One size fits none

Problem: The tangible benefits of supplying a suite of teaching rooms based on a single template offering the same room colour, furniture layout and technology are primarily the economies of scale for equipment and support the Institution is able to provide. These rooms are traditionally rows of front facing tables and chairs. Operationally, a standardised room is less disruptive as it means that academics can comfortably plan and deliver the same session without being challenged by the room to adapt a different teaching style or learn new technology. However, this also means that the rooms, rather than tutors, dictate the learning experience and can potentially be inflexible in supporting innovative curriculum development. Due to the front facing nature of these rooms, the power relationships between staff and student remain under the control of the teacher, and students aren’t automatically given the flexibility or authority to become partners in their own learning. Approach: Innovative and flexible teaching requires innovative and flexible spaces which in turn supports enhanced student attainment.  Educause (2013) support this viewpoint “…in flexible designs that support active, collaborative learning, students are empowered—under faculty mentoring and guidance—to explore course content and ideas in an environment that has multiple points from which learning may emerge”. The Learning and Teaching Test Environment (LaTTE) project at the University of Wolverhampton is intended to explore and evaluate what that space will look like. A cross departmental task force designed and delivered not only a learning and teaching space, but a network of in-house support (technical and pedagogical) for the use of the room. The room is intended to provide exciting uses of interactive technology which involve students in active participation in their own learning, utilising the skills they take for granted in their social world and was intentionally designed to support and facilitate communicative, collaboration based activities. Bickford and Wright (2006) suggest that “Community catalyzes deep learning and should be a critical consideration when planning physical and virtual learning spaces”. The evaluation methodology was based on the Social infrastructure Framework (Bielaczyc, 2006); which takes into account learning activities, participant structures and configurations of space,  whilst also building in a series of questions identified in the JISC Learning Space InfoKit (JISC, 2013). Findings: Early indications are that the environment is a success; staff and students are enthusiastic and are positively adapting their teaching and learning styles, resulting in better engagement and potentially greater achievement.  It had been observed that the pedagogy in the room is changing and developing into a “knowledge building community” (Boys, 2011 p. 122) and indications are that this is due to the structure of classroom communication (Scardamalia, & Bereiter, 2006).  Student quotes about LaTTE include “the layout is welcoming and friendly” and “this room will help us to learn”. Further evaluation will be based on NSS results, module evaluations and academic achievement. Informal coaching and collaboration between tutors and the project team are frequently taking place developing skills and confidence in curriculum design and the use of technology.