Understanding the importance of post occupancy evaluations

Lasting change and innovation comes from the reflection of past experiences and the application of that knowledge to future projects. The Awards Program 2001 program emphasizes post-occupancy evaluations (POEs) in an effort to share with educational and architectural practitioners those lessons learned by designers who entered their schools into competition.

The jury was looking forward to reviewing the POEs, but unfortunately, only nine out of 62 project were submitted with complete post-occupancy evaluations. Interestingly enough, six of those nine projects ended up receiving awards. The correlation is clear: exemplary projects are not only expertly planned and executed, their designers see the value in evaluating a project and applying what they learn to future projects-they learn from experience what makes a school great.

A few caveats: there is a recognized tendency for architectural firms to submit projects for awards before the facilities are built or occupied. Waiting a year to conduct an evaluation before publishing is obviously not common practice. Additionally, most POEs emphasize what works rather than what does not. Admittedly, it is difficult to emphasize weaknesses without the fear of lost credibility. And, for the most part, new buildings are always going to be more satisfying to their occupants than the old building, which is why POEs are conducted at least after a full year of occupancy. Finally, discovering how well a building really works is a difficult task, one that is even more difficult to represent in a brief statement and survey advocated by this competition.

In lieu of discussing the merits of any one post-occupancy evaluation, I would rather discuss elements of the POEs submitted for this competition and the lessons we can all learn from them.

The Hypothesis of Design

While it appears some projects did not have a POE in mind when their planning and design criteria were developed, the process of linking evaluations and design is, in general, not typical for the practice of architecture. However, many submittals had hypotheses implicitly stated in project descriptions-even if they were not followed up on with a POE.

For example, one project, Merit Award-winning Cragmont Elementary (this page), submitted a hypothesis that read, “the small size of the school and its embracing architecture is the best security, promoting a sense of belonging and community in a very diverse student population.” The POE did not provide data to support that hypothesis, but the information to prove it may not exist and it may be impossible to qualify.

A project that successfully tested its hypothesis is the Ipswich Middle/High School, which Flansburgh & Associates designed with “kivas” (shown next page). The firm hypothesized that kivas would “give students a casual, comfortable venue to present their ideas without the usual awkwardness and inconvenience of getting up on stage in front of an audience. The design promotes collaboration, visibility, and community, making it difficult for students to disengage or go unnoticed.”

The Ipswich POE provides supporting information, reporting that one teacher says “the kiva teaching area in the middle is a coveted teaching space.” Another teacher explains that “kiva are a favorite spot for students and the students are involved in exciting and meaningful learning experiences.”

What I cannot stress enough, though, is that proof of a hypothesis is not as noteworthy-or encouraging-as the fact that these issues are being framed as criteria early in the process of design. The problem of social alienation and school climate and culture is a critical one, and one that several projects, in addition to Ipswich, attempted to address through design.

Another hot issue tested within these projects is the role of natural daylighting and how it enhances the process of learning.

The Cragmont project was expressly interested in “highlighting natural materials and abundant natural light in classrooms to provide a better learning environment.” Designers accomplished the task using a series of bay windows in each classroom that bring natural light deep into classroom spaces. Special education teachers reported “a marked improvement in the attention span of ADD students, due to the calming effects of views and light.”

Interestingly, the Cragmont POE points out that one side effect to the light-giving bay windows is that classrooms can get hot and the temperature is difficult to control. One explanation for this difficulty is suggested by a central, district-controlled heating system. This finding raises questions of personal comfort control and can be used to enact improvements at Cragmont or future schools designed by the firm.

The POE for the Palmer HDFS Building at Iowa State University reports that one explicit criterion was to create an overall design that “strives to be calm, relaxing, and comfortable to heighten the ideas of warmth and family.” The hypothesis suggested the effect would be accomplished through the proper use of color, chosen for its comforting effects, and a waterfall, selected for the creation of soft, white noise that calms those waiting for family therapy sessions. The building is designed with operable windows and HVAC systems that pumps optimal fresh outdoor air into the building, which itself is constructed of materials selected because of their minimal negative impact on indoor air quality.

The Palmer HDFS Building POE, reports that “adults speak most favorably about the lighting and beauty of the building spaces through the use of natural (Iowa) materials and products.”

The hypothesis explored by Wilson Elementary, a school designed by Charney Architects of New Haven, Conn., concerned L-shaped classrooms with variable-height ceilings and direct and indirect lighting that “create different zones within a single room emphasizing activity-based learning.” Additional commentary says the rooms have the “ability to address changing educational programs…” One teacher addressed that design feature, saying, “I now have room to spread out with the kids working on the floor in designated areas in the room, leaving things out until finished, corners set up for special projects, and larger areas of displays.