Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and ...

Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations Background The efficient and effective use of physical learning spaces is a major issue for many educational institutions. Organisations all face pressure to deliver higher standards of education, to greater numbers of students, with tight financial restrictions, but still need to provide facilities that will attract students in a competitive educational market. Learning spaces are expensive to build, maintain and support and must be suitable for an ever widening range of learning scenarios. Making long-term decisions is difficult in any area, but with the pace of technological development this is particularly challenging and decisions will seriously impact upon the future direction and success of an institution. The outcomes of the study are intended to help senior managers to understand and manage the risks involved in projects to develop learning spaces. The need for this study came from a recognition that most, if not all, institutions are now integrating learning technologies into the design of new buildings and the refurbishment of existing ones. Managed learning environments, mobile computing, wireless LANs (local area networks) and broadband are just a few of the technologies that are influencing how we design, use and manage our learning spaces. This study has brought together examples of the wide range of current practice, based on a comprehensive survey, and includes a set of guidelines for senior managers and possible scenarios for the future. Methodology The project consisted of the following components: • • • • •

An initial questionnaire on current practice and planned developments Background research papers on current and future trends in learning space design and learning technology Desk research into technological and pedagogical developments Follow-up questions to expand upon responses to the survey Site visits to gain an in-depth understanding of institutional developments

The initial questionnaire used a blend of qualitative and quantitative questions to gather information on current use of physical space, the ways in which technology is changing the use of space and how institutions expect that to impact on future pedagogy. The questionnaire was sent to over 700 post-16 educational institutions across the UK, which included Sixth form Colleges, Further and Higher education institutions. Senior managers were targeted in order to obtain an ‘institution-wide' perspective. Respondents were asked to consult with colleagues if necessary. A combination of qualitative and quantitative techniques were used to analyse the questionnaires. This analysis led to a number of follow-up questions and helped to target the site visits. Each visit is reported upon via a standard template. The final report pulls together all the components of the study into a single document, designed for an audience of senior managers and decision makers.

JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

Current Practice, Trends and Visions of the Future It is clear from the study, having visited 15 sites across the sector, that learning spaces are highly diverse. However, it is helpful, for the purposes of the study to consider learning spaces in four separate categories; teaching spaces, open access spaces, social spaces and other learning spaces. The detailed findings for each are given in chapter two. The main findings tell us the following: •

Forecasting over five years is difficult in any area of technology, so building and refurbishment projects need to build in contingencies for future changes, to 'expect the unexpected.'

•

The use of wireless networking and mobile computing devices is growing, but there is still a need for the institution to provide wired networking and permanently fixed desktop computers, which will increasingly be supplemented by wireless networking and mobile devices.

•

The provision of power for mobile devices is very important and will continue to be necessary for the next few years.

•

The management and development of technological facilities within open access and social spaces is growing in importance.

•

The design of all learning spaces needs to reflect the trend to more student-centred, collaborative and group learning.

•

The use of learning technologies within social spaces is of growing importance.

•

Access to online services from outside the traditional institutional boundaries is growing rapidly.

The visions of the future describe a world where learning is highly personalised and flexible. Learners are able to access online services from almost anywhere and on almost any device. The capabilities of the devices and the supporting network systems may still vary, but learners can be in communication with learning systems at any time that suits their needs. Although learning in the future is likely to be tailored to individual needs there will still be schools, colleges and universities and those institutions will still have a traditional geographical location, albeit used in a more flexible way. Lecturers, teachers and tutors will still be at the heart of the learning process; creating materials, supervising, assessing and facilitating learning, but their role will evolve.


Strategic Management Management Structures The study shows that there are many different kinds of management or committee structures that are in place for the strategic planning and management of learning spaces. This complexity is, at least in part, the result of the variety of academic and support departments have a stake in the use and support of learning spaces. Although job titles and names of management groups vary considerably across the difference post-16 sectors the management structures were very similar. The larger institutions, particularly in higher education did tend to have committee structures whereas the smaller institutions were more likely to achieve the necessary representation from permanent, often pre-existing, management groups. Details of the groups of key stakeholders are in chapter five, but diagram 1 illustrates an 'average' structure.

"Learning Space Management Group” (Or equivalent)

Estates Management

IT Services

Library Services

Other Operational Service Departments

Student Support Services

Academic Departments

Diagram 1 Vision into Implementation Most innovations start off as an idea from a small group or an individual, however there is extensive work needed to get from vision into reality. Drivers for Change Perhaps the first stage of bringing about a change is to understand the key drivers that will make that change happen. The study identified many drivers for change in the different institutions, which broadly fell into two categories: Operational – Operational drivers were those that contributed to the effective, efficient and sustainable management of the institution. These included the need to refurbish poor estates; the physical infrastructures, consolidation of sites, special projects, increase/decrease in student numbers etc. Pedagogic – the pedagogical drivers come predominately from institutional learning, teaching and assessment strategies and/or changes in learning and teaching methods within faculties, schools and individual subject areas. These were the drivers that related to the quality of student learning. The evidence of the site visits showed that where innovations were most successful both drivers were evident, ensuring that the innovations supported improved learning by improving organisational efficiency and by enabling pedagogic development.


Funding Funding was obtained in three main ways; direct (often ring-fenced) money from funding councils, money from within the core institutional budget and external, often private-sector, funding. Direct funding council money was at least a partial source of funding for the majority of developments, with funding from core budgets being the next most common. The other key factor in relation to funding was the distinction between recurrent and non-recurrent funding. Non-recurrent funding has the benefit that it can enable developments to be carried out quickly and holistically. Recurrent funding allows for longer term planning and a more organic approach to innovation. Both have their place and bring benefits, the challenge is to obtain an appropriate balance between the two. Change Management Innovation, by its very definition means change. Changes can involve some or all of the following; the physical infrastructure, learning and teaching methods, staff roles, student expectations and support systems. The development and implementation of innovative learning spaces will require effective change management. From our site visits, we have found that if the following components are in place, then the change process is more likely to be successful. Shared Sense of Purpose – The project team need a shared vision to help establish and focus upon their key aims and how they are going to achieve their goals Key Stakeholders – All key stakeholders need to be involved and share the sense of purpose for the innovation. Key stakeholders include a wide range of staff from the senior manager to all the support staff and students. Learning from others – It is important to learn from other institutions and to keep abreast of what they are doing. Reading case studies and accessing other institutional information (such as institutional websites) are no substitute for site visits, meeting staff and students and discussing their experiences and experiencing for oneself the innovative learning spaces. Expect the unexpected – It is difficult to predict the future in terms of the development and use of learning technologies and spaces. The survey analysis highlights the importance of flexibility in the use of space. For example, if it is possible, new learning spaces should not be limited by the physical structure of the building. In terms of technical infrastructure, predicting what technologies might be used in the future is difficult, so robustness as well as flexibility is important. Ownership – Ownership is a key aspect of effective change management. That is, academics, support services and students must all have a strong sense of ownership about any innovations that take place. To achieve a shared sense of ownership and purpose, it is important to involve these ‘stakeholders’ in the development of an innovation. Ownership is also important when the project is handed over to the end user. In order to ensure successful uptake, it is important that the endusers feel a strong sense of ownership. Appropriate and timely staff development – Staff development is a critical part of any change process. Changes in learning and teaching methods can require significant changes in both academic and support staff roles. In order to enable staff to get the most out of their new roles there need to be development opportunities made available. JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

Appropriate and timely student induction – Student induction, or orientation, is also a critical part of change. As far as possible technology should be transparent to students, so that they can concentrate on their subject-related learning rather than the technology. Where new skills are required, appropriate support should be made available to students at the time it is needed. From the above we can see that vision to successful implementation of innovative learning spaces involves a wide range of stake holders and effective change management and the key to any successful innovation is to focus on the students and how we can enhance their learning experiences. Senior Managers Checklist The senior managers' checklist emphasises the need for senior managers to take an active, informed and supportive role in learning space projects, throughout the life of the project. Specifically the checklist points senior managers at the main areas that they should generally consider, but does not remove the responsibility from senior mangers to take a thoughtful and thorough approach to the needs of each different project. Conclusions •

Funding – Non-recurrent capital funding can enable development to take place in a timely and co-ordinated fashion, but can also make it difficult for institutions to plan ahead and make responsive and evolutionary developments as the needs arise. There is a place for one-off funding for large projects and a place for ongoing funding for regular development.

•

Stakeholders - The development and management of learning spaces is complex, it involves a wide range of stakeholders from both the support services and the academic community. These people should be appropriately represented at all stages of learning space projects.

•

Key drivers - For successful innovation it is important to understand and acknowledge the pedagogic and operational drivers behind innovation. Without the pedagogic drivers the same pedagogy will simply be applied to new rooms, without the operation drivers the innovations are unlikely to be scalable and sustainable.

•

Knowledge and Skills - The effective development of innovative learning spaces involves both an in-depth knowledge of learning technologies and of pedagogy. In order to improve the success of projects it is important that the lead department on any project, often the department responsible for management of the estate, should include pedagogic and technical skills within their team.

•

Change Management - Effective change management of the development and implementation of the innovative learning space is crucial. This includes generating a sense of ownership and involvement for the key stake holders, especially the end users.

•

Innovation - From the survey returns and the site visits it has been shown that new learning technologies are the enablers not the drivers, but without them the innovative use of learning spaces would not, in most cases, have taken place. Innovative learning spaces and the innovative use of learning technologies are also enhancing the learning experience of students and enabling many institutions to ‘manage’ the wide ranging demands the education funding bodies and the students are placing on them.

•

Growth - The use of learning technologies will continue to grow both on and off campus especially with the ever increasing use of virtual learning environments.


•

Service Provision – There is growing potential for the use of personal computing devices in learning and teaching, which may in the long-run reduce the need for central provision of computers. However the evidence is that to introduce a sufficient level of ownership of appropriate personal computing devices needs quite a fundamental change in many areas of the organisation. If these are not happening then central provision of services and systems needs to continue. In the majority of institutions it is clear that central provision of computing facilities will continue to be necessary for the foreseeable future.

Recommendations 1. Continuation of the Project This project has given an excellent overview of development linking learning spaces and learning technology across a significant cross-section of post-16 education. Many of the visits gave an insight into the planning processes relating to learning space development projects and helped to disseminate the extensive expertise that staff involved in the projects had accumulated. However, this is a rapidly developing area and it is important to remain up to date on developments. In order to keep the project findings up-to-date the project team recommend that a smaller-scale annual review is carried out. This would have the following deliverables: •

Five site visits per year, publishing site visit reports to a standard format.

•

A photo gallery, making annotated versions of all photographs available via the web.

•

An annual review of the report, making changes as highlighted from the further site visits and desk research.

2. Areas for Further Study There are a number of areas that the project team would have liked to have studied in far more detail, but that were beyond the remit of the project. These included the influence of various factors on the ability of an institution to respond innovatively to changing circumstances, in particular: •

Funding models – does not recurrent funding limit innovation in the use of learning spaces? Management structures – what are the most effective management structures in the development, implementation and management of learning spaces?

•

Evidence-based decision making and cultural factors such as risk-acceptance – who are the risk takers? The site visits have shown different approaches to innovation some were based on firm evidence while others are willing to take significant risks. How do these people bring their teams together?


3. Areas for Further Development The production and ongoing support for an online booklet that contains the Guidelines for Effective Learning Space Design to include such areas as seating capacity in relation to room size, display screen sizes, use of microphones etc. For JISC to provide small amounts of funding to a significant number of FE and HE institutions to develop innovative ways of using learning spaces and learning technologies and to develop communities of practice in the use of these learning spaces. The project team did find a number of innovative uses of learning spaces, there are many more out their and many more being developed JISC could make funding available for more detailed case studies. One of the key findings was that learning technologies are enhancing the learning experience of students in many ways further studies could look at how these learning technologies are enhancing different learning and teaching methods to include the types of learning environments students are working in as many of what we would consider ‘traditional learning spaces’ are being used for innovative ways of learning and teaching.


Chapter Two: Site Visit Reports Visit One

-

Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education

Visit Two

-

Birmingham College of Food, Tourism and Creative Studies

Visit Three

-

Doncaster College

Visit Four

-

Glasgow Caledonian University

Visit Five

-

Harper-Adams University College

Visit Six

-

South-East Essex College

Visit Seven

-

University of Aberdeen

Visit Eight

-

University of Birmingham

Visit Nine

-

University of Bristol

Visit Ten

-

University of Hertfordshire

Visit Eleven

-

University of Strathclyde

Visit Twelve

-

University of Ulster

Visit Thirteen

-

University of Warwick

Visit Fourteen

-

York College

Visit Fifteen

-

York St. John College

Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

Visit One Name of Institution

Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education – [http://www.belfastinstitute.ac.uk/]

Type of Institution

College of Further and Higher Education

Date of Visit

5th May 2005

Name and Job Title of Interviewee(s)

Mr W Brian Turtle - Director

Reasons for Visit

This institution has recently completed a substantial new building project.

Main Findings

The college and the main funding body both believe in the pedagogic benefits of elearning. This particular college has used a large capital sum to carry out the necessary learning space developments to take forward their strategy to enhance learning and teaching by introducing more blended learning.

Mr A Dummigan – Head of Learning and Teaching Resources

The three new buildings were funded through Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs) [http://www.dh.gov.uk/ProcurementAndProposals/PublicPrivatePartnership/PrivateFinanceInitiative/fs/e n] and are leased over 25 years.

Funding Sources

Its annual budget is in the region of £42.5 millions, and is funded by the Department for Employment and Learning (DEL), international funding bodies, the private sector, and student fees. 15% of funds for e-learning come through the Chancellor’s Initiative, equating to around £900,000. Operational - Government policy was identified as one of the key drivers for the implementation of Information Technology in the institute’s learning spaces. It is a leader in the Further Education sector for it’s e-learning, and they are currently the only college in Northern Ireland with a Grade 1 inspection in this area. The Department of Learning and Education (DEL) has encouraged the institute to move towards a more blended learning approach to teaching, although the institute doesn’t get any additional funding learning that is delivered online. Inspection is also seen as a driver for developing learning spaces. The Northern Ireland Inspectorate see the use of ILT and the availability of ILT facilities as an important part of a colleges provision.

Key Drivers

The expectation that learners have for both access to hardware within the college and to online learning resources from outside is also seen as a driver in shaping the learning spaces in the college. Pedagogical – It is felt that Information Learning Technology (ILT) is beneficial for learners particularly for part time students, some of whom are only there 2 ½ hours per week. It is believed that the implementation of E-Learning will “improve the quality of learning” [Brian Turtle]. The move towards “blended learning”, a mixture of online and traditional teaching methods is also a major pedagogical driver. It was stated that half of their 40,000 students use ILT to support their learning… “because we believe it improves quality ” [Brian Turtle]. It is not driven by funding but the needs of the student.

The Teaching and Learning Resources department, supports learning development Academic Support Units projects and staff in all departments. People within this department have expertise in the use of learning technology and provide staff development. Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

The College VLE, Blackboard [http://www.blackboard.com], is used to support learning in a number of ways. In particular the VLE is used to deliver learning materials developed within the College and the National Learning Network (NLN – [http://www.nln.ac.uk]) materials. Use of communication tools within the VLE is also encouraged, especially for part time learners.

Changes in Learning and The Institute has won a National Training Award and a Beacon Award for its VLE Teaching Methods activity.

It is estimated that at least 75% of staff are using some degree of ILT - 50% of staff are regarded as being quite well into to it and 25% of staff are heavily immersed in it. “The advantage of ILT is that you can bring the whole world into the classroom." [Brian Turtle].

Changes in Staff Roles

Staff roles have changed to some extent as a result of the uses of technology. The main change is seen as a shift from a traditional teacher to a learning facilitator. Staff are strongly encouraged to make use of the VLE to support their learners. This has created a number of changes for the 75% of staff who are using the VLE. Timetabling of most learning spaces in the college is managed centrally by a project manager. The large open learning spaces are managed centrally through the Learning and Teaching Resources department, by non-academic support staff.

Management of Learning Software is to be installed to monitor computer usage in learning spaces and to Spaces improve utilisation.

All learning spaces are treated as an institution resource rather than ‘owned’ by any one teacher or department. Enhancing Learning and The Institute believes that teaching and learning have improved. This is evidenced by Teaching a number of awards for the use of ILT that the college as gained. Feedback from Staff and There is formal feedback from the students at the start, mid and end of year. Staff using Blackboard are encouraged to put up questionnaires at the end of courses. Students Feedback from these have been very positive.

Picture Gallery

The Gerald Moag Campus Learning Resource Centre


The Whiterock Building

Visit Two Name of Institution

Birmingham College of Food, Tourism and Creative Studies – [http://www.bcftcs.ac.uk]

Type of Institution


Date of visit

22nd March 2005

Name and Job Title of interviewee

Amin Pradhan - Director of Information Services

Reasons for Visit

The college is making innovative use of PDAs (personal digital assistants)

Main Findings

The College uses learning spaces and new technologies to provide staff and students with a realistic industry standard working environment. The College receives funding from Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE).

Funding Sources

Funding is centrally controlled and coordinated by the IT Development Committee (ITDC), and all IT spending is subject to the approval of the ITDC. The ITDC will receive all proposed budgets for expenditure in each year from each section of the College. Operational - The major operational driver behind the use of learning spaces is the need to provide students, particularly those on vocational courses with as realistic a working environment as possible. This has seen the College recently refurbish its restaurant and acquire Richmond House for Hair and Beauty courses. Also, the new halls of residence are to have internet access points in all student bedrooms. This will enable students to access course material from outside the college.

Key Drivers

Pedagogical - The 7 ILT champions across all sections of the college are a key driver for the implementation of eResources within the college. They are given time and resources to initiate, analyse and evaluate learning technologies in order to develop innovative ways to address the delivery of learning. There is a need to provide students on vocational courses with industry standard software and as realistic working environment as possible. There has been support for E-Learning from the West Midland JISC Region Support Centre [http://www.rsc-westmidlands.ac.uk/]. An example of this is collaboration involves the College looking at the use of the Moodle VLE [http://moodle.org/].

Academic Support Units

There are two elements. E-Learning will take a big role in ensuring they implement technology and embed it into the curriculum itself but also there are ILT Champions within the specific areas. The eLearning co-ordinators have a higher level of IT skills and the ILT Champions will have their own level, but they have the expertise that they can call upon when tasks are beyond their capability. Also there is the IT Support Unit and they will implement the systems to go with it because the eLearning staff are purely developing the curriculum and the IT elements within, but not the hardware implementation. They all work together in a team environment in order that they can deliver the objectives of the college, meet the staff needs and achieve the eLearning objectives.

Over the last 2 or 3 years, there has been a significant change in learning and Changes in Learning and teaching methods within the collage. There has been a move away from “acetates” that were a feature of teaching methods 4 or 5 years previously to PowerPoint Teaching Methods presentations in the learning spaces, aided by the implementation of interactive whiteboards and data projectors in 80 - 90% of the learning spaces over the next Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

year. The use of electronic whiteboards and data projectors in the classrooms has been noted by the Inspectorate. Staff are also making use of digital cameras that are available to them. It was stated that it was important that the staff were able to take full advantage of the new technologies in the learning spaces and there was adequate training and support provided. The college use an eLearning Co-ordinator to ensure that staff are able to embed the training, using the staff development section and liaise with them so they can use the new technologies. Staff are able to use a dedicated computer room to try out a wide range of industry standard and vocational software, and if required get in-house training (see Photo Gallery). The college understands that having state-of-the-art technology will not, on its own, ensure that it achieves its ILT objectives. However, it does provide a sound infrastructure from which to support development and to successfully embed ILT into learning and administration. To this end, the college purchased a VLE in 2000 for online learning and now has over 120 modules online.


The college aims to develop the VLE into a full Managed Learning Environment (MLE), allowing students to interact with both the academic and administrative sections of the college. This will enable the college to use Blackboard to deliver learning in a more flexible and innovative way, especially for overseas students from areas such as the Maldives and Hong Kong. Hairdressing and Beauty staff and students have access to specialist software called JOICO [http://www.joico.com] - an online system where the students can enter data about a client's hair in order to identify suitable products. There is also a ‘virtual makeover’ system that allows the user to put in a picture of a person and preview it with different make up and hair styles. The use of technology has had a significant impact on learning and teaching and will continue to do so within the institution. They are aware of setting achievable targets for what can be achieved using learning technologies within a realistic time scale.

The College has invested approximately £30,000 for specialist software for the courses in caring, which is used by schools or independent nurseries to interact with students. There is a specific caring room (see Photo Gallery), with specialist software. The Supporting Learning Foundation Degree also has specialist software, Enhancing Learning and which is used to support students in their use of IT in teaching and in primary schools Teaching and secondary schools. In terms of technology, the restaurant management system (Remanco) has had a significant impact in creating “a realistic working environment." [Amin Pradham], who went on to say "I think that technology does have a big impact. We like to get different stakeholders involved, it could be lecturers, it could be E-Learning Coordinators it could be the technical people as well and I think that it is very important that we keep them together and keep them communicating, because in the end you get what you want." The IT Support Unit produce questionnaires to get feedback about how the support has been. There is also an interactive software, called Course Genie, to produce a response questionnaire from hairdressing students. In addition there is a crossFeedback from Staff and college questionnaire, based on ILT, which is self-evaluated and presented to the Students governing body. The IT Support Unit is also responsible for the Helpdesk, which logs and responds to IT enquiries from staff and students. It currently responds to approximately 90% of all enquires within 1 hour.


Picture Gallery

Staff Receiving IT Training


The “Micro Manic” computer room

Visit Three Name of Institution

Doncaster College – [http://www.doncaster.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

Further/Higher Education College

Date of Visit

27th April 2005

Name and Job Title of interviewee(s)

Pat Turner – ILT Manager Richard Summerfield -Director for Information and Learning Technologies

Reasons for Visit

Doncaster College were in the process of designing a complete new building and demonstrated a good awareness of the need for associated staff development to ensure the successful use of the new facilities.

Main Findings

The college management felt that new buildings would consolidate sites for efficiency gains and to provide flexible learning spaces to for a more innovative and flexible curriculum, supported by the use of learning technologies. Key to this is specialised staff development and significant investment in an institutional learning environment. The College is in the process of building a new main site in the centre of Doncaster (see Picture Gallery). This has been funded through a number of sources. The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) [http://www.lsac.ac.uk] has contributed 30% to the development. Other funding has come from the local council and from the college itself. A large part of the colleges’ contribution has been raised by the sale of one of its original sites.

Funding Sources

Funding for elearning spaces within other parts of the college has been raised via a number of projects. There has been substantial funding from the South Yorkshire elearning Programme [http://www.e-sy.info/] and from REPLIKA [http://www.replika.org.uk], a collaborative project between Hull University, Leeds Metropolitan University and Doncaster College to create learning materials. Other developments have been funded via the National Learning Network [http://www.nln.ac.uk]. Operational - It was identified that running four separate sites was expensive and that efficiency gains could be made by consolidating onto one site. Most of the original accommodation was built in the 1960s and was proving increasingly unsuitable for delivering a modern curriculum. Efficiency gains would include heating, ventilation, better use of space and ICT infrastructure. It was also felt that the new building would provide better accommodation for developing partnerships with other education providers within Doncaster.

Key Drivers

Pedagogical - One of the main drivers for the development of new learning spaces has been the recognition that the curriculum needs to be more innovative and exciting, and that the use of technology is one route to achieving this aim. Doncaster’s economy has traditionally been based around the coal and rail industries. Over the last 20 years these have almost disappeared and it is aimed to replace some of these jobs with jobs in digital industries. Doncaster Education City [http://www.dec.ac.uk], incorporating the Digital Knowledge Exchange [http://www.dec.ac.uk/client_pages/pages/page_23.asp], is a major initiative and a significant driver in the development of the college. This collaborative partnership, between the College, Doncaster Council and local schools, aims to provide clear progression routes through to higher education. The impact on the college is the need to develop more flexible provision and more HE provision. This has impacted significantly on the development of learning spaces.



The college does not have a central unit for learning development, although staff development is seen as a very important activity, and is an embedded part of learning and teaching activity. The college has developed a successful staff development programme for learning how to integrate information and learning technologies (ILT) into delivery of the curriculum. This staff development programme has used the FERL (Further Education Resources for Learning) Practitioners Programme [http://ferl.becta.org.uk/]. Much of the delivery of this staff development has been carried out in a dedicated ILT staff development room. The college also has dedicated ILT mentors in each school whose role is to encourage and support staff in their schools to make use of ILT.

Changes in Learning and Teaching Methods

The college has invested considerable resources in the development of its Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), Blackboard [http://www.blackboard.com]. The funding for the licence of the VLE in its first year (2000 – 2001) was paid for by the LSC via the National Learning Network (NLN) ILT funding. In subsequent years this licence has been paid for out of recurrent spending. At present use of the VLE is inconsistent, with some schools making more extensive use than others. The impact of these developments on learning and teaching has been mixed, with some teaching staff making good use of ILT. Examples of this include Interactive Whiteboards to support and enhance classroom and workshop based teaching. There is also some use of online learning materials including the NLN materials [www.nln.ac.uk/materials] and content developed by a Yorkshire Forward (the regional development agency) funded project called Higher Level Skills for Industry [www.hlsi.org].


New technologies and learning spaces have not impacted greatly on the roles of most staff beyond an expectation that they will use them. The staff whose roles have changed the most are the ILT mentors whose role is to support their colleagues in their use of ILT.

Management of Learning Spaces

The college uses a centrally managed timetable. There are some specialist teaching spaces (such as workshops or hair and beauty salons) which are only available to certain schools. There are also some rooms which can be booked by staff in any school.

Enhancing Learning and Teaching

There is no empirical evidence that technology has enhanced learning. However the perception in the college is that learners are benefiting from and enjoying the use of ILT.

Feedback from Staff and Students

The college uses a SPOC (Students Perception of College) analysis for formal feedback. Staff feedback is mainly informal.


Picture Gallery

Artist's impression of the exterior of the new college building Artist's impression of the new college building at night

Artist's impression of the interior of the new college building


Visit Four Name of Institution

Glasgow Caledonian University – [http://www.gcal.ac.uk/]

Type of Institution

University

Date of Visit

14th April 2005

Name and Job Title of Interviewee(s)

Les Watson - Pro-Vice Chancellor (PVC) for Learning and Information Services Tom Finnigan - Director of Learner Support David Donald - Director of the "Spoken Word" project

Reasons for Visit

Learning Services are building a new Learning Centre (under construction). The design is based on the feedback from students using the facilities in the Learning Café and from a student ‘Access Survey’. University’s vision is to be: • Entrepreneurial • Innovative • Inclusive • Responsive (to different needs) To achieve this vision the University’s strategy is four-fold: 1. To use the skills, abilities and views of stakeholders to enhance the learning experience. 2. To achieve, through the application and pervasiveness of technology, a student-centred and widely accessible environment. 3. To consider environment issues such as the design and configuration of buildings, to change the feel and to play to student aspirations. 4. To draw upon student perceptions to find out what makes people satisfied with their learning experience.

Main Findings

Underpinning this vision is the idea that ‘all learning starts with conversation’ [Senior Member of Staff – Glasgow Caledonian University]. 70% of job competence is achieved through conversation with colleagues. This conversational model is at the heart of the new Learning Centre, due to open in September 2005, whereby learning space is designed to provide opportunities for students and staff to converse easily. Integral to this vision is an emphasis on experience and service rather than what a particular department does. Students should not have to understand how a university is structured in order to access a service. One of the drivers for the design of the Learning Centre was the outcome of a 'Student Access to Services' (SAS) project that looked at how students accessed the wide range of services they needed to use whilst at the University. Three main areas for the development of Learning Services have been identified: • its people and the development of their skills and activities • the environment in which services are delivered • the application of technology so that it is effective and creatively meets the needs of all. This student-centred approach has been the key driver for the design of the new Learning Centre, which will give staff and students access to a wide range of physical learning environments and provide all the services that students will need.


Funding Sources

The new buildings have been funded entirely from the University's reserves, at a cost of around £20 million. Operational drivers - To support the University’s strategy the library had to be updated, as it had traditional shelving and computing facilities. The Learning Café had shown that students liked a mix of social and learning activities. The new Learning Centre was based on the same philosophy, providing spacious and flexible areas for students to carry out a wide range of activities. By creating a flexible space with easy access to power data and infrastructure, the University hopes to embrace the ‘unexpected’ in the future while at the same time giving students access to all the services they need from one service point.

Key Drivers

Pedagogical drivers - To support the University’s four fold strategy the mission of Learning Services is “to support and promote effective learning in the university community through the innovative use of resources, people and technologies”. To achieve this mission, Learning Services aims to integrate social and learning spaces to create spacious, flexible areas where student users can engage in conversation and learn from each other. Learning Services also seeks to make the provision of services a focus by providing access to student services under one roof. Other important pedagogical drivers are student views (SAS survey) and the attitude of ‘expecting the unexpected’ in designing new learning spaces. (Note – it is difficult to distinguish between to the operational and pedagogical as the University’s strategy and Learning Services mission are very pedagogically focused.)


The PVC for Learning and Information Services has an extensive portfolio that includes General Academic and Professional Studies (GAPS). GAPS has units that cover academic practice, C&IT training and eLearning innovation. The Learning Café was the first innovation at the University and provided a radically new way of delivering services to students. The space was designed around the conversational model in that students are able to come into the Café to use computers, bring their own laptops, work in groups with or without the technology, or have a coffee and relax.


The design of the Learning Centre is based on the Learning Café and the feed back from the SAS. It will have flexible learning spaces to cover a wide of learning activities, including quiet areas for the times that students need to be on their own. 80% of materials within the Learning Centre are now online, but students and staff still need access to paper copies. These paper based materials are stored in compact shelving to give more space to users. As peer-learning increases in popularity, space needs to be provided to accommodate these changes in learning methods. This is the focus of the new Learning Centre.



In the current library, students receive a wide range of support, from what they call ‘The Base,’ from library loans to student welfare. However, the actual support services are not in the library - students have to go across campus. In the new Learning Centre, 'The Base' will be on the ground floor bringing together all the support services in what the project team would like to call a ‘Learning Mall’. This Learning Mall will entail a change in all staff roles. However, many of the changes are already taking place so they will not seem so dramatic when staff move into the Learning Centre, although many staff will be moving into open plan office spaces.

The Learning Mall is a very large building with four floors, with ‘roving support staff’ who will be able to advise and guide users. These staff will have Bluetooth headsets enabling them to provide first line support for the wide range of services that students need to access.


The Campus Steering Group, chaired by the Principal, is responsible for learning spaces. The PVC for Learning and Information Services liaises with architects and service people regularly, and was instrumental in the design and building of the Learning Mall. The Director of Learner Support provides the ‘front of house’ operational support for library and student support services.


Students are generally very satisfied with the Learning Café. Students were asked informally what they thought of the Café during our site visit. One student described the Café as ‘wonderful’ because of the choice it gave him between working at home or at the University. He also suggested that working in the Café helped him to focus on his objectives, making him more productive when working at home. Students also liked the flexibility of the Café in that they could use tables for group work and eat at the same time. A relaxing environment used purely as a café for some students.


There have been a number of surveys carried out on the Learning Café since its opening. This feedback is used to update the services they provide and also feed back to senior management, hence the new Learning Centre.

Photo Gallery

The Learning Café - Putting fixed seating round the walls The Learning Café - with around 80 computers and seating for helps to create the open spaces while as the same time keeping 200. the occupancy levels high


The library

The Learning Centre. Work in progress – the tower contains the lift shaft and the stairs.

Ground floor of the Learning Centre – this is where students View of the ground floor from the mezzanine will get access to a wide range of services.


Visit Five Name of Institution

Harper Adams University College – [http://www.harper-adams.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

College of Higher Education

Date of Visit

13th May 2005


Chris Taylor – Head of Information Services Cathryn Greaves – Library Manager Clive Wells – End User Support and Training Manager Sarah Parsons – Senior Lecturer and Learning Support Tutor Martyn Reid – Manager, ICT Development Team

Reasons for Visit

The college has recently built a Learning Resources Centre and Engineering Development Centre. Wireless networking is being rolled out across the campus. The campus has a recently built, mixed-mode learning space, which provides a 'Hi-tech' learning space, both in terms of learner facilities and architecture. This is part of a whole-campus IT strategy, including wireless campus. One of the main challenges was designing learning spaces that meet everyone’s needs.

Main Findings

Funding Sources

Features of Learning Resources Centre • Group study rooms, each with a networked computer and traditional whiteboard provide space for groups to ‘turn up and use.’ • 100 open access computers, designed for individual work, sited physically close to the campus IT helpdesk. • Designated silent room for individual study. • Use of space and natural noise barriers to separate zones for different purposes (e.g. Open plan upper room changes from computer cluster Æ central ‘social’ seating Æ display journals Æ other journals Æ study desks.) • Several small tutorial rooms in the engineering design centre, some of which have interactive whiteboards. • Café. • Wireless hotspots. • Environmentally friendly design – low power computers, natural ventilation and heating, automated lighting. The total cost was £3.5 million, of which £0.75 million was a combination of bequests and other external funds. The remainder was from HEFCE and internal funds. Operational – There was a critical need for more library and engineering design space, so the college created an entirely new space – a 'one-stop-shop' for learners.

Key Drivers

There was also evidence of changing student needs with 70% of students having laptop computers and one third of halls-based rooms having registered for the wireless network. Pedagogical – Changing patterns of learner behaviour require different support. Increased group working and reliance on personal portable computing needed to be addressed in the architecture and provision of the building. ICT is being increasingly embedded into formal teaching and learning, which demands not only more workstations but also greater provision of training and technical support. Whilst making the centre as flexible as possible, careful thought has had to be given


to the purpose of each area to ensure that environmental aspects, such as noise, are appropriate to the activities taking place. Academic Support Units

There is an eLearning Development Team and a Learner Support Team, which are based in the same building.


There has been a marked increase in embedding of ICT in teaching.


There has been increased use of ICT by all staff, helped by the new IT training suite.

The facilities are managed by the Library Manager in association with the Head of Management of Learning Information Services and the engineering department. A co-ordinated approach is used across all aspects of provision, access, support and security, including the Spaces review of regular feedback from students. Enhancing Learning and Teaching

The training room is designed to run library and computing courses (including ECDL and aspects of learning technology) for staff and students. Assessment for learning support is aided by the use of the training room There are regular opportunities for feedback, including a formal survey. Ad-hoc feedback (e.g. emails to IT support) are used to inform service development.


Feedback is generally very positive and constructive. There is a substantially increased footfall compared to old library, though library borrowings have remained static - demonstrating a marked change in usage. • • •

• Lessons Learned

•

•

• •

•


The technologically sophisticated building design has been good apart from self-adjusting windows, which make a lot of noise. Wider desks in the computer cluster would have allowed more space for students to work with other materials and may have reduced noise levels. Group study rooms were being used by individuals who wanted private, silent study space with room to spread out. Groups have now been given explicit priority. However, groups often comprise a set of individuals who wish to work alone together rather than in collaboration. A booking system has not been employed because students often do not plan in advance, it was also felt to be important to avoid academics reserving the space. Computers were added to the study rooms after the original opening, in response to demands from students. Fewer dedicated OPAC (open access catalogue) computers were required than originally provided, so several have been converted to general purpose computers. Where students are unsupervised in the engineering design centre in the evening, small amounts of damage have occurred and there has been a larger issue surrounding eating and drinking. Mobile phone noise has increased in the Library and ICT suite, and is being dealt with through sanctions on computer use. 24-hour computer access with printing was required, for which a dedicated room has been provided. This is used throughout the day, as it is a quieter space, not just out of hours. Utilisation of the building is very high. There is an obvious bias towards using the upstairs area, which is aesthetically and socially more appealing. Typical behaviour of students is to arrive early in the day, find a preferred space to work (usually at a computer or in a wireless zone), collect all the

• •

• Future Changes

•

necessary books and journals and to remain there for much of the day. The dedicated ICT training room (14 seats) has been in very high demand. The college has been awarded HEFCE CETL (Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching) which will focus teaching and learning development elsewhere on campus. Learner support will move to the new centre, providing a less conspicuous venue. The eLearning Development Team will also be moved there, and there will be new staff development facilities for trying out and creating teaching and learning resources. Wireless coverage is increasing to meet demands. In time, the intention is to reduce the proportion of fixed computer provision, in favour of offering more space, reduced noise and greater flexibility for students using their own computers. Wireless networking is being rolled out to other spaces on the campus (animal houses, dairy) where teaching or research takes place. The security will be upgraded in due course. The decision for the time being is to restrict food and drink to the café, though water is allowed in other areas it is not allowed at computers. It is likely that there will be an experiment to install wireless networking in the café.

Picture Gallery

The Bamford Library


Mixed use of space – including social space

Using furniture to create natural breaks and sound barriers

Open access computer cluster

Open, light and airy space

New teaching space including an interactive whiteboard Dedicated ICT Training Room


Visit Six Name of Institution

South East Essex College – [http://www.se-essex-college.ac.uk]

Type of Institution


Date of Visit

4th May 2005

Name and Job Title of Interviewee

Paul Groom - Director of Information Services

Reasons for Visit

To report on the radical new building design at the college and the use of flexible learning spaces

Main Findings

Driven by a strong personal vision the college has sought to use the space, and the layout of the space, to bring about far greater use of modern teaching methods; these include group work, collaborative work, extensive use of ILT and supported selfstudy. Teaching staff are still at the centre of the academic activity, but learning support staff are playing an increasingly direct role in student learning.

Funding Sources

The new building of South East Essex College was funded from a number of different sources. The major ones were reserves and borrowing, the LSC, European Regional Development Fund, Thames Gateway and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minster. Operational - Other drivers identified were a need to increase student numbers (as identified by the Learning and Skills Council) and the needs of the widening participation agenda.

Key Drivers

Pedagogic – The former Principal, Tony Pitcher, had a vision for post-16 teaching and learning. His aim was to create flexible learning spaces where a number of groups could work simultaneously. These learning spaces would be staffed by tutors and support staff and would aim to deliver resourced based learning with learners engaging in group work. There is also an emphasis on the use of ILT (information and learning technology) to deliver learning. This pedagogical approach was a major driver in the shaping of the building.


No. The college doesn’t have a central unit to support learning development.


The new building helped the college to continue its move to the use of flexible open learning spaces. This model of delivery involves a number of groups sharing the same learning space. There is a strong emphasis on group work, resource based learning and ILT. The college has developed its own VLE (virtual learning environment) onto which staff are encouraged to upload learning resources for learners to access. In addition to teaching staff these learning centres are also staffed by learning support staff and a learning centre co-ordinator.


The college have more support staff than most similar institutions would have. The lecturer’s role has changed from a traditional one to many teaching role, to a more facilitative role. Lecturers are also expected to be able to make use of the college’s VLE and to share any resources that they have created with their colleagues.

Management of Learning All the learning spaces in the college are managed centrally. However there is an Spaces informal sub-culture of room swapping between teaching staff. Enhancing Learning and

There is no hard empirical evidence within the college to demonstrate that teaching


Teaching


and learning has been improved by changes in delivery. However there is a general feeling amongst staff and learners that teaching and learning has been enhanced by the use of learning technologies and flexible learning centres. Some staff initially found the change to teaching in learning centres challenging. Over time, however, staff attitudes have become more positive. Learners like access to computers in the learning centres; this is particularly marked amongst learners whose previous educational experiences were not positive as they will often see this new approach to teaching and learning as a fresh start.

Picture Gallery


Visit Seven Name of Institution

University of Aberdeen – [http://www.aberdeen.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of visit

19th April 2005


Heather Dale – Senior Assistant Registrar

Reasons for Visit

Main Findings

Patricia Spence – Learning Technology Unit Manager The survey return and additional information showed that at the University of Aberdeen the following were evident: • Senior management are highly support of innovations • Consideration is given to scalability of innovations • Innovation is widespread • Innovation is driven by learning and teaching needs • Staff responsible for the management of learning spaces are aware of the need to innovate • Staff development incorporates the use of new technologies The University of Aberdeen is a medium –sized University with a positive approach to innovation. Innovation is seen as a routine part of daily working and is driven by the learning, teaching and assessment needs. The different stakeholders communicate well and seem to share a common sense of purpose. "Communication is the key to innovation." – Heather Dale "Working together with a shared sense of purpose." – Particia Spense

Funding Sources

Primarily central university funds, some SHEFC (Scottish Higher Education Funding Council) [http://www.shefc.ac.uk] funded projects. Key drivers for innovation come from two main areas, pedagogic and operational. The visit was organised by the assistant registrar responsible for room bookings and timetabling. Included in the visit were key members of the Directorate for Information Services and representatives from two of the academic teaching schools.

Key Drivers

Operational Drivers - Like most universities, Aberdeen seeks to optimise the use of its estate. Centralised management of estate is one of the key ways of achieving this, not only by allowing greater flexibility in timetabling but also by greater economies of scale in purchase and support costs. However, this is not a one size fits all approach, with careful attention being paid to the needs of different departments and innovative teaching requirements. As new technologies become available so they are adopted in teaching and learning situations. These technologies have to be provided so that they work in a consistent and reliable fashion, they also have to be maintained to continue to work in that way. So the Directorate of Information Systems and Services (DISS – [http://www.aberdeen.ac.uk/diss]), who are responsible for the technology, are driven by the need to make the technology available. At a higher level the operational drivers for the use of new technology are to achieve greater operational effectiveness. Pedagogic Drivers - Aberdeen is a long-established research intensive university with high academic standards, for both teaching and research. Academic teaching


staff are driven by the need for constant improvement in teaching methods. This requires the use of innovative teaching methods and innovative learning spaces. Although the drivers can be divided between pedagogic and operational, the main enabler for innovation at Aberdeen was the sense of partnership and mutual trust. Pedagogic needs identified by teaching staff were accepted as legitimate by administrative and support staff, even though they might be challenging or even unachievable, a willingness to "try it and see" allowed technologies to be introduced and objectively evaluated. Similarly the teaching staff trusted that the administrative and support teams were making every reasonable effort to deliver their requirements. Communications were good both within departments and across the University as a whole, reinforcing the innovative environment.


Although there was no single unit that was responsible for developing and supporting academic practice, there were positive and co-operative attitudes to pedagogic innovation and development from across the corporate services.


Technology is used to support an evolution of learning and teaching. New technology is made available to teaching staff, who are then able to explore the ways in which it can best enhance their teaching.


The University staff are flexible in their roles, the impression is that the overall aims of the services are seen as more important that individual job descriptions.


This is done by a close alliance between the converged Directorate of Information Services, the Academic Registry (responsible for timetabling) and teaching staff.


Enhancing learning and teaching is viewed as an ongoing process. Teaching staff take a lead in identifying the areas in which technological developments will enhance their work, corporate services staff then seek to provide those requirements within the available resources.


Staff work in a mutually trusting environment, formal working methodologies are used when it is felt necessary, but most needs for innovation are delivered as and when required.

Picture Gallery

Before refurbishment A 'traditional' wet-lab


After refurbishment

Working with computers in the laboratory


Visit Eight Name of Institution

University of Birmingham – [http://www.bham.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of Visit

April 2005 to June 2005

Name and Job Titles of Interviewees

Bob Hunter - Director of the Learning Development Unit Stephen Clarke – Head of eLearning Toni Kelly – Learning Accommodation Projects Manager Dan Corlett – CETADL Projects Manager

Reasons for the Visit

The University of Birmingham has made substantial developments in its use of both learning technology and the design of physical learning spaces, over the past three to four years. The central Information Services department [http://www.is.bham.ac.uk] is a converged service responsible for the provision of learning spaces, IT services and the eLearning support service. Within Information Services, and incorporating the eLearning support service, is a Learning Development Unit, which seeks to introduce new and flexible ways of teaching and learning to the university. This central department works in close co-operation with the university's CETADL (Centre for Educational Technology and Distance Learning – [http://www.cetadl.bham.ac.uk]) research unit. This has led to a number of research projects being scaled-up into institutional services. The University of Birmingham, in common with other similar universities, has a highly devolved structure. Academic schools and departments take a lead upon, and responsibility for, all matters relating to learning and teaching. The central support services, of which Information Services is one, provide a range of services to those schools and departments – although many provide some services of their own to complement those available from the centre.

Main Findings

The last five years have seen, starting with the building of a central learning centre, a move from school-based learning spaces towards centrally managed learning spaces. Although the university still has, and will for the foreseeable future have, a blend of school-managed and centrally-managed learning spaces. During this time the university has also sought to roll-out, and incorporate into learning spaces, a wide range of learning technologies including managed desktops, a virtual learning environment, wireless LAN and collaborative working software. The scope of what constitutes a managed learning space has also extended to include social areas, with plans for more technological development in social areas and greater provision of drink and snack outlets within library and other learning spaces. Plans for the near future include considerably extended availability of desktop videoconferencing and the use of web-streaming.

Funding Sources

Key Drivers

HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England) – [http://www.hefce.ac.uk]) Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund - [http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2002/02_24.htm] Operational Drivers- Operationally many academic schools are now looking to get better value from their 'corporate services contribution' (a payment made by schools to fund the provision of central services). This has led to greater reliance upon central learning spaces, which in turn have had to deliver a broader range of facilities and a higher standard of equipment.


Pedagogic Drivers - Pedagogically the university seeks to use learning technologies and learning spaces to enhance the quality of the learning, and the quality of the student experience. Learning technologies are seen as a means of providing additional pedagogic opportunities that build upon established good practice. The aspiration is to deliver an appropriate, and pedagogically validated, blend of traditional teaching with a variety of new and flexible methods of learning and teaching. Academic teaching staff receive support in a range of ways. Support for the practical use of learning equipment in teaching and learning spaces is provided by the Learning Resources Accommodation Team [http:/www.lrat.bham.ac.uk], this team of technicians install and maintain equipment, and will give staff and students instructions in the operation of equipment within learning spaces.


Training and support in the use of learning software is provided by the central eLearning Team [http://www.weblearn.bham.ac.uk], via a range of formal training courses, online training and support and personal support and consultation. The Learning Development Unit, of which the central eLearning Team is a part, also funds and supports a wide range of learning and teaching projects. These projects seek to develop new and flexible methods of learning and teaching and to apply them in a genuine learning and/or teaching situation. The Staff Development Unit provides general and pedagogic training to academic teaching staff, this includes a PGCHE (Post-Graduate Certificate in Higher Education) along with a range of other accredited and non-accredited courses.


Over recent years the University has made a strong move towards a blended approach to learning. Learning technologies are not being used to replace more established methods of learning and teaching, but to enhance and complement them. Around 30% of modules now have an online component, 95% of undergraduates are enrolled on one or more online courses and the virtual learning environment received over 1 million visits in the last academic year, this number is growing rapidly. The teams responsible for learning space projects work closely with the learning technologists, ensuring that new and refurbished learning spaces are able to support the online activities that have now become a routine part of learning. A number of other innovations are currently being developed and are spreading rapidly, in particular use of video conferencing for distributed collaborative learning and mobile computing, which utilises the wireless networking that is already widely available and spreading rapidly [http://www.wireless.bham.ac.uk].


The greater use of learning technology has impacted in different ways on different types of staff. For teaching staff learning technologies provide a way of supplementing their teaching and improving quality, while reducing administration. Creation of online materials requires investment of time, as does the creation of any learning material, but the reduced burden of tasks like marking and student monitoring enables staff to increase the proportion of their teaching time that is spent supporting learning, rather than administering learning. For support staff the use and management of technology is now a routine part of their work. For many staff there has been a change towards a more specialised role, particularly in the support of the use of online learning and the use of technologicallyrich learning spaces.

The management, and particularly the development, of learning spaces is now a Management of Learning highly specialised role with a need to have knowledge and understanding not just of the technology that is going into learning space, but also of the ways in which it is Spaces used, and may potentially be used.


Furthermore the scope of learning space management has extended. Library and other study spaces are changing, and are becoming more challenging to manage. Students are expecting facilities to access computers, display equipment, online information and to enable collaborative working. Many areas that may not previously have been considered as learning spaces, such as common rooms and cafes, are now being equipped with a wide range of learning technologies. There is an increasing trend to optimise use of all spaces for the support of learning, both for operational efficiency and the quality of the student experience. One of the main barriers to the uptake of new and innovative learning and teaching methods, particularly more student focused approaches, has been the availability of suitable learning spaces. The traditional lecture does, and will continue to, play an important role in the learning and teaching processes, however the wider range of facilities now gives teaching staff a greater choice in how contact time is used and the learning activities that can be provided outside the established contact time.


Guaranteed availability of a large number of desktop computers configured, supported and maintained to a common standard, ensures that teaching staff can rely upon their students being able to access online materials, participate in 'scaffold' learning [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_scaffolding] and course related discussions. Examples of this taking place are numerous, but include video-based movement analysis with nursing and physiotherapy, professional learning mentors within medicine and studies into ethnic diversity within social sciences. Furthermore the widespread use of online learning, combined with easy availability of computers with which to access that online learning has enabled teaching staff to monitor, guide and support a far wider spectrum of the students' learning, whether those students are campus-based or remote.

Picture Gallery

Working collaboratively in a flexible learning room


Distributed learning connecting Birmingham and Dublin

Changing the library

At 8am during vacation, computer clusters are still popular

With a range of furniture…


The former current periodicals room is now a wellequipped computer cluster

The 'junior common room' in the Arts building is now a popular space for work and socialising

….and a coffee bar

Sometimes a wireless network point …

….is all that it takes to create a learning space

Practical research in to the use of mobile computers…….

…will help the University to plan for their widescale use


Visit Nine Name of Institution

University of Bristol – [http://www.bristol.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of visit

26th April 2005

Names and Job Titles of interviewees

Sue Timmis – eLearning Research Fellow Dr Jocelyn Wishart- Graduate School of Education Sue Somerset- Teaching Space Co-ordinator John Stanton- Director of Estate Development

Reasons for Visit

The University started a major refurbishment programme in 2004. A survey showed that a staff development programme is an essential component to ensure that new technologies are exploited in a positive way.

Main Findings

As a result of teaching space questionnaire, the University has decided to hold a ‘Teaching Space Management Process Review.’ This review should help them to form a university-wide teaching space management strategy.

Funding Sources

Key Drivers


Currently there are no central funds to support the emerging institutional VLE (virtual learning environment). Funds are mainly provided through the Medical and Veterinary Schools HEFCE Teaching and Learning funding has been allocated to refurbish 15 centralised lecture theatres (£1.2 million). In December 2005 the University allocated £2.5 million to continue the funding. Operational Drivers – The University needs to be able to provide a high-quality service to students while they are off-campus, with approximately 20% of students being off-campus at any one time. The University is still largely devolved with facilities and support managed locally by Schools and Departments. Pedagogic Drivers - The VLE has outgrown its pilot usage, but is not supported centrally. Maintaining a high quality of service as demand continues to rise is seen as important. There is now an increasing desire amongst staff to use VLE technology in their teaching. An eLearning strategy has recently been produced. There are several units with a remit which includes research into innovation in learning and teaching technologies. These include: The Institute for Learning and Research Technology (ILRT), who are usually invited to take part in any new projects; and the Learning Technology Support Service (LTSS), which aims to enable the adoption and implementation of appropriate technologies in the support of learning, teaching and research. The Staff Development Unit (SDU) which has a programme of development to which LTSS contributes. Currently the different units are not linked strategically with respect to planned innovations and projects.


There have been several successful initiatives which have resulted in changes to the delivery of learning and teaching. Recently a pilot scheme looking at the use of handheld computers and mobile phones has been undertaken with PGCE (PostGraduate Certificate in Education) science students. Further projects include looking at uses of 'blogging' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogging] for economics students.


eBeam [http://www.e-beam.com/] facilities have been purchased and are being trialled currently but are not installed in regular teaching rooms The medical, dental and veterinary schools are building a database of clinical cases for experiential learning, and to act as virtual cases for assessment purposes. The University's 'SignLab' is used for teaching sign language, mostly to hearing people.


To date, the space management strategies have not made specific reference to teaching estate, so there has not been a strategy relating specifically to teaching and learning spaces. A major driver for the process review is to gain academic input for such a strategy, which will in turn change the way in which teaching staff are involved in the space management processes. The University has a new Vice-Chancellor, who has a clear vision for space management and is creating a new university structure to manage the decision making processes. Currently, a great deal of teaching and learning space is managed by the individual academic schools and departments. The University is about to implement a 'Teaching Space Management Review' in order to create a strategy for all teaching and learning spaces. Large teaching spaces have been managed centrally since the early nineties, but there has not been a formal management framework. There have also not been any major investment programmes.

Management of Learning One of the aims of the new regime is to change perceptions of ownership, with the Spaces use of a space charging system. However, small rooms will still be managed locally by academic schools and departments. Large lecture theatres are now being refurbished to a common standard and new centralised teaching space being built - the ‘NUCLEUS’ centre. (New University Centre for Learning and Education for University Students). Currently, the audiovisual support is distributed around campus, with no central helpdesk. The draft elearning strategy recognises need to review physical space to support elearning.


Various technologies are being employed to enhance teaching and learning. A wireless network is being used, but there are still issues to be addressed with regard to the infrastructure. For example, it is currently felt that the security is too tight, and students are unable to log on with handheld computers. The system is currently not designed for 'nomadic' use and is unable to support a whole class for simultaneous use. However, further wireless network points are being installed as buildings are upgraded and refurbished. Twenty four hour access to the library has helped to improve access to technological and other learning resources. Halls of residence have a system called RESNET [http://www.resnet.bristol.ac.uk/]. This is used as a source of help information for other users of wireless devices. Signlab [http://www.sign-lab.org/] is a facility consisting of Apple Macintosh [http://www.apple.com/] computers with bespoke software. , headsets and web cams used for teaching signing and assessing translation skills.


The University, through the Teaching Space Co-ordinator, ran a teaching and learning space management survey for four weeks during May and June 2005. The survey was run through the 'Bristol Online Survey Tool' [http://www.survey.bris.ac.uk/] and was open to all students.


The aim of the survey was to gain student opinion for both teaching and learning space management processes and to inform the NUCLEUS Project [http://www.bris.ac.uk/nucleus/]. The objectives of the survey were to: • Gain Student feedback on current t & L space provision and management • Improve understanding of what students would ideally like to see in the provision of new or refurbishment of existing space • Increase knowledge of students’ external access to technology • Gain a better understanding of constraints on students’ time and the integration of the teaching timetable with their overall schedule. The survey was circulated to 20,000 students and 2,287 responses were received. The final report cannot be reproduced here, however, some interesting comments were received, including: "Need better off-peak computing facilities." "Need more computers." "Wireless access would be excellent." "Blackboard is a God-send" "Would like to see all lectures recorded for us to download if we want to recap." "I have access to web-cams for recording BSL communication, the facilities are really great, it enhances my learning tremendously." Picture Gallery


Visit Ten Name of Institution

University of Hertfordshire – [http://www.herts.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of visit

4th May 2005 Di Martin – Dean of Learning and Information Services (LIS)


Professor Peter Bullen – Director; Blended Learning Unit (BLU) John Altree – Deputy Director; Blended Learning Unit (BLU) Adam Hervey – Media Consultant (LIS)

Reasons for Visit

The Survey return showed that at the University of Hertfordshire, the following were evident: • The was a strong and active commitment to the development and management of teaching space • That the institution had a strong vision for the support of learning and teaching • Innovation is widespread • Innovation is driven by teaching and learning needs The University of Hertfordshire is a medium sized university, with an active and positive approach to innovation. There is a clear vision that innovation is a constant part of learning and teaching, which needs to continually address the pedagogic and operational challenges created by the changing teaching and learning needs and changes in technology.

Main Findings

The academic and corporate agenda seem to be well co-ordinated and indicate a shared sense of purpose. Staff in the University believe that “it is progressive, dynamic, innovative, an exciting place to be” Staff in the University believe in “working together with a shared sense of purpose.” The underlying philosophy is one of “giving students a strong sense of ownership.”

Funding Sources

Funds are primarily central funds, from the core budget. The University has recently closed two remote campuses generating funding for a new, purpose built, campus close to the main site. Operational – in the early 1990's the University started to look at what type of facilities students and staff would require of a university in the 21st Century. This process was informed by the Follett report and the Government policy to increase student numbers. As a result of this process the institution recognised the need to rationalise remote sites

Key Drivers

Pedagogic - the University published its first 'Learning Resources Strategy' in 1995. This activity was driven by the central services, but academic representation was strong. The University strategy is driving the use of the University's MLE (managed learning environment - [http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=circular_1_01]) and staff have targets for content creation, but are supported by a “mentoring” arrangement. Under this mentoring arrangement academics, identified as champions within each of the departments, provide information and practical support to new, and less experienced, staff. All modules taught within the institution have some presence on


StudyNet [http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/ltdu/may2003.nsf/getpage?readform&id=editorial].

Although all courses are expected to have a presence on StudyNet there is still a very strong message that for learning, “one size does not fit all.”


A result of the University’s well established MLE, StudyNet, and institutional strategy for learning and teaching, the University has seen a high level of blended learning being delivered. The newly created Blended Learning Unit (BLU – [http://perseus.herts.ac.uk/uhinfo/info/blu/]) will enable further development, evaluation and dissemination of blended learning for all students and create more choice in the way they learn. The BLU is creating as its base a “drop in centre” within one of the learning resource centres, and is looking to design 'Blended Learning Classrooms' for up to 25 students. Consideration is also being given to the creation of an observation room for use in the development of teaching skills. The Learning Technology Development Unit [http://www.herts.ac.uk/ltdu/] is responsible for delivering the three stage staff development programme, for the training of staff in the use of all learning technologies. StudyNet is used in the delivery of this training, exposing new staff to the MLE at an early stage. Approximately 400 – 600 academics receive training each year. Further support is provided online and through a “Champion” scheme. Designated named learning technology champions exist in each department to provide expert advice in the use of learning technologies. These staff are able to help on a practical level, with peer support being seen to be key in encouraging staff to use and develop their elearning modules. The university has been active in developing tools to support teaching and learning for many years. It rolled out an integrated student desktop in 1996 and began development of an in-house purpose built MLE. The resulting StudyNet system was rolled out 2001-02. By 2004-05 4 million accesses had been recorded. StudyNet is used by approximately 90% of staff and students. All academic staff are required to have some, if not all of their teaching and learning modules, available through StudyNet. Although use of the MLE is high, there has been no reduction in the numbers of visits to the library or in the number of books issued. Overall, there has been an improvement in the utilisation of resources generally.


Hertfordshire has some very large teaching groups, in one case a group of 800 needed to attend lectures in groups of 200. Today these students are able to access a narrated version of the lecture beforehand and the actual lecture slot is managed as a workshop. This has improved engagement, interaction and reduced failure rates. An audience response system is to be piloted during 2005-06, with a view to integrating results into the student study record when appropriate. Funding from the CETL (Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning – [http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/TInits/cetl/]) and central capital has provided laptop computers and a variety of educational technologies for staff. The

Learning

and

Information Services Department, LIS [http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/lis.nsf], are currently looking at interactive whiteboards for use in the large teaching venues. The School of Education are already using Smartboards. The university has seen a sharp rise in the rate of student laptop ownership, with students using wireless facilities in the learning resource centres and halls of residence.


The delivery of services to support the learning resource centres, teaching rooms and Studynet are managed through a relatively small staff base reporting through LIS. As a result, the emphasis of support is based very strongly around self-service, for example, self issue book loans. Each centre has a small helpdesk team who are able


to respond to queries relating to library, computing and teaching rooms. Over 100 self-help resources, in print and on-line, are available, with plans to increase these further. Learning resource centres are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with a security presence throughout this time. Enquiry staff are available between the hours of 8.30am and 10pm. All teaching rooms are in central management, 163 in total. The university has a rolling programme of development of teaching rooms and has recently revised its specification for upgrade to ensure that all rooms are equipped with built in media presentation facilities to reduce the number of equipment deliveries currently Management of Learning undertaken. There is a small team of technicians providing second line support Spaces where problems in teaching rooms cannot be resolved by the LIS teams, or a media consultant. The learning resource centres contain a large number of group study rooms, all of which will be equipped with presentation equipment during the summer. The following recent developments are seen as having significantly enhanced learning and teaching: • • • • • •


• • • • • • • •


Wireless networking is available throughout all three learning resource centres Over 1000 personal laptops have been registered for access to the wireless network service There are now 2942 study places Over 14,000 bookings have been made by students for the group study rooms in the learning resource centres There are 1,500 computer workstations The library and learning resource centres are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. There are two video studios. There are two video conference studios There are two multimedia development suites There are social and refreshment areas in the learning resource centres There is a student portal There are audio induction guides for the learning resource centres Network points and telephone dial up facilities are available in student residences Planned further developments include a new digital laboratory and new computer labs

Staff are both committed to, and enthused by, the work they are doing and are reporting that students are engaging more. The University currently has a member of staff who has been awarded “e-Tutor of the year” [http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/etutor.htm], an award which staff at the University have won in previous years. The students observed in the learning resource centres were taking full advantage of the resources available to them. The University runs an annual student feedback survey, which is showing that there is a high satisfaction rate by current students (2.08 during 2003/04 on a 5 point scale where 1 is high and 5 low).


Picture Gallery

The Fielder Centre One of the learning resource centres


Visit Eleven Name of Institution

University of Strathclyde – [http://www.strath.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of visit

14th April 2005 Estates Team: Graham Roderick and Eleanor Magennis

Names and Job Titles of Interviewees

IT Support: Bruce Rogers and Pat McGuiness, Academic: Professor Jim Boyle

Reasons for Visit

To visit the University’s centrally provided 'Managed Teaching Cluster' that was designed for use with mechanical engineering students and to see how these facilities were established. The University has developed and implemented three phases in the development of ‘Managed Teaching Clusters’ that included fixed, curved seating for group work in large lecture rooms in the first phase, and mobile tiered seating in lecture rooms in the following phases (see the picture gallery below).

Main Findings

Development and implementation of these spaces is achieved though the estates teams working closely with the academic schools and the IT department. There is ongoing interaction with academics, with teaching sessions held regularly to encourage staff to use the innovative teaching spaces and related technologies.

Funding Sources

Funding of £1 million for the first phase of the work came from the SHEFC (Scottish Higher Education Funding Council – [http://www.shefc.ac.uk]) fund for refurbishing teaching spaces. This was used to refurbish the teaching space to support the learning and teaching strategy for the School of Mechanical Engineering. Due to the success of the first phase, funding was made available from the University's own internal infrastructure fund to develop further managed clusters of learning and teaching spaces.

Key Drivers

Operational – Over the last 15 years the estates strategy has been to consolidate teaching activities, in order to improve operational efficiency by reducing the geographical spread of teaching spaces and reducing the number of non-standard, or sub-standard, teaching rooms. The Estates Department has done this by bringing the centrally managed teaching spaces together into what they have called ‘Managed Teaching Clusters.’ This was seen as more cost effective in terms of managing these spaces. For the first of these centrally managed teaching clusters, academic departments were asked to put forward suggestions as to how they would refurbish the centrally managed teaching spaces within their school managed buildings. This gave ‘ownership’ to the academics and ensured that the projects were pedagogically driven. Pedagogical – Supported by the University’s Teaching and Learning Methodologies Initiative (TLMI – [http://www.strath.ac.uk/ces/tlmi/tlmi.html]), the School of Mechanical Engineering developed peer instruction, based on a model seen at Harvard [http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?ed=1&rowid=8]. The TLMI then made recommendations that investment should be made in developing the physical teaching environment to enhance the quality of the interactive learning and teaching. Supported by the Dean of Engineering, the School of Mechanical Engineering put forward a proposal for the first of these Managed Teaching Clusters to support peer instruction. Evaluations and feedback show that the development of the managed


teaching cluster has enhanced the learning experience of students and has significantly improved student retention. To formally bring the operational and pedagogical drivers together, the University has set up a Teaching Infrastructure Strategy Group to explore further developments and build on the good practice that they have developed. Other key committees at the University, such as the Hub Committee (responsible for IT), have members that include academics and the Estates Department. This ensures a ‘joined-up’ approach to developments in learning technologies and learning space.


There is a central support unit, called the Centre for Academic Practice that is focused on supporting and developing academic practice. [http://www.strath.ac.uk/Departments/CAP/]

Staff and students are moving towards a more interactive approach to teaching and learning. Peer instruction has been possible with the introduction of the Personal Response System (PRS) – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_response_system] and the Studio Class Room, as shown in the picture gallery. Changes in Learning and Teaching Methods

Group work is proving popular the picture gallery shows the curved seating that has been designed to help group working. Each group of four students are given a PRS remote control and feedback their group responses to the tutor. A laptop initiative has also been helpful in supporting group work – learning spaces have been specifically designed to support the use of laptops, with a range of chairs and tables that can be moved to support different learning and teaching methods, as shown in the picture gallery. Cameras link rooms together so break out sessions can be held. Staff are facilitating group work more and more as peer instruction, problem-based learning and other interactive approaches to learning are adopted.


Traditional lectures are still seen as a valuable learning and teaching method, but the way this pedagogical model dominates is a problem. The level of enthusiasm across the full spectrum of staff is variable, but there are few complaints.

The spaces referred to in this study are all centrally managed, with a member of staff Management of Learning from the ‘local’ school taking responsibility for anything from room maintenance to Spaces staff induction.



The introduction of the PRS and the curved design of the seating in the large lecture theatre has been a great success, with a perceived benefit in terms of student retention. Attendance in the lectures has also been over 90% at all times, due to student enthusiasm for this style of teaching. Another area that has been successful is the 'Studio Teaching' in the computer lab shown in the picture gallery. The decision was taken not to carry out evaluation until staff felt comfortable with the new initiatives. There were some focus groups with students, which gave positive feedback. A number of articles have been written on the work of Professor Jim Boyle and his colleagues. It is clear that student expectations of technology are rising.


Picture Gallery

Curved seating to support Inter-Active Teaching

A range of different types of tables can be moved to support different learning and teaching methods – designed to support the use of mobile computers with wireless networking.

The 'Studio Class Room' has two ‘teaching’ areas at the front with benching and seating that enables interaction to support a range of learning and teaching methods.

Bird's eye view of a parliamentary style lecture theatre.

The theatre style seating can be moved back to support a range of different activities



Visit Twelve Name of Institution

University of Ulster – [http://www.ulster.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of Visit

5th May 2005

Name and Job Title of Interviewees

Noel Wilson - Assistant Director (IT User Services) Mervyn Watley – Head of Planning and Development (Physical Resources Department)


The University has recently built a new Learning Resource Centre. The team felt that, from the associated description, there was a range of technologies that had been applied in an innovative fashion.

Main Findings

The learning spaces have evolved away from specific subject rooms to multiple use spaces incorporating new technologies. Capital funding is obtained in two portions; one associated with the physical space and the other associated with the technology provision within the space.

Funding Sources

Learning space developments receive university funding in addition to that available from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) “Capital Rounds 2 and 3” Initiatives. In Northern Ireland, the Department of Employment and Learning (DEL) [http://www.delni.gov.uk] administers HEFCE allocations. The maximum capital allocation obtainable from DEL and HEFCE is 75-90%, the average amount being between 50 and 75%. The Learning Resource Centres (LRCs) at the Jordanstown and Magee campuses were funded partly by DEL and partly by The Atlantic Philanthropies [http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/], an international grant making foundation. In addition there was a direct contribution from the University of Ulster. Overall the Jordanstown LRC was funded by DEL (41%), Atlantic Philanthropies (40%) and the University core budget (19%). The LRC on the Magee campus was funded by Atlantic Philanthropies (65%) and DEL (35%). Operational - Growth in student numbers, and in particular the changes in profile of students across campus, has a significant impact on the learning space requirements of the University. Currently the University considers it equally important to provide both physical space and associated technologies for all disciplines, to support student growth.

Key Drivers

Pedagogic - At a strategic level, over the past few years, major drivers are an increasing emphasis on group activity and the impact of e-learning. The University is a major WebCT-based [http://www.webct.com] institution. For example, the majority of existing courses now incorporate an element of e-learning. This particular development facilitates changes in course delivery, as there is less need to have all the students together in one place as frequently as with traditional teaching methods. The ability to learn independently and to participate in group-based activity is beneficial. As a result of such trends, student dependency on unsupervised use of IT facilities has increased. This change in learning style coincides with the development of the Learning Resource Centres (LRCs) where, for example, over 400 personal computers are now available on the Jordanstown campus, as well as extensive provision for group study activity and the use of personal mobile computers. The need for course-specific learning spaces, for example, for art, media and technology courses is another driver for innovative learning space development.


At the Magee campus a new £3million purpose-designed facility has been created, within a 19th century listed building, to meet the needs of the creative and performing arts [http://www.ulster.ac.uk/news/releases/2003/942.html]. Since 2000, the University has achieved the top rating in the Learning Resources category of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) [http://www.qaa.ac.uk] subject reviews, with only two exceptions. This category includes IT and other technologies associated with teaching and learning, and the consistently high scores are an indicator of the extent to which the University has been developing its learning spaces.


At the University there are two organisational units associated with academic support services; these are the Staff Development department [http://www.ulster.ac.uk/staffdev/] and the Institute of Lifelong Learning (ILL) [http://www.ulster.ac.uk/lll/]. These units work very closely together to provide ongoing staff development opportunities. The Staff Development department is the lead player in the provision and delivery of development opportunities, however it works with the Institute of Life Long Learning, and other units, to ensure a comprehensive portfolio of opportunities. The responsibility for the university’s virtual campus, called CampusOne [http://campusone.ulster.ac.uk/], and for the promotion of E-Learning development strategies resides within ILL. One of the changes brought about by the use of new technologies within learning spaces is the ability to effectively manage large class sizes, without repeating teaching sessions. Since 1990, the University has used video-conferencing technology to link studio space on the Magee, Coleraine and Jordanstown campuses, the Belfast campus was added later. In the past year the video-conference service has been expanded to provide “Video-Classrooms” (see the picture gallery) that allow for the support of much larger classes and the corresponding reduction in course duplication across campuses.


Professor Maurice Stringer, a professor of psychology stated “There is a real need for the use of this technology, to allow the efficient teaching of larger group sizes, such as my own classes. This is now crucial to the University”. Videoconferencing is also used to teach language courses, not only on the University’s four campuses but also with overseas-based students -“..fantastic time saver, with very significant savings in costs. Allows regular contact with our overseas PhD students, facilitating the exchange of ideas and information in our international research programmes." - Dr. Hugh McGlynn. To support the increased usage of video-conferencing, there is extensive training available to academic staff, there are ‘drop-in’ sessions on use of facilities and a course called “Technology and Pedagogy” for teaching applications, which is delivered in partnership with academic staff who are experienced in technologyenhanced teaching methods.


There is a significant influence of e-learning on the role of staff and their resource provision in support of taught courses. Sitting alongside this development is a major investment programme in learning technologies (mainly IT equipment within teaching spaces and video-conferencing services) that is also heavily influencing how teaching and learning experiences are provided. The University’s Staff Development department has responsibility for ensuring that staff feel comfortable and confident with the use of modern technology. The Information Services Department (ISD) [http://www.ulster.ac.uk/isd/], provides and manages IT equipment and also seeks to ensure the effectiveness of its use; either by hosting technical awareness and training sessions or through working with Staff Development department and faculty “advocates” to provide more detailed development programmes.


There has been a notable change in how staff prepare resources to support their courses. The University regards e-learning in the same way as it does traditional course provision; both modes of delivery are subjected to formal rigorous course approval and review processes. High-quality e-learning generally entails much more consideration than merely the production of electronic handouts and their hosting on the VLE. Academic staff receive training in the use of the VLE and the University Institute of Lifelong Learning produces suitably enriched e-resources to support of conventional and online courses [http://campusone.ulster.ac.uk/]. Learning space across the campus is centrally managed, with the University timetable controlled by the Physical Resources Department (PRD) [http://www2.ulster.ac.uk/staff/dept-physres.html]. Centrally managed teaching spaces Management of Learning (classrooms, lecture theatres and IT labs) are all of a generic type. Specialised Spaces spaces are associated with Faculties, however they are timetabled by PRD so that an institution-wide perspective of space utilisation can be achieved. The centralised timetable is available to staff and students via the intranet; students may obtain a personalised timetable through a ‘portal-type’ interface.


The impact on physical space developments coupled with technology provision, including a growth in the use of e-learning resources, is difficult to quantify. There is, however, a clear perception that the quality of the learning experience has improved. Students can now download web-based materials before they attend a lecture, hence familiarising themselves with the forthcoming topic; they then acquire additional notes and discuss issues with their lecturer and participate in group activities to consolidate their learning experiences. “Overall it [new technology] has considerably enhanced the student experience." [Noel Wilson, Assistant Director (IT User Services)] ”For example, in our 2003-2004 Assessment of Teaching Survey both items relating to opinion on the quality of technology in support of presentation and audibility were rated as 'Strongly Agree' indicating the level of acceptability of our provision." Student mobility is a recent phenomenon, indicating further technological developments, most notably those associated with wireless technology and an ability to assess critical information in an ‘anytime anywhere’ mode. At the Magee campus, a Department of Enterprise Trade and Industry (DTI)-funded wireless campus initiative aims to achieve an infrastructure for the city. This infrastructure is provided by a partnership involving the University, Derry City Council and the North-West Institute for Further and Higher Education [http://www.nwifhe.ac.uk]. This partnership is referred to in a recent University news release [http://www.ulst.ac.uk/news/releases/2005/1707.html]. This project will place the city and its university at the forefront of modern communications technology thus allowing students to learn ‘on the move’ and in their own time and place. The University conducts an 'Assessment of Teaching' survey, and has been doing so for many years. The psychical environment and academic quality are included, and there is evidence to show that there has been a gradual enhancement of both teaching methods and learning spaces [http://www.ulster.ac.uk/quality/qmau/currentstud.html].


The quality of teaching and learning, given that it is built upon the use of technology, will be influenced by the quality of the supporting technology. There has been very positive feedback from academics regarding the technological developments within classrooms. The University’s Information Services Department senior management team meets annually with each Faculty Executive to determine a set of joint strategic priorities and in this forum there has been a very clear request made to continue this innovative development plan.


Picture Gallery

The Jordanstown Learning Resource Centre with 400 desktop computers


A 'Video-Classroom'

Visit Thirteen Name of Institution

University of Warwick – [http://www.warwick.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

University

Date of visit

21st April 2005 Matt Ismail


Mark Childs Steven Carpenter

Reasons for Visit

The survey return showed that at the University of Warwick the following were evident: • Innovation is widespread • Innovation is driven by learning and teaching needs • Staff development incorporates the use of new technologies •

Staff responsible for the management of learning spaces are aware of the need to innovate

The University of Warwick is a medium –sized University with a strong reputation for both teaching and research. Schools and departments have traditionally taken a strong lead on innovations within their particular areas. The visit focused on two key areas, the use of the access grid and a new student facility called the learning grid. The access grid [http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/csc/facilities/accessgrid/] was designed to support high-end collaborative research and teaching activity – particularly where video-conferencing was required to support distributed collaboration. The philosophy is to create a user-friendly environment that can be used by research and teaching staff. This room offers the potential to extend teaching activities beyond the limits of the traditional classroom in areas such as live performance, expert mentoring and synchronous wide area collaboration.

Main Findings

The 'Learning Grid' [http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/study/grid/], not to be confused with access grid despite the similar title, is a student centred open access learning space. The University has a deliberate and successful policy to "Give students a strong sense of ownership." The room is equipped with a wide range of equipment, both presentational and collaborative, some of which is very new, some of which is established technology. Wherever possible furniture and equipment are designed to be flexible and the students use the equipment to create their own learning situations, generally small group collaborative work but the main philosophy is to seek to incorporate all scenarios. The learning grid is a well designed area, and would appear to be a modern, purpose-built learning space. It is in fact a refurbishment of a former office building previously owned by the National Grid. Space has been well used and the restrictions imposed by the building have been turned to advantage, helping to break-up the space and provide some separation of groups without subdividing the space. The working environment is pleasant, light and airy. Moveable acoustic screens act as ad-hoc dividers and help to manage the noise levels. There is an active buzz of background noise that students appear to find relaxing and conducive to study, especially collaborative study.


The philosophy of the room is to allow flexibility and reconfiguration. This does leave the room, which is 24 hour access, vulnerable to some misuses, but the occasional connection of a games console to a plasma screen, although strongly discouraged, is not seen as harmful and doesn't appear to be a major problem. Food is allowed, this is a common trend, as are drinks. Alcohol and hot food are not allowed, although hot food can be eaten in the adjoining cafe area. Support staff are not placed at desks but are available within the room, identified by a blue t-shirt and pictures up on the plasma screens, these staff will both supervise the room and provide help to students. Consideration is being given to also introducing counselling support for students at times of high stress. Operational Drivers - The nature of modern teaching requires an increasing amount of group study. Spaces need to be provided for this that avoid other learning spaces, such as teaching rooms, laboratories and libraries, being overtaken by ad-hoc working groups. The University believes that facilities of this sort help to attract and retain students. Key Drivers

Having spaces open 24/7 also helps occupancy levels and reduces the need for further new build, so greater student numbers are accommodated through longer opening hours rather than increasing floor space. Pedagogic Drivers – Learning and teaching is currently in a period of change. Modern teaching methods are putting a greater emphasis on students to play an active part in their own learning. To ensure high-quality student-focused learning universities must provide high-quality student focused learning spaces. The Learning Grid is seen as an excellent example of such a space.


The

University

has

a

[http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/cap/]

Centre for Academic Practice that helps to develop new and innovative

learning and teaching activity. Changes in Learning and The learning grid supports the trend to more group work and a greater Teaching Methods proportion of supported self-study in the modern curriculum.


The most noticeable changes in staff roles relate to the way in which the support staff, in this case supporting the learning grid, are having an increasingly direct role in the students' learning. A more traditional arrangement might be for students in an open access learning space to seek support only when they encounter a specific problem, in this scenario they would walk to, phone or email a helpdesk which will open a traditional 'call', which is often referred to an appropriate expert, which will then be answered and the call closed. In the learning grid the staff are an integral part of the learning environment, requests for help, support and advice are not logged or measured, they are seen as a natural part of the learning process.

The management of this learning space is innovative in a number of ways. Technology is seen as essential and the ways in which it is used are determined by the students. Security devices are present, but are low profile and do not Management of Learning interfere with use of the equipment. The emphasis is on enabling use, rather than preventing misuse. The experience of the staff would suggest that while Spaces machines are being well used this is normally sufficient to deter deliberate misuse. Drinks and cold food are allowed, this is a growing trend but goes against the more traditional no food, drink, talking, mobile phones etc in learning spaces. Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

The space is open twenty four hours a day seven days a week, and there is staffing and security support available at all times.


The use of the room and l the contents of the collaborative whiteboards shows that the room is being well used and that the work is both focused and high quality. The room has been designed to support the way in which students work, rather than to change or direct the way in which they work. Another way of looking at it may be to say that the learning grid reinforces the aspects of student working that the University wishes to encourage.


Staff are highly motivated and proud of the work they are doing. Students seem focused and diligent in what they are doing.

Picture Gallery

The Access Grid Node




Visit Fourteen Name of Institution

York College – [http://www.yorkcollege.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

College of Further Education

Date of Visit

22nd April 2005

Names and Job Title) of Interviewees

Graeme Murdoch – Deputy Principal Azhar Iqbal – Information Manager

Reasons for Visit

York College are planning to close both their current sites and to build a completely new building at a third site. This provides an unusual opportunity to design a technologically rich and innovative learning environment from first principles. York College values the use of technology to enhance learning and teaching, and has appropriate structures in place to ensure that the key stakeholders are involved in the associated planning and development processes. Although the project is for an entirely new building the college is, nevertheless, facing a number of challenges in relation to its estate and the rollout of technology.

Main Findings

The new building strategy is offering the college a wide range of opportunities. The college management have not chosen to deploy unproven technology, for example, not to rely solely on wireless networking. However there will be wireless access throughout the building and the backbone or ‘infrastructure’ will enable technological changes in the future. The strategy is to "expect the unexpected" by building in such a way as to allow for flexibility both in the technologies within rooms and the levels of infrastructure, power and data, that are available. Staff from the college have travelled extensively across the UK, and locally, to discover what other institutions have done and to identify what they see as the 'bestpractice' most suited to their needs. The staff involved in the visits have brought back considerable knowledge and experience to feed into their own design processes. The design philosophy of the new building will be to ensure the flexibility to facilitate future pedagogic developments.

Funding Sources

The project will be funded by a combination of capital grant from the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) [http://www.lsc.gov.uk], sale of part of the existing estate, and college borrowings and reserves. Operational Drivers - The current estate is of variable quality and many of the older buildings are difficult to equip to the required standard. To do so would divert significant resource from programmes of study.

Key Drivers

The new building will provide a better overall facility within a smaller overall footprint, and with reduced operational costs will allow, resources to be directed into learning and teaching. Pedagogic Drivers – The current estate represents a barrier to the development of new and innovative pedagogy, particularly, but not exclusively, with respect to the use of technology. Overcrowded classrooms, lack of network connectivity, poor lighting and ventilation are pedagogic barriers that a new building would help to overcome.


In common with most colleges of this type academic support is provided by the academic departments, rather than a specialised unit.



The College is seeing a shift to more student-centred and interactive teaching methods. This trend is accelerated by a general increase in vocational training, which naturally favours those methods.


The greater availability of new technology will require staff to acquire new skills and to gain familiarity with a wider range of teaching and learning methodologies. Integrated building management systems, for example, will inevitably lead to significant changes for facilities and estates staff.

The learning spaces in the new building will be managed to match the needs of each of the curriculum areas, who are also involved in forming and implementing the ILT Management of Learning (Information and Learning Technology) strategy. The aspiration is to ensure that as Spaces the equipment within rooms needs to change the estate, particularly infrastructure, will not provide substantial barriers to those changes.


The new building will be designed around the needs of the college's portfolio of teaching and learning. Technological and space-related opportunities will be created by the design of the new building, and it is hoped that the building itself, in particular the infrastructural services, will be able to adapt and change as the learning and teaching needs change.


The staff approach to this major upheaval ranges from trepidation to eager anticipation, with all phases in between.

Picture Gallery

Artists impressions of the new building Work has started on the 'brown-field' site where the new college will be built.


Visit Fifteen Name of Institution

York St John College – [http://www.yorksj.ac.uk]

Type of Institution

College of Higher Education

Date of Visit

22nd April 2005

Name and Job Title(s) of Interviewee(s)

Patsy Cullen - Director of Learning and Teaching Gerry Kregor – E-learning Adviser


York St. John College has recently completed a substantial building project. The accommodation upgrade has provided an opportunity to reflect the modernisation of the college's learning and teaching strategy, in particular the move to a substantially greater proportion of supported self-study in the curriculum. York St John College needed to substantially change its learning and teaching methods, both to modernise its pedagogy, by introducing more flexible ways of learning and teaching, and to overcome a number of operational and financial challenges. The review of the curriculum identified the need to provide more contemporary learning and teaching space. One of the main actions to help achieve this was the building of a new learning centre that would provide a range of environments to support flexible ways of learning and teaching. The result of this project was the Fountains Learning Centre. This centre provides a range of modern learning and teaching facilities. The layout of the space and the balance between open access learning spaces and traditional large teaching rooms has changed substantially, the number of traditional classrooms has reduced and facilities within the remaining classrooms have been modernised.

Main Findings

The fusion of library spaces, open access learning spaces and teaching spaces has been managed effectively to give a seamless continuum across different modes of learning. Bringing these together into a single building also facilitates 'multiple-uses' of rooms, with teaching and meeting rooms doubling up as group or individual work areas. The resulting flexibility substantially increases occupation levels. For example the college boardroom is a well-equipped modern meeting room, within the learning centre, and is also used by students wanting to practice presentations or work on collaborative projects. Driving and informing the physical changes to learning space is a diligent strategy to support new learning modes; this has been a major cultural shift for the college and has only been possible by ensuring the provision of high-quality learning facilities. Foremost among the enablers for managing this change is the campus virtual learning environment, VLE. With 80% of courses having an online component the VLE is seen as the single most important development, as it has served as an effective means of bringing learning content to learners in an efficient and personalised way, while still maintaining the central role of the teaching staff. The college is also working with the local community, in particular the local authority, to share space and enhance facilities for both students and the wider community.

Funding Sources

HEFCE Restructuring and Collaboration Fund.


Key drivers

Operational Drivers - Operationally the college had reached a critical point with its range of degree programmes. The number of taught hours had ceased to be operationally sustainable and the college was forced to revise its learning and teaching methods to save costs. Pedagogic Drivers - Pedagogically the college faced a challenge in moving from a primarily didactic, tutor led model of teaching to one which would develop much more learner independence and needed to provide the structures and appropriate oncampus learning environments.


The college's Director of Learning and Teaching is responsible for academic support.


The changes in learning and teaching drove all the other changes. The move from 70 hours of classroom based teaching, for each 20 credit module, to 14 hours of classroom, or other face to face teaching, blended with 14 hours of supported open learning required substantial changes to learning spaces and the use of technology within those spaces.


Staff roles have not changed drastically, but have evolved to have a greater focus on facilitation, support and guidance of learning over more traditional directed learning.

Learning spaces are now provided in a more flexible way. Use of learning spaces is more varied and, as a result, average occupancy levels have increased. Learners are Management of Learning encouraged to be pro-active in the way they use learning spaces. Spaces Fusion of the different modes of learner support, such as library, IT and careers, have led to better use of space and make it easier for students to access the range of academic support services appropriate for their individual needs.


The move from reduction in face to face teaching and increase in supported and directed self-study has moved the students to a more independent way of learning. The changes to the learning spaces and the use of technology within them were a fundamental part of helping this to happen.


An evaluation of the new learning and teaching model was carried out in 2003. The results showed that students enjoy the new learning environment, which has a relaxed and purposeful feel. Staff are positive about the changes, but are also reflective on how they can learn from what has already been done and continue to develop.

Picture Gallery

Ground floor of the Learning Centre, sometimes called the Learning Curve. Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

The Fountains Learning Centre, opened in September 2003.

A group working area within the Learning Centre


One of the Learning Centre's Self Study Areas

References and Further Reading Apple Computers - http://www.apple.com/ Atlantic Philanthropies - http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/ Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education – http://www.belfastinstitute.ac.uk/ Birmingham College of Food Tourism and Creative Studies – Blackboard – http://www.blackboard.com CELCAT - http://www.pugh.co.uk/products/celcat/index.htm Course Genie - http://www.horizonwimba.com/products/coursegenie/ Department of Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland (DEL) - http://www.delni.gov.uk Digital Knowledge Exchange - http://www.dec.ac.uk/client_pages/pages/page_23.asp Doncaster Education City - http://www.dec.ac.uk Doncaster College – http://www.doncaster.ac.uk eBeam - http://www.e-beam.com/ Glasgow Caledonian University – http://www.gcal.ac.uk Harper Adams University College – http://www.harper-adams.ac.uk Harvard Model for Peer Instruction - http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?ed=1&rowid=8 Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) – http://www.hefce.ac.uk Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETLs)– http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/TInits/cetl/ Higher Education Academy (HEA) “e-Tutor of the year” - http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/etutor.htm Higher Level Skills for Industry – http://www.hlsi.org Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) – http://www.jisc.ac.uk Managed learning environment (MLE) - http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=circular_1_01 JOICO – http://www.joico.com Learning and Skills Council (LSC) - http://www.lsc.gov.uk Moodle - http://moodle.org/ National Learning Network (NLN) – http://www.nln.ac.uk/ North-West Institute for Further and Higher Education - http://www.nwifhe.ac.uk Personal Response System (PRS) - http://www.gtcocalcomp.com/interwriteprs.htm Private Finance Initiative http://www.dh.gov.uk/ProcurementAndProposals/PublicPrivatePartnership/PrivateFinanceInitiative/ Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) - http://www.qaa.ac.uk Remanco - http://www.rsd.geac.com/page/remanco_rsd.html REPLIKA - http://www.replika.org Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) - http://www.shefc.ac.uk South-East Essex College – http://www.se-essex-college.ac.uk South Yorkshire eLearning Partnership - http://www.e-sy.info/ University of Aberdeen – http://www.aberdeen.ac.uk/ Directorate of Information Systems and Services (DISS) – http://www.aberdeen.ac.uk/diss University of Birmingham – http://www.bham.ac.uk Centre for Educational Technology and Distance Learning (CETADL) – http://www.cetadl.bham.ac.uk Information Services - http://www.is.bham.ac.uk Wireless Networking - http://www.wireless.bham.ac.uk University of Bristol - http://www.bris.ac.uk/ Chapter Two - Site Visit Reports

Nucleus project - http://www.bris.ac.uk/nucleus/ Online Survey Tool - http://www.survey.bris.ac.uk/ Residential Network Service (RESNET) - http://www.resnet.bristol.ac.uk/ SignLab - http://www.sign-lab.org/ University of Hertfordshire - http://www.herts.ac.uk/ Learning and Information Services (LIS) - http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/lis.nsf Learning Technology Development Unit (LTDU) - http://www.herts.ac.uk/ltdu/ Studynet - http://www.studynet2.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/ltdu/may2003.nsf/getpage?readform&id=editorial University of Strathclyde – http://www.strath.ac.uk/ Teaching and Learning Methodologies Initiative (TLMI) – http://www.strath.ac.uk/ces/tlmi/tlmi.html University of Ulster - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/ Assessment of Teaching Survey - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/quality/qmau/currentstud.html CampusOne - http://campusone.ulster.ac.uk/ Centre for the Creative and Performing Arts - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/news/releases/2003/942.html Educational Partnership - http://www.ulst.ac.uk/news/releases/2005/1707.html Information Services Department (ISD) - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/isd/ Institute of Lifelong Learning (ILL) - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/lll/ Staff Development Department - http://www.ulster.ac.uk/staffdev/ University of Warwick - http://www.warwick.ac.uk/ Access Grid Node - http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/csc/facilities/accessgrid/ Learning Grid - http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/study/grid/ WebCT – http://www.webct.com West Midland JISC Region Support Centre - http://www.rsc-westmidlands.ac.uk/ Wikipedia - http://www.wikipedia.org/ Definition of 'blogging' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogging Definition of 'instructional scaffolding' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_scaffolding Definition of 'personal response system' - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_response_system

York College – http://www.yorkcollege.ac.uk York St. John College – http://www.yorksj.ac.uk Yorkshire Forward - http://www.yorkshire-forward.com/


Chapter Three – Current Practice, Trends and Visions of the Future Introduction Analysis of nearly 90 surveys, desk research and visits to 15 sites across the sector show that learning spaces are highly diverse. It could be said that the only thing they have in common is that they are unique. However, it is helpful, for analysis, to categorise learning spaces. This study uses four categories; teaching spaces, open access spaces, social spaces and other learning spaces, these categories are explained more fully later in the chapter. It may be that many of these spaces serve different purposes at different times, such as computer teaching rooms that double up as open access clusters outside teaching hours, and also that the location of these rooms with respect to each other, such as clustered into central 'Learning Resource Centres' or distributed into subject areas, will also have an impact on how they are used and the technology that is needed with them. Looking at the influence of learning technologies on the design of physical learning spaces shows that space which is now being planned will still be in use, with much of the same furniture and equipment, in five years time. However, five years is a long time in terms of technology. Moore's Law [see http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm ] suggests that, depending upon the precise application of the law, computing power will increase by a factor of between 10 and 30 in that time. There are, however, many technological advances that have been available for a number of years, such as wireless networking, the wireless standard IEEE 802.4L developed into the current 802.11 set of standards as far back as 1977 see [http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/i.g.clark/async/coherent/publications/ACD_bluetooth_stpetersberg_5-2002.pdf; Davies, A] and video conferencing, dating back to 1930 [http://www.internet2.edu/presentations/20010308-I2MMGettingStartedEndUsersDetails.PDF; Poe, T; Yafchak, M F], but are only now becoming widespread and

would still be seen as emerging technologies in terms of their use for learning and teaching. Yet, other technologies move very rapidly from the drawing board into the classroom, video recorders, digital cameras, Virtual Learning Environments and PowerPoint are good examples of technologies that have reached the classroom within a very short time of being developed. So the five year planning horizon is fairly clear, with the caveat that design still needs to be flexible. It is beyond the five year horizon that it is very difficult to predict. The "Vision of the Future", presented at the end of this chapter provides some useful pointers, but perhaps the most relevant single piece of advice that came from our site visits was to "Expect the Unexpected" [Senior member of staff – Site Visit, York College].

JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Three – Current Practice, Trends and Visions of the Future

Overall Trends Before looking in detail at different types of space it is worth considering some of the overall trends, both technological and pedagogic, that are likely to influence the use of learning technology and the design of learning spaces. •

Increasing demand for access to online services and information, leading to a continuing need to invest in IT facilities.

•

Moore's Law suggests that computing power will increase by a factor between 10 and 30.

•

Extended opening hours for physical spaces, and associated services such as helpdesks, will be considered increasingly necessary, this also enables better overall use of expensive space and mirrors the wider move to a 24/7 culture.

•

Staff and student training and support will continue to be important, in order to facilitate effective use of learning technologies.

•

Personal and home computing, particularly for communications, will increase. include:

This will

o Faster broadband o Voice over IP o IP Television o Video Conferencing o High speed mobile phone connections These changes will offer new pedagogic opportunities and are likely to affect pedagogic practice, in both physical and virtual learning spaces.


Teaching Spaces Teaching space, for the purpose of this report, covers any space that is used primarily for directed learning activities, usually during a set time with a tutor present. Teaching spaces can be large lecture theatres, seating over 300 students, or small seminar rooms, designed for ten or fewer. Configurations and equipment can vary considerably. Teaching spaces include science laboratories, computer rooms, workshops and other practical teaching areas - such as kitchens and hair-dressing salons. Below are two examples of laboratory teaching spaces, as they used to be. The scientific 'wet-lab' in Figure 1 shows the traditional layout of such rooms. The traditional benches and equipment are designed around the need for experimental work, itself a pedagogic and technological innovation in its day, but leave little flexibility for other pedagogic scenarios.

Figure 1 – University of Aberdeen

Figure 2 shows a similar laboratory a few years later. There are now television screens within the laboratory and the lighting is more modern, but from a pedagogic perspective the room has changed very little. When looking at figures 3 and 4, which are different views of the laboratory in figure 2, the difference is very marked.



The first impression is the sense of space, although the capacity of the room has not been reduced. The white coats show that this is still an active wet-lab, but with computers being brought in alongside the experimental benches. The innovations here are simple and effective. Groups of up to twelve students work around 'island' benches, each with four computers. The monitors are on a raised shelf and the keyboards can be put on to the shelf below the monitor when not in use, or used on the bench. Figure 4 is taken from the centre of the room, with the other half being a mirror image, including a second projector. The use of learning technology is a truly embedded part of the learning and teaching, with a wide range of new pedagogic opportunities being added to the learning space.



Figure 5 shows a familiar layout for a small seminar room. There are many positive features in this room; the furniture can be moved, there are multiple projection screens and a television. So this room does enable a variety of pedagogic approaches, which should not be lost when incorporating new technology, but it is not technologicallyfriendly - with a lack of power and data for students and no desktop computer for teaching use. Figure 5 – University of Strathclyde


Figure 6 shows a similar room to that in figure 5, but in a more modern style. The aesthetic differences are evident, and should not be dismissed as merely cosmetic, but the real changes are in the new pedagogic opportunities that have been made available. There is now a lectern at the front, incorporating a modern desktop computer. This permanently fixed computer is linked to display equipment and the institutional network. There is a mixture of fixed and flexible seating, but perhaps most Figure 6 – University of Strathclyde significant are the curved desks. These are designed specifically to facilitate group working as an embedded part of the teaching session. The example in figure 7 illustrates group working taking a central role within a teaching session. The desks within this teaching space can be used without computers, but the introduction of power and wireless data to the rooms means that, when appropriate, students can work individually or in groups on networked computers.

Figure 7 – University of Strathclyde

Figure 8 – University of Strathclyde

Larger teaching rooms allow scope for larger-scale innovation. Figure 8 shows a large lecture theatre set out in 'parliamentary' style. Sophisticated lighting and projection equipment is evident, but not immediately obvious is the fact that the tiered lecture seats are movable, meaning that this space can, in addition to its use for lecturing, be used for activities such as dance and drama. Furthermore this room can, when not needed for learning and teaching, be used as an exhibition space.


Figure 9 shows the same lecture theatre from the same angle, however the room has now been divided and the display configuration changed to give a more conventional lecture arrangement, but with multiple display screens. The multiple display screens can be used to give all learners an optimal view of the same display, or to display different items simultaneously. Figure 9 – University of Strathclyde

Another important innovation in the use of teaching spaces is distributed teaching and learning. Distributed learning might be considered a form of distance learning, however a distributed session involves linking entire classrooms with individuals or other groups, hence some of the learners are learning at a distance others are not. Figure 10 shows an example of a mediumsized teaching facility, which is equipped for video conferencing. This facility allows medium sized groups to be co-located but to be taught, or for the tutor to teach, remotely with another similar sized group.

Figure 10 – University of Ulster

Figure 11 shows another example of this in practice with a group of students working together, but located in Dublin and Birmingham.

Figure 11 – University of Birmingham JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Three – Current Practice, Trends and Visions of the Future

A very strong trend, picked up from our survey as the single most likely type of new equipment to be installed within the next three years, is the use of audience responses systems. Figure 12 shows a light-hearted example of a quiz question used in an orientation session for use of the equipment. These devices allow a tutor to display a set of questions and to get immediate responses from the audience, typically these would be to test comprehension or for other formative assessments. The responses can be anonymous or named, and can include levels of confidence. Taking 'audience participation' a step further, writing pads or panels can be made available to participants, allowing writing, drawing and Figure 12 – University of Birmingham annotation of displayed documents. With the right software this facility can operate with any handheld or laptop computer. Seeking to summarise what the study found with respect to teaching spaces; there are a few technologies that we can expect to see in most teaching space building and refurbishment projects over the next five years: Display Equipment – Display equipment is still a very important part of teaching technology. That display equipment might be a data projector combined with a 'smartboard', a whiteboard with a camera or a document camera and data projector, but is of continuing importance in teaching rooms. Some developments are already taking place; plasma screens have become a viable alternative to data projectors in smaller rooms; display equipment is becoming more sophisticated with multiple projection systems and some threedimensional systems coming on to the market. Wired and Wireless Networking – to be fully exploited as devices for information and communication computers need network access. Wired networking still offers superior performance to wireless infrastructure, especially where computers are fixed and in high densities. Wireless networking is developing fast, but so is wired networking and so are the data needs of learners. So the 'rule of thumb' that seems to be developing is that where there are fixed computers they should be wired, where mobile computers are in use wireless access should be provided.


Electrical Power – The need for electrical power is still a weakness for mobile computing. Providing mains electrical power to individual places in large lecture theatres is expensive both in terms of capital and maintenance, yet without power, at least to small clusters of users, mobile computing will struggle to become fully embedded into learning and teaching. There are three trends which may help, at least partially, to address this problem. Firstly is the trend to reduce the power needs of computers, the net-powered computer [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4494899.stm] is a good example of this but still needs a physical cable. The second trend is the improvement in battery technology, the aspirational position being the use of fuel-cell technology [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4434277.stm] which could allow 40 hours or more of battery life. The third factor which may help is the potential for the use if induction loop power, such as is found commonly in electric toothbrushes. In this scenario a single, low voltage power supply could be made available without the need for mains wiring. Flexible Furniture- The ability to reconfigure a teaching space, and the learners within it, is very important if we are to allow pedagogic flexibility. However, flexible furniture does not always mean moveable furniture. Fixed furniture can be designed to allow different working styles and different groupings of learners. Flexible furniture should also allow for the technology that may need to go with it. Interactive Technology – consisting of: Collaborative software – collaborative software allows users, with some sort of networking technology available to them, to share programs, diagrams, text and presentations with each other and with other learners and tutors participating in the same activity. Video Conferencing – Video conferencing is often a native feature of collaborative software, and is an effective way for physically remote learners to speak and interact in a natural way. Audience Response – Audience, or personal, response systems bring learners who would otherwise have had the opportunity to be passive into the centre of teaching activities. Audience response systems are teacher-led but involve the learner in a powerful and relevant way. Document Cameras – There is a vast array of information that is available in digital format, but for the foreseeable future a significant proportion of information will not be readily available electronically. A document camera allows any text, drawing or other object to be displayed to large groups of learners with minimal preparation or as an ad-hoc response to learner needs. Printers – In the same way that document cameras allow us to bring physical objects into the digital world, so printers allow us to being digital objects into the physical world. The need to print is reducing, but at present that is at least counter-balanced by the increase in material available for printing.


Open Access Spaces Open access spaces are, currently, one of the types of learning space that is being given most thought. The use of group work and supported self-study is rising sharply, and students need and expect facilities to be provided that help them to do this work. A recent survey [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4098608.stm] showed that a supportive and 'friendly' atmosphere is the most important factor in student selection, and many of the universities selected for our site visits, were, without any prior knowledge of the survey, among the most highly rated by students. Efficient use of open access spaces improves the student experience and also helps to contribute to ensuring that very expensive estate is used to maximum advantage. Figures 13 and 14 show what can be done with a very traditional 'Current Periodicals Room.' During peak times there are always queues of students waiting to use this very popular facility, and even at 8am outside term time, as in figure 14, the room is still well used.

Figure 13 – University of Birmingham

This room uses a pattern which was widely seen among the sites visited. The computers in this room are interspersed with empty desk space, to accommodate books papers and laptop computers. Many of the people interviewed for the survey had considered whether or not to take this philosophy a step further and leave such spaces completely free of desktop computers, but instead provide wireless networking and plenty of power sockets. This would require students to bring their own laptops, which Figure 14 – University of Birmingham would need wireless capability. The study carried out at Eindhoven, by Lidgey and Roberts, shows that this can be done, but raises a wide range of issues which would need to be addressed at an institutional level. At present open access spaces with high availability of desktop computers are popular and well used. Students can bring their own laptops and use the wireless connection if they wish, but the evidence across the study shows that it is still pragmatically necessary to provide wired desktop computers in these spaces.


Figure 15 shows another example of an open access area, computers in this area are available alongside comfortable seating, where students can sit and discuss their work. This space has incorporated electronic display equipment, in this case a plasma screen. This particular screen is, at this time, showing learners a list of alternative locations with computers currently available.

Figure 15- York St. John College

Figure 16 shows a similar area, with a mixture of casual seating, desktop computers and paper-based learning resources in the same areas.

Figure 16 – Harper Adams University College

In figure 17 the display equipment in this open access building has pictures of the support staff on duty. These staff do not have a fixed support desk, instead they move around the learning space, offering a wide-range of help and advice to the learners.

Figure 17- University of Warwick


Figure 18 – University of Warwick

Figures 18 and 19 show examples of students working in small, self-directed, work groups. Figure 18 shows clearly the use of display equipment to facilitate and record collaborative work. In this particular building a wide range of working areas are available, and students are encouraged to use the space creatively and flexibly. Different types of display equipment and different types of seating are used to help different types of group activity, with the ability to share work with a group and to record group work being fundamental to support effective collaboration.

The flexibility of the furniture and the availability of moveable screens mean that students can create different working areas for different working scenarios. An interesting feature of contemporary openaccess spaces was the attitude to talking. For collaborative work to be taking place then talking, and even argument and debate, is a necessary part of the process. However there is still a need for quiet individual study. From the site visits the impression was that students could work very well in an area with a quiet background 'hum', and in fact found that more relaxing than total silence.

Figure 19 – University of Warwick

Figures 20, 21 and 22 show three parts of a single open plan space. In each part the furniture is set out to encourage different styles of working. In figure 20 the style and layout of the furniture is designed to encourage open and casual conversation.

Figure 20 – York St. John College


In figure 21 the arrangement of small tables is designed to encourage quiet, but not silent, work in small groups.


The individual working spaces in figure 22 are designed to encourage silent, individual working. This range of design approaches seems to work in a natural and intuitive way, with students selecting their working area in accordance with the type of work they intend to do at any given time.



Open access spaces are likely to become an increasingly important part of managed learning space. They will, by their very nature vary considerably. But there are a few key items that should be considered in the design of open access spaces. In common with teaching spaces they need wireless networking, access to collaborative software and plentiful access to power. Display equipment is needed, but will be smaller and more 'localised' than in a teaching space. Also in common with teaching spaces there needs to be flexibility in the furniture and provision for group working. Of particular importance in open-access spaces are the following: Information display equipment – learners need to be able to get access to information that is useful and of direct interest to them. This might include announcements, opening hours, availability of support and availability of working space in other areas. High specification desktop computers at each place with individual cameras, personal headsets and microphones – learners still need, in most cases, to be provided with desktop computers. With increasing use of multimedia headphones become important, and with increasing use of collaborative software so cameras and microphones become very important. Headsets do, of course, introduce management issues which will need to be considered in context. Desktop computers with adjoining deskspace for books, paper and mobile computing devices – it is still unusual for learners to be able to access all information on a single electronic device, so books and other electronic devices may be necessary. It may also be that the learner does have their own wireless mobile device and simply needs access to power and a desk. Flexibly partitioned group working areas – this will allow learners to form groups as and when appropriate and of an appropriate size.


Social Spaces Social spaces have long been recognised by universities as an important part of the learning process " an essential aspect of the teaching-learning process is in developing a conversational framework" [Diana Laurillard, Rethinking University Teaching]

Pedagogically social spaces serve to extend not only the learning times and learning spaces, but also the opportunities for informal 'conversational' learning. However, given the more relaxed approach to social activities, such as talking and discussion, in open access spaces, the question may be raised as to why we need to make use of social spaces and why they need to be seen as different from other open access spaces. The first thing to recognise is that the distinction is certainly becoming more blurred, and may well break down further in the future, but for the present there is a difference. Social spaces are designed primarily for socialising and relaxation, open access spaces are designed primarily for working. However, it can bring pedagogic benefits to be able to combine the two. Operationally it is also an opportunity to make more efficient use of space. Student computer ratios can be improved as can social facilities without the need for expensive new buildings. Figures 23 and 24 show different views of a 'junior common room' that has been converted into a technologically-rich social space. The space incorporates a range of seating styles, both with and without computers. At one end is a café, where students can buy drinks and snacks, to one side are standing places for quick use of equipment and at the other end is a range of tables with desktop computers. This facility Figure 23 – University of Birmingham is very popular with students, having enhanced both the social and working facilities available to them, and provides an effective bridge between a working and a social environment This approach to learning spaces design was very popular among the sites visited, as it seemed to provide an 'easy win' for students, teaching staff and administrative staff, by simultaneously improving social facilities, learning facilities and improving utilisation of space.



Figures 25 and 26 show different views of the same social space; created as part of major refurbishment project. Based on the clear pedagogic vision that ‘all learning starts with conversation’, these projects have created a friendly and inviting working environment that is highly student-centred.

Figure 25 – Glasgow Caledonian University

Figure 26 – Glasgow Caledonian University

Bringing technology into social spaces does not always need major refurbishment projects. Figure 27 shows that social and leisure space, such as this entrance and reception lobby, can be transformed into a learning space by making wireless networking available.



Figure 28 shows an outside area covered by a wireless network, when weather permits the outside area can become a natural extension to working areas. Widespread use of wireless networking means that any appropriately equipped mobile device, such as a laptop, tablet or handheld computer, can be used to access online information and services.


In summary social spaces need the same facilities as open access spaces, but with the addition of drinks and snacks. It is also important to maintain the genuinely social aspects, so some areas may have little or no learning technology. It is perhaps also important to remember at this point that this study has classified some spaces as open access and some as social. Adding learning technology into social spaces does create de facto open access learning spaces, and the transformation can also occur in the other direction. Providing social facilities, typically snacks and drinks, in an open-access learning space will make that space into a social space. So the trend to increasingly manage the technological provision within social spaces is facilitating a greater fusion between learning and socialising.


Other Learning Spaces Post-16 educational institutions are willing and able to manage the provision of learning technologies within the boundaries of the campus, however availability of Internet access and therefore online services is extending far out into the wider community. Student accommodation is perhaps the first area to which we would expect online services to be extended, and indeed this is now widespread practice. This can be outsourced to a specialist provider or can be covered by institutions themselves. However students living on-campus at, or near, their place of learning are not the majority in post-16 education, many students study, either full or part-time, while living at home. Home Internet access, particularly un-metered broadband, is still on the increase. In the fourth quarter of 2004, 52% of households had some form of Internet access [Office of National Statistics http://www.statistics.gov.uk/CCI/nugget.asp?ID=8&Pos=1&ColRank=1&Rank=192].

So broadband in the home is now commonplace and is continuing to spread. Effectively this extends the potential for learning into the home. Home learning is not necessarily a part of distance learning, it may be a natural extension to classroom learning, with activities supporting and building upon the activities initiated as part of a formal teaching session. Asynchronous communication, such as email and discussion boards, can also help to bring together people who would otherwise be out of communication for long periods of time. Out of the home high speed internet access is also growing. Cardiff city centre now has extensive wireless network, coverage as does Stratford-upon-Avon where wirelessly enabled handheld computers can be hired as tourist guides. In the case of Cardiff the wireless networking has been extended into St John's Church at the instigation of the local rector [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/4594989.stm]. Broadband has also now been extended into planes, see figure 29, trains such as the Thalys European trans-continental train offering 4Mbps at 300 km/h [http://telecom.esa.int/telecom/www/object/index.cf m?fobjectid=18364], and even into a mobile

classroom [Hysbys: http://www.hysbys.org].

Figure 29 – Courtesy of Verizon Airfone


Learning Resource Centres So far the study has categorised the learning spaces for ease of analysis, however categorising spaces does not mean that they are necessarily separated. There are two possible models when locating learning spaces; one model is to locate the learning spaces within the academic departments, the other is to 'centralise' the learning space into one or more learning centres. Both models have their advantages and disadvantages, and most institutions had a blend of the two approaches. The site visits have shown that providing appropriate learning spaces and ensuring that they are technologically fit for purpose is only a part of the overall picture. The way in which the learning spaces are located, configured and supported is very important, and will impact considerably on the learning and teaching that can take place. Many institutions have responded to this challenge with the creation of learning resource centres, such as these ones in figures 30 and 31. Within these buildings students can access a full range of learning spaces and learning support services. This gives us the concept of a ‘Learning Mall’ (see Visions of the Future) where a student can take out a book, replace their identity card or get access to student welfare services, all from the same service desk. Figure 30 – Harper Adams University College

This single point of access for students creates far greater transparency, and reinforces the approach that “students should not have to know how the university’s departments are structured in order to get access to the services they require” [Senior member of staff, Glasgow Caledonian University].

Figure 31 – University of Hertfordshire


Figure 32 shows us an artist's impression of one learning mall currently under construction.

Figure 32 – Doncaster College

Complete new buildings, as in figure 32, or major rebuilding projects as in figure 33 do provide opportunities to create such facilities, but the essence of the learning mall is about transparent access to services and facilities - which it may also be possible to provide within existing estate. It is also important to consider the technical support that such transparency requires. Responding to user needs via a single service desk means that the service desk must have access to all the necessary Figure 33- Glasgow Caledonian University information, and be able to change and update information as appropriate. This may require some planning and enhancements of management information systems within the institution, but will made a substantial difference to learners' experiences.


Vision of the Future Learnwell College of Further and Higher Education Learnwell College gives every member of staff a tablet computer and all students a personal digital assistant (PDA). When staff and students arrive on campus they are automatically connected to the network. Upon connection they are registered as present and files such as learning resources, timetables and learning tasks are automatically updated and integrated into their learning software, so staff and students have all the resources they need at their fingertips for the activities for the day. The college provides a number of Wimax (long-range wireless network – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimax]) points, meaning that members of the college can access the college network from city centre shops and cafés, libraries and in places of work. This way staff and students are always online and all their files and other information can be kept up-to-date. The

electronic

'one-stop-shop'

of

resources on the students’ PDAs – [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_digital_assistant] is reflected in the design of the college’s main building ‘The Learning Mall’. In this building, students have access to a wide range of learning resources and support, ranging from IT support, such as solving problems in the use of their PDAs, to accessing student finance and welfare services. The Learning Mall was built to be flexible, with soundproof ‘dividers’ that can be moved when required. The focus of the Learning Mall is on providing students with a wide range of learning environments, such as resource centres, Internet cafés, self study booths and large rooms where groups of students can engage in a range of activities and, of course, teaching rooms. All the rooms are supported by a wide range of learning technologies. Working with their tutor or learning facilitator, students can design learning activities to support their programmes of study and then book the appropriate learning space. The latest generation of PDAs and tablet computers have become sufficiently energy efficient and to be powered while connected to the network or by induction loops in desks. The fuel cells that now power their laptops are good, with around 100 hours of battery time, but still not as good as their mobile phones used to be back at the turn of the millennium. The Learning Mall has highbandwidth wired networks alongside wireless networking, to support the wide range of devices that people are using. All the social places and learning areas are linked together with video and audio conferencing and staff and students can 'connect' their computers to large plasma screens when they need to demonstrate aspects of their work to others. The tutor/facilitator Emma is a tutor. A typical day for her will begin with using a tablet computer to check that all the students are where they are supposed to be, and doing what they are supposed to be doing. She cross-checks the students with the learning activities that she has set them, and logs on to the room they are in. Emma quickly checks her appearance on her own computer, before sending the image to the learning room. As she says "Hello" her students rush to turn down the speaker volume to a more comfortable level, the last person must have left it on too high. Now with less amplification Emma says "Hello" again and asks how things are going. John gives her access to his PDA to explain a problem they are having and she transfers it to the plasma screen to go through it together. This takes only five minutes. At 10am she has a group of students that have asked her to run a workshop and they have booked a room in the Learning Mall. There are 15 students in the workshop. They use interactive pads with their PDAs, and have also arranged to link up with the other students from another college to help them complete their tasks. During the workshop, JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Three – Current Practice, Trends and Visions of the Future

students record the main points of their activities into their learning logs on their PDAs. These are then downloaded automatically to the ‘National Learning Grid’ where each student's learning log is kept for as long as they need it. At midday, Emma has arranged to video-conference with eight part time students. These students are unable to come onto the campus for this meeting, so Emma uses the collaborative software on her tablet computer, which is now linked to a plasma screen in her office. The broadband connections into the students’ homes are provided as part of the college’s wide area network, so there is no additional cost to the students. For lunch, Emma joins her colleague Sally in the Learning Mall in the technology free zone. Sally is the supervisor in the motor vehicle workshop and she brings Emma up to date on the learning technologies she is using to support her students learning activities. For the afternoon, Emma is officially ‘off-line’ as she has put this time aside to prepare a range of learning activities for a new course she will be running next year. From her office she links up with Bernard, who works in a similar institution in France. Bernard and Emma will be running the course on-line linking up both institutions. At the end of the day she checks her learning software and she sees that the students that were preparing for the seminar have uploaded the resources they will be using, she checks them and is very pleased with the work they have done. Learning Mall Service Desk Manager David manages the service desk in the Learning Mall. Using the management interface to the learning environment, he is able to access the wide range of services that students require. Today he is going to work on the main desk for a couple of hours, as it is the start of a new term and lots of students need help in finding their way around. One or two students have had difficulty with selfregistration; they have been unable to get their ID cards from the automated dispenser - even with the online support. David logs into the learning environment and sees that one large local employer appears to have not paid its fees. David manages to solve the problem and students are able to get their ID cards. A few students are also having problems with their accommodation, David uses the student accommodation system and finds that their accommodation had to be changed at the last minute, he is able to sort out their problems. One or two students have some concerns about how they are going to manage their full-time study and David is able to book them sessions with the welfare service, that same day in the adjoining ‘consulting booths.’ Some of David’s staff ‘patrol’ the Learning Mall with PDAs that have hands free headsets. These staff provide a wide range of support and are clearly identified by their bright blue uniforms. All enquires are logged and continually monitored so that support systems can be continually updated to provide a high quality service. At the end of David's shift he hands over to the evening manager, who will work until 10pm. As the evening goes on things do get quieter, but the building remains open all night.


References and Further Reading BBC – http://www.bbc.co.uk Fuel-cell technology - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4434277.stm Net-powered computers - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4494899.stm St John's Church, Cardiff [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/4594989.stm] Students 'want friendly campuses' - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4098608.stm European Space Agency – http://www.esa.int Thalys European Train - http://telecom.esa.int/telecom/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=18364 Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE) – http://www.ieee.com IEEE Standards http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/i.g.clark/async/coherent/publications/ACD_bluetooth_stpetersberg_5-2002.pdf Intel – http://www.intel.com Moore's Law - http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm Internet 2 – http://www.internet2.eud History of Video Conferencing - http://www.internet2.edu/presentations/20010308-I2MMGettingStartedEndUsersDetails.PDF University of Wales, Bangor – http://www.bangor.ac.uk Hysbys Mobile Classroom - http://www.hysbys.org]. Wikipedia – http://www.wikipedia.org PDA – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_digital_assistant Wimax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimax


Chapter Four – A Review of Post-16 Funding Introduction A number of external factors have emerged over the last three or four years that have affected a wide range of institutions in post-16 education in many different ways. These include: Institutional Mergers: When the database of all post-16 education institutions was updated to conduct the survey it became clear that many institutions had merged. Special Initiatives: These initiatives are extensive and current examples are given below. Formula Funding: The study needed to clarify the methodology that was used by funding bodies for new builds or major refurbishing. Institutional Mergers Institutional mergers for both HE and FE are seen as an important way of creating large, powerful and influential educational institutions, avoiding total closure of educational units too small to be independently viable and increasing the value for money within education. This view is clearly expressed in the report to the National Assembly for Wales from the then Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW [http://www.wfc.ac.uk]) entitled "The Scope for Institutional Mergers at the Higher Educational Level" [http://www.wfc.ac.uk/education/hefcw/pub99/w99101he.html].

An

analysis

of

the

impact

of

mergers

in

further

education

[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR459.pdf#search='institutional%20mergers%20lsc%20funding]

was also commissioned jointly by the DFES (Department for Education and Science [http://www.dfes.gov.uk]) and LSC, which concluded that while not all mergers were fully beneficial that mergers would generally improve student access to learning, particularly if mergers were well managed and based on mutually beneficial strategic synergies. As a result funding councils, such as the LSC [http://www.lsc.gov.uk/National/Documents/Series/Circulars/0110ReorganisationsFurtherEducationCorporationReorga nisationsandRationalisationFundSupport.htm] may be able to make funds available to support mergers. Putting together the potential for rationalisation and economies of scale, with potential disposal of assets (as was found at a number of institutions listed in the site visit reports) and funding council (and possibly other) financial support, institutional mergers can have a major impact on institutional funding. Central to the funding context is often the need to extend, modify or otherwise enhance learning spaces, so institutional mergers may be seen as both a driver and an opportunity for the innovative use of learning technologies.

JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Four – A Review of Post-16 Funding

Special Initiatives Special initiatives might be funded directly from a wide range of sources. A few examples are listed to illustrate the breadth of funding that is available. The JISC has, for over a decade [http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=about_history] been providing small, medium and large funding opportunities [http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=funding] to support networking and specialist information services. Regional development agencies, such as Advantage West Midlands [http://www.advantagewm.co.uk/] support initiatives that "bring together employers with suppliers of education and training" – [http://www.advantagewm.co.uk/skills.html]. The Atlantic Philanthropies is an example of an international charity support special initiatives in education [http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/giving_statistics/giving_statistics.asp].

To expand upon the diversity and nature of these initiatives this section provides a brief overview of current strategic initiatives that may have an impact on the development of innovative learning and teaching spaces in post-16 education. This overview is based upon a review of recent literature and publications from key national governmental and non-governmental bodies such as DFES, JISC, HEFCE, British Education Communications and Technology Agency (Becta [http://www.becta.org.uk]) and others. The literature search uncovered documentation falling into the following categories: •

HEFCE Policy Documents 2000 – 2005

•

Circular Letters 2000 – 2005

A significant number of circulars exist which make reference to learning and teaching, particularly in the following contexts: •

Widening Participation

•

Increasing Student Population

•

e-learning

•

e-University

•

Institutional L&T Strategies

In most cases, these circulars raised general issues relating to the teaching and learning infrastructure required to support the various activities outlined above, and highlighted areas of concern without making specific recommendations. However, UKeU (the UK eUniversity) was funded to generate some highly specific outcomes, although these were not ultimately successful [http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2004/euni/june.htm]. The UKeU was prominent in early drafts of the HEFCE and DFES e-learning strategies, but subsequent versions sought to place a higher emphasis on recognising the achievements of, and enhancing the quality of, existing e-learning provision. Policy Documents 2000 - 2005 Numerous policy documents have been drafted, and in some cases finalised, including e-learning strategies for the DFES, HEFCE and the JISC. However these have tended to make little specific reference to the ways in which learning technologies could be integrated into learning spaces.


Circular Letters 2000 – 2005 •

Invitations to Tender

•

Other Funding Opportunities

•

Funding for Poor Estates

During the 1990’s, universities underwent significant changes, including a huge expansion of student numbers. This expansion was accommodated, for the most part, by utilising existing spaces and facilities. New buildings to accommodate increasing student numbers were impossible for many institutions. Throughout the 1990’s, institutions were required to make difficult decisions about the allocation of resources for teaching, learning and research. By the end of the decade, many institutions were reporting that under-funding for maintenance and general upgrade of estates had led to serious infrastructure problems. HEFCE responded by making funds available to enable remedial and upgrade works to go ahead [HEFCE CP 3/97; HEFCE 01/13]. Part of the criteria for this funding included the need for institutions to demonstrate their need for major refurbishment programmes and to identify other projects that would make more efficient use of space - both new and existing buildings. In addition, institutions requiring the redevelopment of their estates, such as major estate rationalisation, would be looked upon favourably. Institutions which could also demonstrate that they had high levels of poor quality space were favoured in a competitive bidding process. In the academic year 2000/2001 £74m was allocated among 30 successful bidders. However, a further £30m was available to bid for in 2001-02. In all 59 projects were submitted for new buildings, including nine bids for new libraries and learning resource centres and 26 for general teaching accommodation. 69 projects were submitted for the refurbishment of 10 further library/learning resource centres and 27 for general teaching. It became clear, from institutional feedback and evidence that a number of important projects did not receive funding and that further long-term investment in learning spaces was necessary. To date, nearly £300 million has been set aside to support capital improvements. This funding is no longer based on a competitive bidding process, but is allocated on a ‘formula’ as outlined in the response from HECFE above. HEFCE Teaching and Quality Enhancement Fund In a separate initiative that began in 1999, HEFCE established a fund to improve the capital and IT infrastructure in support of teaching and learning. Allocation of funds were linked to HEFCE’s Teaching and Quality Enhancement Fund (TQEF [http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/1999/99_48.htm]), which is based upon specific criteria. For example, funds can be used to upgrade teaching laboratories and laboratory equipment, refurbish teaching facilities, update audio visual, engineering and computer equipment, including networking costs for online learning. A total of £90M was set aside for 2003 to 2005, with a further £158M allocated between 2002 and 2004, to support the TQEF, and £56M to address disability issues. This funding is also allocated on a formula, rather than competitive, basis to each institution. It is still, however, a requirement that institutions will inform HEFCE how funds will be used and how it will enhance the quality of learning and teaching within their institution.


June 2000 Development of Teaching and Learning Strategies At the same time that funding was being made available to address problems with university estates, HEFCE announced that TQEF funding was available to support institutional learning and teaching strategies. The circular identified 5 national priorities, including the “exploitation of C&IT in the services managed improvements in Teaching and Learning” and “promoting innovation in the curriculum”, BUT did not include any references to learning and teaching spaces or facilities. June 2001 Strategies for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: A guide to good practice. Following submissions of initial statements by institutions on widening participation and learning and teaching strategies, HEFCE published a good practice guide to aid institutions in the development of learning and teaching strategies. Although the guide clearly stated that Learning and teaching strategies need to be co-ordinated with information strategies (for example, developing access to a range of library and information sources both on and off campus), there is NO mention of anything relating to issues of space design or its availability. June 2002/31 Issues Paper: Teaching and Learning Infrastructure in Higher Education During 2002, HEFCE published a report it had commissioned from JM Consulting. The report was “a review of the requirements for infrastructure for teaching and learning in UK universities and colleges of higher education”. This report assessed the extent of remedial investment required and set out the conditions needed to manage this infrastructure on a sustainable basis. There are two areas of discussion in this report. Firstly, the report discusses pedagogic issues, including the development of teaching and learning, space utilisation in libraries and resource centres, and the implications of these factors on infrastructure. It concluded that: There is no real strategy driving teaching and learning methods or infrastructure use (these are based significantly upon staff wishes/experience); with approximately 50% of the estate built in the 1960’s and early 1970’s. The report further notes that “there will need to be a vision of what a 21st century university will look like”. The final section concentrates on the teaching infrastructure and discusses the value and condition of the estate and capital funding of infrastructure. JM Consulting ran some “expert workshops” as part of the review, inviting Directors of Estates to identify the issues surrounding the management and upkeep of their estate. Comments from the workshop include: •

We are stuck in our infrastructure – the use of our rooms, timetabling, exam structure. We can’t implement our teaching and learning strategies because infrastructure is blocking us from achieving change

•

(They) have bled money from estates maintenance into audio visual facilities

•

Student numbers have expanded……physical overcrowding is a real issue

•

(We) have a lot of space, but not all of it is fit for purpose

•

We are not teaching with the infrastructure they are going to experience in the workplace


•

(They) point out the changing way the library is now used, students no longer need space to read a book, but need to reference text and screen at the same time- all this has implications upon space

JM Consulting also observed that “institutions are not good at linking academic and functional (finance, estates HR) strategies. This is clear form the T&L Strategies which hardly address “infrastructure blocks”, ¾ make no mention to their estates strategy, a 5th just a mention and only 2% making explicit links. They go on to say that “there is no point in just updating existing estates, believing the large lecture theatres and laboratories and computer clusters will continue to be required as they always have been. Space needs to be made fit for purpose, and its purpose needs review. Teaching Initiatives HEFCE highlight the key areas where they are promoting good practice in learning and teaching through several initiatives[http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/]. These include: •

Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL)

•

Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning

•

New Technology Institutes.

These initiatives concentrate on issues such as increasing the number of students receiving high quality teaching in information and communications technology (ICT) and advanced technology skills, rewarding excellent teaching practices, and to further invest in such practices so that CETLs funding delivers substantial benefits to students, teachers and institutions. Again, no mention is made of the spaces required to deliver the initiative or the impact on space and other infrastructure that the initiatives will inevitably have. Some of the CETLs will be looking at learning space design. JISC 2000 – 2005 - Lecture Room Services Initiatives Since 1999, JISC have commissioned 3 projects (including this current project) relating to the support and standards of Lecture Room Services and Teaching Space. AGOCG (The U.K. Advisory Group on Computer Graphics) – published a document entitled “Managing, Delivering and Supporting Lecture Room Services for the Multimedia Age”, which contains a series of case studies from a range of Universities. The Standing Conference of Heads of Media Services (SCHOMS) considered this to be a timely opportunity to influence at a strategic level the management of central teaching space in Higher Education. SCHOMS invited the Lecture Theatre Managers Group (LTSMG) to consider the matter. The LTSMG held a workshop (funded by JISC) and to develop these standards. As a result, the LTSMG produced a report for JISC ASSIST “Providing Teaching Room Services, Good Practice and Standards 1999. This report considered in detail the application of technical and operational standards and developing a set of standards and good practice guidelines. Technical specifications for facilities in teaching rooms was considered and recommended that they should be developed to produce an update to BS8205 (recently withdrawn) “Design of Learning Spaces where AV will be used”. This recommendation was not followed up.


In March 2003, two workshops were held as part of the JISC Workshop Series to look at the implications of new technologies and new methods of learning and teaching on physical environments for learning. The JISC had been actively engaged with supporting colleges and universities in implementing technology to support learning and now wished to explore: •

How can colleges and universities plan and develop programmes that enable delivery to increased student numbers within available facilities to a larger and more diverse student population without diminishing the student experience?

•

How can management structures change to facilitate the adoption of new learning methods?

•

What good practice is available in the UK and elsewhere?

•

How can the Learning and Teaching and Estates strategies develop together with appropriate planning time scales?

No final report on the outcomes of these workshops appear to be available Becta Review 2005 The Department for Education and Skills has a 5 year strategy which sets out the vision and agenda for the UK education system, in which ICT is seen as a critical enabler of progress [http://www.becta.org.uk/research/research.cfm?section=1&id=3497]. The report discusses increases in computer to learner ratios, networking and rapidly increasing levels of use during the last 5 years. The investment in ICT infrastructure (hardware and connectivity) by the government has been a key element to this activity. Access to wireless networks and supporting technologies, such as interactive whiteboards, is improving rapidly with the overall percentage of teaching areas equipped with such presentation technology also rising rapidly. The report has a section devoted to Infrastructure Developments and in particular identifies that many school buildings restrict the development of ICT, including the ability to site computers in classrooms. The reports states: Evaluations of the DfES Schools Whiteboard Expansion programme are currently in progress, this research will provide a robust assessment of the impact of using interactive display technologies on learning and other outcomes However, the report does not go as far as to include classroom design to accommodate the rising use of ICT.


Formula Funding Post-16 funding is highly complex and needs to make allowance for a wide range of pedagogic and operational differences between institutions. As a result there is not a simple formula that could be usefully and concisely published. Information from the following websites is useful in setting the funding context, but can not be used to provide detailed funding information. •

HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England [http://www.hefce.ac.uk])

•

The LSC (Learning and Skills Council) [http://www.lsc.gov.uk]

•

The Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) [http://www.delni.gov.uk]

•

The Scottish Funding Councils for Further and Higher Education (SFC) [http://www.sfc.ac.uk/]

•

Education and Learning Wales (ELWa) - [http://www.elwa.ac.uk]

HEFCE were approached by email for a more complete explanation. To this end the project team sent the following email: “We are trying to find out how and when HEFCE fund new builds. For example, does HEFCE have a formula for the amount of learning space per FTE student or the size of the estate per FTE student, and what percentage of funds does HEFCE set aside for new builds?”

and HEFCE responded as follows: The HE sector is so diverse, and we are dealing with autonomous bodies in the institutions, that any "one-size-fitsall" formula would have so many caveats and exceptions that it would be very bureaucratic to operate. We are also not just dealing with teaching but also research facilities. Different courses having different requirements say History or Arts, Media or Agriculture, Chemistry or English. Each institution has a different estate, its own mission and strategy, specialities and an offering that tries to make the best of the opportunities open to it. Each is at a different state of play in terms of its location, size, properties, building age profile, fitness for purpose, condition etc. Each chooses its strategy in accordance with its ambitions and direction. To date we have been looking at each project application for funding on its merits, these have to fit within one of the funding initiatives which are dictated by government or our own strategic plan based on government policy to deliver the desired outcomes. There are certain metrics that we use to see how well an institution is managing its estate, we try not to reward poor or inappropriate management, and in some cases there are specific metrics that we may apply to demonstrate good practice. As we have moved away from bidding for the main capital funding so the way in which we assess projects is also changing. The main capital funds are allocated by formula and institutions are required to demonstrate how a project is contributing to the strategy and how value for money is being sought. This system too is evolving as a consequence of the requirement to reduce the accountability burden on institutions. There is no percentage set aside for new builds and much of the capital is used for refurbishment thus making best use of existing assets. New build can be seen as the easy option and whilst necessary in some circumstances it must not be done to the detriment of the existing estate which remains a drain on resources if not properly maintained. Another issue to consider is that institutions have access to various sources of funding, their own resources, borrowings, our recurrent funding, capital grants wrapped up in larger initiatives as well as specific capital, not to mention individual business relationships, alumni, benefactions, etc. etc. HEFCE funding accounts for approximately 40% of the income to institutions and so we are by no means involved in all the projects through direct funding. Institutions have the freedom to develop buildings without our funding. As a funding council we look at many aspects of each institution, governance, finance, corporate plans, recruitment, retention as well as estates. The picture we build up helps us to look at the capital investment in the context of the holistic situation. So formula funding is very complex because the funding councils need to be able to cater for local differences and they have regional representatives that liaise with the senior mangers of the FE and HE institutions when new builds are required or significant funding to upgrade the estate.


The HEFCE response makes it clear that: The HE sector is so diverse, and we are dealing with autonomous bodies in the institutions, that any "one-size-fits-all" formula would have so many caveats and exceptions that it would be very bureaucratic to operate. Thus, any funding model needs to be flexible. However, the HEFCE Teaching and Quality Enhancement Fund to enhance learning and teaching spaces is enabling some institutions to develop innovative learning and teaching spaces not just in HEFCE but with other HE funding bodies as well. Another key driver is the HEFCE funded Learning Teaching and Assessment Strategies currently funded from 1999 till 2006. This has had a significant impact on some institutions we have visited, as they have used it as their key driver for change and in some instances has resulted in new builds. Overview of other HE funding bodies As stated above, researching into how the different funding bodies apply their formula for funding for new builds is somewhat difficult. From the policy documents of the funding bodies, however, one can see that additional funding is being made for learning and teaching infrastructure. For example, the SFC “Aiming further and higher: Joint Corporate Plan 2003-06” (updated for 200405) states that: "Resources for the HE sector for 2005-06 have increased by 8.4 per cent on the previous year’s allocation. The Scottish Executive’s present spending plans for financial years 2006-07 and 200708 are for resources to increase by 12.4 per cent and 7.3 per cent respectively. These increases include resources for the introduction of a new dedicated capital funding stream for teaching and learning infrastructure, with the allocation of £28 million in 2005-06 rising to £75 million by 200708. The planned increases in recurrent resources are therefore approximately 4.8 per cent for 200506, 10.7 per cent for 2006-07 and 4.4 per cent for 2007-08. These figures do not include funding for the Council’s running costs" (words in italics: our emphasis). "Resources for the FE sector for 2005-06 have increased by 12.8 per cent on the previous year’s allocation. The Scottish Executive’s present spending plans for financial years 2006-07 and 200708 are for resources to increase by 12.7 per cent and 2.8 per cent respectively. These increases include allowance to increase the spend on capital for estates infrastructure from £37.9 million in 2004-05 to £87.9 million in 2007-08. The planned increases in recurrent resources are therefore approximately 7.5 per cent for 2005-06, 9.8 per cent for 2006-07 and 3.3 per cent for 2007-08". Wales, too is "joining up" infrastructure for FE and HE through the establishment of an umbrella body, Education and Learning Wales (ELWA), within which the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) is beginning to work, and the establishing of a Common Investment Fund (CIF). ELWa believes that in order for Wales to be recognised as the Learning Country, an integrated post16 planning and funding system is needed. Between now and the year 2010, ELWa will be allocating, on behalf of the Assembly, over £3 billion on post-16 learning. "The CIF is to promote collaborative working to bring about improvements in the learning infrastructure, the quality of the learning experience and the quality of the learning environment, for the benefit of stakeholders in learning across Wales." This is to "... ensure maximum flexibility for the potential 3 million learners in Wales." JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Four – A Review of Post-16 Funding

"The CIF refers to strategic investment through collaboration and innovation in support of the development of a learning network for the future. It relates to investment to bring about sustainable change that is in addition to core funding. The CIF encourages joint working and will promote funding initiatives to remove unnecessary duplication and nugatory competition by sharing curriculum and resources." The ‘Strategic Plan 2004-2007 the Department for Employment & Learning’ (DEL, in Northern Ireland) is looking at “Reform of the education and training system for 14 to 19 year olds” and to have “an e-learning strategy that supports the use of Information & Learning Technologies in the further education sector”. By the end of 2005, “through collaboration with the Department of Education, a pilot framework will be implemented and evaluated to support both the provision of a blended curriculum of academic and vocational courses for 15-19 year olds, and a collaboration between school and further education sector”. The outcomes of this pilot my have an impact to future funding for learning technologies and learning spaces. It is worth noting that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have, or are consolidating their post-16 education funding. This does not yet appear to be happening in England.


References and Further Reading British Education Communications and Technology Agency - http://www.becta.org.uk/ Department for Education and Skills - http://www.dfes.gov.uk/ "An analysis of the impact of mergers in further education" http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR459.pdf#search='institutional%20mergers%20lsc%20funding

Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) - http://www.delni.gov.uk Education and Learning Wales (ELWa) - http://www.elwa.ac.uk HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England) - http://www.hefce.ac.uk HEFCE Circular 15/00 - Development of Teaching and Learning Strategies HEFCE Circular 01/37 - Strategies for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education; A guide to good practice. HEFCE Teaching Initiatives http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/tinits/ HEFCE Teaching and Quality Enhancement Fund (TQEF) - http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/1999/99_48.htm Report to the HEFCE by JM Consulting; Teaching and Learning Infrastructure in Higher Education (June 2002/31)

Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) - http://www.wfc.ac.uk HEFCW Report - "The Scope for Institutional http://www.wfc.ac.uk/education/hefcw/pub99/w99101he.html

Mergers

at

the

Higher

Educational

Level"

JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee - http://www.jisc.ac.uk/ History of the JISC - http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=about_history JISC funding opportunities- http://www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=funding]

Lecture Theatre Service Managers Group (LTSMG) - http://www.ltsmg.org.uk/ LTSMG Publication: “Providing Teaching Room Services, Good Practice and Standards 1999.

LSC (Learning and Skills Council) - http://www.lsc.gov.uk/ LSC Rationalisation Fund http://www.lsc.gov.uk/National/Documents/Series/Circulars/0110ReorganisationsFurtherEducationCorporationReorganisat ionsandRationalisationFundSupport.htm

Scottish Funding Councils for Further and Higher Education (SFC) - http://www.sfc.ac.uk/


Chapter Five – Strategic Management Management Structures The survey analysis shows that there are many different, and sometimes complex, kinds of management/committee structures that are in place for the strategic planning and management of learning and teaching spaces in post-16 education institutions. This complexity may be shaped in part by the variety of different departments that are involved in these structures, and by the way in which such departments report to each other. The analysis has shown that institutions outline their particular management/committee structure in one of two main ways. Many institutions have provided detailed structures, specifying the particular departments involved while a significant number of other institutions have provided a more general description. From an analysis of these two different kinds of descriptions, some common themes have emerged. Many of these institutions have reported having senior management teams leading the strategic planning and management of learning spaces. Similarly, estates teams are also reported to play a role within many of these structures. Most commonly reported to be involved after estates teams were IT support teams, showing the increasing importance of learning technologies within learning spaces. Some institutions have reported having ‘Heads’ of departments or services involved. Institutions who provided specific detail about these ‘Heads’ show that Academic and Support Departments, Faculty, Quality Improvement, Information and Media Services are represented within some institutional management/committee structures. The analysis has also shown that the majority of institutions have multiple layers to their strategic planning and management structures, whereby some departments report to others in the process of planning and managing learning spaces. These reporting mechanisms indicate a structure whereby those who are responsible for the operational management of learning spaces liaise with, and/or report to, those who are responsible for the strategic development of these spaces. The study has highlighted some of the particular organisational challenges in managing the innovative development of learning spaces. One of the major challenges is the range of stakeholders who are necessarily involved in the design and use of learning spaces. To put this into context, the people involved in completing the survey had over 200 different job titles, and came from a number of academic and support areas. In terms of the detailed strategic planning and management processes at these institutions, the decision making processes are clearly complex, involving a wide group of stakeholders. To fully understand these processes would require further research with a focus on this particular issue. Although the analysis suggests that there are complex variations in management structures between further and higher education, there are also many similarities. For example, a typical institutional structure would most likely involve representatives from different support and academic sections coming together under what could be defined as a ‘Learning Space Management Group’ (LSMG). This LSMG would most likely report into a strategic tier of the institutional management structure. This strategic tier might comprise a single person or a senior management team, group or committee with further management layers above. Many of the different structures identified reflected the size of the institution, small institutions, regardless of sector, had fewer 'specialised' committees, with the strategic management being carried out as part of the standard business of one of the existing management groups, larger organisations tending to have committees and working parties, seeking to draw representation from across the institution.

Chapter Five – Strategic Management

From the analysis of the survey, a typical composition of a LSMG therefore may include a combination of representation from 'corporate services' or 'support services' (depending upon the terminology used) and academic departments. This is represented in Figure 30 below:

Learning Space Management Group (or equivalent)

Estates Management

IT Services

Library Services

Other Service Departments

Student Support

Academic Departments

Figure 30 – Learning Space Management Structures

It is interesting to note that in most institutions the student body was not reported as having any direct input into the decisions taken by the ‘Learning Management Space Group’ as evident from figure 30. This may be as a result of student needs being represented in other ways, it may that the student involvement is there, but was not mentioned. Whatever the reason it is clear from the site visits that, as the end-users of learning spaces, students are a very important part of the process. Operational Management From the previous section we can see that there are many different departments involved in the strategic management of learning spaces. Operationally a similar pattern is evident, with estate management departments being the most likely to have responsibility for learning spaces, in both further and higher education. Academic teaching units, such as schools, faculties of departments were the next most likely. If neither of those were responsible then it would typically be another central administrative department. Drawing on the evidence of the questionnaire IT and computing services departments were reported to be involved in operational management in 22% of FE colleges and 51% of HE institutions. The same percentage of HE institutions also report having a media services department involved. From the analysis, we can see that there are a range of departments involved in the operational management of learning spaces. Further investigation would be required, however, to determine how these various departments work together. Institutions were also asked what percentage of learning spaces were managed centrally, or by teaching units and at individual course level. 62% of FE institutions have between 75% and 100% of their learning spaces managed centrally. This compared to 32% of HE institutions, with 78% of HE institutions having some of their learning spaces managed by teaching units. In terms of staffing, the majority of FE institutions have between 1 and 5 full time staff involved in the operational management of learning and teaching spaces at their institution. HE institutions typically had over 20 full time staff involved. These figures seem to reflect the differences in average sizes between FE and HE institutions. From the above, we can see that the management of learning spaces is complex. In the majority of institutions the management involves at least two departments. In the further comment sections to these questions, some institutions said that they were reviewing their Chapter Five – Strategic Management

structures to enable them to make better use of the learning spaces--both those that were managed centrally and those that were looked after by schools or faculties. Allocation of Resources Institutions were asked institutions about their spending priorities for learning and teaching spaces. Listed items were ranked from 1 to 12 (1 being the most important). Upgrading or investing in technology or equipment was the greatest priority. A closer inspection of the data shows that this was the most important criteria for over half of the institutions who responded (54.4%). Occupancy level was rated as the second most important priority by institutions and room layout was considered third. The least important spending priority was ‘external noise reduction’, with 23.3% of institutions ranking it 12th. Institutions were also asked about sources of funding. The most common source of funding in both HE and FE was direct from funding councils, the next most likely source was from the institutional budget. Around 20% of institutions indicated some involvement of commercial sponsors. As part of the questionnaire institutions were asked institutions to indicate approximately how much had been spent over the last two years in upgrading and developing learning and teaching spaces, including new buildings. They were also asked to give a comparison with their spending plans for the next two years. FE colleges - 58% of FE colleges had spent over £1 million pounds over the last two years, with 16% of FE colleges spending over £5 million, including new buildings, over the same period. Looking at planned spending over the next two years, 51% plan to spend over £1 million, with 24% planning to spend over £5 million, including new buildings. In essence this suggests that spending levels on learning and teaching spaces will remain broadly stable, but perhaps with an increase in major learning space projects. HE institutions - 61% of HE institutions spent over £1 million pounds over the last two years with 31% of HE institutions spending over £5 million, including new buildings. Looking at their planned spending over the next two years, 67% are planning to spend over £1 million with 38% planning to spend over £5 million, including new builds. Again a fairly stable level of spending, but with a clear upward trend. It is reasonable to assume that any single project over £5 million is likely to include new buildings or major refurbishment of existing buildings. Funding is likely to be from multiple sources, including FE and HE funding bodies. However to draw any detailed conclusions would require further investigation focused on these particular questions. From the review of the funding bodies above, there appears to no recurrent funding for the refurbishing of learning spaces, although the HEFCE and SEFC have recently allocated some short term funding for refurbishment projects, analysis of how this funding is used would be of great interest, but falls outside the remit of this study. Discussions with learning space managers, and the results of the questionnaire, did highlight the relative merits of recurrent and non-recurrent funding as an issue. Large one-off grants enabled institutions to implement large-scale plans rapidly and holistically, but made planning of long-term strategic evolution difficult. Recurrent funding did allow institutions to plan ahead more effectively, but meant that developments happened over a longer period of time and the full impact of innovations might, therefore, take longer to realise.


Effective Development and Implementation For innovative learning spaces to be effective and to have an impact at the institutional level, a strategic leadership is required from senior managers of the institution at its inception. Throughout our visits the greater the engagement and support from senior management the greater the impact. Furthermore if teaching staff are to fully engage, and thereby fully realise the benefits of the innovations, then a strategic academic lead needs to come from the senior staff within the teaching units, be these Heads of Department, Heads of School, Deans etc. The survey returns and site visits have shown that pedagogic innovations are most commonly initiated within the teaching units, and will only impact across the institution as a whole when they bring about substantial changes, such as: •

The physical infrastructure of the institution

•

Learning and teaching methods

•

Staff roles

•

Student expectations

•

The support systems for the effective use of innovative learning spaces

Learning Resource Centres Many institutions have, as described in chapter three, what are commonly called ‘Learning Resource Centres’. The site visits showed how management and student usage of these Centres varies considerably. At a strategic level it is important to consider the purpose of a learning centre, it may be to provide a stimulating and creative social environment, as in figure 31. In many learning centres there are rows of computers or desks, such as in figures 32 and 33. Many institutions, as seen in chapter three, have learning cafes and collaborative working spaces. Chapter three gives examples of many highly Figure 31 – South-East Essex College innovative learning resource centres, some built recently, some being built and some still in the planning stage. Figure 32 – Harper Adams University College The important point in terms of the strategic management of learning spaces is that learning resource centres are a valuable opportunity to support strategic changes in learning and teaching methods. Survey responses also highlight the range of learning support centres off-campus. These include outreach centres, in libraries supermarkets and fire-stations to name but a few of the diverse locations. So when designing a new learning centre it is important, once again, to consider how the size Figure 33 – University of Stratchlyde of, and the accommodation and technology within, the learning centre complement the overall institutional strategy. Chapter Five – Strategic Management

Strategic Drivers From the analysis of survey and site visits, it was found that there were two key types of strategic drivers, required for the effective development and implementation of innovative learning spaces. These were broadly categorised into the following: Operational Drivers – Operational drivers include the need to refurbish poor estates – the physical infrastructures, consolidation of sites, special projects, increase/decrease in student numbers etc. In short any factors that affect the operational effectiveness of the organisation. Pedagogic Drivers– the pedagogical drivers come predominately from institutional learning, teaching and assessment strategies and/or changes in learning and teaching methods within faculties, schools and individual subject areas. These are the drivers that affect the learning and teaching experience of the students. The most successful innovate learning space projects had drivers of both types. The pedagogic drivers are an essential part of the development and implementation of innovative learning spaces, as learning and teaching methods usually determine how space is designed and utilised. As outlined above, funding bodies have ring-fenced funding to refurbish learning and teaching spaces. How these funds are spent will depend on what the pedagogic aspirations of each institution. Pedagogic innovators use learning technologies to extend the repertoire of learning and teaching methods, with the aim to enhance the learning experience of students. Virtual learning environments (VLEs) are an example of a technological opportunity that has extended the opportunities available to staff and students, in some cases being seen as the "most important single innovation in learning technology." [Senior member of staff – York St. John College]. VLEs are now commonplace in post-16 education, with many institutions highlighting a blended approach – integrating the use of learning technologies with traditional learning and teaching methods. In many cases, this has resulted in changes to learning practices amongst students, with an increased use of electronically delivered course material and information, as well as e-communication modalities available within a virtual learning environment, including e-mail, e-notice boards, chat-rooms. As the cost of Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and laptop computers decreases students are coming to expect to be able to make use of their own technology for learning. This will drive changes in learning space provision and also the facilities available within the space, such as network connection points, mains power sockets and wireless networking. Important here is that any technology introduced must be functionally reliable and, thereby engaging even the most technologically naive users. Reliable and readily available learning technology offers new opportunities to enhance learning in nearly all, if not all, settings. However, a mistake that is sometimes made is simply to introduce such technologies into a traditional teaching setting, with little or no attempt to enhance the teaching and learning methodology. The result is generally a small enhancement in the learning that takes place, with the full benefit of technological advances not being realised. The outcomes of this study show clearly that pedagogical changes must be made in order to capitalise on the enhancements possible through appropriate use of learning technologies. From the above we can see that successful development and implementation of the innovative use of learning technologies and learning spaces involves two drivers: pedagogical and operational. The main driver for learning enhancement is pedagogical and “the design process is changing as architects and designers are becoming more familiar with the instructional and student needs” (Johnson C et-al 2005). Without pedagogy as the main Chapter Five – Strategic Management

driver, institutions may simply replace like with like. In other words, upgrade furniture, fittings and technology with little or no thought as to how they can change their learning and teaching methods. “The organisational process must function to support and value learning as a key outcome and provide the environment for this to occur” (Kenny J 2003). Operational drivers, which include the need to improve organisational performance by exploiting new technology, cannot be neglected, as the ever changing landscape of technical possibilities shapes what can be achieved. In addition to this, student expectations are influenced by other changes such as student finances and top-up fees. Improving staff and student skills in the use of information and communication technologies can be act as both an enabler and a driver for change. That change might appear operational, but will ultimately make staff and students more efficient in their non-academic duties, enabler a greater concentration on teaching and learning. Managing Change Like any innovation, the development and implementation of new learning spaces requires effective change management. Discussions with senior staff on the site visits showed that, although there is no certain formula for success, if the following components are in place, then the change process is more likely to be successful. These components are very similar to what Kenndy (2002) identified as the key success factors in managing educational change. The headings are not unique to learning space projects, however, in each we have added specific comments relating to innovative learning space design. Visionary – The 'visionary' holds the vision of how the developments support the key values of the institution. The visionary should ensure that their vision is achievable, linked to the institution’s mission and supported by the senior management team. “Simply having a good idea for an educational improvement will not, of itself make change happen…. We have to get smarter at both the ‘what’ of change and the ‘how’ of change” (Scott G 2003). Shared Sense of Purpose – For any learning space project the project team need to have a common understanding of a shared purpose, to help establish and focus upon their key aims and how they are going to achieve their goals. The introduction of a new or substantially upgraded learning space will almost invariably mean a change in style of use; which will be determined by the available technology and pedagogical approaches that the space allows. It is essential that the project team do not lose sight of the main objectives and how they are to be achieved in practice. Key Stakeholders – All key stakeholders need to be involved and share the sense of purpose for the innovation. Key stakeholders include a wide range of staff from the senior manager to all the support staff and students. It is important for these staff to recognise their individual and collective responsibility for the learning space design, and why they have been identified as a key stakeholder. To some this is not always clear. For example, academic staff and students are often so immersed in their discipline that they may not see themselves as important to the management of the necessary changes, yet they are the key group of users and must be actively involved in the whole process. Learning from Others – It is important to learn from other institutions and to keep abreast of what they are doing. Reading case studies and accessing other institutional information, such as institutional websites, are extremely useful forms of research, but are no substitute for site visits. Seeing innovative learning spaces at first hand and meeting with staff and students to discuss their experiences is invaluable. Expect the Unexpected – It is difficult to predict the future in terms of the development and use of learning technologies and spaces. The survey analysis highlights the importance of Chapter Five – Strategic Management

flexibility in the use of space. For example, if it is possible, new learning spaces should not be limited by the physical structure of the building. In terms of technical infrastructure, predicting what technologies might be used in the future is difficult, so robustness as well as flexibility is important. Manage Expectations – Make it clear what the expectations, costs, and time scales of the project are, be realistic about the technologies, and how and when the learning space can be used. Ownership – Ownership is a key aspect of effective change management. That is to say that teaching staff, support staff and students must all have a strong sense of ownership of the new learning space design. To achieve a shared sense of ownership and purpose, it is important to involve a wide group of ‘stakeholders’ in the development process. The key stakeholders play an important part in the innovation through their input in the design and, furthermore, will help to maintain a strong sense of ownership when project is handed over, thus helping to ensure successful uptake. Appropriate and timely staff development – Staff development is a critical part of any change process. Changes in learning and teaching methods can require significant changes in both academic and support staff roles. Staff development is a key area that is all too often neglected in the change management process, and was highlighted in a report by the ‘Lecture Theatre Services Management Group’ for JISC ASSIST (1999). This report also highlighted the need for student induction in the use of these learning spaces and made recommendations for a ‘Technician Accreditation Programme' for staff to support these learning spaces. Innovative learning space is very likely to enable, lead to, or even require new pedagogies, and consequently staff development may well be needed to make best use of the new space. Appropriate and timely student induction – To ensure that the student accepts the innovation introduced by changes in the design of the learning space it is important to plan an effective student induction. Through this, the student is encouraged to recognise the benefit and to become a positive and willing user. From the above we can see that they are many factors involved in effective change management and Kotter JP (1995) provides a very useful review of why some change management programmes fail, highlighting the key areas to successful change management. Dissemination of Good Practice As outlined above, there are a number of key factors that contribute to the effective management of new learning technologies and spaces, and in particular, the changes that these innovations are likely to bring to learning and teaching practices within an institution. Flexibility is important – not least of all so that academics have the choice of using innovative learning spaces for traditional lectures as well as for more student-centred and group-orientated work if they so choose. Site visits have shown that academics in many institutions continue to use these spaces for traditional educational delivery, such as lectures, seminars and tutorial sessions. So it is important to enable staff to use the new opportunities, without dismissing the established good practice. To understand the needs of these staff and their students, evaluation and dissemination of good practice should be integral to the project plan from the outset. Many institutions have Learning Development or Education Development Units and/or Centres for Academic Practice, which can provide support for both the evaluation of innovative ways of learning and teaching and for the dissemination of good practice. The engagement of these centres and departments is an important part of a successful project. Chapter Five – Strategic Management

References Resources and Further Reading Gustafson, k. 2003-2004. The impact of Technologies on Learning Planning for Higher Education. 32(2): 37-43. Johnson C, Lomas C, (July/August 2005) Design of the Learning Space – Learning and Design Principles Educause Review available at http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0540.pdf Johnson R, (2005) Changing the Culture of a College with FPP: A Practical Approach, Ferl Practitioners Programme, http://ferl.becta.org.uk/display.cfm?resID=9032 Kenny J, (2002) Managing innovation in educational institutions. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 18 (3) 359-376 Kenny J, (2003) A research-based model for managing strategic educational change and innovation projects, Annual conference proceedings of HERDSA (Higher Education 2003 – surveys.canterbury.ac.nz) http://surveys.cantebury.ac.nz/herdsa03/pdfsref/Y1102.pdf Kopp S. J, Stanford L. S., Rohlfing K., and Kendal J. P (2003-4) ‘Creating Adaptive Learning Environments: The Problem of Traditional Practices in a Learner-Centred Environment’. Planning for Higher Education. Vol. 32(2):12-23 Kotter J, P’ (1995) Why Transformation Fail. Harvard Business Review, March-April P5967. Lonsdale P, Valvoula G, (2005) Research into current technology that could be applied to the design of learning spaces. Background paper to this report see appendices. Scott G, (2003) Effective Change Management in Higher Education, Educause Review, vol.38, no. 6: 64-80 Trowler P.R; (1998). Academics Responding to Change. Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press


Chapter Six Managers Checklist Learning space design is a complex and expert task. Many projects involve refurbishment of existing estate, meaning that the options could be limited. Rebuilding, where the interior of a building is removed and rebuilt, and new buildings can provide more flexibility, but geography, regulation and legislation will still limit what is possible. To help senior managers work within these limitations and still produce successful outcomes, this study highlights a number of critical success factors. In order to assist senior managers in establishing that they have addressed the factors critical to success this chapter lists those factors under the following headings: •

Strategic Drivers

•

Project Management

•

Practical Aspects of Learning Space Design

•

Detailed Design Considerations

•

Working with External Organisations

•

Commissioning: implementing, ownership, maintenance

•

Procedural Checklist

However it is important to remember that all projects are different and a generic checklist such as this may not cover all aspects of all projects. Strategic Drivers For any innovative learning space project to be effective it needs to be driven by a combination of operational and pedagogic requirements, as described in Chapter Four on strategic management, namely: Operational drivers – these might include the need to refurbish poor estate, meeting SENDA (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Act) compliance, consolidation of sites, special projects, changes in student numbers, appropriate use of new technology, meeting student expectations and changes of student finances and life-styles. Pedagogic Drivers – these come mainly from an institution’s academic strategy. Faculties, schools, departments and individual subject teachers will all input to this and will be delivering that strategy on a day to day basis. The strategic aspirations of all the key stakeholders will be more easily delivered if the estates management strategy and the academic strategy are well co-ordinated and complementary.

JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Six - Managers Checklist

Project Management Formal project management methodologies are "principally involved with the introduction and management of change" [Project Management and Project Network Techniques / Keith Lockyer, James Gordon] and thus help to bring about change in an organisation. Project management need not be used as a method of managing the routine business of an organisation, and in some cases estates projects may be part of the routine business. However, when estates projects relate to the innovative use of learning spaces and seek to bring pedagogic benefits then change is inevitable, therefore a project management process is important. To help bring about that change it is recommended that, regardless of the precise methodology employed, a high-level guiding coalition, or 'Working Group,' is set up to facilitate the project. The working group needs the authority, both financial and managerial, to see the project to successful completion, including final handover and commissioning. The working group needs the following elements to ensure that the project can address all the interdependent aspects of the design and implementation of the learning space and its associated facilities. Leadership with appropriate resources and authority - The working group should be led by a person with an appropriate level of authority and influence, and with access to the necessary financial and other resources. This person should be senior within the organisation, and may, particularly in larger organisations, have specific responsibilities for learning space projects. This person needs the authority to make the decisions needed for the project to succeed, and as chair of the working group, needs to create a shared sense of urgency and purpose. Experience shows that in a successful project, the working group leader needs to have a clear overall vision of the project requirements and that he or she should champion all the agreed aims of the project. Membership to cover all the necessary skills - The membership of the group should cover all the necessary skill sets, and all group members should take responsibility for understanding all the relevant issues. Where the primary purpose of a project is the development of new learning space then the pedagogical needs of the ultimate users should be seen as central to the project. The pedagogic experts within the group may lead the pedagogic discussion and debate, but all members of the group should seek to understand the pedagogy and build it into all aspects of the design process. The group should ensure that the following have been considered; building design (include internal specification such as furniture, lighting and ventilation ), learning technology, equipment and connectivity, the role of learning support staff (this would normally include learning technologists and information professionals), financial management and the administrative aspects of learning spaces such as timetabling, student records etc, and last but not least the staff and students who will be using the space. Understanding of the key drivers for the project - The group needs to be clear about the key drivers for the project in order to develop a shared sense of purpose. To have a hidden agenda is likely to be counter-productive, as the working group are unable to support an agenda that is hidden from them. Understanding all the key drivers, pedagogic and operational, will also help the group to make the decisions needed to carry the project to a successful conclusion. JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Six - Managers Checklist

Represents all the key stakeholders - All the key stakeholders must be represented in any development project. In a learning development project the stakeholders will include, in no particular order; estates managers, learning support staff, IT staff, accommodation support staff (such as media services, timetabling and room bookings), teaching staff and students. In all the institutions that demonstrated a good track record for innovation there was strong evidence of good communication among the key stakeholders. This led to mutual trust and understanding, which in turn reinforced the shared sense of purpose. Working with External Organisations It may be that some learning space projects can be completed entirely by people internal to the institution, however in the majority of cases external organisations will need to be involved. These organisations will bring specialist expertise and knowledge with them, which even if not essential will considerably enhance the skills of the project team. By the same gesture external experts and specialists will need to be aware of the knowledge and expertise within the organisation. Those participating in the survey with recent experience of working with external contractors were clear that all parties had to be willing to learn from, and respect the knowledge and expertise, of each other. Central to the process of bringing together the whole project group, and therefore getting the best out of them, is the project manager. This may be someone from within the institution, or may be an external consultant appointed for a particular project. The project manager should have experience of learning space projects and should understand the specific issues of learning space design. The overall purpose of any learning space project is to ensure that the end result meets the initial requirements, is fit for purpose, is built to the required specification and is delivered on time within budget. Formal project management methodologies, especially for large scale projects with external organisations, can be a powerful tool in helping to ensure that this happens. Furthermore such methodologies help to keep an ongoing, written record of what each party is expected to be doing, when they are doing it, what needs to be in place and who is going to pay. At the outset it is essential that the project is fully specified. This specification should clarify the purpose of the learning space, the envisaged usage and users, the overall budget and the over project timescales. The specification should be sufficiently detailed to ensure that all groups understand the project and their role within it. Practical Aspects of Learning Space Design The focus of this study is on the influence of learning technologies on learning space design. This section therefore focuses primarily on those aspects of learning space design that relate to the use of learning technologies, although these can not be totally separated from the rest of the design process. Before a learning space project can begin the physical context must be fully understood. The location and footprint of the learning space need to be determined and these need to be clearly described in relation to the local geography, to other buildings and structures and the overall institutional layout. Having placed the specific project into a physical context the following factors should be considered: JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Six - Managers Checklist

Supplies and Services – It is essential to consider the supplies and services that need to be available within the learning space. Taken in the broadest context supplies and services include utility services, such as gas, water and electricity, access to the space, including, roads, pathways and corridors, and power, data and other telecommunications. An understanding of the broad requirements in relation to services will shape both the planning and budget requirements. Architectural norms for provisions of services will apply to most aspects of the building but ‘purpose specific’ aspects of the building need to be articulated clearly as they may have a significant impact on the building design. For example a permanently installed audience response system could considerably increase the need for provision of cabling. Internal Layout - The internal layout and facilities within a building together with the overall shape and architectural features influence the overall feeling, ambience and usability of the building. There is a close relationship between the design and practical implementation of a building and the way that it operates as a functional learning space. The detailed internal design needs to be undertaken taking into account all aspects of the structure, the furnishing and equipment within the space. Specific factors to consider may include lines of sight, 24/7 access requirements, acoustic and ventilation requirements, numbers of users and patterns of usage over time, vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic. Sustainability – the sustainability of learning spaces is also important to consider. Factors such a running costs, durability and reliability of equipment and furniture, environmental impact, future refurbishment all need to be considered. Intelligent buildings may be able to provide a good level of environmental control at a relatively low cost, however this may impact on the initial building costs and may be less flexible than more traditional heating, cooling and ventilation systems. Security – the security of new high quality learning spaces is an issue that needs a careful and balanced approach. An attractive learning space, especially if fitted with high quality facilities and good connectivity, will be in considerable demand by users, and those users may wish to study at anytime of night and day. This poses a problem for security and safety. Clearly technology can be employed to assist, such as the use of video surveillance of users, swipe card access locks, radio frequency identification (RFID) tagging of moveable items within the space, etc. However there is a balance to be worked out here, as most of these ‘locks’ degrade the environment, especially in terms of flexibility and ease of use. Depending on the location and local culture, the space may easily be occupied by ‘outsiders,' that is members of the public who are not entitled to use the space. These people may be friends of the ‘true’ user. It is important therefore that the users recognise their responsibility and do not abuse their privileges by allowing access to those not entitled to use the space.


Detailed Design Considerations To help us consider some of the more detailed design considerations learning spaces can conveniently be grouped, as in other parts of the study, into four broad categories, namely: •

Teaching Spaces

•

Open Access Spaces

•

Social Spaces

•

Other Learning Spaces

The learning technologies that might be used in each of these types of spaces are discussed in the chapter two. But when considering factors such as size of places, distance from screens, relative positions of equipment and lines of site a comprehensive search throughout the UK and overseas has identified that authoritative information is hard to find. Several universities in the United States have published guidelines on their websites, and it has been possible to identify a trend towards a standard format. In addition a group of seven US universities collaborated to create and publish a “Classroom Design Manual.” In 1996 “Hard Facts on Smart Classroom Design”, [Daniel Neimeyer 2003; University of Colorado], was written by a lecturer with 30 years teaching experience and includes the technical and physical specifications, as in the Classroom Design Manual, but also goes much further and includes templates for classroom evaluation and classroom standards. These templates allow for the development of a classroom improvement plan. The book also brings together and discusses many of the principles that should be followed when designing learning spaces. Many of the recommendations for good practice within this book were confirmed by the findings of this study. The following extract gives some useful indicators.


Philosophy of ‘Classroom Design’ - Concepts to follow when designing teaching and learning spaces include: •

Sound pedagogy must be the guiding principle of planned work

•

Keep it simple and flexible wherever possible

•

Technology should be easy to use

•

Maximise collaboration in planning and design o Get staff from all disciplines involved at an early stage of design o Get students involved if practical

•

“Future proof” where possible - rooms may be upgraded only every 15 to 20 years

•

Future works should emphasise the standardisation across campus

•

Build in simple facilities to allow ease of maintenance etc.

Factors Affecting Classroom Design -Effective Classroom Design is affected by a number of factors including: •

Existing teaching space is not always in the right place, the right building or the right size.

•

Are the o Are classrooms intended for 50 students adequately sized to seat 50 students with the appropriate furniture?

•

Classroom technology o Is the classroom capable of supporting the teaching needs of the academics?

•

Flexibility of Classroom space o Flexibility is a key factor in the design of rooms to accommodate the teaching and learning needs of the future. The configuration of the room and the furniture should have the ability to change as the pedagogy evolves. Classroom design should reflect this.

There would seem to be a need for an authoritative up to date manual for the UK, such a manual would need to be created and maintained by an active grouping of expert practitioners. Part of the study included a 'Think Tank' meeting (Aston University July 16th 2005) bringing together a wide range of expert and senior practitioners of learning space design, management and support. Participants identified a number of headings that should be included in such a design manual. These included: Legal and compliance issues – Examples of possible content included relevant aspects of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), building and planning regulations. Glossary of room types with definitions and standards – This would include definitions of the different types of learning spaces, such as teaching rooms, lecture rooms, computer clusters, seminar rooms and open access spaces. Room Design and Location Guidelines – This would cover factors such as the location of rooms, sizes, proportions, acoustics, ventilation, corridors and circulation spaces appropriate for different uses.


Fixtures, Fittings and Furnishing - To include recommendations on issues such as choice of surface treatments, colours, furniture types and layouts – covering style, density and configuration of seating. It would also be useful to cover issues such as interactivity and flexibility. This section would highlight the differences between different room types, such as lecture theatres and open-access computer clusters. Equipment – Covering the need for, and use of, equipment such as overhead projection, slide projection, audio-visual systems – portable and fixed, types and sizes of writing boards and projection screens. Also covered would be the use and provision of computer equipment and infrastructure. Standards – this section would detail the standards and specifications for use of equipment that should be supported, covering everything from video standards, such as PAL, VHS, NTSC, to file formats, e.g. Windows, Unix, Apple systems. Control systems – What control systems are in use, what level of control such systems should give and how this might change in different types of rooms. Technical Infrastructure – What infrastructure needs to be available to support the equipment within rooms. This covers power, lighting, data (wired and wireless) and other facilities such as video feeds and specialist services such as oxygen and mains gas supplies in specialist laboratories. Physical Environment – This would include security of rooms, equipment and the users; adjustable lighting and emergency lighting; heating and ventilation; signage; waste disposal and other miscellaneous items such as clocks and teaching consumables. The above list is by no means comprehensive, but even with little detail is already extensive. This shows that there is a very real need for such guidelines to ensure that learning space design projects are completed to a high standard and that all necessary questions have been answered. Commissioning: Implementation, Ownership, Maintenance Implementation – New learning spaces will have been designed to support innovative use and almost certainly new pedagogies. As such it is recommended that one or two pilots are operated initially, perhaps with a new cohort of students. This will help staff and students gain experience of operating within the new environment and can provide the platform from which a set of guidelines and recommendations can be drawn-up for new users of the space. If necessary appropriate professional development and user support information should also be made available. Ownership - At the end of the design and build process the room will be handed over to an operational unit or an academic unit. At this stage it is important to ensure that the room is used effectively. In order to ensure a high standard of use it is important that the end-users feel a strong sense of ownership. If the room is a teaching space then it is the teachers who must primarily feel the ownership, if it is an open access space then it is the students who will be the main users, and again must feel ownership. Furthermore the ownership must be collective and non-exclusive. Maintenance - An innovative learning space will necessarily have more facilities and higher grade furniture and décor than learning spaces built some time ago. It is important that the new space is JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Six - Managers Checklist

looked after with care and maintained to a high standard, not least to ensure that all the equipment and facilities are kept in reliable working order. Generally new learning spaces are kept well by users if they are well maintained, so the institution needs to address the question of who should be given the responsibility of looking after the space and what is needed to ensure that it is maintained to a high level. Summary procedural check list for senior managers 1. Identify from the institution's academic and other strategies the following: •

The specific need for the new space, its primary use and user group.

•

The vision for the space and where it fits with the institutional vision.

2. Appoint a project manager to lead the working group for the project, who, with the support of the senior management of the institution, will: •

Define the scope of the project and produce an outline plan.

•

Estimate global costs and identify funding sources available.

•

Identify key stakeholders and establish a project working group to progress the design.

•

Review literature of similar work undertaken elsewhere in UK and abroad.

•

Undertake fact finding missions to other institutions that have completed a similar project.

•

Carry-out detailed planning and design.

•

Review and refine the project plan and budget on a regular basis.

•

Identify the need to appoint external consultants as required, such as architects, interior designers, building services contractors.

•

Keep all personnel in the institution who are outside the project working group well informed of the plans and progress.

•

Ensure that sufficient measures are in place for the ongoing management and support of the space.

•

Ensure that measures are in place to incorporate the use of the space into the mainstream business of the institution.

•

Commission the space and hand it over to the user group.

•

Carry out a review of the space and the effectiveness of its utilisation.

However, perhaps the most important point to remember is that there is no single answer, each institution is different and any successful approach must be adapted to the needs of the institution. JISC Study on how Innovative Technologies are influencing the design of Physical Learning Spaces in the Post-16 Sector Chapter Six - Managers Checklist

“No single magic formula will guarantee successful learning spaces on every campus. It is clear, however, that it will not be enough if we simply place projectors, computers, and DVD players in the classrooms. Nor will it be adequate just to provide scores of publicly available computers. Such tactics, in isolation, may have little impact. Learning space design is a large-scale, long-term project, involving building and maintaining consensus, curricular vision, emerging technology, and layout and furniture options, as well as intracampus organizational collaboration. Learning space design requires a collaborative, integrated approach, with an overarching vision that informs and supports specific projects.” ( Malcolm Brown, Dartmouth College, USA) References and Further Reading Brown M, (2005) Learning Spaces Educating the Net Generation edited by Oblinger G, Oblinger L http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen Collaboration of 7 US Universities Classroom Design Manual 3rd Edition http://www.cit.cornell.edu/computer/instruct/classtech/design/manual-order-form.html Jeffery A. Lackney JA (2003) 33 Principles of Educational Design Lockyer K, James Gordon J (2005) Project Management and Project Network Techniques Pearson Education Limited Niemeyer D, Hard (2003) Facts on Smart Classroom Design: Ideas, Guidelines, and Layouts Scarecrow Press Smart Classroom Design Forum - http://www.designforum.com University of Wisconsin-Madison - http://schoolstudio.engr.wisc.edu/33principles.html


Appendix A

1

JISC Survey – eLearning programme (Innovation strand - www.jisc.ac.uk/elearning_innovation.html )

How learning technologies are influencing the design of physical learning spaces in the post-16 sector The University of Birmingham is conducting a survey as part of a JISC project to explore the ways in which learning technologies are influencing the design of physical learning spaces in post-16 education. The overall aim of the project is to produce a set of guidelines for senior managers in higher and further education on the design and use of learning spaces in their institutions. The aims of the survey are:

To gain an initial impression of current use of physical space in UK post-16 education institutions.

To gain an initial impression of how the use of learning technologies are shaping the design and use of physical learning spaces in these institutions.

Completing the survey A hard copy of this survey has been sent to the senior management team of all higher education institutes, colleges of further education and sixth form colleges, for them to pass on to the most appropriate person. The hard copy is primarily for information as we would prefer you to complete this electronic version of the survey and add any additional information that you think may be relevant. The deadline was January 28th 2005. However, we will still accept electronic versions until March 24th 2005. Please return the survey by email to Alison Davies – [email protected] If you have any questions about this project, please contact: Bob Hunter Project Director Learning Development Unit Aston Webb Building University of Birmingham B15 2TT Tel: 0121 414 2958 e-mail: [email protected] THANK YOU

2

A. Institutional information 1. Name of Institution………………………………………..

2. Type of Institution Sixth Form College Further Education Institution Higher Education Institution

3. At your institution, what is the number of: (Please include academic and non-academic staff in these figures) Staff: Staff: FTE Students: Students: full part staff full part time time time time 0-49 0-49 0-49 0-999 0-999 50-99

50-99

50-99

100199 200299 300499 500999 10001499 15002000 >2000

100199 200299 300499 500999 10001499 15002000 >2000

100199 200299 300499 500999 10001499 15002000 >2000

10001499 15001999 20004999 50009999 1000014999 1500019999 2000025000 >25000

10001499 15001999 20004999 50009999 1000014999 1500019999 2000025000 >25000

FTE students 0-999 10001499 15001999 20004999 50009999 1000014999 1500019999 2000025000 >25000

3

B. Teaching space - strategy

1. Which department or service is responsible for the operational management of the learning and teaching spaces at your institution? (Please tick all that apply) Academic Office/Central Administration Estate Management Office Media Services/AV Services Library Services/Learning Resources IT Dept/Computer Services School/Department/Faculty Other…………………………

Any further comments: ………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What proportion (approx) of learning space is: (Please see appendix for further comments) 0% £5m


8. Please indicate approximately your planned spend over the next two years in upgrading/developing learning and teaching spaces, including new build: £0k 100k

£101k – 500k

£501k – £999

£1m – £1.9m

£2m – £5m

>£5m


6

C. Learning Spaces

(Please see appendix for definitions/explanations)

1. Current position: Please give an estimate of the number of rooms, in each category that currently have or are used with the following facilities: Lecture style fixed seating: eg cinema, forum, classroom*

Other fixed seating*

Flexible /moveable seating

Video beam or plasma screen

Interactive white board

Video cameras

Computers for staff use (to include laptops)

Computers for student use

Laptops for student use

LAN

Wireless LAN

VLE

PDA

Mobile phones

Audience response system

Large teaching rooms (>100) Medium teaching rooms (40-100) Small teaching rooms (100) Medium teaching rooms (40-100) Small teaching rooms (2000

Total

FE

1

2

13

8

7

5

0

0

0

36

HE

1

3

3

2

3

6

3

5

16

42

Total

2

5

16

10

10

11

3

5

16

78

PT staff

0-49

50-99

100199

200299

300499

500999

10001499

15002000

>2000

Total

FE

9

1

10

4

7

3

0

0

0

34

HE

2

3

5

4

3

11

4

6

4

42

11

4

15

8

10

14

4

6

4

76

Total FTE staff

0-49

50-99

100199

200299

300499

500999

10001499

15002000

>2000

Total

FE

0

2

8

6

7

13

0

0

0

36

HE

1

0

3

3

4

4

5

4

20

44

Total

1

2

11

9

11

17

5

4

20

80

Table 3: Number of students FT students

0-999

10001499

15001999

20004999

50005999

1000014999

1500019999

2000025000

Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and ...

Chapter One – Background, Summary, Conclusions and ...

Suggest Documents

Chapter 5 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations Summary ...

background objectives summary results conclusions ...

chapter 5 summary, findings, conclusions and recommendations

Chapter 7 Summary, discussion and conclusions

76 Chapter 5 Summary, Conclusions, Discussion and ...

Background Methods Results Conclusions Summary

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND

Background Results Conclusions

background psychometric characteristics conclusions

RESULTS CONCLUSIONS BACKGROUND AIM

background methods results conclusions

Background Methods Results Conclusions

Background Methods Results Conclusions

Background Conclusions

114 Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions I. Introduction The ...

Conference summary and conclusions - Euroguidance

Conference summary and conclusions - Euroguidance

1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Deformation ...

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background to the

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background to the

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND ...

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background to the ...

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of ...