Page 19 - Layout 1

Figure 4.2 Defining the learning landscape very important. If you look at a typical university space budget, all
Informal learning spaces
Broad definition of learning space
Wide range of setting types:
Informal and formal, social, open and enclosed
Access:
Public, visible, distributed, inclusive
Tend to:
– encompass richer range of settings
– allow choice
– be loose fit, unscheduled
– work as a network of spaces rather
than singular settings
– have food!
Generic learning spaces
Range of classroom types
Range of setting types:
Formal teaching, open and enclosed
Access:
In general circulation zones,
access by schedule
Tend to be:
– generic teaching settings
– often limited in flexibility by furnishings
– used when scheduled
Specialised learning spaces
Tailored to specific functions
or teaching modalities
Limited setting types:
Formal teaching, generally enclosed knowledge-sharing. The BOX space is supported by technology
Access:
Embedded, departmental
Tend to be:
– owned within departments,
subject specific
– involve specialised equipment
– require higher levels of
performance specification
– often higher security concerns
the learning spaces will be listed in great detail but the circulation
will be relegated to ‘balance space’, a mere mention for what is
typically 30–40 per cent, sometimes 50 per cent of the learning
estate. All that space is perceived as simply the connection
between the classrooms! But circulation space can in fact be made
to work incredibly hard as an informal leaning environment. It also
offers the opportunity to tell stories, to communicate values, or
share ideas within the learning institution. MIT made the radical
decision to introduce blackboards into their corridor spaces as way
of encouraging discourse. It drives me mad, when I’m going round
universities, to navigate endless corridors without a clue what
department I’m walking through or what they’re doing in it. In
preparation for the future, we need to think through every element
of university space and assess what it could contribute to the
learning experience. And, like it or not, food is a big part of the
transition space. We’re a grazing culture now and the learning
environment needs to embrace that. Social learning is an eating-
learning-talking experience, and we need to create spaces that
support this rather than restrict it.
A project I’m particularly proud of is the BOX innovation space
that DEGW created at the London School of Economics, which
blurs the boundaries between commercial organisations and the
learning institution. It has been innovative in bringing people
together to create a very different kind of learning experience.
I believe there will be a lot more of these types of partnership in
educational institutions in the future, partly for financial reasons
(because you can achieve leverage to create better and more
interesting spaces with the involvement of commercial
organisations), but primarily as a means to achieve improved
at every step of the way – we can’t over-estimate its impact on
learning processes, formal or informal.
If you envisage a map of technology use overlaid on the geography
of a campus, you can think about technology in terms of contours
within the academic space and ask what immersive learning
experiences, what games, what technology will enable learning in
that location. This wonderful image from MIT (see page 18) shows
internet usage on campus – overlaying the virtual on the physical
so you begin to see hotspots and islands where the physical and
virtual come together. We’re particularly excited about mapping
17 Further and higher education