B Cleveland

Pursuing that Elusive Evidence about what Works in Learning Environment Design

It is an exciting time to be involved in education. Every day we witness the pursuit of innovation and creativity in schools, the sophisticated development of personalized learning approaches, the increasing usefulness of ubiquitous technology, and the excitement surrounding the many ways education can contribute to burgeoning ‘knowledge economies’. These ‘new age’ priorities are combining to enable students to increasingly take responsibility for their own learning and are encouraging teachers to become the curators of learning experiences, that range from whole class didactic encounters, through collaborative peer-peer active learning to reflective one-on-one consultations with students – often within a single lesson.

Designing learning spaces for interprofessional education in the anatomical sciences

This article explores connections between interprofessional education (IPE) models and the design of learning spaces for undergraduate and graduate education in the anatomical sciences and other professional preparation. The authors argue that for IPE models to be successful and sustained they must be embodied in the environment in which interprofessional learning occurs. To elaborate these arguments, two exemplar tertiary education facilities are discussed: the Charles Perkins Centre at the University of Sydney for science education and research, and Victoria Universitys Interprofessional Clinic in Wyndham for undergraduate IPE in health care. Backed by well‐conceived curriculum and pedagogical models, the architectures of these facilities embody the educational visions, methods, and practices they were designed to support. Subsequently, the article discusses the spatial implications of curriculum and pedagogical change in the teaching of the anatomical sciences and explores how architecture might further the development of IPE models in the field. In conclusion, it is argued that learning spaces should be designed and developed (socially) with the expressed intention of supporting collaborative IPE models in health education settings, including those in the anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ 8: 371–380.

Addressing the Spatial To Catalyse Socio-Pedagogical Reform in Middle Years Education

For many years in Australia, academics and state government departments have promoted learner-centred and constructivist pedagogies in the middle years of schooling (Years 5–9) (Barratt, 1998; Beare, 2000; Carrington, 2006; DEECD, 2010; DEET, 2002; Hill & Russell, 1999). However, such approaches have still not been widely adopted (Black, 2009; Cartmel, 2013; Pendergast, 2006; Pendergast & Bahr, 2005).

Innovative Learning Environments as Complex Adaptive Systems: Enabling Middle Years’ Education

In a period of post-industrial education, how can we understand school learning environments i.e. educational spaces and practices that are concurrently physical, social and cultural? How might theoretical constructs that deal with ideas associated with ‘complexity’, ‘emergence’ and ‘self-organisation’ aid our interpretations of learning environments in the knowledge era? This chapter explores the emergence, co-evolution and mutual adaptation of the physical, social and cultural practices in three schools (primary and secondary) that attempted to develop contemporary pedagogical cultures of practice between 2008 and 2011 in non-traditional learning spaces. Employing theoretical frameworks derived from the literature on ‘complexity theory’ and ‘complex adaptive systems theory’, this chapter explores the influences of new socio-spatial contexts for learning (i.e. innovative learning environments) on the engagement of middle years’ students. To conclude, an argument is put forward for considering school learning environments, schools and school systems as ‘complex adaptive systems’: educational settings that can ‘learn’ in response to positive feedback loops to provide dynamic socio-pedagogical cultures of practice that are aligned with current middle years’ educational theories.

Emerging Methods for the Evaluation of Physical Learning Environments

The field of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) has provided direction on how evidence can be gathered about the performance of educational facilities for over 40 years (Cooper, 2001). However, such work has generally overlooked the evaluation of learning spaces for pedagogical effectiveness, i.e. the suitability of the physical environment in supporting desired teaching and learning practices, activities and behaviours.