A Tale of Two [Univer]Cities: Changing Learning Environments

Abstract

This paper outlines case study developments in relation to new learning environments in two universities in Hong Kong, with an emphasis on the context behind these changes, the changes involved, and the mechanisms employed for informing and guiding these changes. From past to present, the focus of learning has shifted from the search and understanding of information to the application and construction of knowledge (Brown & Long, 2006). The learner-centered paradigm of teaching and learning (e.g. Laurillard 2002 & 2009; Biggs 2003) highlights the importance of engaging students actively in both the manipulation and construction of knowledge. This leads to new interpretations of what constitutes 'good' learning activities, and the process of knowledge acquisition, active learning, interaction and social engagement (Brown & Long 2006). Learning environments have an important role in coordinating and affording different learning activities (Aimee 2009; Brown & Long 2006; Van Note Chism & Bickford 2002; Van Note Chism 2006; Lomas & Oblinger 2006). With an increased emphasis in interactive and collaborative learning, new designs of environments have been demanded. For example, Bransford, Brown and Cocking (2000) called for new research to review physical learning environments in higher education that facilitate group work and the promotion of interaction between students and students, and students and teachers. Learning environments in this paper are divided into two categories: physical and virtual. The physical relates to the buildings, the classrooms, the laboratories, the libraries, the cafés; the formal and inform places where student study and learn. Informal learning spaces or ILS refers to the learning environment that is outside formal facilitation by instructors (Hunley & Schaller 2006), for example, open spaces in corridors or outside classrooms. In addition to lectures in classrooms and studying at libraries, students have always engaged in informal learning activities in other parts of the university campus. Students often engage in deep learning through face-to-face discussions in ILS. In previous university designs, these ILS have often focused on student residences, open areas between buildings where students gather, etc (Jamieson, Dane & Lippman 2005). Wolff (2002), however, points out the importance of focusing on other factors in ILS mostly brought about by new technology affordance and that designing the right ILS can make a major difference in supporting a range of learning activities, both individual and group-based.