“Every challenge, every adversity, contains within it the seeds of opportunity and growth.”

― Roy Bennett

Globally, school learning environments are undergoing spatial transformations that incorporate innovative designs, digital technology, and ergonomic furniture—often deviating from traditional classroom layouts to better support contemporary learners (Mahat & Imms, 2021). In Australia alone, an estimated 750 new schools will be built by 2026 (Goss, 2016), representing an infrastructure investment of up to AUD$11 billion (Holland, 2017). Similarly, across Europe, aging schools are being replaced and new schools are being built to respond to the influx of migrants (Duthilleul et al., 2021) and a growing population. To maximise the return on investment, structured professional learning in teachers’ spatial competency is essential (Imms & Mahat, 2020; Mahat & Loh, 2024). Developing spatial competency equips teachers to harness the affordances of these environments, fostering the multidisciplinary and lifelong learning skills essential for today’s students.

The concept of spatial competency is rooted in theories of environmental competency (Lackney, 2008; Lawton, 1977) and architectural phenomenology (Pointon & Kershner, 2000). It reflects an educator’s intrinsic ability to engage with and optimise the physical learning environment to support teaching and learning (Lackney, 2008; Lawton, 1977). Rather than viewing school architecture solely as a structural or symbolic language, it can be understood as a framework for thinking and interaction (Hays, 2016). In education, learning spaces also embody societal values, instructional purposes, and cultural contexts, which are continually shaping and being shaped by educators (Casey, 2009).

The idea that space might make a difference pedagogically for teachers, and educationally for students, has prompted considerable thinking about the relationship between pedagogy and space, and how best to deliver a contemporary vision for teaching and learning, particularly where deeper outcomes such as critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration are valued. The transition of teachers from traditional classroom-based spaces to these new, more innovative spaces, however, is complex and challenging; involving not only aspects of space but also parallel shifts to pedagogy and roles played by teachers. Research into this transition has highlighted areas where support, professional learning, and leadership, is beneficial and required (Imms & Mahat, 2020).

This study aims to explore challenges Victorian teachers face when transitioning into flexible and agile spaces and identify their professional learning needs to enhance their ability to use physical space as a pedagogical tool. Research on spatialised professional learning within the local context is essential, as recent findings indicate that Australian teachers are primarily motivated by improving their own practice for better student outcomes, rather than by fulfilling compulsory administrative requirements (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL], 2023). By supporting Victorian teachers in developing their spatial competency, this study contributes to positive social and educational outcomes, ultimately enhancing student learning and achievement. Given the substantial investment in educational infrastructure, this research ensures that professional learning is of high quality and addresses a critical gap in knowledge, maximising the impact of these investments.

The study utilised an online survey to help gain a deeper understanding of the challenges teachers have experienced, and support required when teaching in more contemporary learning environments. A whole-population sample of all Victorian primary and secondary school teachers was the target (1,782 Government schools, 542 Catholic schools, and 413 Independent schools). However, due to restrictions imposed by the Victorian Department of Education, the survey was sent out to a random sample of 20% of Government schools and all Independent schools. Recruitment occurred via: (1) direct email to schools, (2) through the researchers' networks, (3) via peak organisations such as Independent Schools Victoria and (4) through social media such as Facebook and LinkedIn. The survey received 133 responses, of which 100 were usable and included for analysis. The study received ethics approval from the University of Melbourne (Project ID: 2024-29301-52402-2) and the Victorian Department of Education (Project ID: 24-03-279). The Spatial and Pedagogical Activities and Challenges for Educators (SPACE) Survey consisted of five sections. The first section asked respondents for their demographic data such as gender, role and years of teaching, as well as contextual data about their school, such as location (metropolitan, regional or rural) and sector (Independent, Government or Catholic). The second section asked respondent about the types of space that they predominantly teach in. Based on Dovey and Fisher’s (2014) spatial typologies, respondents select one of five types: Type As are characterised by traditional closed classrooms entered from a corridor, Type Bs are traditional classrooms with breakout space; Types Cs are traditional classrooms with flexible walls and breakout space, Type Ds are open plan with the ability for separate classrooms and Type Es are open plan with some adjoining spaces. Visual images and text were used to enhance understanding of each type. The third section asked two open-ended questions regarding the professional learning support they received in using and teaching in these spaces. The next two sections drew on literature on teacher practices in contemporary learning environments and on professional learning and development. The fourth section asked respondents to select challenges they faced whilst teaching in these spaces, and the fifth section asked respondents to select professional learning support or resources that would have been helpful to overcome these challenges. For both sections, respondents could select all options that apply to them. One final open-ended question for additional comments was included at the end of the survey.

The study revealed several key results. First, 77% of respondents indicated that they had not received any professional learning in using the physical learning environments. Second, the top five challenges that were selected by most respondents were: (1) Managing distractions for students; (2) Managing issues concerned with noise; (3) Time to reflect on how well the space is being used; (4) Managing and sustaining student behaviour; and (5) Time to develop, evaluate, and modify approaches to teaching and learning. Third, respondents selected these top five options for support or resources that would have been helpful to overcome these challenges: (1) Collaborative planning time with colleagues; (2) Classroom supplies or equipment; (3) Opportunities to trial spaces beforehand; (4) More training and professional development opportunities; and (5) Opportunities to trial teaching approaches beforehand. Additionally, respondents indicated face-to-face or online workshops focusing on practical strategies as well as formal mentoring and coaching as professional learning opportunities that were most effective to support them in using more flexible and agile spaces. The challenges faced by teachers in the transition to contemporary learning environments can be summarised into three interconnected and overlapping themes: (1) Pedagogical challenges, i.e. understanding and implementing pedagogies suitable for a new approach, including technologies, assessment practices, and curriculum alignment; (2) Professional challenges, particularly reorienting position as teacher, relationships with colleagues, the move towards more collaborative ways of working, and the implications of deprivatised practice; and (3) Spatial challenges, associated with understanding affordances of new spaces, the use of furniture settings, managing acoustics, and conceptualising the role that space may play in learning and teaching. The findings highlight important implications for the development of a spatialised professional learning program for teachers, whilst pertinent to Victoria, have broad relevance to other education systems more generally.

AITSL. (2023). High-quality professional learning for Australian school teachers and school leaders. Retrieved from: https://www.aitsl.edu.au/research/spotlights/high-quality-professional-learning-for-australian-teachers-and-school-leaders Casey, E. S. (2009). Getting back into place: Toward a renewed understanding of the place-world. Indiana University Press. Dovey, K., & Fisher, K. (2014). Designing for adaptation: The school as socio-spatial assemblage. The Journal of Architecture, 19, 43–63. https ://doi.org/10.1080/13602 365.2014.88237 6. Duthilleul, Y., Woolner, P. and Whelan, A. (2021). Constructing Education: An opportunity not to be missed. Thematic Reviews Series Council of Europe Development Bank, Paris. Goss, P. (2016, January 22). Should you worry about a schools shortage? It really depends on where you live. Conversation. https://theconversation.com/should-you-worry-about-a-schools-shortage-it-really-depends-on-where-you-live-53296 Hays, K.M. (2016). Architecture’s appearance and the practices of imagination. Log, 37, 205-213. Holland, K. (2017, June 28). Major crisis in Australian public school infrastructure. Retrieved from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/06/28/infra-j28.html Imms W. & Mahat M. (2021) Where to now? Fourteen characteristics of teachers’ transition into innovative learning environments. In W. Imms & T. Kvan (Eds), Teacher Transition into Innovative Learning Environments (pp. 317-334). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7497-9_25 Lackney, J. A. (2008). Teacher environmental competence in elementary school environments. Children, Youth and Environments 18(2) 133-159. Lawton, M. P. (1977). An ecological theory of ageing applied to elderly housing. Journal of Architectural Education, 31(1), 8–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1977.11102585. Mahat, M. & Imms, W. (2021). Establishing a reliable measure of perceptions of teacher and student use of learning environments. The Australian Educational Researcher, 48, 145 – 164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-0020-00382-z Mahat, M. & Loh, C. E (2024). Teachers’ changing perspectives of their spatial competencies: A case study of professional learning in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education, 152(2024), 104797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104797 Pointon, P., & Kershner, R. (2000). Making decisions about organising the primary classroom environment as a context for learning: the views of three experienced teachers and their pupils. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(1), 117-127.