Transcript Slide 1

‘A really wicked place’: Involving
students and evolving ideas
Carolyn Roberts
Centre for Active Learning
University of Gloucestershire
‘Third Symposium on Social
Learning Space: Redesigning
Universities’, Oxford Brookes,
March 2008
What’s CeAL about?
“Tell me and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember.
Involve me, and I will understand”
Confucius 450BC
The Centre for Active Learning is an
international centre of excellence reviewing,
developing, promoting and embedding
inclusive and exemplary active learning for
students in geography, environment and
related disciplines such as landscape
architecture, community development and
heritage management
The Gloucestershire
approach to active learning
The distinctive feature of
the University of
Gloucestershire definition
of active learning is that it
centres on the mastery of
theory within a ‘learning
by doing’ approach
involving working in real
places with actual people
and live projects
The Gloucestershire
approach to active learning
• Inquiry-based approach, linking the thinking,
doing and reflecting
• Innovative ways of linking the theory and
practice
• Innovative methods for developing blended
learning
• Active involvement of external agencies
• Creative ways of assessing active learning
• Underpinning practices by pedagogic research
• Involvement nationally and internationally
• Maintaining inclusivity
• Making learning enjoyable for everyone
Wicked Problems (Rittel H.
and Webber, M., 1973)
• Poorly formulated and complex
issues, involving physical,
environmental and social issues
• A multiplicity of actors or stakeholders
• Competing value systems
• Ambiguous terminology
• Spatial and temporal interdependency
• An absence of a clear end point for
any resolution
‘Space is neither innocent nor neutral: it
is an instrument of the political; it has a
performative aspect for whoever inhabits
it; it works on its occupants. At the micro
level, space prohibits, decides what may
occur, lays down the law, implies a
certain order, commands and locates
bodies’
Pouler, 1994
‘The built environment may be seen as
the ability to “suggest” a new or different
behaviour’
Zeigler, 1986
‘Wicked’ trait 1
• Poorly formulated and complex
issues, involving physical,
environmental and social issues
Early development of the
idea
• Pedagogy clear, but implications not
• Discussions with the architect about
the external elevation
• Key visits to other locations
• Limited accessible guidance about
HE building design in 2004
– Informed by ‘Information Commons’
(Mountifield, 2004)
– JISC ‘Designing Spaces for Effective
Learning’ - came later
Building Design Constraints
• Historic ‘Grade 2 listed’ campus
• Small size
• Footprint, height and external shape
of new building also determined by
existing premises, and constrained
• ‘Environmental sustainability’ is a
strong University priority
Francis
Close
Hall
Campus
‘Wicked’ traits 2 and 3
• A multiplicity of actors or
stakeholders
• Competing value systems
Consulting and involving
students
‘Meeting the needs of students is almost
impossible without an informed
understanding of their approaches to
learning’
(McInnis, 2003)
• Student representatives, used to being involved,
and keen to contribute
• Diverse students eg. young and mature
students, disabled students, distance learners
• Lack of understanding of the full range of issues,
but with clear ideas on generic matters
‘A really wicked place’
•
•
•
•
•
24/7 access
Food and drink on hand
A place to hang out, social purpose
Comfortable and stylish
Like Starbucks?
Awesome…Cool… Sweet…
Attractive…?
CETL bid team
• Limited experience of developing
premises and furnishing
• Clear pedagogic ideas developed
through experience, research and visits
• ‘Strong’ brief developed, with scenarios
and vignettes of future use in T&L
• Assistance available from Learning and
Information Service staff, especially on
ICT
University Management
• Represented by the Vice
Chancellor, who selected the site
• Some separate discussions
between University Senior
Management and architects
• Strong interest in environmental
sustainability, ISO14001/BREEAM
• Some interest in design details
University academic and
support staff
• Some said space was needed to
experiment, to move away from
traditional conceptions of teaching
• Symbolic of CeAL aspirations
• Mostly conservative in relation to
premises potentially supporting active
learning
• Interested in ICT novelty, ‘high quality’,
furnishings
• Some practical issues e.g. cleanability
Peter Clegg, Feilden Clegg
Bradley, Architects
‘.. A strong aspirational brief from you and
from the University….a very strong brief in
terms of how you wanted the spaces to
work, and they were radical, multi-use
spaces… recognising the fact that learning
was not confined to laboratories or lecture
theatres or seminar rooms or the
conventional kinds of formats,… but it was
relaxed, and that people learned by actually
chatting to each other…that was quite a
radically new brief for us to have - the
architectural interior design aspects - to
create a really attractive space.’
Local community
• Interest groups e.g. local
residents, Cheltenham
Civic Society
• Visual appearance important
• A regeneration instrument?
• Environmentally-sustainable
building
• Business conference
aspirations
‘Wicked’ traits 4 and 5
• Ambiguous terminology
• Spatial and temporal
interdependency
‘The building will provide a variety of
spaces designed to support the
development of capable and
enthusiastic active learners’
• Collaborative, innovative and social
learning
• Flexible environment for students and staff
• ‘Student owned’ space
• Self supporting in layout and management
• Accessible for diverse student groups
• Exhibition and celebration space
Social Learning?
• Meaning unclear and contested
During construction
• Repeated drift away from mission,
towards assumptions about traditional
layout and furnishing styles (ie ‘lecture
theatre’, ‘seminar room’, ‘laboratory’, staff
offices)
• Need to keep reminding everyone about
the pedagogic purpose, in straightforward
language, without ambiguity
• Some lack of clarity on appropriate
communication lines, responsibility,
autonomy and authority
• Very time consuming
Purpose signified through
the interior design
• Lived and learning space (Al-Mahmood
et al)
• Detail thought through from the start
• Stimulating but not ‘cluttered’ feel
• University colours for background
• Indicative (highlight) colours by floor signifying
busyness through to reflection, informal through to
formal
• Para-natural materials -wood, glass, steel
• Thought-provoking e.g. signpainted quotations
• Change in one location precipitated
students’ expectations of changes in
others
• Perceptions of facilities being
unequal (and inequitable) across
different campuses
• Unexpected impacts on timetabling
• Other campuses decided to develop
some similar facilities
‘Wicked’ trait 6
• An absence of a clear end point for
any resolution
Evaluating the building’s
evolution as a learning space
Observation
• Photographic records
• Recording of use – use and numbers
• Learning mentors blog
– ‘student perspective’
– Module evaluations
Learning Space Questionnaire
• All users
• Staff
Observations on student use
• Early use by individuals
– Taking advantage of ‘quiet’ space
• One girl was using CE002 all the time I was here,
and so I asked her why she was using this
building, and she replied because it is quiet...sure
is! (October, 2006)
• Increasing group activity over time
– Group activities
– Social space
• Said they much preferred working here over the
Learning Centre because of the kit, the desks, the
fact they can talk, etc. (November, 2006)
Other
Social
activity
Individual
work for
independent
study
Individual
work for a
specific
lecture
Groupwork
for
independent
study
Groupwork
related to a
specific
lecture
Q4. What are you doing here
today?
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
In
s
tru
c
ns
co
p
Fu
an
d
ur
e
rn
itu
re
ad
vi
ce
st
ru
ct
e
yi
ng
ho
ur
s
dr
in
k
Am
bi
en
c
to
ild
in
g
tio
Bu
Ph
o
g
an
d
ni
n
od
Op
e
Fo
Number of responses
Q6. What could be improved?
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Students say…
‘Just want to use it more’
‘All in all a really lovely building. The facilities here
are excellent’
‘More sofas – they are amazing!’
‘More of the same!’
‘This space is most like a good work environment –
a lot of the others including the learning centre
are more like a call centre’
‘Facilities are fantastic’
‘I like the relaxed atmosphere of this building, and
how it is quiet but not silent’
‘I am very impressed. All the facilities are available
and utilised well’
‘It’s great’
Students say…
‘The aesthetic appearance of the building is
off-putting’
‘ <need>More quiet space, bookable rooms’
The lighting quality is poor – the
atmosphere it creates is cold and
impersonal. Temperature is often too high
or too low’
‘I don’t like the lavatory facilities – no
urinals’
‘A chocolate machine would be a bonus’
‘This building already feels under-used,
unloved, scruffy and depressing’
Students say…
‘Laminate flooring so the chairs with
wheels could really get a speed on
them…’
‘An on- site hot tub and sauna…’
‘Squash court and lap dancing club..’
Learning mentors blog,
Year 1
• Used as means of communication
between learning mentors and CeAL staff
• Proved a valuable source of information
– Mentors observation on level and nature of
activity – ‘student observations and
reflections’
There were no lectures on, so I feel that most
people therefore use this building (at the
moment) to eat, socialise, check work and to
meet before lectures in the building.
(November, 2006)
Observations on the learning
environment, Year 1
• Students welcomed the informal nature of the
environment
– comfortable, relaxed atmosphere
– encourages discussion
• Good presentation space for students
• Has created opportunity for ‘change’
(Kember & Kwan, 2002)
• Staff more likely to want ‘fixed’ environment
• Intimidating building
– Reluctance to use ‘office space’ and enter teaching
rooms (elsewhere on campus these are locked)
Issues
• Provision of mixed teaching/learning space
– Interpretation by students as ‘off-limits’
– Learning space versus teaching space with
rows of chairs
– Compete with ‘bums on seats’ view
• Time needed for staff and students to explore
how the space might be used
• Support expectations from academic staff
– Expect a conference facility
• Overcoming ‘building management systems’
– Lighting, heating, security
Visitors say…
‘Keep inviting me back! I like it here…’ (USA)
‘Very inspiring environment…’ (Netherlands)
‘Fabulous building and wonderful facilities’ (UK)
‘What a great example of how to use the technology
and space to engage and inspire students and
their teachers!’ (Australia)
‘I am very envious of these superb facilities – this
bodes well both for student learning and for the
business of staff development…’ (New Zealand)
‘This is a wonderful building with impressive facilities.
I liked the contrast between classical buildings on
campus and this super modern one’ (Japan)
‘Oxford has no buildings like this’ (UK)
More…
‘An interesting and impressive contribution to
the debate about learning spaces and how
space interrelates with pedagogy. This building
is a contribution to that debate and very
welcome it is…and welcoming’ (UK)
‘My short visit has been eye-opening, in terms
of…how creatively space can be used’ (South
Africa)
‘It was wonderful to see the building but very
reassuring to witness the library with which it is
being used’ (UK)
‘Open spaces for opening minds!’ (USA)
‘The classical systems approach … is
based on the assumption that a …
project can be organized into distinct
phases: ‘understand the problems’,
‘gather information,’ ‘synthesize
information…,’ ‘work out solutions’ and
the like. For wicked problems, however,
this type of scheme does not work. One
cannot understand the problem without
knowing about its context; one cannot
meaningfully search for information
without the orientation of a solution
concept, one cannot first understand,
then solve.’
‘in order to describe a wicked problem in
sufficient detail, one has to develop an
exhaustive inventory for all the
conceivable solutions ahead of time.’
Criteria for judging the validity of a
solution to a wicked problem are strongly
stakeholder dependent; students, staff,
local community, learning technologists,
University managers, see the alternative
solutions simply as better or worse
Wicked traits again
‘Since you cannot define the problem, it
is difficult to tell when it is resolved. The
problem solving process ends when
resources are depleted, stakeholders
lose interest or political realities change’
‘every implemented solution is
consequential. It leaves "traces" that
cannot be undone … And every attempt
to reverse a decision or correct for the
undesired consequences poses yet
another set of wicked problems.’
Solutions to wickedness?
• Accommodate multiple alternative perspectives
rather than prescribe single solutions
• Function through group interaction and iteration
rather than back office calculations
• Generate ownership of the problem
• Formulation through transparency
• Facilitate a graphical (visual) representation for
the systematic, group exploration of a solution
space
• Focus on relationships between discrete
alternatives rather than continuous variables
• Concentrate on possibility rather than
probability
Rosenhead, 1996
‘We shape our buildings and
afterwards our buildings
shape us’
Winston Churchill, in Jamieson
et al, 2003
Contact Details
CeAL Director
Carolyn Roberts
[email protected]
tel: 01242 714559
CeAL Website
http://www.glos.ac.uk/ceal/index.cfm
Two references
Rittel, H., and Webber, M. (1973).
"Dilemmas in a General Theory of
Planning". Policy Sciences, Vol. 4, pp
155-169. Elsevier Scientific Publishing
Company, Inc: Amsterdam
Rosenhead,. J. (1996). "What's the
problem? An introduction to problem
structuring methods". Interfaces
26(6):117-131