Transforming the Kindergarten Experience by Design: A Comparative Research Case Study

Kindergarten education is becoming a priority throughout the USA as research shows its importance on later in life outcomes. The State of Washington instated full-day kindergarten for all public-school students beginning in 2016–2017. It “...is part of the state’s constitutionally protected definition of ‘Basic Education’” (Reykdal, n.d., n.p.), working to support all children in the state. Acting on this new state requirement, one school district chose to design and build a center dedicated solely to kindergarten education, housing approximately 600 kindergarteners. The school was divided into four ‘neighborhood pods’ each with immediate access to specific activity programs (i.e., dining, interventionists, elective functions) reflecting a new ‘expanded push-in’ model and reduce transition times. This model was compared with a ‘traditionally’ operated kindergarten where learners travel to activity programs throughout a campus (i.e., dining, interventionists, electives). A human-centered research design using mixed-methods for this comparison study between an ‘expanded push-in’ and a ‘traditional’ model was used to understand the impact of this new architectural solution particularly focused on timing transitions between the classroom and activity program settings. Findings discovered a reduction in the length of transitions between accessing the programs by recaptured seven school days of learning time (approximately 45 hours), when compared to the traditional one, and more positive connections between students/students, teachers/teachers, and students/teachers to build community.


Introduction
Evidence suggests a kindergarten experience is a critical path for all children. "Students who attend school from kindergarten through secondary school typically spend more that 13,000 hours of the developing brain's time in the presence of teachers" (Desautels, 2016). Clearly, kindergarten is important, but putting 600 students in one building is unusual and perhaps unprecedented for this level of cohort. This situation necessitated a new design vision to support the state's new mandate.
The focus for this kindergarten cohort is on: (a) stimulating the brain, (b) developing social skills, and (c) addressing and increasing awareness of health and wellness both at the physical and emotional levels. It continues the same goals as did the early learning education phase of pre-school, and prepares these young learners for the transition into elementary school. The pedagogy, or teaching practices for these kindergarten places follows the idea of activity-based, or 'circuit' learning in activity zones in the formal learning place (aka 'the classroom'). These activity zones are designed to directly support the types of learning experiences the pedagogy of this age cohort requires. All manners of simple learning tasks are taught from how to line up, to get one's own items out of a personal cubby, and to tying one's shoes, etc. So, sight lines for a teacher are very important as staying on task at this early age is not easy for little ones. Transparency and view planes to the outside and nature along with the ability to see into the corridors or transition areas are important considerations for safety and security. Taylor (2011) says, "I'm often baffled when I talk to those who think a kindergarten class, or any class for that matter, should be quiet. For one thing, students at this age love to talk. Kindergartners' vocabulary is growing very rapidly, and many are developing the power to express ideas. When we provide students with opportunities to talk about what they are learning, we are helping them to construct meaning and learn from their experiences. Children should be working together, problem-solving and sharing ideas and activities. This helps children learn how to think through problems and find solutions together. In addition, the teacher should be reading to students throughout the day. One of the most important things teachers can do in preparing children for success in school and in reading is to read aloud to them. Read-alouds help build listening skills, comprehension skills, and so much more. At times the children should also be reading, to themselves, other students, or the teacher" (n.p.).
The teacher often uses the areas outside of the classroom for multiple purposes including breakout activities, or push-out segments for special support, art, eating, and moving from one area to the other. The architecture of the place including interior design affordances (i.e., furnishings and fit-outs) must support multiple postural changes, and technologies both analogue (non-digital) and digital, and lots of storage; the latter is critical.

Design Understandings and Solution Development
Faced with a state mandate to instate full-day kindergarten and accommodate growing capacity demands, for this school district it established its first kindergarten center at a selected site for this elementary building. As mentioned, this design team spent time at multiple kindergarten sites to more clearly understand and experience the learning and teaching needs for this age cohort in what might be referred to as typical 'traditional settings.' Early insights revealed: (a) a lot of rules and regulations, (b) creativity seemed stifled, (c) special program activity centers were spread out across a campus, and (d) transitioning from one program activity center to another took a lot of time. With actvity programs and specialty areas spread out across a campus in this traditional model, it meant that the design of the school did not appear to revolve around the student, was hard to generate a sense of community, and transition times to these specialized activity areas were quite substantial. Time spent observing at a traditional kindergarten showed that teacher coordination and the length of transition times were impacting learning time (see Figure 1). The resear the next, ( Below is a (see Figure  for patterns an d spots, (c) w f an early roun notations were n, the physical igure 9).

Com
In order to comparativ school dist (as researc one resear moved or followed t behavior a was select Kindergart

Key Di
Case #2- One key p One can see that the transitions for Case #1 are shorter and simpler, with locations close by and specials consolidated. Studies of the various transition paths taken in both schools revealed that the average travel distances in Case #1 were 1/10 th of the average travel distances in Case #2 (see Table 2). It's important to note that transition travel time does relate directly to walking speed. The times logged in these observations for both schools included intermediate stops to ensure the entire class stayed together, or for teachers to attend to any disruptive behavior. The longer and more complicated a travel path, including going up or down stairs, the more intermittent stops were required, extending the transition travel time even more. The design hypothesis was the longer the transition time the more 'lost learning time.' However, several teachers and specialists anecdotally indicated that particularly at the beginning of a school year, all time is learning time. Each child is learning basic tasks and skills-lining up, walking as a group, and staying focused-in addition to academic skills.

RQ.1. Does the New 'Expanded Push-in' Design, Bringing Dining and Other Activity Spaces into a 'Neighborhood Pod' Reduce Overall Transition Times and Increase Time Spent on Meaningful Learning and Play?
Transition travel times, at Case #1, from one program activity pod spot to the next within the neighborhood averaged 35 seconds, while the whole classroom transitions from door of classroom to specials or to the gym was three minutes. Teachers at Case #1's location felt the benefits of the reduced transition time in the daily schedule as reclaimed learning time.
"We're able to maximize the school day because everything is so close together…(at) my old school, we'd have to allow at least five minutes for transitions and here…it's less than a minute"-Teacher.

RQ.2. How Do the Kindergarten Learners and Teachers Utilizing the New Pod Spot Designs?
At both Case #1 and Case #2, pod spot areas were located immediately or almost immediately outside the classroom; as such, transition time to or from them were negligible for both campuses. It should also be noted that the size, quantity of pod spots, and arrangement of classrooms varied greatly between the two, resulting in a different degree of utilization.

At Case #1
Note that each neighborhood at this school had six classrooms, all with adjacent pod spot spaces designed immediately outside the classroom intended for that classroom educator's use for specialists. While specialists frequently utilize the push-in method, by which this person works with groups of students within an area in the classroom itself, the pod spot spaces outside 'acted like an extension of the classroom.' Long tables for mixed-use of dining and other hands-on activities were provided in the expanded hall space. On site the researchers coded these pod spots as: 1, 2, para, 3, 4, 5, TBL 1, and TBL 2 (see Figure 13). The two floors observed at Case #1 utilized the pod spots differently.   Analysis submits perhaps a mitigation of the potential use for the classroom educator with this repurposing of three of the six intended pod spot usage. Furthermore, when activities were scheduled in the specialist's area it would be utilized for approximately three hours and twenty-five minutes concurrently. Several quotes from educator's and staff support the information shared above.
During interviews, the following comments were made about pod spot usage: • "I really like being part of the classroom…but there's just not room with the play-to-learn and everything going on in there" (specialist) • "…even though the kids are being 'pulled-out' of the classroom into the pod spots…that works well" (teacher) • "She (meaning the interventionist/specialist) started in our classroom…but…she liked it out in the hall (pod spot). She's right there…even though there's a window between us, I still feel like she's part of the room" (teacher) • "The stigma of pulled-out activities is changed with the direct classroom connection" (teacher). The various pod spaces in Caterpillar (second floor) were collectively used for a total of 8 hours and 40 minutes over the course of the observation timeframe. Meanwhile, the various pod spaces in Grasshopper (first floor) were collectively used for 6 hours and 11 minutes-2 hours and 30 minutes less than in Caterpillar. Assuming 6.5 hours in each school day, even the most frequently used pod space (area 2 in Caterpillar) was only utilized for approximately 27% of the day. The table below outlines the total amount of time spent in small groups during each day of observation at each table area for each floor observed (see Table 3). The differences in utilization between pod spaces and between floors at Case #1 raised a number of questions relative to design intensions: • Is pod space utilization dependent on educators' perceived ownership of the spaces adjacent to their classrooms? As shown above in Figure 14 (refer back to Figure 14) although all classrooms have a pod spot immediate outside their classroom door, only three of the pod spots are not shared for specialist use. These pod spots are also the spaces that experienced the most use. Over the course of the observation period, pod spot spaces 1, 2 and 3 were used by over one hour more than pod spot spaces 4 and 5, and the dining tables. If the teachers adjacent to pod spot spaces 4 and 5 felt they had full ownership over them, and that the pod spot was perhaps considered a part of their 'owned' classroom, would those pod spaces be utilized more (refer back to Table 2)?
• Are educators holding on to the traditional push-in model? One role of the pod spots was to serve specifically as a pull-out space for specialists, while still maintaining a visual connection to the classroom. However, many of the teachers brought the specialists into their classrooms, as opposed to sending students out into the pod spot. One interventionist speculated that the individual educator's comfort level impacted their use of the pod space, "I think it's a comfort level…I think some of it's classroom management, so that they'll feel more free in coming out and using the spaces. They do have a better classroom management than some of the other classrooms that I worked with" (teacher).
• Is perceived time to transition causing educators to favor the pushing-in vs. pulling-out approach-opposite of the actual time it takes? Observation showed that multiple small groups could transition between the pod spot space and the classroom for intervention activities within seconds. The proximity to the classroom of some pod spot spaces resulted in a negligible transition time between In the con personaliz  Vol. 9, No. 2;2020 Additionally, the specific design of the campus fosters collaborative relationships that are not so easily formed on traditionally designed campuses. Although classrooms are still owned, educators have a shared office allowing them to more easily collaborate with their neighbor.
At Case #1, "…having … the office together and the doors together, we have that community." In this way, educators felt that "…there's that constant collaboration going on…whereas, in a traditional classroom you're in a room with yourself and the students and then with the support staff, they're usually in their own offices…with this, we're all together, and we're sharing." This last finding was particularly true for the specialists teaching technology, art, music, physical education, etc. In a traditional school, specialists own their own spaces and therefore become siloed in their own work around a school. During the interviews, one specialist indicated, "This (meaning the design at Case #1) is incredible. I've never sat next to a teacher. We were always in our own little island, and never would talk." Because educators have quick and convenient access to each other through their shared offices and connected classrooms, kindergarteners at Case #1 have an additional adult that they know and become comfortable with. The new design model also allowed other adults to develop stronger relationships with the kindergarteners.
Specialists got to know their students better, since they only work with two neighborhoods, as opposed to a full campus. Additionally, students were able to form better relationships with food service staff. Food service staff served a smaller group of students at one time, allowing them to form better relationships. One food service staff member felt that working at Case #1, "has been an amazing experience…here you kind of get surrounded with the kids, and they give you a lot of appreciation feedback…" They felt welcomed.
The design of Case #1 isn't simply about creating a school. It's about creating a sense of community. One educator felt that, "the design really lends itself to a family-kind of community, and…that impact is huge!"

Transparency
One of the key design elements at Case #1 is the use of transparency (glass between the classroom and the pod spot area). The design intent for the transparency was to allow for passive supervision, passive observation, and increased daylight penetration into the pod spot. An educator's immediate reaction might be one of consternation. After one year of operation transparency looks compromised with every glazed area covered in something-student work, notices, etc. The question then becomes, "Why are educators covering up the glass?" One probable scenario is that they really do not want people viewing into the classroom.

Staffing and Operations
Interviews and observations revealed other unexpected outcomes and potential misalignments at Case #1. Two items in particular are shared, the new dining model and 'points of sale.' The new dining model at Case #1 worked well to reduce transition travel times and helped students create better relationships with the adults with whom they interact. However, a few operational issues emerged. Two staff individuals rolled the kitchen food carts daily into one end of the neighborhood pod. The set up required a mobile computer station, or 'point of sale,' to log the finger prints of the students, and due to this log in procedure long lines of students stretched from one end of the pod neighborhood to the other. This line up time decreased the actual amount of time a student had to physically eat. To mitigate this situation, some teachers held their students in the classroom longer, "Since the dining line is really long if all of us go out there at the same time…I say, ' activities. An u are sufficient f Figure 25).

.2 Pod Floors and Navigation
An unexpected design discovery was the use of the two different types of flooring in the neighborhoods (refer back Figure 26) appeared to provide an added navigational aid for a visually impaired student. One observer saw this particular student navigate the neighborhood pod by tapping her cane across the boundaries of the two floor surfaces each time she went from one end of the neighborhood to the other, and she did so multiple times in the course of a day.
While the design intent of providing two different flooring types was to visually and spatially distinguish the dining area from the pod spot areas, it also created a layer of wayfinding that improved the space's accessibility.

Limitations
A Research Case Study is an opportunity to more fully understand a particular design or model, post-occupancy. The Human-centered Research Design's protocol is a rigorous social science set of mixed-method procedures using multiple types of techniques to gather data limiting research bias. Even so, two days of behavioral observation does not allow for a full understanding of any model. The comparison of one 'traditional' model to a 'new' one is important, however, the convenience sample models are not easily compared on a one-to-one basis and any findings have to be considered under these conditions.

Next Steps
A new design solution was developed as a result of responding to a new governing mandate. The initial hypothesis was 'proven,' and more questions raised from what was revealed through the research observations from the design intent to the actual use of the spaces. Specific items needing further investigation include the connection between visual 'noise' and distraction and the aforementioned questions presented regarding educator use of ancillary spaces, such as the pod spots (e.g., educator perception and its impact on use and the tendency to stick to traditional models). Professional development may be required to understand how these new space types (pod spots) can be affectively utilized.

Conclusions
The original design hypothesis was tested along with the design goal of reducing transition travel times as a result of the new 'expanded push-in' design; both were successfully met. Reduced transition travel time equaled more learning time recaptured, and a higher utilization of the built square footage. More staffing was required for the implementation of new dining experience. The new physical design functioned well, but there is always room for improvement. Relationships and student outcomes perceived to be improved with respondents comparing this new place to more traditional design models.
As in any on site case study, a lot of data is generated. The findings were categorized into the following areas: (a) transition time, (b) use of the pods spots, (c) impacts of the new design model, and (d) some side notes that might be of interest. What do these findings mean for others?

What Does This Mean for School Leaders?
Often one doesn't have control over the design process for a campus and the distances students are expected to travel. However, there is often opportunities to select where in the building different age groups will sit, develop their abilities, and the impact this opportunity has on the time it will take to travel. When designing a new campus, consider opportunities for shortening the distances all students especially the younger ones have to travel. Planning the school's schedule so that whole class destinations are grouped together (such as dining, leading in to an adjacent recess) could also assist in reducing the amount of transition time.

What Does This Mean for Designers of Schools?
The development of a one-age cohort is very different. Perhaps the design using the ancient Nautilus's proportions actually encourages a new developmental model for engaging students and educators in a more connected learning process. The new 'expanded push-in model' clearly had advantages over the 'traditional one'. The organizations of space types for particular activities with the goal to reduce student transition times, and the generation of neighborhoods supports what is know about how people develop a sense of belonging and therefore adding to the motivation to become more engaged in one's learning process.

Disclosure
Two of the researchers are members of the architectural firm that designed Case #1, but were not part of the design team.