Open, flexible space and separated, closed classroom space are both crucial to the architecture of the contemporary school. I believe that both should be reconsidered and that they should be combined in fresh ways. To better comprehend these two kinds of space, it is useful to consider the historical evolution of school design in New York City public schools.

When the New York City Board of Education established an architectural department at the end of the 19th century, it named C.B.J. Snyder as superintendent of school buildings. Snyder's designs typify what we now think of as "traditional" urban schools.

In these schools, classrooms with doors separating children of differing ages replaced the earlier open shared single schoolroom of the mid-19th century. Enormous double-hung windows were used to give every classroom plenty of light and ventilation. In general, these schools were large buildings based on the T-, U- or H-shaped plan and were designed to resemble large English country houses. Conceptually, they were palaces of learning. Pedagogically, the textbook replaced the former system of instruction by rote.

This traditional model of school building was typical until the 1960s. At that time, radical theories of education began to stress an approach based on helping children to realize their own unique qualities. Imagination and self-discovery were given priority over book learning. At the same time, modernist architectural theories such as those pioneered in America by former Bauhaus director Walter Gropius had developed a language of flowing, open, interpenetrating space. The result of applying these theories of architectural design to school construction was the creation of shared multifunctioning spaces, which began to displace individual classrooms, regarded as overly rigid and confining. Schools with experimental and ingenious arrangements resulted, in which children shared various kinds of open space for a wide range of activities.

Due to increasing security concerns during the 1970s, urban schools right up to the present have, in contrast, frequently stressed the arrangement of students into separated classrooms that create manageable teaching units, which help prevent the mixing of potentially hostile student groups. These concerns have tended to constrain the exploration of architecural uses of open space.

I believe that the way forward for school design should be to combine the best of open space and the closed classroom in order to respond to the increasingly wide variety of educational challenges that are encountered in urban schools today. The idea of combining historical models, including Snyder's most inventive school designs and the innovative thinking stemming from the modernist tradition, has not yet been fully explored. It is in the imaginative combination of these traditions to meet the pressing needs of today's urban schools that we need to look for solutions.

Gavin Macrae-Gibson is principal of Macrae-Gibson Architects (www.m-ga.com), which completed more than 25 projects for the New York City School Construction Authority.

When I began my career as a school psychological consultant more than 25 years ago, I came across my first open multiple classroom. In that large attractive setting, three classrooms were operating at the same time and in the same space. Although spacious and beautiful, I observed that many students found it difficult to focus on their teacher. When a teacher in a part of the learning pod began talking rather loudly, his or her voice carried quickly and easily to the others. When students were attempting to work on a paper-and-pencil task in one section while student presentations were being given in another section, many eyes found their way to the other classroom. In addition, the teachers who worked in that setting found it very difficult to hold the attention of their students.

In a traditional classroom, students may still find themselves distracted by sights and sounds around them, however this is minimal compared to the distractions available in a multiple classroom. Having multiple teachers teaching multiple groups of students at the same time and in the same space creates teaching and learning challenges that far exceed the difficulties in a traditional classroom.

Open space classrooms are especially difficult for students who struggle with inattention and distractibility. According to recent research figures, approximately 7.5 percent of students have attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD). An open classroom with multiple activities is difficult enough for most students, but it is an AD/HD nightmare. There are also students who have learning disabilities that affect their auditory processing, students with Asperger's Syndrome and autism who find it difficult to be with large numbers of people, and students with speech and hearing difficulties--all of whom are not well suited for this type of environment.

In addition, when a student exhibits disruptive behavior, the number of students affected is greatly increased by the absence of noise barriers and walls.

Open spaces--other than the classroom--can be a wonderful addition to many schools. A sense of community could be provided by grouping students in pods for activities such as recess or meals.

The open space classrooms in our area have been updated to traditional classrooms. I know that every once in a while we revisit an old idea, but please don't bring back the open classroom or pod without talking to the teachers who tried to teach under those conditions and the students, especially those with special learning needs, who tried to learn under those conditions.

Michele Novotni is on the board of the Attention Deficit Disorder Association and author of Adult ADD and What Does Everybody Else Know That I Don't?

American Federation of Teachers, AFL•CIO - 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW - Washington, DC 20001