This presentation provides a brief outline of a research project investigating the impacts of space on the design of open online learning environments.

1. MICHELLE HARRISON, PHD, THOMPSON RIVERS UNIVERSITY, BCMAY 18, 2017
CONSIDERING SPACE IN OPEN
ONLINE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS @mkinchina

2. Overview
Definition of Space
Spatial Metaphors
Research Context
Theoretical Framework
Analysis and findings

3. flickr photo by Patrick Goossens http://flickr.com/photos/goossens/
3333965118 shared under a Creative Commons (BY-SA) license
Container or Backdrop
to Action
Turbulent, enacted, flow
According to this tradition, space is
“a set of relations between
individuals, groups and the material
environment” (Kuntz & Berger, 2011,
p. 245).
flickr photo by tim caynes http://flickr.com/photos/timcaynes/352901751 shared under
a Creative Commons (BY-NC) license
WHAT IS SPACE?
Soja, (2000) and Massey (2005)
emphasize a dynamic relationship
between social norms, how
material and social structures
influence these norms and how
they are then embodied by
individuals

4. “walled garden with windows”
(Dron & Anderson, 2014)
“gatekeepers”
Safe, controlled
Invisible
Open Spaces
“in the wilderness”
needing…
taming, mooring (Knox, 2014), tethering
(Cronin, 2014), wayfinding (Siemens,
2011), skilled orienteers (Waite et al.,
2012)
Spaces of Enclosure
Chaotic, overwhelming
Visible

5. Spatial focus for educators
Fenwick, Edwards & Sawchuk, (2011 ) ask the following
questions:
•“how do spaces become specifically educational or
learning spaces;
•how are they constituted in ways that enable or inhibit
learning;
•create inequities or exclusions,
•open or limit possibilities for new practices and
knowledge;
•how is space represented in the artefacts we use in
educational practices, such as maps and pictures” (p. 129)

6. Research Context: Open Boundary
Courses (I am not a MOOC)
Alevizou, Galley, & Conole (2012)—the participatory culture afforded by social technologies blurs
“the boundaries between creative production and consumption, and opens up novel, public
spaces for, and styles of, networked learning; social spaces that promote communities of enquiry,
collaborative knowledge building, and shared assets (e.g. interests, goals, contents, ideas)” (p. 75).
BUT
They can also be characterized as “uncanny”, unsettling or troublesome when co-opted into
hierarchical learning models (Alevizou, Galley, & Conole, 2012; Bayne, 2010; Hemmi, Bayne, &
Land, 2009; Ryberg, 2008).
SO
Open boundary course (Weller, 2013)
blurs the boundary between formal/informal
invites wider participation
opens up the learning space
Case Study
Virtual Ethnography
(Hine, 2008)

7. Research Questions
What effects do virtual learning spaces have on the development of a
learning culture in online, open networked learning environments?
How do learners’ perceptions of learning spaces as being open/closed, formal/informal,
private/public, online/offline affect how they use or inhabit these spaces?
How do characteristics of the virtual learning environment both enable and constrain elements
of student participation and creation of their own learning processes?
At the same time, how do learner practices, both online and offline, help shape the learning
spaces?
Do learners who are formally registered in a course perceive and use the learning space in
different ways than from those learners who are participating using informal learning
pathways?
In what ways can the open and participatory elements of social technologies create
“troublesome” or “boundary” spaces (as per Savin-Baden 2008, and Ross, 2012) that
encourage learners and teachers to explore new practices, pedagogies, and subjectivities?

8. Framework for Analysis
the daily practices and
interactions between the
material and social spaces
of the course
how these spaces were
designed, interpreted and
used by the participants and
other contributors in the
course.
Content Analysis
Structural Analysis
Social Network Analysis
Spatial Analysis

9. Data collection/Analysis
Pilot: Explore
Interviews
Participate in
Course
Explore and
Capture
Course pages
Postings (Forums, Blogs, Twitter)
Field notes
Mapping of course space
Student feedback via email interview
Course pages
Postings (Forums, Blogs, Twitter)
Mapping Course spaces
Skype, 1 hour
Recorded and transcribed
Preliminary
Coding
Coding
Social Network
Analysis
(SNAPP tool)
Course
Mapping
(Participation/
time)
Data
Practices
SpatialAnalysis

10. Boys, J. (2011). Where is the theory. In A. Boddington & J. Boys (Eds.), Re-shaping learning: A critical reader: The
future of learning spaces in post-compulsory education (pp. 49–66). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS: A SPATIAL LENS
Spatial Practices
Representations
of Space
Representational
Spaces
Ordinary routines of existing educational
practices
Designed transformations of ordinary routines
of learning
Perceptions, relationships to and negotiations
with ordinary routines and designed
transformations
GapsTensions
Contradictions

11. • Openness - flexibility, OER, assessed/not-assessed (Wild-west Moodle)
• Autonomy - anytime, choose your own path
• Social Dialogue - participation within course, external networks, sharing projects

12. PRACTICES -TWO PATHWAYS FOR LEARNERS

13. Number of instances
0
12.5
25
37.5
50
Week 1 Week 3
3029
Cognitive Teaching Social
Practices - Discussion Analysis

14. SPATIAL ANALYSIS

17. Highlights of Findings
Tensions related to visibility/anonymity, assessment, flexibility (pathways, time), resources,
conceptions of openness, and complexity of the learning environment, all had an impact on
how the learning spaces were perceived or enacted.
Learners valued direct pathways - challenge for designers/learners to find coherence -
need mooring/wayfinding
Learners/Instructors inscribed this space as an educational space, through their identities
and practices (boundary crossing, norms/rules/hierarchies, the familiar or homely)
Multiple spaces/places - nooks/crannies create feelings of disorientation, different levels
of visibility and anonymity, conceptions of openness
Repurposing/remixing by instructors/designers/learners to wrangle their spaces
Blurring and repurposing spaces (virtual/work/home/travel)
The learning space is an assemblage (material/social) - a code/space, an educational/
learning space, a globalized space - all influence communication practices
Material space both constrains/supports - hierarchical, compartmentalize structure interrupts
the flow of communication - barriers to autonomy, access and visibility

18. Institutional provisions for open spaces are not always
supported, how do we open our boundaries without having
to create a “wild-west” version?
How do we make the “rules of the game” more explicit for
learners? How do we balance this with making space for
greater learner agency?
How do we create learning designs that provide engaging
pathways for informal/formal participants?
How do we make space for troublesome encounters? (it is
not the tools)
How do we incorporate learners multiple spaces (both
material and conceptual) more effectively?
QUESTIONS

19. Alevizou, P., Galley, R., & Conole, G. (2012). Collectivity , Performance and Self- representation: Analysing Cloudworks as
a Public Space for Networked Learning and Reflection. (L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. Mcconnell, Eds.)
Exploring the Theory, Pedagogy and Practice of Networked Learning, 75–84. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-0496-5
Kuntz, A. M., & Berger, J. B. (2011). Faculty Work Practices in Material Environments: A Case Study. The Journal of Higher
Education, 82(3), 239–264. doi:10.1353/jhe.2011.0019
Boddington & J. Boys (Eds.) (2011). Re-shaping learning: A critical reader: The future of learning spaces in post-
compulsory education (pp. 49–66). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Boys, J. (2011). Where is the theory. In A. Boddington & J. Boys (Eds.), Re-shaping learning: A critical reader: The future of
learning spaces in post-compulsory education (pp. 49–66). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Hemmi, A., Bayne, S., & Land, R. (2009). The appropriation and repurposing of social technologies in higher education.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 19–30. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00306.x
Hine, C. (2008). Virtual Ethnography: Modes, Varieties, Affordances. The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
Massey, D. (2005). For Space. London: Sage Publications.
Ryberg, T. (2008). Privacy, power, place and identity – the construction of mixed spaces in an educational context. IR 9.0 –
Rethinking Communities, Rethinking Place. Association of Internet Researchers.
Savin-Baden, M. (2008). Learning Spaces: Creating Opportunities for Knowledge Creation in Academic Life. Learning
spaces: Creating opportunities for knowledge creation in academic life (pp. 7–21). Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill,
Open University Press.
Weller, M. (2013). Registration open for my Open Education MOOC. The Ed-Techie. Retrieved March 3, 2013, from http://
nogoodreason.typepad.co.uk/no_good_reason/2013/02/registration-open-for-my-open-education-mooc.html
References