Reading an article the other day about adding color to Korean schools, I was bolstered that the psychological effects of color are impacting people at the level of education. It's about time!
Superficial? Back we go to square one. If the addition of the educated application of color is considered superficial, then where does that leave us? Why is is that color is considered merely aesthetics? An after-thought?
Of course, they could simply mean that it was an easy change to make- slapping a coat of paint on the walls is much easier than say, adding a skylight, or a new classroom wing. Color has a huge impact, and while it seems that something so simple couldn't possibly make that much of a difference, the facts are irrefutable. The principal at one of these improved school buildings says, "with the positive change in the school’s environment, I now see that students have also changed for the better.” (ie. no more carving or scribbling on desks)
My question is, how do we convince public agencies that funding for educational facility improvements should be high on the list of priorities? (well, after first bumping up spending for education as a whole, of course...)