Report comment

Whilst the anology is poor, the points made have a good deal of validity. An agreed degree of standardisation - from brief, through classroom sizes, to a larger kit of bits would streamline the process and be more cost effective where it matters. This need not necessarily be to the detrement of the product - getting the standardised kit of bits right is the trick.
(if every PS classroom looked like the Archetype one in the image then I personally would be happy with the product)

If the front end cost can be significantly lower, then more schools can potentially be built. Architects will still be required to tailor these KoBs to the client and be site and context specific. If architects are throwing the dummy out of the pram because they don't have blank sheets of paper to start with, then they need to dry their eyes, put their egos back in check and grow a set.

As an educational architect who has designed over 20 schools, I would welcome a joined up more cost effective centrally led approach to the design and procurement of the future school estate - as long as we get the chance to get the KoB right!

The standardised components need to be fit for purpose and designed over a period of extensive consultation with the right people. They need to be designed to the right areas with good natural daylighting and ventillation. They need to be spaces designed for their specific users and be stimulating, fun and inspirational. They need to consider environmental comfort and life cycle - and they need to be cost effective and flexible enough to allow adaptability over their design life.
They must not be rushed and they must not need to be cheap.

As architects we have still have a considerable opportunity to effect positive change to education system in the future.