TED 536
Fall 2010
Problem Statement
Zachary Dupree
October 11, 2010
Problem Statement
Many teachers walk into their classroom for the first time and do not consider the
physical arrangement of the classroom. Most teachers consider the classroom layout to be
unimportant when compared to other factors in the educational process (Sommer, 1977).
Today’s classrooms have given way to more flexible configurations in which teachers
have gained considerable control. Many classroom furnishings are movable and expand
the amount of control the teacher has on physical arrangement of the classroom.
Arranging the physical environment of the classroom is one way to improve the learning
environment and to prevent problem behaviors before they occur. How to arrange a
classroom and in what manner are questions many teachers now answer for themselves.
This decision is should be made based on the teachers role, conditions for learning,
appropriate means for maintaining classroom control, space, and learning activities
(Rosenfield & Lambert, 1985). However, there are still factors that may limit the
flexibility of the classrooms physical arrangement. These include factors such as
classroom space, types of furnishings, district policy and custodial help (Sommer, 1977).
Although some believe classroom layout to be unimportant, a well arranged
classroom environment is one way to more effectively manage instruction because it
creates less behavioral problems and establishes a climate conducive to learning.
Research on the classroom environment has shown that the physical arrangement can
affect the behavior of both students and teachers (Savage, 1999). A well structured
classroom also tends to improve student and behavioral outcomes (MacAulay, 1990). The
research has also shown that classroom environment acts as an indicator to students and
others regarding what teacher’s value in behavior and learning (Weinstein, 1992). If a
classroom is not properly organized to support planned learning objectives, it will impact
the functioning of the lesson as well as limit what and how the students learn.
The spatial structure of the classroom refers to how students are seated, where the
students and teacher are located in relation to one another, how individuals move around
the room, and the overall sense of atmosphere and order. The research has shown that
classroom environments should be organized to accommodate a variety of learning
activities and meet the teacher’s instructional goals (Savage, 1999; Weinstein, 1992). It
has also shown that the classroom should be set up in a manner that is appropriate in
addressing academic, social and emotional needs of the student (MacAulay, 1990). There
is no ideal classroom layout for all learning activities. Different arrangements are
appropriate for different activities and one should not be restricted to one permanent
layout.
Most researchers agree that well arranged classrooms reflect the following
attributes. Clearly defined spaces within the classroom that are used for different
purposes and ensure students know how to behave in each of these areas (Quinn, Osher,
Warger, Hanley, Bader, & Hoffman, 2000). For example, classrooms should be
structured to contain a high traffic area around shared resources, such as work stations,
and spaces for teacher led instruction. According to the research, there should also be
areas for large and small group activities that set the stage for specific kinds of
interactions between students and the teacher (Rinehart, 1991). Seating students in rows
facilitates on task behavior and academic learning where as more open arrangements,
such as clusters or work stations, facilitate social exchanges (MacAulay, 1990). The
learning environment should be designed in a way that limits student distractions and
behavior problems (Bettenhausen, 1998). This can be done by keeping the classroom
well organized and focusing on the attributes above.
The physical arrangement of the classroom can provide students with effective
instructional areas and facilitate positive teaching and learning interactions. In the field of
Technology Education many classroom designs differ from one building to the next.
There are two major types of layouts that are present in most technology education
classrooms. The first layout consists of one large area that is designated for instruction as
well as work space. This classroom typically has a series of work benches in the form of
clusters that are used for instruction as well as work spaces. The second layout consists of
two separate areas, one is designated for instruction and the other is for work space. The
area designated for instruction contains an arrangement of desks usually in a rows or ushape pattern. The area designated for work space contains a series of work benches that
can be used for instruction as well as other learning activities. As stated above many
teachers do not consider these layouts and how they relate to student behavior. The
research provided above suggests that these arrangements be considered in order to
provide students with effective instructional areas that are conducive to on-task behavior.
Do to the lack of researchers in the technology education field this type of
research has not been completed before. Many studies have been completed on classroom
arrangement and how these arrangements affect student behavior. However, no studies
have linked the research to include two separate learning areas. A study completed in this
area would not be limited to the field of technology education but could also be used for
other disciplines such as the sciences. Many science classrooms such as physics,
chemistry and biology are composed of the two layouts described above.
The physical arrangement of a classroom is very important in the educational
process. Research suggests that arranging the physical environment of the classroom is
one way to improve the learning environment and to prevent problem behaviors before
they occur. In the field of technology education, it is appropriate to focus on two main
layouts commonly present in classrooms.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Since technology education classrooms are set-up in two different ways. There is
a need to decide which arrangement is more conducive to on-task behaviors. The first
arrangement consists of one area which includes instruction and work space together, this
will be called layout 1. The second arrangement consists of two areas, one for instruction
and the other for work space, this will be called layout 2.
Research Questions:

Which arrangement will lead to a more conducive learning environment?

Which arrangement is more conducive to on-task behaviors?

Which arrangement is more flexible for desired learning outcomes?
Hypothesis:

Layout 2 will be more conducive to on-task behaviors than layout 1.
Limitations

Only middle school students will be tested

Both genders will be tested

Only on-task behaviors listed in the appendix will be measured

Student type will be taken into consideration
(High and low ability) (High and low interaction)

Instructional Content

Position of the teacher

Control group
Delimitations

Specific teacher and student influences

Subjective influences

Gender related differences

Classroom distractions
Relevant Terms
Work Benches: are benches located in the “shop area” that are designed as work spaces
for students. These benches may include vices for woodworking and student
storage.
Importance of the Study
In the field of technology education each classroom arrangement is unique to the
building. Unlike other traditional square shaped classrooms the technology classroom
may be arranged in a number of ways. The two most common layouts are described
above. Many teachers do not consider how these arrangements impact the behavior of the
student. Active participation of students is essential for developmental learning. The
present study is designed to test the hypothesis about the effectiveness of different
arrangements for promoting student interactions identified as conducive to student
learning. The two arrangements were chosen because they are common in technology
education classrooms. The findings of this study will show which arrangement is more
effective in promoting on-task behaviors in the technology classroom.
As noted previously these arrangements are common not only to technology
education classrooms but other disciplines as well. Many science classrooms are
composed of the two arrangements used in this study and the results can be used to link
classroom arrangements to student behaviors. The impacts of this study will help
educators decide which learning environment best fits their learning objectives and
teaching styles. Previous research has been done on desk arrangements but have yet to
compare the layouts described above.
Organization of the Study
This study will be carried out experimentally. The two layouts will be tested and
on-task behaviors will be observed in each of the arrangements. The behaviors chosen for
observation encompass those commonly found in classrooms. They include on-task
behaviors and off-task behaviors. A detailed description of these behaviors will be listed
in the appendix. Students will be observed by video camera and the behaviors will be
recorded for each of the two arrangements. The first chapter will look at the subjects
involved in the study. The next chapters will look at the lesson being taught, the setting
and procedures and the observational procedures.
Reference List
Bettenhausen, S. (1998). Make proactive modifications to your classroom. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 33(3), 182-183.
MacAulay, D.J. (1990). Classroom environment: A literature review. Educational
Psychology, 10(3), 239-253.
Rinehart, J. (1991). Organization of the environment. Interventions for students with
emotional disorders. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Rosenfield, P., & Lambert, N. (1985). Desk arrangement effects on pupil classroom
behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 101-108.
Quinn, M.N., Osher, D., Warger, C.L., Hanley, T.V., Bader, B.D., & Hoffman, C.C.
(2000). Teaching and working with children who have emotional and behavioral
challenges. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Savage, T.V. (1999). Teaching self-control through management and discipline. Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Sommer, R. (1977). Classroom layout. Theory into Practice, 16, 174-175.
Weinstein, C.S. (1992). Designing the instructional environment: Focus on seating.
Bloomington, IN: Proceedings of Selected Research and Development
Presentations at the Convention of the Association for Educational
Communications and Technology.