Abstract:

The University of Leeds, UK has redesigned 3 lecture theatres as ‘Collaborative Lecture Theatres’ (CLTs) in the summer of 2016. The lecture theatres have been reconfigured in two different ways, in their design and in their use of technology. What is different about these spaces is that the University chose to retain the tiered nature of the spaces but with seating reconfigured to allow for groups of 5 students to sit in a ‘pod’ around a desk, but still allowing all learners to have a good ‘line of sight’ to the front of the room. Each of the desks is equipped with an internet-enabled laptop, microphone, speaker, spotlight, HDMI input and USB charging and power. The front of the room has a lectern-based PC, a control panel, lecture capture camera and controls, a lapel microphone, a whiteboard, dual projectors and a presentation wall.

Staff from across the University used these redesigned rooms extensively in the 2016/17 academic year. Towards the end of the year an evaluation of the use and perceptions of these newly refurbished lecture theatres was carried out. The evaluation, focused on both the staff and students who used these lecture theatres via the administration of surveys to both staff and students, and interviews with staff.
This presentation, within the topic of ‘Next Generation classroom and Learning Space Design’ will report the findings of the evaluation, by focusing on staff usage and perceptions to explore the following research questions:
• To what extent and in what ways have staff used the CLTs?
• What are staff perceptions of the CLTs and their impact on teaching and learning?

Dobbin et al. (2014) assert that the 3 legs of the stool of space, technology and pedagogy are required to bring about effective teaching and learning. The presentation will report on how the redesigned rooms (space), and the introduction of technology has influenced pedagogy. Has the redesigned space and the inclusion of technology caused lecturers to rethink what they do in their lectures, what they do in these rooms? We found that on average the time spent by the lecturer talking was around 50%, the remainder of the time spent on a range of activities including collaboration between students and interactions between students and lecturer. However, we found there to be a difference in time spent on activities between those who had actively chosen to use these rooms and those who were compulsorily timetabled into them. For those who hadn’t chosen to use the rooms, the time spent talking was greater with less time spent on collaborative activities.

Our evaluation focused on staff perceptions as well as usage. We asked a range of questions related to the redesign, the technology and use of the spaces for collaborative activities. There was general agreement about these spaces as enablers of collaborative teaching, and that they challenge staff to think about and develop their teaching strategies. However, we again found that those who had actively chosen to use these rooms were more positive about these aspects than those whose sessions were compulsorily timetabled in the rooms.
These findings raise an important question. What other support can institutions provide to help with that third leg of pedagogy – it’s not simply enough to provide the space and the technology and expect the pedagogy to automatically change as a result.

References:
[1] Dobbin, G., Diaz, V. & Brown, M. (2014). Re-imagining learning spaces: Design, technology, and assessment.

Keywords:

Collaboration, learning, spaces.