Wanganui
Girls College
Case
study of the development of technology facilities
Architect:
Tony Baker and Associates, Wanganui
This material was produced by the Royal Society of New Zealand (RSNZ)
under contract to the Ministry of Education in 2000 and 2001. It was written
to assist teachers and schools in their delivery of the technology/ hangarau
curriculum statements. The project was jointly coordinated by personnel
from the Technology Education New Zealand (TENZ)
and National Association of Māori Mathematicians, Scientists and Technologists
(NAMMSAT) networks. Monitoring and evaluation of the material was carried
out by a national project advisory group.
|
Background
Wanganui Girls' College is a state, single sex, year 9 - 13 secondary
school with a roll of 540 students. The attached hostel draws students
from a wide catchment and contributes about 25 percent of the roll. The
decile rating of 4 indicates the student body represents a wide cross
section of the Wanganui and districts community. Approximately 20 percent
of the roll is Māori. The school has a teaching staff of 47, twenty-two
of whom are full time.
The school had no existing hard material facilities and so its ability
to deliver the new technology curriculum in a manner which was consistent
with the philosophy of the document, was seriously impaired. In 1998
the Ministry of Education made funding available in 1998 to correct
this inequity in facilities for single sex boys and girls schools.
Curriculum
linkages
The school had been looking at methods of implementing the new curriculum
for a number of years and as a staff had gone a long way down the path
towards an integrated whole-school delivery model. This model was ultimately
rejected in mid-1998 – at which point staff members were faced with
coming to terms with the requirements of delivering technology in a stand-alone
manner and determining the type of facilities that it would need.
Technology facilities in other schools were examined. In evaluating these
facilities it often appeared to staff that the emphasis seemed to be on
the maximisation of space, not on "... the creative synthesis of the multitude
of factors contributing to the effective operation of that space".
A member of the school technology team commented that, "We didn't just
want functional space, we also wanted something which would never suffer
from being described as 'boring'!"
We were looking to challenge the architect – It wasn't
enough to merely provide the spaces and relationships required
to implement the new technology curriculum, but we wanted to
work with an architect who would understand the philosophy behind
what students would be doing in those spaces ... In Tony Baker
we had an architect who was not only aware of the culture of
the school and its environment but who was prepared to spend
time to get inside the new curriculum document and develop an
understanding of what the school was trying to achieve in the
way it had decided to implement technology ... This new facility
had to embody the feel of "technology" in its use
of a range of materials, mechanisms, and structural forms –
so, if you were talking to students about levers and linkages,
strengths of beams, or the properties of various materials they
were there around you ...
Philip Mottram, HOD Technology
|
Design
Development
Architect Tony Baker had been working with the college since 1993 when
he was commissioned to prepare the Development Planning Study, which subsequently
provided the framework for many building projects at the college. Ministry
funding became a reality in August/September 1998 and Tony was commissioned
to carry out a quick review of the facilities required at the college
in order to teach the new technology curriculum. The ultimate objective
of the study was to have suitable facilities in place by the end of 1999.
A problem we were faced with from the outset was that the college
had surplus area in relation to the assessed peak roll of 700
students. Consequently "every effort was to be made to develop
the new facility within the existing building envelope", to
quote the Ministry's instruction.
Tony Baker, architect
|
The cross-curricular technology team at the college included a teacher
who had practised as an architect. This team had been coming to grips
with demands of the new technology curriculum for some time and were able
to provide valuable preliminary material which the study developed in
a collaborative manner – with interaction between the technology
team, the architect, the appointed project manager/quality surveyor, and
a technology education adviser nominated by the Ministry of Education.
In the absence of a detailed brief from the college, the architect was
able to utilise the Architectural Design Guide for technology facilities
in schools developed by the Ministry of Education. This guide proved to
be a most valuable resource throughout the term of the project.
An initial Technology Accommodation Study was carried out in
order to:
1. Review present technology
facilities at the school in the context of the Ministry's guidelines.
2. Prepare a schedule of
accommodation (and equipment) and relationship diagram based on the
guidelines.
3. Review planning options
for achieving appropriate accommodation.
4. Develop the preferred
option sufficiently for a budget estimate of cost to be prepared.
5. Prepare budget estimate
of cost.
A difficulty we had was that the whole school was organised
on rows of classrooms off long straight corridors ... a very
linear arrangement of distinctly separated teaching spaces.
The basis of the location of the new building was that we had
to use existing (technology) space as much as possible ... much
of this area was solid concrete and difficult to alter ...
Philip Mottram
|
The concept of integrating the existing linear arrangement with the
philosophy of a new central space for planning and design, with the
practical areas radiating out from that, was there from the start of
the development – but what was also evident from the initial concept
drawings was "a real lack of interest or excitement in the new structure!".
Approval to proceed with the Developed Design Stage was received on
8 October 1998. The project was managed by a Project Control Group chaired
by the project manager and comprising the principal, key technology
staff, architect, and secondary consultants as required.
Because of the tight timeframe, obtaining feedback from the college
on the initial study, developing the college approach to teaching technology
and detailed briefing and design development proceeded in parallel with
other necessary tasks such as fee negotiations and appointment of secondary
consultants.
The development of brief/design/costings proceeded as an integrated
evolving process through the 1998 - 99 summer holidays, so that by the
end of January 1999 the design and cost estimate were sufficiently advanced
for the Ministry to approve proceeding to working drawings and firm
estimate of cost.
The comments fed back by college staff on the Study Indicative Plan,
played a major role in shaping the evolution of the design. However,
the project manager/ quantity surveyor determined that the initial concept
was too big and expensive, and the initial plan had to be trimmed to
make it more efficient and less costly.
Responding to these comments led the architect to a plan which was more
compact, had spaces in reasonable relationships, maximised the use of
existing spaces, was "tight" and "functional" –
but unfortunately both the architect himself and the principal of the
college agreed that what had been produced still failed to realise the
potential in the project.
Out of this "lack of excitement" a new proposal evolved. One
which aligned the new hard materials suite with the existing swimming
pool, enclosed by a curving wall, mirroring that of the cafeteria, and
defining the route to the pool. This was the scheme, which generated
real excitement among those involved – and the one that would
finally be realised.
|
)
)
