Research into the relationship between innovative physical learning environments (PLEs) and innovative psychosocial learning environments (PSLEs) indicates that it must be understood as a network of relationships between multiple psychosocial and physical aspects. Actors shape this network by attaching meanings to these aspects and their relationships in a continuous process of gaining and exchanging experiences. This study used a psychosocial-physical, relational approach for exploring teachers’ and students’ experiences with six innovative PLEs in a higher educational institute, with the application of a psychosocial-physical relationship (PPR) framework. This framework, which brings together the multitude of PLE and PSLE aspects, was used to map and analyse teachers’ and students’ experiences that were gathered in focus group interviews. The PPR framework proved useful in analysing the results and comparing them with previous research. Previously-identified relationships were confirmed, clarified, and nuanced. The results underline the importance of the attunement of system aspects to pedagogical and spatial changes, and of a psychosocial-physical relational approach in designing and implementing new learning environments, including the involvement of actors in the discourse within and between the different system levels. Interventions can be less invasive, resistance to processes could be reduced, and innovative PLEs could be used more effectively.
MULTIFILE
In this paper, I first discuss in some detail the current use of Learning Objects and show it to be wanting. Although their use, in principle, may offer much flexibility in creating content, in practice it will not, particularly since it does not support sufficient pedagogical flexibility. Then I offer an alternative view which, in my view, is indeed capable of fulfilling all the needs of customised learning, both the need for custom content and the need for custom pedagogies. I conclude by addressing some possible criticisms of my line of reasoning. This Chapter is a remake of Necessary Conditions for the Flexible Reuse of Educational Content.
DOCUMENT
The potential impact of urban (re)development on the well-being of residents has been recognized in literature (Butcher & Dickens, 2016; Brummet and Reed, 2019), underscoring the need to critically examine one’s approach to studying the so called ‘urban peripheries’. This paper proposes the practice of mapping alternative city imaginaries, together with local partners, to promote inclusive and 'a more diverse and sustainable perspective on [city] prosperity' (Arbonés Aran, Petkova and Moodey, 2023).We present a case study of the living lab ‘Cities and Visitors’ (Amsterdam School of International Business) based in Amsterdam Southeast (Zuidoost). The study employs a mixed methods to capture and map 'alternative imaginaries' of 'urban peripheries' together with local partners, students, and inter-city collaborators. As urban developments continue to comply with technocratic systems and strategies (Pries, 2022), it becomes important to deepen our understanding, engagement, exploration, and preservation of city spaces, particularly in the so called urban ‘peripheries’ that are often subjected to the dynamics of de/reconstruction and rejuvenation brought by external actors.The paper also advocates for a reflective and ethical research methodology, as the participants engage in thoughtful and (self) reflective research practices. We see this as an intervention in the business curriculum, often criticized for producing 'neoliberal agents' (Orta, 2019), whereas students must also cultivate competences in 'sustainability' (UNESCO 2014, 2017). Embracing the perspectives of affect (Thrift, 2008) and standpoint theory (Harding, 2008), as well as critical counter-mapping with digital methods (Rogers, 2013), we intend to nurture the emotional intelligence and literacy in students, facilitating transformative pedagogies (Mezirov 1990; Maiese 2017).
DOCUMENT
