Bridging the gap from student to employee: Linking academic studio design to the professional workplace

Meredith Banasiak, M.Arch, EDAC  

Melissa Piatkowski, MS, EDAC, Green Belt Lean Certified for Facilities Design  

Marianne Holbert, AIA

Akin to a team workspace or conference room found in design practice, pods support collaborative modes of learning and working in design education. Photo credit: Stephen Cardinale, Environmental Design, University of Colorado

Overview

Despite ongoing changes in pedagogy, curriculum, technology, and the profession, studio environments in higher education design programs have generally not evolved in parallel. The majority of academic studio classrooms remain much the same as the early 20th century, and students are being conditioned to work in school in ways very different from how they will work as members of the workforce in a professional setting. Utilizing a workplace-based approach to design, the aim of this project was to simulate high-performance work environments to cultivate a studio environment which was more “pre-professional” and less “post-secondary” to bridge the gap between academia and the workforce.

 Following an exploratory prototype, the workplace studio continued to evolve over time championed by faculty and students who adopted a spirit of continuous improvement and innovation. Building on the initial project, while also responding to the dynamic nature of changing curricula and enrollments, students actively innovated their own studio spaces and furniture through a design-testing-innovation feedback loop.

 Background

While students in design fields such as architecture, interior design and urban planning are learning how to create environments which meet human needs, they are often working in settings which do not support their own needs and work practices. Existing Environmental Design studio spaces at University of Colorado were organized to maximize the number of workstations within the existing building space. Workstation dimensions were the result of a dated pedagogy based on manual drafting: desks were sized to accommodate a drafting board and tools for typical sheet sizes utilized in manual drafting. While manual drafting is still taught in foundation design courses, the pedagogy overall supports diverse manual and digital methods of practicing. The existing drafting-driven arrangement was intended to serve individual, focused-attention work by providing every student a dedicated desk, yet the maximized density of the desk-filled open studio created an acoustical and visually distracting environment with little control for its occupants. In terms of performance, the layout ultimately failed to support focused attention processes, as well as other cognitive modes of working and learning which characterize studio-based learning such as reflection-in-action and interpersonal skills (Schon 1987).

 The workplace studio prototype: A multidisciplinary approach

A multidisciplinary team from the University of Colorado Boulder, Davis Partnership Architects, and Steelcase Education joined forces to address the question, “How can the studio-based classroom design better support our future workers in the ways that they will be working?” The team included representatives from university faculty and administration, professional practice, design research, and industry market research. By utilizing workplace design strategies, performance goals, user input, and assessment methods applied to the educational setting, the team developed a prototype design which could be quickly applied to an existing open studio space.

Performance goals were culled from workplace design literature supporting four categories of knowledge creation for creative class workers to support activity based working: focusing, collaborating, socializing and learning (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). In a 2010 study, Steelcase reported improved outcomes across learning, collaboration, innovation and efficiency when these four domains were supported in workplace design (Steelcase Workspace Futures 2010). We aimed to achieve similar outcomes by applying these strategies to a learning setting. 

Four studio sections of approximately 15 students each were randomly assigned to the redesigned workplace studio, and the same number was assigned to existing studio spaces, identical in size and shape to the experimental workplace studio setting. The sole difference between the two settings was that the workplace prototype studio included a collaborative pod with features to support social and team based learning and working. The design team applied a strategy similar to workplace hoteling where unassigned workstation options are available to support different levels of interaction or separation in the workplace. The team hypothesized that the updated “workplace studio” would better support the diverse work modes correlated with practice, and ultimately support better transition into professional practice. 

4 existing studio spaces 

2 dedicated + 2 hot desk workplace studio spaces with shared pod

In the prototype workplace studio, a collaborative workspace pod was swapped for a Foundation Studio bay. The Foundation Studio students shared hot-desks with the northeast studio quadrant. The four studio sections were scheduled to allow exclusive use of a pod space during their designated meeting time.

Design Strategies

Focusing. Focusing describes work which requires a state of concentration or internal processing. Focused and sustained attention processes are supported by the brain’s ability to inhibit irrelevant stimuli such as environmental distractions. Compromised inhibition and attention processes can result in decreases in perceptual speed, reaction time and cognitive processing. A 2008 study reported that the lowest health status was found in medium-sized and small open plan offices, while the best health status and highest job satisfaction was correlated with employees in cell offices and flex offices (Danielsson & Bodin 2008). Consistent with that study’s findings, students assigned to the existing studio reported that they often chose to work at home rather than in the studio space, “because of the clarity of thinking available and the comfort” (Lindsay 2015). Yet, while working from home may support focusing, and advances in technology support the logistical ability for students – and workers –to work from home, this physical disconnect it creates has negative implications for other performance domains such as teamwork, engaged learning, and access to fabrication support and equipment housed within the building.

Because the prototype studio arrangement separated group work spaces from individual work spaces, those introverted spaces better supported students in the focusing domain: in post-occupancy surveys and interviews, students and faculty reported that distractions were minimized and acoustical privacy and comfort improved. 

The acoustics are way better than they used to be. I can actually hear my students; they can hear me. - Studio Faculty

Collaborating.

Working with others can yield many benefits, for example: feedback from others during a studio review or class discussion allows multiple perspectives to be shared and fosters critical dialogue about ideas, and social creativity leverages the diverse knowledge and skills of an interacting group to collectively contribute to a work (Fischer et al 2005). Two key characteristics of workplace spatial settings associated with perceived collaboration are: the distance from a personal workstation to group meeting space, and the percentage of floor space dedicated to shared services and amenities (Hua et al 2011). Thus, to optimize the access between individual and group spaces, the collaborative work spaces, the pods, were placed in the floorplan directly adjacent to desk studios. Classes assigned to the desk studios met on different days and times so they had dedicated use of the collaborative pod during their scheduled class time.

 Students assigned to the workplace studio rated their ability to work with others and ability to take a break from work higher than those assigned to the existing studio spaces. Instructor feedback suggested that the pod space in particular supported small group conversation and learning better than the existing condition. 

To optimize performance goals of the competing individual versus collaborative work modes, the studio was demised into smaller spaces: the collaborative pod, and the individualized desk studio. Image credit: Jennifer Henry, Davis Partnership Architects

The best quality of this space was to be able to go with a smaller group of students to work independent of the whole studio but still be within a short distance to check in and get feedback from our instructor.

– Student comment

Socializing. Relationship building through socialization can benefit the health and wellbeing of the worker, as well as support positive outcomes for the larger organization by creating a sense of trust among workers and enhance teamwork performance. Many workplaces have adopted amenity-driven strategies to draw employees into the office because of the benefits associated with having employees engage. Game rooms, snack bars, and barbeques in the workplace are means of fostering socialization among workers. The pod spaces have a similar opportunity to foster socialization. Among university students specifically, the built environment is shown to have a strong influence on perceptions of school experiences (Lopez del Puerto 2011), and providing welcoming social spaces can positively impact student perceptions of their learning experience. In the prototype, students appropriated the pod space outside assigned course times to accommodate social events such as movie nights.  

Students moved tables together to work and study together in pairs or groups, and often appropriated the pod spaces outside of scheduled class times to hold movie nights. Photo credit: Stephen Cardinale, Environmental Design, University of Colorado

Learning. Because credentialing in higher education is made to individuals, not groups or teams, learning in higher education is often narrowly framed as an individual accomplishment. This is perhaps the most significant difference between education and the workplace with the result that learning spaces have historically been devoted to promoting the individual accumulation of knowledge, rather than a group’s co-creation of knowledge. In the prototype workplace studio, learning opportunities were optimized through supporting focused individual work, small and large group collaborative work, and peer to peer socialization. Access to technology was provided both in the pod spaces, and in the adjacent centralized computer lab and fabrication shops as another tool to support both individual and collaborative learning.  

A table with a mobile, large screen computer monitor in the pod served as a break out space for instructor led demonstrations and discussions with small groups of students. Digitally displayed work cut down on large scale printing costs. Photo credit: Stephen Cardinale, Environmental Design, University of Colorado

The pod is nice for doing collaborative work, is good for taking a break, and is good for doing digital work on a personal computer. – Student comment

Students assigned to the prototype workplace studio space reported that they spent more time working in the building as opposed to working at home. In post-occupancy surveys, instructors working in the existing studio spaces expressed frustration at not having been permitted to utilize the new pod spaces for collaborative work. These outcomes on faculty and student satisfaction, perceptions of learning and observed and reported use of the pod space supported the administrative decision to implement pods in the building the following semester so that every student would have dedicated access to a pod space during their course meeting time. Ultimately, having applied a design strategy to support these four modes of working in an educational setting validated the conclusions reported by Steelcase in their workplace studies, “When the workspace is designed to fully support the new realities of collaboration, better learning, more innova-tion and faster decision-making can result” (Steelcase Workspace Futures 2010).

Disruptive innovation

Medical education for future healthcare professionals has adopted simulation pedagogy as a standard learning and skill-building mechanism, and most medical and nursing schools include a variety of physical and virtual simulation training spaces designed to mimic care delivery spaces such as exams and operating rooms. Forward-thinking design firms are making use of design simulation, through full-scale physical and virtual simulation activities, to test and evaluate designs with real users.

Subsequent iterations of the pods were developed and fabricated by a faculty and group of students building upon the performance goals and lessons learned from these initial discoveries. The prototype pod spaces in the Environmental Design building transformed to adapt to the changing needs in student design education. In this way, learning was not only passively enhanced by the physical arrangement of the space supporting activity-based working and diverse work modes, but moreover, learning was actively enhanced by giving students the opportunity to design their own furniture and spatial arrangements to support their learning and working modes.

Students in a senior level architecture studio led by architect Marianne Holbert, AIA were tasked with creating a flexible piece of furniture for the pods which could serve as flexible seating and desking to accommodate group activities such as pin ups, meetings, discussions and collaborative activities. Intended to support sitting, standing, studying, mingling, collaborating, debating and displaying, the pod spaces continued to serve both as active learning spaces during class time and study and social spaces when classes are not being held. The students first documented and analyzed the use of the prototype pod spaces to inform a proposal for an innovative furniture solution which would be fabricated by the students. Students formed teams of 3 and developed proposals for furniture to accommodate the diversity of learning and flexibility needs across the ebbs and flows of a day. The student team proposal that was selected by competition was a multi-use chevron shaped unit that could host small group collaboration, pin up, individual work and collaborative work. Rotated in different orientations, the singular unit served as a bench, a chair and a desk.

Design by student team Molly Kostoff, Jared Bravo, and Matthew Schmalhorst, Program in Environmental Design, University of Colorado

The course together then built a dozen chevron units which could be manipulated in both configuration and position. The result permitted students to take ownership of the design concept, construction and configuration to accommodate a diversity of needs. The notion of break out ‘pod’ areas with multi-use furniture has become extremely popular and the furniture units now populate the pods, as well as the entry and other areas of the building.

All students in the course contributed to the fabrication of the multi-use furniture. Photo Credit: Stephen Cardinale, Program in Environmental Design, University of Colorado

The furniture in the pod is always in different places. Every class period it’s rearranged indicating to me that people are using that space in a variety of configurations for a variety of uses—Excellent! - Studio Faculty

The pod space installed with the furniture constructed the students. Photo Credit: Stephen Cardinale, Program in Environmental Design, University of Colorado

Design education spaces in the near future will likely feature such spaces for full-scale physical simulation mock-ups, as well as digital simulation centers, and the supporting fabrication and evaluation resources for students to effectively build and test their ideas. When that happens, the design of learning spaces, will certainly reciprocally disruptively innovate the design of the workplace as students carry over those innovative practices as new members of the workforce.

 Implications for practice.

Adopting a workplace-based approach to studio design created better alignment for students between higher education work and the environments they would soon be transitioning to in the workplace by:

• balancing individual and group spaces
• supporting diverse work modes and activity-based working such as focused, attention-demanding work vs. collaborative work
• providing access to technology
• using flexible furniture to accommodate different groups sizes and types of meetings  

Workplace design trends applied to studio design included:

• Hoteling options as a means of supporting diverse work modes and tasks
• Team-based workstation arrangements to support collaboration
• Centralized fabrication and creative technology labs to support visualization and testing – amenities students would not have access to from home
• Social spaces and recreational opportunities to support relationship forming among co-workers/co-learners

References:

Danielsson, Christina Bodin, and Lennart Bodin. "Office Type in Relation to Health, Well-Being, and Job Satisfaction Among Employees." Environment and Behavior 40, no. 5 (2008): 636-68. doi:10.1177/0013916507307459.

Fischer, Gerhard, Elisa Giaccardi, Hal Eden, Masanori Sugimoto, and Yunwen Ye. "Beyond binary choices: Integrating individual and social creativity." International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 63, no. 4-5 (2005): 482-512. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.014.

Hua, Ying, Vivian Loftness, Judith H. Heerwagen, and Kevin M. Powell. "Relationship Between Workplace Spatial Settings and Occupant-Perceived Support for Collaboration." Environment and Behavior 43, no. 6 (2010): 807-26. doi:10.1177/0013916510364465.

Lindsay, Georgia. ENVD Building Review: Priorities Survey Final Report. 2015.

Nonaka, Ikujiro. The knowledge-creating company. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press, 2008.

Puerto, Carla Lopez Del. "The Influence of the Built Environment on Graduate Student Perceptions of Graduate School Experience." Journal for Education in the Built Environment 6, no. 2 (2011): 79-92. doi:10.11120/jebe.2011.06020079.

Scho?n, Donald A. Educating the reflective practitioner:. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.

Steelcase Workspace Futures. “How the workplace can improve collaboration.” Steelcase, 2010. 360steelcase.com

Project team acknowledgements

Meg Rapp, AIA

Jennifer Henry, IIDA, LEEP AP, EDAC, Davis Partnership Architects

Anne Chillman, Steelcase Inc.

Leah Drach, Steelcase Inc.

Aileen Strickland, Steelcase Inc.

Photos: Stephen Cardinale, Environmental Design, University of Colorado