Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 719-726

  Brooks, D Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE LEARNING; CLASSROOM SETTINGS; ENHANCED LEARNING; FORMAL LEARNING; PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTS; STUDENT LEARNING; STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES;

CURRICULA; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

ENGINEERING EDUCATION;

EID: 80051750470     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01098.x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. ACT (1998). Prediction research summary tables. Iowa City, IA: ACT.
2. ACT (2007). The ACT technical manual. Iowa City, IA: ACT.
3. Beichner, R., Saul, J., Abbott, D., Morse, J., Deardorff, D., Allain, R., et al, (2007). Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) project. In E. Redish & P. Cooney (Eds), Research-based reform of university physics (pp. 1-42). College Park, MD: American Association of Physics Teachers.
4. Dori, Y., &, Belcher, J., (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 243-279.
5. Dori, Y., Belcher, J., Besette, M., Danziger, M., McKinney, A., &, Hult, E., (2003). Technology for active learning. Materials Today, 6, 44-49.
6. Hunley, S., &, Schaller, M., (2009). Assessment: the key to creating spaces that promote learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 44, 26-35.
7. Jorn, L., Whiteside, A., &, Duin, A., (2009). PAIR-up. EDUCAUSE Review, 44, 12-15.
8. Lippincott, J., (2009). Learning spaces: involving faculty to improve pedagogy. EDUCAUSE Review, 44, 16-25.
9. Lomas, C., &, Oblinger, D., (2006). Student practices and their impact on learning spaces. In, D. Oblinger, (Ed.), Learning spaces (pp. 5.1-5.11). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE.
10. Long, P., &, Holeton, R., (2009). Signposts to a revolution? What we talk about when we talk about learning spaces. EDUCAUSE Review, 44, 36-48.
11. Marsh, C., Vandehey, M., &, Diekhoff, G., (2008). A comparison of an introductory course to SAT/ACT scores in predicting student performance. The Journal of General Education, 57, 244-255.
12. Montgomery, T., (2008). Space matters: experiences of managing static formal learning spaces. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 122-138.
13. Oblinger, D., (2006). Space as a change agent. In, D. Oblinger, (Ed.), Learning spaces (pp. 1.1-1.4). Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE.
14. Pedhazur, E., &, Schmelkin, L., (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: an integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Stumpf, H., &, Stanley, J., (2002). Group data on high school grade point averages and scores on academic aptitude tests as predictors of institutional graduation rates. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 1042-1052. (Pubitemid 36688764)
16. University of Minnesota Active Learning Classrooms Pilot Evaluation Team (2008). Active learning classrooms pilot evaluation: Fall 2007 findings and recommendations. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Retrieved September 15 2009
17. Whiteside, A., &, Fitzgerald, S., (2009). Designing learning spaces for active learning. Implications, 7, 1-6.
18. Wilhite, P., Windham, B., &, Munday, R., (1998). Predictive effects of high school calculus and other variables on achievement in a first-semester college calculus course. College Student Journal, 32, 610-617.
19. Ziomek, R., &, Andrews, K., (1996). Predicting the college grade point averages of special-tested students from their ACT assessment scores and high school grades. ACT Research Report Series, 96-7. Iowa City, IA: ACT.