22 SES 04 E, Student Engagement and Active Learning
At the same time as most learning and teaching activities today are technology enhanced to some degree (Watson, 2008; Davies et al, 2017), a majority of classrooms are designed the same way as they were a hundred years ago. Several studies indicate that we have to redesign our classrooms to open up for more flexible learning sessions and to support collaborative learning (Cotner et al., 2013; Bernade, 2017). A promising concept seems to be technology enhanced active learning classrooms where the furnishing is meant to facilitate group-based activities (Charles & Whitaker, 2015; Cotner et al., 2013; Vercellotti, 2017). This study is an evaluation of two active learning classrooms equipped with Internet-connected computers where students can be divided into groups of up to six students, each group with a separate digital screen and a separate whiteboard.
These classrooms are inspired by the active learning classrooms that have been built at the University of Minnesota and the evaluation of the classrooms was also based on an interview schedule from the same university (Baepler & Walker, 2014). At the university where this study was conducted blended synchronous learning is frequently used. An educational blend that can be defined as the mix of on-campus and distance students participating synchronously in common learning and teaching activities. Research studies have highlighted the importance of bridging the gap between these two groups and create equivalent learning conditions (Turoff, 2000; Popov, 2009). The aim of the study was to analyse and discuss if and how the technology equipped and group work furnished classrooms might support university teachers' work with various types of collaborative learning. Traditional classrooms are furnished for traditional lecture-based rostrum teaching, this study explores how classrooms that better supports student centred learning should be designed.
As theoretical frameworks for the analysis, Gibson's concept of affordances (Gibson, 1979; Hutchby, 2001; John & Sutherland, 2005) and instructional proxemics (McArthur, 2015) was used. The concept of affordances can be defined as "functional and relational aspects which frame, while not determining, the possibilities for agentic action in relation to an object" (Hutchby, 2001, p. 444), and was useful for discussing how the room, the ICT equipment and, its furnishing affects teaching and learning activities. Instructional proxemics, defined as "[e]ducational space and the use of space in the classroom" (McArthur III, 2008, p. 4) was used to discuss the impact of physical space on student behaviour.
The research strategy has been a case study approach where data has been collected from interviews with teachers and from group discussions with the university's helpdesk staff. Furthermore, ALC error report logs from three semesters have been analysed and compared to the interview answers. A case study case can be defined as a structured investigation of a real-world phenomenon (Yin, 1989), with case units consisting of processes or entities that should be explored in depth with data collected from multiple sources (Creswell, 2009). Case studies should have a focus on one, or a few instances of the chosen phenomenon with an emphasis on a thorough description of the particular instance(s) (Remenyi, 2012). Interview subjects were sampled with a purposive strategy, where teaching time in the ALC's and a broad representation of academic disciplines were the primary criteria. Informants consisted of nine teachers and a focus group with three persons from the university help desk. The interviews had an average duration around one hour and were recorded in mp3-format with Dictaphones, at the same time as authors took rich field notes and frequent comments with the use of pen and paper. Interviews were semi-structured and based on a question schedule inspired by questions that were used in an earlier evaluation of resembling ALC's at the University of Minnesota (Baepler & Walker, 2014). After nine teacher interviews and the focus group discussions, a state of data saturation was reached. Informants have been treated confidentially as far as possible. No real names of persons, educational programmes or department affiliations have been used and all informants participated on a voluntary basis. Interview answers and error report logs have been thematically analysed abductively (Danermark, 2002) to identify patterns and develop themes. To support a systematic analysis the computer assisted qualitative data analysis tool Atlas.ti (Atlas.Ti, 2017) was used, enabling authors to cooperate on basis of an a priori set of agreed main categories, which subsequently was expanded with themes and categories emerging from the data. The important research question to answer was: How should an active learning classroom be furnished and equipped to facilitate different learning and teaching sessions based on collaborative group work?
Findings show that furnishing was more important than technology enhancement for the support of active group learning. The group seating was the most valued feature, and the whiteboards the second most valued feature. The possibility for teachers to seamlessly switch between shorter information transfer segments, or lecturing, and group activities within the same room, and without the need to regroup students or move furniture around was generally appreciated by the teachers. Some teachers expressed that this led them to alter their lesson plans towards shorter chunks of information transfer/lecturing intermixed with shorter group activities as virtually no time was lost when shifting modes. Due to altered instructional proxemics, teachers experienced that students were more focused on the task during group activities, and less inclined to engage in distracting use of mobile devices compared to similar activities in traditional lecture halls/group rooms. However, teachers did express a few contradictory preferences regarding details in the placement of some of the rooms features, primarily the main projection screen in relation to the main whiteboard. As expressed by the helpdesk staff: "It's hard to please all teachers at the same time with a fixed design". Teachers generally reported very few problems with scheduling the ALC's when needed, but the increasing rate of utilization suggests that the problem of finding suitable time slots probably will increase in the future. To conclude, the two active learning classrooms shows a strong potential to afford collaborative group learning. Due to the increased utilization rate of the ALC's, recommendations are to provide more active learning classrooms, but since furnishing seems to be more important than technology enhancement, this could be implemented through a 'light version' of active learning classrooms without a separate screen for each group. Final conclusions will be presented at the conference.
Atlas.Ti. (2017). (Version 8.1). ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH. Baepler, P., & Walker, J. D. (2014). Active Learning Classrooms and Educational Alliances: Changing Relationships to Improve Learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2014(137), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20083 Benade, L. (2017). Is the classroom obsolete in the twenty-first century?. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(8), 796-807. Charles, E. S., & Whittaker, C. (2015). Active learning spaces: Blending technology and orchestration. In Exploring the Material Conditions of Learning: The CSCL Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 225-226). Cotner, S., Loper, J., Walker, J. D., & Brooks, D. C. (2013). "It's Not You, It's the Room"-Are the High-Tech, Active Learning Classrooms Worth It?. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(6), 82-88. Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Incorporated. Danermark, B. (Ed.). (2002). Explaining society: critical realism in the social sciences. London ; New York: Routledge. Davies, S., Mullan, J., & Feldman, P. (2017). Rebooting learning for the digital age: What next for technology-enhanced higher education?. Higher Education Policy Institute, Report, 93. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Echological Approach to Visual Perception. Oxford: University Press. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/pdfy-u5hmFOvOM2Civ4Gz Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441-456. John, P., & Sutherland, R. (2005). Affordance, opportunity and the pedagogical implications of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 405-413. McArthur III, J. A. (2008). Instructional proxemics: Creating a place for space in instructional communication discourse (PhD Thesis). Clemson University. McArthur, J. A. (2015). Matching Instructors and Spaces of Learning: The impact of classroom space on behavioral, affective and cognitive learning. Journal of Learning Spaces, 4(1). Retrieved from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/766 Popov, O. (2009). Teachers' and students' experiences of simultaneous teaching in an international distance and on-campus master's programme in engineering. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(3). Remenyi, D. (2012). Case study research. Academic Publishing International. Turoff, M. (2000). An end to student segregation: No more separation between distance learning and regular courses. On the Horizon, 8(1), 1-7.
Some networks have already started to plan their chairperson(s).
But at the moment chairpersons are only pencilled in, as we will still need to check for time conflicts between presentation and chairing duties. EERA office will work on this in due course and then officially let chairpersons know about their chairing duties.
Meanwhile, thank you for your patience.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.