Innovation in learning spaces alicia regodon

Schooling is not always about reading, writing and arithmetic.

Discuss how learning spaces are an important part of schooling?

Introduction "People like to keep certain distances between themselves and other people or things. And this invisible bubble of space that constitutes each person´s bubble or territory is one of the key dimensions of modern society." (Hall, 1966) Why is space, that fluid interface that coexists in between human beings, so important? It gives a sense of scale, distance and position of each other, more important, it shapes how we interact by collaborating with, for example, cultural background to define, “power relations” (Malen 1994), interactions among the human beings. Education is not only about the knowledge exchange generated among human beings, space also plays an important role in the learning philosophy (Johnson 2015) in the way it aids to define the learning ecosystem (Hannon et al 2011).

The aim of the essay is not to settle the rules towards the perfect learning space. The classroom, conceived as a social system (Durkheim 1938) may not serve to reproduce the wider society´s inequalities (Darvin, Norton 2014). Developing Freire´s conception of space as a tool with the purpose of revolutionary learning, the goal is to develop what features can define positive learning spaces, to embrace different understandings of learning and prove that constraints in learning philosophy are supported by a rigid arrangement of space and its use.

The complexity of contemporary society does not support anymore the “deculturalized” plain and rigid classrooms (Freire 2000) alienated from their cultural background and sense of identity (Milligan 2003). Transmission of cultural values by the institutions is a sensitive issue that coexists with the growth of the digital era in all social dimensions (Hannon et al 2011). The essay will discuss the role of space within the new educational paradigm, regarding education as directly interacting with development, literacy is considered one of the millennium development goals (McCormick 2014), and contemplating innovation as a result of this revolutionary movement at an educational system level.

Key words

School, education, culture, learning ecosystem, engagement, identity, inclusion, creativity.

Schooling, perception and learning space design.

“The classroom is the most visible symbol of an educational philosophy”. (Johnson 2015) Since the beginning of the 20th century educating people has been an effort not only for the referred to as “developed countries” but extended worldwide, it also opened the discussion between different educational philosophies. The traditional classroom, designed as a series of parallel lines facing the teacher, who is regarded as the unidirectional source of knowledge, was designed after Henry’s Ford success in factory chain production methods. (Prakash et al 2005). A new progressive movement headed by Dewey pursued a more student-centred education looking forward to more autonomous and capable citizens.

“Banking education” (Freire 2000) is related to Henry Ford´s static arrangement, the learning process is unidirectional and the students are objects of assistance, immobilising them and imposing cultural values, morality and capabilities to become alienated members of society.

“Problem-posing education” (Freire 2000) as an alternative is expected to develop critical thinkers, promoting creativity and capability in human beings (Sen 1999), is the revolutionary future and instead of a static situation as “banking” relies on a process of continuous transformation where flexibility is a must.

Besides the bad reviews of banking education and Henry Ford´s classroom arrangement, the self-contained classroom is also not enough to facilitate 21st- century learning (Ertmer 2005).

Learning is bursting through the constraints of the classroom as space and as a philosophy.

Technology is supporting that theory by making knowledge available far beyond the traditional time and space constraints and leading towards a new learning ecosystem where the school is not always the only possibility.

After setting the boundaries of the new educational paradigm, we will define the features towards a new education paradigm, based on the problem-posing education defined by Freire and how space, regarded as a tool to enable education, should be defined. Through extensive research, we have defined three characteristics that are agreed to be considered essential when defining education: Engagement, identity and inclusion (Freire 2000; Hannon et al 2011; Nasair et al 2006). We will connect them with three principles to measure how is space is designed: Stimulation, Scale (Individualisation) and Naturalness. Developed by the SCRI’s, Senses, Brain and Spaces (SCRI 2002), a project of research that considers spatial configurations to have a significant impact on students´ academic outcome and ability.

The first feature is engagement and its relation to stimulation. Getting and maintaining engagement is a crucial step in order to achieve a durable; purposeful and passion led learning outcome (McClenney 2007), lack of interest is related to the loss of meaning in education (Hannon et al 2011) and literacy is considered to be the transmission of meaning that, through the appropriate level of stimulation in students, can lead to a better outcome (Blackmore et al 1999). Design for stimulation (Nasir et al 2006) is directly related to serendipitous design

(Miller 2008), avoiding the established classroom and conventions as sociological rules of behaviour for students and teachers, looking for new spaces that generate a link between the individuals and the socio-political context, lead to a space in continuous transformation where students are meaningful and therefore become more engaged as members of the process.

Knowledge emerges only through invention and reinvention (Freire 2000).

Far from a motionless reality as regarded by Freire, stimulation and engagement have to be thought in every specific moment and context. We have already surpassed the necessity of school as containers of learning, space is only the “finished beginning” to start thinking about education. The awareness of transformation as a creative process and as a cooperative understanding looks forward to achieving engagement in the learning ecosystem, including students, teachers and new conceptions of knowledge exchange, are essential to understanding the importance of innovative design (Blackmore et al 1999).

Achieving the appropriate level of stimulation involves different parameters depending on the cases and outcome desired. Problem-posing education defines the content and identified users cannot be defined as a single term, sensorial features such as attention, perception or even silent curriculum, when designed thoroughly, will increase engagement (Parsons and Taylor 2011). As a result, in broad terms, different spaces could suit the needs of specific learning groups in a specific moment, varying from small-group classrooms, houses, assembly areas or even excursions. The holistic nature of design solutions has to be openly considered when regarding engagement.

The second feature is identity and it is linked with the perception of scale and individualisation.

Every brain is uniquely organised and every human being perceives the world in its own way and acts accordingly (Barret, Zhang 2009). When the target is to identify with every individual, flexibility and choice are essential for success.

The one-size-fits-all approach to education is no longer the objective of education, how, what and even when to learn is a new concern. Technology and relativity of the learning perspective have to work with an individualised sense of learning, it is not about losing the human side of teaching by substituting it with the open media network available anytime anyhow, but about profiting the advantages of both to achieve a richer spectrum of capacities and typologies of learning in order to reach a wider spectrum individuals involved and engaged. Learning relies continuously on the process of reconciliation (Freire 2000), and has to be constantly updated to the context of the time, the individual perspective and the society.

This leads us to the third feature, inclusion and its relation to naturalness. As Juan Downey, Chilean architect and artist mention once, “teach me the way you live to be able to see the world through your understanding”. It is as important to be aware of the cultural and sociopolitical context of every educational background and to be able to deal with the complex and contemporary situations of migrant casuistic, transnational situations will also shape new and unique learning ecosystems. Education has to prevent marginalisation, such as material poverty, lack of access and mitigate tensions in school (Milligan 2003).

Humans have basic requirements, such as the basic need for natural light, fresh air or safety.

The perception of these characteristics in space makes us feel comfortable and reliable and promote participation, have an intuitively good response to it. Finding those characteristics or creating them through the design of spaces will help to provide a positive learning ecosystems.

On the other side, generating constraints will make all individuals or certain people uncomfortable and will transmit the feeling of psychological or sociological issues associated with space, such as status, inequality, control or social segregation (Vischer 2005).

There is no perfect neither unique design for learning space, but providing a variety of different spaces or a flexible space (Barret, Zhang 2009), will help to find in each moment the most suitable place to engage and make the different identities, included and in a positive ecosystem essential for learning. Non-traditional, in the sense of new typologies of learning spaces, encourage students to participate and acquire knowledge for themselves (Barret, Zhang 2009).

As a whole, the challenge of achieving a positive learning experience is directly related to the philosophy pursued and the success of using the space as a tool to meet the different features described.

21rst Century is the era of globalisation, communication and new technology. It is a time of innovation when the learning paradigm is being redefined and new ways of learning are being considered and accordingly new learning spaces. The importance of maintaining the mind open to new perspectives stablishes a unique opportunity towards developing new learning ecosystems, more inclusive and seeking identity and engagement, using space as the proper tool to achieve these objectives.

Examples of alternative learning

The “Subiendo al Sur” program of educational routes. The program consists of a group of young people who design a route along traditional villages and learn with them in their specific contexts and from their schools and traditions, with exchange as a method. Education is understood as learning through exchange, surpassing the static and isolated boundaries of a classroom, the participants instead, go outside in the search of knowledge, experience to learn with and from other communities. There is no classroom or fixed space or expected curriculum to learn. The “classroom” or learning space is the journey in itself, the different stops in the villages and the paths that link them as if it were a roadmap.

In this itinerant learning ecosystem, engagement is generated by reciprocal transmission between the travellers and the communities of reception, the identity in the learning experience is perpetuated by the open experience where each individual chooses how much to share and therefore the level of implication and exposure, so everybody feels comfortable with the process. Finally, is an inclusive experience in the sense that participants become aware of the different backgrounds and situations of each other, a new sense of community is generated, through diversity. Every experience on the journey is different from the previous and unique. The learning process departs from the idea of transformation and continuous

change, achieving very different outcomes. understand this philosophy.

Creativity and innovation are essential to

" We are all visitors to this time, this place. We are just passing through. Our purpose here is to observe, to learn, to grow, to love... and then we return home. " Australian Aboriginal Proverb The Cultural Centre of Uluru as a learning ecosystem is also a unique experience. The Anandale people of Uluru consider the scale of knowledge starting from an individual perspective and scaling to the community knowledge, making reference to the identity feature, it is unique to every person. The Cultural Centre pursues this feature and it is designed so everybody can enjoy it alone, without the need of a guide, or teacher, that could influence your acquisition of ideas, later on, you can decide what interests you the most and keep that knowledge to yourself and share it or use it to cohabit with others.

The consequent space is an easy route through the history, common knowledge and traditions of the Anandale people. The other two features are a consequence to the first one. As the participants are free to choose what experience to learn, the engagement will be satisfactory for both sides and as the route is open, it is the spectator who decides the rhythm speed and starts and finish point. The Cultural Centre has been developed by a collaborative team of members from different cultures backgrounds and in a scenery of mutual respect and inclusion, it shapes an uncommon and positive learning ecosystem for the different visitors.

Conclusion Education has to generate an open, global, diverse and non-static ecosystem. Space is considered to be a tool to enable the three features highlighted to promote a positive learning ecosystem based on Freire´s definition of problem posing philosophy of education. As a result, creativity and innovation are a key towards this achievement and the “classroom” or learning space, regarded as a social system, has to act consequently to avoid reproducing the outer world mistakes of inequality, alienation and segregation. Development in education is regarded as a way to provide, capabilities, welfare and choice among the learning system.

This open perception of innovation to create a broader variety of learning ecosystems in the new and global learning paradigm is a reason to suggest the challenge of including the socalled “developing countries”, they share common goals, engagement, identity and inclusion and offers a possibility to be included in the paradigm, when education systems are considered to be in a process of continuous evolution and every day more transmission among cultures.

The disposal of the traditional classroom generates a constraint in the system. Traditional constraints pursue the acquisition of certain social values. We cannot conclude that there is a perfect space for learning, but we can determine that constraint restricts creativity. Flexibility, as a solution in the design of space, reduces standards that generate roles and power relations of behaviour and interaction between individuals.

“The fluidity, diversity and dynamism of learning eco-systems are now manifest. The promise for accelerated innovation is great. Equally the challenges – for equity, for democratic process and for leadership – are considerable. Meeting them will require different mindsets – but the potential prize is great.” (Hannon et al 2011).

References

Arch Daily (2016). Cultural frictions: towards a transfer of traditional architectures into contemporary production. Arch Daily. (original text in Spanish). http://www.plataformaarquitectura.cl/cl/792642/fricciones-culturales-hacia-una-transferencia-de-lasarquitecturas-tradicionales-a-la-produccion-contemporanea?ad_medium=widget&ad_name=navigationprev

Barrett, P ; Zhang Y, 2009. Optimal Learning Spaces. Design Implications for Primary Schools.

Blackmore J et al (1999). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes. State of Victoria (Department of Education and Early Childhood Development).

Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2014). Social class, identity, and migrant students. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 13(2), 111-117.

Durkheim, E. (1938). The Rules of Sociological Method. Trans. Sarah A. Soloray and John H. Mueller. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press.

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration?. Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25-39.

Fielding, R.; Nair, P, 2005. The Language of School Design: Design Patterns for 21st Century Schools. Minneapolis: The National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities and The KnowledgeWorks Foundation.

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Hall, E, T. 1966. Hall, The hidden dimension. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication.

Hannon, V., Patton, A., & Temperley, J. (2011). Developing an innovation ecosystem for education. Innovation Unit, London.

Johnson, C, 2015. https://www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?articleid=576 McClenney, K. M. (2007). Research update: The community college survey of student engagement. Community College Review, 35(2), 137-146.

Miller, H, 2008. Rethinking the Classroom. Solution Essay. http://www.hermanmiller.com/research/solution-essays/rethinking-the-classroom.html

Malen, B. (1994). 9. The micropolitics of education: mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school polities. Journal of Education Policy, 9(5), 147-167.

McCormick, A. (2014). Who are the custodians of Pacific 'post-2015' education futures? Policy discourses, education for all and the millennium development goals. International Journal of Educational Development, 39, 173-182.

Milligan, J. A. (2003). Teaching between the cross and the crescent moon: Islamic identity, postcoloniality, and public education in the Southern Philippines. Comparative Education Review, 47(4), 468-492.

Nasir, N. I. S., Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Lee, C. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 489-504.

OECD, 2006. 21stC Learning Environments Paris. Innovative Learning Environments Research Project Paris. http://www.oecd.org/edu/innovation-education/centreforeffectivelearningenvironmentscele/

Parsons, J, Taylor, L. (2011). Improving student engagement. Current issues in education, 14(1).

Prakash, N., & Fielding, R. (2008). The language of school design: Design patterns for 21st century schools. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2).

Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. OUP Catalogue.

SCRI 2002. Research Report. Salford Centre for Research and Innovation in the built and human environment (SCRI).

Vischer, J.C. (2005) Space meets status: Designing workplace performance, New York, Routledge.

Case Studies

Subiendo al Sur. http://www.subiendoalsur.com/ Cultural Centre of Uluru, http://parksaustralia.gov.au/uluru/