Skip to main content
Log in

Future Learning Spaces in Schools: Concepts and Designs from the Learning Sciences

  • Published:
Journal of Formative Design in Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As institutions invest time and money into constructing or redesigning spaces to meet educational goals of the innovation age, it is prudent for designers to be guided by lessons learned from research. Based on a synthesis of four leading future learning spaces, a novel conceptualization is offered here to advance both scholarship and practice of future learning spaces. Specifically, this synthesis distinguishes between two types of spaces: content-flexible and content-specific. Content-flexible spaces are dedicated for instruction or open learning, while content-specific spaces are used as a stage for learning or as sources of content. In addition to this conceptualization, eight principles about the process of establishing future learning spaces and about specific features of their designs are provided based on interviews of lead designers of the four exemplars considered for this paper. The analysis of these principles shows that developmental principles are relatively fixed, while design principles have a wider range of diversity. These conclusions provide formative knowledge for designers of future learning spaces.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acosta, A., & Slotta, J. D. (2013). Evaluating knowledge community curricula in secondary science using model-based design research. Paper presented at the 17th annual knowledge building Summer Institute (pp. 1–11). Puebla: Knowledge Society Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams Becker, S., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Cummins, M., & Yuhnke, B. (2016). NMC/CoSN horizon report: 2016 K-12 edition. Austin: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2016). Epistemic (meta)cognition: Ways of thinking about knowledge and knowing. In J. A. Greene, W. A. Sandoval, & I. Bråten (Eds.), Handbook of epistemic cognition (pp. 409–424). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beichner, R. J. (2014). History and evolution of active learning spaces. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 137, 9–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: Advancing knowledge for a lifetime. NASSP Bulletin, 83(2), 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charles, E. S., & Whittaker, C. (2015). Active learning spaces: Blending technology and orchestration. In O. Lindwall, P. Hakkinen, T. Koschmann, T. Tchounikine, & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Exploring the Material Conditions of Learning: The CSCL Conference, volume I (pp. 225–226). Gothenburg: ISLS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cress, U., & Moskaliuk, J., & Jeong, H. (Eds.). (2016). Mass collaboration and education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

  • Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. USA: The Macmillan Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D., & Reiser, B. (2006). Making authentic practices accessible to learning: Design challenges and strategies. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 335–354). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R. A., & Goodyear, P. (2016). Models of learning space: integrating research on space, place and learning in higher education. Review of Education, 4(2), 149–191.

  • Fraser, K. (Ed.). (2014). The future of learning and teaching in next generation learning spaces. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hod, Y., & Sagy, O. (2017). Whose culture is it? Modeling the design of authentic learning environments and the cultures they mediate. In B. K. Smith, M. Borge, E. Mercier, & K. Y. Lim (Eds.), Making a difference: Prioritizing equity and access in CSCL, 12th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL), volume 1 (pp. 87–94). Philadelphia: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hod, Y., Charles, E., Bielaczyc, K., Kapur, M., Acosta, A., Ben-Zvi, D., Chen, M., Choi, K., Dugdale, M., Kali, Y., Lenton, K., McDonald, S. P., Moher, T., Quintana, R. M., Rook, M. M., Slotta, J. D., Tietjen, P., Weiss, P. T., Whittaker, C., & Zhang, J. (2016). Future learning spaces for learning communities: New directions and conceptual frameworks. In C. K. Looi, J. L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Transforming Learning, Empowering Learners: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), volume 2 (pp. 1063–1070). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaacson, W. (2011). The man in the machine. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Learning groups. In S. A. Wheelan (Ed.), The handbook of group research and practice (pp. 441–461). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC horizon report: 2016 higher (Education ed.). Austin: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kali, Y., Sagy, O., Kuflik, T., Mogilevsky, O., & Maayan-Fanar, E. (2015). Harnessing technology for promoting undergraduate art education: A novel model that streamlines learning between classroom, museum, and home. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leander, K. M., Phillips, N. C., & Taylor, K. H. (2010). The changing social spaces of learning: Mapping new mobilities. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 329–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lui, M., & Slotta, J. D. (2014). Immersive simulations for smart classrooms: Exploring evolutionary concepts in secondary science, Technology. Pedagogy and Education, 23(1), 57–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moher, T., Uphoff, B., Bhatt, D., López Silva, B., & Malcolm, P. (2008). WallCology: Designing interaction affordances for learner engagement in authentic science inquiry. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 163–172). Italy: ACM.

  • Moher, T., Slotta, J. D., Acosta, A., Cober, R. M., Dasgupta, C., Fong, C., Gnoli, A., Silva, A., Silva, B. L., Perritano, A., & Peppler, K. (2015). Knowledge construction in the instrumented classroom: Supporting student investigations of their physical learning environment. In O. Lindwall, P. Hakkinen, T. Koschmann, T. Tchounikine, & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The CSCL conference, volume II (pp. 548–551). Gothenburg: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Lead States, N. G. S. S. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D., & Lippincott, J. K. (2006). Learning spaces. Boulder: Educause.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, V. L., & Slotta, J. D. (2010). Scaffolding knowledge communities in the classroom: New opportunities in the web 2.0 era. In M. J. Jacobson & P. Reimann (Eds.), Designs for learning environments of the future: International perspectives from the learning sciences (pp. 205–232). Secaucus: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Radinsky, J., Bouillion, L., Lento, E. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Mutual benefit partnership: A curricular design for authenticity. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(4), 405–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, B. J., & Tabak, I. (2014). Scaffolding. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (Second ed., pp. 44–62). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rook, M. M., Choi, K., & McDonald, S. P. (2015). Learning theory expertise in the design of learning spaces: Who needs a seat at the table? Journal of Learning Spaces, 4(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotello, C. (2013, September 15). The Education Issue (The All-Out, All-Ages Overhaul of School Is Happening Now). The New York Times Magazine.

  • Roth, W. M., McGinn, M. K., Woszczyna, C., & Boutonne, S. (1999). Differential participation during science conversations: The interaction of focal artifacts, social configurations, and physical arrangements. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3–4), 293–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savin-Baden, M. (2007). Learning spaces: Creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, K. (Ed.) (2014a). Introduction: The new science of learning. The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences: Second edition (pp. 1–20). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Sawyer, K. (Ed.) (2014b). Conclusion: The future of learning: Grounding educational innovation in the learning sciences. The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences: Second edition (pp. 726–746). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (Second ed., pp. 397–417). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schejter, A. M., & Tirosh, N. (2015). “seek the meek, seek the just”: Social media and social justice. Telecommunications Policy, 39(9), 796–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D. (2010). Evolving the classrooms of the future: The interplay of pedagogy, technology and community. In K. Mäkitalo-Siegl, F. Kaplan, J. Zottmann, & F. Fischer (Eds.), Classroom of the future. Orchestrating collaborative spaces (pp. 215–242). Sense: Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D., Tissenbaum, M., & Lui, M. (2013). Orchestrating of complex inquiry: three roles for learning analytics in a smart classroom infrastructure. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 270–274). Italy: ACM

  • Smith, A., & Anderson, J. (2014). AI, Robotics, and the Future of Jobs. Washington, D. C.: Pew Research Center.

  • Sutherland, R., & Fischer, F. (2014). Future learning spaces: Design, collaboration, knowledge, assessment, teachers, technology and the radical past. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temple, P. (2007). Learning spaces for the 21st century: A review of the literature. York: Higher Education Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temple, P. (2008). Learning spaces in higher education: An under-researched topic. London Review of Education, 6(3), 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, H. M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. l78–192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Chen, M.-H., Tao, D., Sun, Y., Lee, J., & Judson, D. (2015). Fostering sustained knowledge building through metadiscourse aided by the idea thread mapper. In N. Rummel, M. Kapur, M. Nathan, & S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Exploring the material conditions of learning: The CSCL conference, volume II. Gothenburg: ISLS.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the I-CORE Program of the Planning and Budgeting Committee and the Israel Science Foundation grant [1716/12], as specifically the LINKS Research Center. Special thanks goes to the designers of the exemplary FLSs analyzed in this paper, who include Elizabeth Charles, Scott McDonald, Tom Moher, Michael Rook, Jim Slotta, Chris Whittaker, and Jianwei Zhang, as well as to the LINKS FLS partners: Dani Ben-Zvi, Ornit Sagy, Yael Kali, and Tamar Weiss.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yotam Hod.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hod, Y. Future Learning Spaces in Schools: Concepts and Designs from the Learning Sciences. J Form Des Learn 1, 99–109 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-017-0008-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-017-0008-y

Keywords

Navigation