logo
From modern to modular: the revolving door of open-plan classrooms

From modern to modular: the revolving door of open-plan classrooms

Newsrooma day ago
Analysis: Last week, headlines hailed the end of modern learning environments, following a press release from the education minister saying the Government 'calls time on open-plan classrooms'.
While the Government might want parents – and schools – to believe this is the end of open-plan classrooms, that's not quite what's happening.
It might have been more accurate to say the Government is sending a strong signal to schools that when they eventually build new classrooms or undertake upgrades to their existing school property, the Government would prefer they opt for one of their kitset, modular spaces now being offered by the ministry rather than completely open-plan classrooms.
But without a law change, or at least a change to regulation, the Government is unable to direct schools – and communities – on exactly how their classrooms should be configured. And the education minister says she hopes it won't get to that point.
The announcement comes off the back of a long-running discussion about the merits – or lack thereof – of innovative learning environments, which are also known as modern learning environments or open-plan classrooms.
While Education Minister Erica Stanford has made comments about these so-called 'barnyard classrooms' since early in the parliamentary term, the move to try and phase out open-plan classrooms comes as the Government also announces a new crown entity to manage school property, off the back of major cost blowouts, poorly maintained classrooms, and a lack of transparency.
Innovative learning environments – or what Stanford is calling open-plan classrooms – have been around since the 1980s, but more recently experienced widespread uptake under former National Party education minister Hekia Parata.
Parata made a push for the classrooms that were more open, allowing for more flexibility regarding student-teacher ratios for schools under staffing pressure, more seamless use of digital devices, student-led learning, and collaborative teaching methods.
In the wake of the Canterbury earthquakes, rebuilt schools were being fitted with these modern learning environments and Parata vowed to revamp every primary and secondary school – all 38,000 classrooms at the time – to the new modern learning environment standards by 2021.
New Zealand wasn't the first to adopt these environments, with Australia and (of course) the Finnish also doing away with single-cell classrooms where the teacher stands in front of the rows of desks and students are expected to absorb knowledge.
But it didn't take long for parents and teachers to revolt against the push for open-plan.
In some cases, the dislike appeared to be that which always comes with change – especially in education. But over time parents, teachers, experts and officials raised issues with the noise in the classrooms. Parents of children on the autism spectrum or with neurodivergence were particularly concerned.
Not all spaces were initially fitted with the right materials for acoustic cushioning and furniture that helped diffuse the higher noise levels that sometimes comes from the style of teaching and learning, where several conversations or lessons can be taking place at the same time.
Meanwhile, some teachers had these new classrooms foisted on them without the appropriate professional development and training. They did not know how best to operate in the space, the modern pedagogy that aligned with collaborative teaching and learning, and general best practice.
According to the secondary schools union PPTA – modern learning environment sceptics: a flexible learning environment is not an innovative learning environment.
'For a space to be innovative, the pedagogy needs to be innovative. Without innovative teaching practice, it is only an 'open plan' environment.'
Under this Government and the last Labour-led Government, there has been a push to pull back from these types of classrooms. Some schools have taken it upon themselves to re-introduce walls, or at least sliding doors, to close up the space.
And some have gone as far as to label classroom design as a notable contributor to New Zealand's educational achievement woes, citing noise, distraction, students feeling overwhelmed, and general behaviour issues.
Just last week, Pāpāmoa College in the Bay of Plenty sent out a note announcing the school – built in 2011 – would be re-configuring all its open-plan spaces into single-cell classrooms.
'Our board considers this current layout as a significant barrier to educational achievement at Pāpāmoa College,' the online notice said.
'The school completed its own due diligence over the past few years and, amongst other things, trialled relocating senior students from the open plan spaces into our temporary relocatable classrooms. This initiative has resulted in positive achievement outcomes for the students and the school.'
But it does not appear to be that simple. The research is unsettled, if not contradictory.
The PPTA has long been calling for more research in this area, raising concerns that without evidence to support the rollout out of modern learning environments students were essentially being used as guinea pigs.
(Primary teachers union NZEI Te Riu Roa doesn't have a position on the classrooms.)
A similar message has come from libertarian think tank the NZ Initiative, which has written a report and pushed the message that there is no evidence to support the roll-out of these classrooms, and therefore they are bad.
Following public discussion, political discourse, and the continued lurch from single-cell to open-plan and back again, the Ministry of Education did finally commission some research.
In 2017, the study carried out at the University of Melbourne found 'open plan learning spaces lead to higher teacher mind frames and student deep learning'.
Overall, the results were ambivalent. This report also called for further research.
A 2019 study of English-medium primary schools from the NZ Council of Educational Research produced some similar findings, with teachers saying they enjoyed teaching in collaborative, open-plan environments.
'Sixty-two percent of those who taught in an innovative learning environment enjoyed teaching in such an environment, and 55 percent thought their teaching had changed for the better,' the survey report said.
However, most of the teachers surveyed said some students found the spaces and way of learning overwhelming.
Two years later NZCER carried out another study on secondary schools, which found secondary teachers also believed some of their students were overwhelmed and that teachers had not received the necessary professional learning and development required to teach effectively in these spaces.
Meanwhile, New South Wales started to do away with the classrooms and a Senate inquiry also questioned their efficacy, saying many of the classrooms were designed by architects without proper knowledge of education or consultation with educators.
One local example of this was at Grey Lynn School in Auckland, which was fitted with open-plan, collaborative learning environments, designed by architects.
While there was some consultation with the board and previous principal, the school found it needed to retrospectively create a transition strategy, which helped staff understand the links between pedagogy, space and design.
While much of the blame for the wholesale move to open-plan has been dumped at the feet of Hekia Parata, a former government source told Newsroom there were reasons to move in that direction at the time.
Some schools were under staffing pressure and this design allowed for flexibility. It also coincided with a time when schools were increasing students' tech literacy and many were moving towards one-to-one device use.
Moreover, it was being used in countries that were at the forefront of educational success.
The source admitted it wasn't going to be the right fit for every learner or every teacher, but doing away with innovative learning environments without the research to prove they were detrimental was a short-sighted move.
The anti-collaborative space debate was already bubbling away under the previous Labour government, and property was a feature of the 2018 Tomorrow's Schools review.
The independent taskforce recommended removing school property decisions from boards, for a variety of reasons, including a lack of capacity and expertise when it came to design and project management.
Ultimately, it was decided the Ministry of Education would provide advice on the feasibility and cost of taking on more property related responsibilities from boards over the next five to 10 years, while ensuring schools and communities continued to have significant input into the design of their physical spaces.
Former education minister and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has also been known to refer to the open-plan approach using the pejorative 'barnyard' description, but he says schools and communities should retain choice in the matter.
When asked about the Government's so-called scrapping of open-plan classrooms last week he managed to synthesise the through-line from much of the inconclusive research: 'It comes down to the quality of teaching,' he said.
'It will all come down to whether you know that's actually being properly supported by professional practice. The quality of teaching is what makes the single biggest difference in schools, not the size of the classroom.'
Questions about whether teachers have received the appropriate training and professional development to make the most of open-plan, collaborative spaces to enhance their practice and lift student outcomes have been canvassed by the research.
But there's been little discussion about those barriers to lifting the quality of teaching, which has nothing to do with open-plan classrooms.
This Government has identified the need for improvement in initial teacher education, ongoing professional development, non-contact time for planning classes, and support for students with additional needs.
If these issues are addressed, it is more likely teachers will have the necessary expertise and capacity to make the most of innovative learning environments.
Crucially, the research also fails to make a causal link between innovative learning environments and poor student achievement.
While there is undoubtedly a lack of research to prove these environments are better for children, there is also nothing to prove they are worse.
It is easy for school leaders, parents and politicians to point towards a simple, tangible thing as the reason for falling achievement. Especially when it's something that can be physically altered and sold as a fix.
What educational research is clear on is that the single biggest factor affecting educational achievement in the classroom is the quality of teaching. But beyond that, societal factors, including a household's economic circumstances and structural racism in the education system are have the biggest influence on student outcomes.
So, while the Government might like parents to think they're going to secure their children's future by doing away with open-plan classrooms, it's not that simple. And perhaps more to the point: they can't.
While some schools – like Pāpāmoa College – are taking it upon themselves to upgrade or reconfigure classrooms back to single cells, under the current law the Government can't compel them to ditch open-plan.
The Education and Training Act (clause 161) lays out what the Secretary of Education can specify, including minimum health and safety standards.
Beyond that – without a change to regulations or this part of the law – the secretary (or the minister) can't direct a school what to do.
This is why Hipkins has referred to last week's announcement about open-plan classrooms as 'virtue signalling'.
But what the minister will be hoping is that it sends a strong signal to schools and communities that when they do come to do maintenance or upgrades on classrooms that they will think about whether to add in sliding doors that allow for partitioning and single-cell learning.
Meanwhile, the raft of schools currently on the list to get additional classrooms to deal with roll growth will be offered the kitset, modular classroom design that are no bells and whistles, and can be used primarily for teaching in a single-cell configuration, with the ability to open into a wider space for certain activities, like assemblies, physical education, art or music classes.
Essentially, she's looking for a phase-out.
But if a school says they want to remain open-plan, or have new classrooms built in this collaborative style, they retain the power to do so. Stanford says she hopes they won't go that route.
'Overwhelming feedback I've received from schools across New Zealand is open-plan classrooms aren't meeting the needs of students.
'While open-plan designs were originally intended to foster collaboration, they have often created challenges for schools, particularly around noise and managing student behaviour,' she says.
'In many cases, open-plan classrooms reduce flexibility, rather than enhance it. We have listened to the sector and new classrooms will no longer be open plan.'
The open-plan announcement came the same week Stanford unveiled a $120 million growth plan for Auckland schools that need to build more classrooms to account for new students in their area.
This came alongside an announcement that a new crown entity, led by former National Party minister Murray McCully, will be set up to manage school property.
When this Government took power it discovered a list of unfunded school property projects, big builds where the prices had blown out, and a general lack of transparency and mismanagement. Stanford set up a ministerial advisory group and commissioned an inquiry.
At the time, an architecturally designed classroom was costing as much as $1.2 million, meaning some schools were missing out on new buildings because the funds weren't there.
By focussing on kitset and modular designs, finding efficiencies of scale, and removing duplication, the cost of a classroom is now down to $620,000, Stanford says, adding that she thinks it can drop further still.
Next in her sights is improving the maintenance programme for classrooms, meaning they'll last longer overall.
One of the key priorities of this school property overhaul – and the new agency – is to increase transparency and accountability.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Mixed Reaction As Councils Told To Halt Planning Work
Mixed Reaction As Councils Told To Halt Planning Work

Scoop

timean hour ago

  • Scoop

Mixed Reaction As Councils Told To Halt Planning Work

The Government's call to halt planning work has taken North Canterbury council leaders by surprise. Resource Management Act (RMA) Reform Minister Chris Bishop has put a stop to councils working on District and Regional Plans until the new RMA legislation takes effect. ''Rather than let these pricey, pointless planning and policy processes play out, we will be giving councils clarity on where to focus their efforts while they await the new planning system,'' Mr Bishop said at the Local Government NZ conference in Christchurch last week. The shake-up of the RMA is expected to come into effect in 2027. The Waimakariri District Council recently completed its District Plan, and barring any Environment Court appeals, it will become operative next month. But the Hurunui and Kaikōura district councils are just starting out on their District Plan reviews. Waimakariri Mayor Dan Gordon said he welcomed any initiative which streamlines planning processes and reduces the financial and capacity burdens on councils. ''However, it's essential that these changes still allow for meaningful local decision-making. ''Our recently notified District Plan represents a major investment in the future of our district, built on years of dedicated work and community engagement. ''Growth is important, but it must not come at any cost. We need development that is sustainable, well-planned, and aligned with the aspirations of our residents.'' Mr Gordon said local voices must remain central to local planning. Hurunui District Council chief executive Hamish Dobbie said his council welcomed the pause, but he would seek some clarity around potential plan changes. ''We have held off doing it (the District Plan review) on the basis this (new legislation) was coming up and we didn't want to waste the effort.'' The Kaikōura District Council has been working through a review of its District Plan, which was adopted in 2008. Council chief executive Will Doughty said the announcement will stifle the council's attempts to make changes to benefit the community. ''We have just awarded a contract to our consultants to work on the first two or three chapters. ''We always knew reform was under way, but we took an approach to respond to the needs of our community, while being flexible enough to review and respond to any changes.'' Mr Doughty said the council faced criticism that the ''rules are prohibitive'', so it was keen to update the plan. Mr Bishop said money is wasted on planning review processes, which is required under the existing RMA. ''The Government will suspend councils' mandatory RMA requirements to undertake plan and regional policy statement reviews every ten years, and the requirement to implement national planning standards.'' Mr Bishop said there will be some exemptions, including private plan changes and natural hazards planning. It means Cargill Station Ltd will be able to proceed with its private plan change to sub-divide sections in the Ocean Ridge development, south of Kaikōura, but the council may not be able to make any changes. Other council leaders from around the country expressed frustration, following Mr Bishop's address, at not being able to make changes to fix any planning issues, while private developers are still able to submit plan change requests.

Ministers Release Homelessness Insights Report
Ministers Release Homelessness Insights Report

Scoop

timean hour ago

  • Scoop

Ministers Release Homelessness Insights Report

Hon Chris Bishop Minister of Housing Associate Minister of Housing The Government has released the latest Homelessness Insights Report and announced a series of actions to reduce the number of people living without shelter, including sleeping rough in New Zealand, Housing Minister Chris Bishop and Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka say. 'Homelessness is a problem New Zealand has grappled with for a long time. It is a symptom of a dysfunctional housing market and is exacerbated during challenging economic times,' Mr Bishop says. 'Census data shows an ongoing trend of increasing homelessness, with 4,122 people living without shelter in 2013, 3,624 people in 2018 and 4,965 in 2023. 'The 2018 to 2023 period showed a 37% increase of people living without shelter despite the large-scale use of Emergency Housing costing well over $1 billion across that period. 'The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development's latest Homelessness Insights Report confirms what frontline organisations like the Auckland City Mission and Salvation Army have been saying: there are too many people in housing need. 'Accurate numbers are difficult to pin down - people without shelter often move around and may avoid engaging with government services - but it's clear we have a real problem. 'The Government takes this seriously. At present, over $550 million is spent annually across a range of programmes run by multiple agencies, including Transitional Housing, Housing First, Rapid Rehousing and many other support services.' 'All New Zealanders deserve a warm, dry place to stay, and the Government is determined to make progress on this long-running challenge for New Zealand,' Mr Potaka says. 'In the short-term, we've asked officials for advice on further targeted interventions to provide help and support to those living without shelter, including rough sleepers. We've asked for recommendations around better utilisation of existing programmes and existing services, and we are also open to new ideas that will make an enduring difference. 'We've made it clear that officials should engage with frontline providers such as the Auckland City Mission, The Wise Group and the Salvation Army, among others, because they are the organisations working at the frontline of this problem. 'We will not be returning to the previous government's large-scale emergency housing model, which cost over $1 million a day at its peak and was a social disaster. New Zealanders – including people sleeping rough - deserve better than that. 'The Government has an existing review under way of housing support services. There are hundreds of contracts for these services, and the system is complicated and often duplicative. Our aim is to make the system simpler, more effective, and reduce duplication. We want to fund what works. 'We're also looking at how to better support people leaving residential support programmes or prison. Stable housing is critical to successful reintegration and reducing reoffending.' 'Our long-term focus is on fixing the fundamentals of our housing market: freeing up land, removing planning barriers, improving infrastructure funding, and giving councils stronger incentives to support housing growth,' Mr Bishop says. 'Next year we'll replace the RMA with a new planning system that makes it easier to build the housing and infrastructure New Zealand needs. 'We're also looking at ways to improve the social housing system to ensure it delivers the right homes, in the right places, for the right people. The Government has recently changed Kāinga Ora's funding settings to enable the agency to build more one-bedroom units. About 50 per cent of people on the Housing Register require a one-bedroom unit, but they only make up about 12 per cent of Kāinga Ora's housing stock. 'Homelessness is complex and there are no easy answers, but we're determined to take meaningful actions – like our Priority One policy which has seen more than 2,100 children and their families moved from emergency housing motels into homes.'

Another Offensive Launched In The Government's War On Nature
Another Offensive Launched In The Government's War On Nature

Scoop

time2 hours ago

  • Scoop

Another Offensive Launched In The Government's War On Nature

Last week the Minister for Resource Management Reform, Chris Bishop, announced that the government would be intervening, yet again, to prevent councils from progressing environmental protections under the Resource Management Act (RMA). Legislation will prohibit the notification of any new changes to regional policy statements and regional and district plans. It will also prevent notified plan changes from going ahead if they have not yet had a hearing. These will need to be withdrawn within 90 days. The legislation will be passed before the end of the year. 'This is extremely unwelcome and yet another salvo in this government's war on nature,' said, EDS CEO Gary Taylor. 'It would, effectively, prevent any further implementation of national direction under the Resource Management Act, like the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity. It will also stop councils from improving any environmental outcomes in plans. 'The justification is that it would be inefficient for councils to make changes to their plans when the RMA is set to be replaced with a new system in a couple of years' time. The rhetoric is all about wasted effort. 'But what's truly inefficient is to spend the better part of a decade creating and implementing national direction and then scrapping it. Or for years of work and investment by councils to prepare plans, and even notify them, to be abruptly frozen because of future legislation that we still know very little about and which a new government might repeal anyway. 'The changes are also being framed as a kindness – to relieve pressure on struggling councils. But most councils and their constituents don't want to be patronised and actually want a better natural environment. Between now and when the new resource management system is stood up in 2027, the environment will continue to decline. 'Astonishingly, all private plan changes will still be allowed. So too will work that delivers on the Government's priorities like housing and urban development. 'Councils will be able to apply to the Minister for an exemption to progress other plan changes. But this will be completely discretionary, and not linked to the purpose of the RMA. And it is likely councils will simply not bother to apply where they know they will be denied. 'To top it off, the law change is being done by an Amendment Paper, which means an 11th hour change to the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Bill. This will completely bypass scrutiny by select committee and public submissions. Local government won't have a say. 'It is not just another central government attack on the environment and localism, but also on the democratic process itself,' concluded Mr Taylor. Environmental Defence Society EDS speaks for the environment. It has influence. Since 1971, EDS has been driving environmental protection in Aotearoa New Zealand through law and policy change. That's why it's one of this country's most influential non- profit organisations when it comes to achieving better environmental outcomes. EDS has expertise in key disciplines including law, planning, landscape and science. It operates as a policy think-tank, a litigation advocate, and a collaborator – bringing together the private and public sectors for constructive engagement. EDS runs conferences and seminars on topical issues, including an annual Environmental Summit and the Climate Change and Business Conference. EDS is a registered charity and donations to it are tax-deductible.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store