 1975. This also shows the importance of designing form to aid natural ventilation and to consider layout of electrical equipment; supporting the model mentioned previously by Kopec74. Fig. 15 General Teaching Classroom Grouped Desk Arrangement

Appendix IV, Question 2. Appendix IV, Question 3. 73 Appendix II, Question 10. 74 Kopec, David Alan. Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild, 2006, 225, Print. 72

4.2.3 FURNISHINGS AND LAYOUT Each classroom is for a maximum of 6 pupils, provided with a desk and computer each. Teachers have control over orientation of desks; a contrast in opinions was seen when comparing adjacent classrooms. One teacher prefers to keep a mainstream school environment encouraging group work by placing desks together. (See top of figure 16) Two other teachers prefer a disciplined approach, placing pupils on separate desks (See bottom of Figure 16). One teacher stated they believe it “Improves concentration of pupils by eliminating distractions.” All pupils face the front, allowing for maximum visual access between teacher and pupil. Both models appear to work as pupils are achieving well showing how integration of teaching methods and personal preference of teachers can affect layout and pupil interaction. The majority of pupils found seating comfortable but 60% responded positively to having adjustable seating.75 The current layout has changed from previous years, placing the computers together in one space, removing a reading room from between the classrooms and reducing unused storage. One teacher stated, “As a result of the improvements to my room I can support and work with several students at once and the learning environment is far more suitable.”76 This shows the importance of extra space for teachers to see and move in. From this it can be concluded that pupils concentrate better when there is maximum visual access between pupil and teacher.

Fig. 16 Plan of Adjacent Teaching Classrooms Showing difference in desk arrangements i

Awkward Space Created by Reading Room i

4.2.4 INTERIOR WALLS The interior walls of the classroom were mostly exhibited with

Fig. 17 Removal of Reading Room has created better special arrangement. i

pupil’s work and no graffiti or vandalism was reported; supporting the work of Walden.77 80% of pupils reported negatively to exhibiting their work, this appeared to be due to lack of confidence in work. A difficulty in exhibiting updated work as new pupils join was mentioned; pupils prefer to keep their own portfolio of work. Fig. 18 Display of Student Art Work 75

Appendix IV, Question 8. Appendix II 77 Walden, Rotraut, Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe, 2009, 89, Print. 76

4.3 BLUEPRINT PRU

Built in 2010, Blueprint PRU is a new build short stay school in Buckinghamshire designed by ADP Architects, for 40 pupils aged 14-19. Interviewing the architects it was found that government regulations they were given: Document B78 was not helpful in creating an aspirational space; the regulations

Fig. 19 Inviting Entrance to Blueprint PRU

were of “lowest possible adequacy.”79 The architects found inspiration working with the head teacher, who delivered a more aspirational brief. Pupils were less involved in the design process, as in the long term they should be returning to mainstream education.

The overall scheme of the project was to present a building that does not feel like a school; a bright, warm and positive building, reflected in the choice of material, interiors and form. The building has separate entrances for key stage 3 and 4 students; increasing security, minimising conflict in the building and thus reducing poor behaviour. The design of this school was intended to be a “Blueprint” for future new build PRUs across the country.

Fig. 20 Overall Plan of School integrating separate entrances, cluster areas and courtyards.

Fig. 21 Main Central Cluster with interesting rooflights and non-school like material treatments.

Department for Education and Skills, Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Information for Local Authorities, Teachers-in-charge and Management Committees. Norwich: TSO, 2007, Print. 79 Appendix I, Question 1.

4.3.1 NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING The main teaching classrooms are lit with a mixture of fluorescent strip lighting and large windows. Making sure the lights were tamperproof and unreachably high was a priority. No complaints have been made about the fluorescent lighting opposing research by Winterbottom and Wilkins80. Lighting is not adjustable and pupils do not have control; this is to reducing the opportunities for them to fiddle, making bad decisions that reflect poor behaviour. Thin wide windows placed high up allow for ventilation and windows look out on to external courtyards and landscaped surroundings, said to have a calming effect on pupils. This supports research mentioned earlier by West81 and Ulrich82. All teaching classrooms have the same window size, layout and similar views. Pupils with BSED find it difficult accept change and so similar themes are kept throughout the design of the whole building. Glare caused by over glazing classrooms was combatted with the use of special roller blinds; allowing views out but preventing views in, decreasing excessive sunlight entering the classroom. The blinds are adjustable, but only staff are to have control; again reducing opportunities of misbehaviour.

Winterbottom, Mark, and Arnold Wilkins. "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. 81 West, M.J. Landscape and stress response in the prison environment. M.L.A. thesis. Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 1985, web. 82 Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. and Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental

4.3.2 FORM AND THERMAL COMFORT Before deciding on using solely natural ventilation the site was considered- fortunately the school is on a remote large site; thus windows can be opened without the consequence of intrusive noise. Natural ventilation occurs from two directions. The roofs of classroom slope upwards, following the model described by Kopec earlier, allowing heat to rise naturally and be released from openings placed high up. The equipment and positioning of furniture is also dictated by this. The head-teacher reports this system to have been very effective. See Diagram 23. The amount windows could be opened also became problematic as pupils tried to escape through the windows. Window handles are now guarded to prevent student use; giving control of ventilation to the teachers. Creating a balance between the distance a window can be opened and not allowing it to become an escape route must be considered in future regulations.

Fig. X Sectional Diagram Fig. 22 Quiet Surroundings make it ideal for natural ventilation.

Fig. 23 Sloping roofs drive natural ventilation in two directions

Keeping the classrooms rectangular prevents pupils from hiding, if pupils need to breakaway external areas and central clusters are available. Creating alcoves promotes independent learning however pupils with BSED need constant visual access with teachers; the head teacher believes alcoves provide the opportunity for misbehaviour.

Fig. 24 Axonometric showing sloping roofs complimenting context.

4.3.3 FURNISHING AND LAYOUT The PRU offers a range of vocational courses, providing pupils with practical skills for future careers; this includes lessons in hair and beauty, horticulture, construction and vehicle maintenance. These classrooms are designed specifically to subject; preparing pupils for a professional environment. For example, the art classroom has high stools and desks allowing people to stand or sit when creating, but also useful for Craft, Design and Technology. The hair and beauty room resembles that of a salon.

Fig. 25 Hair and Beauty Classroom made to look like working salon environment

All eight general teaching classrooms are designed identically; providing the same robust but ergonomic seating, furniture layout and material treatment of ceiling and walls. The chairs are not adjustable and heavy to prevent them from being thrown. As mentioned earlier this surrounds pupils in a familiar environment; limiting change which can create disturbance in pupils with BSED. One central round table for six pupils sits in the middle of the classroom, encouraging student interaction and maximising visual contact between pupil and teacher.

Fig. 26 Drama and Dance Studio

The ceilings are cladded with natural wood, creating a nonschool like, warm environment; pupils in PRUs do not want to be at school thus creating an environment that feels different will encourage them to attend. 4.2.4 COLOUR Classrooms are painted white, creating a calm, light atmosphere that allows walls to be used as white boards; preventing teachers from having one fixed teaching space. Each classroom has a specified area for display of notices and the colour of the board is translated and used throughout the school; giving each colour a purpose. Some work is displayed, temporarily in classrooms but no fixed displays are used and the pupils attending the school are constantly changing. In addition to this pupils often respond negatively to displaying their work; instead they keep an independent portfolio- supporting the findings at Jesse Street PRU.

Fig. 27 Art and Design Classroom with higher chairs for practicality. Windows for Natural Ventilation can be seen.

Fig. 28 General Teaching Classroom

4.4 MONKSEATON HIGH SCHOOL Orginially built in 1970, Monkseaton High school is a foundation school for 13-18 year olds in Newcastle. Recently rebuilt by Devereux Architects in 2009, the new school has attracted attention for its innovative and sustainable design; the â&#x20AC;&#x153;oval and aerodynamicâ&#x20AC;? shape is designed to maximise daylight and improve natural ventilation. Although not a PRU, the school was designed as a blueprint for future schools incorporating a new angle on Natural and Artificial Lighting, Furnishings and Natural Ventilation.

Fig. 29 Domed Shape of School aids light and ventilation

4.4.1 JOINED UP DESIGN FOR SCHOOLS Fig. 30 Light, airy open plan interior

In 2002 a group of designers and architects teamed up to ask pupils around the country what they would like to change about their schools and to propose potential classroom designs. Monkseaton High School was featured in this book with comments on how to improve their light and furnishings. This case study analyses features of the newly designed school with regards to the pupils original comments, the literature reviewed previously and how this is affecting pupils learning and behaviour today.

Fig. 31 External Solar Shading to prevent Glare

4.4.2 NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING Generally pupils commented on the lack of light within the old school; that larger windows were needed to create a light, spacey environment. Spotlights were preferred to fluorescent striplights, described as “too harsh.” Devereux Architects seemed to have tackled both these issues not just within classrooms but throughout the whole school. The domed roof of the building maximises natural light entering the building. Although the school has three floors, classrooms are still well lit with an open plan interior designed to “harness and maximise natural daylight.”83 Very few ceilings are added, instead roof lights and wall lay lights bring light directly down in to classrooms. Devereux Architects have combatted glare caused by large amounts of glazing with the use of solar shading, seen in figure 32. This prevents opportunity of fiddling with blinds from students but provides less control in winter. Overall PRUs would benefit more from roller-blinds.

Fig. 32 External Solar Shading to prevent Glare

Fig. 33 Circular tables encourage group work

4.4.3 FURNISHINGS Modern furnishings supplied by S and B provide ergonomic comfortable and adjustable seating as requested by the pupils. Pupils stated they wished for seats to be “more comfortable, with adjustable height and able to recline.”84 Although the new seats supplied do not recline, they are adjustable in height. Similar to Blueprint PRU the tables are circular encouraging student interaction and keeping a 360 degree view for the teacher.

Fig. 34 Open Plan, high ceilinged Classrooms

Nicholls, Nichola. "Futuristic New School Unveiled." Futuristic New School Officially Unveiled. North Tyneside Council, 6 Nov. 2009. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http://www.northtyneside.gov.uk/browsedisplay.shtml?p_ID=510206&p_subjectCategory=4>. 84 Sorrell, John, and Frances Sorrell. Joinedupdesignforschools. London: Merrell, 2005, 66, Print.

4.4.4 THERMAL COMFORT Breathing Building’s E stack A series ventilation system; shown in Figure 35, uses the atrium to drive natural ventilation; many PRUs like Jesse Street and Blueprint are designed around atrium spaces and thus could be applied to new PRUs. Similar to Blueprint PRU a gradual sloping roof model appears to be the most efficient for driving natural ventilation. However, an added ventilation system is placed in the ceiling, allowing seasonal changes in ventilation. The system is quiet enough to meet with BB93 to allow maximum concentration of students. “Our students, staff, parents and visitors all comment on the refreshing change from the institutional air they have always experienced in public buildings.”85 From this comment the positive impact it has had on the atmosphere can be seen, resulting in better learning and concentration in pupils.

Fig. 35 Natural Ventilation Systems supplied by “Breathing Buildings” could be applied to PRUs.

Breathing Buildings. Breathing Buildings Ltd. Registered in England and Wales., n.d. Web. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breathingbuildings.com%2Fmedia%2F33722%2Fmonkseaton_case_study>.

5.0 RESULTS By reviewing conclusions made about each key design area established to be lacking in current government regulations for classroom design in PRUs for BSED pupils through literary research and testing them through Case Studies, a set of specific complimentary design regulations have been proposed.

5.1 PROPOSED DESIGN REGULATIONS Research found that the most communicative format would be in a table86, outlining each design element with additional information. Diagrams have been placed to make ideas proposed clearer.

5.1.1 NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

PREVENTING GLARE

To prevent glare and excessive sunlight, roller blinds as opposed to venetian blinds should be installed in classrooms. The control of these could be automatic, responding seasonally and hourly or manually operable. If manual, control should be placed within a guarded space, accessible only by staff to prevent pupils from fiddling with the system. Views out of windows when possible should be of landscaped areas or as natural as possible with minimal activity framed. This promotes a calming and non-distracting environment within the classroom, increasing concentration of pupils with BSED.

VIEWS OUT OF CLASSROOM

ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING

Automatic dimming luminaires should be used that respond to the amount of natural light within the classroom, preventing over lit rooms and glare. Control of the lighting should be given to teachers, preventing misbehaviour from BSED to occur, however pupils should be allowed to express a change of lighting when needed. Artificial lighting should be tamperproof, unreachable and mounted to the ceiling. The use of adjustable spotlights emitting white light that are flicker free as opposed to fluorescent strip lighting would be favoured. Personal lamps should be available for those pupils who prefer to work in brighter light. These lamps should have a colour temperature of 3500K. A method of measuring lux levels should be provided for the teacher to assess lighting within the classroom.

Appendix I, Question 8.

STUDENT TASK

STANDARD LUMINANCE NEEDED (LUX) The best lux levels that should be achieved within the classroom to enhance concentration for each activity. This should be used to compliment standards written in Building Bulletin 90.

Reading White Board and looking at teacher

300-500 Lux, preferably adjustable between this range. The higher end allows for pupils with BSED to have maximum visual access with teacher. Children with hearing impairments will also find it easier to lip read the teacher in higher lux levels.

Studying at Desk Viewing Interactive Whiteboard Working on Computer Screen Using Keyboard

The white board should have its own dedicated luminaire. 500 Lux 300 Lux 30- 50 Lux 300 Lux

5.1.2 FURNISHINGS AND LAYOUT TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

GENERAL

Furnishings should be kept consistent throughout General Teaching Spaces when possible as pupils with BSED can be easily disturbed by change. All seats in general teaching classrooms should be robust and heavy but padded to allow for comfort, with a backrest.

SEATING

Chairs should be adjustable in height, however once adjusted should be locked in place by the teacher to prevent students from fiddling. MATERIAL TREATMENT

The use of non-school like material treatments, such as timber cladded ceilings are recommended to create a more comforting atmosphere.

DESK LAYOUT

Figure 36 shows recommended layout of classroom. Circular tables are preferable, allowing for group interaction and keeping focus of the class within a 360 degree view, maximising the visual relationship between teacher and pupil. Using two semi-circular tables allows for flexibility of separation in to smaller groups. If using rectangular, individual desks they should be easily movable to create opportunity for group learning. Care must be taken to choose tables that can be locked in place to prevent mis-handling from students. Various layouts, possible table types and their effects are shown in Figure 6. The diagrams have been drawn to the maximum recommended area of 54m2 for a class of 6 pupils.

5.1.3 COLOUR

TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

COLOUR PALETTE AND RANGE

Cooler colours such as greens, pale blues and creamy yellows should be used if a colour scheme is desired. The mid-range of these colour palettes should be used as shown in figure 37, as this prevents glare occurring, reflecting less light. These ranges of colours should have a calming effect on pupils with BSED.

COLOUR AND GLARE

The lightest shades of colours on the left are recommended for walls with openings to contrast less against daylight, resulting in reduced glare.

WHITE BOARDS

It is recommended that white boards should not be placed in the room; instead walls can be painted white, and should be dry wipe acting as white boards. If a white board is placed in the room, the colour of this wall should be within the lightest range to prevent students becoming disorientated when staring for long periods of time.

Figure 37 Recommended colour palettes and shades for particular walls within classroom

PLAN Recommended Layout of Furnishings, Electrical Equipment and openings in average 54m2 Classroom. (9x6)

w SECTION Sloping roof design to aid natural ventilation, enhance acoustics and maximise teacher pupil visual access.

h1 h2 =h =h 1 1 w w should be less than 5h. h should be > 2.7m h2 should be > 2m Diagram shows w=9m h=3.5m h1 = 5m

Figure 36 Recommended model arrangement of classroom in plan and section. Designed to maximise Natural Ventilation, Light, Boost Acoustics of speech and instill a calming, group working atmosphere to prepare pupils with BSED to their return to a mainstream school environment.

Fig. 9 Explanation of design of form in section.

1. Heat from pupils, teacher and electrical equipment rises up and away creating a constant fresh flow of air.

Fig. 6 Alternative Desk Arrangements

2. Speech from teacher is focussed down on to pupils.

3. Lowering towards the back of classroom creates less distraction for teacher and larger frame of view for pupils.

5.1.4 INTERIOR WALLS

TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

DRY WIPE WALLS

Rather than traditionally placing a white board at the front, it is recommended to have dry wipe walls, allowing staff to teach and write at any point in the classroom. Interactive White boards should have a matt finish to prevent glare and tilted at 5-10Ë&#x161; from the base of the wall to allow views for pupils from all directions. These should be placed on the wall with the highest ceiling, allowing for heat produced to rise up and away from pupils. Display of student work is recommended in longer stay PRUs to encourage confidence in work and reduce vandalism. If displaying work in short term PRUs, the work should be continually updated. Work should be displayed on the back walls of classrooms along with notices and reminders of future events to reinforce and reward pupils. Colour coding displays of different functions ie, rules, events notices and pupils work is recommended to be used within and surrounding classrooms, giving pupils with BSED familiarity and recognition.

INTERACTIVE WHITE BOARDS

WALL DISPLAYS

COLOUR CODING

5.1.5 FORM: The Classroom as a Volume See Fig. 36 for detailed diagram and approximate dimensions87.

TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

CLASSROOM IN PLAN

The highest range of classroom area is recommended, allowing pupils with BSED to have their own space; ranging from 54m2 and onwards. Figure 36 explores a typical classroom layout measuring 9m by 6m. This allows for maximised space for teachers to move around, aids the natural ventilation, acoustic and creates a larger frame for pupils to focus on when looking at the interactive board. Classrooms should be rectangular in shape, allowing for a maximised pupil teacher visual relationship. It should be symmetrical to create a sense of balance, easing the minds of pupils with BSED. Alcoves and L shapes should be avoided as this encourages places for pupils to hide, providing pupils with BSED the opportunity to misbehave.

CLASSROOM IN SECTION

By gradually increasing the height from one side of the classroom to the other (as shown in Figures and 37) s a more interesting roof shape is created, stimulating more interest and increasing concentration in pupils with BSED. Figure 9 shows how this allows for efficient natural ventilation, improved acoustics by allowing speech to reflect down to the students and frames the view of the teacher. By making the front of the classroom taller, the space appears larger and attracts attention of BSED pupils for longer. This also helps staff to focus on pupils with minimum distraction.

Information for recommended widths and heights. http://www.windowmaster.com/Files//Filer/Brochurer/Design%20Guidelines.pdf

5.1.4 THERMAL COMFORT TOPIC

PROPOSED REGULATION

NATURAL VENTILATION CONTROL

Window opening should be controllable only by staff, allowing for sufficient natural ventilation when needed all year round but should be carefully limited to not allow pupils to use the window as an escape route. Using a key system that only staff can access would be preferable over the use of window guards- decreasing the institutional like feel.

TEMPERATURE OF CLASSROOM

Temperature of the classroom should fluctuate between 70-72˚F (21-22˚C). To ensure this a digital thermometer should be placed in all classrooms, with an alert system when temperature is out of range.

NATURAL VENTILATION WINDOWS

Wide ventilation windows should be placed high up on the tallest wall to allow for hot air to rise and be replaced, achieving an air exchange rate of 8 l/p/s as opposed to the minimum 3 l/p/s to allow for maximum natural ventilation.

PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

Electrical equipment such as the interactive white boards, projector, and student computers should be placed closest to the tallest ceiling, within the same half of the classroom. This will prevent heat from accumulating in the centre of the classroom.

6.0 CONCLUSION Critical analysis of regulations and interviews with Architects found that Current Government Design Regulations supply a generic, vague information for the design of PRUs with little specifically categorised for the needs of BSED.88 Design aspects found to be lacking were categorised as Natural and Artificial Lighting, Thermal Comfort, Interiors and Form, which through literary research were proven to affect the behaviour of pupils. Using this information, the aim of the dissertation became to provide a set of complimentary design guidelines that will allow for more efficient and specific designing of future PRUs to aid the concentration and learning of pupils with BSED. Existing literary research comments mostly on the effects of design on behaviour in mainstream classrooms, which are larger and less specific than PRUs causing some points to be reconsidered. Research on subjective matters such as colour and lighting could be contradictory but overall a broad range of conclusions for each design aspect was found. Creating a space that restricts behaviour but is not institutional was difficult to assess theoretically; testing these conclusions through case studies was fundamental to achieve realistic results. The Case studies provided a method of measuring correlation between behaviour and design to make specific decisions about each design aspect. The strengths and weaknesses of classroom design with regards to behaviour and concentration of pupils with BSED were identified, showing how they could be improved. Conclusions on each design aspect aided refinement of the final results: a proposal of complimentary regulations. Some aspects of the final results did not have sufficient evidence to support a specific regulation being recommended. For example, proposing an artificial lighting system of a classroom would need further testing and technical knowledge. However, the regulations proposed have met the original aim to be more specific; adding details that were dismissed vaguely in current regulations. They are formatted to be understood efficiently under specific design headings. Further investigation of supplying catalogues of furnishings and artificial lighting could be made. Overall, there was success in proposing a model classroom that explicitly displays connections between design and aiding concentration and learning of pupils with BSED. Feedback from Jesse Street PRU was positive with general agreement on the regulations proposed and how the needs of BSED pupils with respect to each design aspect were carefully considered. â&#x20AC;&#x153;It is clear that you have put a lot of consideration into the needs of the young people but also the fact that there is a distinct need for the unit to be a very controlled and positive environment.â&#x20AC;?89 Some contradicting opinions arose with regards to classroom sizing; the Headteacher believes minimising space for movement results in better behaviour, whilst the proposal was opposite. Special appraisal was given towards the incorporation of acoustics, visual range and natural ventilation all within one form, which could conclude that the proposed model classroom was a success.

88 89

Appendix I Appendix V

Certain limitations were reached when conducting research for the case studies. Feedback from pupils was difficult to obtain as only the short terms effects of their environment could be assessed. Pupils with BSED are generally reserved and difficult to engage with, thus only responses from a simple closed questionnaire could be obtained. This meant student satisfaction measured in all case studies were heavily reliant on information provided by staff. To improve the regulations further, groups of BSED pupils would be taught in a classroom environment similar to the proposed model to test each design aspect. Feedback on each area would be taken to see the effect on behaviour. The results would narrow down more subjective areas such as colour and types of artificial lighting. The regulations would also be sent to several architects to gain feedback on the format and specificity. Through feedback from the local PRU it can be concluded that the aim of this dissertation has been successfully achieved but could be further refined and critiqued by Architectural Practices. Architects in the future should be able to design efficiently for pupils with BSED, knowing the effects particular design aspects will have on their behaviour. Government Design Regulations should provide the tools to create aspirational spaces and not just supply the basic adequacies.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Brubaker, C.W. (1998) Planning and designing schools. New York: McGraw-Hill. Breathing Buildings. Breathing Buildings Ltd. Registered in England and Wales., n.d. Web. 2008 <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breathingbuildings.com%2Fmedia%2F33722%2Fmonkseaton_case_study>. Buddensiek, W. (2001) Schule Future Oriented learning in the houses of learning, Gottingen: Werstatt. Charlton, T & Kenneth, D. (1989) Managing Misbehaviour: Strategies for Effective Management of Behaviour in Schools. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education. Department for Children, Schools and Families (2008) Building Bulletin 102: Designing for Disabled Children and Children with Special Educational Needs: Guidance for Mainstream and Special Schools. Norwich: TSO Department for Education.â&#x20AC;?Statistical First releaseâ&#x20AC;? Department for Education. Sanctuary Buildings,30July13.Web.8Sept14 <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225699/SFR30-2013_Text.pdf > Department for Education. "Pupil Referral Units." The National Archives. UK Government Web Archives, 18 July 12. Web. 7 Sept. 2014. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.education.gov.uk%2Fvocabularies%2Feducationtermsandtags%2F945>. Department for Education and Skills (2007) Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units: Accommodation Requirements and Design Guidance: Information for Local Authorities, Teachers-in-charge and Management Committees. Norwich: TSO. Douglas Silas Solicitors. "Emotional & Behavioural Difficulties (EBD)."Www.SpecialEducationalNeeds.co.uk. Special Educational Needs, 2005. Web. 8 Sept. 2014. <http://www.specialeducationalneeds.co.uk/emotional--behaviouraldifficulties-ebd.html>. Engelbrecht, K. (2003) The impact of color on learning. Chicago, IL: Perkins & Will. Engle, O., & Dahlmann, J. (2001) Padagogische Architektur [Educational Architecture], Unpublished thesis submitted to the State Examination Office for State Examinations at Schools in Cologne as parts of the first state examination for special needs education. University of Cologne, Germany. Garner, P. (2000) "Pupil Referral Units: A Policy and Practice Paradox." ISEC 2000. Nottingham Trent Univeristy, Web. 07 Sept. 2014. <http://www.isec2000.org.uk/abstracts/papers_g/garner_1.htm>. Glamox. "Classrooms." Glamox Luxo Lighting, n.d. Web. 11 Jan. 2015. <http://glamox.com/uk/solutions/test-small-classroom>. Hedge, A. (2000) Where are we in understanding the effect of where we are? Ergonomics, 1019-1029. Hertzberger, H. (2008) Space and Learning: Rotterdam: 010 Publishers Kopec, D. (2006) Environmental Psychology for Design. New York: Fairchild Lang, D. (1996) Essential criteria for an ideal learning environment. Center for Architecture and Education. Nicholls, N. (2009) "Futuristic New School Unveiled." Futuristic New School Officially Unveiled. North Tyneside Council, Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http://www.northtyneside.gov.uk/browse-display.shtml?p_ID=510206&p_subjectCategory=4>. Raynham, P (2013) SLL Code for Lighting. S.l.: CIBSE.

Rittelmeyer, C. (1994) Schulbaten positive gestalen: Wie Schuler Farben und Formen erleben. [Positive School Design: How pupils experience colour and form], Wiesbaden:Bauverlag. Riddi Schools. "Brochure 5." Specifinder. Ridi Schools, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http://specifinder.com/brochures/5412_pdf32.pdf>. Rohles, F.H. (1975) Humidity, human factors and the energy shortage. Ashrae Transactions. Santamouris, M (2008) "Experimental Investigation of the Air Flow and Indoor Carbon Dioxide Concentration in Classrooms with Intermittent Natural Ventilation." Energy and Buildings 40.10 1883-843. Schoff, L. (2014) Light Levels in Schools Interior and Exterior (n.d.): n. pag. E2 Energy Solutions. E2 Energy Solutions. Web. 6 Jan. 2014. Sinofsky, E.R. & Knirck, F.G. (1981) "Choose the Right Color for your Learning Style." Instructional Innovator. Sorrell, John, and Frances Sorrell (2005) Joinedupdesignforschools. London: Merrell. Theatres Trust. "Lighting Systems in Schools." The Theatres Trust. The Theatres Trust, n.d. Web. 6 Jan. 2015. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theatrestrust.org.uk%2Fstore%2Fassets%2F0000%2F4241%2FDCSF_LightingSystemsinSchools_Sta ndardspecifications_4.>. Troussier, B., et al. (1999) Comparative Study of different kinds of furniture among children, Ergonomics. Ulrich, R. S. (1983). Aesthetic and affective response to the natural environment. In I. Altman and J. F. Wohlwill, Eds. Human Behavior and Environment: Advances in Theory and Research, 6, 85-125. NY: Plenum. Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A. and Zelson, M. (1991) Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11: 201-230. Walden, R. (2009) Schools for the Future: Design Proposal from Architectural Psychology, Hogreefe. West, M.J. (1985) Landscape and stress response in the prison environment. M.L.A. thesis. Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Winterbottom, M, and Wilkins, A. (2009) "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology 63-75.

IMAGE INDEX Table 1. Department for Children, Schools and Families, Designing for Disabled Children and Children with Special Educational Needs: Guidance for Mainstream and Special Schools. Norwich: TSO, 2008, 198, Web. Fig. 1 The Ate Trust Example of Lighting Control Model with Daylight Sensors in classroom http://www.theatrestrust.org.uk/store/assets/0000/4241/DCSF_LightingSystemsinSchools_Standardspecifications_4.pdf, p. 13. Web. Fig. 2 Glare on Matt and Interactive White Boards Winterbottom, Mark, and Wilkins, Arnold "Lighting and Discomfort in the Classroom." Journal of Environmental Psychology (2009): 63-75. Web. Fig. 3 Requirements of illuminance in schools according to European Norm AN 12464-1since (2003) http://www.lightinglab.fi/IEAAnnex45/publications/Technical_reports/lighting_in_schools.pdf, p.1. Web. Fig. 4 Palettes of colours that incorporate research by Kopec, Engelbracht and Brubaker Author’s own Fig. 5 Diagram showing Creekmore’s Categories of Wall Display, Fig. 6 Exploration of Seating Author’s own Fig. 7 Herman Hertzberger’s Unarticulated and Articulated Space Diagrams Hertzberger, Herman. Space and Learning: Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2008, 24, Print. Fig. 8 The L Shaped Classroom, Fig. 9 Sectional Diagram showing Kopec’s ideas Author’s own Figs. 10 -18 Photographs and Diagrams of Jesse Street PRU Author’s own Figs. 19, 21, 25-28 Interior and Exteriors of Blueprint PRU http://www.blueprint.org.uk/gallery.htm, Web. Figs. 20, 22-24 Plans, sections and conceptual drawings of Blueprint PRU Supplied by ADP Architects via email. Fig. 29 Monkseaton High School Exterior http://slaterjackson.co.uk/cms/uploads/images/mhs2.jp, Web. Fig. 30 Monkseaton High School Interior http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Education/Pix/pictures/2010/05/17/save-our-technology-main.jpg, Web. Fig. 31 Monkseaton High School Exterior http://www.urbanrealm.com/images/news/news_1851.jpg, Web. Fig. 32-33 Furnishing in Classrooms http://www.splusb.co.uk/educational-products/gallery/monkseaton-high-school, Web. Fig. 34 Open Plan, high ceilinged Classroom https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4126/5102076574_01e50f017d.jpg, Web. Fig. 35 Natural Ventilation Diagrams from Breathable Buildings http://www.breathingbuildings.com/media/33722/monkseaton_case_study.pdf, p. 2, Web.

APPENDICES APPENDIX I SEMI-STRUCTURED PHONE INTERVIEW ELEANOR SPARROW, ADP ARCHITECTS 1. Did you find existing government regulations useful? Was information on the design of PRUs specific enough? This documentation gives the most minimal information, for what seems like “cabin like” architecture. The focus is on transforming old spaces in to PRUs rather than the new build projects that are being commissioned more recently. Quotations used to describe “Learning Environments for Pupil Referral Units.” “Basics of what is needed in pupil referral unit.” “Of lowest possible adequacy.” “Not that useful.” “Not aspirational.” 2. Did something else drive inspiration behind the design of Blueprint PRU? Working with the Head Teacher and staff made the project much more exciting, he was driven to create an aspirational learning space. This was more useful than government documentation. The Head Teacher had very specific ideas about the atmosphere and concept of the school as a whole. 3. Tell me more about the design of Ventilation in the school. The school is completely naturally ventilated, designed to have ventilation from two directions but the consequences of natural ventilation were first considered.; opening windows can result in disturbing background noise , intrusive noise can enter the classroom, causing distractions. The site planning was carefully considered, the site was ideal; far away from busy roads and the public. 4. What colours were decided upon in the unit and why? The Head Teacher was very keen on bright vibrant colours, to create a happy and positive environment. 5. How many pupils was the school designed for? 40 pupils, but many more pupils could attend. The size of classrooms are much larger than the recommended sizes within government regulations. 6. Tell me more about the overall design of the school. The school is designed around clusters, avoiding corridors and feeling non institutional or school like. The shape allows for external areas and separate exits between key stages to avoid conflict of pupils. The design to begin with was an experimental design to create a Blueprint for future PRUs and hence the name of the school. 7. Were pupils involved in the design process? The pupils were not formally consulted about the design of the unit. Time was spent chatting to teaching staff and pupils to understand needs and aspirations for the new building. I think it was quite important that individual students didn’t invest too much in the project, as this isn’t intended to be their permanent school, and one of the main roles of PRU is to support students and work with them so that they are ready to go back into mainstream school. 8. Would displaying the final proposal of regulations in a table be a suitable format? Yes, this would give clear information, particularly if separated with regards to design categories.

APPENDIX II PERSONAL SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS PHILIP HANNAH: HEAD TEACHER, JESSE STREET PRU & KIRSTY SHEERAN, MEDIA AND ENGLISH TEACHER

1.How long are pupils referred to this unit for? The main focus is on getting pupils back in to school, so usually for a maximum of 8 weeks. They are then sent back to their original schools, having been reconditioned. The unit is in touch with surrounding local schools who refer their pupils when behaviour is uncontrollable. 2. What is a general school day like? Lessons are planned to an ordinary school day- the place is all about getting them back in to a school environment, everything is planned to ease them back in to mainstream education. This includes five, one hour lessons in the day, a break and a lunch. 3. Is there a gender bias? 80 per cent of pupils are boys- something to look in to- can things be more gender specific. Only recently has the number of female pupils risen from 10-20 per cent. 4. How is Security controlled? The entrance is key fobbed, with the reception by the entrance. Once pupils are in for the day they are not allowed outside except for physical education/sport activities. Lunch and breaks are outside of classrooms in the central atrium like space. 5. Who Controls the layout of Desks and seating? Furniture is arranged to how the teacher likes to teach, a contrast can be seen in two classrooms layouts. This lead to further questioning of two different Teachers: 6. Why have you chosen to arrange your classroom like this? One teacher preferred to group tables three, to encourage group work and feels this will help them ease back in to mainstream education as this is how most secondary schools set up their classrooms. Another teacher preferred having six separate desks, believing that pupils will focus more sitting alone, with less distractions. 7. What are pupils taught in an average week? Pupils will spend the whole day in the one classroom, being taught a variety of subjects, English, Maths, PSHE, art, Media, Sport etc. Unless they are timetabled for Food or Design Technology which are specially facilitated classrooms. 8. Tell me more about the Design Changes that took place over Summer. The classrooms used to be connected with small rooms accessible by a classroom on each side, basically to send pupils out of the classroom- a flexible, private space. Removing this space allowed for more room in the classroom, less cramped and less irritability. The replacement was one individual separate room for the whole P.R.U as they felt the others were not being used much. They prefer using the central atrium space- a flexible space, used for dining and breaks, with fixed chairs and tables, and loose chairs, two pool tables and books and recourses. Student work is exhibited on all the walls. This space was improved by opening up what was two separate rooms, again creating larger space.

The only problem with this space is the lack of natural light, small windows line the very top of the walls. The room is very much artificially lit. As the changes were new when the unit was visited, feedback from a teacher about the design changes was requested via email. One teacher responded with: ‘Prior to the Summer break my class room was small and disjointed. As a media teacher PC’s were spread around the room, which made it very difficult to support students during lesson, mainly as you could only work with one student at a time.’ ‘As a result of the improvements to my room I can support/work with several students at once and the learning environment is far more suitable. Given the nature of our students, a large cupboard was a constant draw for them – be that to hide in or for the curiosity of what it contained – this is no longer a concern.’ ‘I am now in a position where I can sit students in two large groups – which is a huge bonus!’ 9. Where do pupils store their belongings? Pupils leave all of their work in the classroom- each have an individual tray and coats can be placed on hooks or on chairs. Most pupils do not- as they do not need to- bring a bag, so safety of possessions is not an issue. All equipment for work is provided by the unit, writing equipment, stationary, paper etc. As pupils are not in the unit for more than 8 weeks generally, storage was a different issue, this is probably something that would need more emphasis in a long term PRU. 10. How are internal conditions in terms of ventilation and temperature within the classroom? No AC, or design of natural ventilation system. Generally a very “stuffy” classroom and windows have to be opened almost all year. Six computers emitt heat along with 7-8 people being in a room no more than 28m squared; there needs to be a better ventilation system. Pupils become very irritable, especially in summer. Pupils described to become “restless and tired.” 11. Are there any external sounds that distract pupils? PRU is next to a very busy main road and sounds can be heard- however pupils are only distracted if something particularly loud like an ambulance/policecar/ fire engine etc. drives past. Sounds from outside the classroom in the atrium, central area can be distracting, ie. If a child is misbehaving and decides to go in their- shouting, swearing, throwing things etc. Carpeted classrooms really stop any disruptions – minimises intrusive sound, making it easier for pupils to settle down at start of class. 12. Does any Vandalism Occur? Only vandalism that occurs is etching on to desks, in the toilets etc, places where there is little or no supervision. 13. How are pupils that are misbehaving generally handled? Staff are trained and are allowed to physically restrain but this is the last resort, usually they will be kicked out of classroom, or more often walk out by themselves. Having padded rooms and external areas are a good idea. Chess as an activity has been found to help to calm pupils down.

APPENDIX III SEMI-STRUCTURED PHONE INTERVIEW HEADTEACHER DAVE JONES, BLUEPRINT PRU 1. Did Blueprint exist in another building prior to the new building? Yes , In 2008 in four temporary huts that overlooked a playing field. 2. If yes, have you found that the behaviour of pupils in general has improved since moving in to Blueprint school? Absolutely, much more positive and doesn’t feel like a school anymore. Pupils and staff enjoy the space much more. 3. How long do pupils usually stay for? From a few months to two years depending on their situation. Usually Year 8-9s stay 2-3 months and year 11 (later years) will stay for one year + 4. How many pupils is there per classroom? Maximum of 6, but usually less than this. Overall there are 36 pupils but can facilitate for 50 realistically with the amount of room there is. It is much larger than most PRUs 5. Tell me more about the design of Natural Ventilation within the school. Works well with no complaints. Control of window opening was originally for pupils but this lead to misbehaviour; windows now have guards and control is only for teachers. 6. Is the design of the natural ventilation within classrooms effective? Yes, sloping roof and ventilation windows work effectively. 7. How have pupils responded to the internal temperature- is it comfortable or have there been complaints? There was a problem with underfloor heating but this has been resolved. It caused overheating in certain classrooms, creating difficult in gaining even temperature around the building. 8. Are there particular classrooms that seem to be warmer or colder than other, affecting student behaviour? They are all the same since the heating has been fixed. 9. Do you find that opening the windows lets in any background noise? No, the unit is in a very secluded area. Care needs to be taken when designing windows so they can only be opened so far- otherwise pupils will try and escape through window. Classrooms are slightly over glazed causing problems with Glare which has troubled – resolved by adding in roller blinds which work much better. The blinds allow light and views out, but no views in. 10. Is a mixture of natural lighting and artificial lighting used? Yes, natural lighting used as much as possible. Fundamental to have artificial lighting fixed to the ceiling, mounted and unreachable. Fluorescent strip lighting is used in classrooms and adjustable spot lights used in central space. (Not adjustable in classrooms) 11. Do pupils have control over the lighting of classrooms? No- teachers have complete control, minimising opportunity for misbehaviour. 12. Do Windows have views out? Yes – landscaped natural surroundings and courtyard- external areas and view in to another half of school. Teaching classrooms all have very similar views- keeping classrooms as regular and same as possible to stop “change” which can deeply affect pupils with BSED.

13. Do pupils have space to display their work in classrooms? Which rooms? How are they exhibited? Yes but within a very strict layout in classrooms, only certain spaces are allocated solely towards display of work. Generally pupils are not proud of work, they prefer to have their own portfolio. Displays would need to be frequently changed as the pupils who are in the school are constantly changing. 14. What inspired you to choose the colours you did as bright colours were mentioned by ADP Architects. Which colours were they? Noticed any effect or comments from children? Blue greens and purples are colour coded- bright colours have a positive friendly effect. As well as colour coding different areas – key stages and certain walls have notices etc. A two tone colour floor- taking pictures of architectural aspects became art to be placed on walls that the kids really enjoy – rather than displaying work. Feels more like a college, preparing them for their next stage in life- treating and giving them independence and responsibility (respect) will result in better behaviour. 15. Is the furniture supplied specific to each subject; in terms of the vocational subject teaching rooms? All teaching rooms and exactly the same- the furnishing, layout, colour, form and views. Vocational subject rooms are very specialised- creating the feeling of a working environment. 16. What is furniture like in normal teaching classrooms- any comments from students? Is it comfortable, adjustable? One Central circular table to stop children focussing on one wall all the time and increases student pupil interaction. Chairs are robust and heavy but comfortable- they are not adjustable. 17. What kind of colours are used within teaching classrooms Light whites in the general teaching classroom and various colours in vocational classrooms. 21. Anything else about interiors? All Walls are dry wipe rather than having a designated white board area- stops there from becoming just one focused teaching space which also helps with the circular table in the centre of the classrooms- constant pupil teacher interaction, there is no-where to hide. 22. What lead to the sloped roof design idea- was this to do with ventilation? For Ventilation purposes soley. Timber used for ceiling treatment to make it not to feel like school, schools often use normal polystyrene like roof tiles. The timber feels, solid and warm “Making it feel more like it’s not a school.” 23. Most classrooms are rectangular- is there a reason for not articulating the space? Creating alchoves will children a place to hide, reducing children’s decisions means they will make less poor decisions and their behaviour will be better. “If I don’t want to learn I will hide here.” Curved Walls prevent children from sneaking out and scaring people, maximum visual access.

APPENDIX IV QUESTIONAIRE RESPONSES: FIVE PUPILS FROM JESSE STREET PRU

1.How old are You? 12 40%

13 60%

2. Do your prefer to work near the window in natural light? YES 60%

NO 40%

3. Do you find the view outside distracting? YES 40%

NO 60%

4. Once distracted do you find it difficult to gain concentration again? YES 20%

NO 80%

5. Do you ever find it difficult to hear the teacher? YES 0%

NO 100%

6. Do you like to see your work displayed? YES 20%

NO 80%

7. Do you find the seating comfortable? YES 80%

NO 20%

8. Would you prefer the seating if it was adjustable? YES 60%

NO 40%

9. Would you rather have one activity within a lesson, or several that you can switch to? ONE 80% SEVERAL 20%

10. How do you feel about the number of pupils you study with in the classroom? BETTER WHEN THERE IS LESS (2-3) 80%

BETTER WHEN THERE IS MORE (4-6) 20%

11. Would you prefer to have your own personal desk with storage? YES 60%

NO 40%

APPENDIX V FEEDBACK ON PROPOSED REGULATIONS PHILIP HANNAH, HEADTEACHER JESSE STREET PRU Overall I think the thought you have put into the proposed regulations really does reflect the needs of service such as ours at BCPRU, it is clear that you have put a lot of consideration into the needs of the young people but also the fact that there is a distinct need for the unit to be a very controlled and positive environment. Some examples which I particularly like include: Lighting A clear understanding of the need for as much natural light as possible, with the capacity for staff to readily control the amount of light in the learning environments, it’s particularly worth noting that this is ‘tamper proof’ as far as the students are concerned, as sadly, at times this can be an issues for some young people when they are in crisis. Furnishings and Layout The need for flexibility is well reflected in your proposals, it is clear that the more comfortable and welcoming the environment is the more likely it is that young people will engage positively in lessons, once again a more ‘natural’ feel to the environment is preferable. I like the fact you have allowed for different table layouts, the ever changing cohort of many PRU’ means that the group dynamics of the different class groups can change on a regular basis, thus there is a distinct need for flexibility. Regarding space in classrooms, I believe that the rooms should in relative terms be small and not allow for too much movement in the rooms. Colour I agree wholeheartedly with your choices here, pale, more neutral colours are preferred, ideally in more natural tones and ideally providing a ‘matte’ finish. Walls / Form I very much like your proposal of the room shape being larger at the ‘front’ of the classroom, thereby making it the focal point of the room itself. The more space there is at the front of the room to attract the attention of the students and be as visually stimulating as possible, the better. Such space could be used to display a variety of key information for the students. I also like the fact that you accounted for the need for there to be ample space for students to display their own work, this can be a very powerful motivational tool for many young people. I especially like that you have accounted for how sound carries around the classroom, this is a very nice touch. As you no doubt are aware, the students at PRUs can be challenging and therefore relatively loud at times, that you have taken this into consideration reflects the amount of thought you have put into your work.