Innovative Learning Spaces at LJMU: How They Indicate

Possible Improvements to Learning Space Design?

Jim Turner Learning Development Unit 14/05/2010

Acknowledgements
This report was completed with the help of
• The AV-IT Forum
• Academic staff who have developed spaces in their areas
• Staff and students who helped complete the questionnaires.

Contents
Summary................................................................................................................................2
Introduction............................................................................................................................2
Who was involved in creating these rooms?......................................................................2
Definition of Learning Spaces...........................................................................................3
Research.................................................................................................................................3
Results or findings..................................................................................................................3
Rooms as Amplifiers..........................................................................................................3
The 7 Spaces..........................................................................................................................4
68 Hope St - Social Learning Zone....................................................................................4
Byrom St - Innovation Centre............................................................................................6
The Automatic....................................................................................................................8
John Foster.......................................................................................................................10
B209.................................................................................................................................12
Edge Lane Room 3...........................................................................................................14
The Workplace.................................................................................................................16
Attributes..........................................................................................................................18
Student Survey.................................................................................................................18
Staff Survey......................................................................................................................20
Discussion............................................................................................................................21
Match between staff and students perceptions.................................................................22
Conclusions and recommendations......................................................................................22
References............................................................................................................................23
References

1
Summary
This report wishes to benefit future teaching room developments and their use, by building
understanding of how learning space design can affect learning and teaching. Learning spaces
cover a wide range of types e.g. libraries and social areas, this report focuses on what can be
loosely defined as classrooms. It will; review 7 innovative learning spaces of this type at
LJMU, using data gathered from research into some of these rooms and compare this with
evidence from other research in this area.
The main conclusions and recommendations are:
• The learning space design process, can act as opportunity to re-focus universities.
• Learning spaces do not change practice on their own, but amplify existing practice.
• Group-learning and student-centred learning should remain a focus for development
of learning space design.
• More academic staff need to engage in an deeper and informed way in developments.
• Staff support, development and sharing of practice will help with ownership and
enable staff to get the most from these spaces.
• Colour although not a direct influence on learning is highly valued by students.
• A need to explore the potential of re-designing other aspects of the learning landscape
such as lecture theatres.

Introduction

Who was involved in creating these rooms?

AV-IT Group
The AV-IT Group was established to improve student experience in the classrooms and
learning spaces around with University. They look after audio and visual technology in
teaching rooms. All rooms in University now have a base line provision, and the group
continues to works together to reduce cost of maintenance and replacement. They are now
expanding to look after furniture.
Membership includes:
• Director of Teaching and Learning Development (Chair)
• Faculty learning and teaching managers
• Senior Technicians
• Head of Technology Enhanced Learning
• Faculty Managers
• Libraries & student services
• Resource Directors
• Deputy Director of Computing and Information Services
• Welfare - Head of Department
• Procurement Officer - Infrastructure Planning
In 2009 they decided to put a small budget aside for innovation of technology and room
design, this resulted in the exemplar learning spaces project. Faculties put proposals together
with AV technicians and academic staff involvement. These were submitted and amendments
suggested by the group before they went ahead.
Localised Initiatives
Some academics/departments have independently developed innovative learning spaces.
These are usually designed to support a particular pedagogy to support a curriculum or skills
development need. Several of these rooms are included in this report.

2
Definition of Learning Spaces
There are a great many types of different learning spaces in a modern University, lecture
theatres, ICT suites, classrooms, specialist lab areas and also informal social areas, such as
those found in libraries. This report focuses on classroom teaching spaces but, it should also
be pointed out that future developments should recognise the whole environment as adding
and enhancing the student and staff experience (Savin-Baden 2008). Teaching predominantly
happens in designated places, learning can happen anywhere (Van Note Chism, 2006)

Research
There is little research in this area (Temple, 2007), what research does exist tends to
concentrate on psychological perspectives of the physical attributes of the space, or the wider
social and cultural dimensions. The research for this report involved; visiting, analysing and
recording 7 rooms, 4 of those rooms were investigated further with staff and student
questionnaires. 135 students and 10 staff members returned questionnaires.
The student questionnaires were designed to gain understanding of the perceptions and
beliefs of the students over the effect the environment had on the way they were taught and
how they learnt. The staff questionnaires tried to establish any change in approach or practice
and the perceptions of effectiveness of the space.

Results or findings

Rooms as Amplifiers
Robert Emery Smith (Educause, 2010) sees learning spaces as Amplifiers of both good and
bad teaching practice. If the teaching and learning practice is aligned with the room design it
amplifies the effectiveness of that process. If they are not aligned or it is simply poor practice
their effectiveness will be dip in performance. The simplest example of this is a group-based
and learner centric approach being delivered in a formal lecture theatre. This idea of
amplification will be used in this report to help frame the findings.

This amplification can also be applied to the effect on the wider social and cultural aspects
surrounding the learning space (Horne-Martin 2004). For instance a room design might
amplify a workshop that wishes to facilitate a cultural value such as ‘freedom of speech’.
This value will need to be present in the culture and the space to amplify it. This phenomenon
of amplification could then become reciprocal leading to a form of amplified feedback,
heightening this value in the local culture.

The 7 Spaces
The 7 spaces will be represented by a 3D diagram, a short description and 2 photographs.

3
 68 Hope St - Social Learning Zone
Fixed seating

Fixed refectory seating

Flexible seating

Subject: Social Science

Students: 60
Purpose: The School has recently moved to a temporary old building. The central atrium
provided a natural focal point to design a space which encourages students to socialise and as
a space for group work.
Pedagogy: Move from formal classroom to social space allowed lecturers to break down
barriers. The lack of technology was seen as a positive, allowing student focused discussion
and debate rather than tutor lead.
Space Design: Strong use of colour, fixed pods allows group to ‘huddle’, flexible tables for
more ad hoc meetings, natural light through ceiling
Technology: Wireless, but there is no fixed technology such as computers or projector
Student quote: “less informal, feel it's easier to have a discussion, more confident about
speaking out”

4
5
6
 Byrom St - Innovation Centre
Multiple Screens

Display Cabinates

Moveable whiteboards

Subject: Engineering and Product Design

Students: 20-30
Purpose: A recognised need for creativity and group work within the subject lead to a space
which challenges students to think differently and build a creative studio/workplace
atmosphere.
Pedagogy: Innovation and Creativity, working on group projects to identify and develop
creative solutions.
Space Design: Moveable whiteboards, flexible layout, display cases for inspiration and
reference.
Technology: Includes multiple presentation screens, use of background music.
Student quote: “more relaxed yet productive and good for communication between staff and
peers”

7
8
9
The Automatic

‘Distiller’ area
Flexible seating

Moveable whiteboards

Subject: Business Development

Students: 20
Purpose: Set up to support internal innovation between teams, this space has now expanded
to include working with external partners. A large range of facilitated activities take place
which are designed to enhance communication, collaboration and creativity
Pedagogy: ‘Making thinking visible’. Many of the activities allow participants to visualise,
as a group, problems and possible solutions
Space Design: Use of colour, soft furnishings, lighting, music and flexibility. Moveable
whiteboards support activities
Technology: ‘Distiller’ a purpose built multi-keyboard mind-mapping tool, multi-projector
screens, serious lego, video and stills cameras.

10
11
12
John Foster

Sophisticated control desk

Flexible desk space

with flip-top computers
Subject: Business and Law

Students: 8
Purpose: To explore the potential of different technologies to help staff members to
understand, develop and practice different teaching and learning activities. It also support
with external partners via video conference.
Pedagogy: technology enabled group work
Space Design and Technology: Use of colour and graphics, lighting, and flexible
table/computer flip tables. Central control screen, video conferencing

13
14
 M209

Multiple Screens

Whiteboards

Flexible seating

Subject: Education, Community and Leisure

Students: 60
Purpose: Upgrading an unpopular and uncomfortably hot teaching space to a space that
explores the potential of innovative technology to support group teaching and learning
Pedagogy: Students work in teams on extended whiteboards together, presenting this back to
the class
Space Design: Strong use of colour, flexible tables and seating, whiteboard on large walls.
Technology: Extra monitors showing main screen, Air conditioning
Student Quote: “seems more interesting and involved, and doesn't get boring”

15
16
17
18
Edge Lane Room 3

‘Distiller’ technology

Group work area

Subject: Media
Students: 20-30
Purpose: Encourage free thinking and creativity in a relaxed atmosphere.
Pedagogy: Facilitated and taught sessions using group brainstorming, shared mind mapping,
idea development, problem identification and solving.
Space Design: Low lighting, soft furnishings, large group-work table
Technology: This room used innovative in-house multi keyboard input technology to collect
students’ thoughts and discussions using the ‘distiller’ as in the automatic (see above).
Student quote: “it's relaxed and comfortable and discussions often include everyone because
of the positioning of the chairs”

19
20
21
The Workplace

ICT suite

Meeting space

22
‘The Workplace’ Student controlled work-based project space
Subject: Social Science
Students: 60
Purpose: Students in faculty have always worked closely with local clients and community
groups, but no specific area was identified to allow them to develop and collaborate together.
This student-controlled area, aligns with work-based learning initiative across the University.
Students can book space to work on projects. Outside clients can also run meetings with
students here.
Pedagogy: Student control – outside clients/community groups contact the workplace
Space Design: Strong use of colour, variety in layout to facilitate different types of activity
Technology: ICT suite next to presentation room

23
24
25
The table below is a summary of particular design attributes in order to illustrate the
differences and similarities between the spaces.

Attributes
Attribute Range Examples
Who set up the project? AV-IT project 68 Hope St
John Foster
B209
Workplace
Local project Automatic
Byrom St Innovation Centre
Edge Lane Room 3

Control Available to all in the faculty

How are the spaces made Locally organised

available. Student controlled

Technology integration High level John Foster

Mid-range Workplace
The level of technology Byrom St Innovation Centre
made available within the Automatic
space. Edge Lane Room 3
B209
No technology 68 Hope St

Pedagogical approach Group Learning Automatic

Byrom St Innovation Centre
The dominate design Workplace
approach, facilitating a John Foster
particular way of learning. Edge Lane Room 3
Flexible B209

Student Survey
Over 80% of students noted a small to strong positive difference in their experience of
learning in the spaces, compared to other types of rooms. Over 40% of these noted a strong
positive difference. No students recorded a negative difference.

26
How significant do you think room layout was in influencing how your teacher went
about teaching, or influenced how you went about learning?

How important do you think that design of classrooms and learning spaces is in
influencing the way teaching and learning happens?

The majority of students (over 80%) perceived that the specific space had some influence of
learning and teaching. The majority (over 60%) of students believe that design has a strong
influence over teaching and learning. More details from open questions on the specifics of
these questions are outline below.

“more relaxed yet productive”. (student comment)

Group learning

27
The changes the students noticed to their learning experience was mostly focused on
providing support for group work. Part of this support was attributed by the students as
creating a relaxed informal atmosphere. The students also referenced their levels of
engagement and interaction to the general change in classroom dynamics. Comments
perceived a change in the atmosphere between lecturer and student as being more friendly
and ‘less stressed’. “she seems more relaxed and unlike the other rooms, everyone sits close
together” (student comment)
Students that noted a change such as this perceived a greater level of informality, allowing a
greater connection between staff and students.
Some students saw this as being to do with the particular lecturer “I feel I learn better in this
room, however, this could be as [lecturer’s name] is one of the best lecturers on the course”.
This links back to the idea of the room as pedagogic amplifier, facilitating and increasing the
effect of the lecturers current teaching practice.

Comfort
Students comment that general comfort is by far the highest attribute an ideal classroom
would have. This is linked to temperature, furnishings, light, colour and space.
Some of the students saw a relationship between these and their attention levels. This high
level of reporting on general comfort could be because it’s simply something to say.
However, there are links made by the students between comfort and it’s contribution to
attention levels and a friendly/relaxed atmosphere, making it “a better environment to learn
in”.

Colour
Students focus on colour as a desired and improving attribute to a learning space. This occurs
even in the spaces where strong colour has not been used. So they are not picking up
innovative aspects of their direct environment. Some rooms had strong wall colour and some
hadn’t, in both environments colour was reported as desirable. Students link colour to ideas
of relaxed and personal environments which, in some cases lead to a perception of heightened
levels of interest.

Technology
Students comments highlight the usefulness of specific technology such as the multiple
screens around the room in helping them focus on the topics.

Staff Survey
“a ‘grown up’ setting for learning”. (staff comment)

The staff perception of what the spaces offers included a “more relaxed atmosphere” leading
to a “less formal teaching space” that would support greater collaboration and discussion. The
general response is that is makes a difference “it feels like a ‘proper’ teaching space I feel
that the students respond better”. (staff comment)

The lecturers are looking for less formal spaces, which lead to less formal teaching. There is a
focus on group work, independent learning with facilitation rather than direct teaching, at all
year levels including Foundation. This links with a desire to move away from ‘spoon feeding’
and ‘school mentality’.

Not all lecturers are interested in technology, in one space the lack of technology was seen as
a benefit, releasing them from something they were becoming over reliant on.

28
Some lecturers did not indicate a change in their practice; this could indicate that the room is
amplifying the effectiveness of their established practice as students perceived greater benefit
from being taught in that space. Where lecturers indicate a change, it was connected with a
particular attribute in the space such as the technology, which they wished to exploit.

Discussion
Learning space designers should be wearing of leaning towards ‘architectural determinism’
(Woolner et al, 2007) and over estimating the affect design has on human activity. Although,
by using the idea of amplification can help support developments that wish to strengthen an
aspect of teaching and learning through learning space design.

Basics
There are some obvious basics you need for a learning space, lighting temperature, air
quality, noise reduction that are backed up by research (Gee, 2006, Woolner et al, 2007).
These can have an effect on teaching and learning. For instance, a room being too warm in
summer can lead to drowsiness. Care must be taken that innovation in classrooms design
doesn’t ignore these basics.

The vast majority of learning space designs in the reviewed literature and around LJMU have
group learning as a central focus. The Learning Landscapes Report broadens this idea to
involve academics into this widen community of sharing and research in spaces designed to
merge academic, Phd and undergraduate research and even beyond into the wider
community. These spaces allow a natural flow of knowledge and re-organise learning around
active participation rather than just delivery and consumption of knowledge.

An interesting evaluation method used classroom observation of teachers in different

environments (Horne-Martin, 2002). A set of teaching and learning activities were defined.
Classroom observations record at intervals, the position and activity of the teacher. The maps
and lengths and sequences of activities were then compared. These were then further
explored in interviews. Horne-Martin's conclusions are that rooms do influence teachers, but
most strongly in a negative way. The strongest effect of these being for student-centred
teachers delivering in teacher-centric designed classrooms. For instance think of the
difficulties of organising group learning in rooms with fixed rows.

A key technology that enables group work is the multi screen presentation, where there is a
presentation screen on more than one wall. This enables the students to remain facing each
other around the table rather than facing back to front. Another technology commented on by
students and staff were large wall length whiteboards. These allow groups to stand, and work
across large spaces to visualise their thinking, which could then be discussed across the
groups.
Many researchers in this area call for participation in the design process to increase
ownership of the spaces by staff (Gee 2006, CERD 2010). Without this ownership, people
simply resort to coping in these environments rather than using them as intended and getting
what they want from them. Old practices are re-established but as shadows of their former
selves (Brennan et al 2002 cited in Horne 1999, Woolner et al, 2007)

Ownership over the design and use of these rooms have been shown to be beneficial to
learning space use. The rooms examined in this study included some that had been created to
meet local needs, usually devised by an academic staff member. These differed from other
general spaces designed by staff members not directly involved in delivery in that space.
There was no difference between the two types of rooms highlighted in the research.

29
However, ownership is highlighted as having an effect on how readily staff members re-
arrange spaces (Horne-Martin, 2002, Rivlin & Wolfe 1985 cited in Woolner et al, 2007). This
was discussed by two staff members using the general rooms, who both did not want to
change the furniture, even though it was highly flexible. Robert Emery Smith (Educause,
2010) has developed ‘room users meetings’ to discuss this might help empower staff to take
more control.
Particular elements were found in the LJMU spaces as having an influence on practice “The
writable walls are fantastic – they allow groups to move about to draw and use space” (staff
comment). However, this single case of changing teaching practice to use environment in a
specific way, would highlight the need for staff time to explore room potential and learn from
others using the rooms. As mentioned above we should not expect major changes in
pedagogical practices caused solely by the use of a learning space. However, all staff using
these rooms can benefit from sharing ideas and discovering different ways to use the
technology within the space. Particular ideas to support this are used in the Robert Emery
Smith (Educause, 2010) where staff commit to using one new technique each semester and
work together to try different room layouts.

There is no clear evidence from research into the effects of colour on learning. Sundstrom
(1987 cited in Woolner et al 2007) warns against claims that are always over optimistic for
affect of colour. There are some suggestions that the use of colour on the wall behind the
presentation screen can aid concentration (Woolner et al, 2007). Colour is highly visible, and
is noticed and valued by students as reported above. Therefore, it is suggested that this could
make an impact on student conception of room quality (Maxwell, 2000 cited in Woolner et
al, 2007) which leads them to having more positive feelings about the space. This in turn may
lead to raising interest or value of the teaching and learning activity (Horne-Martin, 2002). To
give further weight to this argument, consider the current neutral colours in most of
University teaching spaces referred to by one student as 'a giant magnolia prison' quoted in
Burke and Grosvenor (2003) cited in (Woolner et al, 2007)
Match between staff and students perceptions
The pedagogical approaches and the desires for learning outcomes, atmospheres that staff
express are matched in students perceptions of the sessions. This match is close enough that
staff and students use the same terms to describe it. This links again to the idea of
amplification, the room designs fit the pedagogical expectations, the closeness of this fit
results in the expectation creating amplified results. This was highlighted by some of the
students who commented that the lecturer was good in any room, they also recognised the
teaching and learning experience was better in the new learning space.

Conclusions and recommendations

This report has looked at 7 innovative learning spaces at LJMU, used staff and student data
from 4 of those spaces and connected that with wider learning space research. From this it
draws the following conclusions. Learning spaces do not change practice on there own but
amplify it. Group-learning and student-centred learning should remain a focus point for
development of learning space design. That more academic staff need to an informed
engagement in developments. That learning space design process can act as opportunity to re-
focus universities. That colour although not a direct influence on learning is highly valued by
students. That staff support, development and sharing of practice will help with ownership
and enable staff to get the most from these spaces. This will also make faculties more

30
conscious of the wider learning environment and its effects on learning. This in turn may lead
to more interest in re-designing other aspects of the learning landscape such as lecture
theatres.

The limitations of this report mean that this list of conclusions should not be considered as in
any way absolute, many other aspects need to be explored and promoted across the sector.

Notable exceptions include large lecture theatres, which are rarely involved in these recent
design innovations. This raises the question, why these spaces are not being considered for
innovation to possibly improve the learning and teaching experience. Although beyond the
scope of this report there are some models out there such as the 120 seat large scale group
learning spaces developed in Missouri University (Educause, 2009). Displaying student work
has been shown to increased feelings of ownership, and an involvement that leads to
improved motivation (Killeen et al 2003 cited in Woolner et al, 2007)

There are great opportunities provided by learning space innovation to explore the role of
universities and shift current practice into newer and more fertile ground. These do not just
focus on the designed outcome of the room but also on the process of designing. With full
and informed participation of academics in reassessing the ‘learning landscape’ universities
can undergo a process of meaningful change.

References
CERD Centre for Educational Research and Development., (2010). Learning Landscapes in
Higher Education. [Online] University of Lincoln. Available at:
http://learninglandscapes.blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/files/2010/04/FinalReport.pdf [Accessed
21/05/2010].

Educause (2009). ELI In Conversation: Innovative Learning Space Design--Translating

Design Principles and Best Practices. introduced by Gerry Bayne. [Online]. 03/09/2009.
Available from: http://www-cdn.educause.edu/sites/default/files/eli09-learningspaces.mp3
[Accessed: 21/05/2010]

Educause (2010). ELI Session: Stanford University's Wallenberg Hall – Looking Back, Looking Forward
introduced by Gerry Bayne. [Online]. 14/02/2010. Available from: http://www-
cdn.educause.edu/sites/default/files/eli10-wallenburghall.mp3. [Accessed: 21/05/2010]

Gee, L. (2006) “Human-Centered Design Guidelines: Creating the Places That Help
Transform Learning,” Chapter 10 in Learning Spaces, an EDUCAUSE E-Book, 2006
(www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces/10569 ).

Horne-Martin, S. (2002), "The classroom environment and its effects on the practice of
teachers", Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 22 No.1/2, pp.139-56.

Horne-Martin, S. (2004) Environment-behaviour studies in the classroom. Journal of Design

and Technology Education, 9 (2), pp.77-8.

Milne A. J. (2006) “Designing Blended Learning Space to the Student Experience” Chapter
11 in Learning Spaces, an EDUCAUSE E-Book, 2006
(www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces/10569 ).

31
Savin–Baden, M. (2008) Learning Spaces: Creating Opportunities for Knowledge Creation in
Academic Life, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press,
Maidenhead and New York

Temple, P. (2007) Learning Spaces for the 21st Century –A Review of the Literature,
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/research/Learning_spaces_v3.
pdf

Van Note Chism, N. (2006) “Challenging Traditional Assumptions and Rethinking Learning
Spaces,” Chapter 2 in Learning Spaces, an EDUCAUSE E-Book, 2006
(www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces/10569 ).

Woolner, P. et al (2007) A sound foundation? What we know about the impact of

environments on learning and the implications for Building Schools for the Future , Oxford
Review of Education Vol. 33, No.1, PP47-70

32