24 Kostas Dimopoulos
Similar trends for more flexibility can be also traced in the design of workplaces.
Specifically, workplaces today and in the future need to offer flexibility of both space and
personnel, breaking away from hierarchical patterns of the past. They become dynamic to
allow the interchange of ideas and maximum communication which will in turn inspire
creative thought and dynamic interaction to generate innovative ideas (Anjum, Paul and
Ashcroft, 2005).
The shift of organisational set up from a static hierarchical structure to a more fluid team-
working arrangement implies the need for simplicity and flexibility in furniture design as
well. For example many pieces of furniture in school buildings are modular and suspended
from demountable partitions. The original iron desks have been replaced by wheeled light
desks.
Under the influence of this generalized organizational culture nowadays school buildings
are designed with some features intended to maximize flexibility. The school building is
never finished; members of the school community experience it and re-build it over time.
This ongoing adaptation of the school environments is also aligned with a more general trend
of an increased interest in user participation in the shaping of living environments. There is
growing conviction in a number of quarters that the child‘s view on learning environments
should be considered (Burke and Grosvenor, 2003; Clark et al., 2003; DfES, 2002).^12
In a flexible and adaptable school environment one can find elements like: easily
movable objects (e.g. light or wheeled furniture, movable displays)^13 , variability of learning
environments, temporary use surfaces (e.g. temporary writing surfaces), adjustable lighting,
temperature or sound volume or demountable partitions.
Finally, framing has to do with the extent social relations between students and school as
an institution are explicitly hierarchical in nature. The more explicitly hierarchical these
relations are, the stronger the framing becomes. However, social hierarchical relationships
could be signified by a variety of material aspects. It is commonplace in studies of material
culture that different objects, materials, or characteristics like size, shine, style, etc can act as
signifiers of differentiated social status. For example, a teacher‘s luxurious leather chair
contrasted with his/her students wooden cheap chairs could become a symbol of his/her
superior status and authority. In addition, important data about individual or group space is
directly related to membership or status: the amount and kind of space allocated to a member
of a cultural system reflects his/her status in the structure of that system. For instance, the area
of space allocated to teacher in the classroom of Figure 6, being relatively larger than those
allocated to each individual student could be read as a marker of the superior social position
of the former with respect to the latter. Similar significations of hierarchical social
relationships could be realized by a marked differentiation between the dressing codes of
teachers (i.e. formal dress code) and students (i.e. casual dress code signifying a rebellious
spirit of youth culture).
(^12) Nowadays, pupil views and pupil voices are buzz words in education contexts and they are driving many
initiatives and policies, as well as the process of school development and evaluation (Flutter & Rudduck,
2004). This movement for the student voice to be heard and recognized is underpinned by a philosophical shift
within the wider community to listen to the views of children initiated by the UN Convention on the Rights of
13 the Child (1989).
Hellerup Skole, Copenhagen, Denmark is an exemplary case as far as adaptability is concerned. In this school a
series of wooden central staircases double as seating and performance spaces (BCSE, 2006).