Seeking the Third Teacher: Re-mediating Spatial Biases for Diverse Disabilities by zoe-yeoh

S C H O O L O F D E S I G N A N D B U I LT E N V I R O N M E N T D I S C I P L I N E O F A R C H I T E C T U R E

S E E K I N G

T H E

T H I R D

T E A C H E R

RE-MEDIATING SPATIAL BIASES FOR DIVERSE DISABILITIES

S C H O O L O F D E S I G N A N D B U I LT E N V I R O N M E N T D I S C I P L I N E O F A R C H I T E C T U R E

S E E K I N G

T H E

T H I R D

T E A C H E R

RE-MEDIATING SPATIAL BIASES FOR DIVERSE DISABILITIES

T H I S T H E S I S I S P R E S E N T E D F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R C H I T E C T U R E O F C U R T I N U N I V E R S I T Y

Z O E

Y E O H

1 9 0 5 4 7 0 8

F I N A L

T H E S I S

P R O J E C T

A R C H I T E C T U R A L T H E S I S A R C H 6 0 0 6

T H E S I S

W O R D

T Y P E

C O U N T

S U P E R V I S O R

U N I T C O O R D I N A T O R D A T E O F S U B M I S S I O N

R E P O R T P R O J E C T

7 0 D E S I G N 3 0 % W R I T T E N 7 6 8 1 D R . C H A M I L A S U B A S I N G H E A R A C H C H I L A G E R E E N A 2 6

D O N

T I W A R I

O C T O B E R

2 0 2 1

H O W

C A N

S P A T I A L

E N V I R O N M E N T A L K - 6

E X C L U S I V I T Y J U S T I C E

E D U C A T I O N A L

A C H I E V E

W I T H I N

S E T T I N G S

D E C L A R A T I O N

I declare that this thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published by any other person except where due acknowledgment has been made. The following sections are adapted from my previous written work in the unit Thesis Preparation: EDUCATION INCLUSIVITY: REDEFINING SPATIAL EXCLUSIVITY (Yeoh 2021) and are edited for this report:

• • • • • • • •

Abstract Significance Aims & Objectives Background (elements) Methodology Architectural Biases Environmental Behavioral Theories Inclusive Education

Z O E

Y E O H

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T

I would love to thank everybody who has supported me throughout completing the most fulfilling milestones of my degree this past year. The stressful times would not have been as enjoyable without sharing all the late nights, coffee runs and whining with all of you. First and foremost, I would like to thank my family for always being the backbone to my success and throughout my degree. I thank my parents, Ben and Connie, for the endless encouragement especially when times were rough. I thank my sister Jill for giving up one of her bedrooms to let me camp for a few nights when I need a change in environment and offering up her cats for cuddles. To my supervisor, Dr Chamila Subasinghe Arachchilage Don, thank you for the constant positive energy all the time and guiding me throughout this whole process. I appreciate all the encouragement (and toughness at times) for pushing me and my project to reach its full potential. I hope to do you proud in the outside world. To my thesis crew, thank you for making this process as fun as possible. Thank you for all the honest feedback and getting me through every internalized breakdown I’ve had. Everyone here will end up doing great things in life, and I can’t wait to see where we all end up. Drinks after 3! To Dexter, thank you for being a great friend and supporting me through this journey. Thank you for all the brain-storm sessions and feedback, you were one of my closest companions that have seen me through this project. I appreciate you taking care of me and for all the fried rice offers. Finally, to my other half, Tin. Thank you for always believing in me, taking care of me and supporting me when I am mentally drained. You always brought positivity into my life, and I apologize for all the times I was a tad bit snappy. You mean a lot to me and I always appreciate everything you have done for me (especially the bubble tea runs). This has been a wonderful journey and well I am excited for what’s next to come, a little part of me is saddened to part ways with the last 5 years. There are many more that I haven’t mentioned but have a close place in my heart for being such great friends and I would love everyone one of you to know how much I appreciate you guys. From the bottom of my heart, once again for the last time (for now), Thank you!

T h i s

p a g e

h a s

b e e n

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

l e f t

b l a n k

C O N T E N T S P A R T

I N T R O D U C T I O N ABSTRACT SIGNIFICANCE AIMS & OBJECTIVES BACKGROUND METHODOLOGY & METHODS

P A R T

I I

1 3

E N V I R O N M E N T A L J U S T I C E : T O W A R D S A M O R E I N C L U S I V E

S O C I E T Y

LITERATURE REVIEW DISCOURSE ANALYSIS PRECEDENT STUDIES

P A R T

I I I

A R C H I T E C T U R E

O F

P E D A G O G I C A L

S P A C E S

3 5

INCLUSIVE EDUCATION SPATIAL ENVIRONMENT OF PROGRESSIVE EDUCATION MODELS

P A R T S I T E

I V

4 7

SITE SELECTION RATIONALE SITE ANALYSIS

P A R T

6 1

S E N S E S C A P E : A N E T W O R K F O R

I N D E P E N D A N C E

DESIGN PRINCIPLES / CRITERIA

P A R T T H E

V I

T H I R D

T E A C H E R

7 5

DESIGN OUTCOME

P A R T

V I I

R E F E R E N C E S

1 0 9

REFERENCE LIST

P A R T

V I I

A P P E N D I X

DESIGN PROGRESS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS DATA SELECTION INDEX SITE SELECTION - NEEDS ASSESSMENT LOG BOOK

1 1 5

T h i s

p a g e

h a s

b e e n

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

l e f t

b l a n k

G L O S S A R Y T E R M S

O F

INCLUSIVE DESIGN

An umbrella term for the broad collection of approaches, methods, and practices for designing inclusively (Keates and Clarkson 2004)

DISABILITY

A condition of the body or mind that make it more difficult for a person to do certain activities and interact with the world around them due to their specific impairments, such as those who are physically, sensorially, intellectually or neurologically disabled (CDC 2020)

NEURODIVERGENT

One whose neurological development and state are atypical, usually viewed as abnormal or extreme. The term was coined as an opposite for “neurotypical” and applies to disabilities and disorders such as Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, Tourette’s, OCD, Mental Health Etc. (Disabled World 2021)

NEURODIVERSITY

An approach to disability that argues for diverse neurological conditions as a result in a variation in human gene (Disabled World 2021)

NEUROTYPICAL

Neurologically typical with the typical range for human neurology understood by society as “regular” functioning (Disabled World 2021)

P A R T

I N T R O D U C T I O N

A B S T R A C T

Many people will encounter disability in their lifetime, either from themselves or with close family and friends. At any second, anybody could become disabled for a variety of reasons such as from birth, aging or accidents. While some people have more obvious impairments that would easily label them as disabled, many also experience “hidden disabilities” that are neurological or psychological and cannot be easily detected. It is crucial then that architecture acts as a prosthesis that can support individuals of all ages and abilities in maximizing their full potential by being more inclusive towards a diversified society. In the architectural realm, inclusivity aims to reduce contextual barriers that exclude and marginalize specific groups to create accessible environments and provide equitable experiences to those who are disabled (Wills et al. 2014). While progressive compared to outdated design models, inclusive architecture or commonly known as universal design (UD) provisions are often limited to conforming to codes and legislation with little regard towards spatial qualities. UD also presents various unnecessary difficulties for many users and otherwise only cater for specific types of impairments. This creates biased solutions that leave certain groups unaccommodated for, in which particularly excluded are non-physically obvious disabilities. ‘Inclusivity’ as a design ideology is not an unfamiliar concept, however, it is very much an important one. This is as the product of design manifested through spatial qualities directly impact the lived experiences of a large population. As childhood provides a crucial window for changing cultural perception of disability, inclusive early learning environments are steppingstones in progressing society towards accepting and normalizing diversity. In response, this research calls for a paradigm shift to the way universality is addressed within the built environment by constructing a framework that aims to eradicate existing biases and re-mediate design strategies to create an accessible learning environment for all types of disabilities. While the research will encompass total inclusivity for all disabled communities, particular focus is placed on sensory related disabilities and neurodivergent disorders such as those who are deaf, blind, autistic or have other sensory processing disorders. The framework will be implemented within the design of a proposed inclusive school for K-6 education, where the needs of disabled students will be championed and holistically integrated within mainstream education settings.

S I G N I F I C A N C E As the scope of sensory and neurological disorders are less distinguished within UD, this research proposes a counteraction to existing biased practices of universality that will benefit society by improving the way architecture impacts the everyday lived experiences of marginalized communities. The research focusing on educational inclusivity is important to challenge the normalization of exclusionary school systems and foster environments where disabled students of all backgrounds can access the same treatment and fair learning experiences.

A I M & O B J E C T I V E S Inclusive design compels a paradigm shift in design culture to progress from existing exclusionary standards to create environments that maximize accessibility and usability to all members of society. However, a major gap in current standardized practices of Universal Design (UD) lies in its systemic biases that only cater towards selected types of disabilities – that mostly being mobility and is arguably inadequate in offering equal prominence to include nonphysically obvious disabilities such as sensoryrelated impairments and neurodivergent groups (Wills 2016). The aim of this study is to develop a framework that challenges existing exclusionary systems towards certain disabilities in order to create an inclusive learning environment for K-6 Education through “sensescapes”.

c o d e s

d e s i g n e x c l u s i o n s

s p e c i a l e d

p a r a d o x e s

m a i n s t r e a m

r e q u i r e m e n t s

Figure 1.1: A Multi-faceted study embodying 3 layers of research: spatial, pedagogical and disability

P e d a g o g i c a l m o d e l

S p a t i a l m o d e l

D i s a b i l i t y m o d e l

To review existing education models and evaluate potential inclusion strategies to combine special education requirements within mainstream schools

To evaluate the architectural biases that exist within current applications of UD

To construct a framework that reconciles the paradoxes between specific disability requirements to maximize accessibility and usability in education settings

•

Investigate issues faced by the disabled community within mainstream school settings Identify and compare design requirements and specific provisions offered in Special Education facilities

•

Review and evaluate the effectiveness of UD guidelines

•

Identify design exclusions that marginalize specific groups of individuals from participating in ordinary activities

•

Identify and compare the design paradoxes between specific spatial and functional requirements of each type of impairment

•

Identify strategies that accommodate and complement different special needs requirements

“INCLUSION IS NOT ABOUT PRODUCING SOLUTIONS TO MEET A PA RT I C U L A R R A N G E O F NEEDS. IT IS ABOUT A CHANGE IN OUR THINKING” - (CLARKSON ET AL. 2014, 71)

B A C K G R O U N D As architecture strives to become an increasingly enlightened discipline, inclusivity as a design ideology has begun to emerge within discourses in the built environment in contribution to building a more progressive society. Globally, approximately 15% of the population is affected by some form of disability, that being physical, sensory, cognitive or any other difficulties that exceed ‘regular’ functioning (WHO 2011). The impact of the everyday lived experience of disabled communities emphasizes the importance behind inclusivity asserting itself as a dominant ideology that is moving “from margin to the mainstream of considerations” (Donahue and Gheerawo 2007, 4). While inclusivity is not unprecedented, its position in the built environment is arguably limited to conforming to building codes and legislations rather than perceiving it as being central to good design (Barrett and Barrett, RIbaVideo 2009). Despite the goals of UD being distinctly positive, major gaps are still present in the system where certain disabilities, specifically those which are not physically obvious such as sensory related impairments and neurodivergent disorders, encounter issues that are often not given the same level of prominence and resolution as other disabilities (Goldsmith and Dezart 2000). Nevertheless, efforts aimed at ‘integration’ are often mistaken with being inclusive and can be detrimental to an individual’s wellbeing if failing to modify existing systems to overcome barriers for all to participate collectively (Winance 2013). As such, the social model distinguishes between impairment and disability to argue that while impairment is a problem in a body function or structure, disability is much rather the result of the environment and the obstacles it creates (Winance 2013). Therefore, this conceptualization weighs heavy on the built environment and declares the need to redefine how inclusivity is perceived in architecture in order to liberate it from its existing exclusionary biases and create more accessible environments towards all types of disabilities.

E X C L U S I O N Occurs when students directly or indirectly are excluded access to education in any form

S E G R E G A T I O N Occurs when education of students with disabilities is provided in separate environments in isolation from student without disabilities

I N T E G R A T I O N Placing students with disabilities in mainstream educational institutions as long as they are able to adjust to standardized requirements of existing institutions

I N C L U S I O N Systemic reform embodying changes and modification in the content, methods, approaches and strategies in education to overcome barriers with a vision serving to provide all students with an equitable and participatory learning experience

Figure 1.2 : Understanding Inclusive Design adapted from Hehir et al. (2016)

M E T H O D O L O G Y

Hazelwood School

House for Disabled People’s Organisation

Western Autistic School

The research was constructed to be human-centric and used qualitative research to understand the perspectives of disabled communities. It was important that the selected material centered on the everyday lived experiences of disabled individuals to ensure their narratives be prioritized and not be detracted by those of medical experts or family members.

Innovation

Accessibility

Typology

nte

Mo tion ies uca Ed osoph l phi

l rsaal iivveers n u n ng gu issttiin e E ne Exxi ideelliin d i u g gu

Understanding perspective of users

4 Categorization of themes 3 Coding of themes

2 Identification of keywords

I14

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

Collection of data sources

sen

c spe

doc

ger

ima

y I16

spe

n atio

pro

ion ept

gs gs

ron nvi

rnin

lea

s eos

vid

I19

ativ

enc

pet

com

ility

sib

ces

c ina

I20

iga

ired cqu

f-a

sel

tion

I21

ski

I22

stim

ior

a beh

tra

vel

nce

ista

ss na

cat

edu

on rati

sep

ie aph

g bio

I18

ent

nav

blo

ene

siv

lu inc

neg

vlo

I17

nic

c per

ries

a ent

I15

ture

ea al f

com

Key research method used to analyse the particular focus group for more in-depth investigation on topics and patterns surrounding their opinions, knowledge, experiences, and values from a set of qualitative data (Caufield, Jack 2019). 9

ty tivi

log

hno

tec

I23

cro

I10

ada

e ptiv

I24

n pai

I11

n iety atio anx cip i t I12 r pa ial soc I13 nd epe ind

A. DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

T EN D E S EC I PR ALYS AN

orf

ld Wa lia me

-E

gio

afs

ori

ess

nity

com ce

s eed al N i c n e Sp catio u Ed

al ries ent o nm l The o r i a Env avori h Be

LIERATURE REVIEW

s eed al N ents i c e Sp uirem q Re

esi

sa ver

dan

TSS

I25

e pac

Review of well established concepts and theories borrowed from education philosophies, environmental behavioral sciences, and environmental psychology.

A discourse analysis was conducted on several carefully selected data sources: autobiographies, video blogs (vlogs), blogposts, documentaries and videos performed by disabled individuals between 2005 to 2021. The timeframe selected ensured relevancy of the topics discussed by the creators reflect today’s current society. Each source obtained was dissected and its information coded according to their similarities. Each code was then categorized to identify reoccurring themes, topics, ideas, and patterns (Caufield, Jack 2019). The datasets selected covered a range of different disability types with particular focus on sensory related disabilities and neurodivergent disorders such as visually and hearing impairment, autism, ADHD, and other sensory related disorders. A search criterion was developed to filter out sources to determine if the content qualified as a dataset (refer Appendix). The collected data was later categorized to allow comparisons between each disability requirements and their subsequent contradictions (refer Appendix). Discourse analysis was selected as the main research method to analyze the particular focus group and allow more in-depth investigation on topics and patterns surrounding their opinions, knowledge, experiences, and values from a set of qualitative data (Caufield, Jack 2019). While discourse analysis is good in providing flexibility in interpreting datasets and sorting into broader themes, some disadvantages that should be acknowledged include the potential risks of missing nuances in data, and that the data analyzed can be subjective and rely on the researcher’s personal judgement (Caufield, Jack 2019). Therefore, to ensure the data source remains relevant to the research topic, each dataset was reflected on the following questions: 1. Is the author or creator a disabled person? If yes, what kind of disability does the person have? 2. Does the built environment cause the author or creator to personally find difficulty in accessing, navigating, or using a space? If yes, what are the issues identified? If no, what are some of the strategies or features that has improved their experience of a space? 3. What Is the author or creators personal experience with the education system and physical school setting? Is the issue a systematic or physically manifested one?

B. LITERATURE REVIEW Carefully selected literature was reviewed to achieve a more thorough understanding of the following topics: • • • •

Special needs requirements identified from scholarly texts Relevant theories regarding the health and human psychology borrowed from environmental behavioral theories UD and other inclusive guidelines to analyze their strategies and limitations Progressive education models commonly applied in K-6 education systems

The data collected from the literature was reflected upon the evidence extracted from the discourse analysis, providing a layered understanding of the effectiveness of current practices of UD. This revealed the advantages and shortcomings of existing models to help guide the proposal of an improved framework that maximizes usability for types of disabilities.

C. PRECEDENT ANALYSIS Selected precedents identified to be international exemplars of inclusive architecture that exceed basic functional requirements of UD were analyzed. The precedents were dissected based on their programs, spatial configurations, accessibility, and level of inclusivity to uncover how specific architecture interventions (form, color, textures, spatial arrangements, or other innovations) were utilized to produce more inclusive environments.

Identification of keywords

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

• •

Education facilities (Mainstream, SEN, or combined) Health, wellness, or childcare facilities Purpose-built buildings catered towards disability organizations

I14

doc

ure eat

cia

ati

nic

u mm

ries

a ent

I15

spe

vlo

blo

hie

rap

g bio

eos

vid

ity

itiv

s sen

log

hno

tec

Collection of data sources

The selected building typologies were amongst: •

Coding of themes

Hazelwood School

House for Disabled People’s Organisation

Western Autistic School

Innovation

Accessibility

Typology

tion ies uca Ed osoph l phi

I16

spe

I17

I18

ent

s eed al N ents i c e Sp uirem q Re

esi

sa ver

s eed al N i c n e Sp catio u Ed

al ries ent o nm l The o r i a Env avori h Be

ron nvi

rnin

lea

I19

ility

sib

ces

c ina

I20

ired cqu

f-a

sel

tion

iga

nav

enc

pet

com

ativ

neg

ene

siv

lu inc

ion ept

c per

l rsaal iivveers n u n ng gu issttiin e E ne Exxi ideelliin d i u g gu

TSS

y pro

ion

ori

ess

nt Mo

pac

afs

I22

stim

ior

a beh

nce

ista

ss na

cat

edu

on rati

sep

I21

ski

tra

vel

I23

cro

I10

ada

e ptiv

I24

n pai

I11

iety

anx

I25

n atio cip i t r pa ial e soc anc I13 end p e ind

I12

nity

com

LIERATURE REVIEW

ger

elia

-Em

o egi

Understanding perspective of users

Categorization of themes

orf

ld Wa

T EN D E S EC I PR ALYS AN

Review of well established concepts and theories borrowed from education philosophies, environmental behavioral sciences, and environmental psychology.

P A R T

I I

E N V I R O N M E N T A L J U S T I C E : T O W A R D S A M O R E I N C L U S I V E S O C I E T Y

A R C H I T E C T U R A L B I A S E S In the architectural discourse, inclusive design strategies highlight issues of social inclusion to “expand the accommodation of normal provision to facilitate people’s emancipation from artefacts that restrict or prevent access and enjoyment” (Goldmith and Dezart 2000, 2; Vermeersch and Heylighen 2015). The concept of inclusiveness is nowhere new but has grown out of original models such as ‘transgenerational design’ and ‘rehabilitation design’ and have been further developed to encourage a broader inclusion of users. This concept is more familiarly known today as ‘design for all in Europe, Universal Design (UD) in US and Japan and the User Pyramid in the UK (Clarkson et al 2003; Keates and Clarkson 2004). The ‘Universal Pyramid’ depicts the current standardized provisions of UD in the built environment and is used by Goldsmith and Dezart (2000) to critique the unequal distribution of usability within layers of society. The authors reveal that a common flaw apparent within UD is that often only a particular disability is addressed, that mostly being mobility. Cubo Arkitekter and Force4 Architects (2014) criticizes this as being ‘biased solutions’ as there are many other impairments under the special needs classification that require equal attention, wherein frequently ignored are disabilities that are not physically obvious such as sensory-related impairments and neurodivergent disorders. Clarkson et al. (2003) proceed to assess this as ‘design exclusions’ which is consequential to biased approaches of UD and can have detrimental psychological effects and lead to social isolation. Henceforth, an effective inclusive solution requires moving past outdated exclusionary systems by broadening the focus from one particular group to maximize the benefit for as many groups as possible (Wills et al. 2014; Keates and Clarkson 2004). Additionally, several author critique UD against its own claim by highlighting the paradoxes that exists in achieving total universality. Heylighen and Blanchin (2000) argue that many impairments require solutions that may potentially hinder other users, making it difficult to prioritize usability and could result in harming the overall accessibility of a product. A good example is the use of high contrasting lights and colors which are desired for visually challenged individuals to perceive and navigate space but may put considerable stress on individuals with SPD (Heylighen and Blanchin 2000). Nevertheless, Kafka (2018) critiques architecture for being heavily dependent on visual stimulation to engage its users, further denoting the biases within the foundation of design from including people who have specific sensory needs. As the process of experiencing a space is dependent on at least 3 of our senses, thus sensory effects of a particular room can dramatically impact one’s comfort or ability to carry out simple tasks (Wills 2016). In his Ted talk (Downey 2013), renown Blind Architect, Chris Downey urges for architecture to envisage beyond visual cues, and that design is about the relationship between space and function to which textures, smells and sound create ‘atmosphere’. In consensus to that, good architecture should take on a multi-sensory approach as sensory impaired individuals deserve high quality architecture that exceed basic functional needs in which false claims of universality could lead to more damaging consequences through the subjection of ‘architectural discrimination’ (Keates and Clarkson 2004; Goldsmith and Dezert 2000)

INCLUSIVE DESIGN I S A B O U T C U LT U R E AND COGNITION, NOT JUST ABOUT MOBILITY AND DEXTERITY - (CLARKSON ET AL. 2014,9)

Winance (2013) and Heylighen and Bianchin (2000) both provoke that rather than reducing diversity through the unity of universal, the built environment should draw from its ideals to design for pluralism. Nevertheless, the dispute remains unresolved on ways to reconcile the diverse yet specific requirements of disabled individuals and prioritize potential conflicting issues. Therefore, to truly claim ‘inclusivity’, the built environment will need to expand current models of UD to develop a framework that is endowed with qualities and characteristics that service all age or ability.

8 Wheelchair Users (at least 2 assistance)

7 Wheelchair Users (non-independent)

6 Wheelchair Users (independent)

5 Ambulant/ Disabled People

4 Elderly & Infants in push chairs

3 Regular Adult Able-Bodied but in the public realm architects fail them eg. Women

2 Regular Adult Able-bodied

1 Fit & Agile

A: Architects cater well enough for these groups : Building users which can be conveniently accommodated though suitable FigureB1: The Universal Design Pyramid adapted from Goldsmith and Dezart (2000) provisions but are often not A: Architects cater C: Use r s r well e q u enough i r e s p efor c i athese l p r ogroups visions B: Buildings can through suitable provisions but are often not D : R eusers q u i r ewhich s sup p l ebe m conveniently e n t a r y p r o vaccommodated isions

C: Users require special provisions D: Requires supplementary provisions Figure 2.1 : The Universal Design Pyramid adapted from Goldsmith ad Dezart (2000)

E N V I R O N M E N T A L B E H A V I O R A L T H E O R I E S Environmental design theories are crucial when designing for different disabilities as embodied knowledge about the environment involves complex multisensory modalities which have profound effect on health, mood, and performance (Vermeersch and Heylighen 2015). Logan (2021) argues that sensory experiences can play an important role in drawing out unique strengths from disabled individuals such as high intelligence, creativity, leadership, focus, and attention to detail. Contrary to that, poor choices could lead to challenges for these individuals in pattern organization, distractibility, social interaction, and self-regulation. Gaines et al. (2004) theorizes this as being due to the ‘sensory interrogation’ phenomenon which the authors describe as the ability for people to receive information about a space based on all their senses working collectively. However, challenges are present for individuals with sensory processing disorders (SPD) that have problems processing information from several senses at once due to the rapid shifting of attention from different stimuli. Consequently, this may sometimes cause extreme hypersensitive or hyposensitive individuals to react in the form of abnormal behaviors (Gaines et al. 2004). In addition, several researchers explore theories that interrogate the psychology linking space and performance. Foremost, the ‘Theory of Affordances’ originated by James Gibson suggests that the “perceived qualities of an object, feature or change in the immediate surroundings… affect user perceptions and thus their responses are governed by their reading of the environment and the opportunities they receive to their abilities” (Datta 2014, 4). As such, while people are predominantly drawn to scenes that are engaging, it is particularly critical for SPD individuals for self-actualization (Gaines et al. 2010). Barrett and Barrett (2010) henceforth introduced the framework called ‘Positive Places’ as a holistic placemaking approach using sensory experiences to assist people in reaching their full potential by manipulating spatial experiences through capturing the combined stimuli received. Furthermore, individuals who experience impairments to one or more senses will have to depend heavily on their other available senses to navigate independently and conduct everyday activities. In translation into spatial qualities, the ‘Therapeutic Environmental Preference’ theory deciphers the ways in which architectural features can contribute as interventions that affect behavioral qualities, classifying them as having two types: Prosthesis, interventions that serve as an aid and allow greater autonomy, versus diathesis, interventions that hinder access. Therefore, the connection between the psychology and qualities of spaces is made distinct, for which environments when designed can either assist or further suppress an individual’s abilities.

“ONE SHOULD NOT DESIGN FOR THE DIAGNOSIS, B U T R AT H E R T H E B E S T P R E D I C TA B L E U S E R ”

ce s pr o

ory

percep tua l

e n ts

preference

rm impai

INCLUSIVE DESIGN

ental

. social

s e ns

psychologica l

p es sca nd La

ga tio n

me nts

In t

m ron nvi

ory i

rs io

visual im pair

ace s

ory dit

environmental behavioral theories

e pl

ce u ti pe ra

rs rde o s di

positiv

nt e rr o

es .

nc corda

g sin

c of a

Arch itec tur e

ory the

n ri e e exp

ral

rge

ur ne

r pe

se ns

vio

ive

tia l

se ns

spatial design

- (RIEDEL AND MAHOE. 2014, 71)

ity

y hypo-sensitivit

sensory disabilities

itiv

Figure 2.2 : Environmental Design Theories

D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S Our built environment is largely constructed for non-disabled people and present a variety of challenges to which disabled communities have been forced to respond by altering their surroundings to fit their needs. Accessibility and usability within the built environment are often interpreted simply as ‘physical accessibility’ and as such are limitedly perceived as ‘being able to enter a space’ (Rychtarikova, Herssens and Heylighen 2012). Winance (2013, 1339) suggests that a discrepancy exists to which accessibility and access are often misconceived, “whereby accessibility to places and services does not suffice quality access for a particular person”. When designing for sensorial disabilities, often little regards are paid towards spatial experiences that go beyond acoustical and lighting requirement. Nevertheless, deeper considerations when integrated as part of the overall architecture could enhance the overall wellbeing of disabled communities, such as interventions that facilitate lip reading, sign language, ‘orientation and mobility’ (O&M) and sensory seeking and defensive tendencies. Additionally, architectural features could potentially learn from disabled individual’s ways-of-being and capitalize off their heightened sensory skills. For instance, people with vision impairments often use echolocation as an effective means of O&M by extracting sound reflection to map their surrounding which allows them to determine the presence of an object and its corresponding texture, size, and shape (Garcia 2017). In response, architecture can take advantage by integrating design features such as alternating ceiling heights and different wall types that perform as wayfinding techniques that can be both effective and aesthetic. Aside from UD, specialized design guidelines have been established in order to expand on current standardized practices. These guidelines such as Deafspace and ASPECTSS have design criteria that exceed basic requirements of accessibility and are aimed towards enhancing the livelihood of specific disabled communities.

P R I N C I P L E S O F U N I V E R S A L D E S I G N

TOLERANCE FOR ERROR

PERCEPTIBLE INFORMATION

SIMPLE & INTUITIVE

LOW PHYSICAL STRENGTH

APPROPRIATE SIZE & SPACE

EQUITABLE USE

FLEXIBILITY IN USE

1 USABILITY Making it easier to use

People with no disabilities

People with special needs (heights, nationalities, etc.) Elderly people

ACCESSIBILITY Disabled people

Making it easier to use

(legs, arms, visual, aural, etc.)

Making it easier to use

Expanding the range of users (User diversity)

Figure 2.3 : Universal Design adapted from Fuji Film (n.d.)

D E A F S P A C E

Figure 2.4 : Deafspace Principles adapted from Bauman (2010)

2 Deaf people depend on interrelated systems of perception such as visualtactile cues and require 360° spatial awareness that facilitate orientation, way-finding, and communication

SPACE AND PROXIMITY

SENSORY REACH

The Deafspace project originally established by architect Hansel Bauman depicts the basic elements of architectural expressions unique to the deaf experience. The deaf community is “one that is diverse in which many people inhabit a rich sensory world with heightened visual-tactile means of spatial orientation and visual language” (Bauman 2010, 10). As the physical environment presents a critical role in conditioning the sensory aspects of the deaf experience, Bauman has developed over 150 distinct design elements that is addressed though five key principles (Bauman 2010, Gallaudet University n.d.):

Spaces need to be designed to accommodate for visual forms of communication and opportunities to sense movement and feel connected from multiple vantage points

5 As deaf people depend heavily on visual aids, spatial elements such as glare, shadows and color should be designed strategically to reduce eye fatigue and subsequent loss of concentration

Not every person with hearing loss is completely deaf. As such, spaces should reduce reverberation and other sources of background noise that could make speech unintelligible

ACOUSTICS

Spaces need to facilitate clear communication and freedom of movement for signers with minimal hazards for easy flow of movement.

LIGHT AND COLOR

MOBILITY AND PROXIMITY

The ASPECTSS design guidelines originated by Magda Mostafa is catered towards designing inclusive learning environments for autistic children. As “autism is a spectrum with each individual exhibiting a different sensory profile with variant response to stimuli”, characteristic behaviors are tied to different spatial experiences based on the sense-making and organization processes in the autistic mind (Anderson 1998, as quoted by AltenmüllerLewis 2017, 217). The design index’s main purpose is to encourage independence by freeing “the child’s sensory network of unnecessary traffic and sensory noise from the surrounding environment…so they can communicate, respond, learn and interact, a little bit longer” (Quirk, 2013, para 15)

ACOUSTICS

A S P E C T S S

Controlled acoustic environments that vary according to the level of user-focus where students can graduate from one level to the next, slowly moving towards a “greenhouse effect”

The design guideline constitutes of seven major touchstones (Mostafa 2015):

TRANSITIONS

Areas of respite that are neutral sensory environments for autistic users to seek refuge from overstimulation

Transition zones that help users recalibrate their senses as they move from one level of stimulus to the next

COMPARTMENTALIZATION

Spatial zoning in which each compartment has a single and clearly defined function and consequent sensory quality. Each compartment can be separated through furniture, materiality, heights and levels and lighting

Organization and grouping of spaces according to their sensory quality, with transition zones to aid shifting from one zone to another

SAFETY

Areas are to be organized in a logical order to capitalize on the affinity of autistic individuals towards routine and predictability

ESCAPE SPACES

SENSORY ZONING

SPATIAL SEQUENCING

Autistic children have an altered sense of environment that needs to be accounted for

Figure 2.5 : ASPECTSS Design Index adapted from Mostafa (2015) 23

T h i s

p a g e

h a s

b e e n

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

l e f t

b l a n k

D A T A

A N A L Y S I S

Following the discourse analysis conducted on the selected data source, several consistent themes were identified through the repetition of major keywords. The keywords were later assigned to codes and categorized either as issues or opportunities based on the experiences of the content creators. The themes were then ranked according to their significance which were weighted via the number of repeated appearances.

ISSUES

OPPORTUNITIES

Sensitivity

O v e r l o a d , I n p u t , U n d e rs t i m u l a t e d , F e e l , Tr i g g e r, Defensiveness

Special Features

Learning Competency

Learning, , Workload, S t u d y , Te a c h i n g , F o c u s , Grades, Assignment

Self-acquired Skills

Cope, Self-regulating, S t i m u l a t o r y, P a s s i v e

Social / Participation

Friends, Participate, Organizations, Activities, Involve

Stims

V i s u a l , A u d i t o r y, F i d g e t , S e n s o r y, M o v e

Inaccessible

Hard to access, Cannot support…, Unequipped, Not included

Education Assistance

S u p p o r t , I n t e r p r e t e r, Assistance, Attention

Communication

Communicate, Conversation, Comprehend, Inform,

Tactility

To u c h , Ta c t i l e , E x p l o r e , Te x t u r e , F e e l

Anxiety

D i f f e r e n t , W o r r y, Frustration, Ashamed, Depressed, Exposed

Technology

Separation

Separate, Alternative, Special

Navigation

Negative Environment

Noise, Dark, Sounds, Echo Amplify

Perception

Concepts, Perception, Unsure

Prospect

Routine, Plan, Structures

I10

Behavior

E n e r g y, R e p r i m a n d , Tr o u b l e , F o c u s , W a n d e r

O10

Inclusive

Include, Anyone, To g e t h e r

I11

Crowd

Crowd, People. Spaces

O11

Independence

Freedom, R e s p o n s i b i l i t y, S a f e t y

I12

Pain

Pain, Discomfort, Distressing

I13

Community

C o n n e c t , C o m m u n i t y, Organization

I14

Adaptive

Accommodate, Adapt, D i s c o v e r, N e w

I15

Travel

Tr a v e l , A r r i v a l

I16

Future Prospects

Future, Work, Tr a n s i t i o n

Imagery

Accommodation, Alternative, Features, To o l s , A c c e s s o r y

C o m p u t e r, A s s i s t i v e , Device

Guide, Detect

S e n s o r y, I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , Description

Figure 2.6 : Discourse Analysis - Categorization of keywords and coding of themes

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THEMES

tat

sen s inte ory rea r ch des pretati o c spa riptio n n t vol iality um e& op en ne ss

noise dark echo sounds amplify

im ag ery

n tio

vio r

hard to access unsupported

no l ogy ity

ty xie

perception

wd cro

t ec ity n nn un co mm atio z ni ga

rou pla tine str n uc t pr ed ure ict ab ilit y

separate

alternative

segreg

concept

perception unsure

ate special

mm od ate fle xib dis le co ver ad ap t

pr es s r ex ess ed po ed se d

sepa ration

un m m o c

wd cro e l op pe ces spa

com pute r ass istiv e dev ice amp lify

pr os pe

an ad ap tiv e

fe dif

i on cat

nt re rry wo on ti ra ed st fru ham as

arrival travel

mobility orientatio

tec h

ni mu

e icat mun com on i t a s ver n d o c hen pre m com infor nd a t rs de n u

co m

ped unequip excluded

features tools accessories

travel

inaccessible

involved

atio mmod acco ve alternati accessible

special features

activities

sp re fety sa

stim

friend s particip ate organizatio ns

ilit

s on

l ua vis itory d au et fidg ory s sen ent vem mo

e nc de en

na vi g

negative environme nt

tra cti on ene rgy rep rim an trou d ble focu s wan der

lity cti

y sitivit s en

nd ing ion

ger trig n ulatio stim n o ti c distra lm e h rw ove input

socia partic l ipati b on eha

dis

fre

yfi

ch tou e tur tex re plo ex ile ct ta el fe

ori

feel defensiveness

The identified themes were assessed and plotted in order to understand the levels of interconnections between each theme. It was found that many themes do not work in solitary but either influence or conflict with each other.

Figure 2.7 : Interrelation between themes

education assistance | stim crowd | pain | community

learning competency | inaccessibility | self-acquired skills

technology 13

imagery | prospect | inclusiveness

independence

tactility 10

anxiety | social participation

adaptive

travel

separation | behavior

navigation

negative environment

perception

communication

special features

sensitivity

EFFECTIVENESS OF DESIGN GUIDELINES Inclusive design frameworks such as principles of UD, Deafspace and ASPECTSS were analysed and reviewed against the themes identified from the discourse analysis. This allowed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of suggested criteria against actual responses from disabled communities. For instance, the disabled experience identified tactility as a major technique that many communities depend on to navigate and live independently. However tactile features and textures are not always utilized effectively as tools for sensory wayfinding when incorporated in architectural spaces but more often seen as secondary design elements for aesthetic purposes. This clearly reveals that inclusive practices need to engage from the perspective of the intended demographic instead of what is assumed to be accessible from an nondisabled perspective.

14 15 16 17

existing frameworks

the disabled experience

Figure 2.8 : Comparison of discourse analysis against established inclusive frameworks 27

S U M M A R Y O F F I N D I N G S Architectural exclusions has become the standard model of our everyday spaces that non-disabled individuals remain unaware and disconnected from the impacts of poor design. Everyday tasks from the perspective of disabled communities show that it can be physically and psychologically demanding especially when the environment is not set up to support the different needs required by a diverse population. Design exclusions further marginalize specific communities as they create inaccessible artefacts, ranging from objects to spaces, that potentially restrict or prevent access to new knowledge and experiences. Some individuals who are sensory-impaired may find difficulty in perceiving the qualities of spatial elements. Individuals who have raised or suppressed sensitivity towards environmental input respond uniquely to different types and levels of stimulation. Depending on the individual, specific stimulants can trigger reactions due to “sensory defensiveness” from over stimulation or cause distress from understimulation resulting in them being “sensory-seeking” (Layle 2021). Additionally, sensitivity towards environment input is also importantly noted for individuals who have impairments towards one or more senses and will have to depend heavier on their other available senses. In response, spatial qualities should be designed to reduce further strain to the individual’s overworked senses (Behm 2016). Design strategies such as opportunity of individualization, as well as refuge spaces and transition zones between different levels of stimulus help individuals to manage anxiety and regain control of the environment so as they can divert all their energy into focusing on their tasks at hand.

NON-DISABLED

VISION LOSS

HEARING LOSS

MOBILITY IMPAIRMENTS

AUTISM

SPD

Figure 2.9 : Different disabilities and their dependency on other available senses 28

S P A T I A L

MOVEMENT & SPACE TYPOLOGIES

Wide circulation spaces Transition spaces Large open spaces / atrium Escape spaces Intimate social nodes Ramps Sensory rooms / sensory garden Spatial zoning (Stimulus)

SPATIAL CONGIGURATION

Level changes and steps

Spatial sequencing Staggered spaces / balconies Alcoves & refuge spaces Round or horseshoe arrangement Soft corners

MATERIALITY

Transparency Reflectivity Textured surfaces High contrast Patternation 29

P A R A D O X E S

MATERIALITY ACOUSTICS LIGHITNG FURNISHING

Soft spaces Muted colour Hard surfaces

Background noise Controlled vibrations

Glare & Backlighting Daylight

Open shelving Conversation pedastal & shelves Flexible seating types and heights Signage, wayfinding cues

SENSE OF PLACE

Therapy equipment

Linked to society Nature Prospects Security

P R E C E D E N T H O U S E

O F D I S A B L E D P E O P L E ’ S O R G A N I Z A T I O N

An architectural precedent that quite successfully manages to equally distribute usability amongst various disability types while offering thoughtful considerations toward spatial qualities and user experiences is the House of Disabled People’s Organization. The designers acknowledged the challenge of designing for over 300 disabled employees and visitors for which individual’s accessibility to quality spaces may often manifest in specific solution with contrasting interests. The final execution however manages to be unbiased and without stigmatizing additions that “spell aid or expose the users of the house” (Danke Handicaporganisationer n.d., 16; Cubo Arkitekter and FORCE4 Architecture 2014). Such negotiations include the central atrium designed pentagonal to create distinct orientation points in each bend, for had it been circular as per the original scheme, the building would be a perpetual motion machine that is difficult for visually impaired individuals to navigate. Other interventions also include perforated low walls to allow visibility for wheelchair users, intuitive wayfinding signage using textures, light and shadow and a sensory garden (Danke Handicaporganisationer n.d.).

CENTRAL VOiD

subtracted void

colour coding

orientation point

SOLAR ACCESS

N AV I G AT I O N P O I N T S

P R E C E D E N T

W E S T E R N A U T I S T I C S C H O O L The Western Autistic School is an award-winning education facility in Laverton, Australia designed by disability design specialist, Hede Architects. In order to encourage independency and reduce overall anxiety, the school ensures that students are not immersed into one big school setting which can turn to be overwhelming, but rater eased into the environment in order for them to gradually build learning skills and expand their contact with larger number of students when they are ready (Hede 2015). The school breaks down its spaces into sub-hubs that provide access to controlled separate play areas via courtyards that are attached to learning areas. Additionally, the school organizes smaller class sizes to offer students better connectedness by dividing its built form into 3 pods with 8 learning areas each hold 6-8 students (Hede 2015). Walls are color coded with strong geometric shapes to act as a navigation guide as well as exposed students to “realistic” environments to prepare them for mainstream schooling.

S PAT I A L S E Q U E N C I N G

SOFT TRANSITIONS

Sequencing of spaces in a logical manner according to level of stimulation High

Medium

Low

LEARNING PODS

Medium Stimulus

Circulation

Orientation Node

LEVELS OF SECURITY

Self-sustaining units containing indoor and outdoor learning spaces, kitchens, toilets and withdraw rooms High Stimulus

Soft curves to ease trasition between spaces and reduce anxiety

Low Stimulus

Series of courtyard spaces to s t i m u a l t e i n d o o r- o u t d o o r l e a r n i n g

Courtyard

Fenceline

Access

P R E C E D E N T H A Z E L W O O D

S C H O O L

Hazelwood is an award-winning school dedicated for children who are dual sensory impaired – deaf and blind, aged between 12 to 18. The school accommodates a maximum of 60 students whereby those who attend are deafblind, physically handicapped or are within some degree of cognitive impairment and may require lifetime support (IHCD 2016). The building snakes through a parkland site and forms gentle curve around existing mature trees to create a series of small garden spaces that maximize the potential for intimate outdoor learning. The curved internal spine is used as a intuitive wayfinding tool and to provide extensive storage for a wide range of equipment. The curve form breaks down the ‘street’ into manageable visual scales to help reduce the institutional feeling that a single long corridor might create. The building is single storey and constructed using natural materials such as weather larch boarding that possesses tactile quality for trailing and stimulating sense of smell (IHCD 2016).

‘ T R A I L R A I L’ Tr a i l r a i l a c t a s t a c t i l e a i d s t o practice orientation and mobility skills for increased confidence and sense of mastery

CLASSROOMS Tr a n s i t i o n z o n e s b e t w e e n “ s t r e e t ” and classroom to inform children of their location

‘Street’

Tr a n s i t i o n zones

Classrooms

Withdraw rooms

C O N N E C T I O N T O N AT U R E Small gardens suitable to maximize potential for intimate outdoor learning

T h i s

p a g e

h a s

b e e n

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

l e f t

b l a n k

P A R T

I I I

A R C H I T E C T U R E O F P E D A G O G I C A L S P A C E S

I N C L U S I V E E D U C A T I O N Inclusive education is defined as a social model against exclusionary practices and advocates for the restructuring of mainstream schools to better respond and meet the needs of all students (Wills et. Al 2014; Clark, Dyson and Millward 1995). Within current education models, practice of segregated ideologies is still prevalent where Special Education Needs (SEN) students are urged to attend separate schools instead of mainstreams education facilities. Howbeit, even within schools that claim to be ‘inclusive’, SEN students are not adequately having their needs addressed and are very much distinguished from their peers. Such actions are apparent when SEN children are given their own entrances, break times, directors, and study materials (Wills et.al 2014). This issue propels authors Clark, Dyson and Millward (1995) to argue that in order to achieve inclusion, exclusionary ideals cannot simply be modified as the two worldviews are so different, they cannot co-exist. The authors believe that attempts to integrate would result either in the colonization of exclusionary organizational strategies or in the total displacement of segregation practices by inclusive ideologies. Hence, Wills et al. (2014, 276) calls for a paradigm shift, whereby if “inclusive education is contingent on culture”, it needs to start with education progressiveness as “schools are places where children move across elements of their hybrid identities: social, cultural, and academic.” From an architectural perspective, the key objective in designing inclusive school environments is to reduce contextual barriers that may marginalize students so that all can be present, participate and learn effectively (Tomas, Cross and Campbell 2018; Wills et al. 2014). As Datta (2014) stresses, design activism does not advocate to cure disabled students via school design but rather study the conditions of environments that could support needs of these students. Inclusive schools will require capturing the functional requirements needed by SEN students, while embracing aspirations for spatial qualities that will guide students to maximize their full potential. In retrospect, results have proven that SEN students do achieve greater academic and social performances in inclusive schools as compared to attending segregated schools when effective approaches have been taken to ensure all students regards of age or ability are offered an equitable and participatory learning experience (Tomas, Cross and Campbell 2018).

“SCHOOLS ARE PLACES WHERE CHILDREN MOVE ACROSS ELEMENTS OF THEIR HYBRID IDENTITIES: S O C I A L , C U LT U R A L A N D A C A D E M I C .” - WILLS ET AL. 2014, 276-277

the prepared environment

the material

By borrowing from progressive teaching models, architecture can create bonds with educational spaces to help disabled students flourish in their academic and social development. Compared to traditional teaching methods, progressive pedagogical ideologies are constructed through the belief that learning should be based on intellectual curiosity, excitement, and discovery through a continual interaction between the child and the environment (Al, Reyhan and Nimet 2012). Ideologies such as the Montessori, Regio-Emelia and Waldorf methods are child-centred approaches that believe children learn best through direct-hands on experience that engage with all five senses (Siwy 2011). While each method has within themselves a set of rules that are distinct from one another, the common thread seen by all is the emphasis placed on the learning environment in developing the child in all areas: socially, academically, physically, and spiritually (Liebschner ·2002). For instance, the Montessori method frames learning around the three pillars: the child, the conscious adult, and the prepared environment, and enforces that the three should always work together and be connected. Similarly, the Regio-Emelia method sees the learning environment as ‘the third teacher’, whereby the design and construct of schools should match the teaching method to be part of the didactic materials of the learning environment (Audrey and Jose 2020; Al, Reyhan and Nimet 2012). Contrary to that, education philosopher Maria Montessori supposes that insufficient levels of stimuli are the root causes of learning and behaviour development delays in children (Migliani 2021). As such, the goal is to create learning environments a sensorial place where architecture and technology can coincide nicely with child development and education theorists (Siwy 2011).

the guide

P R O G R E S S I V E E D U C A T I O N

M O N T E S S O R I M E T H O D

movement

balance

thought & landuage

‘the third teacher’

W A L D O R F M E T H O D

R E G I O - E M E L I A M E T H O D

S P A T I A L E N V I R O N M E N T Montessori method is a child-centred approach which goal is to develop the whole child’s selfdiscipline, independence, sense of justice, emotional intelligence, and analytical thinking. The theorist believes in the constructivist model where pupils learn concepts from working with materials rather than from direct instruction. Additionally, each child is unique with different critical periods in development where the child sensitive window allows them to best obtain certain skills (Spielga-ben 2013; Al, Reyhan and Nimet 2012).

A n t h r o p o m e t r i c d e s i g n

A r t i c u l a t e d c l a s s r o o m s f o r i s l a n d s o f c o n c e n t r a t i o n

F l o o r a s w o r k s h o p a p l a y g r o u n

‘ E v e r y d a y t h e a t r e ’ / L e a r n i n g s t r e e t

the prepared environment

the material

the guide

O p e n a r r a n g e m e n t o f e q u i p m e n t

M O N T E S S O R I M E T H O D

a n d n d

I n t e r c o n n e c t e d s p a c e s p r o v i d i n g a t o p o g r a p h i c a l e x p e r i e n c e M e a n i n g f u l a c c e s s t o w a t e r

‘the t

S P A T I A L E N V I R O N M E N T The Regio-Emelia method believes that a child is the protagonist of their own development and that adults are much rather col-collaborator that guide the child’s learning process. The philosopher believes in R E G I O - E M E L I A educating through collective experiences M in E Twhich H O D learning should be facilitated through community and experience in society. Evidently, the method treats the learning environment as the ‘third teacher’ for which providing a suitable safe stimulating environment for exploration and experimentation is integral to a child’s holistic development (Audrey and Franco 2020).

C e n t r a l

S p a c e s f o r r e f u g e

s q u a r e s

R h y t h m a n d M o v e m e n t

C e i l i n g a n d w a l l s a s e x h i b i t i o n p l a t f o r m s

‘the third teacher’

R E G I O - E M E L I A M E T H O D

G l a s s

w a l l s

F l e x i b l e f u r i t u r e 44

W A L D O R F M E T H O D

movement

balance

thought & landuage

C o l o u r

N a t u r e i n s i d e a n d o u t s i d e

S h f i t n g c o l o u r s c a l e

w a

S P A T I A L E N V I R O N M E N T Rudolf Steiner developed a holistic curriculum in which the philosopher believes that children learn best through play and through all 12 senses – the traditional 5 plus thought, language, balance, movement, warmth, life and individuality, in which creativity and imagination is at the heart of learning (Spielgaben 2013). The built setting for learning is the ‘social room’ and is significant in facilitating communication and relationships whereby the class acts as a community and the classroom as a home (Bjørnholt 2014).

a s h i n g

H a r m o n y b e t w e e n t h e a r t s

M e t a m o p h o s i s f o r m s

o f

F l e x i b l e f u r n i t u r e

P A R T

I V

S I T E

The project is proposed to be situated in the Helena precinct in Midland, Western Australia. Midland and its adjacent suburb, Midvale were identified as being appropriate locations following a screening process comprising of 4 levels of evaluation (refer Appendix). • • • •

Needs Assessment 1 – Percentage of Developmentally Vulnerable Children Needs Assessment 2 – Socio-economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) Accessibility and Surrounding Land Use Wellness Assets

The needs assessment classified Midland and Midvale as having one of the highest percentages of developmentally vulnerable children and lowest SEIFA scores amongst Western Australian Metropolitan suburbs. The community is currently serviced by several mainstream local schools, with only 2 Secondary Education Support Schools. From a needs-based perspective, an inclusive K-6 educational facility will offer the opportunity for young children, abled and disabled, from different racial and economic backgrounds to receive good education in a safe and fair learning environment. The strategic location of the site will capture student intake from Midland and its adjacent suburbs Midvale and Swanview. The selected site sits within a heritage-listed industrial site, in which the proposed project will integrate and repurpose two existing abandoned heritage building. The project coheres with the ongoing Midland Redevelopment Scheme as its intended function supports the existing Curtin Midland campus and future proposed knowledge and medical hub. The site is also situated within the vicinity of an indigenous significant site – Helena River and is adjacent to a natural bush creek that allows access to natural environments and stimuli. The following illustrates the site rationale that had met the selection criteria:

Needs Assessment 1: Percentage of Developmentally Vulnerable Children in WA (Australian Early Development Census 2018)

• •

Midvale ranked 2nd highest in percentage (57.5%) Midland ranked 5th highest in percentage (43.1%)

Needs Assessment 2: Socio Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) for WA suburbs (Australian Early Development Census 2018)

• •

Midvale ranked 1st lowest in SEIFA score (853) Midland ranked 3rd lowest in SEIFA score (891)

Accessibility and Surrounding Land Use

•

The two combined suburbs have access to 2 Educational Support Schools for only secondary school students The immediate surrounding context of the site is still undergoing development including new knowledge and medical hub Site will be within 400m of new train station location proposed in the MRA Within current context, site is located next to a child advocacy center and Curtin Midland campus

• • • Wellness Assets

• • • • •

Indigenous Heritage Site Strong connection to site history and culture Existing heritage site to be preserved and adaptive re-used Adjacent to Bushland and Helena River Near but not directly next to high-traffic main roads

Supply Branch Storage

M I D L A N D R A I L W AY W O R K S H O P

age P reci

General Store / Supply Branch

Herit

M I D L A N D R A I L W AY W O R K S H O P

LOCATION PLAN

nct

S I T E

M I D L A N D Midland is located within the City of Swan and is till today regarded for its heavy industrial dominance and contribution to the economic development of Western Australia. In the presettlement era, Midland was long inhabited by the Noongar people of the south-west of WA, in which the Swan Valley region contains some of the oldest evidence of indigenous occupation (MRA 2017). Following the arrival of European settlers, the growth of post-colonial Midland was heavily dictated by its strategic position that rested on the “junction” of the main routes to agricultural areas and Eastern Goldfields. During the gold discoveries in the 1880s and 1890s, the increased demand for railway lead to the erection of the 3 Midland workshops and surrounding buildings in the Railway Square (MRA 2016). The Midland railway site is currently managed by the Midland Redevelopment Authority and holds high value for its industrial heritage. The site possesses significant examples of major railway workshops in Australia that represents the daily life of settlers throughout 90 years of apprenticeships in trades that fostered many skills and craftsmanship. As the main Westrial Workshop in the 20th century, the Midland heritage precinct still contains several significant buildings and possesses a wide range of machinery, tools, equipment, furniture, and fixings that were used by the railway workshop workers (Oliver and Bertola 2006). The Midland workshops eventually saw closure in 1994 to which announced the end of its industrial dominance. Revitalization projects that followed continue to celebrate the essence of the site’s history and its roots of technical skills, craftsmanship and innovation. The site is highly respected as a place of significance to both traditional owners and subsequent settler relating back to (MRA 2017).

S I T E

Figure 4.1 : MRA, Midland Master Plan. 2016, Digital Image. Reproduced from: MRA.

F I G U R E

H E R I T A G E

G R O U N D

SOLID

VOID

SITE

INDIGENOUS H E R I TA G E

H E R I TA G E BUILDINGS

H E R I TA G E CURTILAGE

C I R C U L A T I O N SITE

TRAIN LINE

MAIN ROADS

BUS STOP

S H A R E D PAT H

PEDESTRIAN DESIRE LINE

N A T U R E

A S S E T S

N O D E S

O F

I N T E R E S T

SITE

PLAZAS + G AT H E R I N G S PA C E

S I T E

INTERPRETIVE ARTWORK + SIGNAGE

I N F L U E N C E S

SITE

BUSHLAND

SITE

BUSHLAND

W AT E R

O P E N G R E E N S PA C E

BUSH FIRE ZONE

TRAIN LINE

6 0 M R A I LWAY V I B R AT I O N S

1 5 0 R A I LWAY NOISE

M I D L A N D W O R K S H O P S Prior to the erection of the Midland workshop site, the Fremantle workshops operated as the main railway workshop to house tools and machinery ordered from Whitworth’s in Manchester. The workshops faced challenges due to the limited number of trained expertise and poorly planned spaces of the workshops. With new discovery of goldfields, Australia saw pressure to perform efficiently which demanded additional rail services to cater toward the increased workload and output. New workshops were then required to provide training, equipment, and space to develop specialist area to respond to new developments (Oliver and Bertola 2006). The Midland Railway Workshop replaced outdated Fremantle workshops and centered around saw-toothed roof, brick masonry buildings. Block 1 offered services as a carriage and wagon shop and housed the sawmill, Block 2 served as the boiler and blacksmith shop and Block 3 for machine fitting and erecting shop (Australia Railway Historical Society 1992). Several other buildings that were erected to support the 3 main workshops were the Main Stores, Foundry, Pattern Shop, Tarpaulin Shop, Electrical Store, Tool Room, Office, and Diesel Shop. Timeline extracted from (Oliver and Bertola 2006; MRA 2006)

Improved workshop facilities to cope with pressure of larger railway system

Opening of first railway workshop in Fremantle to house tools and machinery ordered from Manchester

1 8 7 7 53

1 8 8 5 1 8 8 3

1 8 8 1 1 8 7 9 55 km Government railways between Geraldton and Northampton commenced operation

MIdland Junction

1st Railway Workshop

Further extended railway system by opening of Fremantle to Guildford railway and opening of government railway workshop in Fremantle

Arrival of rail to Eastern States promoted the town as “Midland Junction”

Strategy Heriage Intepretation

Midland Railway Workshops

New workshops open in Fremantle

Midland recognised as a main urban corridor

Acquisition of former Great Southern Railway workshops in Albany and creatin of integrated workshops in Midland

1 9 9 4 1 9 7 0 1 9 1 4

Final closure of the Railway Workshops

1 9 0 4 1 8 9 6

Workshops extended and doubled in size

1 8 8 7 Construction of further sheltered area to construct locomotives

S C A R P

Arundo Donax

Giant Reed

Gomophocarpus Fruiticosus

Narrowleaf Cottonbush

N A T I V E

W O O D L A N D S

Melaleuca Rhaphiophylia

Swamp Paperbark

Eucalyptus Rudis

Flooded Gum

D A R L I N G

I N D I G E N O U S S I G N I F I C A N C E

E L E N A

R I V E R

The town of Guildford has long been an important place to Noongar people. The place in which we today call “Midland” is a landscape that is rich of natural and cultural heritage to indigenous people and contains many spiritual and camping sites utilized by indigenous people from pre-contact to present day (Briggs et al. 2009). The Helena River, known as Moort Bidi was a main run for Noongar people to travel to and from Guildford where corroborees were performed. The river weaves through the bushland and was an abundant food source from its waterway and fertile lands surrounding them (MRA 2017).

Castor Oil Plant

Ricinus Communis

Blackberry

Rubus Ulmifollius

Avena Fatua

Wild Oat

Ehrharta Calycina

P e r e n n i a l Ve l d t G r a s s

Kikuyu Grass

Pennisetum Clandestinum

According to indigenous traditions, the Swan and Helena rivers were believed to have formed by the Waugyl arriving at the waterway and valleys as they made their way to the mouth of the river of Fremantle. The river is respected as place for healing, ceremony and women’s and men’s business and continue to hold cultural importance to contemporary indigenous culture (Briggs et al. 2009). Till today, Midland carries a strong sense of ancient cultural landscape thorough its connection with the river and glimpses of the scarp, native bushland, and the vast plains beyond. Ve g e t a t i o n species Environmental 2006)

extracted

from

( ATA

H E R I T A G E I N T E R P R E T A T I O N The Midland Heritage Interpretation Strategy was developed as a guideline for future heritage interpretation works within the Midland Redevelopment Area to ensure continued prominence of heritage values through evocative ways of engaging people in the site’s history, stories and significance. The National Trust WA defines interpretation as “an interactive communication process, involving the visitor, through which heritage values and cultural significance are revealed, using a variety of techniques in order to enrich the visitor experience and enhance the enjoyment and understanding of the place” (MRA 2017, 7) The Midland Redevelopment Area has 3 major precincts to which are zoned according to their historic associations: Helena precinct – Industrial (railway, river, water, power, trades) Victoria precinct – residential and commercial (town, hoes, institutions work, rest, play) Clayton precinct – Agricultural (cattle, grain, markets, abattoirs, coaction to the Eastern goldfields)

F i g u r e 4 . 2 : W a t s o n , L i n d s a y, S i t e P l a n . 1 9 9 5 , S c a n n e d I m a g e . R e p r o d u c e d f r o m : T h e Railway History of Midland Junction.

Figure 4.3 : WAGR, Midland Workshops c1905. Main Store, - View From South West. n.d., Digital Image. Reproduced from: Rail Heritage WA.

F i g u r e 4 . 4 : WA G R , M i d l a n d Wo r k s h o p s c 1 9 0 5 . M a i n S t o r e , - I n t e r i o r, L o o k i n g E a s t . n.d., Digital Image. Reproduced from: Rail Heritage WA.

1:2000

59 SITE

B - B

General Store / Supply Branch

Railway Workshop 1

S E C T I O N Railway Workshop 2 Blacksmith Shop, Boiler Shop

Wo o d M i l l , R o l l i n g S t o c k Ti m b e r, R o l l i n g S t o k

A - A

Site Boundary

1:2000

S E C T I O N

Railway Workshop Electrical Shop

The Stan and Jean Perron Child Advocacy Centre

Foundry

Railway Workshop

S I T E B I O P S Y

MIdland Campus

Curtin University

Site Boundary

Supply Branch Storage

SITE

Railway Workshop 3

Site Boundary

General Store / Supply Branch

SITE

Site Boundary

Diesel Shop, Fitting Shop, Machine Shop

P A R T A

S E N S E S C A P E : N E T W O R K F O R I N D E P E N D E N C E

D E S I G N C R I T E R I A The proposed framework takes upon a multisensorial approach in redefining the notions of inclusivity to encompass a broader range of users that are of different disability types. The proposal emphasises accessibility and usability in particular for those who have sensorial disabilities such as visual and hearing impairments and neurodivergent disorders. The framework constructed utilizes 5 key design criteria that were developed through expanding on existing universal design guidelines as well as drawing from the analysis of perspectives of the disabled community. Each criterion has within itself a set of design strategies as a toolkit for composing the different spatial element that cater towards providing an accessible K-6 learning environment that is barrier-free and best correspond to their requirements and preferences.

S E N S E S C A P E : N E T W O R K F O R I N D E P E N D E N C E

PROSPECT VS REFUGE

AUTONOMY

n at

ili

n io at S P oc ar ia ti l ci p

vig

ati

vity Sensiti

ion

den

rat

ption

pen

ib ty

ss ie

tiv

ac nx

Perce

Inde

In A

F Sp e a ec tu ia re l s

STRUCTURING THE UNSTRUCTURED

Imagery

SENSORY MAPPING

Negative Environment

S PAT I A L SEQUENCING

Tr a

P R I N C I P L E

Configuration of spaces in a logical order that are grouped according to stimulus zones (high, medium, and low) (Mostafa 2015). The project is multistorey and extends vertically to minimize travel distances and utilizes transition zones to ensure spaces remain at a manageable scale and flow seamlessly from one activity to another (Riedel and Mahoe n.d.).

lo d me hi

L E V E L O F S T I M U L A T I O N

Spatial organization in accordance sensory qualities rather than typical functional zoning

S P A T I A L

S E Q U E N C I N G

T R A N S I T I O N Z O N E S

S O F T T R A N S I T I O N S

Opportunities to pause between activities that help students recalibrate their senses as they move from one stimuli to another

Curvilinear elements to provide visual sightlines around corners and offer a sense of flow and welcomeness

P R I N C I P L E

A learning environment that is intuitive to stimulates a child’s autonomy and selfconfidence, bringing benefit to children development in areas of concentration, creativity and curiosity (Al, Reyhan and Nimet 2012). Equipment and architecture are geared towards respecting a child’s individuality and ensuring each individual has the capability to learn through equal access to knowledge and new opportunities.

L E V E L O F S T I M U L A T I O N

Opportunities for children who respond uniquely to different levels of stimuli to seek or refuge according to their comfort

A U T O N O M Y

F A C I L I T A T I N G I N D E P E N D A N C E

O P P O R T U I T Y F O R I N D I V I D U A L I Z A T I O N

Education beyond classroom learning to offer training in life skills and environmental studies.

Flexible furniture and equipment that can be adapted to varying requirements to avoid separating students from their peers

P R I N C I P L E

Providing a diverse range of natural and human-made sensory cues manifested spatially as architectural features within the horizontal and vertical plane. These elements are designed to encompass a broad spectrum of sensory, cognitive, and social differences to foster independence and enable students to engage with their surroundings. N A V I G A T I O N P O I N T

Each point and bend in the landscape is designed specifically as a wayfinding tool to orientate students towards specific directions

S E N S O R Y

M A P P I N G

WAY F I N D I N G T H R O U G H N AT U R A L E L E M E N T S

E C H O L O C A T I O N

The sensory trail reflects the natural context of the site and stimulates different senses as a wayfinding guide

Alternating ceiling heights and wall textures that form thresholds allow students with visual impairments to independently navigate across the campus

P R I N C I P L E

Options and opportunities for students to seek respite from overstimulation found in their environment by being physically separated but still maintaining visual connection to observe adjacent activities for passive social participation (Owen 2016). Spaces also provide unimpeded view over a distance for surveillance. T O N E S O F C O N N E C T I V I T Y

Linked infrastructure with varying degrees of physical, visual, and auditory connection from different spaces and stimuli so all can feel included

P R O S P E C T

R E T R E AT NOOKS

Intimate areas that are neutral sensory environments with minimal stimulation that provide relief and is customizable to the necessary sensory input

V S

R E F U G E

M I C R O V I E W S N A T U R E

T O

View corridors and connection to the restorative powers of natural environments

P R I N C I P L E

Breaking down expansive spaces into visually manageable scales with clearly defined functions through landscape features and builtin furniture. This provides interactive elements that creates smaller nooks for varying levels of play and concentration and can assist with students who strive to orient and make sense of place. C O M P A R T M E N T A L I Z A T I O N

Configuration of spaces into smaller compartments using furniture to create a topographic journey throughout learning spaces

S T R U C T U R I N G T H E U N S T R U C T U R E D

COLOUR - CODING

S A F E T Y & S U R V E I L L A N C E

Utilizing colour as means of intuitive wayfinding and visual zoning through muted colours that are calming and less strenuous to avoid over-stimulation

Organization of spaces to allow for passive supervision throughout the school and prevent against wandering tendencies

P A R T ‘ T H E

T H I R D

V I T E A C H E R ’

P R O J E C T B R I E F A spatial composition that shifts the paradigm of universality to one that eradicates existing systemic biases in order to create more accessible and inclusive environments for young learners and generations to come. The proposed K-6 school combines mainstream school settings and special education requirements to cater for developing minds that encompasses a broad spectrum of sensory, cognitive and social differences. The school takes on a multi-sensorial approach which targets different types of learning that takes place beyond the typical classroom. This ensures all students have equal access to learning and opportunities to foster social inclusion and enhance wellbeing. The ‘Third Teacher’ highlights that the environmental set-up – the place where we inhabit, plays a fundamental role in the learning process to shape children’s identities and aids in self-development (Audrey and Franco 2020). The strategies put in place prioritizes student autonomy and dignity by ensuring that the learning environment allows each student to navigate and use spaces independently within their own capabilities. To facilitate social and academic growth, as well as connectedness to existing environmental contexts, the project:

•

encompasses various learning spaces that support the different genres of learning such as essential life skills, environmental education, and formal classroom learning.

•

re-purposes two old heritage buildings marked with strong historic ties to the Midland Railway heritage as a skills hub and multi-purpose hall.

•

utilizes brick in various functional forms in the horizontal and vertical plane as visual-tactile wayfinding guides to continue the prominent existing architectural language

•

utilizes terracotta panels to imply a contemporary rendition of clay that references the remaining essence of the Midland Brick.

SENSESCAPE: A NETWORK FOR INDEPENDANCE

P R O S P E C T

R E F U G E

S E E K I N G

V S

M IC TO RO NA VIE TU W RE S RE

S E N S O R Y M A P P I N G

L HO

ON TI GA S VI INT A N PO

S NG TI CE N TA LI DE N CI FA E P E D IN

R FO N IO TY N I Z AT U I RT AL PO DU OP IVI D IN

NG AL DI UR I N AT YF H N TS A N W UG ME RO ELE TH CO TO NN NES EC O TI F VI TY

I R

OF N L O V E AT I LE UL M I T

A IZ RTM AT E IO NT AL N

LEVEL OF S T I M U L AT I O N

lo me

CO CO LO DI UR NG

TRANSITION ZONES

A U T O N O M Y

SU SAF RV ET EI Y & LA NC E

S T R U C T U R I N G

T H E

U N S T R U C T U R E D

SOFT TRANSITIONS

S P A T I A L

S E Q U E N C I N G

G R O U N D

DROP OFF ZONE

1:500 @

ENTRY

EARLY LEARNING C

RECEPTION

LEARNING PODS

SKILLS HUB

10 OUTDOOR LEARNIN

HEALTH CENTRE

11 SENSORY TRAIL

STAFF LOUNGE

12 ‘BUSHLAND’

STAFF OFFICE

13 ‘RIVER’

GROUP STUDIOS

14 ‘SCARP’

MAIN GATE

GAUGE RD

F L

3 1

4 2

5 7 17

11 12 13

21 20

8 9

LIFT

L O O R

P L A N

@ a1

CLASSES

15 CAFETERIA 16 MULTI-PURPOSE HALL

NG COURYARD

17 GENDER-INCLUSIVE TOILET 18 PLAYGROUND 19 OVAL 20 CARPARK

CENTENNIAL PL

21 SECONDARY ACCESS

fenceline 18

lin

fen

19 C 14

elin

fenc

L E V E L

1:500 @

TERRACE

SOLAR

LEARNING PODS

TOILET

LIFT

P L A N

@ a1

R LAB

COLLABORATION HUB

BREAKOUT SPACES

4 C

L E V E L

1:500 @

ROOFTOP EDIB

LIFT

P L A N

@ a1

BLE GARDEN

P R O J E T C O M P O N E N T R Y The compartmentalization of different types of learning occurs within pods of spaces of varying scales. The campus is comprised of 3 main components that are dedicated to these different learning styles to encourage interaction with the environment so as to foster independence and selfconstruction.

01 SKILLS HUB The hub is comprised of several skill pods dedicated to fostering different essential skills such as life skills, literacy skills and motor skills

P I L L A R S O F L E A R N I N G

02 SENSORY TRAIL

03 LEARNING PODS

The sensory trail acts as both a navigation guide and promotes connection to different natural elements as part of environmental education

The learning pods is a selfsustaining unit that contains an activity center and classrooms to conduct formal learnings

pla

wa en

ski

itin

g a rea

lls

tfo

yfi

bre

ing

tra

he ou

cks

t s p

alt

pla h c e

ntr

rou

ltip

urp

ose

try

01 S K I L L S

H U B

The heritage building marks the main entry threshold into the compound where the journey of learning is choreographed and flows seamlessly from one space to another. The skills hub takes place in the core of the existing heritage building and references the historic tones of the site. Midland as a one of the first railway workshops, fostered many significant trades and skills that contributed to the economic boom in WA. The new function of the building adapts the essence and memory of the railway carriage through several interpretive carriage pods that sit along a line of re-purposed abandoned railway tracks. The pods aim to capitalize off the affinity that many young learners, particularly those who are neurodivergent, have towards routine and schedule. The pods and their associated activities (life skills such as food preparation, literacy skills and motor skills) are arranged to follow the natural circadian rhythm of a child’s day. The pods and bridges break down the large volume of the existing warehouse into more manageable scales that are less overwhelming and easier for students to navigate.

SPINE Continuation of heritage spine to set the ‘backdrop’ of the project

SECTION A -A

WAYFINDING

THRESHOLD

Re-purposing of abandoned train tracks as visual-tactile wayfinding guides

Alternating ceiling heights for echolocation to indicate thresholds and break down the scale of the building

7 .3 M

8.3

9.30

L I S K F E I L L S

Life skill pod to train students on basic life skills such as food preparation

10.30 AM

11.30 AM

L I T E R A C Y S K I L L S

12.30 PM

1.30

Literacy pod that performs as a localised libbrary to house reading material

R T O L S O M I L S K

2.3

Motor skill pods with a range of obstacles for restless students to exert energy at the end of the school day and develop gross motor skill PM

L I T E R A C Y

P O D

02 S E N S O R I A L

T R I A L

The sensory trail is constituted of strategies that are designed to stimulate different senses for students to be able to independently navigate across the campus. For students who have certain senses compromised, interrelated systems of wayfinding such as visual stimuli through color and shadow, textures, scent of landscapes and sound of natural elements allow them to still able to navigate through their other available senses. Each curve and bend in the landscape provide subtle cues that help indicate the presence of thresholds, entrances and decisions points. The stimuli introduced through natural and man-made features also allows those who are sensory seeking to find elements of relief. As large expansive fields can be over-stimulating to developing minds, the smaller courtyard offers more interactive playscapes that promote environmental education and can be both open and intimate. The courtyards provide a suitable environment for exploration and experimentation for informal learning activities that help modulate transitions through different types of social and recreational play. Smaller breakout spaces are woven in between to ensure students who require places for refuge and respite still feel visibly connected with to their peers.

SIGHT

TOUCH

SMELL

SOUND

TASTE

Sensescapes: Sensorial map illustrating the interrelated systems of intuitive way-finding

Casting of shadow patterns onto surfaces as a visual wayfinding guide

Brick pattern create a navigation trail on surfaces for independent wayfinding

en m

te rds

bi r

ibl

e p lants

e g ard

foo

ibl

T A S T E

ruslting

leave

ter

S O U N

plants

L L M E

ceilin

T O

timb er

native garden

Planting of scented vegetation of native species in ‘Bushalnd’

sand

miss

hit&

pit

sand

atio

dow

echoloc

sha

Native planting attract bird species to adds life, colour and sound

Edible garden for students to practice environmental education

LANDSCAPE INTERFACE The sensory trail references the 3 significant landscapes of the Midland context: the bushland, the Helena River and the Darling Scarp. Each landscape pod has within itself a range of elements that stimulate different sensorial needs.

B U S H L A N D

Plating of native vegetation and turf mounds to create intimate nooks for play

Kneipp hydrotherapy pool for sensory stimulation using collected rainwater from downpipes

R I V E R

Introduction of nature play elements such as sand pits and climbing posts

S C A R P 93

‘ R I V E R ’

H Y D R O T H E R A P Y

P O O L

03 L E A R N I N G

P O D S

The learning pod is a self-sustaining secured unit modelled after progressive education ideologies such as Waldorf, Montessori and Regio-Emelia. In treating the environment as the ‘third teacher’, architectural elements are designed to be part of the didactic materials of the classes. Each pod is comprised of an activity center that performs as an ‘everyday theater’ for students to meet and prepare for the day before diverting to individual classes. The center also acts as a transitional zone between the high stimulus activities to low stimulus classroom to help mitigate the difference and reduce anxiety in the abrupt change. The center houses other activities such as a kitchenette, toilet and shower, storage and a retreat room and is a passive line of security for teachers to supervise their students. Each classroom within the pod is comprised of a main learning area as well as several other small intimate breakout spaces. Spaces are compartmentalized using low furniture that create a topographical journey which allow students who seek refuge to feel physically separated but are visibly connected to the rest of the class. A soft space within the classroom offers sensory relief to students who feel overstimulated and also provides space for stretching and movement. The classrooms is populated with flexible, yet safe furniture that can be re-arranged to suit such as in a U-shaped configuration to facilitate lip reading and sign language and improve concentrate amongst students. To facilitate connection to the natural environment, the classrooms exit onto secured secondary courtyards. As direct sunlight may hinder students who are sensitive to light, the classrooms are orientated south for natural diffused light accessed from the courtyard (Bauman 2010). To reduce the travel distance across the campus, the learning pods extend vertically to cater for large number of student.

‘EVERYDAY THEATRE’ / ACTIVITY CENTRE

KITCHENETTE

9 9

3 RETREAT ROOM 4

STORAGE

UAT

UAT + SHOWER

LEARNING ZONE

MAKERS SPACE

SOFT STRETCHING ZONE

2 1

6 5

10 11

10 STORAGE 11 OUTDOOR COURTYARD

Learning Pod - Classroom Plan

SPATIALITY OF PEDAGOGICAL SPACE

C L A S S R O O M 1.

Learning Zone

Makers Space

Soft Zone

Storage

REFUGE NOOKS

Soft spaces for sensory relief and to provide space for stretching and movement

2 3

Access to Courtyard

1 3

E V E R Y D A Y T H E A T R E

RETREAT ROOM

A neutral room for students who require sensory relief and seek respite

Ya r n i n g C i r c l e

Kitchenette

Retreat / Withdrawal Room

Storage

U AT + S h o w e r

U AT

Shelving

Entry

Access to Courtyard

Courtyard

Refuge Space

TRANSITION ZONE

L E A R N I N G P O D 1.

The ‘everyday theatre as a transitional space to mitigate change between stimulus zones

4 3

‘ E V E R Y D A Y

T H E A T R E ’

100

SECTION B -B

SOLAR LAB

ALCOVES S E AT I N G SKILLS HUB

101

Series of carriage pods to foster a variety of skills for holistic childhood development

Alcove seating nooks that offer opportunities to pause and retreat and break up the scale of long corridors

Open skylights to allow natural daylight and promote connection between land and sky

C O U R T YA R D S R E T R E AT R O O M

EDIBLE GARDEN

Rooftop edible garden to be used for life skill training and facilitate environmental educational studies

Secondary courtyards to f o s t e r i n d o o routdoor learning and promote connection to nature

Classroom to allow passive surveillance for teachers to supervise students and ensure safety

102

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

WESTERN ELEVATION

1:200 @ a0

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

SOUTHERN ELEVATION

1:200 @ a0

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

SECTION C -C

1:200 @ a0

103

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

FFL +7.00

FFL +3.50

FFL 0

104

C O N C L U S I O N

This dissertation called for a shift in paradigm towards our perception of universality in order to redefine the discourse surrounding inclusive design as one that becomes part of our mainstream design language. As the fight for environmental justice perseveres, inclusive learning environments amongst young learners are the steppingstones in paving the way towards becoming a more progressive and accepting society. While this dissertation does not provide a concrete solution, it begins to spark the conversation on whether what we so long have perceived as an inclusive world from a non-disabled perspective, is in fact accessible by a large, diversified population. In the past, the ‘universal’ has been constructed for the most privileged in society, whereas more recent research argue that buildings and cities should be designed for the least privileged in mind – disabled people, women, people of colour and children. Therefore, in order to be reach absolute inclusivity, we need to begin by first designing for those with the most barriers, as only then are we truly designing for all. Henceforth, “enabling accessibility is broader than focusing on the needs of one particular group to the detriment of all others. Effective inclusive solutions try to maximise the benefit for as many groups as possible” (Keates and Clarkson 2005, 8). In conclusion, to welcome a society whose ability in sight, hearing, smell, movement all vary from one another, it is crucial that we are ready to critique our own internalized biases to further strive for the emancipation from architectural barriers to embrace a diversified population.

105

Concept Model - Skills Hub, Carriage Pods

106

S E N S E S C A P E :

N E T W O R K

O F

I N D E P E N D E N C E

Inclusivity aims to reduce contextual barriers that exclude and marginalize specific groups to create accessible environments and provide equitable experiences to those who are disabled (Wills et al. 2014). While progressive compared to outdated design models, inclusive architecture or commonly known as universal design (UD) provisions are often limited to conforming to codes and legislation with little regard towards spatial qualities. UD also presents various unnecessary difficulties for many users and otherwise only cater for specific types of impairments. This creates biased solutions that leave certain groups unaccommodated for, in which particularly excluded are non-physically obvious disabilities.

S E E K I N G

P R O S P E C T

V S

R E F U G E

M IC TO RO NA VIE TU W RE S

E EC

LEVEL OF S T I M U L AT I O N

O TI

lo m

i ed

S K I L L S H U B

The heritage building marks the main entry threshold into the compound where the journey of learning is choreographed and flows seamlessly from one space to another. The pods aim to capitalize off the affinity that many young learners, particularly those who are neurodivergent, have towards routine and schedule. The pods and their associated activities (life skills such as food preparation, literacy skills and motor skills) are arranged to follow the natural circadian rhythm of a child’s day. The pods and bridges break down the large volume of the existing warehouse into more manageable scales that are less overwhelming and easier for students to navigate.

M I D L A N D

NG TI CE N TA LI DE N CI FA E P E D IN

R FO N Y O IT TI UN IZA RT AL PO DU OP IVI D IN

ALCOVES

0 1

CO OF N L O V E AT I LE UL IM

S E AT I N G

H UG RO TS TH EN NG LEM E DI IN AL R YF W A AT U N

Alcove seating nooks that offer opportunities to pause and retreat and break up the scale of long corridors

M A P P I N G

I R

Series of carriage pods to foster a variety of skills for holistic childhood development

S E N S O R Y

CO TO NN NES EC O TI F VI TY

SKILLS HUB

In response, this research calls for a paradigm shift to the way universality is addressed within the built environment by constructing a framework that aims to eradicate existing biases and re-mediate design strategies to create an accessible learning environment for all types of disabilities. The proposed framework takes upon a multi-sensorial approach in redefining the notions of inclusivity to encompass a broader range of users that are of different disability types, in particular for those who have sensorial disabilities such as visual and hearing impairments and neurodivergent disorders. The framework constructed utilizes 5 key design criteria that were developed through expanding on existing universal design guidelines as well as drawing from the analysis of perspectives of the disabled community. Each criterion has within itself a set of design strategies as a toolkit for composing the different spatial element that cater towards providing an accessible K-6 learning environment that is barrier-free and best correspond to their requirements and preferences.

R A I L W A Y

W O R K S H O P

SU SAF RV ET Y EI LL & AN CE

TRANSITION ZONES

30 A M

A U T O N O M Y

S T R U C T U R I N G T H E U N S T R U C T U R E D SOFT TRANSITIONS

9.3

10.3

T H I R D

ski

wa en

itin

01 g a rea

lls

pla

bre

tfo

ing

he ou

tra

t s p

cks

alt

pla h c e

ntr

11 . 3 0 A M

rou

ltip

urp

ose

0 PM

Literacy pod that performs as a localized library to house reading material

rm 1.

02 S K I L L S H U B

Life skill pod to train students on basic life skills such as food preparation 0 AM

L I T E R A C Y S K I L L S

12.3

yfi

0 A M

T E A C H E R

The proposed K-6 school combines mainstream school settings and special education requirements to cater for developing minds that encompasses a broad spectrum of sensory, cognitive and social differences. The school takes on a multi-sensorial approach which targets different types of learning that takes place beyond the typical classroom. The ‘Third Teacher’ highlights that the environmental set-up – the place where we inhabit, plays a fundamental role in the learning process to shape children’s identities and aids in self-development (Audrey and Franco 2020). The strategies put in place prioritizes student autonomy and dignity by ensuring that the learning environment allows each student to navigate and use spaces independently within their own capabilities

L I F E S K I L L S

S P A T I A L

S E Q U E N C I N G

T H E

L E A R N I N G P O D S

S E N S O R I A L T R I A L

try

R 30 T O S O L M I L K S

Motor skill pods with a range of obstacles for restless students to exert energy at the end of the school day and develop gross motor skill

fenceline DROP OFF ZONE

3 1

4 2

5 e elin

7 17 15

19 11

6 12

LIFT

line

fence

107

Entry

Staff Office

11 Sensory Trail

16 Multi-purpose Hall

Reception

Group Studios

12 ‘Bushland’

17 Gender-Inclusive Toilet

Skills Hub

Early Learning Centre

13 ‘River’

18 Playgound

Health Centre

Learning Pods

14 ‘Scarp’

19 Oval

Staff Lounge

10 Outdoor Courtyard

15 Cafeteria

20 Car park

21 Secondary

Access 1:1000

L I T E R A C Y

P O D

0 2

Rooftop edible garden to be used for life skill training and facilitate environmental educational studies

Classroom to allow passive surveillance for teachers to supervise students and ensure safety

0 3

S E N S O R Y T R A I L

Secondary courtyards to foster i n d o o r- o u t d o o r learning and promote connection to nature

C O U R T YA R D S

R E T R E AT R O O M

EDIBLE GARDEN

SOLAR LAB

Open skylights to allow natural daylight and promote connection between land and sky

L E A R N I N G P O D

Casting of shadow patterns onto surfaces as a visual wayfinding guide

C L A S S R O O M

Brick pattern create a navigation trail on surfaces for independent wayfinding

echolo

ceilin ed

ibl

rusltin

e g ar

e p lan

leave an

pl r

Native planting attract bird species to adds life, colour and sound

Planting of scented vegetation of native species in ‘Bushland’

ibl

N O O K S

ter

S O U N

plants

de native gar

T A S T E

R E F U G E

Soft spaces for sensory relief and to provide space for stretching and movement

L L M E

timbe

T O

The classrooms is populated with flexible, yet safe furniture that can be re-arranged to suit such as in a U-shaped configuration to facilitate lip reading and sign language and improve concentration amongst students

pit

sand

iss hit&m

sand

tion

s re

hadow

1. Learning Zone 2. Makers Space 3. Soft Zone 4. Storage 5. Access to Courtyard

den

E V E R Y D A Y T H E A T R E

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Ya r n i n g C i r c l e Kitchenette Retreat/Withdraw Room Storage U AT + S h o w e r U AT S Shelving

R E T R E A T

The center also acts as a transitional zone between the high stimulus activities to low stimulus classroom to help mitigate the difference and reduce anxiety in the abrupt change and is a passive line of security for teachers to supervise their students

R O O M

A neutral room for students who require sensory relief and seek respite

Edible garden for students to practice environmental education

B U S H L A N D

Plating of native vegetation and turf mounds to create intimate nooks for play

E A R N I N G P O D S

Kneipp hydrotherapy pool for sensory stimulation using collected rainwater from downpipes

1. 2. 3. 4.

Entry Access to Courtyard Courtyard Refuge Space

T R A N S I T I O N

Z O N E

The ‘everyday theatre as a transitional space to mitigate change between stimulus zones

To facilitate connection to the natural environment, the classrooms exit onto secured secondary courtyards. As direct sunlight may hinder students who are sensitive to light, the classrooms are orientated south for natural diffused light accessed from the courtyard (Bauman 2010). To reduce the travel distance across the campus, the learning pods extend vertically to cater for large number of student.

R I V E R

Introduction of nature play elements such as sand pits and climbing posts 4

S C A R P

‘ R I V E R ’

H Y D R O T H E R A P Y

P O O L

T H E

‘ E V E R Y D A Y

T H E A T R E ’

108

109

P A R T

V I I

R E F E R E N C E S

110

R E F E R E N C E

L I S T

Al, Selda, Reyhan Midilli Sari and Nimet Candas Kahya. 2012. “A Different Perspective on Education: Montessori and Montessori School Architecture.” Procedia, Social and Behavioural Sciences 46(1): 1866-1871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sbspro.2012.05.393. Altenmüller-Lewis, Ulrike. 2017. “Designing Schools for Students on the Spectrum.” The Design Journal 20(1): 2215-2229. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352738. ATA Environmental. 2006. Vegetation and Fauna Assessment Helena East and Southern Embankment. https://www.epa.wa.gov. au/sites/default/files/PER_documentation/1524-PER-Appendix%207%20-%20Site%20Vegetation%20and%20 Fauna%20Assessment.pdf. Barrett, Peter and Lucinda Barrett. 2010. “The Potential of Positive Places: Senses, Brain and Spaces.” Intelligent Buildings International 2(3): 218-228. https://doi.org/10.3763/inbi.2010.0042. Bauman, Hansel. 2010. Gallaudet Deaf Space Design Guidelines (DSDG). Gallaudet University. https://infoguides.rit.edu/ ld.php?content_id=59890829. Bjørnholt, Margunn. 2014. “Room for Thinking: The Spatial Dimension of Waldorf Education.” Research on Steiner Education 5(1): 115-130. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329442139_Room_for_Thinking_The_Spatial_Dimension_of_ Waldorf_Education. Briggs, Alan, Robin Chinnery, Laura Colman, David Dolan, Sue Graham-Taylor, Jenni Howlett, Cheryl-Anne McCann, Brooke Mandy, Gina Pickering, Rosemary Rosario, Alison Storey and Richard Walley. 2009. Swan and Helena Rivers Management Framework. https://www.emrc.org.au/Profiles/emrc/Assets/ClientData/Documents/Page_Content/ Environmental_Services/Swan_Helena/Heritage-Audit-and-Statement-of-Significance-Report.pdf. Caufield, Jack. 2019. “How to do thematic analysis.” Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis/. Clark, Catherine, Alan Dyson and Alan Millward. 1995. Towards inclusive schools? London : David Fulton Publishers. Clarkson, John, Roger Coleman, Simeon Keates, and Cheris Lebbon. 2003. Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population. London : Springer London. https://ap01a.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver. do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=10222951940001951&institutionId=1951&customerId=1940. Cubo Arkitekter and FORCE4 Architects. 2014. “House of Disable People’s Organization” ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily. com/495736/house-of-disable-people-s-organization-cubo-force4. Danske Handicaporganisationer. n.d.. “House of Disabled People’s Organisations: The world’s most accessible office building.” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/politics/trump- russiacharges.html. Datta, Soma Mandal. 2014. “Spatial Design in Schools: Impacts on Learning Potential of Children with Learning Disabilities” Thesis., Curtin University. https://espace.curtin.edu.au/bitstream/20.500.11937/65992/1/Datta%202014%20part.pdf. Donahue, Sean and Rama Gheerawo. 2007. “Inclusive Design 1.0: New Challenges and Social Concerns.” Paper presented at the 4th International Include Conference, London, UK, April 2-4, 2007. Downey, Chris. 2013. Design With the Blind in Mind. TED, 11:27. https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_downey_design_with_the_ blind_in_mind. Gaines, Kristi, Angela Bourne, Michelle Pearson and Mesha Kleibrink. 2016. Designing for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Ney York : Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Designing-for-Autism-Spectrum-Disorders/Gaines-Bourne-Pearson- Kleibrink/p/book/9780367030469. Gallaudet University. n.d. “Deafspace.” Gallaudet University. Accessed July 15, 2021. https://www.gallaudet.edu/campus-design and-planning/deafspace/. Garcia, David. 2017. “Can Humans use Echolocation to Hear the Difference Between Different Kinds of Walls? Paper presented at the 173rd ASA Meeting, Boston, US, June 25, 2017. https://acoustics.org/2669-2/. Goldsmith, Selwyn and Jeanette Dezart. 2000. Universal Ddesign: Manual of Practical Guidance for Architects. Oxford, England: Architectural Pres. 111

Hede, Paul. 2015. “The Disabled Need More Than Just Ramps.” Educational Facility Planner 48 (2&3): 58-61. https://www. hedearchitects.com.au/uploads/File/Pages-from-CEFPI_Vol48-Issue-2and3_pp.58-61.pdf. Hyelighen, Ann and Matteo Bianchin. 2018. “Building Justice: How to Overcome the Inclusive Design Paradox?.” Built Environment 44(1): 35. https://doiorg.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/10.2148/benv.44.1.23. IHCD. 2016. “Universal Design Case Studies: Hazelwood School.” Institute for Human Centered Design (IHCD). https:// universaldesigncasestudies.org/education/primary/hazelwood-school. Kafka, George. 2018.Brain Landscape: Access All Areas Designing Spaces and Places for Diverse Sensory Needs. Design Crucial. http://www.designcurial.com/news/access-all-areas-designing-for-diverse-sensory-needs-6175613/. Keates, Simon and John Clarkson. 2004. Countering Design Exclusion: An Introduction to Inclusive Design. London : Springer. https://ap01-.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_ id=10223450670001951&institutionId=1951&customerId=1940. Layle, Paige. 2021. Come Stim With Me: What Even is Stimming. YouTube video, 16:25. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= s94S2Ofz6M&ab_channel=paigelayle. Liebschner, Joachim. 2002. A Child’s Work: Freedom and Play in Froebel’s Educational Theory and Practice. Michigan, US: Lutterworth Press. Logan, Katharine. 2021. “Continuing Education: Design for Neurodiversity.” Architectural Record, January 1, 2021. https://www. architecturalrecord.com/articles/14931-continuing-educationdesign-forneurodiversity?v=preview?oly_enc_ id=2459H8927923I0G. Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (MRA). 2016. Midland Redevelopment Area Design Guidelines. WA: Australian Government. https://cdn.mra.wa.gov.au/production/documents-media/documents/midland/file/midland- redevelopment-area-design-guidelines.pdf. Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (MRA). 2017. Midland Heritage Interpretation Strategy. WA: Australian Government. http:// cdn.mra.wa.gov.au/production/documents-media/documents/midland/file/midland-heritage-interpretation-strategy. Migliani, Audrey and José Tomás Franco. 2020. “How to Design Schools and Interiors Based on Waldorf Pedagogy.” ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/935990/how-to-design-schools-and-interiors-based-on-waldorf-pedagogy. Migliani, Audrey. 2021. “How to Stimulate Children’s Autonomy Through Architecture and the Montessori Method.” ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily.com/930510/how-to-stimulate-childrens-autonomy-through-architecture-and-the-montessori- method. Mostafa, Magda. 2015. “Autism ASPECTSS™ Design Index.” ASPECTSS Architecture for Autism. https://www.autism.archi/ aspectss. Oliver, Bobbie and Patrick Bertola 2006. The Workshops: A History of the Midland Government Railway Workshops. WA: University of Western Australia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340599439_The_Workshops_A_history_of_ the_Midland_Government_Railway_Workshops. Owen, Ceridwen. 2016. Design Across The Spectrum: Playspaces. Tasmania, AU: University of Tasmania. Quirk, Vanessa. 2013. “An Interview with Magda Mostafa: Pioneer in Autism Design.” ArchDaily. https://www.archdaily. com/435982/an-interview-with-magda-mostafa-pioneer-in-autism-design. RIBAVideo. 2009. Inclusive Design. Youtube Video, 8:53. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z82Ql3cGK4. Riedel, Philip and Alyson Mahoe. n.d.. Designing for Special Education: Best Practices for Special Needs Learning Facilities. https://www.nacarchitecture.com/publications/DesignForSpecialEducation.pdf. Rychtarikova, Monika, Jasmien Herssens and Ann Heylighen. 2012. “Towards More Inclusive Approaches in Soundscape Research.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Noise Control Engineering: The Soundscape of Blind People, New York, US, September 19-22, 2012.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259464595_Towards_more_ inclusive_approaches_in_soundscape_research. 112

R E F E R E N C E

L I S T

Siwy, Eric. 2011. “Building Tomorrow’s Primary Schools Today: using futures Studies to Determine how increase Technology Use in Education Might Effect Current Primary School Design” PHD Dissertation., University of Hawai‘i. https://core.ac.uk/ download/pdf/84320403.pdf. Spielgaben. 2013. “Comparison among Froebel, Montessori, Reggio Emilia and Waldorf-Steiner Methods.” Spielgaben. https:// spielgaben.com/comparison-froebel-montessori-reggio-waldorf-part-1/. Tomas, Vanessa, Andrea Cross, and Wenonah N. Campbell. 2018. “Building Bridges Between Education and Health Care in Canada: How the ICF and Universal Design for Learning Frameworks Mutually Support Inclusion of Children With Special Needs in School Settings.” Frontiers in education (forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00018. Vermeersch, Peter and Ann Heylighen. 2015. “Mobilizing Disability Experience to Inform Architectural Practice: Lessons Learned from a Field Study.” Journal of Research Practice 11(2): 1-27. http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/495/419. Vox. 2016. How Architecture Changes for the Deaf. YouTube video, 4:47. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNGp1aviGvE&ab_ channel=Vox. WHO (World Health Organisation). 2011. World Report on Disability. HSE 168. Switzerland: WHO Press. https://apps.who.int/iris/ rest/bitstreams/53067/retrieve. Wills, Ben. 2016. How Designing with all of our senses creates a more inclusive world. Common Edge. https://commonedge.org/ how-designing-with-all-of-our-senses-creates-a-more-inclusive-world/. Wils, Rod, Missy Morton, Margaret McLean, Maxine Stephenson, Roger Slee. 2014. Tales from School: Learning Disability and State Education after Administrative Reform. Rotterdam: SensePublishers : Imprint: SensePublishers. https://ap01a.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do;jsessionid=704DBADDA23383490C9DD3E5D719F747. app04.ap01.prod.alma.dc05.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com:1801?operation=resolveService&package_service_ id=10208906290001951&institutionId=1951&customerId=1940. Winance, Myriam. 2014. “Universal design and the challenge of diversity: reflections on the principles of UD, based on empirical research of people’s mobility.” Disability and rehabilitation 36(16): 1334-1343. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.93 6564.

113

F I G U R E

R E F E R E N C E S

Hehir, Thomas, Todd Grindal, Brian Freeman, Renee Lamoreau, Yolanda Borquaye and Samantha Burke. 2016. A Summary of the Evidence on Inclusive Education. Sau Paulo: Alana. https://alana.org.br/wpcontent/uploads/2016/12/A_Summary_ of_the_evidence_on_inclusive_education.pdf. Fujifilm. .n.d.. Universal design at Fuji Xerox. Fujifilm. https://www.fujifilm.com/fbglobal/eng/company/social/ud. MRA. 2016. “Midland Master Plan.” MRA. https://cdn.mra.wa.gov.au/production/documents-media/documents/midland/file/ midland-redevelopment-area-design-guidelines.pdf. Watson, Lindsay. 1995. Site Plan. The Railway History of Midland Junction. WAGR. .n.d.. Midland Workshops c1905. Main Store, - Interior, Looking East. Rail Heritage WA. http://www.railheritagewa.org.au/ archive_scans/displayimage.php?album=51&pid=14342#top_display_media. WAGR. .n.d.. Midland Workshops c1905. Main Store, - View From South West. http://www.railheritagewa.org.au/archive_scans/ displayimage.php?album=51&pid=14342#top_display_media.

114

115

P A R T

V I I I

A P P E N D I X

116

D E S I G N

117

P R O C E S S

118

D E S I G N PRELIMINARY DESIGN OPTION 1

PRELIMINARY DESIGN OPTION 2

119

P R O C E S S

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

120

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

LAYOUT AND PROGRAMME PROGRESSION

121

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

122

D E S I G N LEARNING POD

123

P R O C E S S

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

SPATIAL QUALITIES

124

D E S I G N SKILLS HUB

125

P R O C E S S

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

FACADE STUDY

126

D E S I G N PRECEDENT STUDIES

127

P R O C E S S

D E S I G N

P R O C E S S

SITE STUDY

128

D I S C O U R S E

129

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

130

D I S C O U R S E

131

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

132

D I S C O U R S E

133

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

134

D I S C O U R S E

135

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

136

D I S C O U R S E

137

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

138

D I S C O U R S E

139

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

140

D I S C O U R S E

141

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

142

D I S C O U R S E

143

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

144

D I S C O U R S E

145

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

146

D I S C O U R S E

147

A N A L Y S I S

D I S C O U R S E

A N A L Y S I S

LIST OF DATA SOURCES Disability Types Blind Blind Blind Blind Blind Blind Blind Blind Deaf Deaf

Deaf Deaf

Tittle Perspective of a bind students What School was life as a blind student My Experience at a School for the Blind Multisensory Museum: learning to see from a blind perspective How Blind People See With Sound… feat. Molly Burke! Kyren and the Mysterious World of Sight: Growing up Blind Blind people do not need to see Blind Man Describes Abstract Sculpture With Echo Location Growing Up Disabled in Australia: Wired for Sound A Deaf Student’s Experience on Campus Students who are deaf face challenges on campus Making Education Accessible to Deaf Children A Comparative Perspective on the Experiences of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals as Students at Mainstream and Special Schools Young and Deaf: Dean's Story What Deaf Students Want In A Teacher

Deaf

How architecture changes for the Deaf

Cerebral Palsy

Growing Up Disabled in Australia: You are enough Growing Up Disabled in Australia: Noisy Silence Growing Up Disabled in Australia: Chlorophyll like pink Growing Up Disabled in Australia: Catching Meaning COME STIM WITH ME! | What Even Is Stimming? AUTISM vs. ADHD similarities and differences Being autistic in mainstream education | Becky Cox | TEDxYouth@StPeterPort Two young people with autism's different experiences of finishing at school Ask an Autistic #9 - What is Sensory Processing Disorder? Growing Up Disabled in Australia: Et Lux (also Light)

ADHD, autism Autism Intellectual disability Autism Autism vs ADHD Autism Autism

SPD Connective tissue disorder; autism

Author University of Texas

Year 2009

Data Type YouTube Video

Molly Burke

2020

YouTube Video

2020

Youtube Video

Van Abbemuseum (Marleen Hartjes),, KULeuven. Its Okay to be smart (Molly Burkel Brian Bush) Kyren Andrews; Attitude

2018

YouTube Video

2019

YouTube Video

2016

YouTube Video

Santiago Velasquez

2018

TedTALK

Brian Bushway

2015

Youtube Video

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

Courtney Duerig

2016

Web Article

Georgia Davis

2016

Web Article

Nyle Dimarco

2018

Ted Talk

Panayiotis Angelides and Christiana Aravi

2006

Article

Dean Buckley, Attitude The Florida School for the Deaf and Blind Derick Behm; Vox

2016

Youtube

2015

Youtube

2016

Youtube Video

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

Paige Layle

2021

Youtube Video

Paige Layle & Olivia

Youtube Video

Becky Cox

2016

Ted Talk

Ambitious about Autism

2012

Youtube Video

Amythest Schaber

2014

Youtube Video

Findlay, Carly

2021

Book

148

D A T A

149

S E L E C T I O N

I N D E X

D A T A

S E L E C T I O N

I N D E X

150

S I T E NEEDS ASSESSMENT

151

S E L E C T I O N

S I T E

S E L E C T I O N

152

S I T E NEEDS ASSESSMENT

153

S E L E C T I O N

S I T E

S E L E C T I O N

154

L O G

155

B O O K

L O G

B O O K

156

L O G

157

B O O K

T h i s

p a g e

h a s

b e e n

i n t e n t i o n a l l y

l e f t

b l a n k

158

T H A N K

Y O U