Architecture, Building and Planning - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Affordances, Architecture and the Action Possibilities of Learning Environments: A Critical Review of the Literature and Future Directions
    Young, F ; Cleveland, B (MDPI, 2022-01)
    This paper critically reviews the body of literature on affordances relating to the design and inhabitation of school buildings. Focusing on the influence of learning spaces on pedagogical practices, we argue that links between affordances, architecture and the action possibilities of school-based environments have largely been overlooked and that such links hold great promise for better aligning space and pedagogy—especially amidst changing expectations of what effective teaching and learning ‘looks like’. Emerging innovative learning environments (ILEs) are designed to enable a wider pedagogical repertoire than traditional classrooms. In order to transcend stereotypical understandings about how the physical environment in schools may afford teaching and learning activities, it is becoming increasingly recognised that both design and practice reconceptualisation is required for affordances of new learning environments to be effectively actualised in support of contemporary education. With a focus on the environmental perceptions of architects, educators and learners, we believe affordance theory offers a useful framework for thinking about the design and use of learning spaces. We argue that Gibson’s affordance theory should be more commonly applied to help situate conversations between designers and users about how physical learning environments are conceived, perceived and actioned for effective teaching and learning.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    The “state of play” concerning New Zealand’s transition to innovative learning environments: Preliminary results from phase one of the ILETC project
    Bradbeer, C ; Mahat, M ; Marian, T ; Cleveland, B ; Kvan, T ; Imms, W (New Zealand Educational Administration & Leadership Society, 2017-01-01)
    Driven by international trends and government policy, it is a requirement for all newly built schools in New Zealand to be designed as innovative learning environments (ILEs) with flexible learning spaces. These environments, celebrated by some for the “transformational” educational opportunities they may provide, also raise questions about whether the anticipated pedagogical value of these “non-traditional” spaces is based on idealised visions of teaching and learning rather than empirically derived evidence. Before such complex issues can be efficiently addressed, evidence of the actual “state of play” of ILEs is required. Drawing on New Zealand specific data from a large Australasian research project, this paper triangulates principals’ opinions, teachers’ perspectives, and the literature on some key preliminary issues: what types of learning spaces can be found in New Zealand schools; what teaching styles are evident in these spaces; what pedagogical beliefs are driving ILE teaching practices; and what types of learning activities are occurring in ILEs? The paper provides an evidence based platform for further discussion about the opportunities and challenges surrounding the use and practice of ILEs in New Zealand.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Plug n play: Future prefab for smart green schools
    Newton, C ; Backhouse, S ; Aibinu, A ; Cleveland, B ; Crawford, RH ; Holzer, D ; Soccio, P ; Kvan, T (MDPI AG, 2018)
    While relocatable, prefabricated learning environments have formed an important component of school infrastructure in Australia, prefabrication for permanent school buildings is a new and emerging field. This review of prefabrication for schools is timely. In 2017, Australia’s two largest state education departments committed to prefabrication programs for permanent school infrastructure. In this paper we examine the recent history of prefabrication for Australian school buildings in the context of prefabrication internationally. We explore the range of prefabrication methods used locally and internationally and introduce evaluation indicators for school infrastructure. Traditional post-occupancy evaluation (POE) tools measure indicators such as indoor environment quality (IEQ), cost benefit, life cycle performance, and speed of delivery. In response to a shift towards more student-centred learning in a digitally rich environment, recently developed POE tools now investigate the ability of new generation learning environments (NGLEs) to support optimum pedagogical encounters. We conclude with an argument for departments of education to consider how prefabrication provides opportunities for step changes in the delivery, life-cycle management and occupation of smart green schools rather than a program of simply building new schools quicker, better, and cheaper.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Equitable pedagogical spaces: teaching and learning environments that support personalisation of the learning experience
    Cleveland, B (The Australasian Journal of Philosophy in Education, 2009)
    This paper introduces the concept of equitable pedagogical spaces and discusses the potential educational gains that may result from the creation of physical learning environments that are designed to facilitate equity of instruction. Incorporating Monahan's concept of 'built pedagogy', and informed by work in constructivist educational theory by Dewey, Gardiner, Vygotsky, Friere and Bruner, the paper explores the potential for 'space' to play a significant role in supporting the authentic personalisation of student learning in schools.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    The evaluation of physical learning environments: a critical review of the literature
    Cleveland, B ; Fisher, K (Springer Nature, 2014-04)
    This article critically reviews the methodologies and methods that have been used for the evaluation of physical learning environments. To contextualize discussion about the evaluation of learning spaces, we initially chart the development of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) for non-domestic buildings. We then discuss the recent evolution of POE into the broader evaluative framework of building performance evaluation. Subsequently, a selection of approaches used to evaluate higher education and school learning environments are compared and critically analyzed in view of contemporary approaches to teaching and learning. Gaps in these evaluative approaches are identified and an argument is put forward for the evaluation of physical learning environments from a more rigorous pedagogical perspective.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Designing learning spaces for interprofessional education in the anatomical sciences
    Cleveland, B ; Kvan, T (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2015-07-01)
    This article explores connections between interprofessional education (IPE) models and the design of learning spaces for undergraduate and graduate education in the anatomical sciences and other professional preparation. The authors argue that for IPE models to be successful and sustained they must be embodied in the environment in which interprofessional learning occurs. To elaborate these arguments, two exemplar tertiary education facilities are discussed: the Charles Perkins Centre at the University of Sydney for science education and research, and Victoria University's Interprofessional Clinic in Wyndham for undergraduate IPE in health care. Backed by well-conceived curriculum and pedagogical models, the architectures of these facilities embody the educational visions, methods, and practices they were designed to support. Subsequently, the article discusses the spatial implications of curriculum and pedagogical change in the teaching of the anatomical sciences and explores how architecture might further the development of IPE models in the field. In conclusion, it is argued that learning spaces should be designed and developed (socially) with the expressed intention of supporting collaborative IPE models in health education settings, including those in the anatomical sciences. © 2015 American Association of Anatomists.