Skip to content

Virginia Beach City Public Schools and HBA, 2015

Today’s students are learning to be critical thinkers and creative innovators. They are moving beyond being consumers of information and are becoming creators of content. They are collaborating in teams and leveraging their collective intelligence to become effective problem solvers in service of our community, and they are honing their communication skills to become both respectful teammates and our future leaders.

You know these learning activities as the 5 C’s of 21st Century Skills, and having the right type of learning environments, coupled with passionate and heroic teaching, will enable our young people to acquire and develop these skills into lifelong “habits of the mind”.

View Furniture_Idea_Book

21st Century School Fund, 2011

Quality schoolyards are important places for elementary schools because outdoor activities are critical for growth, health, education and enjoyment. All children should experience pleasant and well equipped outdoor environments on a daily basis.

View PowerPoint

By T. R. Dunlap, April 17, 2015.

One very important feature of the EFC’s upcoming webinar, Designing Safe Schools, is the identification of low-cost and effective strategies to make schools safer. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), once called ‘defensible spaces’ (Jeffery, 1971; Newman, 1966), describes ways in which the design and modifications of facilities can help thwart criminal activity and deter violence. CPTED strategies derive from the best practices of architects, security consultants, law enforcement, city planners and management, educators and facility administrators (Angel, 1968; Atlas, 2008; Jeffery, 1989; University & NCPI, 2000), and many of these principles are easy to identify and cost very little (or nothing!) to implement. CPTED involves three principle components to manage exposure to crime and harm: natural surveillance, access control and territoriality. Let’s look at how we can make some small changes within each component to achieve greater levels of safety.

Natural surveillance is crucial to the security of a facility. Criminal activity thrives when there is a low expectation of getting caught. The best way to address this issue is to create a space in which there is no place to hide. Many new constructions have an open concept floor plan to better ensure natural surveillance; however, steps can be taken in older spaces to create better sightlines for supervision. Just look for some simple fixes. For example, make sure that landscapes do not obstruct natural surveillance; if so, you may need to cut back branches or relocate shrubs. Designate visitor parking and bike racks within the natural surveillance and make sure places where visitors enter are easily monitored. Keep hallways clear of obstructions and determine if classrooms and staircases can be used as hiding places—you’ll want to give extra attention to these spaces. Make sure supervisors are on the scene when utilizing common spaces like atriums, gymnasiums, cafeterias and auditoriums where natural surveillance is optimal. When we are careful to use natural surveillance, intruders and threats can be more quickly identified and addressed.

Think about the security of your facility’s entrances (Spicer, n.d.). Regulations and limitations imposed on entrances reduce the number of opportunities for intruders to enter the facility. Consider the inclusion of perimeter fencing to deter trespassers and limit the number of points of entry. Make sure to secure all unnecessary entrances so that intruders cannot just walk into the facility without being noticed. Install security window film to reinforce glass on main entrances. Some violent attackers have entered school building through unsecured windows. Also, locate dumpsters and other objects that could be used to climb onto or into the building at sufficient distance from the facility. Your school should also incorporate procedural directives to secure entrances. For example, have staff members conduct ID checks for all visitors. These are some simple ways to make sure that facility entrances pose as little risk as possible to your students and staff.

Finally, think about the territoriality of your space. Territoriality is the delineation of spaces that creates an environment where intruders are more likely to standout. Consider using generic, clear and concise signage at all hallway entrances, and use directional signage to gyms, cafeterias, library and other parts of the facility. The designated use of space creates a sense of ownership among staff and students. When all occupants have a clear idea of the space’s utility and function, they are more likely to recognize when a person does not belong or when something is amiss. The identification of spaces is a CPTED principle that is inexpensive and easy to employ.

The implementation of CPTED strategies is highly important in a safety-centered education facility, and all stakeholders should be made aware of these and other simple steps to develop a safe learning environment.

You can learn more about CPTED and other ways to secure education facilities in our Designing Safe Schools webinar April 30, from 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. EDT. The U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Office of Safe and Healthy Students (OSHS), with its Education Facilities Clearinghouse (EFC) and Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools (REMS) Technical Assistance (TA) Center, will celebrate National PrepareAthon! Day by hosting a webinar that provides insight on safety and security design and cost-effective features to consider for new construction of or retrofitting existing school buildings and grounds.

Printable Blog

Bibliography

Spicer, B. (n.d.). “11 Components of a Secure School Front Entrance." Retrieved March 24, 2015, from http://www.campussafetymagazine.com/article/11-components-of-a-secure-school-front-entrance/

Angel, S. (1968). Discouraging crime through city planning. Berkeley: Institute of Urban & Regional Development.

Atlas, R. (2008). 21st Century Security and CPTED: Designing for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Crime Prevention. Auerbach Publications. Retrieved from http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/book/10.1201/9781420068085

Jeffery, C. R. (1971). Crime prevention through environmental design. Sage Publications.

Jeffery, C. R. (1989). Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Approach (Facsimile edition). Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall.

Newman, O. (1966). Creating Defensible Space. DIANE Publishing.

University, T. C. M. S. C.-F. S., & NCPI. (2000). Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, Second Edition (2 edition). Boston, Mass: Butterworth-Heinemann.

T. R. Dunlap is a research assistant at George Washington University in the Education Facilities Clearinghouse. After having worked as a foreign language educator, he now researches topics relevant to education facilities and their improvements.

By G. Victor Hellman, Jr., Ed.D., March 19, 2015.

Previous editions of Bricks and Mortar have focused on school facility topics such as the important role facilities play in education, the need for maintenance, how schools are integral parts of the community, how students’ perceptions of safety impact achievement, ways to retrofit older facilities to make them safer and how changing pedagogies impact facilities for the 21st century. This edition will continue to address the importance of school facilities; however, it will do so from a slightly different vantage point. I will examine three recent articles in which school facilities made headlines.

“Schools on military bases struggle with maintenance” read a recent headline in the Los Angeles Times. At the crux of the issue is an elementary school located on Edwards Air Force Base. The school ranks eighth out of 160 schools on the Pentagon’s priority list for improvements. Needs include a roof replacement, an upgrade to playground equipment, new doors for classes and offices, electrical upgrades, lighting upgrades, and new HVAC equipment.

All told, the price tag for these maintenance and construction projects is approximately $27.8 million, of which the locality must allocate $5.5 million. Unfortunately, the California Department of Finance denied the funding request by the California Department of Education for this and similar projects. While the federal government has agreed to provide 80% of the necessary funds, the state has declined to meet its required 20% match.

Really? What kind of message does that send to the children and parents of the elementary school and other schools in similar situations?   As citizens, parents, and taxpayers, why don’t we require the same level of maintenance for the places our children learn as we provide for our own homes? Few of us would allow a leaky roof to persist or not replace an air conditioner when it is not operational. How can we allow a school with a 60% military population to have anything less? Not funding the State’s share of required repairs is paramount to a slap in the face of the federal government and all of our military families.

“Big roaches and moldy juice? Students put Sunset High cleanliness in spotlight” is a headline right out of the Miami Times. Students complained but no one responded to their allegations. After a student’s post of pictures went viral—purportedly showing moldy juice, a fat cockroach, and yellow and cloudy water from a water fountain--action was taken. The school was scrubbed clean; however, the situation sparked a petition calling for the principal’s resignation. The school also failed a facilities inspection conducted by the Florida Department of Health. The failure was a result of mold found in a storage room and in ceiling tiles.

Really? How can school administrators allow a facility to become so unkempt? How can parents that enter the facility turn a blind eye on such horrid conditions? Did faculty complaints fall upon deaf ears? Did the faculty complain or was it complacent with the filthy conditions? Why does it take a web post to go viral before anyone acknowledges the problems? These are rhetorical questions, but the facts remain, schools must be clean and sanitary.

In many situations, a school lunch is the only hot meal a student gets. It must be prepared under sanitary conditions. If a restaurant consistently failed health inspections, it would not stay in business. Likewise, a hotel with a roach or rodent problem is destined to have a very high vacancy rate. At what level of cleanliness should we maintain our schools? I would suggest that a school be as clean as a hospital. As parents and citizens, why would we want to expose our children to anything less than hospital clean? That is my recommended benchmark for a clean school building. And please do not confuse the age of a facility as a proxy for how clean it can be. Visit any federal building in our nation’s capital and you will understand my point.

Recently in Education News it was reported, “From Spending to Governance, Buffalo Facing School Turmoil.” This article discussed how $41 million was missing from a $175 million building fund to renovate deteriorating school buildings.   This was discovered in the final phase of a ten-year, $1.4 billion capital restoration project. The article illustrates that school construction and renovation is big business with billions of dollars at stake. There must be adequate systems in place for oversight of public funds and accountability of those whom we entrust these funds with. This will be the topic of further posts.

I know some of you are thinking that these cases are extreme and that conditions like those mentioned do not exist in your locality. I would submit that if these conditions do not exist in your locality, you know someone who lives in a community where they do. Together, we can all help improve the places where students learn.

Printable Version

References:

Mejia, B., (2015). Schools on military bases struggle with maintenance. Los Angeles Times, Retrieved March 12, 2015, from http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-military-base-schools-20150116-story.html.

Smith, G., (2015). From spending to governance, Buffalo facing school turmoil. Education News, Retrieved March 11, 2015 from http://www.educationnews.org/k-12-schools/from-spending-to-governance-buffalo-facing-school-turmoil/.

Veiga, C., (2015). Big roaches and moldy juice? Students put Sunset High cleanliness in spotlight. Miami Herald, Retrieved March 12, 2015 from http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/education/article7825257.html.

Victor serves as the Research Project Director for the Education Facilities Clearinghouse (EFC). Dr. Hellman has more than 31 years of work experience in public schools in Virginia. Prior to joining the EFC, Dr. Hellman served as Deputy Superintendent of Operations and Support for a mid-urban school district. In that role, he was responsible for finance, facilities, transportation, student services, and food services.

Gary David Schwartz, 2013

Considering the billions of dollars invested in school buildings and the accountability for improving student achievement, there has been the lingering question about how the physical learning environment impacts student achievement. This study explored the impact of a new 21st-century-designed middle school facility on student academic achievement in mathematics and science.

This case study used a mixed methods approach to examine the student achievement of 158 middle school students and the perceptions from 13 teachers and two administrators about the impact of the new facility on teaching and student learning. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect on middle school student achievement in mathematics and science when students experienced a change in the physical learning environment, from an aging school facility to a new 21st-century-designed school facility.

View Dissertation

21st Century Schools, 2010. There has been a slow but steady increase of research on the impact of public school facilities on educational achievement and community outcomes and of the rigor of the research. This summary of studies is part of a larger literature review conducted by the 21st Century School Fund with funding from the Charitable Trust of the Council on Educational Facility Planners International.

The review is designed as an update to the 2002 review “Do School Facilities Affect Academic Outcomes?” by Mark Schneider, originally commissioned by the 21st Century School Fund’s Building Educational Success Together collaborative and then expanded by Dr. Schneider and published by the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities.

Recent research continues to point to a small but steadily positive relationship between the quality of a public school facility and a range of academic and community outcomes.

This study reviews the literature on:

 Facilities & academic outcomes
 School building systems

View link