After seeing him present this design scenario at a CEFPI conference and watching the “Great Schools by Design” video that highlighted this award-winning school, we sensed that there was much to learn from this unique project. We were particularly intrigued by the ability for a school to truly live up to the “for the future” technology mantra that is so common in today’s design/education conversations, while also creating spaces that immediately allowed teachers and students to collaborate across the program. We think you’ll be impressed, too.
In advance of reading Sam’s interview below, we highly recommend watching this 4-Minute video put out by the American Architecture Foundation (AAF) — Located via YouTube. Note: Full details on the video and its creation by the American Architectural Foundation’s “Great Schools By Design” initiatives can found at the end of this interview. To order your copy of the 20-minute full length video, go to this AAF link for more details:
*****
DesignShare: Take us back to the beginning as you worked with the community/client before a single sketch was made. What was the initial ’story’ or vision that everyone agreed to at the beginning of the process?
Sam: David Greenberg, Amy Slothower, and David Stephen (the brain trust of New Schools Development Corporation (NSDC)) impressed to us in the very beginning that DSST was going to be a small school that was emphasizing a science and technology curriculum for “under-served” students in this field. The under-served students were to be 40% free and reduced lunch kids and 45% females.
NSDC was trying to reverse the lack of participation of these students in engineering fields in the world marketplace. The school was to be a non-traditional, non-institutional environment and only was to be considered a 10 year school, not the normal 50 year.
DesignShare: What did you and your team sense as the real opportunity as designers at that vital point in the conversation?
Sam: No restrictions by a school district construction standards or educational specifications meant that the slate was clean and the opportunities were endless.
We recognized that we could really use the building as a learning tool, not just pay lip service to it. So that is when the “building as a lab” concept was developed.
DesignShare: In terms of process and research, describe the steps you and your team took early on to ensure that this school would surpass previous educational models. What schools did you visit to foster ideas?
Sam: Our firm is committed to continually stay on top of current trends in educational planning and research, either from publications, or web based links from the organizations we belong to like CEFPI, Design Share, AIA Committee on Education, etc. We use this well documented research on education to mold our philosophy in approaching the design of learning environments.
We were also lucky that David Stephen was hired by NSDC as a consultant. David not only worked on High Tech High, he also taught there for a year and could relay accurate assessments of the design and how it effected the delivery of curriculum, since we were to use that as our model. We toured High Tech High with NDSC and also took them to our project, Denver School of the Arts to debate the pros and cons of their concepts and results.
DesignShare: You often use the phrase “Form follows Engagement” to describe this school. What do you mean by this as a school planner? What does this mean from the educator’s point of view?
Sam: What we are hoping for is how a student acquires knowledge. How do they get “engaged” with tools, themselves, people, or anything that helps them acquire knowledge to make them productive members of society.
From a designers standpoint, it means looking at relationships between people, either alone with a learning tool or in various size groups and how can the environment we design enable those relationships to work.
From an educators standpoint, it means their approach to delivering knowledge. Is it a method that needs to be verbal? Is it visual? Is it kinetic? It allows educators to decide how best to meet the needs of the student.
DesignShare: Describe a few key spaces on the campus that were designed to serve the development of “21st century” skills in ways that most school facilities cannot adequately support.
Sam: I think that the spaces that are not traditional classrooms meet that description. Those spaces that would be considered “unassigned” spaces in traditional school programs.
The studios for each learning cluster are the major pieces. The studios, adjacent to the classrooms and faculty offices, were designed for students to leave classrooms for group or individual study and also serve as presentation spaces for various programs that are brought to the students or put on by the students. The exterior equivalent are the courtyards that are adjacent to each studio.
Larger spaces, such as the commons and the galleria are also larger versions of the studios that can accommodate larger groups, in fact the entire school population if necessary.
DesignShare: Discuss the design and educational decisions that allowed spaces typically listed as ‘unassigned’ on most campuses (hallways, etc.) to become areas of ‘engagement’ and ‘collaboration’. What allowed these areas to become part of the program rather than value-engineered out of the design through the process?
Sam: Actually it wasn’t a matter of making them a part of the program or keeping them from the cost reduction. We were going to do them and NSDC supported these concepts from the beginning.
The real issue was how the local building official would interpret the 1997 Uniform Building Code work with us to allow these spaces to not be considered “exit ways”.
We accomplished this by having exits directly outside for all classrooms. So the interior circulation spaces at DSST became learning spaces that included furniture, etc. without compromising student safety. The circulation spaces become learning areas or classrooms or whatever moniker you what to call them. The fact is they are the extension of the classroom.
DesignShare: What surprised you about the students’ and teachers’ reactions once they had been in the building for a few weeks or months? What opportunities were missed (due to budget constraints, only seeing options after the school was completed, etc.)?
Sam: My biggest observation (I wouldn’t say surprise) was that we as human beings are so conditioned to our environments that when we are placed in new conditions, we relate back to our social norms.
There was one instructor that complained about the angle wall in one of the project rooms. In one sentence she complained about the angled wall and then stated that it made for great flexibility. Project rooms were used as science classrooms, the robotics lab was used as a lecture center.
As architects, we always know that it won’t necessarily be used the way it was designed and some of the spaces at DSST fall into that category. It took probably a year or so for the instructors to conditionally adjust to the building and start using it as designed.
The 2 biggest things that were missed due to either budget constraints or philosophical direction were the proper acoustical treatment in the classrooms and additional sustainable concepts. The acoustical aspect will be addressed with the construction of the middle school. Additional sustainable concepts (photovoltaic power, ice storage, etc.) may also be addressed with the expansion of the middle school, though the current design saves 42% energy consumption from those building designed under the model energy code.
DesignShare: What opportunities is the district considering with regards to expanding this campus or fostering other campuses around the city?
Sam: DSST is now planning a middle school that we hope to start designing this June. As for Denver Public Schools, they are in the process of restructuring use of some of their existing schools and until they determine that direction, it would be hard for me to say what they are thinking.
DesignShare: What do you see as ’scalable’ about the project considering that most of Denver’s schools will need to house far more students per campus?
Sam: I believe that if the norm of thinking that a school has to be in one large building can be changed, it would allow flexibility for a campus of schools of 400 students per facility with common core facilities - gyms, fields, admin, etc. or maybe an downtown school in an office building that has a contract with the YMCA 2 blocks down for use of their facilities. This can help to foster those intimate relationships or “engagements” between adults and students that will enhance their opportunity to learn.
DesignShare: If you were asked to sit down with a group of national school leaders who were interested in developing similar educational facilities in their community, what advice would you give them before they even hire an architectural partner?
Sam: I would tell them to think “outside the box”. Not that I like that term, but it fits.
Essentially, with the research that has been done that backs up the concepts of how humans learn, they need to trust the research and develop programs that will be based on this research. It may mean that they don’t even hire an architect and they can accomplish their goals without a building.
DesignShare: What do we tend to overlook in the school planning/design community when we seek to develop ’schools for the future’?
Sam: We still like to rely on the fact that we are placing students in a building with 4 walls, roof, floor with the “latest” technology and using the same agrarian calendar. We tend to rely on those norms too much.
We need to really think about how we are creating ways for students to acquire knowledge. Not only how, but when and with what age group. We should try to think about kids or adults out in the community during the day, maybe helping out in a homeless shelter preparing dinner, then on their way home get a lesson ( I won’t say how ) that addresses Keynesian Economic theory that they should be ready to discuss at lunch the next day. That is an engagement of ideas, thoughts and concepts, not just between individuals, groups or tools.
Why do students need to be in school for 6 hours? Maybe we should look at other models of scheduling, it may reduce the need for facilities and subsequent energy consumption.
What areas of research/development do you see as being most vital for our industry in the decade to come to guarantee that we foster projects oriented around our students’ futures? Continued brain research on humans and how we acquire, maintain and retain knowledge.
What are the limits, if any? How will we respond to new methods, to the rate? We have to continue to ask questions and not be satisfied with the status quo. Also, what is going to motivate kids to learn? That is also a huge issue that we need to keep in front of us.
Is it the relevance of the material? How it is presented?
So much for my amateur dissertation in philosophy.
*****
Bio:
Sam Miller, AIA, CEFPI, LEED AP, is an Associate Principal and the Senior Project Architect in klipp’s Education Studio. Additionally he is the Awards Chairman for Southwest Region of the Council of Educational Planners International (CEFPI). His participation in CEFPI keeps him abreast of trends in education environments. For the past twelve years, Sam has worked as lead architect on educational projects such as Denver School of Science and Technology and Denver School of the Arts. His awareness and understanding of different educational delivery methods benefits the design team and ensures that program requirements are translated into quality learning spaces. He coordinates the architectural and consultant team, manages the production of design graphics and construction documents, refines the technical aspects of the design and completes necessary code compliance reviews. Sam is LEED accredited and works closely with the owner’s representative and general contractor to help ensure the success of the project and create a positive long-term relationship.
Schools Designed for Learning: The Denver School of Science and Technology
Presented by the American Architectural Foundation, KnowledgeWorks Foundation, and Target, this video features the innovative Denver School of Science and Technology. The video will allow you and your community to be introduced to an exciting example of how the design of an educational facility can help promote student achievement.
For students at the Denver School of Science and Technology, learning takes place in an environment that is engaging, instructive, and comfortable. The building is an example of design supporting learning, and it provides spaces that are both flexible and inspiring. In addition, the school is outfitted with cutting edge technology—the building is a wireless environment, and each student works with a laptop computer. These students learn in new and exciting ways every day. It is truly a school that has been designed to promote student achievement, and you will see many examples of this powerful idea in the video.
“Schools Designed for Learning: The Denver School of Science and Technology,” is a video case study that is paired with a resource guide providing further information, practical suggestions, and additional resources for viewers. To learn more or order the guide, please visit www.archfoundation.org
DesignShare publications are submitted by designers, university professors, architects, planning consultants, educators, technologists, futurists, and ecologists. Publications include podcasts, detailed case studies, conference proceedings, interviews, original research, editorials, thesis projects, and practical design guidelines.
Denver School of Science & Technology: Sam Miller Interview
DesignShare had the opportunity to sit down with 
Sam: Our firm is committed to continually stay on top of current trends in educational planning and research, either from publications, or web based links from the organizations we belong to like CEFPI, Design Share, AIA Committee on Education, etc. We use this well documented research on education to mold our philosophy in approaching the design of learning environments. 
