Education in Finland has had a steady shift towards collaboration especially in the Basic Education level with emphasis on learning together through pupil-centeredness (OPS-LÄHDE). Finnish primary schools’ class teachers see co-teaching to be beneficial especially for differentiating and sharing responsibilities and professional skills (Kokko et al., 2021), but successful implementation requires different aspects, such as administrative support (see Ahonen et al., 2023; Härkki et al., 202), time for planning and negotiations of  teaching (Rytivaara et al., 2021) and a balanced professional relationship between co-teachers (Guise et al., 2017).

Simultaneously, since 2016, renewed and built primary school -buildings have included features of innovative learning environments (ILEs), which can be described as more open spaces with possibilities for collaborative aspects and flexibility (OECD, 2017). When put together, there are schools where pupils are being co-taught by several teachers and in new pedagogical spaces that require different pedagogical practices (Cleveland, 2009). Innovative learning environments change the way everyday schooling occurs by demanding more complex use and altering pedagogical and collaborative practices. Recognizing and realizing these changes takes time, and for these changes to be successful, research shows that strong leadership (Mackey et al., 2018), having shared visions for the future (Fletcher et al., 2024) and listening to teachers (Niemi, 2021) are imperative.

In co-teaching perspective, ILEs are seen to enable the use of varied teaching methods compared to more traditional learning spaces (Frelin et al., 2025), but utilizing these spaces may create tensions from the architectural intended usage and teachers’ actual use (Grannäs et al., 2025). For teachers, the amount of co-teaching (Frelin et al., 2025) and collegial support are seen to increase within ILEs (Niemi, 2021).

This presentation, which is based on my on-going dissertation research, examines co-teaching in aforementioned settings, highlighting how co-teaching is being developed, and what are the affordances and experiences in these settings.

I will present the two main research goals of my dissertation, which are to 1) examine how co-teaching is developed and which factors influence it, and 2) map ILEs connection to co-teaching and examine teacher- and pupil experiences. The dissertation articles address these topics through case studies by 1) researching school-level development of co-teaching, 2) exploring pupil and teacher experiences and reflections on the affordances of ILEs and co-teaching, and lastly, 3) by focusing on the values and meanings connected to school building reforms and co-teaching.

These goals are researched through focusing on collaborative teaching, e.g. contextualised team teaching (Härkki et al., 2021), school environment’s change throughout the years, e.g. school environment model (Gislason, 2018) and what the spaces afford with affordance theory (see Gibson, 1979; Mehan, 2017).

Following the epistemological disposition of interpretivism, i.e. beliefs and experiences create a subjective reality, the dissertation research consists of three case studies. The main research materials for these researches include classroom-observations, pupil and teacher -interviews and questionnaires. Additionally, secondary documents and emerging materials, e.g. personnel meetings and discussions, were utilized in contextualizing the cases. A guideline was used with observational material with descriptive and reflective notes differentiated to highlight the researcher's subjectivity and interpretations. These materials have been collected as part in the Growing Mind -project during 2018-2023. For the analysis, the first two case studies followed qualitative data analysis: the first had data-based categorization and grouping into themes, and second followed attribute, descriptive and process coding (Saldaña, 2016), which allowed for the collected material to show the processes behind ILE-usage, co-teaching and pupil-teacher-perspectives. Third case study utilizes discourse analysis as it intends to see school personnel’ view on changing school environments and what possible power relation and expectations are tied with ILEs and co-teaching.

Co-teaching and innovative learning spaces are central to current educational discussions. The aforementioned practices reform teachers’ roles and teaching methods. Renewing learning environments also creates a need to reform the school culture (Young et al., 2022) so that we don’t redo the mistakes in the past (Rothenberg, 1989). Studying this change is crucial especially in Finnish primary schools to identify effective and harmful practices and support-systems within co-teaching. Conducting qualitative research within classrooms allows for deeper insight of pupils’ and teachers’ understanding and experiences. Methodologically, the holistic view of classroom occurrences reveals both the opportunities and challenges with co-teaching and ILEs. Understanding how educators perceive their agency within co-teaching helps identify what works for the everyday school life, and how co-teaching and ILEs can be implemented and developed effectively. Research on these topics makes the phenomena more visible, and gives an opportunity to transform scepticism into practical approaches and knowledge on ineffective models. For both co-teaching and ILEs, there is a wider need for reshaping the entire school. Schools cannot remain static in a world that is global and ever-changing, but they also cannot be on the receiving end of constant pressures to change without a scientific research background and support to implement these changes. This presentation intends to show experiences of co-teaching in ILEs, what useful practices exist and possibilities and affordances are available. Additionally, it aims to bridge co-teaching and its aspects with the ‘new’ environmental aspects, vocalizing their challenges and possibilities.

Cleveland, B. (2009). Equitable Pedagogical Spaces: Teaching and Learning Environments that Support Personalisation of the Learning Experience. Crit. Creat. Think., 2009(1), 59–76. Fletcher, J. F., Everatt, J., Chang, G., & Subramaniam, Y. (2024). Teacher collaboration and innovative learning spaces in New Zealand. Teachers and Teaching, 31(2), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2024.2401062 Frelin, A., Grannäs, J., & Woolner, P. (2025). Comparing teachers’ experiences of innovative and traditional learning spaces: What’s going on? Learning Environments Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09550-3 Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin. Gislason, N. (2018). The Whole School: Planning and Evaluating Innovative Middle and Secondary Schools. In S. Alterator & C. Deed (Eds), School Space and its Occupation (pp. 187–201). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004379664_012 Grannäs, J., Frelin, A., & Östlin, T. (2025). Unpacking flexibility in innovative learning environments—Teachers’ experiences in practice. Educational Studies, 0(0), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2024.2448781 Guise, M., Habib, M., Thiessen, K., & Robbins, A. (2017). Continuum of co-teaching implementation: Moving from traditional student teaching to co-teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.002 Härkki, T., Vartiainen, H., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2021). Co-teaching in non-linear projects: A contextualised model of co-teaching to support educational change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, 103188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103188 Kokko, M., Takala, M., & Pihlaja, P. (2021). Finnish teachers’ views on co-teaching. British Journal of Special Education, 48(1), 112–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12348 Mackey, J., O’Reilly, N., Jansen, C., & Fletcher, J. (2018). Leading change to co-teaching in primary schools: A “Down Under” experience. Educational Review, 70(4), 465–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2017.1345859 Mehan, A. (2017). An Integrated Model of Achieving Social Sustainability in Urban Context through Theory of Affordance. Procedia Engineering, Urban Transitions Conference, Shanghai, September 2016, 198, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.070 Niemi, K. (2021). ‘The best guess for the future?’ Teachers’ adaptation to open and flexible learning environments in Finland. Education Inquiry, 12(3), 282–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2020.1816371 OECD. (2017). The OECD Handbook for Innovative Learning Environments. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264277274-en Rothenberg, J. (1989). The Open Classroom Reconsidered. The Elementary School Journal, 90(1), 69–86. Rytivaara, A., Pulkkinen, J., & Palmu, I. (2021). Learning about students in co-teaching teams. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 0(0), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1878299 Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (Third edition.). Sage Publications. Young, F., Tuckwell, D., & Cleveland, B. (2022). Actualising the affordances of innovative learning environments through co-creating practice change with teachers. The Australian Educational Researcher, 49(4), 805–826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-021-00447-7