Principles of Effective Learning Environment Design

2010 ◽  
pp. 327-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R Quinton
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Higher Order Thinking ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Effective Learning ◽  
Discursive Interaction ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
New Thinking ◽  
Collaborative Engagement

New thinking on the design and purpose of learning solutions is needed where the focus is not only on what to learn, but also the strategies and tools that enhance students’ capacity to learn and construct knowledge. The vision underpinning this chapter is to extend the notion of advanced learning environments that support learners’ to construct and apply knowledge to include the capacity to understand how and why they learn as individuals. Whenever conceptual change occurs as a result of active cognitive processing, higher order thinking emerges, which is further enhanced through discursive interaction with other individuals and groups. A shift in the focus of learning from the passive accumulation of information and knowledge to learning as a life changing experience that is augmented by active, collaborative engagement in the learning process provides direction as to how the complex tasks of learning and creative knowledge construction can be supported in the design of advanced learning environments. The purpose of this chapter is not to argue the need for ‘virtual’ learning environments – the literature abounds with positive endorsement for such applications. Instead, the strategies and factors that afford learners greater opportunities to engage in rewarding, productive learning experiences are examined with a view to laying down the groundwork and design principles to inform the development of a model for devising educationally effective, multi-modal (face-to-face and online) learning environments.

scholarly journals A collaborative design model to support hybrid learning environments during COVID19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Cochrane ◽  
James Birt ◽  
Neil Cowie ◽  
Chris Deneen ◽  
Paul Goldacre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Collaborative Design ◽  
Distributed Learning ◽  
Hybrid Learning ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Resource Guide ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Face To Face Learning

COVID-19 has catalyzed online learning environment design across all university disciplines, including the traditionally practice-based disciplines. As we move from a rapid response triage mode of online learning towards a more sustained engagement with a mix of online and face-to- face learning environments (particularly for practice-based learning) we face some unique challenges. This concise paper explores an example of collaborative co-creation and co-design of a resource guide as a response to the challenges of COVID-19 for best practices for designing hybrid learning environments to facilitate distributed learning environments (face-to-face and remote students). The co-creative co-design of the resource guide highlights some of the identified key design principles behind facilitating distributed learning communities.

scholarly journals FACE-TO-FACE VERSUS THREADED DISCUSSIONS: THE ROLE OF TIME AND HIGHER-ORDER THINKING

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina A. Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Higher Order Thinking ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
Online Discussions ◽  
Course Evaluations ◽  
Threaded Discussions ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Experience Of Time ◽  
The Face

This study compares the experiences of students in face-to-face (in class) discussions with threaded discussions and also evaluates the threaded discussions for evidence of higher-order thinking. Students were enrolled in graduate-level classes that used both modes (face-to-face and online) for course-related discussions; their end-of-course evaluations of both experiences were grouped for analysis and themes constructed based on their comments. Themes included the “expansion of time,” “experience of time,” “quality of the discussion,” “needs of the student,” and “faculty expertise.” While there are advantages to holding discussions in either setting, students most frequently noted that using threaded discussions increased the amount of time they spent on class objectives and that they appreciated the extra time for reflection on course issues. The face-to-face format also had value as a result of its immediacy and energy, and some students found one mode a better “fit” with their preferred learning mode. The analysisof higher-order thinking was based on a content analysis of the threaded discussions only. Each posting was coded as one of the four cognitive-processing categories described by Garrison and colleagues: 18% were triggering questions, 51% were exploration, 22% were integration, and 7% resolution. A fifth category – social – was appropriate for 3% of the responses and only 12% of the postings included a writing error. This framework provides some support for the assertion that higher-order thinking can and does occur in online discussions; strategies for increasing the number of responses in the integration and resolution categories are discussed.

Balancing Tradeoffs in Designing, Deploying, and Authoring Interactive Web-Based Learn-By-Doing Environments

2011 ◽  
pp. 339-361
Author(s):  
Lin Qiu
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Software Tool ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Interactive Learning Environment ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Challenge Based Learning ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Learn By Doing ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Design Tradeoffs

Computer-based learn-by-doing environments have been used to provide students supportive and authentic settings for challenge-based learning. This chapter describes the design tradeoffs involved in interactive learning environment design, deployment, and authoring. It presents a combination of design choices in INDIE, a software tool for authoring and delivering learn-by-doing environments. INDIE’s design balances the tradeoffs and leverages Web technologies to improve the accessibility and deployability of learning environments as well as feedback generation and authorability. It explores a vision of learning environments that are more accessible and usable to students, more supportive and customizable to instructors, and more authorable to software developers.

scholarly journals Reconnecting Children with Nature: Biophilic Junior Level Learning Environment Design

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Emma Woodward
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Primary School Teachers ◽  
Design Elements ◽  
Biophilic Design ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Learning Environment Design

<p>More than half of all humanity now live in urban centres. In westerns counties generally at least 80% of people’s time is spent indoors. This means that people are spending less time outside and in places that can be considered ‘nature’. This is problematic because quantitative and qualitative research shows that isolation from the natural world negatively affects human well-being, suggesting that it is essential that nature is a constant part of humans’ lives. This ‘nature deficit’ also impacts the development of personal bonds with nature which relates to learning to value and protect nature, and particularly affects young children. As children grow up in environments increasingly removed from nature, how will children form personal bonds with the living world if they spend their key developmental years removed from it? To address this issue, this design-led research asks: how can we reconnect children with nature using biophilic design in junior level learning environments? This question was explored through design-led research methodologies, primarily using an iterative design process, a ‘triangulation’ approach to research, and two sets of user-based interrogative research. This included a workshop with children aged 5-7 and a New Zealand primary school teachers’ survey. These were conducted to gain insight into user opinions and preferences. Observations, discussions and results were combined and compared with related literature and initial design testing, and then refined into a set of key design elements (see chapter 8.0). These elements were found to be critical in creating well-functioning learning environments that offer biophilic potentials to improve learning, and directly appeal to the users. These elements were tested, developed, and refined through the design of a block of junior level classrooms, in Wellington, New Zealand. Design explorations resulted in a proposed spatial solution that encourages children to interact with and experience nature on a regular basis, with the intention of stimulating the development of a personal bond with and value for the natural world.</p>

scholarly journals Social Media and Learning Environments: Shifting Perspectives on the Locus of Control

in education ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen S. Hoffman
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Web 2.0 ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Major Influence ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
The Past ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
E Learning

In the past, centralised technology departments had major influence over the choices of learning applications in higher education. With the emergence of freely available Web 2.0 and open-access tools, instructors and designers have been given greater ability to customize e-learning. This paper examines the historical roots of the impacts of authority from centralised technology units to an emerging user-centric control over learning environment design in higher education. A case study is used to illustrate the potentials and pitfalls in this more decentralised configuration for both learning and organization.Keywords: learning applications; higher education; Web 2.0; e-learning; open-access tools

scholarly journals PENGELOLAAN LINGKUNGAN BELAJAR INDOOR OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND BERBASIS MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES UNTUK ANAK USIA DINI

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Rita Mariyana ◽  
Ocih Setiasih
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Learning Environment ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Multiple Intelligences ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Indoor And Outdoor

The purpose of the study is to develop a learning environment design that integrates indoor and outdoor playground to optimize multiple intelligences. Background research is the low ability of multiple intelligences of early childhood. The research approach uses research and development. Develop some of the intelligence needed to support the indoor learning environment and outdoor playground. Through the design of the learning environment setting indoor and outdoor playground to optimize multiple intelligences of early childhood. The implementation of main learning environments to develop multiple intelligences in early childhood education institutions.  Keywords: Learning environment, Indoor Outdoor Playground, Multiple Intelligences, Early Childhood.     Tujuan penelitian untuk mengembangkan desain lingkungan belajar indoor dan outdoor playground terintegrasi untuk mengoptimalisasi multiple intelligences anak usia dini. Latar belakang penelitian adalah rendahnya kemampuan multiple intellegences anak usia dini. Pendekatan penelitian menggunakan penelitian dan pengembangan. Pengembangkan instrumen multiple intelligences diperlukan untuk mendukung pengaturan lingkungan belajar indoor dan outdoor playground. Melalui rancangan seting lingkungan belajar indoor dan outdoor playground untuk mengoptimalisasi multiple intelligences anak usia dini berdasarkan tahapan pengembangan. Implementasi rancangan lingkungan belajar indoor dan outdoor playground terintegrasi untuk mengembangkan multiple intelligences anak di lembaga pendidikan anak usia dini.   Kata Kunci: Lingkungan Belajar, Taman bermain Indoor-outdoor, macam-macam kecerdasan, anak Usia dini.  

scholarly journals Mutual Benefits: Interdisciplinary Education of Pre-Service Teachers and HCI Students in VR/AR Learning Environment Design

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Oberdörfer ◽  
Sandra Birnstiel ◽  
Marc Erich Latoschik ◽  
Silke Grafe
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Content Knowledge ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
Interdisciplinary Education ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Stem Learning ◽  
Successful Development ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Classroom Integration

The successful development and classroom integration of Virtual (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) learning environments requires competencies and content knowledge with respect to media didactics and the respective technologies. The paper discusses a pedagogical concept specifically aiming at the interdisciplinary education of pre-service teachers in collaboration with human-computer interaction students. The students’ overarching goal is the interdisciplinary realization and integration of VR/AR learning environments in teaching and learning concepts. To assist this approach, we developed a specific tutorial guiding the developmental process. We evaluate and validate the effectiveness of the overall pedagogical concept by analyzing the change in attitudes regarding 1) the use of VR/AR for educational purposes and in competencies and content knowledge regarding 2) media didactics and 3) technology. Our results indicate a significant improvement in the knowledge of media didactics and technology. We further report on four STEM learning environments that have been developed during the seminar.

scholarly journals Bridging Theory and Practice: Developing Guidelines to Facilitate the Design of Computer-based Learning Environments

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa D. Young
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environments ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Constructivist Theory ◽  
Cognitive Tools ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
Computer Based Learning ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Technical Rationality ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Computer Based Learning Environments

Abstract. The design of computer-based learning environments has undergone a paradigm shift; moving students away from instruction that was considered to promote technical rationality grounded in objectivism, to the application of computers to create cognitive tools utilized in constructivist environments. The goal of the resulting computer-based learning environment design principles is to have students learn with technology, rather than from technology. This paper reviews the general constructivist theory that has guided the development of these environments, and offers suggestions for the adaptation of modest, generic guidelines, not mandated principles, that can be flexibly applied and allow for the expression of true constructivist ideals in online learning environments.

Mash-Up Personal Learning Environments

2011 ◽  
pp. 126-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fridolin Wild ◽  
Felix Mödritscher ◽  
Steinn Sigurdarson
Keyword(s):  
Learning Environment ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Technology Enhanced Learning ◽  
Environment Design ◽  
End User ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Personal Learning ◽  
Personal Learning Environment ◽  
Learning Environment Design ◽  
Enhanced Learning

In this chapter, the authors formulate a critique on the contemporary models and theories of learning environment design, while at the same time proposing a new approach that puts the learner centre stage. It will be argued that this approach is more apt to explain technology-enhanced learning and is more helpful in guiding (even end-user driven) engineering and maintenance of personalized learning environments. The authors call this new approach a mash-up personal learning environment (MUPPLE) and it is a vision (and prototype) of the future of personalized, networked, and collaborative learning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document