Active Learning (Flexible) Classrooms: An Innovative Partnership Project
Net-savvy students today arrive in college classrooms with much higher expectations of educational technology. They want to be constantly connected, and expect ubiquitous access to wireless and plug-and-play technology wherever they go on campus.
In light of these changes, the Office of Classroom Management (OCM) has partnered with the Office of Information Technology (OIT) to pilot two flexible learning spaces on the Twin Cities campus, Biological Sciences Center 64 in St. Paul and Electrical Engineering/Computer Science 2-260 in Minneapolis. These student-centered classrooms feature multiple display screens, document cameras, 360-degree glass marker boards, dual projectors, and round tables with laptop plug-ins for every three students.
Cognitive theory indicates that students are better able to actively process information when sensory stimulation, information exchange, rehearsal, feedback, and application opportunities are available. Flexible classroom spaces are thus designed to encourage students to share what they know and build on this shared base. The key to useful knowledge exchange in these spaces is openness, creativity, collaboration, and interactivity.
A Partnership Project
Several University of Minnesota faculty are participating with OIT and OCM in a yearlong pilot project to investigate the ways in which changed space and technology can impact higher level teaching and learning practice, the U of M Active Learning General Purpose Classroom Initiative.
Professor Robin Wright—associate dean, College of Biological Sciences, and professor, Department of Genetics, Cell Biology and Development—and her colleagues Dr. Susan Wick, Dr. Mark Decker, and Dr. Robert Brooker has been teaching introductory biology to biology majors in the St. Paul active learning classroom.
In the Minneapolis classroom, Professor Maria Gini, Morse-Alumni Distinguished Teaching Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, has been conducting a seminar in high-level software design, and Professor Jennifer Gunn has been teaching history of medicine seminars.
Readings
Brown, Malcolm B. and Joan K. Lippincott. "Learning Spaces: More than Meets the Eye." EDUCAUSE Quarterly 26, no. 1 (2003): 14–16.
Technology creates a shift from traditional classrooms to innovative learning spaces. In these new learning spaces, Brown and Lippincott suggest that teaching and learning transcend the boundaries of the traditional classroom. Therefore, these new learning spaces require a paradigm shift and an integrated strategy for technological and faculty support.
Brown, Malcolm, and Phillip D. Long. “Trends in Learning Space Design.” In Learning Spaces, edited by Diana G. Oblinger. EDUCAUSE, 2006.
Brown and Long suggest that advances in understanding how students learn, coupled with increasing demands on student time, have “led to rethinking the use, design, and location of learning spaces” (p. 1). These authors point to three major trends in learning space design: (a) design based on learning principles, resulting in intentional support for social and active learning strategies, (b) an emphasis on human-centered design, and (c) increasing ownership of diverse devices that enrich learning.
Chism, Nancy Van Note. “Challenging Traditional Assumptions and Rethinking Learning Spaces.” In Learning Spaces, edited by Diana G. Oblinger. EDUCAUSE, 2006.
Advances in our understanding about space and activity, cognitive theory, and Net Gen student characteristics have together challenged our traditional assumptions about teaching and learning. Nancy Van Note Chism suggests that learners require several elements in their learning spaces, including flexibility, comfort, sensory stimulation, decenteredness, and technology support. She concludes that "we need more research on the impact of existing and experimental spaces on learning" (p. 10).
Oblinger, Diana G. “Space as a Change Agent.” In Learning Spaces, edited by Diana G. Oblinger. EDUCAUSE, 2006.
Oblinger suggests that changed spaces equates to changed practices. These changes are necessary because today’s learners favor a more social, active, and participatory learning experience. Learners today also face more time constraints and have more responsibilities than learners in generations preceding them. In addition, Oblinger points to great advances in information technology and understanding how people learn as trends that have led to changes in learning space design. Overall, this author urges that learning space design is a “process, not a product,” which requires “involving all stakeholders—particularly learners” (p. 1.3).
