conference Archives - Tom Barrett

Reflections on Transition C – Final Thoughts

TomEducation Architecture, FeaturedOctober 5, 2019February 26, 2024Leave a Comment

The conference has finished, and you might have already read some of my reflections in my weekly newsletter. In this post, I wanted to explore those ideas in a little more depth and share a few other insights from Day 3 of the Transitions19 conference in Melbourne.

(You can also read my day one and two reflections)

The conference was exploring three questions:

What are innovative learning environments (ILE)?
How do they function?
How do we know what impact they can have on our teaching and student learning?

(These would be a great set of questions to start a discussion in a PLC or staff meeting.)

I notice that my reflection and critique from the conference is evenly focused on the content and the experience itself. I need to share what I know about designing and facilitating learning experiences more openly.

Jayne Heath, the Principal from the Australian Science and Maths School, shared they have been on the journey for over 17 years. I wanted to know from Jayne what she wishes she knew back then? And how she thinks we might better capture and share the lessons learned? Schools, leaders and teachers should not be isolated in their projects as there is lots of experience to share.

The conference as an experiment

A great insight I took away was from Colin Campbell about the increase in our cognitive load from high ambient noise levels. There was a noisy air system in one of the conference spaces which served as a good prop.

Colin also measured the sound levels of each area during the conference (part of the research vibe of the event) and presented these back to the audience. Here is an excellent reading about cognitive load from CESE in NSW.

I enjoyed learning more about how the conference spaces and the way we used them held some insights. Environmental factors such as acoustics and temperature play an essential role.

Previously I have been critical of a conference on learning spaces ironically not applying what they were espousing. This conference still suffered a little from that, more on this later in the post, but the insights gathered from how we used the space was fascinating.

Acoustic design insights from @edu_colin #transitions19 pic.twitter.com/ErBsPnYWMP
— Tom Barrett (@tombarrett) October 4, 2019

We were asked to consider five sets of typologies of learning environments judging the spaces we were in during our workshops.

Space / Acoustics / Furniture / Pedagogy / Technology

Click through the images below.

Looking back at the modes of learning in the Pedagogy set makes me wonder whether we are too general with this group. Is it me or are these not actually pedagogies?

Take Dialogic Pedagogy – learning through talk. This pedagogy could exist within each of the other modes apart from the independent setting. I want to explore more of this in the future – so parking this for now. Needless to say, it seems like a gap.

The longer conference format

Over three whole days, we had plenty of opportunities to meet, speak and chat with lots of different people. The “coffee break” probably defines my conference experiences over the years.

With a more extended programme, I was able to meet new people and revisit conversations we started on the first day. I was also able to think out loud with some emerging professional connections.

The length of the conference allowed for new connections that might not have been made had it been shorter.

The flexibility of the conference space

I enjoyed seeing how the environment we were in at Studio 5 in Melbourne University, adapted for the final day of the conference. The large gathering space for the whole group had transformed back to a smaller group teaching area.

You can see the whole group layout here, with a large screen and lots of different seating in a rough round.

And you can see the same space changed to a learning space with small group tables and multiple screens.

The number of different layouts space can change into, and the ease it can be changed should be something we explore more. It might be a new metric we start to consider – how many different ways this space can adapt over time.

This reminds me of this time-lapse from Stanford University’s d.school studio space. See if you can spot how many different ways space is configured — a flexible learning space in action.

The map is not the territory

Korzybski introduced and popularized the idea that the map is not the territory. In other words, the description of the thing is not the thing itself. The model is not reality. The abstraction is not the abstracted. edThis has enormous practical consequences.

(The Map is Not the Territory – Farnam Street)

When it comes to the typologies we have for learning environments – see above – the value of using them may well be shortlived. They instigate thinking and provoke reflection about what we have and where we might go. But the vast intricacy and nuance of each learning context soon make them a little redundant.

As I mentioned before I think the precision is a little lacking too when we look at the Pedagogies set — too much abstraction, perhaps.

This was borne out in a way through the experience of the conference. In the large space, the whole conference was arranged in the round. But the approach to presenting in that space had barely changed. We had a spatial layout that allowed us to see each other and interact – but we didn’t get the chance to do that.

Across nearly all of the whole group presentations, the pedagogy was surprisingly singular. Sharing ideas through story, presenting and talking through slides. I think I was only asked to discuss an idea once with someone next to me.

Find a Door That Fits Us Both

The research into the impact of learning spaces on teachers and student outcomes is an ongoing journey, and we heard of the history over the last twelve years of projects. But I have been pondering on why teachers and school leaders still find the domain of learning environments research more difficult to access.

Our fluency and literacy, when it comes to the research into teaching and learning, are seemingly pretty strong. There is still work to do – only yesterday I saw something in a school about the neuromyth “learning styles”. Certainly stronger than a decade ago. But is this true of research into learning environments?

I think this is attributed to the lack of quality studies into innovative learning environments – hence the intense focus on research and emerging insights. However, I believe it is the second-order effect of this. Teachers are not creating commentary about the science we can access. There are not enough blogs and teacher discussions into what is working and what doesn’t.

It is fine to have PhDs creating a body of emerging knowledge, but we also need a broader ecology of social commentary! You can tell I have been at a research conference for too long! We need more practitioners (educators and designers) talking about the studies out there and sharing that thinking. The lack of that behaviour is what makes learning spaces research distinct from the science of teaching and learning.

Final Takeaways

We do not share the same pedagogical language.
Modelling how spaces can flex to different layouts and learning modes is a powerful way to learn.
The dialogue “below the line” or on a digital space is a critical conference space to consider.
Teachers have latent spatial competency and understanding of affordances of space.
Prototyping needs to be an ongoing part of the design process, not just a single stage.
More of us need to share our understanding of learning environments.
The journey into researching the impact of learning environments has been a long one and continues now into looking at Community and the impact on student outcomes.
Ambient acoustic levels increase our cognitive load.
There was hardly any reference to the outdoors and biophilic design.
What are innovative learning environments for students with complex needs?

You can see my thinking from day one and day two. There are some future posts I want to follow up with – especially around the precision of our pedagogical language.

Thanks for exploring these reflections – in the comments below please share any questions or thoughts you have.

Reflections on Transition B

TomEducation Architecture, FeaturedOctober 4, 2019Leave a Comment

I am reloading for another day at the conference, the final day of the Transitions19 Conference in Melbourne. I had better share some ideas before I get started, clear the decks and allow some new thinking to prosper today.

Here are my reflections from Day 2 of the conference:

The balance of the day was much better for me than day one. The balance was between the different modes of learning and thinking – it was much more satisfying, and it helped me to stay focused.
More specifically, the day involved:

presentations of about fifteen minutes each (sitting, listening, processing, tweeting)
workshops (sitting, movement, chatting, discussion, individual time for reflection, small group collaboration)
morning tea + lunch (sitting, movement, talking, discussion, connecting+reconnecting with people)
a bus ride to a school visit (sitting, chatting, conversation, individual time for reflection)
school visits – children learning (sitting, talking quietly as we explored the school, observation of learning taking place,
personal time for reflection, a small presentation (more sitting, listening, processing, tweeting)

The provocation of visiting an active school with all the lovely noise of teaching and learning was quite comforting. It helped centre me on the reason we are all trying to improve learning environments. This helped me experience a much more balanced conference day.

What do we notice?

It is rare to have the chance to do a learning environments school visit with children and staff there. There is so much more we can learn from being in an environment that is active. I was in the first group visiting, and I am sure we all learned much more from the experience than visiting without staff and students present.

How might we capture, share and make accessible more of this ambient insight from site visits?

During the school visit, I asked one of the architects who was with me, ‘What do you notice when you look at learning spaces?” He explained he pays attention to the small details and notices how problems are resolved. Reflecting on the group, we all would have noticed something different from the same space. We walked through an early learning centre and Grades 1-3. Architects, designers, educators, doctors, teachers and researchers may all have noticed something unique to the lense we have. The acoustic specialist I was with was seeing how space responded to the noise of learning.

This reminds me of the book by Alexandra Horowitz “On Looking: A Walker’s Guide to the Art of Observation” and how specialist guides might help unlock insights we might never notice. Perhaps there is a way to share guided tours of the same learning space – curated cues from designers, teachers and other specialists. Maybe it is just a short briefing framework that helps us look more closely beyond our familiar frame.

Student Participation in the Design Process

The reflection activity during the regular conference programme asked us to look at how much participation students might have in the design process. One of the other workshops were using Lego in small group collaboration to map out the levels of participation throughout the process. Generally speaking, I want to see more students involved in the design process. But it often feels a bit empty and tokenistic.

I have run student workshops during the master planning process for schools, and their insights are so vital. Our students have a different story to tell of the environments we share. We need to find lots of different ways to surface these stories. It is not just about asking students to ‘redesign the playground’ or big open draw whatever you want in your new school type tasks. The cold reality of our work means less grappling hook elevators and flying foxes to get around the campus, unfortunately.
It makes me wonder about the authentic, meaningful role that our learners can have in the process. I want to talk to more people about their ideas for this as I explore it further.

Shadowing students using design thinking approaches is an excellent start as it puts the learner’s experience at the centre of challenging our assumptions. Many schools I work with over the years have used this technique to uncover insights previously disconnected from strategic planning.

Protospaces

Some of the presentations and the site visit featured active prototyping on low budgets. This was a missing element from the process diagrams we had seen. Prototyping done well, gives students and staff the chance to learn and experience something – not just talk about what might be. Clarity comes from action.

At the school visit prototyping lower budget spaces had been an integral part of the success fo their project. I wondered if prototyping was just the norm and how much we might gain from adopting a prototyping approach to the whole process.
Prototyping comes with risk and some uncertainty – how much stability do you need in a learning environment to make the most of prototyping a range of ideas. Perhaps it is like the risk portfolio – we need to balance our risks, some low some high. Stability here means a higher propensity for risk there.

Key Takeaway

A critical reflection for me from day two is that we need to keep asking questions about the process of designing schools and new learning environments. We need more innovation within the process, not just the outcome.

Thanks for exploring my reflections with me, let me know what you think in the comments below. It is the final day of the conference today, and I will be sharing more in my newsletter later today.

Reflections on Transition A

TomEducation Architecture, FeaturedOctober 3, 2019October 3, 2019Leave a Comment

On the way home yesterday from Melbourne I realised I had quite a headache. I spent the day in the company of about 100 others at the #transitions19 conference. Transitions 19 is a three-day event exploring innovative learning environments and how teachers transition into such spaces.

Here are some of my reflections from day one, in the order, they emerge from my head/keyboard.

It is hard to access someone else’s PhD research.
I tried.
My jargon radar is still working.
Communicating ideas is just as important as expertise and originality. You can have great insight, but if you can’t express it, fewer people can take that idea and take action of their own.
Concrete style (Steven Pinker) is an essential approach to communicating ideas.
Learning experience design is a holistic skill set that encompasses the way we move in a space, utilise the stuff in a space and lots of other nuance.
When you don’t pay attention to task design or activity design, it doesn’t matter about the environment.
Environmental factors impacting on learning spaces are different in different Australian states.
A Welcome to Country shares symbols of safety. Made me think about the way we signal safety to each other in facilitation.
The Typologies of Space (Fisher – see pic) or a set of categories of modern learning spaces is quite limited. It seems to miss more than it captures.
Are there specific types for modes of learning? (like collaboration)
For different subjects? What is the spectrum of space types for science and maker labs, for example?
What is the range of types for specific pedagogies? Take dialogic pedagogy – what spaces might create the ideal conditions for that?
How is the outdoor connection represented in the set in the image? Most Primary age learning spaces need to consider their relationship to the outdoors.

There is still a vast gap between practitioners (teachers and designers) and academia in the learning environments. This gap is exacerbated by more academese.
We need to find better ways to distil, communicate and share the emerging research and evidence.
Teachers and school leaders have poor access to the evidence and research that informs physical environment design.
School leaders still ask “why should schools bother creating innovative learning environments?”
There is still a great deal of uncertainty about what works and what doesn’t – there are more questions than answers. I suppose that is why there is research.
This problem reminds me of my role and responsibility in helping teachers bridge the gap to emerging research. I might develop some one-page summaries of a dozen papers that should inform our thinking.
How does the aesthetic and design of the workplace influence the design of universities? How does the aesthetic and design of universities impact K12 schools? Has the Google office design, usurped the design of primary school spaces?
When teachers speak about their direct experience of spaces and furniture, it is a tonic to the theory.
We need to spend more time immersed in the experience of teaching and learning to better co-design learning environments. My design thinking spidey sense is tingling.

I tweeted through day one – so that is another repository of some random thoughts on the conference as they happened. More to follow tomorrow as I settle in for another day of the conference. Let me know if anything resonates with you.

SSAT Primary National Conference – Connected Classrooms

TomBlogging, Games Based Learning, My class, Twitter, Voicethread, WiiJanuary 28, 2010April 22, 2019Leave a Comment

Today I attended the 4th Specialist Schools and Academies Trust Primary National Conference. I was invited to run some seminars for the delegates. Situated in one of the conference suites of the Emirates stadium, the home of Arsenal football club, the event accommodation was spacious and well equipped.

I ran my hour long session twice during the day, it was titled “Connected Classrooms“. I based my practical ideas on 4 different connections.

Student – Student (same class)
Students – Students (different classes, countries, cultures)
Teacher – Student – Learning (connecting with our curriculum)
Teacher – Teacher (using Twitter for CPD)

I tried to keep my presentation simple and coherent, with a clear message about the ways we can use technology to engage learners.

We used the Nintendo Wii and I spent some time playing Endless Ocean and talking about the ways we have used it in our recent topic. I highlighted classroom blogging as a simple means to establish meaningful connections with other classes around the world.

Drawing upon my experiences of Twitter I spoke about why it is the most important CPD I have had. The most important connection we need to facilitate is between students in our own classes. I went into detail about how Voicethread can do this, the ways we have used it in a recent sequence of writing work and why it is one of my classroom cornerstones.

I think technology has the potential to both perpetuate traditional notions of classwork and to in fact smudge the definitions of what independent work means.

If you were one of those attending the sessions, thankyou for joining me and please feel free to leave me a comment about your reactions. I really value your feedback.

Enter your search term below

Tag: conference