The Space Beyond Equity: Toward the Radical Possibilities of School Design

• In Event: What Is Possible and Desirable: Conceptualizing Race and School Quality Across Local Contexts

Abstract

Objectives
The quality of school design, often measured by technical criteria like ventilation or noise levels, has been linked to positive health, school climate, and academic outcomes (Maxwell, 2016; Eitland et al., 2017). While an important factor in fostering equity, design is also associated with creating spaces that foster joy, solidarity, and cultural preservation in communities of color (Gooden, 2016). What we ultimately conceive of as possible or desirable in a school’s design is shaped not only by pragmatic architectural or budgetary concerns, but also by dominant “common sense” assumptions about the purpose of schools and the students they serve (Kumashiro, 2004). In this paper, I analyze school design standards across urban school districts in order to derive a framework for thinking about minoritized school spaces in ways that push beyond equity to encompass aspects of community identity, wellbeing, and power.

Theoretical perspectives
The paper responds to two notable theoretical gaps. First, education scholarship largely invokes spatial theory to explain forms of domination, as opposed to its potential for resistance (Gulson & Symes, 2007; Lipman, 2018). On the other hand, architectural frameworks are often presented as functional and politically neutral, incapable of explaining how the built environment perpetuates or interrupts racial inequality (Schindler, 2015). Seeking the “radical possibilities” that are presented when education is situated within broader social transformations (Anyon, 2005), I derive a critical framework for quality school design that is contextualized, holistic, and oriented towards liberation.

Modes of inquiry
The content analysis seeks to deconstruct official definitions of quality school design by drawing on design principles published by 20 urban school districts across the U.S. that largely serve students of color, as well as school architectural guidelines from professional associations, unions, and other education groups.

Findings
Here, I outline three key design principles commonly cited in the reviewed documents. Although they are stated in ways that are mindful of equity, I provide a critical analysis of how they may be re-framed. The paper will also present cases of actual schools/communities that illustrate each principle in practice.

Learner-centered. Fundamentally, designers seek to create buildings that respond to instructional needs and innovations. However, because conceptualizations of “learner-centered” environments are divorced from student/community identity, questions of cultural resilience or aesthetics may be ignored.

Community use. A growing consensus among designers is that schools should enrich their neighborhoods by offering various amenities. Beyond utilization of playing fields, schools can be designed to support community wellbeing by reversing long-standing trends of dispossession.

Community involvement. Designers advocate for local stakeholders to be involved in shaping school design. Instead of struggling for equitable participation, the design process can contend with the whiteness of the architectural field (Lipsitz, 2007) and deconstruct power relations in ways that center communities of color and reckon with racialized assumptions about school spaces.

Significance
Because school design is often an afterthought, the paper aims to integrate the field with research and practice in critical areas like those discussed on this panel, so that it may be more firmly rooted in enduring concerns with racial and educational justice.

Author

• Esa Syeed, California State University - Long Beach