Projects pop-up on peoples radars in various ways. Sometimes information about a person or project comes from many different sources all at once. This was the case for Mandy Lau and her award-winning project, Reach & Match. The project helps visually impaired and autistic children develop their senses, social skills and literacy.

In 2012, Reach & Match was a Student Notable in the Social Impact category for the Core77 Design Awards. In under three years, Reach & Match is now a full-fledged product available for purchase. Core77 spoke with Mandy about bringing a product from idea to market, some of the biggest challenges for designers working in special education and what’s next for this learning tool.

Core77: Tell me a bit about the thoughts that brought you to decided on creating Reach & Match?

Mandy Lau: I have always been very interested in social design and creating effective solutions through design. For my bachelor degree in Product Engineering, I developed a few projects for people with physical limitations as well as blind and vision-impaired people. I also enjoy my other work in art therapy with children and adults with special needs. During my postgraduate research in Industrial Design, I started looking into braille literacy and blindness.

What made you decide to focus your attention on this specific subject?

I found braille to be an incredibly efficient and beautiful system for writing—it’s also an essential skill for developing blind people’s career opportunities and independence. Due to the global decline of braille literacy, I wanted to create a design which helps young blind children learn braille in an interesting way. However, through my primary and secondary research, I observed vision-impaired children often struggling with problems such as cognitive, motor and social barriers. After generating a lot of concepts, I selected a design which can empower children with special needs in a fun and friendly way. It is inclusive and creates a bridge between children with and without special needs. Through well-designed exercises, activities and games, care takers such as teachers, therapists and parents can easily use the product for children with varying abilities.

Reach & Match is now out on the market. What sort of response are you getting from the children and their caretakers?

We received very encouraging feedback from local and overseas clients—organizations, schools, pre-school centers and clinics. Most of our users are specialists such as occupational therapists, mobility instructors and educators who provide training for children. They are applying Reach & Match at their group activities and early intervention programs. Reach & Match will also be used in the degree program for Special Education at a local university. We are really excited to share its applications with future teachers!

We are delighted to know that children enjoy Reach & Match games and its tactile challenges. The children are stimulated by touching the tactile textures with their bare feet and other body parts. They learn to distinguish the difference between sounds. Children also share and communicate with their peers. The creativity and flexibility of the design is double-sided and you can create different 2D and 3D configurations to elicit a ‘wow’ effect when children play together. And I am always surprised by how blind children interpret and understand the ideas of Reach & Match by touching and hearing. You can check out our Facebook page to learn more about how children interact with the program!

To be honest, I am pretty overwhelmed by the whole journey. As a designer, I desired to turn this great idea into a product. However, once I finished the design I realized that it was only the start of the journey; I had to learn everything in order to make the idea happen.

The biggest lesson I learned was to continuously push myself out of my comfort zone. I couldn’t work inside my room as a designer anymore, I needed to go out and talk to people—clients and potential partners. I had to learn other skills to make this idea happen, such as fund-raising, production, marketing and sales. Being the sole founder is not only difficult and lonely, but discipline is also extremely important. This was the quickest way to learn new skills as I had plenty of opportunities to address changes and solve problems each day.

What has been your greatest experience when working with children?

I learned the importance of testing and understanding the real needs of my clients. I start and end the design with the users—children. I observed their problems and created and tested the prototypes for them. Then, I modified and improved the design according to their feedback. So from beginning to end, I focused on how my users responded to the product.

I love working with children. They are genuine and honest with what they think about your design, how they like it or how much they want to play. It’s truly a great experience to work with children with different needs—through this process I’ve worked with children who are blind and vision impaired, hearing impaired, autistic, or facing physical and developmental delays. Every child is unique and every child learns in their own way. It’s inspiring to see their different reactions.

What is a problem that designers should be considering when designing for childhood development right now?

I support and love the idea of inclusive play, especially for children at a young age. It would be great to have a friendly platform for them to understand the differences among their peers and learn to respect and share.

Which stage are you at with Reach & Match right now?

Reach & Match is very new to the market and I definitely need to work hard on the marketing! Also, I have been putting a lot of time and effort into editing the activity manual to help users understand usage and applications. Hopefully, users will receive the latest version very soon!

What will be the next step?

I will focus on the products in local and overseas markets. I look forward to expanding it to the mainstream market, as the design itself is for all children. I believe there’s still a long way to go and I am excited to see more children benefit from Reach & Match. I also look forward to working on my new design ideas!

When I first started writing for this wonderful blog, the one you are on right now, I started off by writing about co-creative processes in relation to education and learning spaces. One of the offices that contacted me in relation to these articles was STL architects, a Spanish architecture studio based in Chicago. I arranged a Skype call with the two directors of the office, Luis Collado and Jose Luis de la Fuente, and we ended up talking for over an hour as shared our previous projects, work methods, processes and personal experiences.

In this interview you will be able to read about their way of working, the strategies when entering a project and their latest project, developing a 20-year master plan expansion for Wilbur Wright College in Chicago, which started working on in the beginning ofJjune this year.

Background Info

The Wilbur Wright College is one of seven Chicago City Colleges, designed by Bertrand Goldberg architect studio back in 1986, all of which are currently undergoing a major remodeling. At the moment, the college hosts students from the age of 18 and up. It is divided into three different programs:
– Credit programs
– Continuing education
– Adult education
Course offerings range from African American Studies to Zoology.

The goal for the central authority of the Chicago City Colleges is to create a 20-year master-plan expansion, while the end goal with the expansion plan for STL is to “create spaces that promote learning.”

A 20-year master-plan expansion

STL’s mission is to create a 20-year master plan expansion for Wright College, which includes taking the university through a major transformation from the inside of the organization to the outdoor lawns. One of these changes is transforming Wright College from being one of seven city colleges—which allow the students the possibility of studying almost anything between heaven and earth—to focusing on IT, making it the IT hub of the Chicago universities.

In order to be able to handle this big change, STL had to dig their teeth into more than just the exterior and interior of the building—they had to study the existing structure of the organization to get a true understanding of how to create, and be a part of, a lasting change.

Based on previous experience, STL had prepared themselves for a rather stubborn, and difficult-to-please client, similar to the ones they had encountered in the past. But to their great surprise, that wasn’t the case this time around. The client, which in this case consists of administrators, stakeholders, students and the central authority of City Colleges, completely broke this perception by giving STL loads of encouragement and support.

The STL Process

STL has throughout the years developed their way of working. As with so many architect studios and designers it is divided into:
1) Discovery
2) Analysis
3) Design

These three phases often overlap, and vary in length depending on the span of the project at hand.

The discovery phase consists of getting an overall view of the facilities, patterns of students, teachers and the surrounding community, as well as the organization structure, and this is where they are right now.

The work on the Wright College started in June, as soon as spring term came to a close, leaving the architects without the possibility to work with one section of the client group. This made things a bit harder when it came to figuring out the students patterns in how they use the spaces inside and outside of the walls. On the other hand, having the college campus all to themselves gave STL a chance to study the building itself more closely, letting them create their own view on the school and its possibilities and problem areas

Discovery

They started of the Discovery Phase by conducting 17 interviews, of about two hours each, with people from various parts of the organization and with students. These interviews, in combination with their own research of the space, have formed the basis for the rest of the research. One of the most important parts of the Discovery Phase is to collect as much relevant data as possible without judging or making conclusions. First you learn, learn, learn from the information collected, later you digest it and start asking the crucial questions such as What, Why, When and How?

It’s when you first step away from the information and look at it without judging and concluding that you can establish a true connection with it. This, in turn, will form the basis for the development of the project.

After going throughout the information gathered in the interviews, STL developed a survey with the sole purpose of understanding how students and teachers viewed the building, how they interacted with it and how they interacted with others using the facilities. These questions were very focused in order to get focused answers in turn, making it easier to turn them into statistics and other sort of information making it easier to identify problem areas and trends and create user profiles.

Some of the problems they identified during this section of the process were:
– A nonexistent organizational chart
– The lack of a social infrastructure
– The absence of informal social environments
– A nonexistent Wright College culture [physical and virtual]

These problems all have to be addressed in their own ways to create one coherent solution

Breaking down the hierarchy

As mentioned earlier, the survey is designed so that the respondent can’t give long in-depth answers, but rather short, focused answers making it easier to get a more coherent overview over the project. The questions are more about the ‘What?’ than the ‘Why?’ and ‘How?’ By asking ‘What?’ STL want to get a greater understanding of the building, organization and campus as a machine, of the relationship between the users and the machine and the relationship between the the community at large and the machine.

In order to be able to make a true transformation of the space, STL had to work both from the bottom up, and the work their way down from the top pyramid. This could only be done by breaking down the hierarchy and subsequently developing a completely new organizational chart based on STL’s research.

Creating a Wright College culture

Creating a new culture anywhere is a tricky task. There are so many pieces that have to fall into place to make it happen, and when the space itself doesn’t lend itself to social interaction, the change is even harder to generate.

The college was designed in such a way that it is hard to find your way around, where many of the spaces look exactly the same, which ultimately stifles human connectivity and togetherness. The space feels suitable only for passing through, rather than congregating and socializing. STL set out to solve this problem by asking how the users access the campus and learning spaces, where they feel comfortable, where they naturally gather and which spaces they find inviting.

Once STL can work through this problem, they can create the sort of spaces that they hop to create and establish the sort of culture that promotes learning and strong relations between users.

The future of learning spaces according to STL

Education has been developing way, way faster then the spaces where it takes place. It has gone from being a one-way street, where knowledge was simply transferred from teachers to students, to being multidirectional. In other words, the teacher’s role has changed and is more focused on guiding and facilitating students through the avalanche of information that is to be found across various media.

STL sees learning as an experience taking place in a theater, where the faculty and students are the actors and STL is the designer of the theatre itself. The learning experience is a part of a social infrastructure for which they are designing the stage. They see the spaces becoming more dynamic in their form, creating an environment that invites students to share and interact with one another in a more open and versatile atmosphere.

They predict that the structure of learning in school and doing homework at home, might be flipped on its head, such that more and more of the learning is done at home, while the school is the space where students go to help and talk with teachers and their peers as to solve the problems they encountered at home. Learning becoming home-learning and homework becomes school-work.

The spaces should invite students to learn from one another creating a collaborative experience, while the teachers curate the process of exploration and foster the relationships created between students, at the same time as they guide the students through their exploration of individual abilities.

As for how the spaces themselves will look, only time can tell. Only when the education sector is ready for the next step of creating new spaces in collaboration with innovative architects that STL will get to explore and showcase their vision in this domain.

Over the past few years, since I’ve started researching education, learning spaces and social education projects, my network has expanded exponentially. This was to be expected, considering how much time I’ve spent on various platforms trying to find out what is going on out there. Another thing that was expected was to see just how small the education circle really is. Everyone knows everyone in one way or another, or is just one degree removed from them.

In the beginning of my research, when I had just started my master studies at Aarhus Architecture School, I got in contact with Rosan Boschand her work at Vittra School at Telefonplan in Stockholm, Sweden. This is where I first got into contact with Jannie Jeppesen, then headmaster of Vittra Skolan, now head of of Rebel Learners.

An unexpected meeting on the subway

Rebel Learners is a new initiative created by Rektorsakademin Utveckling (RAU), who also arranges SETT, Scandinavia’s biggest education conference, and are the creators behind the podcast Skolsnack (School Chat) and Learning Narratives, a new game developed to build future learning environments.

The short version is that Rebel Learners is a course for teacher-students developed by teacher-students to upgrade and gain knowledge that they feel that they are not learning at their current institutions.

Rebel Learners came about after Fredrik Svensson, former principal and now CEO for RAU, met a former student of his on the subway in Stockholm. She told him that she was studying to become a teacher, but that she wasn’t satisfied with the education she was receiving from the university. None of her teachers were actively working outside of the university world, which left her feeling that they were lacking the sort of practical knowledge that she was going to need when she started working.

Sweden has a lot of challenges ahead: Amongst others, the country will be 40,000 teachers short of its needs by 2020; in Stockholm alone, the amount of students will increase from 60,000 to 90,000 Moreover, people who decide to study to become a teacher often are looked upon as if they only chose their field of studies due to lack of any other decision.

Instead of complaining and whining about obstacles, RAU decided to do something about it, they created Rebel Learners as a way to bring a positive and professional voice to the discussion about education as well as to support and lift teacher students, and active teachers, with the help of a vast network of professionals and partners as well as courses, seminars and other events.

Co-creating an Plan of Action

In order to be able to pinpoint what was truly needed to lift this task, RAU gathered 12 teacher-students and together they created a game plan and a draft for what was to become a week long summer camp that took place in June 2014. From here on, there will be two seminars per semester and one summer camp each year.

When working together, they identified the three main subject that the teacher-students felt were the ones of most value, and that they felt they didn’t get enough knowledge about throughout their education. These three core problems were to become the main headlines for the summer course.

1) Leadership
2) Core Values
3) Digitalization in theory and practice

The next step was to figure out how to get the knowledge they felt they were lacking and to get other teacher students involved. In order to do this, they decided to create a four-day summer camp, tackling these three core subjects as well as laying a basic action plan for the fall of 2014 and spring of 2015. The summer camp ended up comprising 60 teacher students from various parts of Sweden, four leaders and nine experts.

It was important for the teacher-students that they would get tools, methods and processes that they could use in practice, and that they were introduced to these by people who were actively using them in the classroom on a weekly basis. The dream team that made it happen:
– Ann-Marie Korling (one of Sweden’s most famous teachers) – Language and the importance of using communication as to build good relations
– Frida Monsen – How the role of the teacher has changed
– Helena Kvarnsell – Work smart
– Jonas Monsen – Normcritical pedagogy
– Karin Nygard – Programming for younger children
– Marit Sahlstrom – Web-based learning for students sitting at home
– Markus Bergenord (Digitalista) Working with pre-school children using both worlds (digital and physical)
– Niklas Svensson – Relation and reality-based learning
– Pernilla Glaser – Reflection exercises

The students were tasked with applying the three core subjects in a discussion about teacher education, schools and Rebel Learners. By the end of the week the groups had produced a large numbers of movies, articles and other material relevant to the subject.

They Are Someone?

Word about Rebel Learners is spreading like wildfire both inside and outside the borders of Sweden. As I mentioned before, Rebel Learners currently consists of 60 students and four leaders, but this will change in 2015 when 100 more students and 14 leaders will join the original 64 Rebels. Other than that, various municipalities within Sweden are looking to become a part of the organization, and a second chapter will open in the south of Sweden in order to accommodate the demand for becoming a part of Rebel Learners.

When talking to Jannie Jeppesen, Ante Runquist was taking part of a workshop in Brazil regarding the future of learning and a municipality in Canada has been showing interest in the initiative.

As for where this will lead, only time can tell; naturally, it remains to be seen what sort of impact the Rebels will have on the future of our education system, how we view teachers and what role they will have in the future. But one thing is for certain: Instead of passing the buck on a problem, going “Why doesn’t Someone do Something about that?,” they have decided to be that Someone who does Something. All we can do is support teachers and teachers students as much as we possibly can. After all, being a teacher, and a good one of the sort, is one of the most important professions in our society.

Open Air Neighborhood (OAN) started off as a collaboration between KaosPilot Theis Reibke and architect Louise Heeboell, back in 2011. At first, the idea was simply to develop “Building Playgrounds” through co-creative processes with the users, as a way to develop the city itself. They applied for and received grants from both the EU and RealDania, and started working on the project. After meeting Ellen O’Gara at a conference in 2012, the project has since been a collaboration between Heeboell and O’Gara.

The main focus for OAN has always been on creating a strong connection with the users by making them a vital part of the processes. Here they share some insights into what made them decide to work together, what brought them onto the path of co-creative processes and what they have learned throughout the various projects

Core77: Let’s start off with a little bit of history about each of you.

Ellen O’Gara: Architecture seemed like an interesting thing to study because it combined books and creativity. I liked that combination and I still do. While I studied I really liked that everyone could participate in a discussion on architecture because it is something that is relevant for all. And in some ways we are all experts.

Louise Heeboell: I was both creative and good at math and physics. Good at drawing. I thought I was going to be an engineer. But I figured that the mix of engineering and being creative was being an architect. Besides from that, I had no clue, what being an architect was about. I’m happy about my choice now. Years before Open Air Neighborhood, I worked as a ‘normal’ architect. But I found that there was a conflict in the way architects work and the way the city develops. I had been looking for a way to work differently, open and with the users as a central part of the development—and still be an architect.

Louise, why was this so important to you?

Because I found that the urban space that was built as a direct result of the architects drawings had no life. (And I’d been drawing some myself, so I felt bad about it!) I was interested in finding out what created the places in the city that are filled with life and where people liked to stay.

Ellen, what brought you onto the path of co-creative processes?

Ellen: I studied at the school of architecture in Copenhagen. At the beginning of every year we went abroad for two weeks to do field work. In Sarajevo, Porto, Lisbon, … Here we were free to find something that interested us. I would walk around and talk to people. Ask them what was important to them. This would always lead to something interesting. A topic would emerge, a need, a potential. I would gather all the information I could, measurements, conversations… the rest of the year, I and all the other students would develop each our project. I find this way of working very interesting. Looking at the needs and the resources and developing a program from that. It results in some very interesting synergies and very relevant programs. It is bottom-up development.

Of course you can’t always just wander around and hope to run into something interesting when a developer wants something built but it is an approach I find very valuable. So what I mean to say is that my education has very directly led me to what I am working on today.

So, when did you two start collaborating?

Ellen: We met at a conference in august of 2012 hosted by the city. We each presented projects we had worked on for the previous months. It was clear that we had the same interests and some of the same ambitions for urban planning. The conference was about a project called Skab din By. Very interesting and experimental project by the municipality.

Louise: After that, we had a coffee and I think I asked if Ellen wanted to take part in the talk, that Open Air Neighborhood was going to give at the Think Space conference in September that year.

Ellen: Yes, and from then we started building OAN together. By January, we were working full time. Doing projects for the city and housing organizations.

During the Think Space conference you each presented a project. What were these projects about?

Ellen & Louise: We presented several projects where you could see that we had some common ideas for how to develop differently, our approach to urban planning and the process by which the city is and should be made. These ideas were about including the users in developing their own urban spaces. We were both very interested in processes where the citizens take a more central part of the development, and we both had experienced first hand that this kind of process can have some good social benefits.

What were your first projects working together in OAN?

Ellen & Louise: I think it was Gribskov Boerneby, wasn’t it? And the second part of SolvangCenteret. Gribskov was a workshop we did. It lasted a few hours and was interesting. Solvangcentret was a project that lasted about a week. It was the second phase of a project Louise did the summer before we met. Solvangcenteret was building the furniture for an abandoned mall in a social housing area together with the local kids. It was about engaging the locals in developing physical and social ‘things’ together as a whole.

Ellen: During the summer, we have renewed the courtyard of the mall, also together with the citizens. The idea for the second phase was to finish the things that had not been finished. But when we spoke with people there, we realized that that plan was not relevant anymore. So we had a talk about what else could be done. Some of the adults already hosted a weekly dinner that they thought could be more public. So the plan became to build tables, benches and a food cart so it would be easier to host the weekly dinner in the shopping center. We ended the week by doing the dinner. Some of the locals made food, kids decorated the court and we used the furniture.

After we left, the project the locals took initiative to contact the owner of the shopping center and asked for permission to use a kitchen for the dinners. This shows that the people who took part were in some ways empowered to act. To take matters into their own hands. This has been a central focus in our work

Louise: The interesting thing about that project was also that it hasn’t been troubled by vandalism, even though that area is usually has this problem. So we found that including the youth really helps to prevent vandalism. The housing association has starting including the youth as a normal part of their practice for preventing vandalism now.

Throughout the time you have been working with OAN, what have you learned about developing processes?

Ellen & Louise: There is a lot of wasted effort. The system is built to be fair and I guess it is but it is also so highly regulated that the regulations sometimes prevents good initiatives. That is quite unfortunate. Luckily the city of Copenhagen is testing new ways of developing. We’ve been following some of the projects. They have some brave attempts of doing things differently. Skab din By was an attempt from the city to test ideas.

Co-creative processes look different from project to project, but they normally have a basic overall structure. Can you tell us a bit about OAN’s basic process design?

Ellen & Louise: We’ve developed a process tool that we call Demokratisk Byudvikling—a method toolkit. This tool is based on our experience from the projects we have done during the last two years. It consists of two models: the DNA model and the 4D model. The DNA model is a tool to get an overview of the project’s ingredients and potential. This is the initial step where we determine who will be involved and what knowledge needs to be developed, and then a potential process. It’s a circular process.

Then we use the 4D model: Discover, Dream, Design, Deliver. It’s different from projects to project which ‘D’ we start with, and how many loops we take. It’s an iterative process in which we make use of the method prototyping. I think this is probably the thing that a lot of people associate us with. It is a method where you move quickly from idea to physical product. We’ve used it a lot when testing ideas. It is good to build an idea in 1:1. It forces you to be very specific and when it is there other people can see and use it. Thereby they will be able to give a more qualified response. It is also fun and a method that can be quite attractive to people who couldn’t care less about a citizen meeting. Speaking in big terms you could say that cities are prototypes. They are always being rebuilt and learn new things that can make them better.

When looking back at your various projects, which one would you say is the most successful one in terms of learning experience for OAN?

Ellen: I really like Vinterbyen. It is a project that includes a bit of everything. It started with us wondering why nobody focuses on urban life in winter time. There is so much focus on urban life during summer and by far most of the architectural renderings are of summer days. But once it gets cold and dark we hurry indoors. This lack of attention on cities during winter led us to developed the concept of Vinterbyen. We’ve gotten so much positive feedback on the project and everyone we talk to completely understands the idea. We’ve done a series of projects under the name of Vinterbyen and I like the whole process behind developing them. We saw a need; researched it; collaborated with a diverse group of partners on developing ideas; tested the ideas; and derived knowledge from them. This knowledge has been shared through lectures and articles. Each project under Vinterbyen leads to the next project. Developing the business plan is also very interesting.

Louise: I think both the Hørgården Nærgenbrugsstation and the Citylife on parking places are interesting in that manner. I think the Citylife on parking places (also called the ITS, or Intelligent Traffic Systems) has some of it all—figuring out the DNA and the creative process of the discovering, dreaming, designing and delivering. We learned a lot though the process—the interviews, the testing, more interviews. I hope it leads to a whole new way of managing parking places in Copenhagen. I also think that working with strategic planning in relation to our work has been interesting. E.g. in the work we did with the strategy of opening up the Hørgården social housing area. And Nærheden, planning a new city.

All good things come to an end, and you have decided to go in different directions. What lead to this decision?

Ellen & Louise: It seems like a good time to move on. We recently finished our process tool and with that, we feel that we tied a knot on something we wanted to explore together. That being done, we both have new directions we want to explore…

What will be you next step?

Louise: I’m starting a new company called IntraCity. I’ll work with ideas and strategies in the urban space, moving rapidly from idea to action. I teamed up with my boyfriend, actually. He’s also an architect, and a master builder. Throughout the work with Open Air Neighborhood, I’ve been very interested in the work with both strategy and innovation, and the combination in relation to the urban space. That will be my path. Working with prototyping has been so good and interesting. That will still be a central part of my work.

Ellen: My company is Platant. It is a continuation of the work that I have done in OAN but with a greater focus on a few things. I am interested in exploring how to measure the social sustainability of all these interesting projects that are going on in the public realm. And how this can lead to new ways of public/private collaborations.

Can you give me your personal Do’s and Don’ts when it comes to working with co-creative projects?

Don’t
– Don’t work with assholes! (No don’t write that.) But seriously that is a very important lesson.
– Don’t get into those development projects that want to seem like they want to listen to people, when the actually don’t. When you open up the process to people, you have to do it for real. All the way.

Do:
– Follow your instinct about people.
– Test it. You’ll get surprised. And learn so much. And you’ll find that the project suddenly jumps miles ahead. Even though it was only a prototype.
– Collaborate with people, companies and organizations who inspire you
– Share ideas
– Prototype again and again
– Document your findings
– Understand ‘idea’ as a verb!
– Be respectful to everyone. Respect their position and what they bring to the project. And be open and friendly. (It sounds very simple, but is very important)

A few months ago, I was contacted by an organization called Women Engineers Pakistan, which introduces girls to the field of engineering and technology. Just reading the name made me curious. For those of you who don’t know, I’m an architect, and I come from a family full of engineers and tech-heads. In other words, my choice of becoming an architect has never, at any point of my life, ever been questioned. I went to a technical high school in Uppsala, Sweden, always with the support of mom and dad, brothers and sister, my grandmother, aunts, uncle and most of all my wonderful grandfather. With 26 boys and 5 girls in my class, the male-to-female ratio was rather high, but my knowledge and competence was never questioned by anyone of the male gender. Not by teachers, nor by fellow students.

Hearing about an organization like this and its origins was inspiring, and it takes more then a bit of willpower and skin on the nose (Swedish expression) to start something as groundbreaking and controversial in a country where female students are told that they should reconsider their choice to study engineering and start studying something more suitable for women…

In this interview, I’ve had the great pleasure of talking directly with Ramla Quershi, the co-founder of Women Engineers Pakistan. She recently moved to the U.S. to study engineering on a full Fullbright scholarship. So even though she’s busy with the big move and getting her bearings, she set aside some time for this interview. I hope you get as inspired by reading this as I did from writing it.

Core77: Tell us a bit about the organisation and the thoughts behind it.

Ramla Quershi: The organization is a budding startup, which looks to increase participation from Pakistani women in Pakistan in engineering. Women have always been by and large in domestic and agricultural jobs in Pakistan, and their participation in science and technology has been minimal. We realize that women make over half the Pakistani population and we’re working to prevent that potential talent for technical prowess from going to waste. We’re working with young girls at high schools to encourage them towards science and math

When did you start working on getting Women Engineers Pakistan up and running?

It started with a Facebook page last August. But it’s wasn’t until six months ago that we started working as an organization.

Why did you decide on starting WEP?

Throughout my engineering degree, I felt a nagging lack of women in this field. We were often discouraged by our professors that engineering is a ‘big boy’ area. It was disheartening to realize that there weren’t many role models set out for us. So I created this organization to give women engineers a platform to represent themselves.

When the professors talked about it being a “big boy” profession, how did your fellow male students react to those sort of comments?

My fellow males knew that I was good at my studies, so they would often turn up for a group study option and ask me to explain things to them. So they had found out that the women in their class were just as good (some even better) engineers. Barring a few, many were courteous and encouraging. However, there were some ‘go make a sandwich’ sort of comments—but not many.

There must have been many ideas/incentives to make it go from an concept into reality, what were they?

Oh yes, there were. Initially it was just a Facebook page, but then it started getting attention, and I realized that I had hit a niche. We were contacted by the U.S. Embassy through the Facebook page for meeting with a NASA engineer coming to Pakistan. And i thought, ‘Oh wow, not much representation for the women in engineering crowd.’

Being contacted by the U.S. Embassy and meeting an engineer from NASA is a rather big deal, what did you talk about?

So the NASA engineer was a very encouraging lady. She told us about the unmanned mission to Mars that she had been working on. She told us about the pressing need for women to participate in engineering. We also discussed the prospects for Pakistani women engineers in future.

What was the most inspiring part of her visit for you personally?

The fact that she had a focused goal, and that she kept working on it for so long to finally achieve it.

In which sections of your life are you implementing this philosophy?

In every part of it—work, education, personal life. I’ve realized that nothing worthwhile comes easy, you have to work tirelessly to achieve it. Which is why I have started a focused approach for the growth of my organization, Women Engineers Pakistan.

What are the plans for WEP in the near future?

That we start from school levels, then college and then target workplaces. I have learned that this change that I want cannot be brought about in just a couple of months. It wil take years, maybe decades, to set back this gender gap. And we’re going one step at a time.

Do you already have partner schools that wants to implement WEP into their curriculum?

No, not yet. The schooling system in Pakistan hasn’t changed much over the years. Devising the curriculum is much easier than actually implementing it. I have received both good and bad feedback from schools in Pakistan. The Gov’t Girls High school in Lahore has been most encouraging and have shown a lot of interest in the cause of promoting science and technology. I have gone to that school a couple of times and WEP will arrange a science competition for them next Spring term. However, curriculum changes are a huge challenge.

What is the biggest challenge when it comes to the curriculum?

This curriculum was set even before my parents went to school. So the education department is hesitant in changing it now. So I need help from the international community to set up a well-rounded curriculum with a special focus on the female audience to it.

Is WEP getting any help from bigger organizations as to make this happen?

For curriculum changes? No. But we’re getting a lot of help from organizations to set up events, set up promotion desks etc. The Mehran University of Engineering & Technology is one such example. They invited us over for sessions, they invited us as a guest speaker to seminars like Opportunity Deck for Women in Engineering, they have really helped us in spreading the cause.

You just got a scholarship as to study over in the U.S., tell us a bit about this.

Yes, I got a Fulbright scholarship to the U.S. It is a fully-funded one that enables me to do my best in education and at the same time be a part of creating a better impact in society. Fulbright scholarships are not easy to get, so there are a lot of expectations associated with the grantee once he or she scores one. I realize this is a golden opportunity for me to take my initiative for women engineers to the next level, forge contacts, raise internships, meet and invite new people to promote the cause, and I am trying to make the most of it.

What will you be studying?

I will be in U.S. for two years studying Structural Engineering with a focus on Performance-based design for earthquakes and other hazards.

Who runs WEP while you’re in the US?

I was hoping you would come to this. I have recruited Campus Ambassadors in major Engineering Universities in Pakistan. The role of these ambassadors is to carry forwad my work while I’m here. They will go to government schools for girls, they will go to colleges, they will arrange conferences in universities. I make the announcement for the selected candidates next week when session starts in Pakistan. Also, supervision is undertaken by Abdul Hadee Janjua, our co-founder. Rafay Qureshi keeps important contacts such as yourself in the loop. Ms. Sidra Kaleem works in Abu Dhabi for us, and she’s already doing a phenomenal job at representation for WEP at coferences there. She is trying to build a job market for Pakistani women engineers in the UAE.

Meanwhile, I am in constant virtual contact with everybody. Google hangouts, Skype and Facebook/Twitter are important in today’s digital age.

Is there anything else you wish i come to regarding questions..? ;-)

Yes. I am calling for international help here. We need growth. We need role models. We need jobs. Women in Pakistan are extremely talented. They are intelligent entities who are willful of changing the world for better. I call for global opportunities for these people. If someone feels they can help us in the tiniest possible way, let them not stay back. From science books to science fairs, anything and everything is welcome.

Do you have any Do’s and Don’t’s for girls and ladies who want to work within the field of technology and engineering?

Do:
– Step up
– Always be in learning mode
– Women generally are better multi taskers. Put this quality to good use.
– Repeat 1–3 daily.

Don’t:
– Give up.
– Settle for just anything. The world is huge. And anything will be yours if you keep trying your best
– Be scared of math/physics. Learn things the way you like, but maths is easy once you rid yourself of the fear of it.
– Think engineering is only for boys. An engineer uses his/her mind. So can you.

What do you mean by “Repeat 1-3 daily”?

That they should step up for a new thing daily. Enginerring is an art form in a logical format. Until women start putting their ideas into it, engineering will lack the diversity it needs.

Learn morning about Women Engineers Pakistan at their website, WomenEngineers.pk, Twitter (@women_engrs_pk) and Facebook.

(Published on core77.com 17th of July 2014)

For those of you who conduct interviews with a voice recorder, you know that the transcription is typically a slow step. If you’re lucky, the interviewee speaks slowly or spends a long time thinking before answering, and the transcription process only takes two or three rounds. This was not the case when it came to Natalia Ivanova: On the contrary, the words flow as quickly from her tongue as the movements that flow from her limbs. She has a fluidity and energy in her way of thinking that comes across in everything she does.

Ivanova is the founder of Hal X, a small indoor training hall for parkour in Copenhagen, and the coordinator of especially designed courses, where parkour is a force for positive change for youths.

Originally hailing from Russia, Ivanova speaks fondly about the memories she has of jumping from garage roof to garage roof in the oppressive heat during summers back home. She remembers how fun it was to run as fast as she possibly could, in bare feet on the burning hot rooftops. Jumping over the gaps between the buildings, she knew that one misstep could mean an unpleasant tumble into rubble that might contain rusty scraps of metal, crushed glass and used needles.

Needless to say, this love for exploring urban spaces and challenging herself with her surroundings has been the defining element of through life. As a child, the hijinks and hyperactivity were just called “fun”; now it’s called “parkour,” and it has spread around the globe with the help of aficionados and YouTube like wildfire.

<iframe width=”853″ height=”480″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/48RKEXYDvAI” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

However, you may not realize that—beyond the physics-defying wow factor of the sport—parkour can serve as a positive alternative to destructive social cultures. In contrast to several other street activities, the philosophy behind Parkour is not only to challenge yourself and push boundaries, but to develop the best version of yourself. You have to have a totally clear mind if you want to be able to get the most out of your practice. That means little or no alcohol, drugs or cigarettes. If you are under any kind of influence, you risk not being able to judge distances properly and having a serious accident. “Alcohol and other substances are off the table since your mind has be clear and focused for practice.”

Observers who aren’t familiar with the sport and the philosophies behind it might see nothing more than loose-limbed young folks jumping from building to building, doing double backflips and hanging from rails, which might lead one to the conclusion that these people are more than a little bit crazy. But as with any sport, parkour practitioners—known as traceurs or traceuses—must train extensively, with utmost dedication, and exercise discipline on every level of their life in order to do what they do. You will never see a traceur leave empty bottles or discarded sandwich papers smeared in mayonnaise behind—they don’t want to mess up their surroundings, their space for practice.

Ivanova shines when she talks about space and her way of perceiving it; she revels in interesting angles on buildings and cherishes spaces that we walk past everyday and never really notice, where she can practice in for hours on end. She talks about an spot high-up on a building and how she wants to figure out a way to get up there. The city is her playground, and everything from a bench to a set of walls can capture her interest.

She has managed to incorporate this passion for Parkour and the underlying principles in a rather innovative way. In addition to being the woman behind Hal X, Ivanova is also teaching parkour in collaboration with various partners as a way to prevent vandalism in schools and to help kids with autism interact with one another and the world.

Before studying at Paul Petersen’s Physical Education Institute in Copenhagen, she was a social worker who specialized in physical education, helping kids with troubled backgrounds. Back then, she couldn’t help herself from using Parkour as a tool to bring out new sides in the kids she worked with, nor has she been able to help herself from doing it in various ways since. The difference between now and then is that Ivanova has learned that the various ways she was working with the students were grounded in theories such as ‘Appreciative Inquiry’ and the ‘SOS Method.’ This discovery not only confirmed that she was on the right track, it also gave her a basis to continue her work. She knew parkour was a good way to work with kids at a level on which she could truly reach them and now she could explain and make others understand why.

After Ivanova completed her studies, she could have just gone the safe route, becoming a conventional teacher who activates kids in various ways, but instead she chose to focus on parkour and let everything revolve and develop around that.

The success of Ivanova’s various projects has spread through word of mouth to the extent that she is typically working five to ten different projects at any given time. A few of these projects are in the development phase, some are being executed, and others, such as Hal X, are regular gigs. This means that she doesn’t really have to go out and find clients, but that the clients come to her with a problem and they figure out a way to reach the goal together.

One of these projects came to her by way of a Danish insurance company that was working with schools around the country. The goal with the project was to stem the vandalism of schools, which was costing them obscene amounts of money. They were looking to address the issue by introducing a new social trend in the schools, to make it uncool to deface the school grounds, and Ivanova was tasked with figuring how to do so.

Her solution was to present parkour in such a way that the students started to interpret everything in the schoolyard as a tool for practice. She challenged the students to figure out various ways to use the benches, the corners, the stairs and other areas of the school grounds for practice. This made them perceive space in a different way and ultimately think twice about smashing bottles and burning the bleachers, because if their activity space was littered with trash or smeared in grease, they could no longer be used for training.

Every new client brings new challenges, new possibilities and new knowledge to be acquired.

PART II

(Published on core77.com 18th of July 2014)

In part one of this two-part series, we introduced Natalia Ivanova, educator and founder of the Hal X parkour training center in Copenhagen; as a passionate traceuse, or parkour practitioner, she has long incorporated physical education into her work with children. Here is a more detailed outline of her method.

Implementation

Getting the kids involved and excited about a new project is normally never an issue—they are more than happy to get out of their routines and try something new. Seeing as this is the case with most projects, the challenge is to make the project become a part of the everyday culture, to ensure that the students continue to practice after the official project is over and Natalia and her crew leave the school. Unfortunately, she has yet to come up with an answer… so No, no formula to be found here. At least not yet.

(When working with co-creative processes at various schools, my colleague Heidi and I encountered the exactly same problem. No matter what approach we tried, we never really managed to implement the way of thinking and working we used when collaborating with the students and teachers in such a way that it became a part of their everyday culture.)

Breaking Down Borders

No matter how much we try to ignore it and think or act otherwise, the fact remains that we live in a system where the gaps between the various social classes are visible to the naked eye. Just as with other sports, parkour is a means of breaking down these imagined barriers and connecting people from various cultures and social groups

Parkour transcends these social borders by creating a common ground—wall, ledge or bench—for participants.

<iframe width=”853″ height=”480″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/NX7QNWEGcNI” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

The Best Version of Yourself

Some call it mindfulness, others meditation, parkour practitioners just seem to call it preparation. Cleaning the soles of your shoes, moving your neck from side to side, stepping inside of yourself while warming up your joints, jumping up and down, visualizing the site and its various possibilities.

While the general public may have the impression that people who do parkour are just mad, jumping between building and doing double backflips, many people don’t realize that traceurs practice year-round. No matter how dangerous a technique might look, they have no intention of pushing themselves so far that they get hurt. Injuries are inevitable in any sport, but with practice and incremental improvement, traceurs can keep the risk to a minimum. Another thing that doesn’t mesh with their way of living is a large consumption of alcohol and other nefarious substances. The potential harm to their only required tool—their body—is far too great to justify. The point is movement, after all.

One of the things Ivanova has pointed out many times throughout the interview is that “there is always something you can do.” If you can’t jump 1m, then jump 50cm, if you can’t do that then jump 30cm and if you can’t jump at all, then train your upper body.

Moreover, the mental strength that one builds through parkour may have a positive impact on other parts of his or her life. Benefits may include: the propensity to look at situations from different angles to find a way to get from A to B; the practice of challenging yourself and pushing your limits when you feel the time is right; the habit of seeing possibilities where other see nothing; and the method of supporting and encouraging peers through struggle and in victory.

The Community

As an outsider looking in, it’s impossible not to notice—and envy—the camaraderie between people practicing parkour. The smiles, the pat on shoulder, the shouts of encouragement and kudos, the curiosity when someone does a maneuvre that others have yet have to master, and how everyone gladly supports and teaches one another. There is no talk about gender, country, culture, age, education, background, language or social layers. And if you, like myself, am curious about what they are up to, they are more then happy to show you some techniques and just or just sit down and give you an insight to what they are up to and what it’s all about.

<iframe width=”853″ height=”480″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/vT9bErnAedo” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

The Next Generation

Outsiders look at parkour and assume that the sport is driven by a distinct lack of mental stability. Looking at some of the appalling videos you can find on YouTube, I don’t blame them. Some of the jumps and maneuvers you will see can make you hold your breath and make your heart skip a beat… or five. Yet the movements continue to evolve and some of the techniques that were earth-shattering a few years back are now seen as standard inventory.

The trend of filming more and more courageous and dangerous routes is cause for concern among some of the more experienced traceurs. They are worried that the new generation will forget the principles behind the sport, that which holds the community together and drives its progress. Principles such as ‘practice makes perfect,’ ‘warming up’, ‘mental awareness,’ ‘taking things at your own pace’ and ‘supporting one another through thick and thin.’

In an effort to prevent this you can now find videos showcasing the small things that make a big difference, such as simple, progressive warm-ups and mindful training.

<iframe width=”640″ height=”480″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/6ZLPs2a9rsE” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

Questions? Comments?

Now that you have a sense of what parkour is about, we’re curious to hear what you think…
– What sort of social problems do you you encounter in your surrounding?
– Do you think parkour could be a way to solve these problems? If so: How?
– How do you create lasting change when a project is over?
– How do you suggest we create a stronger connection and bigger understanding between parkour practitioners and the general public?

Schools kill creativity. This simple message was the point of Sir Ken Robinson’s TED talk, now the most viewed of all time. Robinson challenges the way we view education in todays society, and highlights the fact that it hasn’t developed in the speed that it needs to, but is stuck in the old way of thinking.

The talk was released in 2006. And while much has changed since then (how many of you are now reading this on a smartphone or a tablet?), our schools have remained dully familiar. In the UK, things have arguably got worse, with unpopular figure Michael Gove damning progressive education as a ‘misplaced ideology’ and swinging the curriculum back towards good old traditional methods.

Four students at Royal College of Art in London have decided to do address this issue by developing a summer program where kids can enjoy thinking and learning in different ways. Project 42 is expressly intended for creative learners (ages 9–12) who really don’t fit into the framework of today’s educational institutions. The program will take place between July 28 and August 8 at the Royal College of Art. WhyProject 42? Well, according to the one the founders, Ed Tam:

The name is inspired by the book The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. In the story, a supercomputer was tasked to find the ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything. Millennia had passed and the computer came back with the answer 42. But the people soon realized that it’s going to take a much bigger, more complex computer to arrive at the question. Project 42 was set up to help young people discover the power of the question.

The aim of the weeklong course is to bring out the fearless learner within each child by encouraging them to explore a question that interests them, and by starting with their strengths and working outwards. The theme for this year’s camp is London 2050, and under four themes—fashion, food, habitat and transport—children will be able to explore potential futures for the city through drawing, cooking, sewing, animating, storytelling, making and even coding.

The entire process will be available open-source: Project 42 will be documenting and sharing all of their experiences, methods and outcomes for others to adapt and use.

True to the principles of empathic design, the project has been developed organically, in collaboration with kids, parents, teachers and current experts in the field. Besides Sir Ken Robinson’s powerful talk, the project also bears the legacy of influential educational thinkers such as John Dewey and Lev Vygotsky. Other sources of inspiration include the Independent Project, Sugata Mitra and Logan LaPlante’s talk on Hackschooling.

I will be following the project and the team from London, which means that you’ll be able to read about the project as it unfolds. You can follow it here on Core77 and on Project 42’s own blog.

When I look at schools, I walk into schools, when I interact with schools, I feel like they belong to a different universe. As soon as I set my foot in a school, it feels like I’ve stepped out of the real world and into a something alien and unnatural.

Most people call it an institution, in the same way that we call a hospital or a prison “an institution.”

Institution—this says it all. A public or private place for the care or confinement of inmates, especially mental patients or other disabled or handicapped persons.

Throughout history, it seems like we’ve been dead set on designing educations and education facilities as to make the students feel locked-in, both body as well as soul.

It doesn’t sound very inviting or inspiring, it normally doesn’t look very inviting or inspring, and still we want students of all ages to spend a lot of time in these place, we want them to want to learn, to get inspired, to grow as human beings and to become the next generation when building our society. Yet hardly anything about the ordinary education facilities can be called inspiring, or showcase which direction we want our society to go.

For many years, one of of the questions roaming around in my mind on a daily basis has been, ‘How can we create an good education that builds the sort of minds we want and need in our society, when we don’t even seem to know which sort of society we want?’ Which leads to: How can we go about re-arranging our education over and over and over again, without seemingly taking into account that education and society are undeniably intertwined?

This leads back to what I wrote in the very beginning: How come we have been designing institutions that separates, and in some cases, alienates, rather than intertwines education and education facilities with society? And how can we integrate education in such a way that it becomes a more natural, and less alien, base pillar of the society we want to create?

Is it just me, or is this something that we need to start a serious discussion about that crosses national, social and occupational borders…?

This is the third article in an ongoing series about working with kids by Copenhagen-based architect/designer/educator Moa Dickmark. Her last article was on the Future of Learning Environments.

There are a few things that one should think about when it comes to working on a project using co-creative processes. There are the basics, such as how you develop and structure them, and then there’s the small things that make the process go more smoothly. Sometimes these small things end up making a big difference, so I’m going to let you in on some of the ones that my colleague and I use more or less every time we are out working. Most (but not all) of them are applicable also when working with teachers, leaders, politicians etc.

The Necessities

Start the process with a few meetings with the headmaster and school leadership, where you can decide on a common goal and make sure that you are on the same page. A goal for a process can be something along the lines of:

Develop spaces that students and teachers feel comfortable in and that can be used in various ways depending on subject and the individual students needs.

Decide on a timeline, a budget, how many hours you will spend with the students per workshop and ask them to find a class with teachers that are open-minded and up for the project. No point in hitting your head against the wall with teachers who don’t want you to be there; the students will probably take on the sentiment of teacher and the process to reach the set goals will not be enjoyable for anyone.

Involvement

1.) Make sure that everyone involved in the project feels like they are truly a part of the project, and that they have an important role in the process and outcome.

When working with students, invite their parents for a meeting where you tell them about the project, tell them a bit about the basics of co-creative processes and what sort of things their kids are going to come home and ramble about. It’s really good to let them try what you are talking about, so let them do one of the exercise—i.e. a quick and dirty model-making session always bring out a lot of laughter—in order to provide a greater understanding of how fun it can be, and so they have something to talk about when their kid comes home from school.

This is also a good way to get them more involved—maybe one of the parents works at a warehouse and can arrange some sponsorship deal with the boss or something of the sort, or that some of them want to spend some of their free time helping out at one of the workshops. The more support you get from the parents, the better.

2.) Also make sure that people who are not directly involved of the project feel welcome.

For example, shortly after starting working with a 6 grade class in a small school in the middle of Jylland, Denmark, the biggest ambassadors for the project and for what the students were working on turned out to be the librarian and one of the cleaning ladies. They showed parents what their children were up to, and talked about the vision developed for the various areas.

All on the Same Level / Experts in Their Own Right

No matter who you work with, be it a class of 7-year-olds, a class of 17-year-olds, a bunch of teachers, the school administrators or a mix of all of them, always remember to make sure to listen to them and and take them seriously. Whoever is a part of the project team is an expert in his or her own right, so when working with co-creative processes, no one’s opinion is more worth than anyone else’s. A 7-year-old girl’s opinion about the learning space is just as valuable as that of her teachers and headmasters; make sure that this is clear when you start working together, and that it is respected throughout the process. Make sure that no one plays the seniority card to get her/his way…

Overview

Design an overview of the process and the various workshops. Explain the overall goal with the process, and the goal for each workshop—but not the details—to the students and teachers in the beginning of the first workshop. Draw them on the whiteboard with figures (cameras, maps, tools etc) representing each workshop. It’s good if you do this in the beginning of each workshop—that way, they will have a visual understanding of what is going on, and will be able to see where in the process they are, what they have been through to get there and what they have to look forward to.

Language

Everyone has an opinion of their surrounding, but not everyone has the language to express it. Students and teachers will find it difficult to express why a certain area is good, and why another one isn’t. It is your responsibility to help them develop a better understanding of their surroundings, and a way for them to express it, and it is your responsibility to make sure you get the information you need, and to make sure that the students and teachers participating in the workshops learn from them, and find them interesting to take part of. This wa,y no one feels like they are wasting their time and everyone works a bit harder to reach the set goals. It also creates a great positive energy that spreads like wildfire around the school.

When working with students, no matter what age, never ever use oversimplified language. Continue using words such as design process, co-creation and modules. Write them up on a section of the white-board, you can call it “The dictionary,” and then explain what it means using words that already are a part of their vocabulary.

By the end of a workshop, you might hear a student say to another student something along the line with “Oh, but this is not the finished product, it’s just a prototype of the modular system we are working on…” When that happens you will stop, listen and think to yourself, “Wow, so cool!”

There’s no Right or Wrong

Another thing that is good to think about is to tell the students when you start working with them that:

There’s no right or wrong! If you want to write down your idea, write, we don’t care about the spelling, or grammar for that matter. If you want to draw down your idea, draw. If you want to build your idea, we are going to do that too!

What at your age is called Fantasy and Imagination is called Creative Thinking later on, and is something older people go to university to learn more about. So don’t lose it, you will need it now and for the rest of your life!

Teams

When designing the process focus on teamwork. Make sure that they vary in size in the very beginning; depending on how many students you are working with in total, you can make them bigger. We have found that the magical number is 5–8 people in one group. It’s better with more teams than bigger teams. During the first few exercises, you will be able to see how they work in teams: which ones work more closely; who naturally becomes a leader and who takes the leader role by force; who is a good project manager or creative thinkers; who brings positive and productive energy to the team; and who simply can’t work together. Try to get them to reflect upon this in various ways so they are more likely to develop good team by themselves later on in the process.

And then you have the ones that just don’t seem to fit in—or in some cases don’t want to fit in—to any sort of group. It is your challenge to figure out what sort of role they can play in process. Maybe they can be the Journalist, create a blog for the project, take pictures, do interviews with teachers and their fellow students, and write articles for each workshop. Or maybe they can be your personal assistant, or the shoulder-tapper, the one who goes around and gives high-fives, tells the other students how good they are and gives them positive reinforcement, it’s an important task too. Just make sure that no one is left out.

Following her first article on her experiences as an architect/designer working with kids, Moa Dickmark offers her insights into the future of pedagogy and learning environments, an issue that raises various questions around the world. Here, she shares her vision for learning spaces in the future, how to go about developing them, and why she believes that students and teachers should have a say and be a part of the development and implementation process.

What do I believe will be the future for education and education facilities?

Einstein, who said something to the effect of “If you can’t explain the problem simply, you don’t understand it well enough,” would not be happy with my answer.

The question seems so simple, but the answer, as most of you probably have noticed, is oh-so complex.

More and more, we see that newly designed schools around the globe is that the majority of architects rely on the teachers and the school administrators’ feedback regarding their work environment as the basis of their designs. Like most of you, I agree that this is an important part of developing a more multi-faceted school then what we have seen in the past.

And it is without a doubt important, as an architect, to listen to and truly understand the needs of the people who use the school spaces on a day to day basis. It is also vital that the architects read between the lines and interpret what the users can’t put into words themselves. We are fluent in the language of space, but we have to remember that not everyone is. This is also important when it comes to developing an environment that not only works better than the ones they had before, but becomes a way to develop and challenge existing ways of teaching and learning.

One thing I have noticed when studying various projects and architecture studios around the globe is that very few of them consult the students on a serious level. Don’t get me wrong, there are some really good projects where they are doing just this (and i will write about them, i can promise you that), but they are few and far between.

There are many reasons for this: the students (kids, tweens, teens) ideas can seem unserious, far fetched and unrealistic. They can also be hard to comprehend, and hard to implement into the design because of a lack of understanding of why the students are asking for whatever they are asking for. And then there is of course the problems that all kids have with adults: that the adults believe that they know best and know what the kids truly need.

Once more we have to keep in mind that not everyone speaks the language of space, but most people, no matter what age, have an opinion about it, and kids are no different. It can be hard for anyone to understand and pinpoint why they think, work, concentrate or come up with better ideas in one area of a learning space, and not in others.

There are various ways to get around this little hurdle—by guiding them through various small workshops where they explore and question everything from existing spaces at the school and the surrounding areas, as well as where they hang out after school and in their homes.

In the beginning, you (as an architect, designer or teacher seeking more insight to the students minds) will probably find it rather tricky—I know I did. But in this way, both you and the students will get a greater understanding of which areas are best suited for which sort of work, what areas work best for them and why, which areas do not work and why, and how you together can develop the areas that don’t work so that the students start using them.

The Almighty Designer…

During my time studying architecture at university and based on what I’ve heard from fellow architecture students in other countries, our mentors continue to talk about the importance of a good process, and that we are supposed to study our clients and users as thoroughly as we possibly can. Unfortunately, at least for me, it is not a part of the curriculum to learn how to develop our own design and work process, how to collaborate with non-architects, how to set a timetable for a project or how to develop and conduct a workshop.

This often results in students who believe they have the infallible taste when it comes to design, and that this means that their opinions are worth more than those who are actually going to use the building.

Janitors, Students and Teachers Are Also Experts

As an architect, it can be extremely hard to let go of your role (and view of yourself) as the expert when it comes to design, and I’m not saying that you should do so completely. But—and this is a big BUT—it is important to remember that everyone who uses the space is an expert in her/his own right, and that their expertise is not to be taken lightly. The teachers’ expertise, the janitors’ expertise, the 12-year-old students’ expertise, and the librarians’ expertise all must be taken into consideration in order to arrive at the optimal end result when designing or redesigning space.

Unfortunately, many architects see the client/users as a disruptive element, along with budgets that are too tight, annoying regulations and other parameters that messes up their design.

If you instead choose to see it as an opportunity to work together on developing and designing a solution that measures up to as many requirements as possible, the entire process will develop in another, more enjoyable, direction. A common goal of a good collaboration, where everyone involved is on the same level and is respected for their respective expertise, leads to a more interesting and more sustainable project.

It will probably cost a bit extra on the spreadsheets and take a bit longer, but considering the life cycle of a building, one to two months of extra research and development does not really matter, especially not if the results exceeds the ordinary.

Asking for What They Know

When my colleague Heidi Lyng and I first started working closely with schools to develop design processes with students and teachers, we were just starting our final year of our master from Aarhus School of Architecture in Denmark.

For the major part of our first semester, we were out working with students in various elementary schools located in Aarhus, and a school with for tweens with concentration and learning disabilities in Vejle. During this time we developed various co-creative design processes in order to get a hold of the information we needed as to be able to understand the students needs. We also developed different methods with regard to the age of the students, energy levels etc.

One of the many things we learned from our first semester at uni is that when asked the question of what sort of spaces they want and need in a new school, the teachers, students and school leaders answer by asking for what they already know or what they think we as architects want to hear without considering whether the spaces actually work. This is the reason why we use co-creative design processes—to open up for a mutual understanding and dig deeper into what is truly needed and what is just for show.

Another thing we learned (and keep reminding ourselves of) is that “small kids have small pockets.” For us, this means that we always have to keep in mind who we are developing the co-creative design processes for when it comes to both age and size…

The Ultimate Learning Environment

I have thought long and hard about what is needed as to create the ultimate learning environment, and come to the conclusion that it doesn’t exist. The only thing we can do is to create as much of an advantageous basis for space to develop as possible. We can do this by developing a space that works in collaboration with the educators, by hiring teachers who burn for what they do, and to create spaces where students and teachers work together as a team to create a good atmosphere where learning is something that students genuinely want to do.

The school, in terms of both architecture and pedagogy, must take in consideration that people are different and they have different needs to feel good and comfortable, and ultimately fulfil their potential. Only after you have specified the needs and wishes of various individuals can you design a space that even comes close to what can be called “the ultimate learning environment,” and this takes time, close collaboration between the various users and partners and the architects and engineers.

One of the things that I personally find to be important throughout the process is to design a solution that not only supports current pedagogy, but also challenges teachers and students to develop it further, and hopefully meets their future needs proactively. This is difficult, of course, since we can’t possibly know what the future will bring, but what we can do is study and develop spaces that work in the present so we can stop designing and developing spaces that don’t.

So let’s collaborate and co-create more, let’s take one another seriously when doing so, and let’s develop ways of working where we truly understand what the other one is saying, and not just brush opinions under the rug because they aren’t expressed in a language we can understand.

Let me start off by saying that this is solemnly based on personal experiences and opinions! Sure, there’s some facts to back it up seeing that we have done our research, but the sources are long forgotten. Not because they weren’t relevant, but i’ve mixed them up in my mental blender…

To the point: Working with kids has many sides. It can be hard, it can be challenging, you have to plan the day down to the minute, and make sure that you can rearrange your plans depending on the day play out, but most of all it’s good fun, inspiring and amazingly awesome to be let into their world.

As an architect by training, I have worked with my lovely colleague Heidi Lyng to develop various methods when working together with kids, teachers and leaders on developing educational spaces using co-creative design processes. We’ve been doing this for over two years now, and have been working on everything between concrete projects such as developing more active playgrounds to more fluffy projects such as developing a common vision for a gymnasium. We see everyone involved—from the 7-year-old student to the 62-year-old principal—as experts in their field. No one is as good at being a 7-year-old girl as a 7-year- old girl…

As I’ve already written, working with kids have many facets—it can be hard, it can be tricky, it can be hilarious, it can be oh-so-many things, but most of all it’s fun, it is inspiring and it is vital if you want to reach the optimal result with the project.

First, the Good

No matter what their age, kids have an insight into, and a view of, how it is to be a kid of their own age that no one, no matter how good you are at putting yourself into the shoes of others, can do to the same extent. Figuring out why a certain space works, and why another one doesn’t is something only the kids you work with can tell you. It’s their field of expertise. They know, instinctively, where they prefer to work, where they get inspired and where they feel safe etc. What we, the architects, do is help them define and understand theses spaces by playing games and asking questions.

The Bad

Let’s start with the obvious: Kids have an extremely short concentration span! But here is where it’s up to you to make sure to arrange the day in such a way that you can keep them interested. If one method doesn’t work, tweak it until it does or try another approach. If you notice that the concentration is on an all-time low, take a break, ask them to run around the building a few times and see who can do it the fastest, take them out onto the playground and play a game, get some fresh air. But whatever you do, do NOT continue as if nothing is wrong. There’s always something you can do, even if it’s just to let them go crazy for 5-10 minutes…!

Another thing we have noticed is that our school is built up in such a way that the kids pretty early seem to lose their natural sense of imagination. By first grade, they are already taught that there are some things that are right, and some that are wrong. The more right you are, the more golden stars you will get. Unfortunately this means that their ability to wander through the door into a wonderful world of imaginary friends and create fairytale spaces is fading at a young age.

Thankfully this is not the case with all kids—some manage to keep the door open longer than others.

We find that starting off a process by telling the kids that we aren’t looking for right or wrong answers when we are there—we don’t care if they draw perfectly, if they spell correctly or build a perfect house. Whatever they do is good. Our job is to make sure that we create an environment where the doors of imagination can re-open and stay open.

And if it helps, let them know that what is called imagination and fantasy now is called creativity or creative thinking later on, and is something older kids study at university!

Now for the Awesome

Kids have this amazing ability to come up with cool and crazy ideas when you give them the possibility. You get to see completely new sides of them when you work with them through co-creative design processes. Their way of solving problems, the curiosity to try out things they’ve never tried in school, new methods of learning, working in teams, helping out their peers, and doing things that—at the beginning of the day—they thought they would never be able to do.

To see how they automatically switch roles in a group when they notice that someone else is a better leader on the new task then they were on the last one; how they develop their language and new ways of thinking; how their view on others and themselves changes. How they get grander visions for their future, and get excited about the idea of becoming a designer, a construction worker, a photographer, a teacher, a journalist or whatever else they find interesting.

To see how they encounter problems within the group and figure out a way to solve it within the group without crying, blaming and dragging in the teacher. Or how they go from being shy to standing in front of a crowd, explaining what they have come up with, and why it’s so good.

Taking the kids seriously and acknowledging that they are experts within (and outside of) the process is always a must for projects that have anything to do with them. If you give kids more responsibility and tell them out loud that you expect certain things from them—such as accountability for their own actions and achieving a goal as a group—they will do their utmost to not fail the group, yourself or themselves. It’s inspiring to be a part of their development, and it’s awesome to see the results they produce throughout the workshops.

Einstein said something along the lines of, “Don’t judge a fish on it’s ability to climb a tree.” So don’t judge a kid on his/her ability to be, say, a lawyer, and don’t judge a lawyer on his/her ability to be a kid. While the kid still has the possibility of becoming a lawyer, the lawyer’s ability to be a kid vanished a long time ago. Judge them on being experts on being exactly what they are at the moment.