We built it and they came: A report on the findings of a pilot study of students’ usage and perspectives of the Learning Hub Prepared by Cindy Xin, Seanna Takacs and Farimah Salimi, 14 April 2014
Preamble The Faculty of Education has recently completed the renovation of EDUC 8620 and
equipped the space with state-of-the-art technologies and furnishings. This new space, the
Learning Hub, is intended for both classroom and non-classroom uses (e.g. study spaces,
meeting spaces). Designed based on contemporary architectural concepts and an
understanding of 21st century learning, the place is intended to inspire creative,
imaginative and flexible forms of teaching and learning in both formal and informal
ways.
Given the intellectual and capital investment and their potential effects on user
experience and on teaching and learning, there is a need to understand how the Learning
Hub is used, what emergent activities it supports, what new forms of teaching and
learning it affords, and how the informal and formal learning spaces impact human
engagement with one another and with the material objects (including the technologies)
in the environment.
Purpose A comprehensive evaluation plan is being put in place to investigate the short-, mid-, and
long-term effects of the Learning Hub on user experience, on the development of
pedagogy, and on learning. The current report provides a summary of the findings of a
pilot study of students’ initial usage and experiences of the Learning Hub based on
informal interviews and unstructured observations. In order to understand the evolving
role, functions and effects of the Learning Hub, it is critically important to capture and
understand its users’ initial reactions to and experiences of the new space.
The pilot study was to investigate the use of the Learning Hub outside formal classroom
time. The investigation of formal classroom use of the Learning Hub will be a future
study.
Research questions Our pilot study focused on the following research questions:
1. Who are the students using the Learning Hub?
2. Why do they come to the Learning Hub?
3. What do they do when using the Learning Hub?
4. To what extent do they use the Learning Hub?
5. How do they perceive and experience the space and the place?
1
6. What do students recommend to make the Learning Hub a better place for them?
Methods For this pilot study we used semi-structured interviews with students individually, in
dyads and in groups. This was complemented by unstructured observations.
Data collection
Interviews with students present at the Learning Hub were conducted independently by
three researchers between February 27 and March 13, 2014. We chose to stop the
interviews at the end of second week because we had begun to hear similar answers being
repeated and there were strong themes emerging from our respondents’ comments. This
was observed across interviewers. The following variables were considered for the
interview sampling:
1. Day of the week: We tried to cover as many days of the week as our time allowed.
2. Time of day: Based on the Learning Hub operation hours, we sampled students
during three consecutive time periods:
a. Morning: 9:00am – 11:00am
b. Late morning and lunch time: 11:00am – 1:00pm
c. Afternoon: 1:00pm – 4:00pm
3. Group type: We sampled the students from three main group types:
d. Single
e. Dyad
f. Group (more than 2 people together)
4. Sitting location:
g. Kitchen bench area
h. Café bench area
i. High tables
j. Lounge area (in the middle of the flex space)
k. Mediascape
l. Back walls and corners (left and right)
m. Side walls (left and right)
n. Classrooms (8620.1 and 8620.2)
The intention of this scheme is to have an even coverage of days of the week, times of
day, group types and sitting locations. Within these considerations, the interviewers used
their own discretion to choose which individuals or groups to interview. In addition to
interviews, observations were conducted during the two full months of February and
March 2014 by the same three researchers.
2
Interview protocol
An initial version of the interview protocol was used and tested for one week between
February 27 and March 4, 2014. It was then revised for clarity, redundancy and gaps.
Questions were reworded, removed or added based on students’ initial responses. A
second version of the interview protocol was used for an additional week of more densely
scheduled interviews between March 7 and March 12, 2014.
There are two main sections of the interview protocol: 1) background information and 2)
usage and user experience. See appendix A for the complete instrument.
Background information includes demographic data, group type and seating location.
Usage and user experience includes the following questions:
1. When did you first come here?
2. What prompted you to come here the first time?
3. How many times have you been here since you came the first time?
4. Approximately how many hours have you spent in total in this place since you
first came here?
5. How often do you come here?
6. What are you working on right now?
7. What do you normally do when you are here?
8. Do you plan to take an Education course in the future? (If the subject is not an
Education student.)
9. How do you like this place?
10. How do you compare it with the other public indoor spaces, such as the Library,
Student Central in the Maggie Benson building, the AQ study areas, the
Renaissance’s Café, Starbucks, etc.
11. How do you like the sound/noise level in this place? How do you like the
background music?
12. Is there anything that bothers you?
13. Do you have any suggestions for making this space a better place for you?
Results and discussion In total we conducted 48 interviews involving 100 individuals. The lengths of the
interviews ranged from 2 to 15 minutes depending on the number of students involved in
the interview and the time they had available to speak to us. Since our interviews were
informal and we had to interrupt the students’ activities, we did not insist on every
student answer every question. Table 1 provides the number of interviews conducted
during various time periods.
3
Table1: Number of interviews conducted during various time periods
9am-11am 11am-1pm 1pm-4pm Total
Singles interviewed
7
5
3
15
Dyads interviewed
7
6
8
21
Groups interviewed
4
3
5
12
Total number of Interviews
18
14
16
48
Who are the students using the Learning Hub?
Among the 100 students interviewed, 33 were male and 67 were female. Ninety-seven
were undergraduates and three were graduates.
Of the 87 students who reported their Faculty affiliation, only 13% were from Education.
The top two user groups were from Science and FASS. Together they made up over 60%
of the students. Students from all eight Faculties visited the space. Table 2 shows the
distribution of students from various Faculties.
Table 2: Faculty affiliation of the students interviewed
Faculty
Number of students Percentage
Science
FASS
Education
Business
Applied Science
FCAT
FHS (Health Science)
Environmental Science
Total
32
22
11
8
5
4
4
1
87
37%
25%
13%
9%
6%
5%
5%
1%
100%
Sixty-eight students answered the question “Do you plan to get a degree in Education?”
About half of said no; the other half was split between yes and maybe (see Table 3).
Whether yes, maybe, or no, it is uncertain how many of them would ultimately pursue an
education degree and whether a space like the Learning Hub would make any difference
in their decision (whether consciously or subconsciously).
Table 3: Do You Have Plans to Get a Degree in Education?
Yes
Maybe
No
Total
20
13
35
68
29%
19%
52%
100%
Why do students come to the Learning Hub?
In talking to the students it became apparent that the lighting, noise level, colors,
furnishings, and facilities of the Learning Hub were the main reasons why students chose
to come and spend time there. In particular, most students interviewed mentioned the
4
brightness and colorfulness of the Learning Hub. Students also noted the balanced noise
level, which allowed both group work and quiet study at the same time. One commented
that, “It’s not too quiet that you feel self-conscious and it is not too loud you can still
concentrate.” They enjoyed the convenience of the facilities (e.g., microwaves), the
comfort of the furnishings (e.g., funky, colorful and movable tables and chairs) and the
usefulness of the embedded digital technologies (e.g., computers, the Internet, white
boards). They praised the combination of these attributes of the Learning Hub allowed it
to fulfill multiple functions: studying, doing group work, socializing, resting or relaxing,
and personal management (e.g., answering email, organizing calendars). One Education
student’s comment was representative, “I like that we can heat up our lunch, rest, hang
out and study all in the same place.”
When asked what brought them to the Learning Hub for the first time, word of mouth
was the number one reason given. They either heard from or were brought to the place by
a friend. The number two reason was that they saw the place when passing by and were
attracted by the ambiance and setting, so they came in and then decided to spend some
time. Our largest user group is students from the Faculty of Science. This was partially
because two science classes, one from the Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology
department (BPK) and one from the Biological Sciences department, were held on the
7000 level this semester. On their way to or from class students saw the Learning Hub,
came in, stayed, and decided that they would like to come back. Not only that, some of
them brought their friends who were not part of their classes to study and socialize at the
Learning Hub. This was true for student users from other Faculties as well.
What do students do when using the Learning Hub?
When asked, “What are you working on right now?” and “What do you normally do
when you are here?” by far the most frequently reported activity was studying. This
included preparing for class, studying for exams (some interviews were conducted during
the mid-term exam period), doing assignments, reading, reviewing lecture notes, writing
papers, and working on theses. Group work was the second most reported activity. This
included working on group projects or assignments (e.g., writing a research paper) and
preparing for presentations.
The third most reported activity was socializing. Students came to the place to hang out,
talk, or listen to music. Often these groups consisted of students from different majors,
departments or Faculties.
Resting and relaxing was the fourth most reported activity, including eating, taking a
break, reading for pleasure, and taking a nap.
The fifth category of activities was personal management activities such as checking
emails and organizing calendars. Table 4 provides the frequency of the reported
activities.
5
Table 4: Frequency of the reported activities
Individual Dyad Group Total
Studying
12
11
8
31
Group Work/Presentation Prep.
N/A
5
3
8
Socializing
N/A
3
0
3
Resting & Eating
1
2
1
4
Personal Management
2
0
0
2
Total
15
21
12
48
Students also reported that they often came to the place for multiple purposes during a
single visit, or they came with one purpose in mind but ended up doing something else or
doing more and sometimes less than what they had intended. Despite the fact that none of
the groups interviewed reported socializing, we observed that students, especially when
in groups, often mixed socializing and studying.
To what extend do students use the Learning Hub?
Based on our observations, it was clear that the Learning Hub was well used. Within the
first month of opening, the place became well occupied throughout the opening hours. It
has become noticeably busier since we made our observations. Overall, the quiet time is
between 9:00 am and 10:00 am (the first hour that it is open) but begins to fill up quickly
after 10:00 am. The busiest time starts just before the lunch hour and often continues
almost until when it closes (4:30 pm from Monday to Thursday, 4:00 pm on Fri). During
this time we saw the place is filled with students working on their own, in pairs or in
groups. There was a constant buzz of conversation in the room, although no one seemed
to be bothered by it.
Among the 28 or students who answered the question “When did you first come here?”
five said that they were there for the first time, the rest of them had been coming to the
place multiple times (see Table 5).
Table 5: Time of first visit
Four weeks
ago
10
36%
Three weeks
ago
1
4%
Two weeks
ago
7
25%
A week
ago
5
18%
First
time
5
18%
Total
28
100
%
Among the 50 students who answered the question “How often do you come here?” only
8 or 16% reported that they came once or less than once a week, while the rest of them
(42 or 84%) came more frequently – up to eight times a week (see Table 6). Some said
they came every time when they were on campus or as often as they could. A number
said they came almost every day. Thus a large majority of these students were regular or
even frequent visitors, many of whom expressed a desire to spend their on campus time at
the Learning Hub.
6
Table 6: Frequency distribution of visits
≤ once a week 2-4 times/week 5-7 times/week ≥8 times/week Total
8
15
12
6
50
16%
30%
24%
12%
100%
Depending on the number of times the students visited the Learning Hub and the
activities they did, the total number of hours they spent here ranged widely, from 10
minutes (e.g., to heat up a meal) to 30 hours (e.g., accumulated study and socializing
time). From both students’ self-reports and our observations, we learned that a significant
number of students stayed for extended time (at least one hour) each time they visited.
For example, one BPK student reported that he came three times a week and stayed for
four hours each time to study. Among the 29 students who answered the question
“Approximately how many hours have you spent in total in this place since you first
came here?”, 13 or 45% spent two to five hours at the Learning Hub, while the rest spent
between less than one hour in total (5, 17%) and up to 20 to 30 hours in total (4, 14%).
Table 7 provides the frequency distribution of the total number of hours users spent in the
Learning Hub since they first visited.
Table 7: Frequency distribution of the total number of hours spent in the Learning Hub
< 1 hour 2-5 hours 6-10 hours 20 - 30 hours Total
5
13
7
4
29
17%
45%
24%
14%
100%
In summary, the Learning Hub is well used by undergraduate students. It has become
increasingly popular over the semester. There is a large portion of frequent visitors who
have spent a significant number of hours at the place.
How do they perceive and experience the Learning Hub?
All students interviewed had much to say about how they felt about the Learning Hub.
Their comments were overwhelmingly positive. They liked it because of its look and
ambience, its facilities and furnishings, its location, and the flexibility in terms of what
they can do there.
For look and ambiance, they used adjectives like these to describe the space: nice,
pleasant, open, spacious, bright, colorful, lively, cheerful, inviting, clean, comfy,
refreshing, relaxing, welcoming, trendy, new, and different.
Location-wise, they liked the fact that it was central and convenient for going to other
places on campus. The pointed out that it is next to Renaissance Café, close to the bus
stops, and near the AQ; and yet at the same time, it is a place to retreat to and to hide
away from crowds, noise and busy happenings elsewhere.
In terms of facilities, they liked the many conveniences the Hub has to offer: the Internet,
the touch-screen computers, whiteboards, microwaves, and the water fountain. Some
students thought the wall-mounted screens were TVs. After being shown by one of the
researchers that they were actually touch-screen computers, they began to use one along
7
with the adjacent whiteboard for group work. Other more venturesome students
experimented with these computers on their own.
In terms of furniture, they thought the chairs were comfortable. They liked the fact that
there were lots of tables and chairs even though some thought there were not enough
during the busy times. They liked the screen dividers because they provided some privacy
when desired. Several students pointed out that the Nod chairs were fun. They are
especially good for “scooting around” but the attached table space is too limited when
one wants to study because one often has to juggle between a computer, textbook,
notebook, papers and a cell phone. As the result, they prefer to sit at a desk or table so
that they can “spread out.”
When asked how the Learning Hub compares with other popular places on campus, a
large majority of students interviewed reported that it was their favorite place to be. The
most cited attributes of the Learning Hub were its openness and spaciousness, its
brightness, its facilities and furnishings, and the balanced noise level (not too noisy or too
quiet), in order of frequency of being mentioned.
In contrast, they reported that the Library was too “uptight.” They commented that at the
Learning Hub they could eat, talk, do group work, and move things around to suit their
needs. Maggie Benston Centre was “too busy.” At the Learning Hub, one could relax and
lounge. Students reported that it was nice to have people around and yet there was still
personal space. Renaissance, Starbucks and Mackenzie Café and Tim Horton’s were “too
loud” and sometimes “too crowded.” At the Learning Hub the noise level was suitable for
personal conversations and for quiet study. It was “not too full.” One could always find a
place to sit, “at least for now”: students anticipated that it would get crowded as more
people find out about it. The AQ was “cold.” The Learning Hub was “comfortable.” The
West Mall “had sofas but there were no tables” so it was not suitable for studying. At the
Learning Hub, students could lie down to take a nap or sit at a table to work individually
or as a group.
Students reported that in general the Burnaby campus was “dark,” “grey,” “dull-looking”
and “depressing.” They were always on the hunt for good places to spend their time on
campus. The Learning Hub provided them with a pleasant space to escape to. A number
of groups of students mentioned that it is “nice to hang out here.” One group said that the
place resembles the Google workplace, especially the color. One student mentioned that
the Learning Hub reminds her of the Surrey campus because of how it felt to her.
Our interviews indicate that students are purposeful space hunters. They choose the
places they go to depending on the activities or tasks they have in mind and they seem to
be constantly on the lookout for spaces with the combination of features that suit their
learning and socializing needs at the time, often with some frustration. For example,
when they want to do serious and concentrated study they go to the library but the library
often precludes group work or is too quiet. Likewise, Tim Horton's provides a large
number of chairs and tables and ease of eating, but several student in our study
commented that it's extremely noisy at most times of day. Similarly for the Mackenzie
Café. Students’ comments in this study clearly indicate a desire for places on campus
8
where living, learning and socializing can be integrated. In general, the Learning Hub
appears to provide just such a place, accommodating a range of activities in comfortable
ways.
Overall, students said they “liked” or “really liked” the place. They described it as “really
awesome,” “perfect,” or “5 out of 5.” They reported that they were “so happy” being at
the Learning Hub. Two women agreed that “It’s a magical place!” and several others said
it is their “go to” place or “It’s my home base.” They thought no place on Burnaby
campus was like the Learning Hub and wished there were more places like it on campus
because “happy working places produce better quality work.”
What do students recommend to make the Learning Hub an even better place for
them?
When asked whether there was anything that bothered them, the great majority of
interviewees said there was nothing. Five people mentioned that it was too noisy at times.
Five complained of the lack of a sink. Two thought the benches were too high to sit on
comfortably. One student told us that they were referred to as sushi benches because they
were reminded of sitting awkwardly at Japanese restaurants. However, we observed that
these benches were also one of the most popular spots students chose to sit. We have yet
to explore this apparent contradiction. Four students were anxious that it would get busier
once more students discover the place. Other individual complaints (each mentioned by
only one student) included the lack of proper light in the bench areas, a shortage of tables
or desks, chairs without backs and lack of cell phone reception.
A place like the Learning Hub is not without tensions. Students enjoyed the openness and
spaciousness, yet at the same time they desired certain level of privacy. Many expressed
that the noise level was ideal to allow private conversations and group discussions, yet
others complained the place was too noisy at times. Some enjoyed the background music;
some would prefer not to have it.
There was also perceived tension between Education and non-Education students. One
Education student who is a regular user of the Learning Hub told us, “People from other
Faculties see the place as a fun, entertaining environment and just want to hang out. But
for Education students, courses are always collaborative and we're really working.” In
fact, many students from other Faculties were also using the place for serious work. The
real tension perhaps lies between the desire for light-hearted socializing and the need for
serious work.
The same education student, speaking for herself and for her fellow students, told us, “A
staff member came and asked us to be quiet. That doesn’t make sense. When we’re on
task, we have to talk. We can’t avoid it.” When and to what extent should the rules be
enforced and when should the rules be relaxed to accommodate chaos and disorder?
These are some practical questions to be explored, as they have an important impact on
how the place is perceived and used.
One of the three graduate students interviewed said the place was not suitable for them
because they needed a quieter place for doing thesis work. The fact that only three of the
9
100 students we interviewed were graduate students raises the question of why there were
not more graduate students using the Learning Hub. One of our graduate student
researchers suggests that the experience of graduate students involves more solitary
activities like reading and doing research, whereas the undergraduate experience is more
social. The graduate students in our study shared the same view. It is also possible that
graduate students take fewer courses and they are not on campus as much; when they are,
they usually have their own spaces (labs, TA offices, etc.).
When students were asked what they would recommend to make the Learning Hub a
better place for them, most of their suggestions had to do with additional facilities and
furnishings. In the list below, the number in parentheses indicates the number of times a
suggestion was mentioned.
1. A sink (5)
2. More tables/work stations and bigger study desks (4)
3. More power outlets (3). We learned that this was one reason why students were
drawn to the spaces next to the walls.
4. Hot water for tea (1)
5. More couches (1)
6. More chairs (1)
7. Bean bag chairs (1)
8. A washroom (1)
9. Add a game console (1). The same student also wished to have the “TV” continue
to show sports (at that time, the screen was showing the Olympics).
These suggestions indicate students’ desire for an integrated, all-in-one place for their
activities on campus.
One graduate student suggested that there should be private spaces especially for doctoral
students, designated spaces with a library for graduate students, and cabinets with keys.
One person recommended that the noise level should be managed; one recommended the
playing of soft music or radio in the background.
One jokingly said that the place should be kept less known to others so that it would not
get too crowded. Jokes aside, the comment suggests the scarcity of desirable places like
the Learning Hub on campus.
Summary Even through our investigation is informal, strong themes have emerged from our
interview and observational data. Overall the Learning Hub is a success. We have
identified the following themes:
•
It is a place that accommodates simultaneous engagement of diverse activities
whether it is social, academic or intellectual, whether it is individual or group.
10
•
Students see the Learning Hub as an ideal place for group work because of its
physical features, balanced noise level, and overall ambiance.
•
Students are studying! It is the top mentioned reason why they come to the
Learning Hub. Ironically, the fact that they can engage in non-academic activities
comfortably here is perhaps an important reason of why students choose to come
to the Learning Hub to study.
•
The Learning Hub is a space that bridges the time between going home and
attending classes. Because SFU is largely a commuter campus, students need
places to “park” themselves between classes and appointments. The Learning Hub
serves this purpose. However, such a liminal space is not simply a “parking lot”:
it is a place of happenings and engagement.
•
The Learning Hub is an event-based space. In the span of two months (February
and March 2014), beyond formal classes and numerous informal, concurrent
activities, it successfully hosted a faculty forum, a formal reception, two Ed Tech
Talks seminars, one webinar and showing of the Olympic Games. The size,
transparency and openness of the space, its movable furniture, the availability of
the facilities and digital technologies allow instantaneous reconfigurations to
accommodate a wide range of concurrent events from small to large and from
informal to formal. Such efficiency and effectiveness maximize the potential of a
physical space.
•
At the Learning Hub we see multiple boundaries crossed and blurred. These
boundaries, whether physical or conceptual, become highly permeable. Students
mix activities, whether they are social or academic. The space allows a natural
flow of activities and accommodates emergent activities. The line between
informal and formal learning is blurred. Because of the transparency between the
formal classrooms at the back and informal open space at the front, students
naturally and freely mixed the use of these spaces depending on what they saw as
most appropriate for their current activities and the availability of these spaces.
We have observed the flexible, open space being used for formal classes and the
classrooms being used for informal individual or group activities.
•
The Learning Hub becomes a “third space” outside classroom and home. By
accommodating students from all SFU Faculties and cutting across multiple
functions, the Learning Hub serves to be a place where students come together on
levels and in ways that they might not in the residence hall, classroom, at home or
off-campus locations.
•
The Learning Hub has so far welcomed students from all SFU Faculties. This
provides opportunities for cross-discipline interactions among students, whether
social, academic or intellectual. In our study, we found that some of the groups
consisted of students from different departments or Faculties. Whether and to
what extent students take advantage of such opportunities remain to be
investigated. Furthermore, in which ways we should guide or scaffold such
11
interactions, for what purpose, and how we foster communities of learners are
worthwhile questions to be explored.
•
The fact that only 13% of the students interviewed are Education students and the
top two user groups are from the Faculty of Science (37%) and the Faculty of Arts
and Social Sciences (25%) indicates that there is a demand for spaces like the
Learning Hub else where on campus. The students in our interviews clearly
expressed this desire.
•
The Learning Hub serves not only as a physical space: it is also a conceptual
space and an affective space. Students’ comments from our study clearly show
that the physical attributes of the Learning Hub are the fundamental reasons why
they choose to be here, yet at the same time they connect with this place
conceptually and affectively. They associate it with the Google workplace, call it
“my home base,” “the go-to place” and want more places like it on campus. They
used affectionate adjectives to describe how they felt about the place. They
wished that it would be less known to other students so that they could keep it to
themselves. Their comments, in different yet consistent ways, show that they see
the Learning Hub as its own category of space, differentiated from the rest of the
university spaces.
•
Students are savvy space evaluators and space hunters. There is a clear awareness
of spatial context and which place is suitable for what purpose. They judge and
understand the functions and limitations of available spaces and choose where to
go intentionally. They see the value of the Learning Hub due to a sheer lack of
comprehensive activity spaces available elsewhere on campus, and particularly
due to the lack of comfortable or appropriate spaces.
•
Our results suggest that merely having the space becomes something that enables
and enhances learning. It opens up activities that previously did not exist simply
for lack of somewhere for them to happen. One student pointed out that “happy
working places produce better quality work.” In the context of the Learning Hub,
it is valuable to investigate how widely this view is held among students and to
what extent it truly affects learning.
•
Space, well-being and learning are intimately connected. It is disheartening to
hear how our respondents view SFU Burnaby campus in general. This perception
no doubt impacts students’ general sense of well being on campus. Our study
suggests that there is thirst for spaces like the Learning Hub. There is a need for
imaginative ways to conceive more creative learning spaces to foster students’
well being and enhance their learning.
Future work Our pilot study identifies multiple directions for future investigation. Even though the
Learning Hub has barely been open for a semester, a wide range of activities and events
have taken place in it. We have yet to learn in depth how students and faculty experience
12
space, time and their activities in the place and how it adapts and evolves to serve various
purposes of teaching, learning, and living on campus. In particular, we ask
•
How do people spend time and conduct their activities in a place like the Learning
Hub?
•
What metaphors do people use to describe the Learning Hub and their experience
in it?
•
How does the Learning Hub add value to the academic experiences of students
and faculty?
•
How are space, learning and student well-being connected?
•
What tensions exist in a place like the Learning Hub? How do they shape and
define, and evolve the place?
•
What are the consequences for learning when a learning space abandoning the
design elements (e.g., podium, front and center of a classroom) that assert
teachers’ authority and being in favor of those (e.g., lounge chairs, computers
designed for collaborative use) that suggest the teachers are the students’ partner
in the learning enterprise?
•
What would happen if we intentionally design learning activities around various
faculties (e.g., lounge seating vs. desks and tables) and technologies (e.g.,
Mediascape vs. touch-screen computer vs. white boards) in the Learning Hub?
•
What are students’ behaviors and preferences in relation to why, where, what,
when and how they use the informal learning spaces in the Learning Hub?
•
In which ways does the Learning Hub enable and constrain activities? Whom
does a space like the Learning Hub include or exclude?
•
Does a place like the Learning Hub serve to create communities of learners? If so,
in which ways and under what conditions does it foster the formation of these
communities?
•
How can it function as an interdependent facility with other learning and teaching
opportunities in the Faculty of Education and on the SFU Burnaby campus as a
whole?
•
How does the Learning Hub reflect the vision of SFU and that of the Faculty of
Education?
•
What are implications of the Learning Hub for future planning and the design of
new learning spaces on SFU campus and elsewhere?
With these questions in mind, we are ready to embark on the next phase of our
investigation.
13
Appendix A – The Learning Hub Interview Questionnaire
The Learning Hub Interview Questionnaire Interviewer _________________________ Date ______________________ Date of the week _________________ Time ____________________
A) Group Dyad Single B) Who: • male female • Faculty _______________________ Major (or intended major) ____________________ • Undergraduate (years at SFU) graduate • intention to get a degree in education? Yes No C) Location: • kitchen • tall tables: left right • benches: Kitchen area • centre lounge area • Mediascape workstation • Whiteboard: left right • Back wall and corner area: left • 8620.1 (right classroom) • 8620.2 (left classroom) Study area right 1.
When did you first come here? 2.
What prompted you to come here the first time? 3.
How many times have you been here since you came the first time? 4.
Approximately how many hours have you spent in total in this place since you first came here? 5.
How often do you come here? 6.
What are you working on right now? 14
7.
What do you normally do when you are here? 8.
Do you plan to take an Education course in the future (If they are not Education student)? 9.
How do you like this place? 10. How do you compare it with the other public indoor spaces, such as the Library, the Student Central in the Maggie Benson building, the AQ study areas, the Renaissance’s Café, the Starbucks, etc. 11. How do you like the sound/noise level in this place? How do you like the background music? 12. Is there anything that bothers you? 13. Do you have any suggestions for making this space a better place for you? Interviewer’s notes: 15