Education - Revision history

Albert: /* Economic */

2016-06-17T14:25:02Z

Economic

Albert: /* Economic */

2016-06-17T14:24:03Z

Economic

John P: /* Economic */

2013-11-13T15:41:42Z

Economic

Olav: /* Security Issues */

2013-07-10T12:28:30Z

Security Issues

Olav: /* Mobility */

2013-07-10T12:23:50Z

Mobility

Olav: /* Economic */

2013-07-10T12:22:02Z

Economic

Olav: /* Economic */

2013-07-10T12:21:30Z

Economic

Olav: /* Social */

2013-07-10T12:20:50Z

Social

Olav at 12:18, 10 July 2013

2013-07-10T12:18:21Z

Olav at 12:16, 10 July 2013

2013-07-10T12:16:51Z

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 {| class="wikitable"
 |-
-! Schools  !! Cost of security plan !! Cost of crime prior to security plan !! % change cost of crime (due to security plan)!! Number of offences prior to security plan !! % change number of offences (due to security plan) !
+! Schools  !! Cost of security plan !! Cost of crime prior to security plan !! % change cost of crime (due to security plan)!! Number of offences prior to security plan !! % change number of offences (due to security plan)
 |-
-|  A  || AUD 26,902 || AUD 174,803 || -68.74% (AUD 120,160 savings) || 166 || -39.76% (66 less offences)|
+|  A  || AUD 26,902 || AUD 174,803 || -68.74% (AUD 120,160 savings) || 166 || -39.76% (66 less offences)
 |-
-|  B  || AUD 27,950 || AUD 97,662 ||  -65.88% (AUD 64,337 savings) || 114 || -19.30% (22 less offences)|
+|  B  || AUD 27,950 || AUD 97,662 ||  -65.88% (AUD 64,337 savings) || 114 || -19.30% (22 less offences)
 |-
-|  C  || AUD 48,807 || AUD 96,494 ||  -73.78% (AUD 71,192 savings) || 109 || -23.85% (26 less offences)|
+|  C  || AUD 48,807 || AUD 96,494 ||  -73.78% (AUD 71,192 savings) || 109 || -23.85% (26 less offences)
 |-
-|  D  || AUD 27,166 || AUD 81,093 ||  -29.52% (AUD 23,936 savings) || 96 || -13.54% (13 less offences)|
+|  D  || AUD 27,166 || AUD 81,093 ||  -29.52% (AUD 23,936 savings) || 96 || -13.54% (13 less offences)
 |-
-|  E  || AUD 34,661 || AUD 7,222  ||   +218% (AUD 15738 extra costs)  || 23 || +117% (27 more offences)|
+|  E  || AUD 34,661 || AUD 7,222  ||   +218% (AUD 15738 extra costs)  || 23 || +117% (27 more offences)
 |-
 |}

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 {| class="wikitable"
 |-
-! Schools  !! Cost of security plan !! Cost of crime prior to security plan !! % change cost of crime (due to security plan)!! Number of offences prior to security plan !! % change number of offences (due to security plan) !!
+! Schools  !! Cost of security plan !! Cost of crime prior to security plan !! % change cost of crime (due to security plan)!! Number of offences prior to security plan !! % change number of offences (due to security plan) !
 |-
-|  A  || AUD 26,902 || AUD 174,803 || -68.74% (AUD 120,160 savings) || 166 || -39.76% (66 less offences)||
+|  A  || AUD 26,902 || AUD 174,803 || -68.74% (AUD 120,160 savings) || 166 || -39.76% (66 less offences)|
 |-
-|  B  || AUD 27,950 || AUD 97,662 ||  -65.88% (AUD 64,337 savings) || 114 || -19.30% (22 less offences)||
+|  B  || AUD 27,950 || AUD 97,662 ||  -65.88% (AUD 64,337 savings) || 114 || -19.30% (22 less offences)|
 |-
-|  C  || AUD 48,807 || AUD 96,494 ||  -73.78% (AUD 71,192 savings) || 109 || -23.85% (26 less offences)||
+|  C  || AUD 48,807 || AUD 96,494 ||  -73.78% (AUD 71,192 savings) || 109 || -23.85% (26 less offences)|
 |-
-|  D  || AUD 27,166 || AUD 81,093 ||  -29.52% (AUD 23,936 savings) || 96 || -13.54% (13 less offences)||
+|  D  || AUD 27,166 || AUD 81,093 ||  -29.52% (AUD 23,936 savings) || 96 || -13.54% (13 less offences)|
 |-
-|  E  || AUD 34,661 || AUD 7,222  ||   +218% (AUD 15738 extra costs)  || 23 || +117% (27 more offences)||
+|  E  || AUD 34,661 || AUD 7,222  ||   +218% (AUD 15738 extra costs)  || 23 || +117% (27 more offences)|
 |-
 |}

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 ''Case example: Cost-effective security programmes for schools''
-The Department of Education and Training in Western Australia initiated in 1999 a successful security risk management programme helping school principals to evaluate existing security measures and determine cost-effective levels of security to meet the risks faced by their schools <ref>[http://www.oecd.org/education/country-studies/centreforeffectivelearningenvironmentscele/38162484.pdf OECD (2007). ''School Security Assessment Programme in Australia.''PEB Echange 2007/3 ISSN 1609-7548]</ref>. Part of this assessment was the draft of a treatment plan for which the principal provided a description of the school plan, including costs of individual security measures and the applied locations. Examples of types of treatments include procedure changes, target hardening measures, landscape management, lighting, and ownership. The table below illustrates the significant cost reductions that were achieved in 2006 with the help of this security plans:
+The Department of Education and Training in Western Australia initiated in 1999 a successful security risk management programme helping school principals to evaluate existing security measures and determine cost-effective levels of security to meet the risks faced by their schools <ref name="OECD 2007">[http://www.oecd.org/education/country-studies/centreforeffectivelearningenvironmentscele/38162484.pdf OECD (2007): School Security Assessment Programme in Australia. PEB Echange 2007/3 ISSN 1609-7548]</ref>. Part of this assessment was the draft of a treatment plan for which the principal provided a description of the school plan, including costs of individual security measures and the applied locations. Examples of types of treatments include procedure changes, target hardening measures, landscape management, lighting, and ownership. The table below illustrates the significant cost reductions that were achieved in 2006 with the help of this security plans:
 '''Table: Cost of crime and number of offences prior and after the implementation of the security plan'''
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 |-
 |}
-Source: OECD (2007)<ref>Ibid.</ref> Note: The increase in crime at School E is attributed to the theft of computers, an isolated occurrence due to a lack of security in the computer room.
+Source: OECD (2007)<ref name="OECD 2007"></ref> Note: The increase in crime at School E is attributed to the theft of computers, an isolated occurrence due to a lack of security in the computer room.
 === Mobility ===

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 * [[Security issue: Vandalism| Vandalism]] and [[Security issue: Graffiti| Graffiti]] are strongly correlated with the presence of young people. Graffiti offenders are typically young and male<ref>[http://www.popcenter.org/problems/graffiti/ Lamm Weisel Deborah, Graffiti, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, Guide No. 9]</ref> and thus likely to be found around schools. Vandalism and break-inns are most common among junior high school studens, and become less frequent as students reach high school<ref>[http://www.popcenter.org/problems/vandalism/ Dedel Johnson Kelly, School Vandalism and Break-Ins, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police, Guide No. 35, August 2005]</ref>.
-The extent to which the venues are vulnerable depend on the nature of the educational facility and the measures in place to prevent security issues arising. Elements in the nature of the event that determine its vulnerability for these security issues, are
+The extent to which the venues are vulnerable depend on the nature of the educational facility and the measures in place to prevent security issues from arising. Elements increasing the likelihood of these security issues to happen and contributing to the vulnerability of educational facilities are:
 * the occurence of [[crowd]]s
 * the level of excitement in or from school activities

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 The mobility associated with the different education facilities will vary significantly depending on the type of facility (and the specific age group that it is intended to serve), its location, the availability of public transportation modes and the student population.
-Primary schools need good [[Accessibility|accessibility]] and parking options for cars, since primary school children are often brought to school by car. Older children at primary schools and secundary schools usually go to school by bicycle or public transport ([[Modes of transport#Bus|bus]]). This also differs per country. While in the Netherlands, most children live close by school and go to school walking or cycling, in other (less densily populated) countries, children are often brought to school with dedicated school buses.
+Primary schools need good [[Accessibility|accessibility]] and parking options for cars, since primary school children are often brought to school by car. Older children at primary schools and secundary schools usually go to school by bicycle or public transport ([[Modes of transport#Bus|bus]]). This also differs per country. While in the Netherlands, most children live close by school and go to school walking or cycling, in other (less densily populated) countries, children are often brought to school with school buses.
 === Safety ===

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 The primary economic function of education facilities is in the education of children and students to the optimum level, allowing them to become valuable and productive members of the workforce. Because of the personal benefits, education links heavily with economic growth due to the increasing global demand for highly skilled labour. Moreover, educational infrastructure creates jobs and income for not only its staff, but also for employees of supplying organisations (i.e. [[Economic impact|economic impact]]).
-The [[Economic impact of security threats|economic impact of security threats]] is primarily crime and vandalism related (e.g. anti-social behaviour, child abduction). Crime and vandalism generate costs in anticipation of crime (e.g. locks, surveillance, etc.), as a consequence of crime (loss of/damage to property), and in response to crime (police investigation, legal system, etc.). In addition to this,[[Economic effects of anti-crime security measures|security measures impose economic impact]], but they also can have positive financial effects (see the case example below).
+The [[Economic impact of security threats|economic impact of security threats]] are primarily crime and vandalism related (e.g. anti-social behaviour, child abduction). Crime and vandalism generate costs in anticipation of crime (e.g. locks, surveillance, etc.), as a consequence of crime (loss of/damage to property), and in response to crime (police investigation, legal system, etc.). In addition to this,[[Economic effects of anti-crime security measures|security measures impose economic impact]], but they also can have positive financial effects (see the case example below).
 ''Case example: Cost-effective security programmes for schools''

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 == Functions ==
 === Social ===
-The key social functions of education facilities is in the education for children and students, as well as in the provision of employment to teachers and staff within the facilities themselves. Vulnerability assessment and resilience enhancement for this type of infrastructure should consider that citizens' perception of risk and need to protect may be disproportionately increased because children are involved, and involvement of children is a factor generally found to increase [[Risk_perception_mechanisms|perception of risk]]. This should be considered in urban planning, and risk/vulnerability assessment methods applied should include [[citizen participation]]-based methods in order to address [[Public_services_and_facilities#Social|social aspects of built infrastructure dedicated to public services and facilities]].
+The key social functions of education facilities is in the education for children and students, as well as in the provision of employment to teachers and staff within the facilities themselves. Vulnerability assessment and resilience enhancement for this type of infrastructure should consider that citizens' perception of risk and need to protect may be disproportionately increased because children are involved. Involvement of children is a factor generally found to increase [[Risk_perception_mechanisms|perception of risk]]. This should be considered in urban planning, and risk/vulnerability assessment methods applied should include [[citizen participation]]-based methods in order to address [[Public_services_and_facilities#Social|social aspects of built infrastructure dedicated to public services and facilities]].
 === Economic ===

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 == Description ==
-The education system is a fundamental foundation stone of social and economic development. The availability of good quality and life-long education is essential in facilitating the emergence of a knowledge-driven and innovative society and economy<ref>Irish Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (2008) The Provision of Schools and the Planning System: A Code of Practice. Available at: http://www.education.ie/en/School-Design/Design-Guidance/pbu_prov_schools_and_planning_sys_COP.pdf. Accessed on 11 March 2013.</ref>. It is important within urbam planning that due regard is given to the education system, that it continues to develop and improve on its standards of educational attainment and that it continues to meet the new challenges of society’s fast growing and more diverse needs.<br />
+The educational system is a fundamental pillar of social and economic development. The availability of good quality and life-long education is essential in facilitating the emergence of a knowledge-driven and innovative society and economy<ref>Irish Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (2008) The Provision of Schools and the Planning System: A Code of Practice. Available at: http://www.education.ie/en/School-Design/Design-Guidance/pbu_prov_schools_and_planning_sys_COP.pdf. Accessed on 11 March 2013.</ref>. It is important within urbam planning that due regard is given to the education system, that it continues to develop and improve on its standards of educational attainment and that it continues to meet the new challenges of society’s fast growing and more diverse needs.<br />
 Education facilities can be located within a wide variety of urban contexts, depending upon the stage/level of education which they provide; primary and secondary level schools are generally located within easy reach of large residential populations, while universities are often located centrally within an urban area, or close to well connected transportation interchanges, allowing them to serve a wider population, and making them more attractive to students, graduates and employees alike.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 10 July 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Urban object]]		[[Category:Urban object]]

	[[File:Education.jpg\|right\|200x200px\|link=]]'''Educational facilities''' are [[~~Public~~ services and facilities]] which include primary, secondary and third level educational facilities and institutions.		[[File:Education.jpg\|right\|200x200px\|link=]]'''Educational facilities''' are [[public services and facilities]] which include primary, secondary and third level educational facilities and institutions.