Projects for Environmental Health, Knowledge, & Action
PEHKA's vision is to promote education and change in the relationships between local physical environments and human health and development. In many instances information about connections between environments and human well-being does not exist or is not exchanged between researches, policymakers, government agencies, advocacy organizations, and the general public.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Learning Environments: What and How of Responsive Commissioning
Is it enough to add technology to schools and classrooms to create supportive learning environments?
No... Technology is a tool. This tool is a part of the learning environment. That is, if the learning environment is understood as being composed of both the social and physical environments. A supportive learning environment must be understood as "active." In this scenario, the learners are engaged in tasks and /or projects and the spatial design and all the appropriate tools/ resources are being used to assist the learning.
For technology to be supportive, it must be understood for its affordances and constraints. In addition, the physical setting must be designed to encourage its use. When this happens, learners are able to acquire information and share their ideas with others around the globe. However, technology alone will not change the learner’s motivation for entering a great learning experience. From my research, learners want to be engaged, enter these optimal experiences and acquire knowledge. In order for technology to be integrated successfully within the learning environment, these tools must be understood as assisting these experiences rather than viewed as the magic wand that will magically re-shape how learners become fully engaged in activities to acquire knowledge.
Yes, I definitely agree with Peter. This was the same with my dissertation research. Students were more engaged in the online classroom than in the face-to-face classroom but the reasons were not because technology is the "magic wand that will magically re-shape how learners become fully engaged in activities"(Quoting Peter Lippman) it was because student and instructors were in their own place and time responding to the material, usually in their comfort zones in a supportive learning environment, i.e. discussion board. The good "online classes," were those that were taught by faculty who were supportive, empowered students and encouraged student-centered learning and gave students interactive assignments and group projects. Many of the faculty in my study realized going back to their face-to-face classroom that they had to re-conceptualize the way they taught in the face-to-face classroom in order to create the same level of engagement as in the online classroom.
Building on what Carol has stated, designers, educators, and researchers need to understand how learning occurs in order to create spatial design arrangements that assist learners as they work through tasks. Overall schools of the last century didn’t address this issue. However, with an emphasis on creating problem based learning environments, the new ideas about settings must be grounded in how people work with these tools. Generally, spatial configurations are created based on ideas by the designer of how places are intended to be used. This approach is purely conceptual rather than grounded in how people are engaged. Furthermore, educators are not fully aware of the technologies that are available and most appropriate for their learning environment. For example, smart boards which are coveted by many are fixed elements. They provide learners a focal in the classroom in which learning occurs. The question is, “How is this any different than the black board?” In addition, it’s depth takes precious square footage away from the physical environment.
While considering the appropriate furniture and creating a responsible and thoughtful spatial design to support the learner(s) and the learning activities are vital for any learning environment, what cannot be minimized is the transactional relationship between the learners and the physical spaces. In fact, these need to be understood synergistically and holistically. When viewed from this perspective, the choices made in the physical design will enhance, extend and support the learning activities. In addition, designers, educational facility planners, architects, educators, administrators, parents, students, and all stakeholders, must acknowledge that the places that support learners are also evolving in relationship to the people who inhabit them. For this reason, learning environments must be envisioned differently. These places are not static, but dynamic that will change overtime and must to address the evolving notions of teaching and learning. If nothing else technology, IT and social networking, can provide some insight in how these places must be created. Please note that technology isn’t the solution, but contributes to the discussion of what future learning environments may be.
The vision for the creation of the an educational facility must begin with 1) what a great learning experience is or can be 2) understanding of learners different learning styles 3) Teachers different teaching styles. From an understanding of these issues an innovative, state of the art, one of a kind school may be created.
Mediocrity and Mainstream are holding back a responsive design approach. Another way of stating this is that Reflexive and reactive design approaches are guiding best practice for the design professional. Both are “pop” culture oriented. As long as one is recognized for their work, then why examine or even consider aspects of a completed project that are not as successful. Why question “green principles” as long as one has created a platinum building? What happens when technology is embraced as guiding the teaching and learning? Aside from the fact that technology breaks down, what will be lost as technology is seen as the solution for making better learners? How are the solutions for teaching and learning any different then “No child left behind?” In order for the learning environment to be successful, the social and physical environment must be viewed as active and influencing one another. This means that there is no one “vehicle” for creating places, but rather places must be understood as unique and context specific. Responsive Commissioning would investigate this. This research perspective is holistic. Simplistically put, this approach examines what users think about the places in which they work and offers a critique of how the places function for them. This is the approach that needs to be embraced by the design profession. The question is why hasn’t it?
Technology and the leanirng environment Unfortunately, we still need to address issues regarding technology at the Community college and university. How are the leanring environments organizned to support one another. meaning how is the social environment integrated with the physicla and vice-versa? For example, how are these systems being integrated and how do they support the variety of ways that people learn? While Research has shown that technology can encourage engagement between learners and facilitators aslong with showcasing which facilitators are willing to change their teaching styles, it also need sto further explore issues pertaining to the manganment of interactions, access to resources, control, and flexibility.
8 comments:
No... Technology is a tool. This tool is a part of the learning environment. That is, if the learning environment is understood as being composed of both the social and physical environments. A supportive learning environment must be understood as "active." In this scenario, the learners are engaged in tasks and /or projects and the spatial design and all the appropriate tools/ resources are being used to assist the learning.
For technology to be supportive, it must be understood for its affordances and constraints. In addition, the physical setting must be designed to encourage its use. When this happens, learners are able to acquire information and share their ideas with others around the globe. However, technology alone will not change the learner’s motivation for entering a great learning experience. From my research, learners want to be engaged, enter these optimal experiences and acquire knowledge. In order for technology to be integrated successfully within the learning environment, these tools must be understood as assisting these experiences rather than viewed as the magic wand that will magically re-shape how learners become fully engaged in activities to acquire knowledge.
Yes, I definitely agree with Peter. This was the same with my dissertation research. Students were more engaged in the online classroom than in the face-to-face classroom but the reasons were not because technology is the "magic wand that will magically re-shape how learners become fully engaged in activities"(Quoting Peter Lippman) it was because student and instructors were in their own place and time responding to the material, usually in their comfort zones in a supportive learning environment, i.e. discussion board. The good "online classes," were those that were taught by faculty who were supportive, empowered students and encouraged student-centered learning and gave students interactive assignments and group projects. Many of the faculty in my study realized going back to their face-to-face classroom that they had to re-conceptualize the way they taught in the face-to-face classroom in order to create the same level of engagement as in the online classroom.
Building on what Carol has stated, designers, educators, and researchers need to understand how learning occurs in order to create spatial design arrangements that assist learners as they work through tasks. Overall schools of the last century didn’t address this issue. However, with an emphasis on creating problem based learning environments, the new ideas about settings must be grounded in how people work with these tools. Generally, spatial configurations are created based on ideas by the designer of how places are intended to be used. This approach is purely conceptual rather than grounded in how people are engaged. Furthermore, educators are not fully aware of the technologies that are available and most appropriate for their learning environment. For example, smart boards which are coveted by many are fixed elements. They provide learners a focal in the classroom in which learning occurs. The question is, “How is this any different than the black board?” In addition, it’s depth takes precious square footage away from the physical environment.
As I have been thinking about this blog, a few things pop into my head that need to be examined:
1) the furniture and
2) the spatial design
While considering the appropriate furniture and creating a responsible and thoughtful spatial design to support the learner(s) and the learning activities are vital for any learning environment, what cannot be minimized is the transactional relationship between the learners and the physical spaces. In fact, these need to be understood synergistically and holistically. When viewed from this perspective, the choices made in the physical design will enhance, extend and support the learning activities. In addition, designers, educational facility planners, architects, educators, administrators, parents, students, and all stakeholders, must acknowledge that the places that support learners are also evolving in relationship to the people who inhabit them. For this reason, learning environments must be envisioned differently. These places are not static, but dynamic that will change overtime and must to address the evolving notions of teaching and learning. If nothing else technology, IT and social networking, can provide some insight in how these places must be created. Please note that technology isn’t the solution, but contributes to the discussion of what future learning environments may be.
The vision for the creation of the an educational facility must begin with
1) what a great learning experience is or can be
2) understanding of learners different learning styles
3) Teachers different teaching styles.
From an understanding of these issues an innovative, state of the art, one of a kind school may be created.
Mediocrity and Mainstream are holding back a responsive design approach. Another way of stating this is that Reflexive and reactive design approaches are guiding best practice for the design professional. Both are “pop” culture oriented. As long as one is recognized for their work, then why examine or even consider aspects of a completed project that are not as successful. Why question “green principles” as long as one has created a platinum building? What happens when technology is embraced as guiding the teaching and learning? Aside from the fact that technology breaks down, what will be lost as technology is seen as the solution for making better learners? How are the solutions for teaching and learning any different then “No child left behind?” In order for the learning environment to be successful, the social and physical environment must be viewed as active and influencing one another. This means that there is no one “vehicle” for creating places, but rather places must be understood as unique and context specific. Responsive Commissioning would investigate this. This research perspective is holistic. Simplistically put, this approach examines what users think about the places in which they work and offers a critique of how the places function for them. This is the approach that needs to be embraced by the design profession. The question is why hasn’t it?
Technology and the leanirng environment
Unfortunately, we still need to address issues regarding technology at the Community college and university. How are the leanring environments organizned to support one another. meaning how is the social environment integrated with the physicla and vice-versa? For example, how are these systems being integrated and how do they support the variety of ways that people learn? While Research has shown that technology can encourage engagement between learners and facilitators aslong with showcasing which facilitators are willing to change their teaching styles, it also need sto further explore issues pertaining to the manganment of interactions, access to resources, control, and flexibility.
Post a Comment