Comparing Interaction and Use of Space in Traditional and Innovative Classrooms

Abstract

Despite myriad changes to language teaching methods over time, university-level classroom spaces have largely remained the same-until now. Recent innovations in classroom space design center on technological advances, include movable furniture and coffee-shop style rooms, and are believed to facilitate language learning in several ways. Specifically, compared to traditional classrooms, innovative spaces are designed in hopes of decreasing pre-task set-up, increasing student-centered interaction, and facilitating collaborative work with multiple partners-features believed to be important for classroom learning. However, whether or not these features are present in these innovative spaces, or more so than in traditional classrooms, has yet to be tested empirically. This study set out to compare student interaction and the use of space in traditional and innovative classrooms, examining the presence of the aforementioned features. Data collected from university Spanish language and linguistic courses demonstrate that while some differences in use of space and interaction were observed when lessons in traditional and innovative classrooms were compared, notable differences were only present when the instructor was teaching all sections of a course in an innovative classroom and had adapted his/her lesson plans accordingly. Implications for language teaching, instructed language acquisition, and classroom space design are discussed.Keywords: instructed SLA/ enseñanza de segundas lenguas en contextos formales; language learning context/ contexto de aprendizaje de lenguas; classroom language learning/ aprendizaje de lenguas en el salón de clase; classroom space design/ diseño del espacio de instrucción; teaching with technology/ enseñar con tecnología <sh1>Introduction While language teaching methods and approaches have changed over time, often in relation to research findings in second language acquisition (SLA), the physical university-level classroom spaces in which language teaching and learning occur have largely remained the same. Recently, classroom space design has entered into the conversation of how to maximize language-learning opportunities, and universities are adding classrooms designed around technology and with nontraditional organization.Much like other technology-focused initiatives in language learning (e.g., computerbased interactive tasks and hybrid courses), these newer classrooms are believed to promote student-centered learning and to capitalize on student preferences and modern lifestyles (360steelcase 2010a). However, unlike research on other technology-focused initiatives like computer-assisted language learning, which has compared student interaction in computermediated and face-to-face environments extensively (e.g., Blake 2013), when it comes to classroom design, little research exists that compares the use of these newly implemented, innovative classrooms with traditional classrooms.Although it is assumed that these innovative spaces will enhance learning opportunities in a variety of ways...

Learning Spaces Matter: Student Engagement in New Learning Environments

“…While learning is dependent upon the students' engagement in the learning process, student engagement is contingent upon the design of instruction; the physical space can improve student learning beyond the student's abilities measured by standardized tests; the design of learning spaces is thereby crucial (Brooks, 2011). Classrooms are believed to promote student-centered learning and to capitalize on student preferences and modern lifestyles (Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015). Truly innovative spaces will enhance learning opportunities in a variety of ways by decreasing pre-task setup, facilitating student-centered lessons, equalizing participation, and allowing students to work with more classmates than they would in traditional classrooms (Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015).…”

“…Classrooms are believed to promote student-centered learning and to capitalize on student preferences and modern lifestyles (Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015). Truly innovative spaces will enhance learning opportunities in a variety of ways by decreasing pre-task setup, facilitating student-centered lessons, equalizing participation, and allowing students to work with more classmates than they would in traditional classrooms (Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015). However, the reality is that unless teachers and instructors utilize a pedagogy that is functional with the intended use of the space, any design change based on learning will be irrelevant (Bouslama & Kalota, 2013;Dittoe, 2002).…”

Telepresence Robots in the Classroom

“…Pattern coding is a way to "identify an emergent theme, configuration, or explanation" (Saldaña, 2009, p. 236) from the initial codes. This process of identifying descriptive codes and classifying them in broad themes was appropriate for gaining an initial encourage both students and instructors to move around in the room when engaged in collaborative tasks (Brooks, 2012;Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015), and social learning spaces can influence student engagement (Matthews et al, 2011). Continuing research on learning spaces can benefit from considering how physical space can facilitate the learning of both in-class students and telepresence robot users functioning as autonomous agents in the shared space.…”

“…However, both telepresence robot users and physically present students are affected by the physical space in the classroom. Research on the configuration of furniture in the classroom has shown that classrooms designed with group work in mind can encourage both students and instructors to move around in the room when engaged in collaborative tasks (Brooks, 2012; Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015), and social learning spaces can influence student engagement (Matthews et al, 2011). Continuing research on learning spaces can benefit from considering how physical space can facilitate the learning of both in-class students and telepresence robot users functioning as autonomous agents in the shared space.…”

“…The physical space of a classroom can affect the learning process by, for example, encouraging students and instructors to move around in the room when engaged in collaborative tasks (Brooks, 2012; Gurzynski-Weiss et al, 2015). While remotely located students connecting to their classrooms through videoconferencing may be excluded from this physical engagement, or be dependent on others (e.g., relying on a classmate to move the device on which they are connecting), a telepresence robot allows remote students to move independently in the shared learning space.…”