Framing learning entanglement in innovative learning spaces: Connecting theory, design and practice

Abstract

Innovative learning spaces have emerged in response to the influx of educational technologies and new social practices associated with twenty-first-century learning. Whilst dominant narratives of change often suggest that alterations in the designed environment for learning will result in changed practice, on the ground educators are struggling to align their pedagogical models with new spaces for learning, direct instruction is still common, and technologically deterministic narratives mask a failure to engage with the materiality of learning. This article argues for a non-deterministic theory of things in educational research and calls for a deeper understanding of the flows of matter, information and human-thing dependence, which will render visible the heterogeneous entanglements characteristic of innovative spaces for learning. It highlights that educational designers (e.g. teachers, space planners, architects, instructional designers) are in pressing need of analytical tools capable of supporting their work in ways that promote correspondence between (a) pedagogy, place and people and (b) theory, design and practice. In response, we introduce an analytical approach to framing learning entanglement that accounts for the artefacts, resources and tools available to learners; the choice of tasks and pedagogical models and the social roles and divisions of labour governing any given learning situation. Finally, we practically demonstrate how this approach aids in identifying correspondence or dissonance across dimensions of design and scale levels, in both the analysis and design of complex environments for learning. century competencies and skills' (Scott, 2015, p. 1), direct instruction, inauthentic assessment and rote learning are still common across many contexts, although these practices are not specific to particular sectors or subject areas. For example, in universities, lectures are still common in the early stages of undergraduate courses, and in schools some subject areas are more likely than others to adopt project-based or inquiry-based approaches. What is more, deterministic accounts of tools and spaces for learning tend to focus on identifying generic and decontextualised properties of tools or spaces, without considering the qualities of the objects themselves, and how these, in turn, may influence people, their values and purposeful action.In this article, we argue that those involved in educational design (e.g. teachers, space planners, architects, instructional designers) need analytical tools capable of increasing the correspondence between (a) pedagogy, place and people and (b) theory, design and practice. When we speak of correspondence, we draw on the work of Tim Ingold (2013), who contrasts interaction with correspondence, which he illustrates with a simple sketch: two fixed points with an arrow between them-representing interactionand two lines issuing from each of these points that flex in response to movement in the other-representing correspondence. Understanding how we use this term i...

‘The best guess for the future?’ Teachers’ adaptation to open and flexible learning environments in Finland

“…Previous research has found that adaptation has been demanding for teachers (e.g. Saltmarsh, Chapman, Campbell, & Drew, 2015;Szczesiul & Huizenga, 2014), and regardless of changes in the physical learning environments, teachers had continued to use the same pedagogical practices they used in traditional schools (Carvalho & Yeoman, 2018;Cooper, 1981;Sigurðardóttir & Hjartarson, 2016;Woolner et al, 2012. ) In addition, teachers' adaptation to the new spaces has been characterised as being strongly affected by institutional memory and routines, and there have been difficulties in creating a coherent pedagogy for open learning environments (Deed & Lesko, 2013).…”

Moving from pedagogical challenge to ergonomic challenge: Translating epistemology into the built environment for learning

“…Having failed to adequately theorise the analogue, it is not surprising that increasingly complex technologies have amplified the problems associated with untheorised tools and missing methods (Sørensen, 2009). People who are practically involved in educational infrastructure redevelopment are in need of methods and tools to map the effects of change in one aspect of a design as it relates to the totality of the design, and to trace the fine-grained shifts in practice resulting from such changes, especially since these play out moment by moment at the micro scale and their longer term effects may take years to register at the macro scale (Carvalho & Yeoman, 2018;Yeoman, 2017). As things stand, all we (researchers) have to offer those engaged in educational infrastructure redevelopment is that, beyond meeting basic human requirementsto stay warm and dry, to see or be seen, to hear and be heard -it is difficult to provide action-oriented knowledge about how the designed environment shapes valued knowledge-oriented activity.…”

Simulation: A complex pedagogical space

“…But does investment in infrastructure alone assure learning? We suggest that it is also necessary to understand how these material spaces work together with human activities (including pedagogy) to bring about learning (Carvalho & Yeoman, 2018). Like Carvalho and Yeoman (2018) and van Merriënboer, McKenney, Cullunan, and Heuer (2017), we agree that learning can be enhanced through the alignment of pedagogy and space.…”

“…We suggest that it is also necessary to understand how these material spaces work together with human activities (including pedagogy) to bring about learning (Carvalho & Yeoman, 2018). Like Carvalho and Yeoman (2018) and van Merriënboer, McKenney, Cullunan, and Heuer (2017), we agree that learning can be enhanced through the alignment of pedagogy and space. It is in the spirit of such alignment that this paper explores pedagogies of simulation spaces in nursing, medical, and health-related education (henceforth collectively referred to as the health sciences).…”

“…Rather than understanding simulation laboratories as a space within, or stage upon, which learning happens, we seek to explore the interrelationships between simulation pedagogies, learning and these spaces -or as Carvalho and Yeoman (2018) suggest the "human-thing dependence" (e. 1). We adopt a socio-material sensibility (Fenwick, 2010;Fenwick, Edwards, & Sawchuck, 2011), and by doing so we are attentive to a multiplicity of enactments of humans and non-human objects (Fenwick et al, 2011 p. 154).…”