Network
NW 06 Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Title
Educational Space Responding to Social Transformations: Learning Environments and the Changing Conditions of Education Research
Abstract
In the face of accelerating social transformations—ranging from technological disruption and environmental crises to demographic shifts and global pandemics—education systems are increasingly called upon to create resilient, inclusive, and future-oriented learning spaces (Bautista & López-Costa, 2025). In response a rethinking of the interrelation of pedagogy, space, technology, and community is occurring, with Innovative Learning Environments (ILEs) emerging as a key conceptualisation of this change. Rather than focusing solely on content delivery, ILEs seek to establish holistic ecosystems in which teachers and students actively co-construct knowledge, supported by adaptive environments and collaborative cultures (OECD, 2013; Dumont, Istance & Benavides, 2010). We refer to this further development using the term “Educational Space.”
The Call
The following perspectives can be addressed and combined in the contributions:
1. Concepts and Practical Examples: Case studies from formal and non-formal educational settings reveal that Educational Space are not bound to one specific model but emerge from context-sensitive redesigns of the learning process. Evidence on the impact of such innovations indicates improvements in learner engagement, deeper learning outcomes, and better preparation for complex societal challenges (Barrett et al., 2015). However, successful implementation requires institutional support, teacher education, and the involvement of learners in design processes (Byers et al., 2018). These findings highlight the importance of interrelations between educational concepts and their practical applications, inviting critiques and comparisons with other models of open learning, media and environments.
2. Interior Design and Spatial Flexibility: Space matters for learning. Research has shown that classroom design significantly affects student behaviour, motivation, and learning outcomes (Barrett et al., 2015). ILEs often feature modular furniture, open-plan layouts, and multi-functional zones that accommodate diverse pedagogical activities and group formations (Cleveland & Fisher, 2014). Hybrid spaces allow for more fluid transitions between individual, group, and whole-class settings, and enable the personalisation of learning experiences. This spatial flexibility (Grannäs, Frelin & Östlin 2025) is particularly vital for addressing diverse learner needs, from neurodiverse students to those requiring differentiated pacing or support (https://www.ncl.ac.uk/cored/). This perspective invites a critique of traditional classroom designs and encourages the exploration of alternative spatial arrangements that better serve contemporary educational needs.
3. Technology Integration and Emerging Learning Formats: Digital technologies are not mere tools but act as transformative elements in innovative learning ecosystems (Wiklund-Engblom et al., 2025). ILEs integrate platforms for collaboration, learning analytics, adaptive learning systems, and immersive tools (Bautista & López-Costa, 2025). Project-based, modular curricula facilitate interdisciplinary and inquiry-driven learning experiences, reinforcing active learning and the connection between school knowledge and real-world contexts (Sasson et al., 2022; Thomas, 2000). This integration of technology and emerging learning formats challenges traditional educational models and invites a critical examination of how technology can both enhance and complicate the learning process.
4. Roles and Participation: Educational Space challenge traditional role conceptions. Teachers become facilitators, coaches, or co-designers of learning processes, shifting from transmission to orchestration of knowledge-building (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2006). Learners, in turn, are increasingly engaged as partners in curriculum design, space planning, and evaluation processes (Baars et al., 2023; Lea, Stephenson & Troy, 2003). Equally critical is the involvement of broader communities. Partnerships with parents, local businesses, artists, and civil society actors enrich the learning ecosystem and anchor education in its social context (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014). Such participatory approaches are also key to inclusive and culturally responsive educational design, ensuring that learning environments reflect and respect diverse backgrounds and needs (Sigurðardóttir & Hjartarson, 2016: Woolner, 2018). This shift in roles and participation invites a critique of traditional hierarchical structures in education and encourages the exploration of more collaborative and inclusive models.
5. Theoretical and Methodological Approaches: Studying Educational Space requires methodological pluralism and sensitivity to context. Design-Based Research (DBR) has proven effective for investigating iterative design and use cycles of learning spaces (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003). The learning sciences offer interdisciplinary frameworks for understanding cognition, motivation, and socio-material interactions in learning environments (Sawyer, 2006). Questions of scalability remain central: What works in one context may not transfer to another without adaptation, especially across cultural or socioeconomic boundaries. This theoretical and methodological approach invites a critique of universal educational models and encourages the development of context-specific solutions in open learning, media and environment.
6. Social Change and Contextual Responsiveness: Educational Space do not exist in a vacuum. They are embedded in broader societal challenges, including rising social inequalities, migration, climate change, and the erosion of democratic norms (OECD, 2024). As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, learning environments must be resilient and adaptable to rapid change, while safeguarding equity and inclusion (Reimers & Schleicher, 2020). Politically, education policies and funding structures significantly influence the feasibility and direction of innovation. While top-down reform initiatives can provide momentum, lasting change often emerges from grassroots experimentation and local adaptation. As such, Educational Space must be understood as socially and politically situated projects, requiring critical reflection on their aims, values, and consequences (Biesta, 2010). This perspective invites a critique of educational policies and practices that do not adequately address societal challenges and encourages the development of more responsive and equitable educational models.
Contact Person(s)
NW 6: Klaus Rummler, klaus.rummler(at)phzh.ch
Ulrike Stadler-Altmann, ulrike.stadler-altmann(at)hu-berlin.de
Bodil Bojer, bobo(at)kglakademi.dk
Anneli Frelin, anneli.frelin(at)hig.se
References
Baars, S., Schellings, G. L. M., Joore, J. P., & Van Wesemael, P. J. V. (2023). Physical learning environments’ supportiveness to innovative pedagogies: students’ and teachers’ experiences. Learning Environ Research, 26, 617–659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-022-09433-x