Search results

Designing learning environments is increasingly about mediating between the interactions in real and virtual space of largely self-organising learning communities. Traditional ways of briefing designers are less and less proficient, as the demands made on space become less timetabled, more probabilistic. ‘learning landscapes’ ¹ are proposed in which clusters of activity can be seen to be taking place across a field, that activity can be browsed, audited and fully engaged with. Such organic flows of interest and concentration are hindered by traditional demarcated space models, and attempts to enable the flows through ‘flexible’ interlinking of rooms fail.

There is evidence ² that the organic interactions between learners grow exponentially when these learners are connected together as virtual communities in open, robust virtual platforms. But this works best when these interactions are grounded from time to time in real places. How can designers best provide spaces that support learning in real and virtual space? Should design teams be composed of people with skills in devising real and virtual space?

Increasingly the answer is ‘yes’, and this places strains on procurement processes. Built form can take a long time to deliver. So can virtual platforms take time to devise and make operable. Can these processes be aligned? The concepts for RMIT’s Design Hub, a physical design research platform, were developed through research conducted twelve years before the building was completed. Many of the gap years were taken up with establishing the financial basis for constructing the Hub. During this time the concepts were validated by testing with various potential user groups, and a further tranche of international investigations validated the level of innovation being sought. The process for RMIT’s Swanston Academic Building (SAB) was smoother and shorter, but it involved a year in which a ‘learning landscape’ concept was moulded through intensive work with user client focus groups.

Neither of these projects has a virtual doppelganger, though both have sophisticated and evolvable IT systems. The Hub embeds a process of curating research interaction and dissemination that is hampered by this fact. The mediated learning landscape of the SAB falls short of the originating concepts, – because space constraints did not allow for an undivided, flowing landscape. A well designed virtual counterpart could have provided what the insertion of walls has obscured. Should all future innovative learning and researching environments have a virtual counterpart from the outset?

There is an emerging trend for such paired environments in creative city thinking and in museums. Surely briefing and procuring real and virtual environments in tandem will enliven future space use in universities?

This chapter looks to the future of research in next generation learning spaces. It begins with a review of the literature and concludes with the implications for future research. The review demonstrates that most ‘next generation learning space’ research has focused on the design and evaluation of spaces. We know that students like the spaces, but we don’t know if the spaces alone are effective in improving student learning or if the spaces in combination with changed pedagogic practices and/or curriculum design improve learning. There are many opportunities for researchers to provide much needed evidence to institutions on the interrelationships between next generation learning spaces design, teaching practices, curriculum design and learning outcomes.

The professional discourse on academic library planning and design is examined. A critical realist philosophical stance and a constructionist perspective constitute the theoretical framework that, paired with Fairclough's methodology for critical discourse analysis, is used to examine the constitution of interpretative repertoires and of a discourse constructing the academic library as a learning place. The information commons, learning commons, and library designed for learning repertoires are described and the effects of discursive activity are analyzed. Three types of effects are presented: (1) the production by the LIS community of discourse on academic libraries of a sizable body of literature on the information commons and on the learning commons, (2) the construction of new types of libraries on the commons model proposed by Beagle, and (3) the metaphorization of the library as business. The study concludes that the existing discourse takes a facilities management perspective dominated by concerns with technology, equipment, and space requirements that does not address the physical, psychological, and environmental qualities of library space design. Consequently, it is suggested that architectural programming techniques should be used in library planning and design that consider the architectural features and environmental design factors contributing to the making of a place where learning is facilitated.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on connecting recent conceptualizations of learning space design in management education by examining interior building and classroom design.

This study used mixed methods research: external benchmarking with same industry institutions (n=5) and two surveys of students (n=131) and faculty members (n=38).

The process helped to envision how a business school could improve by adapting design aspects from industry peers, understanding the needs of students and faculty, and incorporating new teaching methods and instructional technologies to inform learning space solutions.

The small number of external benchmarking partners may make the findings more applicable to the institutional type examined. Yet, the findings and the mixed methods research have implications for learning space design more broadly.

With the business school building boom, the external architecture of new buildings appears to garner much of the attention. However, the researchers believe that the real impact of new business schools is the centrality of interior learning space design and technology.

This paper uses a mixed methods research approach to examine learning space theory and research in relation to a particular business school’s efforts to use this knowledge to design learning spaces in a new building.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a framework to guide learning and teaching practice in next generation learning spaces. The framework is informed by both learning and teaching theory and the current context of the sector. The framework provides guidance to those who teach in next generation learning spaces and is illustrated with examples of effective pedagogic practices that use the affordances of spaces while avoiding their limitations. The chapter discusses the tension between next generation learning space design and use. Design is influenced by drivers ranging from a need to accommodate ever-larger student numbers and responding to digital technologies and other developments in educational media, to providing for new approaches to learning. Use is determined by understandings of the teaching task, which can range from presentation by a teacher through to students working individually or in groups to generate meaningful knowledge, useful skills and professional values. In this chapter we identify drivers underpinning the creation and design of next generation learning spaces in universities today and associated expectations of the ways in which the spaces will be used. We reflect on understandings of sound pedagogic practice and work through to implications for learning and teaching in NGLS. In some cases advocated pedagogic practice asks teaching staff to make the most of spaces designed to allow students to engage constructively in their learning. In other cases it involves teaching constructively in spite of the design of the space.

Many universities are currently investing significant sums of money into refurbishing existing learning spaces and/or building further infrastructure (including Next Generation Learning Spaces (NGLS)) to support learning and teaching in the face-to-face context. While this is usually welcome by staff and students, there is often a concern that designs are not informed by input from appropriate stakeholders.

This chapter brings together information from a range of sources to provide practical ideas and advice on designing robust, whole-of-lifecycle evaluations for learning space projects. By incorporating pre- and post-occupancy stages, involving a wide array of stakeholders and looking beyond surveys and focus groups as evaluation techniques, universities can ensure that future designs take into consideration the experiences and context of staff and students at the institution as well as lessons learned from previous projects.

This paper aims to describe the immersive atelier model (IAM), a pedagogical model for remote inter-university studios that promotes quality education. The IAM uses multi-user virtual environments (MUVEs) in two atelier types: A predefined MUVE and a student-shaped one. The study questions how the IAM, using MUVEs, meets the needs of remote inter-university studios. The research explores how MUVE types are used and experienced by students.

Forty-six students that participated in a remote studio course involving three universities were monitored through observations and a post-course questionnaire, responded to by twenty-five students.

Findings provide insights into the learners’ experience and a rich description of the teaching and learning acts that emerged while using the MUVEs types. Student-shaped MUVEs were found particularly supportive of acts associated with indirect learning and conceptualization. The study identifies subtypes of student-shaped MUVEs that support these desired educational acts.

Findings provide encouraging insights for expanding the traditional atelier beyond its physical constraints and supporting sustainable quality education in remote inter-university studios.

The IAM can assist tutors in designing future virtual design studios to achieve diverse knowledge and learning progress.

This paper fulfills an identified need to update the atelier pedagogical model to support sustainable quality education in remote inter-university studios. Based on the affordances of MUVEs, the IAM expands the traditional atelier with types of virtual ateliers to support the learners’ sense of belongingness and engagement.

Innovatively, the IAM simultaneously uses MUVEs as educational and design spaces that enhance learning.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a novel approach, underpinned by systems thinking, to structure requirements and support front-end design decision-making around the performance in-use of developments within highly complex environments, with diverse stakeholders and users, such as the case of learning spaces in higher education (HE).

Work domain analysis (WDA), a sociotechnical systems design framework, is first used to model the constraints that shape the expected performance of an informal learning space (ILS). Based on the model, the following stage involved a sector-wide survey questionnaire (n = 175) to appraise the views of different stakeholder groups in relation to ILS. These were analysed using the analytical network process (ANP).

This study provides a novel approach, using WDA, to conceptualise the constraints shaping the performance in-use, integrating the perspectives of different stakeholder groups. Furthermore, it provides a structured approach to establish priorities that can serve as the basis to support complex decision-making during early design stages. The findings and proposed WDA–ANP approach aim to support HE estate managers on better understanding and integrating perspectives in relation to campus developments.

In this paper, a novel systems-based approach is proposed as an alternative to conceptualise ILS. Furthermore, the approach is combined with ANP, a multi-criteria decision-making approach, to develop a novel tool to derive priorities and support front-end design decision-making in learning space design.

This chapter discusses the Learning Theater, a flexible library space that permits substantial patron involvement in designing dynamic environments to meet diverse learning goals.

We use a case study method to describe and discuss the Learning Theater.

We found that many challenges associated with designing and building a radically different library space to support patron learning goals can be resolved by eliciting patron input in all phases of the process.

We offer three lessons for other libraries intent on developing dramatically new kinds of library spaces: engage the community of users early and throughout, new spaces require robust communications to convey the possible set of uses to the community, and a flexible infrastructure and a responsive staff are key to meeting demands for unanticipated uses.

Our experience in developing the Learning Theater as part of the library education program suggests that libraries can share greater control of new flexible facilities and partner in the creation of intellectual properties to make best use of those facilities in more powerful ways than has typically been done in the past.