Signifying the Transition from Modern to Post-Modern Schooling... 15outdoor spaces, social area, dining/cafeteria, etc, has dominated post-modern school
architecture. In the school buildings built under this new ̳paradigm‘ a variety of different
work environments and facilities to suit differing needs e.g. individual private spaces,
communal spaces for teamwork, relaxation areas etc, co-exist. The main underlying and
leading idea is that of the multi-purpose spaces which integrate variable services. Multiple-
use spaces were proposed for efficiency and consecutive use of the same space by different
classes to increase contact between disciplines.
The implication of this idea is to loosen the rigid and clearly defined various
classifications existing in modern schooling like those between students of different ages
(separated in different classrooms) or sexes (e.g. in British educational history the two sexes
were usually segregated with walls and/or fences dividing the playground into two large
sections, one for girls and the other for boys)^3 , subjects (different spaces like gymnasium,
science lab, computer room, art studios are allocated to different school subjects) or learning
practices (e.g. the theoretical part of the lessons were delivered in the classrooms while the
practical parts were exercised in the laboratories, or reading was mainly done in the library).^4
In these conditions the experience of living and learning with difference is conceptualized
as an open journey in which the very act of movement across spatial boundaries unlocks the
fixity of meanings and identities and, hence, problematizes the spatial logic of bounded
learning places.
Case study 2: Moving from the industrial standardized to the locally adapted school
building
This shift is mostly related to the mechanism of contrast between the characteristics of
the material culture of school as an institution and the characteristics of the local (community)
material culture. This contrast can signify stronger or weaker classification between school
and community.
The logic of modern schooling is very well expressed in the words of John Dewey who
argued that school must be somewhat bounded from society to ―fortify the mind against
irrational tendencies current in the social environment‖ (Dewey, 1910, p. 25). This logic led
to a highly standardized and quite distinguishable material culture of schooling. It was
supposed that standardization and the corresponding institutionalization it implied, provided
school with a special character which made it readily distinguishable from the rural or urban
landscapes, it occupied. The most important manifestations of this phase were uniform and
state controlled architectural standards for school buildings, search for the greatest possible
(^3) In U.K the division of the sexes by the use of what we today call ̳gender walls‘ was a policy that continued in
many primary schools until after the adoption of coeducation (i.e. mixed-sex education) in the 1950s, but some
schools still retain these walls (though not the policy of segregation). Where they exist, these walls provide
4 another opportunity for children to demarcate the playground into smaller spaces (Armitage, 2005).
The trend for increased connectivity or weaker classification is a clear realization of the post-modern ideal of
heterotopia (Foucault 1986, 2000; Lefebvre 1991, 2003) which becomes gradually a reality through the open
plan schools or even more through the foreseeable future of the virtual school. For Foucault (1986),
heterotopias are places that are ―capable of juxtaposing in a single real place several spaces, several sites that
are in themselves incompatible‖ (p. 25).
The idea of the virtual school stems from the idea of the ̳Virtual Office‘ which has emerged with the advent of
cordless technology: mobile phones, laptop computers, pagers and electronic notebooks have made it possible
to work anywhere. Also referred to as the ̳Nomadic Office‘, the practice of ̳sedentary‘ and ̳nomadic‘
employees has been adopted by some organisations (Pelegrin-Genel, 1996). While sedentary employees are
restricted to a single static workplace, nomadic workers conduct their work in many different places such as
cars, trains, hotel rooms, airport lounges etc, using mobile technology.