PEBEXCHANGEO

EC

D

6 Ice Storm: Reacting to a Natural Disaster in Quebec

9 Architectural Competition for a Secondary School in Switzerland

12 The Netherlands’ Study House: New Designs for New Pedagogies

14 Teaching Environmentally Sustainable Design

17 A Visit to Three Parisian School Libraries

THE␣ JOURNAL OF THE OECD PROGRAMME ON EDUCATIONAL BUILDING

ISSUE 35 OCTOBER 98

The Oosterlicht College, the Netherlands

The OECD Programme on Educational Building (PEB)The Programme on Educational Building (PEB) operates within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD). PEB promotes the international exchange of ideas, information, research and experience in all aspects of educationalbuilding. The over riding concerns of the programme are to ensure that the maximum educational benefit is obtained frompast and future investment in educational buildings and equipment, and that the building stock is planned and managed inthe most efficient way.Eighteen OECD Member countries and nine associate members currently participate in the Programme on EducationalBuilding. PEB’s mandate from the OECD Council to advise and report on educational facilities for students of all ages runsuntil the end of 2001. A steering committee of representatives from each participating country establishes the annualprogramme of work and budget.

PEB Members PEB Associate MembersAustralia Korea Albania Education Development ProjectAustria Netherlands A.R.G.O. (Belgium)Czech Republic New Zealand Fonds communautaire de garantie des bâtiments scolaires (Belgium)Denmark Portugal Ministerium der Deutschsprachigen Gemeinschaft (Belgium)Finland Spain Province of Quebec (Canada)France Sweden Regione Emilia-Romagna (Italy)Greece Switzerland Regione Toscana (Italy)Iceland Turkey Slovak RepublicIreland United Kingdom Tokyo Institute of Technology (Japan)

PEB AND OECD ACTIVITIES1999-2000 PROGRAMME OF WORK – PEB Steering Committee

The need to rethink educational facilities inresponse to the challenges of the informationsociety and the growth of lifelong learning was seenas a high priority by the PEB Steering Committee atits meeting in June. The Committee adopted a newprogramme of work for 1999 and 2000 whichincluded the following activities.

Work area A: Facilities for the school of thefuture

This work area is concerned with how educationwill be provided in future, and the changing roleof schools in society.

Theme A1: Schools in the information society

As low-cost personal computing becomes morewidely available, and the Internet offers homes andschools access to information sources which werebeyond the reach of even large universities only afew years ago, long-established ways of workingin education are being reconsidered. The role andfunctions of the school library in particular arehaving to be rethought.

Following on from the publication Redefining thePlace to Learn published by PEB in 1995, and theexperts’ meeting on libraries and resource centresin tertiary education held in 1998, PEB plans toanalyse more specifically how the use of personalcomputers is affecting the demand for and the useof space in educational institutions. The work willadopt a case-study approach.

Theme A2: Educational facilities and lifelonglearning in the community

The communiqué of the Education Ministers’meeting in 1996 suggested that schools “shouldbecome ‘community learning centres’ offering avariety of programmes and learning methods to adiverse range of students, and remain open for longhours throughout the year”.

In this context PEB will organise a seminar in Spring1999 to review practice in the provision and man-agement of educational facilities, with particular refer-ence to changes which reflect or seek to respond tothe adoption of policies which promote lifelong learn-ing, and the creation of the “information society”.

3

Work area B: Tertiary education: copingwith demand

Work in this area is concerned with the responseof tertiary education institutions to rapid expansionof student numbers, changes in the delivery oflearning and the diversification of course offerings.

Theme B2: Design of institutions for the earlyyears of tertiary education

Redefining Tertiary Education based on a thematicreview of the early years of tertiary education inOECD countries was published in June (seepage␣ 22). PEB’s report Facilities for Tertiary Educa-tion in the 21st Century was published in May. Policydevelopments and changes in the delivery andorganisation of tertiary-level courses havesignificant implications for the management anduse of facilities. In responding to continuing stronggrowth in student numbers, and diversification ofcourse content and course delivery, institutions areadopting a more client-centred approach. Aseminar in 2000 organised jointly with the IMHEProgramme will analyse how these changes areinfluencing institutional design and organisation.

Work area C: Strategies for managing theeducational infrastructure

Educational facilities represent a very significantinvestment of both capital and recurrent expendi-ture. This work area relates primarily to effectivemanagement and utilisation of that investment.

Theme C1: Maintenance and renewal

The condition of school buildings and their capacityto respond to changing educational demands areunder renewed scrutiny in OECD countries. Follow-ing the conference on maintenance and renewal ofeducational facilities which is due to be held in Spring1999 in the United States, PEB work will include thepreparation and publication of a report which willdraw mainly on the papers from, and discussion at,the conference, which will focus on the school sector.Later in 1999 the work on maintenance will beextended to the tertiary sector, again in co-operationwith the IMHE Programme.

Theme C2: Space management and use in largeinstitutions

The effective management of university infrastruc-ture is an issue of growing concern to a number ofOECD Member countries. A report of the work-

shop on “Strategic asset management in tertiaryinstitutions” in Sydney, Australia, in July 1998 (seebelow) will be published in early 1999.

Theme C3: Financing capital and recurrentexpenditure

In the pursuit of more efficient service provision manygovernments are in the process of reviewing long-standing mechanisms of channelling finance toeducational infrastructure. Recent analyses by PEBhave looked at changing approaches to thegovernance and management of educational facilities,and at the financing of capital expenditure in highereducation. In 1999 PEB will begin a new compara-tive study of existing and planned approaches tofinancing expenditure on facilities, includingequipment. This work will be closely linked to theoutcome of the 1998 joint project with the EuropeanInvestment Bank on the appraisal of investment ineducational infrastructure (see below).

Theme C4: Health, safety and security

The health, safety and security of the users ofeducational facilities is of paramount concern todesigners and managers of institutions. The PEBseminar in Italy in 1997, and the associatedpublication Providing a Secure Environment forLearning provided a broad analysis of some ofthis ground. In the year 2000 this work will besupplemented by an experts’ meeting which willlook more closely at some of the tools andtechniques available to facility managers tomaximise safety and security in and aroundeducational buildings.

Work area D: Improving effectiveness

This work area is concerned with evaluating howgood design and management can contribute tothe effectiveness of schools and other educationalinstitutions; and with the relationship betweenthe resources put into them and the outcomesthat they achieve.

Theme D1: Improving the effectiveness ofschools through design and management

Work will begin in 1999 on the second com-pendium of exemplary educational facilities tobe published by the OECD. The first was publishedunder the title Schools for Today and Tomorrowand concentrated on recently completed build-ings, mainly in the school sector. The second willcover all sectors of lifelong learning and will give

4

greater prominence to the management, use andevaluation of facilities. A dissemination confer-ence will be planned to coincide with publica-tion in 2000.

Theme D2: Indicators for evaluating facilitiesand their utilisation

A joint project in 1998 between PEB and theEuropean Investment Bank will identify issues forwork in this area in 1999 and 2000. They arelikely to include an experts’ meeting followedby publication and dissemination of the out-comes of the project, and closer involvement inOECD work in educational indicators. It is hopedto move forward with the development of a com-parative international data-base and performanceindicators covering space standards and utilisa-tion, environmental standards, costs and size ofinstitutions.

STRATEGIC ASSET MAN-AGEMENT FOR TERTIARYINSTITUTIONS

This PEB workshop held in Sydney in July broughttogether 40 senior managers from tertiary institu-tions who discussed the implications for facilitiesof the changing policy environment in tertiaryeducation: moves to opening the market tothird-party access; student-centredness and userchoice; the impact of lifelong learning; and theblurring of sectoral differences.

Issues covered included:

• risk management in a business environment␣ –accountability and competition;

• the impact of global information networks onfacility planning;

• the changing role of the facilities manager;

• aligning the physical environment with educa-tional objectives;

• total asset management␣ – understanding the realcost of facilities;

• tools of the trade: space utilisation, valuemanagement, life-cycle costing, space charging.

A full report will be made available in the comingmonths.

NEW OECD SUSTAINABLEBUILDING PROGRAMME

The building and housing sector has a significantimpact on the environment. According to estimates,this sector is responsible for approximately 40 per centof the world’s energy consumption when the produc-tion and transportation of construction materials aretaken into account. Likewise it represents about 40per␣ cent of total carbon dioxide emissions.

The OECD has carried out numerous reviews ofenvironmental issues over the years. It has addressedpollution of air, water and soil and the impact ofmany industrial sectors on the environment, i.e.chemicals, energy and transportation. The aim of theSustainable Building Programme is to identify policyinstruments and strategies favouring the adoption ofsustainable practices in the building sector, whileexamining its related links with the broader field ofpublic construction. The project is scheduled to becarried out over a four-year period from 1998 to 2001.

The first step for the Programme is to collect infor-mation on environmental policies and practicesincluding construction projects and criteria relatedto building and housing in each Member countryand exchange information between responsibleofficials.

Next the OECD and experts from various countrieswill analyse these policies and assess their effective-ness from the following points of view:

• resource use: eco-efficiency, life-cycle costing;

• energy use: efficient use and conservation ofenergy, reduction of carbon dioxide emissions;

• system approach: system management for theenvironment, green purchasing.

Workshops will be held once a year to exchangeinformation and opinions, to be followed by anannual report.

The final phase of the project will be the proposal ofa variety of environmentally sustainable buildingpolicies for OECD Member countries.

For more information, contact:

Shoichi Ando, Principal Administrator,Pollution Prevention and Control Division/ENVTel.: 33 (0)1 45 24 14 87, Fax: 33 (0)1 45 24 78 76,E-mail: shoichi.ando@oecd.org.

5

INDICATORS FOREVALUATING FACILITIESAND THEIR UTILISATION(Appraisal of educationalinvestments)

A project organised jointly by the OECD Programmeon Educational Building (PEB) and the EuropeanInvestment Bank (EIB).

Investments in education are key to the developmentof human capital. All education authorities are facedwith having to review their educational provision inthe face of changing demand for education, whetherit be because of population growth or decline, neweducational policies, new technologies or obsoletefacilities. The cost of providing, maintaining and run-ning educational buildings and equipment representsa substantial investment of public expenditure inOECD countries. Technical and economic apprais-als are some of the means of helping those responsi-ble for the planning and management of educationalinvestments to reach decisions which will lead to mak-ing the best use of this money. Appropriate indicatorsmust be selected to make such appraisals effective.

With these considerations in mind, PEB and the EIBhave identified the relationship between investmentsin educational facilities and the quality of educa-tion, measured in terms of its contribution to regionaleconomic development, as a priority area for work.They will organise a meeting of experts on 16 and17 November 1998 at the headquarters of the EIB inLuxembourg to define that relationship more closely.

The primary concern at the experts’ meeting will beto consider those physical, environmental and organi-sational elements which have a direct impact on theperformance of educational investments, and to pro-vide elements of measurement of that performance.The group of experts will exchange case studies andreview recent developments in the following fields:

• identification of needs;• management of educational facilities;• design and equipment of physical facilities for

education;• performance indicators for educational systems;• cost benefit analysis in educational investments.

Expected speakers are researchers, planners andmanagers working on educational policies,architects and those responsible for equipment,

financial controllers and performance evaluatorsof secondary and higher education institutions.Following the meeting, they will participate activelywith regular contributions to electronic discussiongroups up to the publication of a paper primarilyintended for people responsible for improving,appraising or financing facilities for education.

About the European Investment Bank (EIB)

The EIB was set up in 1958 by the Treaty of Romein order to foster European development.

According to Article 198 of the Treaty of theEuropean Union, “The task of the EIB shall be tocontribute by having recourse to the capital marketsand utilising its own resources, to the balanced andsteady development of the common market in theinterest of the Community. For this purpose, theBank shall operating on a non-profit making basisgrant loans and give guarantees...”. Loans grantedin 1997 amount to ECU 26 billion.

Detailed information on the EIB can be found onthe Internet at http://www.eib.org.

About the PEB-EIB collaboration

At the European Council meeting in Amsterdam on16-17 June 1997 one of the main decisions taken bythe European Union’s heads of state was the adop-tion of the Resolution on Growth and Employment.In this resolution, the European Council urges theEIB “to examine its scope of intervention in the areasof education”.

The EIB performs a triple analysis (technical,economic and financial) of all projects submitted forfinance. In this frame, a comprehensive analysis ofissues such as planning of educational investments,operational costs and performance indicators is keyfor a reliable appraisal of educational projects. Giventhat the OECD and PEB have a large experience inmost of these subjects, the EIB approached PEB insearch of a collaborative plan for the developmentof a Guide for Appraisal of Educational Investment.

Agustin Auria, Principal Engineer at the ProjectsDirectorate of the EIB, is on secondment to the OECDfor a three-month period to collaborate with the PEBstaff on the implementation of this programme. Formore information, contact Mr. Auria:

Tel.: 33 (0)1 45 24 93 50, Fax: 33 (0)1 42 24 02 11,E-mail: agustin.auria@oecd.org.○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

6

MEMBER NEWS

ICE STORM: REACTING TOA NATURAL DISASTER INQUEBEC

When a severe freeze hit Quebec in January 1998,schools and universities were forced to remainclosed for up to 23 days. Here is an account ofhow school authorities handled the crisis and thelessons they learned.

The situation

In early January, an ice storm paralysed much ofQuebec and knocked out the Hydro-Quebecpower plant leaving every educational facility insix regions of Canada without electricity, andpreventing 440␣ 000 students from attendingschool. Unlike other disasters such as explosionsor earthquakes, not all of the consequences ofthe freeze were immediate, which made decision-taking extremely complicated.

Initial reaction

An assessment was needed of the consequencesof the disaster on the educational system. TheMinistry of Education’s regional office in the worsthit area, Monteregie, undertook to contact localeducation authorities who in turn contacted theirschools’ administrations to determine the state oftheir facilities and the number being requisitionedby civil authorities for public shelters or for useby the armed services. This task proved quitedifficult as the majority of those individuals werevictims of the disaster themselves. Howeverwithin a matter a days, pertinent information con-cerning institutions at all levels of education frompre-schools to universities was centralised andthereafter provided to the public on an al-most daily basis.

Under the direction of Ms. Pauline Marois, theMinistry of Education and the Ministry ofFamilies and Childhood (ministère de laFamille et de l’Enfance) jointly set up a helpcentre which provided activities for youth,financed by the Red Cross, and adviceto community leaders.

At the request of the Ministry of Edu-cation, schools in regions not affectedby the freeze offered to welcome stu-

dents from the disaster-struck areas into theirclassrooms. For the most part however thispossibility was not taken advantage of, as parentspreferred not to be separated from their children.

Throughout the storm local education authoritieswere encouraged to consult structural experts toensure building security, paying special attentionto roofs under the weight of ice. On 19␣ January,the Ministry of Education announced plans tomaintain salaries and insure compensation formaterial damage resulting from the freeze. Formswere sent to the local authorities asking for detailsof expenses incurred, and the Ministry then begananalysing each claim. Of the 1␣ 800 educationalbuildings in the area which was hit by the freeze,claims relating to 1␣ 046 of them were soon re-turned, for a total of 38.1␣ million Canadian dollars.

Making up for lost time

The freeze had begun while many schools anduniversities were closed for the end-of-the-yearholidays. As the crisis continued, the institutions wereunable to reopen as scheduled. For pre-schools,elementary schools and high schools, local educationauthorities worked with teachers’ unions andemployee representatives to find ways to make up

the missed time without cutting into the springholidays, because many families

had already planned theirvacations and it was agreed that

the break would bebeneficialto students.

Solutionsincluded

January ‘98 IceStorm

7

adding an hour of class atlunch time or after school,cancelling outings or festi-vals and lightening require-ments for certain courses.

Colleges and universitiesshowed flexibili ty inadapting their schedulesby advancing deadlinessuch as cut-off dates fordropping classes. Mostcolleges affected by theice storm made up lostclass time by using thespring break. Universi-ties encouraged studentsand professors to workout together how to make up the lost time: someheld class on holidays and Sundays, others ex-tended the length of classes from 60 to 75 min-utes. Nine of the fourteen universities hit weresuccessful in finishing on the scheduled date; theremainder closed a week late.

Lessons learned

• While many employees were prevented fromreporting to work, others were counted on toprovide invaluable help in handling the unu-sual circumstances. In Canada, human re-source management of educational institutionsis the responsibility of local education authori-ties, but the Ministry of Education offered ad-vice as well as technical and financial sup-port where necessary to resolve questions re-lated to work missed during the crisis. Thereexisted no system for compensating peoplewhose services were required by the city orcivil authorities in a time of emergency, andthis resulted in unfair discrepancies in pay. TheMinistry of Education recognised the need toprepare compensation guidelines for such cir-cumstances.

• The Ministry also learned the importance ofkeeping updated personal address lists of theirlocal education authorities, in the event a crisisprevents contacting them at their place of work.

• The school buildings, centrally located andstructurally sound, made for safe shelters for thepopulation. Being public buildings they aresubject to national building codes, and theMinistry of Education will take an active part in

the next revision of thosecodes.

• Whenever school facili-ties are requisitioned in thefuture, the Ministry ofEducation should be partof any governing bodiesinvolved. It was not inviteduntil well into this crisis tobe represented on theIntersectorial and Inter-ministerial Committee(comité de coordinationintersectoriel et inter-ministériel), which trans-lated into a lack of co-ordination between autho-

rities. Had the Ministry been given immediateaccess to all available information such as Hy-dro-Quebec’s schedule for restoring electricity,schools could have prepared for starting classesand rumors would have been reduced. Thiswould also have allowed for the school systemand civil authorities to be aware of each other’sneeds and handle the most urgent ones morequickly.

• Practicing an attitude of transparency provedto contribute to mutual confidence betweenthe Ministry of Education and the schoolnetwork. It is a policy they will continue topromote.

A detailed account by the Ministry of Education ofthe events of January and the following monthsunderlines the solidarity, ingenuity and goodwilldemonstrated by the numerous individuals whoprovided their help during the crisis.

The report, published in May 1998, is available inFrench through the Ministry. Contact:

M. Romeo LajoieDirecteur des équipements scolairesMinistère de l’éducation1035, rue De La ChevrotièreQuebec G1R 5A5Canada

Tel.: 1 418 644 2525,Fax: 1 418 643 9224,E-mail: romeo.lajoie@meq.gouv.qc.ca.

JANUARY ‘98 ICE STORM

Freezing Rain Accumulations (in mm)

between Sunday, 4 January, 18.00 ESTand Sunday, 11 January, 8.00 EST

Presentation by Environment Canada for the Commission scientifique et techniquesur la tempête de verglas de janvier 1998, 5 May 1998

8

SURPLUS PLACESIN UK SCHOOLSSchool Standards Minister Estelle Morris is addressingthe problem of schools that have more places thanthey have students. In January 1997, there were ap-proximately 774␣ 000 surplus places in primary andsecondary schools in the United Kingdom, just underten per cent of the total capacity. Some 2␣ 700 schoolshad a surplus of 25 per cent or more.

At the same time, other schools cannot meet demandin a country where parents have the choice of whereto send their children. When the Minister publishedthese figures earlier this year concern was expressedfor improving parental choice and boosting stand-ards:

“The focus of all our policies is raising standards.Surplus school places represent a poor use ofresources, particularly where schools with surplusplaces are performing poorly or where parental pref-erence is not being met elsewhere in the authority.

“The supply of and demand for places must bebrought more closely into balance so that parentalpreference can be maximised and that good qualityeducation can be provided in the most cost-effectivemanner. The Audit Commission has drawn attentionto this issue and, with District Auditors, is promotinggood practice.”

It is widely recognised that maintaining a higher thannecessary level of surplus places wastes resources.Rationalisation offers the prospect of stronger institu-tions, which provide better education for pupils. Notall these places, however, are removable. Some emptyplaces are needed to allow for pupil growth, particu-larly in the secondary sector where the number ofpupils is expected to increase by 8.7 per cent overthe next five years. In the primary sector, places maybe required as plans are carried out to reduce infantclasses to a maximum of 30 pupils. Maintaining ca-pacity to secure accessibility to schools in rural areasand to meet parental preference for places reducesthe possibility of surplus place removal.

Trading Places, published by the Audit Commission,focuses on the issues of surplus places. The nationalreport makes a number of recommendations for cen-tral and local governments and has been followedup by District Audit studies in each local educationauthority (LEA) area. It suggests that whilst LEAs mightaim for school occupancy levels of between85␣ per␣ cent and 105␣ per␣ cent of capacity, priority

action should focus on schools with 25␣ per␣ cent ormore places unfilled. The report concludes that asmuch as 40␣ per␣ cent of unfilled places might beremovable over a period of time but understates thedifficulties involved.

Some of the measures in the recent School Stand-ards and Framework Act give effect to recommen-dations in Trading Places and should facilitateprogress towards increasing the rate of removal.Relatively easier removals have now taken placeleaving only those that are politically difficult, as isalmost inevitably the case with school closures, ortechnically difficult, because only parts of schoolbuildings can be removed.

Schemes must also be considered for their cost ef-fectiveness. The capital costs of implementing pro-posals must be measured against recurrent savingsto establish whether removal of surplus places isworthwhile. The following calculation can assistLEAs in assessing cost effectiveness:

100 X Recurrent Savings per Year ÷(Total Gross Capital Costs – Capital Receipts)= Percentage Rate of Return

The recurrent savings in the above test should bebased on real and anticipated savings at current pricesaveraged over five years and include all premises-related costs such as maintenance, cleaning,insurance, heating and lighting. Gross costs are thecapital costs of implementing the proposals andshould include fees and value-added tax, whenappropriate.

Consistent with the School Standards and FrameworkAct and Trading Places, the Minister is particularlyattentive to schools with surplus whose educationalperformance is a cause for concern and those wherehigh surplus is matched by pressure for places inneighbouring schools. Whilst this approach focuseson educational benefits, there is a clear capital costwhose effectiveness will not so readily be measuredin terms of recurrent savings.

For more information, please contact:

Graham LeeArchitects & Building BranchDfEE, Caxton House6-12 Tothill Street, London SW1H 9NFUnited Kingdom

Tel: 44 171 273 6709, Fax: 44 171 273 6762,E-mail: Graham.Lee@dfee.gov.uk.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

9

PROJECTS

ARCHITECTURALCOMPETITION FOR ASECONDARY SCHOOLIN SWITZERLAND

Introduction

The provision of new schools in established urbanareas poses specific design challenges that arenot common to schools on green field sites: theneed to build to high densities to make the bestpossible use of scarce and expensive land; thedesire to conserve the historic urban heritage; theneed to enhance the quality of the urbanenvironment; the obligations to respect the rightsof adjoining properties to light, access andprivacy; and the requirements to protect the usersfrom the noise and pollution of urban transport.Responding to such constraints, in addition tosatisfying the exacting requirements of currenteducational programmes, requires imaginationand design skills of the highest order.

Proposals to build a new secondary school closeto the busy commercial centre of the city of Genevaposed just such a challenge and to meet it theauthorities organised a two stage architecturalcompetition.

The brief for the new school embodies many issuesthat are germane to the PEB programme of work;demographic change and the need to provide for arise in demand for student places; the greening ofthe school site and maximising the potential of schoolgrounds for education and recreation; providing forthe community use of school facilities outside ofschool hours; meeting changes in educationalpractice and information technology by providingbuildings which are flexible and adaptable; andproviding a supportive and healthy environment thatis economical to run and easy to maintain.

In Summer 1997 an architectural competition waslaunched in Geneva for a junior secondary school(750 pupils aged 12 to 15), and PEB was indirectlyrepresented on the panel of judges. In the winningdesign, educational needs have clearly not beencompromised by architectural considerations.

Need for a new school

In quantitative terms, local demographic trendshave made it necessary to plan for an additionalschool by the year 2003. The number of studentsin junior secondary education in Geneva reached10 700 at the beginning of the 1991/92 school year.It remained stable until the year 1997 which sawan increase of about 200 students. It is estimatedthat enrolment will reach 12␣ 000 in 2002 and13␣ 000 in 2005.

The 16␣ 000 square-metre site is situated nearGeneva’s main-line railway station and the citycentre, on the edge of parkland surrounded bydense housing. Adjoining the site are a massivepostal sorting-office within the perimeter of thestation, some old blocks of apartments for rent, animposing turn-of-the-century primary school, andthe parkland mentioned above. This is an island ofgreen in a highly urbanised environment andincludes some magnificent, protected trees and alarge house dating back to 1755, but sadly in needof repair. On the edge of the park are otherbuildings, all in public use, namely a church, acommunity centre and a restaurant.

Junior secondary education in Geneva

Junior secondary education (known as the Cycled’orientation) follows the sixth year of primaryschooling and includes the last three years ofcompulsory education. Its purpose is to preparevirtually all 12- to 15-year-olds for entrance tovocational or academic courses, recommendingthem for one or the other according to their interestsand skills. Junior secondary pupils do not all followthe same curriculum, but may change stream inthe course of those three years.

Traditional junior-secondary school design

The 14 junior-secondary school buildings put upin Geneva from 1962 to 1975 are confined tothe basic facilities required for administrative andeducational purposes. Rooms open off long,narrow corridors in one or two blocks of three tofive storeys. The designs lack imagination andhave no “pupil areas” other than classrooms,which are kept locked between lessons. This isthe kind of design that is acceptable for a schoolteaching a rigid curriculum, on a strict timetable,to pupils who will spend the whole year in theirdesignated groups.

10

Educational trends

However, a number of constraints have prompteda shift in this traditional teaching environment.Nowadays, school is the first structure calledupon to compensate for the decline in the sup-port shown for young people by their families.Rapid economic change is also forcing the edu-cation system to look again at how it preparesyoung people for working life. And the develop-ment of information and communication tech-nology (ICT) is contributing to an educationalshift towards greater personal initiative and in-dividual creativity.

On a more practical level, secondary educationcan no longer be confined to a series of lectures,and adolescents are no longer just one of a crowdin class, but increasingly people in their own right,following their course.

In light of this, new educational goals were drawnup for the competition:

• to foster the development of new teachingpractices, namely interdisciplinarity, group workand teamwork;

• to incorporate information and communicationtechnologies;

• to encourage pupils to socialise (within theschool community) and take part in the life ofthe school;

• to develop the idea of an educational com-munity (with no strictly compartmentalisedfunctions and activities).

Prior to the competition

To translate these goals into a programme ofspecifications for the buildings and other areas,the authorities called in a sociologist and anarchitect from France, both of whom had alreadyworked on a similar pilot project for a boardingschool commissioned by the French Ministry ofAgriculture. They began by talking to each usercategory (management, administrative/technicalstaff, teachers and pupils) about their futureneeds, particularly regarding social life withinthe school. Then they checked their initial find-ings against a survey of users in similar institu-tions, before holding discussions with users,teachers and administrative officials, with theprocess eventually producing a set of specifica-tions for the competition.

The following principles were identified regarding thelayout and general organisation of the future school:

1.The need for diversification as regards volumeand space, avoiding pupils being crowded in stair-ways and corridors and encouraging a variety ofconnecting areas.

2. Activities to be grouped into well-defined areas:

Area 1: language, history and geography teaching;Area 2: mathematics and science teaching;Area 3: creative activities;Area 4: sports lessons;Area 5: media library, computing;Area 6: hall and reception areas;Area 7: management, administration;Area 8: cafeteria, “noisy” recreational activities(game room: table tennis, table football, etc.);Area 9: “quiet” activities (reading, resting, privatestudy);Area 10: outdoor facilities.

3. The creation of open social and study areas forprivate study, group work, or spontaneous recrea-tion and socialising.

Organisation of the architectural competition

For a variety of local reasons, Geneva’s politicalauthorities wanted outside architects to take partin the competition. On the panel, the two foreignjudges were Mrs. A. Castro-Rial Garrone, headof architecture and building for the city of Ma-drid and former Spanish delegate to PEB, andMr.␣ M.␣ Hacker, from the United Kingdom, formerChairman of PEB. The panel also included twoSwiss and eight Genevan architects, a historian,a member of the government, four civil servantsand (only) one education official.

One hundred twenty-one architectural firms(eight of them from EC member countries) tookpart in the first round of the competition, whichwas judged on how well the school was sitedand designed. Seventeen projects were selectedfor the second round, on the basis of additionalfunctional and organisational criteria as well asarchitectural and economic factors (constructioncosts and energy-related operating costs). It isinteresting to note that the winning project is theone that comes closest to meeting currenteducational concerns and likely developmentsin educational practice in the not-too-distantfuture.

11

Panel’s verdict

Although excessively simple in terms of volume,the design clearly fits well into the natural andbuilt environment. It forms a bridging volumebetween the central post office and the Cropettesprimary school, while at the same time respectingthe existing buildings. Unfortunately it is rathertoo close to the existing eighteenth centurybuilding, the “Villa Roux”.

Entrances from the three adjacent roads are clearlydefined and the very wide, transversal openingreaching up two storeys highlights the pedestrianpath leading from the parks in the west to RueMontbrillant in the east. The wide porch matchesthe scale of the building and the project as a whole.However, service entrances are inadequate. Mostof the existing parkland within the perimeter hasbeen conserved, as have the mature trees.

The fact that all the outdoor sports areas have beengrouped on the roof offers the advantage of allowingall the remaining space to be used for pathways,greenery and recreation areas. However, solutionswill have to be found regarding access to thesesports areas.

The highly compact architecture includes a widevariety of indoor spaces which, in particular, livenup the layout of teaching areas and other parts ofthe building. The structure is coherentlyexpressed, but includes some very large spans(15 m and 30 m) that might be expensive to build.The possibility of reducing most of these spansneeds to be examined. As recommended by thejudges at the close of the first round of thecompetition, similar disciplines have beengrouped on the same floors.

The teaching areas opening out onto the patiosare well chosen, in terms of the degree of naturallight. The design lends itself to flexibility of use,from the point of view of adapting to changes ineducational methods.

Areas open to the public outside of school hours(gymnasium, auditorium, media library, etc.) aregrouped to the north. Entrances are clearly definedand can be made independent. Access to thevarious gymnasia is inadequate.

Given the relatively high (gross) floor area, theproject is quite economical, with construction costs

at around the current average. The “loop” layoutprovides scope for substantial savings onmechanical and electrical services. With itscompact design, the building has an excellentenergy-efficiency rating.

This simple, traditional building project is suitablefor multi-stage construction.

Construction

A commission is currently working on a final,detailed version of the successful design project.The commission brings together the architects,the owner (Department of Land-Use Planning,Public Works and Housing) and above all (at last),representatives of future users, i.e. teachers andtechnical officials from the department of publiceducation. In close collaboration with the usergroups for each building in the programme, thefunctional characteristics of each part of thepremises are being defined in detail, in conjunc-tion with the building plans and detailed estimatesof the cost of the project. Provided that theGenevan authorities vote the necessary funds andthat the current tenants (self-employed craftsmen)have left by next spring, building work shouldstart at the beginning of the year 2000 and becompleted in time for the school to open inSeptember 2002.

This article was contributed by Eric Biéler, architect atthe Geneva Department of Public Education and memberof the PEB Steering Committee, and Michael Hacker,former Chair of the PEB Steering Committee. For furtherinformation, contact Mr. Biéler: Fax: 41 22 310 42 90,E-mail: bieler-e@dip.etat-ge.ch.

First prize winner: DOMINO, by Weber + Hofer AG, Zurich

12

THE NETHERLANDS’STUDY HOUSE:NEW DESIGNS FORNEW PEDAGOGIES

Upon leaving school, many people, despite theiryears of study, are deficient in basic workplace andtertiary level competencies.

This has been the assertion of Dutch businessleaders and tertiary educational authorities for someyears (this is by no means restricted to theNetherlands but is a world-wide problem).Consistently, it is suggested that these graduatesdo not have the ability to work in teams, solveproblems, organise their own workload, undertakeresearch or work with limited supervision.

As a result of feedback by employers and tertiaryinstitutions, an innovative form of “learning archi-tecture” is emerging in secondary schools in theNetherlands. Dutch curriculum authorities decidedthat an entirely new approach was required. Bothteachers and learners needed a physical environmentfar removed conceptually from the traditional class-room, to expose them to new ways of curriculumdelivery.

The curriculum

Rather than taking the usual step of trying to adaptexisting individual school subject curricula toachieve competency objectives, they have createda new pedagogical approach for all subjects whichis called the Study House.

The Study House is characterised by attention forcommon skills in learning, research and reflection.The Study House also means a new way of plan-ning – no longer in fixed weekly numbers of lessonsper subject, but in fixed numbers of study hoursper subject. The distribution of these hours overindividual study, group work, workshops, plenaryexchanges and lectures is left to the teachers, ininterplay with the students.

Offered for two hours every day, the new formatrequires students to approach their subjectmaterial in a completely different way. Duringthe allocated two hours they work in the StudyHouse room on all curricula and subjects but ac-

cording to their own priorities. The students canchoose to work in teams, as individuals or indeedin traditional class groups if that is agreed to bythe cohort. Teachers move from the traditionalrole of didactic teaching to that of a facilitator ormentor. Students have access to computers, theInternet and other resource material as needed.This approach will become mandatory inAugust␣ 1999, but some schools have alreadybegun the transition.

Planning

For this new environment, the formal classroomstructure of rows of seats and desks facing the front(a tradition for at least 200 years, or since the adventof the industrial revolution) was consideredconstrictive and no longer viable. A flexiblearrangement of clusters of seating, individualworkstations, discussion areas, project team areasand display areas was needed.

Subsequently, an architectural solution was exploredto accommodate these new pedagogical ideas. Thecurriculum designers worked with groups of teachersand students to evaluate scenarios. This process sawthe gradual evolution of what is now the Study Housesolution. Initial outcomes of the planning meetings,held at the Oosterlicht School, just outside Utrecht,resulted in layouts of classrooms and staff offices inclusters.

Design

More than five iterations took place, moving froma clustering of traditional classrooms, to open-ended classrooms facing a common area, to amix of classrooms and workstation layouts, withthe final model being an office landscapeenvironment.

One of several peninsula tables

13

The innovative Zoo School in Minnesota, USA,conceived by Bruce Jilk, an architect with theCunningham Group, and Professor George Copaof the University of Minnesota paved the way forthe final solution.

To accommodate the three or four classes totalling120␣ students (4x30), there are peninsula tablescatering to groups of 10 students. Three peninsulasconstitute a traditional classroom cohort of 30.

At the end of each peninsula is a computer termi-nal connected to the Internet together withnetworked printers and scanners (reflecting theNetherlands’ Ministry of Education target for acomputer student ratio of 1:10).

Located in the central space is a flexible series ofclusters of seats and tables accommodating five orsix students and one teacher. These clusters can beused simply by students in groups, or a teacher canjoin them to provide group instruction. The teachercan also address the group of 30 in the peninsulararrangement.

The final design layout provides:

• large, flexible open spaces;• plenty of natural light and views;• a familiarity with the commercial workplace

environment;• a sense of informality with a variety of spaces

for students to select from to suit their learningneeds.

Does it work?

When viewed earlier this year, the design andconstruction were completed but the Study Housecurriculum and staff development programme forthe new initiative were scheduled for the 1998/99academic year.

Computers were still on order – a critical element tothe success of the scheme – as technology wouldempower the individuals to seek their own knowl-edge to suit their own needs. However, there was agreat sense of excitement and anticipation at theprospect of this new initiative. Some senior teacherswere concerned that the staff might “sit back and readthe paper whilst students got on with student-centredlearning”.

Sceptics might ask, “What is the difference betweenthis new initiative and the failed open plan classroomsof the 1970’s?” There is a world of difference. This pro-gramme includes integrated curriculum development,information and communications technology, stafftraining and development, student-centred learning,flexible delivery and industry and tertiary educationcompetencies all within a physical learning environmentcustom-designed to enhance these initiatives.

In an environment that is far removed from thetraditional classroom, the Study House will givestudents in the public school system the opportunityto work in teams and set their own tasks, preparingthem for higher education and the workplace.

This article was written by Kenn Fisher, recent ActingHead of PEB.

A view of the flexible central space A group study arrangement

The Bear – the result of the art-in-architecture approachin the Netherlands, intended to ground students in thereality of reflection-in-action.

14

TEACHINGENVIRONMENTALLYSUSTAINABLE DESIGNIN SCHOOLSOECD Environment Ministers met in April 1998 andagreed on shared goals for implementing sustainabledevelopment, expressing “the hope that other Minis-ters would integrate environmental concerns into theirpolicies”. They outlined a set of priority areas for workfor the OECD which includes the development of“effective policy approaches for improving resourceefficiency”. The following report provided by JohnGelder is particularly pertinent in this context.

Introduction

The construction of schools which set out to bemodels of environmental responsibility – eco-schools – is becoming more common. Someeducational jurisdictions have formal programmesfor this, such as Ile-de-France’s Ecolycee programme(PEB Exchange n° 31 ). Where there are no suchprogrammes, environmentally-friendly demon-stration schools are often built e.g. Essex CountyCouncil’s Great Notley primary school, in theUnited␣ Kingdom (Slavid, 1998), and the New SouthWales Department of School Education’s NeminghaPublic School, in Australia (Prasad and Fox, 1996).

Such initiatives are to be encouraged. The teachingof design at tertiary level is often aimed at provisionof sustainable architecture, after all. But teachingan awareness and appreciation of the issues atpre-tertiary level is a vital part of the process, bydeveloping an informed public.

This article explores three ways in which students maybe taught about environmentally sustainable design.The first is through the passive example of the schoolpremises. The second is through architects-in-schoolsschemes, with reference to the school premises. Andthe third is through environmental assessment bystudents of the school premises. Examples are givenof how each of these addresses sustainable designand of how they may be combined to do so.

Environmentally sustainable design

In broad terms, sustainability is understood to meanrestoring, preserving and enhancing nature andculture for the benefit of all life, present and future

(RAIA 1995). Environmentally sustainable designof buildings refers to maximising a building’spositive impacts on nature, and minimising itsnegative impacts, over the whole of its life.

A major component is limiting the use of non-renewable resources, and particularly of fossil fuels,which has the added benefit of reducing green-house gas emissions – another major componentof environmentally sustainable design.

Schools as aids for teaching design

PEB encourages the use of school grounds as ateaching resource, generally with a view to raisingawareness of the natural environment, its complex-ity and its vulnerability (PEB Exchange n° 33).School buildings, like school grounds, can bedesigned with this educational purpose in mind. Newand refurbished school buildings can be an activepart of teaching environmentally sustainable design.

For example, just as exposed building services andstructure can assist students in understandingcomponents of the built environment, so exposedfeatures reflecting sustainable design can contributeto teaching it.

Some of these features must be exposed in order tomeet their function. Examples include rainwatertanks, photovoltaic systems, solar water heatinginstallations, Trombe walls (for solar heating),sunshading, earth roofs and walls, double glazing,dual-flush toilets, recycling bins and thatched roof-ing. Other ecological elements that may normally beconcealed in order that the building look “normal”,or for functional reasons, can often be exposed too.One example is the “truth window” installed in strawbale buildings, where a section of bale may be viewedbehind a piece of glass. Another is leaving adobe orrammed earth walling exposed, and protected byoverhangs, rather than having it rendered. Recycledtimbers, too, can be exposed (especially if notcoloured with preservative).

The concept of a didactic green architecture can becarried further. Permanent graphics identifyingbuilding parts, and giving instructions for operation,might be considered. A good example of the didacticapproach in sustainable design is the EcoDesignFoundation headquarters in Rozelle, Australia. Itoccupies a converted school building and, reflectingits educational mission, is quite overt in itssustainability. The double-glazing is screwed ontothe old frames inside, the photovoltaic controls are

15

a glass-fronted feature in the entrancelobby, and materials and componentsused in the refurbishment are displayedwith information on why they werechosen (and where to get them!)(O’Rourke, 1996).

Architects-in-schools schemes

Through architects-in-schools schemessuch as those in the United States andAustralia, practising architects can as-sist in the teaching of sustainable de-sign in schools. These schemes are partof wider educational programmes aimed at pre-terti-ary students which are intended to help teachers andstudents understand the decision-making processesbehind the built environment and the roles of the vari-ous participants, and to foster demand for quality.The US programme, called Learning by Design, isadministered by the American ArchitecturalFoundation (AAF) and co-ordinated by the AmericanInstitute of Architects. The Australian programme, runby the Royal Australian Institute of Architects, is knownas Built Environment Education (BEE). In both casesthe architects-in-schools component involves archi-tects visiting schools and assisting teachers and stu-dents with their design curriculum, using resourcematerials produced by the programme.

Both take advantage of the school premises (e.g. Learn-ing by Design offers activities in which ”studentsexplore how [their] classroom works and why”), andboth address the issue of sustainability. The AAF WebSite (see references) offers the following:

“The ultimate goal [of Learning by Design] is for everystudent to develop the ability to live in harmony withthe natural environment and the skills to appreciate,evaluate, and contribute to the design of a qualityhuman environment.”

BEE has brought the topic of environmentallysustainable building design into secondary schoolsthrough its book The Greenhouse Effect & BuiltEnvironment Education, now being revised. Thisdocument emphasises, through a dozen worksheetsdevoted to different topics, energy conservationlifestyles and the efficient use of energy, and makesreference to school premises. The worksheet”Keeping cool and dry inside” asks students to sug-gest changes to their school buildings to cope withclimate change, and “Moving people” prompts themto look at their school‘s bicycle-rack provisions.

Environmental assessment ofschoolsA third and much more demandingapproach to teaching sustainable designusing schools is the formal assessmentby students of the environmentalperformance of their school’s buildingsand grounds. Having assessed one’s”ordinary” school, one could then visita high-scoring eco-school to learnabout how the sustainable design ofbuildings might be improved.

The United Kingdom has two suchassessment schemes. The first, suitable for both pri-mary and secondary school students, is the Eco-Schools Award Scheme, part of a European initia-tive created and co-ordinated by the Foundationfor Environmental Education in Europe. The Schemehas been in operation since 1994, and is run bythe Tidy Britain Group. It has its own assessmenttool, the Environmental Review. Its checklist cov-ers the following:

1. Litter and waste management.2. Hot water, insulation, radiators, electricity and

the heating system.3. Vehicle use.4. Washroom taps, toilets and rainwater use.5. Use of recycled paper and responsible purchasing.6. Landscape and wildlife features.7. Environmental education, the school interior

and school involvement.

Under each of these headings, the Review asks aseries of questions (e.g. does the school avoidpurchasing harmful cleaning materials?) and suggestsideas for action. The assessment has an educationalfunction but is intended also to produce direct envi-ronmental benefits as schools undertake a pro-gramme of improvements under these headings.

The second, more recent, British scheme has beenproduced by the Department for Education andEmployment. It is the Schools’ EnvironmentalAssessment Method (SEAM), derived in part fromthe BREEAM1 series for offices, factories, shoppingcentres and homes. The authors of SEAM intend itto be used (1) by designers of new schools, to ensurethat their designs are environmentally responsible;(2) by users of existing schools, for environmental

1. Building Research Establishment Environmental AssessmentMethod.

16

assessment of their own premises; and (3) as partof the national secondary curriculum.

SEAM covers a wider and more in-depth set ofenvironmental issues than the Eco-SchoolsEnvironmental Review. They include the following:

1. Recycling facilities and waste disposal.2. Energy (CO2) rating and energy management.

Low NOx combustion equipment.3. Home-to-school transport policy.4. Water savings and water quality.5. Environmentally-conscious purchasing.6. School grounds.7. School environment policy. Maintenance

manuals and caretaker training.8. Sources of timber and use of recycled

materials (new buildings), ozone depletingchemicals, volatile organic compounds,harmful substances and lead-free paint. Leadpiping and asbestos in existing buildings.

9. Site selection for new buildings.10.Ventilation.11.Integrated electric lighting and day lighting.

Lighting controls.12.Health and safety legislation. Legionnaire’s

disease.

Most issues apply to both new and existingbuildings. All are supported with discussion, data,recommendations and references. Energy ratingcalculations are discussed in an extensive (if notdaunting) appendix, and examples given. All in all,SEAM is a very solid document, and unlike itsBREEAM predecessors, is geared to use in teaching.

At the same time, SEAM is sufficiently complex thathelp from professional building designers wouldbe useful. This brings us back to architects-in-schools schemes. Involving appropriately-trainedarchitects in these assessments would provide anexcellent educational opportunity and wouldensure that they are done well.

Conclusion

A passive approach to the teaching of environmen-tally sustainable design in schools is to allow the schoolbuildings to “speak for themselves”, where they havesomething to say about the issues of sustainable design.But a more active approach, which involves the criticalappraisal by students of their school buildings andgrounds, and in particular bringing architects intoschools to assist students in conducting environmentalassessments of their schools, is a powerful and effectiveway of creating an informed public.

Countries lacking eco-schools, architects-in-schoolsschemes or environmental assessment schemes maydevelop them by drawing on the models discussedabove. And existing schemes should be enhanced,linked and promoted, with a view to placingenvironmentally sustainable design very firmly onthe educational agenda in the future.

References and further reading

Department for Education and Employment (1990), “Architects &Building Branch: Building Bulletin 71: The Outdoor Classroom”HMSO, London.

Department for Education and Employment (1996), “Architects &Building Branch: Building Bulletin 83: Schools’ EnvironmentalAssessment Method (SEAM)”, The Stationery Office, London.

Gough, Annette and Noel (1989), “The Greenhouse Effect & BuiltEnvironment Education”, RAIA, Manuka, Australia.

OECD (1998), “News Release: OECD Environment Ministers SharedGoals for Action”, 3 April.

O’Rourke, Annie (1996), “D.A.R.C. Building Specifications”,EcoDesign Foundation, Rozelle, Australia.

PEB Exchange n° 31 (1997), “France: An Environment-friendly Schoolin the Ile-de-France Region”, OECD, June.

PEB Exchange n° 32 (1997), “Eco-schools, the Environment andSchool Initiatives (ENSI)”, OECD, October.

PEB Exchange n° 33 (1998), “PEB Conference on the Use of SchoolGrounds for Learning”, OECD, February.

Prasad, Deo and Fox, Elizabeth (1996), “Environment Design Guide:CAS 5: Nemingha Public School”, RAIA, Manuka, Australia.

Programme on Educational Building (1996), Schools for Today andTomorrow, OECD, Paris.

Royal Australian Institute of Architects (1995), “Environment DesignGuide: GEN 1: RAIA Environment Policy”, RAIA, Manuka,Australia.

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds & Learning through Land-scapes (1991), “Wildlife and the School Environment”, Sandy,United Kingdom.

Slavid, Ruth (1998), “What is sustainability?”, The Architects’ Jour-nal, 5 February.

Tidy Britain Group (1996), “Eco-Schools: Environmental Review”,Wigan, United Kingdom.

Web sites:

RAIA: http://www.raia.com.au

AAF: http://www.amerarchfoundation.com

John Gelder is an architect and author currently basedin Paris. He was formerly chief editor of Australia’snational master specification system. He contributesregularly to the RAIA’s Environment Design Guide andin June 1998 participated in a symposium for specifiersin Baltimore, Maryland, titled “A Green World”. E-mail:john.gelder@wanadoo.fr.

17

A VISIT TO THREEPARISIAN SCHOOLLIBRARIESAn architect and a librarian from the AlbaniaEducational Development Program were in Parisfor the PEB Experts’ Meeting on Libraries andResource Centres for Tertiary Education. Whilein town, they visited three public schools – anelementary school, a middle school, and a highschool – for ideas on the planning and use oflibraries based on French examples. This briefreport of their tour illustrates contemporarypractice.

LYCÉE TECHNOLOGIQUE RASPAIL

This technical high school, a new constructionon the edge of Paris, opened in January 1996.The school is made up of three parallel, rectan-gular buildings of three floors each, connectedby glass passage ways. Its resource centre, or CDI(Centre de documentation et d’information), islocated in the heart of the school, in the centreof the middle building.

The CDI is equipped with five computers forstudent and teacher use and one for librarymanagement, two printers and eight very popularCD-ROM readers.

The librarian, or documentaliste, was responsi-ble for organising the use of the 340␣ m2 spaceand purchasing the necessary furniture, planningfor ten years’ growth. Flexibility is ensured in partby the use of different types of tables – square,round and quadrangular ones which can bepushed together into various combinations. Onecorner of the CDI has sound-insulated hangingpartitions to create a separate room for thelibrarian or a teacher to hold class.

The “cultural corner” resembles a den, with lowstuffed chairs around a coffee table. Beneath awall of windows, the latest issues of the resourcecentre’s 90 periodical subscriptions are displayedon shelves housing the past year’s issues. Anotherwall is reserved for information on culturalactivities. Storage rooms on two corners of theresource centre hold archived periodicals andaudio-visual material which is loaned to classes.

At the beginning of the school year the librarian givesall students a 90-minute initiation into using theresource centre, including how to use an encyclopaediaand an explanation of the classification system. Shesaid that once they have learned to do research usingthe system there, they will have the tools they need tobe able to use university libraries.

The CDI is open to students and staff throughout theschool day till 5:30 p.m.

The school was designed to be robust and able towithstand heavy use and occasional misuse whileretaining consideration for comfort and aesthetics.Eight terraces with benches are interspersed aroundthe school. The hallways have anti-graffiti paint onthe top half of the walls, and the bottom halveshave a rubber-like coating that can be swept ormopped. Doors are of a high-quality to withstandkicking. In the halls are drink machines, and nearbyare television monitors suspended from the ceiling,used for announcements. The lunchroom’s elegantwooden chairs with carved backs reflect a sensethat the students are worth pleasing.

A presentation of the school is included in the 50-pagebulletin about the CDI that the librarian updatesannually. It provides details of the layout, services andrules of the resource centre.

COLLÈGE ANDRÉ CITROËN

The Collège André Citroën is a middle school whichwas built in 1989, also on the periphery of Paris. Itsresource centre is tucked away at the end of amezzanine above the school’s spacious, glassed-inentrance, opposite the administrative offices.

Lycée Technologique Raspail

18

Like the other two schools visited, the CDI usesa combination of the Dewey system and colourcoding to classify its books. Four computerterminals give access to the electronic catalogueand are available to students for word process-ing; they share one printer. There are plans tonetwork with other schools once their ownsystem is completely functional.

Tables and rows of shelves are interspersed,allowing students to work amongst the books. Acentral shelf is reserved for new acquisitionswhich students check out immediately, and theirtitles are posted in the teachers’ lounge. Amunicipal library nearby brings books for loanevery two weeks on a different theme; at the timeof the visit it was science fiction. The resourcecentre has its own budget as does each teacher;materials they buy are generally kept in theirclassrooms.

The documentaliste underlined the importanceof working closely with teachers and citedsuccessful examples. The French teacher contactedher before assigning a research project on theLouvre museum; she was able to order in advancethe books the students would need that were notalready on hand.

For the history teacher’s lessons on children’srights, the librarian contacted UNICEF, whichcomplemented the classroom work with speak-ers and materials. Together the students wrote atext on the subject. A second teacher was thenincluded in the project: the text was given to thecomputer teacher for his students to work onpresentation, making a booklet for distribution.The librarian would like to pursue exploiting theresource centre’s capacity as a link betweenteachers.

ECOLE ÉLÉMENTAIRE

The third visit was to a 100-year-old elementaryschool, at Odeon in the heart of Paris, with onlysix␣ classes and 140 pupils.

Their library is the result of eight years’ work by theparents’ association, and a classroom was sacrificedto make space for it. The State does not provide abudget for libraries in elementary schools, so parentsraised the funds for renovation and collected thebooks. The Government now donates about 50 booksa year and pays the librarian’s salary. She sees as herrole to teach the children that books are not just forstudying but are fun, and to judge by the fact thatthey compete over who gets to spend recreation timein the library, she has been successful.

A small computer room next door is used for wordprocessing by all grades, including the first gradersafter spending four or five months learning to read.The school’s two largest rooms are first grade class-rooms; the principal explained that the smallestchildren need the most space.

Touring the rest of the building, our visitors wereimpressed by the restrooms adapted to the small users.Above the child-level sinks, a glass wall permitssurveillance from a distance. The joints of the stalldoors are covered with expandable rubber strips toprevent fingers from getting pinched.

This visit ended, as had the others, with the Albanianvisitors remarking the willingness of the librarians andadministrators to open the doors of their schools andshare the experience and the information they had tooffer. The PEB Secretariat would like to thank them.

For further information, contact the PEB Secretariat:Tel.: 33 (0)1 45 24 94 62, Fax: 33 (0)1 42 24 02 11,E-mail: jill.gaston@oecd.org.

Collège André Citroën

19

CANADIAN FUNDINGCOMPETITIONFOR RESEARCHINFRASTRUCTURE

Late last year the Canada Foundation for Innova-tion (CFI) announced the launch of a nationalcompetition for funding infrastructure projects inCanadian research institutions.

The CFI emphasises the strategic development ofCanadian research institutions and offers fourfunding mechanisms to help institutions launchnew research programmes and strengthen existingones. To be considered for funding, eligibleinstitutions will have to submit a developmentplan addressing their priorities for research andthe training of researchers. The Foundation willnot assess the plans themselves, but will ascertainthat reasonable consultation took place with allstakeholders.

1. The Institutional Innovation Fund will be theCFI’s main support mechanism and will enableeligible institutions, alone or in groups, tostrengthen their research infrastructure in priorityareas. This mechanism is aimed at enablingCanadian researchers to work on groundbreakingtopics, and will promote interdisciplinaryapproaches and contributions from individualsfrom a variety of institutions and sectors.

2. Regional/National Facilities are designed toencourage institutions to come together inregional or national consortia and to plan co-operatively for the acquisition or development ofresearch infrastructure.

3. New Opportunities will provide infrastructuresupport to new academic staff. This mechanismwill help universities attract new faculty mem-bers in areas that are essential to the institution’sresearch development

4. The Research Development Fund is identicalin purpose to the Institutional Innovation Fundand New Opportunities but is specificallydesigned to help eligible smaller universitiesstrengthen their research infrastructure.

The CFI is an independent, not-for-profit corpo-ration established in May 1997 with a contribu-tion of C$800 million from the Government ofCanada. The Foundation’s mandate is to investin infrastructure for research and developmentin Canadian universities, colleges, hospitals andother not-for-profit research institutions. TheFoundation’s investments will be made in part-nership with the private and voluntary sectors aswell as with all levels of government. Throughthese partnerships, the CFI has the potential totrigger about C$2 billion in investment inresearch infrastructure.

The CFI’s policies and funding mechanisms willsupport the strategic development of research atCanadian institutions. They have been designed to:

• build capacity for innovation;• strengthen research training of Canadians for

research and other careers;• attract and retain able research workers in

Canada;• promote networks and collaboration among

researchers;• ensure the optimal use of Canadian research

infrastructure by promoting sharing within andamong institutions.

The CFI will support infrastructure projects thatmeet its criteria for eligibility and assessment,regardless of the disciplines or areas of interestof the researchers who will use the proposedinfrastructure.

The Policy and Program Guide is available at the CFIInternet site at this address:

http://www.innovation.ca/english/programs/index.html.

For further information, contact the Canada Founda-tion for Innovation:

CFI350 Albert Street, Suite 1510P.O. Box 77Ottawa, Ontario, K1R 1A4Canada

Tel.: 1 613 947-6496,Fax: 1 613 943-0923.

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

20

Australia – http://www.deetya.gov.au/Department of Employment, Education, Trainingand Youth Affairs

Austria – http://www.bmuk.gv.at/Federal Ministry of Education and Cultural Affairs

Denmark – http://www.uvm.dk/eng.htmMinistry of Education

Finland – http://www.edu.fi/e/oph/National Board of Education

France – http://www.education.gouv.fr/Ministère de l’Education Nationale, de la Recher-che et de la Technologie

Ireland –http://www.irlgov.ie./educ/default.htmDepartment of Education and Science

Netherlands – http://www.minocw.nl/english/index.htmMinistry of Education, Culture and Science

New Zealand – http://www.minedu.govt.nz/Ministry of Education

Province of Quebec (Canada) – http://www.meq.gouv.qc.ca/GR-PUB/m_englis.htmMinistère de l’Éducation

Spain – http://www.mec.es/Ministerio de Educación y Cultura

Sweden – http://www.sb.gov.se/info_rosenbad_eng/ministries/education.htmlMinistry of Education and Science

United Kingdom – http://www.dfee.gov.uk/Department for Education and Employment

USEFUL WEB SITES FOR EDUCATION IN GOVERNMENTS

OpetushallitusUtbildningsstyrelsen

Ministerie van Onderwijs,Cultuur en Wetenschappen

Utbildningsdepartementet

M E C

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

21

BOOK REVIEWS

Fundamentals of Educational Planning

Physical Facilities for Education:What Planners Need to Know

John Beynon, reviewed by Michael Hacker

There are many differences between educationalsystems in different parts of the world. Differencesthat reflect variety in social structures, cultural diversityand levels of economic development. The schoolbuildings provided to house these different systemsof education reflect this variety and there are nouniversal solutions to the wide range of demands thatthese buildings have to satisfy. But whilst individualschool buildings differ from country to country andfrom region to region, there are many commonaspects of planning, design, construction andmanagement that are of general interest to thoseresponsible for educational facilities.

It was the recognition of these common areas ofinterest and the benefits to be gained from the inter-national exchange of information and experience thatled to the establishment of UNESCO’s programme ofactivities related to educational buildings andfurniture. John Beynon was closely associated withthese activities for 32 years, working with over60␣ countries as an architect and educational planner,including a period as Director for the Regional Officefor Asia and the Pacific.

John Beynon’s tightly packed booklet is based on hiswide ranging experience. It contains a wealth ofinformation and soundly based recommendations thatwill be of interest and value to those concerned toensure the provision of educational facilities that are:“...functional, economic, structurally sound andattractive”. Few would disagree with his contentionthat: “The art of good physical planning is to maximisethe quality of the facilities whilst keeping resourceexpenditure to a minimum”.

The booklet is targeted primarily at developingcountries, but it clearly demonstrates that in the fieldof educational building, though there are widedifferences in degree and scale, developed and de-veloping nations share many common concerns andinterests over a wide range of issues: providing newaccommodation to meet the rapidly growing demandfor education, adjusting the capacity of existingaccommodation to meet demographic change; main-taining older buildings and updating them to meetdevelopments in education and information

technology; providing a safe and healthy environment;making school buildings available for adult andcontinuing education; and harnessing developmentsin planning and building technology to obtain the bestpossible value from the limited resources available.

The author summarises the objective of the bookletas twofold; to distil the experiences of the last decadesin a concise form that will be useful to the variety ofplanners dealing with education, and to map out howcurrent trends may affect the future of educationalfacility planning.

The booklet is illustrated by extracts and examplesfrom a variety of case studies and research projects.It sets out a number of broad guidelines coveringsuch topics as: the assessment of educational need;the determination of area and expenditure limits;the preparation of schedules of accommodation;the setting of targets for the intensity of space utili-sation; the definition of environmental, health andsafety standards; the design and procurement offurniture for the different age groups; the needs ofthe physically disabled; the provision for mainte-nance and building-related recurrent costs; and theestablishment of interdisciplinary decision-makingstructures in which administrators, building pro-fessionals, teachers, students and the communitycan all contribute to the cyclic process of plan-ning, implementation and evaluation.

The booklet draws heavily on the work of UNESCO,but it also acknowledges the contributions made byinternational agencies such as the OECD and theWorld Bank, as well as the work of many otherorganisations and individuals. A useful list ofreferences and further reading is included.

This booklet will be of interest to both school plannersand school building professionals. In a period of wide-spread administrative change and decentralisation, itwill be of particular interest to those charged with newand unfamiliar responsibilities for the planning,provision and management of educational buildings.

Physical Facilities for Education: What PlannersNeed to KnowJohn Beynon, UNESCO: International Institute forEducational Planning, Paris 1998ISBN 92-803-1167-0␣ ␣ ␣ 98 pagesprice FF␣ 50

Copies are available from:United Nations Scientific and Cultural Organisation,7 place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris, France.

A French edition is planned.

22

European University Libraries

The French Ministry of Education has published aninformative brochure on European universitylibraries. A first section presents the state ofuniversity libraries in France today, their role andthe services they offer. It includes photographs anddesigns of some of the 60 buildings that were builtor enlarged between 1991 and 1997 under theUniversity 2000 programme. A second sectionoffers advice on designing a library building thatsuccessfully responds to the users’ needs. The finalsection provides details and illustrations of severalexemplary libraries around Europe which can serve

as a reference for different aspects of architecture,layout and the use of information technology.

Free copies of the brochure Bibliothèques univer-sitaires… …nouveaux bâtiments, nouveauxservices are available from:

Marie-Françoise BisbrouckMinistère de l’Education Nationale, de la Rechercheet de la TechnologieDirection de l’Enseignement supérieur,Sous-Direction des Bibliothèques et de laDocumentation1 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France

Tel.: 33 (0)1 55 55 23 81, Fax: 33 (0)1 55 55 25 78,E-mail: bisbrouc@distb.mesr.fr.

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

○

NEW OECD PUBLICATIONS

Under One Roof: The Integration of Schools and Community Services in OECD CountriesRecent years have seen a number of initiatives which seek to provide a range of community services on school sites,including adult education and other social and welfare services. These developments aim atco-ordinating more effectively services which are usually provided separately while optimisingthe use of increasingly sophisticated and expensive educational buildings and equipment. How-ever, providing integrated services “under one roof” poses a number of practical problems.

What is the rationale for integrated service provision? What are the implications for the localauthorities, planners and architects in charge of designing school sites that meet the newrequirements? This report presents the main lessons learned from a conference held in Stockholm,drawing on case studies from Finland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Quebec, Sweden and theUnited Kingdom. The case studies provide a wealth of examples of solutions to the challenge ofoptimising the use of existing schools by better integrating them into local communities and bypromoting new synergies with other services.

OECD code: 95 98 03 1 P, ISBN 92-64-16110-4, July 1998, 65 pp.FF 120 US$20 DM 36 £ 12 ¥ 2 550

Redefining Tertiary EducationGiven the current trends and developments across OECD Member countries, a new and dynamicvision for tertiary education is called for. Higher levels of participation at the tertiary level, drivenstrongly by demands reflecting the diverse interests of students, employers and society at large,have created challenges which must be met. How should tertiary education better respond to theinterests and choices of clients, students foremost among them? What should be done to adaptteaching methods or restructure the curricula? How should the needs of those not currently servedin the first years of tertiary education be addressed? How should governments interact with large,diverse tertiary education systems, comprised of varied and increasingly autonomous providers?

This volume also examines how best to mobilise the energies and expertise of staffs and institutionsas well as partners, and how to secure adequate resources and improve efficiency in the face ofgreater competition for public funds. The findings, analyses and conclusions presented in thispublication will serve as a basis for debate, reflection and exchange as all parties seek to strengthenand extend the contributions of tertiary education to economic and social well-being for all.

OECD code: 91 98 02 1, ISBN: 92-64-16055-8, June 1998, 164 pp.FF 150 US$25 DM 45 £ 15 ¥ 3 200

23

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

ORDERINGIf you do not already subscribe to PEB Exchange and wouldlike to do so, please return the coupon below to one of thefollowing addresses.

AustraliaD.A. Information Services648 Whitehorse Road, P.O.B. 163Mitcham, Victoria 3132Tel.: 61 (0)3 9210 7777Fax: 61 (0)3 9210 7788E-mail: service@dadirect.com.au

GermanyOECD Bonn CentreAugust-Bebel-Allee 6D-53175 BonnTel.: 49 (0) 228 959 12 15Fax: 49 (0) 228 959 12 18E-mail: bonn.contact@oecd.org

ItalyLibreria Commissionaria SansoniVia Duca di Calabria, 1/150125 FlorenceTel.: 39 (0)55 64 54 15Fax: 39 (0)55 64 12 57E-mail: licosa@ftbcc.it

JapanOECD Tokyo CentreLandic Akasaka Building2-3-4 Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107Tel.: 81 3 3586 2016Fax: 81 3 3584 7929E-mail: tokyo.contact@oecd.org

KoreaKyobo Book Centre Co. Ltd.P.O. Box 1658, Kwang Hwa MoonSeoulTel.: 82 2 397 3479Fax: 82 2 735 0030E-mail: kyobo2.@uriel.net

MexicoOECD Mexico CentreAv. San Fernando 37Ed. Infotec, Col. Toriello GuerraDel. Tlalplan, Mexico, D.F., C.P. 14050Tel.: 525 528 10 38Fax: 525 606 13 07E-mail: ocde@rtn.net.mx

United KingdomHMSO, PO Box 276, London SW8 5DTTel.: 44 (0) 171 873 00 11Fax: 44 (0) 171 873 84 63

United StatesOECD Washington Center2001 L St. NW, Suite 650Washington D.C. 20036-4922Tel.: 1 202 785 6323Fax: 1 202 785 03 50E-mail: washcont@oecd.org

France and all other countriesOECD Publications2, rue André-Pascal75775 Paris Cedex 16, FranceFax: 33 (0)1 49 10 42 76E-mail: sales@oecd.orgInternet: http://www.oecd.org

PEB Exchange, OECD Publications, printed in France.

I would like to subscribe to PEB Exchange (88 00 00 1)1998 annual subscription price (3 issues): FF 165, US$ 34, £ 19, DM 49,␣ ¥ 3 500

Name: _______________________________________________________________

Address: ______________________________________________________________

❏ Cheque or money order enclosed.

❏ VISA No. _______________________________

❏ Mastercard No. _______________________________

❏ Eurocard No. _______________________________

Expiry Date: ___________________________

Signature: _______________________

PEBEXCHANGE

the journal of the OECDProgramme on

Educational Bui lding

© OECD(88 98 35 1)

OECD/PEB2, rue André-Pascal

75775 Paris Cedex 16, FranceTel. : 33 (0)1 45 24 92 60Fax: 33 (0)1 42 24 02 11

http://www.oecd.org/els/edu/peb/els_peb.htm

E-mail: richard.yelland@oecd.org

Richard YellandHead of the Programme

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC

CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

1998 subscription (3 issues):FF 165 US$ 34 £ 19

DM 49 ¥ 3500

(Single issue: FF 60)

BP E

PEB DIARYOctober

26-28 – Green Building Challenge ’98. This international conference in Vancouver,Canada, will feature 24 of the world’s finest green buildings and details of theirperformance assessments. It is being led by Natural Resources Canada. The lan-guage of the conference and documentation is English (the opening and closingplenary sessions will also be in French).

Contact: GBC ‘98 SecretariatFax: 1 613 996 9909E-mail: gbc98@nrcan.gc.ca

31 – The 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Construction organised by theInternational Council for Building Research Studies and Documentation (CIB) willtake place in Los Angeles, California.

Contact: Dr. Charles J. Kibert, Univ. Florida, M.E. Rinker Sr. School of Building Construction,Tel.: 1 904 392 7502Fax: 1 904 392 9606E-mail: kibert@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu

November

16-17 – Appraisal of Investments in Educational Facilities. PEB and the EuropeanInvestment Bank will host this international conference in Luxembourg. See page 4for additional information.

30 Nov. - 5 Dec. – The 23rd Session of the World Heritage Committee will be held inKyoto, Japan.

Contact: UNESCOTel.: 33 (0)1 45 68 10 00Fax: 33 (0)1 55 67 16 90

PEB WEB SITE

Libraries for Tertiary Education

A report on the PEB/IMHE Experts’ Meeting on Libraries and Resource Centres forTertiary Education is now available on the PEB Web Site (http://www.oecd.org/els/edu/peb/els_pebn.htm). The document presents the principal conclusions of theMarch␣ ‘98 meeting, excerpts from case studies, as well as numerous recommenda-tions for those involved in building and managing higher education libraries andresource centres. Emphasis is placed on the impact of information technology anddistance learning. A section is devoted to each of the four main topics of discussion:the future role of libraries, libraries and learning, managing libraries and architecturalsolutions. The report may also be obtained by contacting the Secretariat:

Tel.: 33 (0)1 45 24 94 62, Fax: 33 (0)1 42 24 02 11,E-mail: jill.gaston@oecd.org.

The views expressed in PEB Exchange are the contributors’ own and do not necessarily represent those of the OECD Secretariat.