A Colonisation Study
of a
Small Student Social Learning Space
Wheatley Campus, Oxford Brookes University
Context: The Built Pedagogy of the Wheatley
Campus
 Satellite campus
 Concrete brutalism
Martyn Greenwood
Berry O’Donovan
Chris Rust
 Crowded with
students (3,350)
and buildings
Business School
Business School
Social Learning Space
The Built Pedagogy of the Wheatley Campus:
Underpinning Assumptions?













Learning only happens inside and in formal spaces (classrooms, library)
Learning is mechanistic and about reproduction and memorisation
Learning is a separate activity - e.g. you can’t learn and eat or drink
Learning is a silent and individual activity – monastic traditions
Computer use is separate from mainstream learning
Learning starts and finishes at fixed times.
The brighter the light the better the learning
Students need to be kept away from staff as they interfere with research
Out-of-sight and out-of-mind
An impersonal space fosters objective thinking
An unappealing space stops students from being distracted
Students are not to be trusted
Postgraduate students need more space than undergraduate students
Business School
Group work
library room
Social
Learning
The Wheatery
Refectory
Flat seminar room,
flexible furniture
 Spaces that catalyse social interaction significantly
contribute to the personal and professional growth of
students and their orientation within disciplinary studies
(Lomas & Oblinger, 2006; Oblinger, 2006)
 A physical and/or virtual area that is not predominantly
identified with either social or work/study perspective but
transcends both and facilitates forth formal and informal
student-centred, collaborative learning.
(Adapted from Chism, 2006; Oldenburg, 1991 cited in Williamson and Nodder, 1992)
Business School
The Colonisation Study: The space
The Colonisation Study: Context
“Eights” opened January 06
A small Student Union bar on a satellite campus
Transforms into
A social learning space
Business School
Business School
1
The Colonisation Study: Methodology
•
ASKe project
•
Student researchers
•
Questionnaires & Observations undertaken 5 times a day, 5
days a week for 10 weeks of a 12 week semester
•
2,634 visits noted, and for 2,031 of these visits the user
completed a questionnaire
Business School
Business School
Area Usage
Area Usage
Business School
Business School
Area Usage
Findings
•
Overall café usage
350
Tables and chairs
12%
Desk with
workstations
16%
Stand-up
workstations
4%
Sofas
17%
300
In front of TV
10%
250
Booth Seating
28%
200
150
Café tables
13%
100
50
0
Week 1
Business School
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
Week 8
Week 9 Week 10
Business School
2
How was the space used?
Combinations of Activities
 9% (178) were categorised as a combination of computer use,
200
study and social activity
180
 9% (179) were categorised as solely computer use, or
160
140
computer use plus social activity
Computer use
120
Group study
100
Individual study
Refreshment
80
 13% (265) were categorised as study/learning activities
 29% (597) were categorised as a combination of learning and
social activity
Social
60
 40% (812) were categorised as social/refreshment
40
20
Which means that in 38% of visits, students combined learning
with social activity
0
Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Business School
Business School
How big is your group?
Implications and Conclusions
 Integrative rather than sequential behaviours. Students
Groups of 11
0%
Groups of 9
1%
Groups of 8
1%
Groups of 7
2%
Individual users
15%



Groups of 2
30%
Groups of 6
5%

Groups of 5
11%
Groups of 4
13%

Groups of 3
22%


Business School
combined eating, drinking, technology and learning. Integrative
behaviours are increasing amongst students (Lomas & Oblinger,
2006)
Most students intentionally used the space for learning
Patterns of usage varied considerably throughout the semester
Tension between wanting a ‘cave’ and being able to see others flexible screening
Group sizes suggest that we should look to collaborative spaces
that can flexibly seat up to 4 or 5
Student use of space and technology can be easily
misunderstood (Lomas & Oblinger, 2006). Faced with a choice
students seemed to prefer soft seating
First mover advantage
Increased collaboration between students, staff and estates
Business School
References
Business School
•
Chism, N.V.N. (2006) ‘Challenging traditional Assumptions and
Rethinking Learning Spaces’ in (Ed) Diana G. Oblinger Learning
Spaces, USA: Educause
•
Chism, N.V.N. & Bickford, D.J (2002) eds The Importance of
Physical Space in Creating Supportive Learning Environments:
New Directions in Teaching and Learning, no. 92 (Winter)
•
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J. & Associates
(2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that
matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
•
Lomas, C & Oblinger, D.G. (2006) ‘Student practices and Their
Impact on Learning
Business School
3
References
•
Oblinger, D.G. (2006) ‘Space as a change agent’ in (Ed) Diana
G. Oblinger Learning Spaces, USA: Educause
•
Oldenburg, R. (1991) The great good place: Cafés, coffee
shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars,
hangouts, and how they get you through the day. New York, NY:
Paragon.
•
Williamson, A., & Nodder , C. (2002) Extending the learning
space: Dialogue and reflection in the virtual coffee shop. ACM
SIGCAS Computers and Society 32 (3)
Business School
4