social learning symposium: post #2 in a series of...

of course, it seems strange to talk about a learning space symposium without talking about the spaces that were used to hold it. so, here's a brief reflection on the spaces themselves.

let's leave aside (for now, at least) the appearance of the wheatley campus itself, and concentrate instead on the simon williams undergraduate centre, which is described here as a dedicated social space 'to support student learning outside structured class time, in which staff and students can meet and develop a shared understanding of academic standards'. here's one image of it:



(you can see more images of the space at this set over on flickr)

we spent the breaks between sessions in this area. now, while it's true that furniture alone can't make a space, it had a mixture of cafe-style seating and sturdier, softer (not necessarily comfy, mind) seating, combined with semi-transparent screens. and this did give the space an open, social atmosphere. some people stood around the edges of the room (no doubt trying to hog the pastries - hmph), some sat in groups at the cafe tables, some on the softer seating in small groups. one thing i did notice, but have only just realised, is that no-one seemed to look alone, or ill-at-ease. which has got me wondering how much of that was due to the layout of the area, how much to the nature of the sysmposium (ie, the type and/or number of people there)? and how much did the space influence the way people behaved - ie, how much they 'appeared' to be relaxed, how much they were willing to talk to others? and how differently would it be used by 'normal' staff and students (ie, non-learning-space-geeks)? and...and...and...

[ok, deep breath, before i start to doubt my own existence. will mull further on this.]

i guess the main point is that this space was an attempt to blend cafeteria-style, conversational spaces, with stand-alone pcs. this learning space geek felt that it worked well - though as above, it'd be interesting to see it outside of vacation, and how it's used by staff/students.

the sessions themselves were held in a nearby building - possibly slightly disappointingly - in standard reconfigurable classrooms (ie, small tables, standard classroom seating) and a horseshoe shaped lecture theatre with fixed tabling. ok, i've crossed out the bit about this being dissappointing - predictable, maybe, i do get a bit weary of people (myself included) who stand at the front of a room to talk about learning spaces, and apologise for standing at the front of a room. memo to self: get over it!

this clearly needs a little more thought - but what kinds of spaces would i *not* be disparaging about? more later...

learning per square foot, and learning ecosystems

back from the social learning space symposium now - and have come to the conclusion that there's just too much to cover in one blog post. so am going to try and do it in stages, by picking out one or two key messages from each session.



so, will start at the beginning. well, not right at the very beginning - the less said about my 'adventures' on the way from the hotel to wheatley campus, the better. skipping lightly over those details then, and on to the opening keynote, which was delivered by deborah bickford (university of dayton). this was a really great talk - very engaging, with a core message about the importance of community in learning. if you're unfamiliar with deborah's work, there's a chapter in the educause learning spaces e-book that's worth a look: community: the hidden context for learning. now, dayton are in the position of having 95% of their undergraduates living on-campus (with all the attendant benefits and drawbacks this brings) so while some of the specifics might not be easily or broadly applicable, there were some interesting concepts that we'll be wrestling with over the coming weeks and months.

a couple of key things worth picking out here: firstly, the notion of 'learning per square foot'. anyone familiar with learning space discussions in higher education will be familiar with the importance that is placed on space management and allocation, or how many square feet do we allow per student? while i'm sympathetic to the pressures that planners work under, the idea of instead thinking about how much learning there would be per square foot is a much more attractive one to think about. difficult to measure, of course, but interesting to think about how this might open up conversations. we've been having very similar discussions across shu (though possibly not quite as eloquently as that!) particularly in terms of the new extension to the learning centre, and trying to get people to start thinking about effective learning environments, rather than asking 'how many student desks can we fit in here?'. i'll save the outcomes of those conversations for another post :)

the second key idea that i'd like to mention briefly here is the idea of moving away from thinking about individual classrooms, or individual learning spaces. instead, what is important is how these individual spaces connect and interact with each other, how together they can enable effective learning to take place. i think this is a really powerful message - after all, there's only so much that can be achieved in any one setting. but to think about how a formal learning space (let's say a standard classroom) can feed into and be fed from a connected series of informal, social spaces, how the learning can flow between them, and be strengthened by these connections - that offers some real food for thought.

this notion of learning ecosystems is particularly relevant for some of the faculty-based discussions we've been having recently, in terms of co-locating spaces to allow student-centred, collaborative learning activities - in one case, focussing on media production. so having an area where students can record their activity/discussions, co-locating this near to editing/production facilities, with social viewing areas and appropriate support nearby. we're still working on these ideas, and waiting to hear how much we might be able to achieve this year - but the ideas presented at the symposium have given me some new perspectives to bring into the discussion.

musing on progress to date

rather ambitiously, last year we put together a conference proposal to talk about learning space developments, cultural change, and barrier negotiation. the conference is now looming (yikes!) and i'm having fun putting together the presentation.

no, really, it is fun. particularly as i'm working on the barriers section, and thinking of some of the conversations we've had over the past year or so. the presentation (at oxford brooke's social learning symposium) will be framed specifically around developments in the learning centre, which has been a somewhat contentious issue, some people feeling understandably protective over spaces that they feel they own.

without giving the game away, so far, i've come up with 4 key barriers to cultural change in the learning spaces arena, which appear somewhat predictably regardless of type of space, or stage of development:

• everyone's an expert (ie, i know what i want from my space, therefore it must be right for everyone, surely?)
• ownership (ie, you're not changing *my* spaces!)
• the 'f' word (ie, you're asking what i want? well, it has to be...flexible)
• the 'i' word (ie, flexible isn't good enough? well then, it has to be...innovative)

exploring these and thinking explicitly about negotiation strategies is proving to be interesting, and i'll start to explore them in more depth over the coming weeks. meantime, this was just a 'starter for ten' post - in the hope that one day, i might get around to updating this more regularly. fingers crossed... :)