moodboard via Compfight

Architect Maddy Burke-Vigeland writes in FastCompany about her firm’s research and new ideas in campus designs. She proposes some interesting thoughts (below)… Here’s our critique:

The cons: These ideas seem to largely serve the elitist and higher-priced model of education… catering to what students want at expensive, private schools. That’s the weakness in her argument. Should university design cater to the whims of student generations? What about when those aesthetic whims of students in the 1970s change in the 1980s or 1990s. That means schools are constantly tearing down or refurbishing old buildings and building new ones. That’s costly. It’s brick and mortar centric.

The notion that colleges should invest more in buildings and less in technology is a questionable one…. and one that is self-serving to architectural firms. Data shows that more and more students are taking classes online or in blended learning models.

It’s charming that students value paper and pencil tools higher than connectivity. But we think while some students say they want less connectivity, they would raise an incredible ruckus if they didn’t have Wifi on a campus…. or computers and smart phones. Yes. Perhaps there are times and places to turn off computers and to have WIFI-free zones on campus as an experiment (And yes. Perhaps the library is a good place to start). But tread lightly. Students must have the self-discipline to use pen and paper and be inspired. They should be the ones to close their Facebook page and write a term paper rather than relying on a school to tell them to do so.

The Pros: Burke-Vigeland makes a strong point that classrooms shouldn’t just sit dark when class isn’t in session. More classrooms should be multi-purpose rooms where students can collaborate when not sitting in a lecture. The learning experience should be individualized. We’ve seen this trend already happening on many campuses. If there are affordable ways to re-use buildings at community colleges and other institutions, we are all for it. We think there is wisdom in her call for collaborative spaces where students can study and work together. The time to make such changes is when a school is updating existing buildings anyway.

The fine line is knowing how to have student-centric design in education without being dated and without being extravagant in one’s spending on buildings and architects. School is still school. Yes. It should be inspiring. Yes. It should be collaborative. But it’s not the Four Seasons…

Burke-Vigeland writes: