Managing Competing Agendas in Learning Space Design

Managing Competing

Agendas

in Learning Space Design

Next Generation Learning Spaces ConferenceFebruary 25, 2015 • Nashville, TN

John A. McArthur, Ph.D.James L. Knight School of Communication

Queens University of Charlotte

Guiding Questions

• A space is always communicating with its

users. Should a space tell users how to

behave, reveal the design for its

experience, or invite users to participate?

• Next generation learning spaces should

be designed to promote learning

experiences. What principles guide the

development of user-centered spaces of

learning?

• Making spaces flexible seems efficient, but

are multi-use or multi-audience spaces

more likely to be beneficial for everyone

or functional for no one?

JAMcArthur.com@ JAMcArthur #LearningSpaces

Human-Centered Systems

References

• Human-centered Systems as defined in Cooley, M. (2000). Human-centered systems. In

R. Jacobson. Information Design. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

• Applied to Learning Space Design in McArthur, J. (2011). Practical lessons from user-

experience design for spaces of learning. American Clearinghouse on Educational

Facilities Journal, 2(1), 65-76.

• Purpose

• Ownership

• Coherence

• Malleability

• Engagement

• Responsiveness

• Inclusiveness

• Panoramic

• Transcendence


Purpose

The space should be designed with learning (not teaching) in mind.

Some examples:

• Considering pedagogy-based assessment in the design phase of the building.

• Embedding pedagogy in the design and furnishings

• Drive learning space design according to purpose.

• Developing a “portfolio of learning spaces” for varied purposes


Ownership

The design phase should integrate the views of students, faculty, facilities mangers, tech support; and/or the building should offer access opportunities for each of these parties when needed and often.

Some examples:

• Forming user-councils to address practices in the space.

• Allowing access to both formal and informal spaces for all users at regular, predictable times.


Coherence

The space should managed by a team of representatives, selected from each of its user constituencies, who are responsible for relaying information about the space to its users.

Some examples:

• Empowering user-councils to address changes in the space.

• Creating routes and channels for information delivery within and about the space.

• Developing a culture of users (a flexible space should be frequently modified).


Malleability

The space should be modifiable to meet the needs of its variety of users.

Some examples:

• Investing in flexible furniture and technology

• Guaranteeing ubiquitous wireless access to the Internet

• Designing convertible spaces which can expand/contract to serve different sized groups


Engagement

The space should have areas devoted solely devoted to experimentation and innovation

Some examples:

• Designating areas for individual and group work

• Providing materials to encourage creativity (whiteboards and writing surfaces, post-it notes, software, haptic or interactive displays, augmented reality)


Responsiveness

The space should include in-house tech support and necessary student services.

Some examples:

• Locating information and technology support and students service in dedicated spaces within the building.

• Delineating on-site contacts for each learning space.

• Offering real-time connectivity and rapid response to user requests.



Inclusiveness

The space should be comfortable, aesthetically pleasing, and inviting.

Some examples:

• Assessing color, lighting, temperature, and aroma within a space.

• Planning for acoustic concerns.

• Developing appropriate levels of comfortability in a space: interpersonal distance and ergonomics.

PanoramicThe space should fit into the overall model of campus architecture. It should allow pass-throughs to and from other functional areas.

Some examples:

• Balancing a common elements of university facility design with purpose-driven space.

• Connecting to the place-based heritage of the institution.

• Demonstrating quality wayfinding practices.


Transcendence

The space should be designed to facilitate interaction between faculty & students and among various disciplines.

Some examples:

• Locating offices near formal learning spaces

• Assigning diverse disciplines to the same spaces

• Creating informal learning spaces close to the formal ones (cafes, corridors, etc.)

• Arranging nodes, anchors, bottlenecks, meeting points, intersections

• Considering sociopetal and sociofugal arrangements for impact


Guiding Questions

• A space is always communicating with its

users. Should a space tell users how to

behave, reveal the design for its

experience, or invite users to participate?

• Next generation learning spaces should

be designed to promote learning

experiences. What principles guide the

development of user-centered spaces of

learning?

• Making spaces flexible seems efficient, but

are multi-use or multi-audience spaces

more likely to be beneficial for everyone

or functional for no one?


Managing Competing

Agendas

in Learning Space Design

Next Generation Learning Spaces ConferenceFebruary 25, 2015 • Nashville, TN

John A. McArthur, [email protected]

@JAMcArthur


Managing Competing Agendas in Learning Space Design

Education

Transcript of Managing Competing Agendas in Learning Space Design