Downloaded 21 times
![New Production of Knowledge Mode 1 [Closed - Silo] Disciplinary Homogeneous Organisationally hierarchical Tends to preserve its form Quality control related to discipline Context based on basic research or academic science (Gibbons, 1994) (Kirkpatrick, 2007) Mode 2 [Open - Network] Trans-disciplinary Heterogeneous Organisationally heterarchical Transient Quality temporary and heterogeneous practitioners Context around a particular application](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/scupjuly2010-100707040301-phpapp01/85/Scup-july-2010-4-320.jpg)
![Pedagogy & Space – 3 Modes Three spatial archetypes: • Teacher centred [mode 1] • Student centred [mode 2] • Informal – ‘thirdspace’ [mode 3] Mode 2 Mode 1 Mode 3 Issues: • How do you measure space utilisation in 3 modalities? • Do you measure inputs or outputs – what are the performance criteria? • How do you measure the quality of learning environments? 5% 15% 80% Typical Questions: • What is the right balance of the three Where should they be located?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/scupjuly2010-100707040301-phpapp01/85/Scup-july-2010-6-320.jpg)
Uploaded byDr Kenn Fisher
Scup july 2010
The document discusses the changing needs of modern learners and different approaches to teaching and learning spaces in universities. It notes that today's students expect immediate access to information and are comfortable with visual and digital media. It then outlines three modes of knowledge production and pedagogy: teacher-centered (Mode 1), student-centered (Mode 2), and informal collaborative learning spaces (Mode 3). Finally, it provides several examples of universities that have implemented flexible and technology-enabled active learning spaces to support different pedagogical approaches and meet modern student needs.
More Related Content
Scup july 2010
- 1. Graduate Competencies Critical Thinking Self Organise Problem Solve Collaborate/Teams Communicate Cross Disciplinary Learn to Learn University of Sydney
- 2. NetGen & ‘DigitalNatives’ – Prensky 2000 and 2010 Digitally literate Use variety of IT devices Surf the Net Experimental Multiple media literacy Comfortable in visual rich environment Able to weave together images, text, sound Visual interfaces, streaming media, gaming Always connected Mobile phones, laptops, PDA, IM, web cams, wireless, blogs, email, wikis, chat, gaming Immediacy Expect information, communication, entertainment to be 24/7 Immediate responses & instant gratification High expectations Drivers for Change - Learners
- 3. Learning Retention Rates (Montambeau, 2000) http://www.cofc.edu/bellsandwhistles/research/retentionmodel.html
- 4. New Production ofKnowledge Mode 1 [Closed - Silo] Disciplinary Homogeneous Organisationally hierarchical Tends to preserve its form Quality control related to discipline Context based on basic research or academic science (Gibbons, 1994) (Kirkpatrick, 2007) Mode 2 [Open - Network] Trans-disciplinary Heterogeneous Organisationally heterarchical Transient Quality temporary and heterogeneous practitioners Context around a particular application
- 6. Pedagogy & Space – 3 Modes Three spatial archetypes: • Teacher centred [mode 1] • Student centred [mode 2] • Informal – ‘thirdspace’ [mode 3] Mode 2 Mode 1 Mode 3 Issues: • How do you measure space utilisation in 3 modalities? • Do you measure inputs or outputs – what are the performance criteria? • How do you measure the quality of learning environments? 5% 15% 80% Typical Questions: • What is the right balance of the three Where should they be located?
- 7. Inquiry Based Learning – MIT Aeronautical (www.cdio.org) www.CDIO.org
- 8. Inquiry Based Learning – MIT Aeronautical
- 9. Inquiry Based Learning – MIT Aeronautical
- 10. Technology Enabled ActiveLearning – MIT Physics 1
- 11. University of Canterbury– College of Education
- 12.
- 13.
- 14. - Modular Grid Column free spaces SLIDING walls Exposed honest solution pre cast plank flooring plug and play services modular systems i.e. lighting Collaborative Learning Engineering 1 UniSA
- 15. Academic Libraries -Habib Model Informal Formal Physical Space Virtual Space Social Spaces Libraries Academic Spaces Informal, fun, intimate, loose power structures, peer communications Formal, serious, guarded, hierarchical, scholarly communication Facebook, IM, cell phones, blogs… Dorms, bars, parties Study rooms, computer labs, info commons, cafes IM, virtual reference, Flickr, Blogs, Wikis, OPACs Classrooms Office hours Blackboard, Web CT, registration software, blogs, wikis, websites And… Beyond Library - Inquiry Based Learning (Habib 2004)
- 16. Multiple Pedagogical Settings - Airport Club Lounge flexibility choice of settings choice of group size / privacy choice of formal / informal
- 17. Malaysian University – Flexible Learning Centre Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3
- 18. Saltire Centre - Glasgow Caledonian University Diverse range of learning settings Flexible & temporary private meeting spaces Rubida
Editor's Notes
- #3 We are all aware of the rate of change of technology in society. Yet technology is only now having a significant impact on teaching and learning as academics seek ways to deliver material in more challenging and interesting ways. This trend is also responding to the idea of the ‘NetGen’ student or the ‘digital native’. These students are digitally literate and are skilled at using a variety of IT devices. They can surf the net precisely (Bill Mitchell calls it ‘Googling it’) and constantly experiment with technology. They are always connected with mobile phones, PDA’s, laptops, Skype, webcams, blogs, email, wikis, chats and gaming. They are multi-media literate and are comfortable in a visual environment. They can weave together images, text and sound and are familiar with visual interfaces and streaming media . Above all though they expect immediacy – they expect information, communication and entertainment to be 24/7. They want immediate responses and instant gratification and have high expectations of their preferred sources.
- #7 There is another spatial archetype which is clearly needed in response to the NetGen trends noted above, that of the ‘Thirdspace’ (Soja, 1996) or informal learning space on campus. Yet most campuses are constructed of about 80% mode 1, 15% mode and perhaps only 5% mode 3 spaces. Key questions arise here such as what is the right balance of the three modalities and where should these be located? Furthermore, how do you measure space utilisation in 3 modalities; do you measure inputs or outputs – what are the performance criteria; and how do you measure the quality of these respective learning environments?
- #11 Other models are suggested in a range of other studies in the UK
- #17 One model which works well although in a significantly different context is the airport club lounge. These facilities have a wide range of pedagogical settings and resources tuned to the needs of the business traveller. Why not replicate such a facility but tuned to the needs of the student and researcher?