1. A Framework of Factors for Learning Environment Evaluation
Transitions, UK
7 September 2017
Graeme Oliver
Doctoral Research Candidate – Doctor of Education
Melbourne Graduate School of Education

2. Research question
What factors do architects and educators see as most significant in the relationship between innovative learning environments and innovative education practices?
Not viewing factors in isolation.
Developing a framework to provide conceptual organisation for the factors.
Iterative development of framework and factors.

3. Research purpose
Connect the understandings of architects and educators.
(framework and factors)
Provide structure and rigour in connecting evaluation and practice.
(point to most appropriate evaluation strategies)
Allow for pragmatic application in differing situations.
(user friendly questionnaire)
Connect the language, understandings and applications of architects and educators.
Address concerns that the history of evaluation in the filed has had a strong orientation to mechanistic POE, or has been ad hoc and self-gratifying from an educational orientation.
Evaluation should be purposeful (i.e. connected to declared intentions) and flexible (i.e. acknowledge that this is a dynamic situation).

4. Proposing a framework Developed through literature review.
Framework has three key features:
Phases – Design / Transition / Consolidation / Re-appraisal
Perspectives – Learning environment focus / Education practice focus/ organising perspectives
Factors – 72 initially identified, refined to 52.

5. Identifying relevant factors
Technical Provision Evaluation
Furniture Function Evaluation
User Comfort Evaluation
School Operations
User Adaptability
Stakeholder Buy-in
Professional Engagement
Teacher Capacity
Spatial Awareness
Teaching Programs
Student Engagement
Student Well-being
Social Milieu
Learning Activities
Facility Sustainability
Realisation of Affordance
Operational Refinement
Occupancy Adaptation
Quality Indicators
Stakeholder Consultation
Pedagogical Flexibility
Spatial Optimisation
Professional Practice
Operational Alignment
Student Achievement
Student Ownership
Student Voice
Learning Connections
Facility Adaptation
Facility Viability
Facility Reconfiguration
Professional Re-imagining
Developmental Leadership
Pedagogical Innovation
Spatial Innovation
Future Learning
Learning Culture
Flexible Design
Future Proofing
Design Standards
Integrated Technology
Design Brief
Project Management
Education Principles
Stakeholder Engagement
Community Context
School Identity
Teaching Approaches
Professional Learning
Learning Styles
Collaborative Learning
Inquiry Learning
Virtual Learning
Occupancy Evaluation
Building Performance Evaluation
Cost Efficiency Evaluation
A set of factors/issues of significance relating to implementing innovative education programs in innovative learning environments identified from the literature.
Set of factors refined in the context of the framework – relate to key purpose, eliminate repetition & overlap, provide for balance between architecture and education perspectives.

6. Gathering expert opinion Questionnaire using expert elicitation
Questionnaire trialled through invited responses.
V1 had 93 questions covering 72 factors questions and 18 framework questions.
V2 had 53 questions covering 48 factors without any direct framework questions.
Methodology of expert elicitation.
Experts identified through leading professional associations.
43 questionnaires distributed, 20 full responses (11 educators, 9 architects)

7. Key findings (1) The experts agree on the most significant factors for evaluation of innovative education programs in innovative learning environments.
Student Engagement
Education Principles
Teaching Approaches
Pedagogical Innovation
Learning Culture
Student Voice
Learning Styles
Collaborative Learning
Inquiry Learning
Data analysis was done using ranking ordering, scatter plot distributions and univariate cluster analysis to identify sets of most significant factors.
Qualitative data so creating “most significant” set is based along a series of judgements along the way.
Features of the identified factors……

8. Key findings (2) The experts view the phases of the framework slightly differently.
Higher orientation to phase 1 (Design) especially by architects (24 factors).
Educators more even across all phases of the framework, and more consistent in the factors identified as extremely significant (10 across all 4 phases).

9. Outcomes
High degree of agreement between architects and educators in identifying factors. (purpose 1)
A questionnaire that can be used in further situations to identify most significant factors - situational profile. (purpose 2)
Identified factors can be linked to most appropriate evaluation strategies. (purpose 3)

10. Graeme Oliver Melbourne Graduate School of Education
Evaluating 21st Century Learning Environments