Page 32 - Campus Technology, January/February 2018
P. 32

cies (ease of entry, longer hours, friendliness to food, noise and sleep) and an acceptance of the student as a whole person. Connecting library capabilities to class- rooms and residential housing multiplies the impact of space investment, enabling course assignments that can be more creative and ambitious. To get there, we need to look at our campuses as an ecosystem of intercon- nected spaces and ask: How do students experience our buildings over the course of the day? How can we bet- ter understand their behaviors and space needs? How can planning conversations be inclusive and flexible to increase the ROI for learning spaces?
As our understanding of neuroscience deepens, we begin to appreciate the emotional aspects of learning space design, and the importance of spaces that build confidence, feel welcoming and create a sense of inspi- ration and wonder.
Goodrum: The range of active learning approach- es that can be used to foster in-class interaction include:
practice and feedback; knowledge application; students making judgements, comparisons, synthesis and analysis; individual and group problem solving; and even student-to- student instruction. There’s also substantial research sup- porting increased use of active learning methods in general. A large-scale comparison of science teaching methods led by University of Washington researcher Scott Freeman showed that courses that include active learning activities in the classroom led to increased student exam scores and decreased failure rates. Various approaches to active learn- ing classrooms have had considerable success at schools such as MIT, North Carolina State, University of Minne- sota, University of Iowa, Indiana University and others. At Oregon State, faculty have also looked to address the potential for increasing engagement in even the large lec- ture hall as they worked to design a new general classroom building, the Learning Innovation Center (LInC). In the LInC, round lecture halls keep students in the last row within 45 feet of the instructor and facing the majority of their fellow
students, with researchers studying the impact in an effort called The Geometry of Learning.
Hoover: At the University of Louisiana Monroe, we have completed a deselection of the library’s stacks col- lection. We are in the process now of redesigning those newly created open spaces in the library and forming an information commons for our students. In all of our re- search and fact gathering there have been some very interesting, and sometimes surprising, findings. Among them: students crave collaboration space; they desire multiple types of seating, which also includes varied seating heights; they want individual study room space and group study room space; students find whiteboard easels very useful in group and individual study work; and they need access to technology that allows for con- tent to be easily shared among a group of students.
We are working closely with our students, faculty and staff to help develop these spaces that will truly meet the needs of our students not only now but for the next five years.
“We need to look at our campuses as an ecosystem of interconnected spaces and ask: How do students experience our buildings over the course of the day?”
— Anu Vedantham
Read last year’s take on the biggest trends in education technology:
“11 Ed Tech Trends to Watch in 2017.”
CAMPUS TECHNOLOGY | January/February 2018

   30   31   32   33   34