Educational Alliances: The Influence of Classrooms and Online Learning Spaces on Student Engagement
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study investigated the influence of physical and virtual learning spaces on student engagement in a modern university setting. Qualitative analysis of an active learning classroom that employed the use of roundtables was conducted. Interview and focus group data from students and faculty, along with classroom observations, resulted in the finding that the circular arrangement of this active learning classroom positively influenced student engagement by promoting immediate exchange of feedback, agency, and a system of accountability. This study also resulted in the finding that virtual learning spaces influence student engagement and the amount of engagement is heavily moderated by instructor efforts to facilitate interpersonal immediacy. Both physical and virtual learning spaces influenced student engagement and the level of engagement was heavily moderated by students’ desire for engagement. Recommendations and suggestions for future research are provided.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Arlin, M. (1979). Teacher transitions can disrupt time flow in classrooms. American Educational
Research Journal, 16(1), 42-56.
Baxter-Magolda, M. B. (1999). Creating contexts for learning and self-authorship. Nashville,
TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Beichner, R. (2014). History and evolution of active learning spaces. In P. Baepler, C. Brooks, &
J. D. Walker (Eds.), Active learning spaces: New directions for teaching and learning,
Number 137. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Beichner, R. (2008, Sept.). The SCALE-UP project: A student-centered, active learning
environment for undergraduate programs. Invited white paper for the National Academy
of Sciences.
Bitner, N. & Bitner, J. (2002). Integrating technology into the classroom: Eight keys to success.
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 95-100.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental
perspective: A bioecological model. Psychological Review, 101, 568 – 586.
Brooks, D. C. (2012). Space and consequences: The impact of different formal learning spaces
on instructor and student behavior. Journal of Learning Spaces, 1(2). Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/285.
Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. E. (1999). Themes and issues in the self-regulation of behavior. In
R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Ed.), Advances in social cognition, 12, 1–105. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage.
Cotner, S., Loper, J., Walker, J. D., & Brooks, C. D. (2013). “It’s not you, it’s the room”: Are the
high-tech, active learning classrooms worth it? Journal of College Science Teaching,
(6), 82-88.
Copridge, K., Uttamchandani, S., & Birdwell, T. (2021). Faculty reflections of pedagogical
transformation in active learning classrooms. Innovative Higher Education, 46(4), 205-
doi: https://10.1007/s10755-021-09544-y.
Cox, A. M. (2011). Students’ experience of university space: An exploratory study. International
Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 197-207.
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do
students find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-
Retrieved on September 8, 2022 from
https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/1744.
Do, S. L. & Schallert, D. L. (2004). Emotions and classroom talk: Toward a model of the role of
affect in students' experiences of classroom discussions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(4), 619-634.
Edwards, B. (2000). University architecture. London: Spon Press.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Jamieson, P., Taylor, P., & Trevitt, C. (2000). Place and space in the
design of new learning environments. Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 221-237.
Fisher, K. & Newton, C. (2014). Transforming the twenty-first-century campus to enhance the
net-generation student learning experience: Using evidence-based design to determine
what works and why in virtual/physical teaching spaces. Higher Education Research and
Development, 33(5), 903-920. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.890566.
Frymier, A. B. (1994). A model of immediacy in the classroom. Communication Quarterly,
(2), 133-144.
Galton F. (1885). The measure of fidget. Nature, 32, 174–175.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based
environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher
Education, 2-3, 1-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing.
Harvey, E. J. & Kenyon, M. C. (2013). Classroom seating considerations for 21st century
students and faculty. Journal of Learning Spaces, 2(1). Retrieved on September 7, 2022
from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/578.
Henshaw, R. G., Edwards, P. M., & Bagley, E. J. (2011). Use of swivel desks and aisle space to
promote interaction in mid-sized college classrooms. Journal of Learning Spaces, 1(1).
Retrieved on September 7, 2022 from https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/277/166.
Henshaw, R. G. & Reubens, A. (2013-2014). Evaluating design enhancements to the tablet arm
chair in language instruction classes at UNC Chapel Hill. Journal of Learning Spaces,
(2). Retrieved on September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/574.
Horspool, A., & Lange, C. (2012). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning: Student
perceptions, behaviors and success online and face-to-face. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 37(1), 73-88.
Jamieson, P. (2003). Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning spaces: A role
for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 8(1/2), 119-
Jamieson, P. & Fisher, K. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning environments.
Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 221-236.
Journal of Learning Spaces Editorial Policies (2022). Focus and scope. Journal of Learning
Spaces. Retrieved on September 7, 2022 from:
http://libjournal.uncg.edu/index.php/jls/about/editorialPolicies#focusAndScope.
Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
King, P. M. (2003). Student learning in higher education. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodward,
Jr., and Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession. pp. 234-268.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kolleny, J. F. (2003, November). Campus connectivity. Architectural Record, 191(11), 167.
Kraushaar, J. M., & Novak, D. C. (2010). Examining the effects of student multitasking with
laptops during the lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 241-251.
Kuh, G. D. (2000). Do environments matter? A comparative analysis of the impression of
different types of colleges and universities on character. Journal of College and
Character, 1(4).
Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey
of Student Engagement. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 33(3), 10–17.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. & Whitt, E. (2005). Student success in college: Creating
conditions that matter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual and empirical
foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5-20.
Kuznekoff, J. H. & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning.
Communication Education, 62(3), 233-252. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2013.767917.
Kvale, S. & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research
interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lee, N. & Tan, S. (2013). Traversing the design-language divide in the design and evaluation of
physical learning environments: A trial of visual methods in focus groups. Journal of
Learning Spaces, 2(1), 1-7. Retrieved on September 7, 2022 from
https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/503.
LeFebvre, L. & Allen, M. (2014). Teacher immediacy and student learning: An examination of
lecture/laboratory and self-contained course sections. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 14(2), 29-45. doi: https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v14i2.4002.
Lewis, C. C., & Abdul-Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices:
Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83-98.
doi: 10.1007/s10755-006-9010-z.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research. Los Angeles,
CA: Sage.
McArthur, J. A. (2015). Matching instructors and spaces of learning: The impact of space on
behavioral, affective and cognitive learning. Journal of Learning Spaces, 4(1), 1-16.
Retrieved on September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/766.
McArthur, J. A. (2011). Practical lessons from user-experience design for spaces in learning. The
American Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities Journal, 2(1), 65-76.
Monahan, T. (2002). Flexible space and built pedagogy: Emerging IT embodiments.
Inventio, 4(1), 1-19.
Oblinger, D. G. (Ed.) (2006). Learning spaces. Boulder, CO: Educause.
Okojie, M. C. & Olinzock, A. (2006). Developing a positive mind-set toward the use of
technology for classroom instruction. International Journal of Instructional Media,
(1), 33-41.
Orr, D. W. (1993). Architecture as pedagogy. Conservation Biology, 7(2), 266–228.
Ortiz-Rodríguez, M., Telg, R. W., Irani, T., Roberts, T. G., & Rhoades, E. (2005). College
students’ perceptions of quality in distance education: The importance of
communication. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 6, 97-105.
Park, E. L. & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active
learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68(5), 749-771. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0.
Author (2016). “Space and consequences”: The influence of the roundtable classroom
design on student dialogue. Journal of Learning Spaces, 5(2), 15-25. Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1241.
Author (2017). Reforming the environment: The influence of the roundtable classroom
design on interactive learning. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(3), 23-33. Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1516.
Author (2018). Learning the ropes: The influence of the roundtable classroom
design on socialization. Journal of Learning Spaces, 7(2), 23-34. Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1703.
Perks, T., Orr, D., & Al-Omari, E. (2016). Classroom re-design to facilitate student learning: A
case study of changes to a university classroom. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning, 16(1), 53-68. doi: http://10.14434/josotl.v16i1.19190.
Rands, M. L. & Gansemer-Topf, A. M. (2017). The room itself is active: How classroom design
impacts student engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(1), 26-33. Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1286.
Ribot, T. (1890). The psychology of attention. Chicago: Open Court Publishing.
Russo, T. C., & Campbell, S. W. (2004). Perceptions of mediated presence in an asynchronous
online course: Interplay of communication behaviors and medium. Distance Education, 25, 215- 232. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791042000262139.
Song, L., & Singleton, E. S. (2004). Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful
and challenging characteristics. Internet & Higher Education, 7, 59-70. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.11.003.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stalp, M. C., & Hill, S. (2019). The expectations of adulting: Developing soft skills through
active learning classrooms. Journal of Learning Spaces, 8(2), 25-40. Retrieved on
September 7, 2022 from http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1753/1363.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student
persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599-623.
doi: 10.1080/00221546.1997.11779003.
Van Horne, S., Murniati, C., & Saichaie, K. (2012). Assessing teaching and learning in
technology-infused TILE classrooms at the University of Iowa. In Educause: Learning
Initiative’s Seeking Evidence of Impact.
Venezky, R. L. (2004). Technology in the classroom: Steps toward a new vision. Education,
Communication, and Information, 4(1), 4-21.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1463631042000211024.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wei, F.-Y. F., Wang, Y. K., & Klausner, M. (2012). Rethinking college students’ self-regulation
and sustained attention: Does text messaging during class influence cognitive learning?
Communication Education, 61(3), 185-204. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2012.672755.
Woo, C. W., Whitfield, T. S., Britt, L. L. & Ball, T. C. (2022). Students’ perception of the
classroom environment: A comparison between innovative and traditional classrooms.
Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 22(1), 31-47. doi:
https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v22i1.30735.
Zhang, Z., & Hyland, K. (2022). Fostering student engagement with feedback: An integrated
approach. Assessing Writing, 51, 1-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2021.100586.