21stC Modern Learning Environments ( MLEs) and 1970s Open Plan Schools – similar challenges and problems – or new opportunities?

Edmund Burke

‘We build our building and then they shape us’ Winston Churchill.

 ‘Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it’ Edmund Burke

A few months ago I found myself in conflict with a friend of mine who recently been appointed to a  Modern Learning Environments. It was over a blog I wrote about MLEs and he thought I was being over critical. I have since removed references to his school although I believed that his school was doing a great job in their particular MLE. 

In a later blog I suggested the pedagogical beliefs that shouldunderpin such a learning environment. Much earlier I had outlined ideas from educator Charity James outlining her ideas to make use of such flexible environmentsin the 1970s; still one of the best articles about how to use a MLE.

Don’t get me wrong. I believed the open plan schools of the 70s had, and their recent iteration MLEs, have great potential to develop ‘new minds for a new millennium’ (see Churchill’s quote above) enabling students, as the New Zealand Curriculum says, able to ‘seek, use and create their own knowledge’. But , I also believe, that lessons learnt about the success and failure of the 70s open plan buildings are worth considering (refer to Edmund Burke’s quote above).

Modern Learning Environments are the government ‘flagship for change’ and, to quote the Prime Minister, ‘a window to the future’ and will be ‘what all NZ schools will eventually look like’. Similar rhetoric was heard in the 1970s along with such ‘buzz’ words as:  ‘flexible buildings’, ‘collaboration', 'future thinking skills’, and ‘learner centred schools’, often along with derogatory phrases such as ‘single cell classrooms’ being a thing of the past.

A future oriented document

It is also ironic that while the Ministry is building open plan MLEs to prepare students for the 21stC they impose on school reactionary National Standards which look back to a standardised past.  Teachers now have to weld together the innovative spirit of the New Zealand Curriculum with the conformity and compliance targets required by the standards.

MLEs, if implemented properly, might well be ‘windows to the future’ but education is always more than buildings and technology and it is important that they don’t become the ‘silver bullet’ that when provided will solve problems that ‘single cell’ classrooms are unable cope with. Those teaching in such glamorous photogenic environments are naturally all too often over enthusiastic about their experience but what is needed is a critical appraisal of their success.

An evaluation of open schools

Thinking about past history of open plan schools I came across two books (one was more a booklet) that are worth consideration if there are lessons to be learnt. 

 The first is a NZEI book, ‘Aspects of School Organisation’ published in 1976, evaluating open education schools. The smaller booklet ,‘Learning with the Children’, was published by myself outlining open education teaching in traditional classrooms and the transferring of such ideas into an open plan school environment in the 1970s. The later booklet was republished and presented at the 1975 Auckland world Education Conference held at the Elleslie Racecourse.

Re-reading such books brings to the forefront the challenges, problems and some solutions that may apply to teaching in the new Modern Leaning Environments.

By mid 1970s there were over 200 open plan units operating in NZ schools. In most schools, over time, walls were replaced and teachers reverted to ‘single cell’ classrooms.  The Education Department and architects may have thought they were ‘a window to the future’ but the educational advantages of such flexible building, for all the rhetoric was never realised..

The NZEI book had chapters by both practitioners and educationalists. A chapter By Peter Ramsay (then at the School of Education Waikato University) called ‘Egg Crate or Barn: the Open Teaching Controversy in School Organization’ is well worth the read.  In this chapter he outlines the strengths and weaknesses of open plan teaching; strengths and weaknesses that still apply in todays MLE schools.

Published for  Auck NZEI World Conf  1973

The smaller ‘Learning with the Children’ booklet covered the progress of a  group of Taranaki teachers  introducing open education ideas in traditional rooms beginning  in 1970 and later the development of such ideas in an open plan unit in 1974.

The success of such classrooms (self-contained or open plan) was based on a shared set of beliefs about how students learn and the successful transference of such beliefs to an open plan environment was the result of the strong educational leadership of the Deputy Principal.

 The open plan buildings only provided the opportunity.

 This particular successful open plan unit was cobbled together from a number of prefabs and, in contrast to the ‘open prairies’ designed by the architects (Ramsay’s ‘barns’ and many modern MLEs), was defined as a ‘nook and cranny’  style and more designed by the teachers involved.

The ideas underpinning the open education classrooms, and later the open plan, were:

(1) The development of integrated programmes with themes based on curriculum areas, the local environment and students interests.

(2) The valuing of the personal ideas, questions and theories of the students in all areas of learning.

(3) Helping students develop confidence and take responsibility for their own learning choices

(4) Teaching of skills at point of need, individually or in groups, for students to complete quality work (this in contrast to the use of ability grouping in reading and maths)

(5) Develop mathematics and literacy programmes based around motivational challenges and, where possible, to teach skills to be used in the inquiry programme.

(6) To really value the creative and language arts – for many students areas of personal strength often neglected and an excellent way for teachers to develop the idea of doing things well.

(7) One vital idea was to ‘slow the pace of work’ so as to provide time to come alongside learners to assist so they are able to achieve their ‘personal best’ and  to develop a sense of craftsmanship. 'Stickability' or perseverance is a vital attitude. (Too many students think first finished is best. This growth in quality thinking and presentation is best seen in individual student’s bookwork.)

Introducing challenges through displays

(8) A need to provide structure to provide security for students but that this structure is best negotiated with the students themselves.Students need to know ‘what, why, when and how’ to do tasks undertaken. Day to day organisation is continually evolving according to need and the growing skill of both teachers and students. Rotation group work (not ability groups) is a means to keep students and teachers on task. As the year progresses students are able to undertake personal studies of their own choice (individually or in groups)

From 'Learning with the Children'

(9) The best assessment is evidence of students’ growth in the various areas of learning and in particular by what they can demonstrate, exhibit or display. Comparison of the work completed in term one and four ought to be obvious to students, teachers and parents.

(10) Room environments need to celebrate the thoughts and achievements of students across all areas of learning. Units of work to be displayed with provocative headings, study questions and where necessary, framed students work.

(11) All the above demands teachers to be guides, coaches and facilitators.

Encouraging 'slow' loking

To translate this to an open plan environment required leadership, positive relationships between teachers, all in an atmosphere of mutual respect between teachers and learners.

The translation of ideas into an open unit was a real challenge – particularly sharing of students with other teachers.

After two years the ideas developed were:

(1)    The provision of a diversified ‘workshop’ day allowing students to work individually or in groups providing greater choice (and responsivity) and teacher and students skill developed. The more skills in place the less structure required.

(2)    The importance of introducing skills required, in realistic contexts, for students to become confident independent learners.  Most important was to encourage the students to work carefully by ‘slowing the pace’ of their work allowing teachers to assist as necessary.

(3)    The importance of the total learning environment; student work to be displayed to celebrate achievement and for new topics to be introduced by well-arranged teacher displays.

The Deputy Principal involving in establishing the open unit (the students’ called it the ‘open planet’) had read widely about open education and about open plans and had come to the realisation that many open plans were basically introducing traditional ideas rather than new approaches. As a result of this many such schools reverted to self-contained teaching as documented in the NZEI book above.

Cant see the buildings for the student work

He decided it was important to keep home groups to start the day, and often to finish, to provide  security. Students need to know ‘what, why, when and how’ to do tasks undertaken. 

Day to day organisation is continually evolving according to need and the growing skill of both teachers and students. Rotation group work (not ability groups) is a means to keep students and teachers on task. As the year progresses students are able to undertake personal studies of their own choice (individually or in groups) security. 

The programmes the teachers developed were formal and informal; evolutionary in nature. Teachers, he felt, needed to keep a balance of curriculum areas and, where choices were provided that students didn’t revert to shallow ‘busy work’.

Teachers needed to keep the highest of standards for their students with basic skills work covered by targeted  withdrawal groups so all students could produce work of their highest standard.

Cooperative planning is strength of planning in an open unit to develop in depth content areas to be covered and choices for students to select from; from this ‘master plan’ individual teachers plan further activities for their assigned groups.  Students have a checklist to ensure tasks selected are completed. Sometimes individual teachers become in house ‘experts’ and introduce a major theme to the whole group. Often there are multiple studies in progress and as students gain expertise individually chosen studies.

Maths and reading/language arts are covered in the morning in withdrawal groups. Maths follows a topic approach and although one teacher has overall responsibility each teacher plans their own activities; where possible activities are planned to contribute to theme/inquiry studies.

Literature usually starts the afternoon programme and two afternoons are spent on cultural activities – Maori culture and music taken by two teachers while remaining teachers handle the PE programme. All other afternoons students are involved in completing theme/inquiry tasks.

It is not possible to completely define the timetable in an evolving unit but there is always enough structure to ensure all students are on task. The open unit provides for flexibility and change and the variety that evolves are appreciated by all. With experience there are activity works through days – ‘true open education’.

From 'Learning with Children' booklet

Organisations are simply a devise to ensure students are involved so as each to produce work of the highest quality. The success of the unit is reflected by the displays of student work and by their attitudes towards learning; a community of scientists and artists who have done their best to express what they have achieved; a community where all are continually learning.

The lead teacher’s final comments stress the importance of relationships between all involved and that it is difficult to verbalise all that has been achieved – to fully appreciate it all a visit is required. A climate of controlled order and behaviour has been achieved and that this, combined with the emphasis on disciplined work leads little unnecessary noise.

He saw the achievements of the teachers and students in the unit as workshop for future education and was well aware that there is always more to learn and to do.

Colonial display ( Bill Guild)

In our own evaluation of our experiment implementing open education/open plan schooling we wrote ‘It has not been as easy to develop room environments and programmes as might have been expected.

 Teachers felt real and imagined pressures to conform to less venturesome methods and also found that their theory of such teaching was often in advance of their ability to put ideas into practice’ and that ‘and even well over a year our teaching ideas were still being formulated and changed…..Early in the year the major fault was to move forward too quickly forgetting the background of the children and our own ability to cope with the diversity that eventuated.’ ‘We wanted them to independent learners before they had developed the necessary skills to work independently….children worked too fast with little sense of craftsmanship.’

Visitors who came to observe we always impressed with the quality and creativity of the students work on display. The teachers involved wrote ‘ The realisation of the importance of the room environment came slowly to the children. As they saw their work mounted and displayed they began to accept the room as their own and were able to recognise their own contributions to the environment.’

Teachers concluded that ‘it should be appreciated that as a method it is not an easy way to teach and requires considerable thought and time to develop.’

John Holt  (1964)  wrote  about his ideal school as a place in which 'each child in his own way can satisfy his curiosity, develop his

abilities and talents, pursue his interests, and from the adults and older children around him get a glimpse of the great variety and richness of life'.

This brings me back to thinking about current Modern Learning Environment and Edmund Burke’s quote, ‘those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it’.

We need to look past the buildings

MLEs are more than glamorous new buildings and computer access – they are, as in the era of open plans, all about relationships, leadership, and the quality of the teaching and to be judged by the quality of achievements of their students.


'Happiness has to  got to derive from achievement and success not by having a good time.'  Charles Silberman ( another 70s educator.)

Our buildings may indeed shape us, as Churchill wrote, but it is over to teachers to see that students are ‘shaped’ in the most positive way.

Did he get his fingers right?