View
10
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Thesis
“The needs of a 21st century learning environment:
A focus on new ways of learning in university buildings”
Fig. 1: Word cloud new way of learning (http://stevevosloo.com/2008/11/)
Name: Kirsten van der Vaart
Student number: 890716 850 010
Study: MSc Management, Economics and Consumer Studies
Specialization: Facility Management
Chair group: MST, Management studies
Course : MST – 80433
Number of credits: 33 ECTS
Advisor: Herman Kok
1st
examinator: Herman Kok
2nd examinator: Mark Mobach
Start date: 9th
of January 2012
Finish date: 28th
of June 2012
Kirsten van der Vaart
2
Abstract
Changes in the learning environment within universities is an on-going process, full of new developments and
innovations in the fields of education, technologies and the space students learn in. The increasing integration
of communication and information technologies, together with the shift to a more student-centred, web-based
and problem based learning approaches, is changing the way teaching and learning is experienced within
universities. Traditionally learning spaces suggested a physical place and space in which learning take place, in
this century new spaces of value and knowledge, like the virtual world, are emerging as a base of researchers
and learners. Knowledge is no longer restricted within the boundaries of the universities, the universities
become partners in learning and research rather than sole providers. Universities reputations, networks and
spaces are a driving force for research and attractiveness to students. Rapid change to education practice and
technologies is requiring universities to constantly rethink the suitability of the space and its design - the space
design against the needs of learners. The balance between the life of the building, design, education and
technology is a weighty consideration. This research aims to investigate the possibilities for universities in the
Netherlands to improve the adjustments of the education, technologies and the spatial aspects of a 21st
century learning space. By literature research, a key issue checklist, interviews at three Dutch universities &
experts and observations, data is gathered on which the following conclusions were drawn. Problem-based
and student-centred methods are adjusted in the educational world of universities, while web-based teaching
methods are under developed. Technologies in the learning space need audio-visual and virtual improvements
and the spatial environment of universities need flexibility nowadays. Classrooms exist traditionally of a
chalkboard and school desks, the learners and teachers of this century needs flexible furniture, a mix of social-
and curricula activities and need technologies in their learning space. To organise a 21st
century learning space,
information of the stakeholders, a structured organisation within the university and sustainable investments
are needed additional aspects to make a university fit in such learning spaces.
Keywords: 21st
century, learning space, universities, new ways of learning, educational innovations, Mlearning.
Kirsten van der Vaart
3
Acknowledgement This MSc report represents my experience and knowledge I have gained during my masterstudy in
Management studies, with the specialization in Facility Management at the Wageningen University. This
reports shows a view of the adjustments of (three) universities in the Netherlands towards a fit of a 21st
century learning spaces and provides a key issue checklist for other universities in the Netherlands to validate
their adjustment to a 21st century learning environment.
This report is achieved with the help of various persons I would like to thank. At first I would like to thank the
interviewees; Mrs M. Drewes, teamleader facilities of the Ravelijn building at the university of Twente, Mrs L.
Zeeuwen, location manager of the Forum building at the university of Wageningen and Mrs M. Peeters, policy
employee Real Estate of the university of Tilburg, for inviting me at the universities and provide me from the
information that forms the base of my empirical research. At second I would like to thank the experts who
shared their expertise with me about the fields of education and technologies, Mr E. Bomas & Mr F. Evers of
Kennisnet and Mr W. van ‘t Hoog, expert in the field of spatial and design of university buildings at Hevo, to
come to my conclusions and implications.
I would like to thank Mr O. Omta and Mr M. Mobach for sharing their knowledge of innovations in facility
management and scientific feedback of my thesis. In particular I would like to thank my supervisor, Mr H. Kok
at the Wageningen university, for sharing his knowledge of 21st century learning environments, articles, the
feedback and the support of the process which helped me to achieve my final thesis. Further, I would like to
thank my family and friends for their help and support during this process.
Kirsten van der Vaart
Kirsten van der Vaart
4
Management summary
Since the 11
th century until 2012 important changes are happened in the educational, technological and spatial
aspects of universities. The most important educational changes are; from religion based teaching, where focus
was teacher-centred – to a student-centred focus where problem-based learning is leading. These changes are
related to the technological aspects, because the introduction of computers, internet and new methods of
(digital) communicating led to an technological impact in educational methods. Where first universities where
meant as a physical place for learning, a virtual teaching world becomes more important. Students can work at
home and communicate with classmates and teachers via new communicating technologies, this enables the
students to study and work (e.g. group assignments) whenever and wherever they want. Consequently, this
leads to changes in the spatial usage. Nowadays, learning happen outside the classrooms more than ever.
The increasing integration of communication and information technologies, together with the shift to more
student-centred, problem-based and web-based learning approaches, is changing the way teaching and
learning is experienced within universities (Jamieson, 2003). All developments pointed to a shift in the use of
the educational learning space. An investigation to the spatial and technological interventions that are needed
to overcome this shift is interesting for universities in the Netherlands to keep innovative. Implementing new
learning spaces like; a learning cafe, flexible teaching spaces and new technologies in learning centres shown
positive educate related results at 15 universities in the United Kingdom (UK). Building technological capability
across education will lead to better institutional management, reducing costs, research excellence, create a
(digital) student journey and contribute to a sustainable future. This lead to the central research question:
“What technological-spatial interventions can and do Dutch universities commit to make their learning
environment fit to a 21st
century learning space?”
In order to answer the research question, a literature review is conducted to get a clear vision of the
educational, technological and spatial aspects of traditional buildings and of the new ways of learning in a 21st
century learning space. This research results in three core variables; education, technologies and spatial
aspects and three additional variables; stakeholders, organisation and the sustainable aspects of a 21st
century
learning space. These core and additional aspects forms a base of a key issue checklist that is used to check the
adjustment of the learning environment within three universities in the Netherlands (the universities of;
Twente, Wageningen and Tilburg). Besides the key issue checklist, observation and in-depth interviews gave
insight to the level of adjustment of the current learning environments within the investigated universities.
Afterwards an interview and information is gathered from experts in the field of education & technologies and
the spatial environment of universities.
Based on the results the following most important conclusions are presented. The three universities score
relatively high on the educational aspect of the checklist (average of 66,7%) but do not make optimal use of the
technologies (an average of 47,5%). The university of Twente provides live streaming of classes, while
Wageningen university recently started with recording classes (students can look back afterwards) and Tilburg
university do not provide any audio-visual recording facilities. Teachers at the university of Tilburg are afraid of
a low attendance rate if classes were recorded, while results of the Wageningen university show no difference
in attendance and students are satisfied with this service. Web-based teaching methods, such as flipped-
classrooms, are coming up, so universities need to improve their audio-visual services.
A conclusion that is drawn from the spatial aspects in the research is; there is a shortage of flexible workspaces,
quiet study areas and group work spaces within the universities. Nowadays, students mix social activities with
curricula activities and need spaces to communicate and work together or study alone. None of the
investigated university buildings consists of a learning café or spaces which consists of different activities. The
universities score relatively low with a mean of 46,9% at the spatial aspect of the checklist.
Overall, in this research we can conclude that Wageningen university (66,2% in total of the checklist) and the
Kirsten van der Vaart
5
university of Twente (64,4% in total of the checklist) adapted some of the adjustments of a 21st
century
learning space and the university of Tilburg did this only slightly (36,8% of the total checklist). The experts of
Kennisnet have doubts about the purpose of the adjustments that where made within the universities.
According to Mr Evers; “The adjustments that were made to the investigated universities, where probably done
with the idea of ‘we got some money left for it, so let’s do this adjustment’, but not with the purpose to invest
in the learning environment”’. Kennisnet notice that many universities adjust some ideas of a 21st
century
learning space, but mostly with the intention to save costs and to provide a ‘nice building’, not for the need of
the students. At primary schools this focus is changing towards more 21st
century learning environments, while
universities stay behind.
To make a learning environment within universities fit to a 21st
century learning space, universities need to
create flexible workspaces for students; a learning café, small spaces for group work, spaces with multiple
purposes at the same time, quiet study areas and shared offices (non-stop-shop). These spatial interventions
need to be combined with the technology in the learning space; electronic whiteboards, live streaming (and
recording) of classes, Mlearning, enough power points, use of technologies in the class by teachers and web-
based learning. Important for the technological aspects are; a transparent intranet with the needed
possibilities ( e.g. online; library (e-books), agenda of study advisors/teachers and easy access to the needed
information students need) and the adjustment of all stakeholders within a university and their environment.
To adjust the three variables; education, spatial and technology in the learning space, a well-balanced
combination between these three variables is needed to provide a 21st
century learning space environment.
Therefore awareness of the need of adjustment must be present. Awareness can be enlarged by considering
the additional variables; stakeholders, organisation and sustainability, to create a ‘balanced’ 21st
century
learning environment.
Kirsten van der Vaart
6
Table of contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Management summary .................................................................................................................................... 4
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 8
1.1 Background information ........................................................................................................................ 8
1.2 Definition ............................................................................................................................................... 8
1.2 Conceptual research design .................................................................................................................. 9
1.3 Research framework.............................................................................................................................. 9
1.4 Learning spaces framework ................................................................................................................. 11
1.4.1 Applying the learning spaces framework ............................................................................................ 11
2. Technical research design ...................................................................................................................... 12
2.1 Research strategy ................................................................................................................................ 12
2.1.1Theoretical framework ......................................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Research material ................................................................................................................................ 13
2.3 Research design ................................................................................................................................... 14
2.4 Reliability and validity .......................................................................................................................... 14
3. Traditional university buildings .............................................................................................................. 16
3.1 Educational aspects ............................................................................................................................. 16
3.1.1 Current teaching aspects ..................................................................................................................... 17
3.2 Technological aspects .......................................................................................................................... 18
3.2.1 Current technologies in education ...................................................................................................... 19
3.3 Spatial aspects ..................................................................................................................................... 21
3.3.1 Current spatial aspects ........................................................................................................................ 22
3.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 24
4. 21st
century learning spaces ................................................................................................................... 24
4.1 Educational aspects ............................................................................................................................. 25
4.2 Technological aspects ........................................................................................................................... 27
4.2 Spatial aspects ..................................................................................................................................... 30
4.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 34
5. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 36
5.1 Data Collection .................................................................................................................................... 36
5.2 Selection of universities, buildings and persons .................................................................................. 37
5.3 Universities .......................................................................................................................................... 38
Kirsten van der Vaart
7
5.3.1. University of Twente (Enschede) ........................................................................................................ 38
5.3.2. University of Wageningen .................................................................................................................. 39
5.3.3 University of Tilburg ............................................................................................................................ 39
5.4 Results checklist .................................................................................................................................... 40
5.4.1. Description of the results ................................................................................................................... 42
5.5 Results of the interviews of the universities ......................................................................................... 44
5.5.1 Results of the interview of the university of Twente .......................................................................... 44
5.5.2 Results of the interview of the university of Wageningen .................................................................. 45
5.5.3 Results of the university of Tilburg ...................................................................................................... 46
5.6 Variance analyses ................................................................................................................................. 47
5.7 Results of the interviews with the experts ........................................................................................... 48
5.7.1 Results experts view on the educational and technological aspects .................................................. 48
5.7.2 Results experts view spatial ................................................................................................................ 49
6. Conclusion and discussion ...................................................................................................................... 50
7. Managerial implications ........................................................................................................................ 53
7.1 Further research ...................................................................................................................................... 54
Kirsten van der Vaart
8
1. Introduction
This report is a research proposal that forms the base for the major thesis for the chair group Management Studies (MST), course code MST – 80433.
This chapter contains background information of the topic (1.1), a problem analyses (1.2), the conceptual research design (1.3), learning spaces framework (1.4) and the application of the framework (1.4.1)
1.1 Background information The form and functions of the constructed university environment, particularly classrooms and other places of
learning within it, have remained largely unchanged for several centuries. However, the increasing integration
of communication and information technologies, together with the shift to more student-centred and problem-
based learning approaches, is changing the way teaching and learning is experienced within universities
(Jamieson, 2003). “Learning is changing in the 21st century” (JISC, 2006). Technologies used in learning such as
interactive whiteboards, personal learning environments wireless network and mobile devices, plus the
internet and high quality digital learning resources – and the ability to access many of these from home and the
workplace – are altering the experiences and aspirations of learners (JISC, 2006). Traditionally, ‘learning spaces’
has suggested a physical place and space in which learning takes place. However, the increasing prevalence of
digital technologies in educational environments has caused a redefinition of the concept of a learning space to
include virtual, remote and online communities – along with the physical environments – in which students
learn (The group of Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2009). The internet and mobile technology has also
helped to redefine where, and consequently, when, learning takes place (Brown, 2005). Rapid change to
education practice and technologies is requiring educators to constantly rethink the suitability of the space and
its design - the space design against the needs of learners. The balance between the life of the building and
better design is an important consideration. The balance is based on Space, Technology and Pedagogy and is a
challenge for education providers to adjust this in their learning environment (MCEETYA, 2008).
All developments pointed to a shift in the educational learning space. A collective term for all these kinds of
educational innovations is called ‘new ways of learning’ (Schuddeboom, 2011). According to Hilhorst (2009)
“The new ways of learning is an umbrella term where everyone has different meanings about and contains a
broad scale of ingredients, such as ICT, pedagogy, technology and learning methods”. Because of this ‘broad
scale of ingredients’ interesting issues with respect to technology and spatial use in learning spaces are rising.
1.2 Definition The questions that raise from this background information are; to which extent do universities adjust their
design of the buildings on this ‘new ways of learning’ that fits in a 21st
century learning space? How do
universities adjust new technologies in buildings (infrastructure)? What spatial interventions are interesting for
universities in the 21st
century learning space? What is the need and the purpose to adjust the physical learning
space within universities?
An investigation to the spatial and technological interventions that are needed to overcome this shift is
interesting for universities in the Netherlands to keep innovative. Such outcomes are hardly surprising the
priority of many higher education institutions undertaking new building projects has been to create
architectural icons, with the intention of attracting students in an increasingly competitive educational market
place (Edwards, 2000; Bickle, 2001)
Implementing new learning spaces like; a learning cafe, flexible teaching spaces and new technologies in
learning centres shown positive educate related results at 15 universities in the United Kingdom (UK).
According to the ‘Joint Information Systems Committee’ (JISC)(2006) building technological capability across
education will lead to better institutional management, reducing costs, research excellence, create a (digital)
student journey and contribute to a sustainable future. The question that raises from here is; to what do
Kirsten van der Vaart
9
universities in the Netherlands adjusting their learning spaces to a 21st century building?
Dealing with the consequences of implementing new ways of learning with respect to buildings is a real
challenge for universities. This is an interesting problem with regard to the design of a university, it also
contributes to the development of the learners knowledge what will help the learners in their future career.
Building technological capability in universities is an important aspect to adjust in learning environments (JISC,
2006). This lead to the central research question:
“What technological-spatial interventions can and do Dutch universities commit to make their learning
environment fit to a 21st
century learning space?”
In order to answer the research question, a literature review will be conducted to get a clear vision of the
educational, technological and spatial aspects of traditional buildings and of the new ways of learning. After the
literature review, in-depth interviews with universities in the Netherlands and experts will be used to find out
to which extent the Dutch universities are fit for the 21st
century learning environment. Based on the results of
this research, recommendations and a checklist will be presented so that universities can use them as a
reference when constructing new learning environments. Further explanation of the research design and
methods can be found in chapter 2.
1.2 Conceptual research design The conceptual design deals with determining the topic of the research project. It consists of the research
objective, research questions and research framework (Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2010).
Research objective:
To give recommendations for universities in the Netherlands how they can adjust new ways of learning in their
learning environment based on literature and information of experts and other universities.
Research question
“What technological-spatial interventions can and do Dutch universities commit to make their learning
environment fit to a 21st
century learning space?”
The specific research questions that are developed to answer by literature and empirical study are:
Q1.1 What is are the characteristics of a traditional university buildings design?
Q1.2 What are the characteristics of 21st
century learning space with regard to the technological and
spatial environment?
Q1.3 Is there a need to adapt the learning space environment in universities for (new) students?
Q1.4 What educational interventions are needed to adapt in a 21st
century learning space?
Q1.5 What spatial interventions are needed to adapt to a 21st
century learning space?
Q1.6 What technological interventions are needed to a 21st
century learning space?
Q1.7 To what extent do universities currently have adapted their learning environments to a 21st
century learning space?
The research strategy in section 2.1 and the theoretical framework in section 2.1.1 discuss these specific
research questions further.
1.3 Research framework The information that is needed is represented in a research framework. The framework shows the a schematic
representation of the research objective and includes the appropriate steps that need to be taken to achieve
the objective (Verschuren, Doorewaard, 2010). The results of the literature topics will be obtained through
Kirsten van der Vaart
10
literature study. These results are used to build a theoretical framework, together with the methodology it is
the bases of the empirical study. In the empirical study, the results from literature are tested by a key issue
checklist and interviews with (facility) managers of universities and experts. The results from literature and
empirical study will be analysed and give an answer to the main research questions. As last will the gathered
and analysed information be used to give recommendations to universities and a standard key issue checklist
will be available for other universities.
Research Framework
Literature study
- Educational, technological
and spatial aspects about
traditional university
buildings and the new
ways of learning in 21st
century spaces
Theoretical Framework
Methodological Framework
- Research design
- Reliability and validity
- Data collection method
- Operationalization method
- Research planning
Empirical study
- Interviews with universities in the Netherlands
- Key issues checklist within universities
- Interviews with experts
Analyses literature and
empirical study
Recommendations for
Universities
Key issue checklist
Methodology
Empirical
Final
Literature
Fig. 2.
Research
Framework
Kirsten van der Vaart
11
1.4 Learning spaces framework For this study we adapted the “Learning spaces framework” of the Ministerial Council on Education,
Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) (2008) , that identifies the strong relationship between 21st
century learning spaces, digital pedagogy and
digital technology that enhances effective e-
learning in terms of new knowledge gained by
learners.(MCEETYA, 2008).
1.4.1 Applying the learning spaces framework
To use the learning spaces framework (MCEETYA,
2008) for this research, an adjustment in the model
must be made. In our model we identify a
relationship between the technological and spatial
aspects of the learning environment that affect
education and the interaction between student and
learner.
Technological aspects are strong related to the
spatial aspects of university buildings. The
technological aspect is important to investigate because of the degree of adjustment of new technologies
(internet, computers, whiteboard, digital tablets) in universities. These new technologies make it i.e. possible
for learners to study in- or outside the university and whenever they want (Brown, 2005). The physical learning
space move more towards a virtual learning space (Temple, 2007), this movement affects the spatial design of
universities related with the use of technologies.
Multiple investigation is done at the educational aspect of 21st
century learning spaces, this is a base for the
technical and spatial design of the universities. The learner is the object who can give concrete results if an
adjusted learning space will affect their learning outcomes. The aspect teacher is added in the framework at
the same level of importance as the learner and educational aspect. Teachers are the ones who need to
communicate new ways of learning to the learners, but first will learn to understand and deal with it by
themselves. The learners and the teachers are the end users of the 21st
century learning environment. To apply
the learning spaces framework we developed a new framework for this research.
Fig. 4. Learning spaces framework 2012
Fig. 3. Learning spaces framework (MCEETYA, 2008)
Stakeholders (Teachers,
students, staff)
Technological Spatial
Educational
Kirsten van der Vaart
12
2. Technical research design
This chapter contains the research strategy and theoretical framework (2.1, 2.1.1), research material (2.2), research design (2.3), reliability and validity (2.4)
The technical research design consists of three parts: the research strategy, research material and the research
planning. The three parts together give an answer to how the research project is carried out and how the
required data is gathered (Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2010).
2.1 Research strategy The research strategy serves as a guide throughout the research, in this way relevant material can be gathered
and processed into valid answers to the research questions (Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2010). This research
will look in-depth to problem presented in chapter one. A qualitative approach is used to gather data, for this
reason this study aims at gaining in-depth information and a personal view of new ways of learning in 21st
century learning spaces.
Fig. 5. Research strategy
2.1.1Theoretical framework
The theoretical framework shows a base of the study in the report. The first section ‘Traditional buildings’, is
related to the specific research question Q1.1 of the literature study. In this question the research variables;
educational, technological and spatial information about traditional university buildings are gathered. Search
terms for these questions are: space use, design, learning environment, technologies (in education), facilities,
organisational change and (dis)advantages of traditional university buildings are investigated.
The second section “21st
century learning spaces”, is related to the specific research questions Q1.2 and Q1.3 of
the literature study. In this question the research variables; educational, technological and spatial information
about traditional university buildings are gathered. Search terms for these questions are: space use, design,
new way of working, organisational change, learning environment, technologies (in education), facilities and
(dis)advantages of new ways of learning are investigated.
The third section “Current situation universities” is related to specific research question Q1.7 of the empirical
study. This question can be answered after interviews and empirical research of the selected universities. The
universities will be investigated through the results of questions Q1.1, Q1.2 and Q1.3 that are answered in the
first two sections. After analysing the current situation of the universities, experts are interviewed in the last
section “Interventions”. This section answer question Q1.4, Q1.5, Q1.6, Q1.7 and answer the main research
question by gathering information of the research variables; educational, technological, spatial interventions
that universities should take in their current situation. All the four sections are needed to answer research
questions.
Literature study
Questions: Q1.1, 1.2, Q1.3
Empirical study
Questions: 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7
Answer to the
Research question
Kirsten van der Vaart
13
- Educational aspects
- Technological
aspects
- Spatial aspects
- Educational aspects
- Technological
aspects
- Spatial aspects
- Educational
- Technological
- Spatial
21st
century learning spaces Traditional buildings
Interventions Q1.1 Q1.2, Q1.3
Q1.4, Q1.5, Q1.6 main
research question
Current situation universities
Q1.7
- Level of adjustment of new
ways of learning
Fig.6. Theoretical framework
Kirsten van der Vaart
14
2.2 Research material The research materials are the sources that are used in this research to answer the research questions.
- Scientific literature is used in the literature research, these are books about research methodology.
- Scientific articles published in journals like: Journal of Facilities Management, Journal of EDUCAUSE,
the journal of Academic Librarianship, Journal of computers and education are used.
- Professional literature; from universities or for example Facility Management Magazine is used.
- Interviews in the empirical research will be held with (facility) managers/decision-makers of
universities and experts about the objective. Why these parties are interviewed is further explained in
the methodology.
Terms that will be searched for in these sources of information are: Facility Management, architecture,
educational, technologies, (21st
century) learning spaces.
2.3 Research design In this research first theory will be presented by doing a literature study about traditional university buildings
and 21st
century learning spaces, afterwards this theory will be tested by doing interviews with managers and
experts in the empirical research to get a full insight in the case. In the empirical research 3 universities in the
Netherlands will be investigated and experts in this field (see 5.2 for the individuals) are approached. For this
reason a case study design is suitable for this research. Verschuren & Doorewaard (2010) describe case studies
as a research strategy in which the researcher tries to gain a profound and full insight into one or several
objects or processes that are restricted in time and space. The multiple case study design is based on studying
various units within identifiable cases (universities), this is called an embedded approach (de Vaus, 2001)
The research is about the different kind of interventions universities need to overcome to increase their
adjustment of the new ways of learning in a 21st
century learning space. This means that the study is interested
in the exploration of this phenomenon on its own. For this reason the research is descriptive (exploratory)
because it studies ‘what’ is going on and not ‘why’ it is going on (explanatory research). The approach of the
study, which is in line with the understanding of interventions of the adjustment about new ways of learning
with respect to the learning environment, is a descriptive approach. Descriptive in this sense means that the
case study research presents a detailed account of the phenomenon which is functional to present information
about the area of the research (de Vaus, 2001). The analysis of the data is prospective, it is pointing to the
present with the intention that expectations and decisions are based on the current analyses. The type of case
study is ‘evaluative’. Evaluative studies involve description, explanation and judgement (Merriam, 1988), but
the primary purpose is to use the data to evaluate the value of interventions to a 21st
century learning space.
The description has the purpose of achieving a better understanding of the present status of the universities in
the Netherlands.
2.4 Reliability and validity Case study designs cannot provide a basis for making statistically valid generalizations beyond that particular
case. In this research the cases are the universities in the Netherlands, they will be investigated at the same
research variables and checklists, what will give a high external validity.
The reliability of the empirical research is ensured by in-depth interviews. Through this interview technique the
opinion of the interviewees and the degree of how the new ways of learning are adapted in their learning
space, will be researched in-depth. It is therefore likely that the questions for the interviewees are structured
the same when the interviews are repeated. The opinions of the interviewees will likely differ, also to what
Purpose Approach Process Type of case study
Intrinsic & exploratory Descriptive Prospective Evaluative
Kirsten van der Vaart
15
extent the university have been adjusted to the a 21st
century learning space. Therefore is chosen not to
generalize the results at first, but analyse every interviewee separate. The interviews are recorded and written
out in transcripts in the annex.
Besides in-depth interviews a key issue checklist is used. After the literature study a checklist is constructed of
the research variables: technological and spatial key issues. These checklists are filled in during a visit at the
universities by interviewing and observation in and around the university building. The results of the key issues
checklist can be used to see in which degree the universities currently have been adapted to new ways of
learning in a 21st
century learning space. To increase the validity of the research, these checklist will be the
same for every university and will be measured at an dichotomous scale ‘yes ’and ‘no’. To ensure reliable
answers the issues in the checklist are divided in two groups; core aspects and additional aspect. The core
aspects have a weight of 2 and the aspects of the additional checklist have a weight of 1.This is done because
the core aspects are more important than the additional aspects. To use this method standardisation is applied
and it facilitates the results, what give objective answers.
The in-depth interviews with the universities and the checklists are analysed by the transcripts and the score of
the checklists. Each case (university) is analysed separate by checking the answers of the interview(s) and of
the checklist, to see to which extent both methods are align. The answers of the interviews are presented by a
person of the university, while the checklist is answered by the person of the university and the researcher.
Both answers are measured and analysed by comparing. After these analyses, interviews with experts are held.
The purpose of these in-depth interviews is to check the results of the interviews with the universities and the
checklists and the experts will give an advise for every university in their field of research. Each case is
discussed separately. By doing these last interviews with the experts we try to raise the reliability of the
research.
Eventually the results of the analyses and the results of the interviews with the experts are analysed result in a
report per case to which extent the university adjusted new ways of learning and what interventions they need
to overcome to provide a needed 21st
century learning space. The key issue checklist is the main result of the
research for other universities. This checklist is an extended version of the checklist of MCEETYA(2008). The
checklist is extended by literature study and tested in real life situations. Also experts are asked to give their
opinion on the checklist, to ensure the reliability and validity so it can be adapted for other universities.
The internal validity is being ensured through the research is set-up. Extensive literature research is conducted
on; new ways of learning, 21st
century learning spaces, technologies in education and buildings, learning spaces
and traditional university buildings. Empirical research is used to verify the importance of these elements and
to investigate the interventions a university should take to align on a 21st
century learning space.
Kirsten van der Vaart
16
3. Traditional university buildings This chapter answers the first specific research question: Q1.1 What is are the characteristics of a traditional
university buildings design? The conclusion of this chapter presents the educational, technological and spatial
aspects that traditional universities have. The conclusion of this chapter, combined with the conclusion of
chapter 4, is used to build a checklist and a theoretical framework to understand the different aspects of
traditional buildings and 21st
century learning spaces and how they are related. The framework is used in the
empirical research to determine what empirical information is needed to answer the general research
question.
3.1 Educational aspects History of teaching
The definition of traditional education varies greatly with geography and by historical period. “The chief
business of traditional education is to transmit to a next generation those skills, facts, and standards of moral
and social conduct that adults deem to be necessary for the next generation's material and social success
(Dewey, 1938)”. As beneficiaries of this scheme, which educational progressivist “John Dewey” (1859-1952)
described as being "imposed from above and from outside, the students are expected to docilely and
obediently receive and believe these fixed answers. Teachers are the instruments by which this knowledge is
communicated and these standards of behaviour are enforced”.
Historically, the primary educational technique of traditional education was simple oral recitation. A typical
approach was that students sat quietly at their places and listened to one individual after another recite his or
her lesson, until each had been called upon. The teacher's primary activity was assigning and listening to these
recitations; students studied at home (Beck, 2009). A test might be given at the end of a unit, and the process,
was repeated. In addition to its overemphasis on verbal answers, reliance on rote memorization (memorization
with no effort at understanding the meaning), and disconnected, unrelated assignments, it was also an
extremely inefficient use of students' and teachers' time. It insisted that all students be taught the same
materials at the same point; students that did not learn quickly enough failed, rather than being allowed to
succeed at their natural speeds. This approach, which had been imported from Europe, dominated American
education until the end of the 19th century, when the reform movement imported progressive education
techniques from Europe (Beck, 2009). Progressive education is a pedagogical movement that began in the late
nineteenth century and has persisted in various forms to the present. More recently, it has been viewed as an
alternative to the test-oriented instruction legislated by the “No Child Left Behind” educational funding act
(Osterbeek & Webbink, 2004).
The term "progressive" was engaged to distinguish this education from the traditional curriculum of the 19th
century, which was rooted in classical preparation for the university and strongly differentiated by
socioeconomic level (Beck, 2009). A continuing motivation of progressive reformers has been to reduce cost to
students and society. From the ancient times until the 1800s, one goal was to reduce the expense of a classical
(traditional) education. Ideally, traditional education is undertaken with a highly-educated full-time (extremely
expensive) personal tutor. This was available for only to the most wealthy. Encyclopaedias, public libraries and
grammar schools are examples of innovations intended to lower the cost of a classical education (Fort, 2006).
The reformation led to a higher accessibility to universities in also the less wealthy social classes.
National
In the Netherlands an important educational reform was “the Mammoth Law”, this law was introduced in
1968. Its aim was to bring about a more integrated system of secondary education by promoting a system that
would be based on achievement and not on social class (Fort, 2006), the accessibility increased. Plug (2001)
exploits the Mammoth law (1968) to assess the returns on education in the Netherlands. His findings suggest
that the reform positively affects the educational attainment of both men and women in the sample. The next
Kirsten van der Vaart
17
educational reform in 1975 in the Netherlands led to more structure in the educational system. From 1975
onwards, all three-year educational programs in the Netherlands were extended to four years and compulsory
schooling leaving age was increased by one year, from 15 to 16. Osterbeek & Webbink (2004)
The discussion on the structure of Dutch higher education and universities dates back to the end of the Second
World War. Many commissions spoke out concerns about “over education”. Until the early eighties not much
changed and the standard duration of university education was five years. In August 1982 the duration of a
university study changed to four years. The main reason for this reform was a financial one and had nothing to
do with over education. Increasing enrolment had put pressure on the budget for higher education. The Dutch
Minister Pais of education and science solved this problem by shorten the duration of studies. In this way costs
were reduced without restricting enrolment. In general studies reduced many parts of the curriculum, ‘key
elements’ survived and ‘voluntarily’ elements were brought back in duration (Webbink, 2004).
The reform intended to change university education in a so-called two-stage-structure. The first stage consisted
of the standard university degree of four years that included a propaedeutic exam after one year. The second
stage was meant as preparation for scientific research. The duration of this stage should be no more than 2
years. This second part of the reform was in fact never implemented. In 1984 the new Minister Deetman
introduced a new system for PhD students, the so-called AIO-system with duration of four years (Webbink,
2004)
3.1.1 Current teaching aspects Learning methods in the last decades shifted to different ways of learning. Nowadays, many researchers and experts in the field of education are elaborating on the right teaching method and further educational reform.
The change from traditional to problem-based learning curriculum the last decades is the method that had the
most attention. According to McParland, Noble and Livingston (2004), problem-based learning is a method that
is often characterized by the use of patient problems as a context for students to acquire knowledge and learn
problem-solving skills. In this method students create knowledge and understanding through learning activities
built around intellectual inquiry and a high degree of engagement with meaningful tasks (McGrath (2003).
Projects are designed to allow students with a variety of different learning styles to demonstrate their acquired
knowledge. Therefore, a well-designed project-based learning activity is one which addresses different student
learning styles within this method and which does not assume that all students can demonstrate their
knowledge in a single, standard way (Sun associates, 1997). Bruner (1996), complements that the value of
social interaction, believing that learning is a dynamic process in which learners construct knowledge based on
their existing knowledge. He argues for a broad based ‘culture of learning’ beyond the narrow confines of
traditional schooling. Increasingly the pedagogic value of broadening the ‘culture of learning’ in formal
education is being recognized, with an increased focus on ‘student-centered’ learning method instead of a
‘teacher-centered’ method (Greenwood et al, 2007; Obligner, 2006; Barr & Tagg, 1995). In addition, students
expect more, and therefore universities and colleges competing for students are providing a range of learning
opportunities to cater to a wider range of learning styles and learning desires (Toynbee Wilson, 2002).
The most important difference in the educational environment, compared to decades ago, is the method of
communication. Since people start using technologies daily, communication is changed. Earlier, teachers taught
by blackboard and crayons, in this century technologies as interactive whiteboards that are connected to
computers are used to teach (JISC, 2006). Wireless networks, personal learning environments and the ability to
access many of these from home and workplace are altering the experiences an aspirations of teachers, which
led to a different approach of teaching and learning methods (JISC, 2006).
Summary In the begin of the 19th century teachers where seen as instruments who provide knowledge by speaking in
front of a class, while students sat quietly and listened to one individual who recites his or her lesson (Dewey,
1938 and Beck, 2009). Learners act on rote memorization (memorization with no effort at understanding the
Kirsten van der Vaart
18
meaning), and disconnected, unrelated assignments, it was also an extremely inefficient use of students' and
teachers' time. It also insisted that all students be taught the same materials at the same point; students that
did not learn quickly enough failed (Beck 2009). At the end of the 19th century progressive education, a
pedagogical movement has started. By contrast, progressive education finds its roots in present experience
like; hands-on learning, critical thinking, social skills and personal development. In the Netherlands these
educational reformation led to the Mammoth law (1968). This law moved towards a comprehensive system by
bringing more about integration within secondary education, but without abolishing the hierarchy of different
types of secondary education. This educational reform led to positive educational attainment, teaching become
more student-centred. In 1982 there was another educational reformation, the government decided to shorten
studies at the universities from 5 to 4 years, because of financial benefits (Webbink, 2004). The reform
intended to change university education in a so-called two-stage-structure; at first a standard university degree
and a second stage which involved scientific research. The second stage is never implemented, but changed
towards a new system for PhD students.
In this decade, researchers elaborating that there is a shift the last decades from ‘teacher-centred’ to ‘student-
centred’, which lead to more group work and problem-based learning methods. The physical place of learning
and studying is changed from classroom to everywhere outside the classroom, social interaction became more
important. Besides the social interaction, the methods of communication also became an important change,
due to technologies.
3.2 Technological aspects In this section we discuss the technological aspects of traditional and current university buildings. Also we
elaborate on the technological trends in universities all over the world. In chapter 4.2 these new technologies
will be discussed further.
Technologies in universities can be defined as “the application of scientific and other organized knowledge to
practical tasks by organizations consisting of people and machines” (Open University, 1978). We define
technologies within universities as an aspect that concerns; the ability and accessibility to internet (computers,
Wi-Fi), teaching materials (electronic whiteboards and other additional technological devices), infrastructure
(communication through email, web-portals, website, intranet), social systems (technology always involves
people), hardware (technical design, machinery). Educational technology in practice is defined by Richey
(2008),as, “a practice of facilitating learning and improving performance by creating, using and managing
appropriate technological processes and resources
History of technologies in education
The history of “Educational technology, can be traced back to the time when tribal priests systemized bodies of
knowledge and early cultures invented pictographs or sign writing to record and transmit information”
(Saettler, 1990). In ancient Greece, the Elder Sophist used the term “techne” to refer the process of applying
practical art of instruction. They formulated cognitive rules, systematically analysed subject matter designed
instructional technologies and devised effective instructional materials. During the Middle Age, Pierre Abelard
introduced a technology of instruction which was really a new method of structuring and presenting materials
that helped set the style of scholastic education. Later on modern instructional technology was presented by
illustrated textbooks for children studying Latin & Sciences. John Dewey formulated scientific theory for
learning and scientific methods, what results in the advent of effective technological development in the 19th
century. This development includes the production of textbooks, use of blackboards and improvements in
writing implements like pen and ink. Photography was invented, giving a way to movement called “visual
instruction”. By 1920, visual media became widely accepted. Then came the publication of audio-visual media
texts. In 1926, educational films were used as instructional media and in 1927, programmed learning through a
machine which tested and confirming learning tasks was developed. Five years later, the first instructional
television program was aired at the State University of Iowa (TCET,2010)
Kirsten van der Vaart
19
During World War II, the U.S. government encouraged the implementation of technology of instruction for
military training programs. This gave impetus to a system approach to instruction to include: micro-teaching,
individualised instruction, language- and behavioural laboratories, computer assisted instructed and among
others. The first generation of the computer started in 1943. This computer was used to produce in WWII
balistic firing tables for the U.S. Defense Department. After this first generation, the computer development
went quick forward. Federal funds supported many large-scale projects in mainframe computer-assisted
instruction (CAI) in schools, colleges and universities through the middel of the 70’s. (TCET,2010)
In 1975 the first personal computer was developed and in the 80’s the first laptops arrived. In 1990 the HTML-
coding and World-Wide Web (WWW) was developed by Tim Berners- Lee, he made it possible to connect
computers all over the world. All these technological advances were making their entrance in the educational
world. The biggest challenge for the public educational system has been how to prepare schools physically and
train teachers effectively for its use in the classroom. Nowadays, it is normal to use computers daily during
their school/home work. The society learned that computer-based materials are just one component of
resources available to the educational system and to integrate technology as a tool to advance learning in the
content areas adds effectiveness of other resources and teachers created activities. This awareness in the
educational environment led to a new definition of the learning space, it is continu changing. Roblyer (2000),
deifined the educational technology as; “A combination of the processess and tools involved in addressing
educational needs and problems, with an emphasis on applying the most current tools: computers and their
related technologies.” The International Technology Education Assocation (2010), elaborates that schools
should prepare students for work force learning about technology as used in the “real world” is essential.
(TCET,2010)
3.2.1 Current technologies in education
Technological methods
Today, the prevailing paradigm in the regular school system is computer-mediated communication method
(CMC), where the primary form of interaction is between students and instructors, mediated by the computer
(Tremblay, 2010). There are two major approaches to using media and technology in schools and universities.
First, students can learn “from” media and technology, and second, they can learn “with” media and
technology. Learning “from” media and technology is often referred to in terms such as instructional television,
computer-based instruction, or integrated learning systems. Learning “with” technology is referred to in terms
such as cognitive tools and constructivist learning environments (Reeves, 1998)
Integrated learning systems (ILS), a learning ‘from’ method, utilize computer networks to combine
comprehensive educational “courseware” with centralized management tools. This method is used by 9 million
students in 13,000 schools around the world. Perceived advantages of integrated learning systems are the
centralized management network, basis analysis techniques for individualizations of lesson materials for
students, limited logistic problems because of maintenance by centralized servers, tutorials, standardized
assessments and interface between students and teachers across subjects and grades (Bailey, 1993 Becker,
1992, Reeves, 1998)
As computers have become more and more common in education, researchers have begun to explore the
impact of software as cognitive tools in schools and universities (Jonassen & Reeves, 1996). Computers as
cognitive tools, a learning ‘with’ method, represent quite a different approach from media and technology as
methods for educational purpose. Computer-based cognitive tools have been intentionally adapted or
developed to function as intellectual partners to enable and facilitate critical thinking and higher order learning
(Reevey, 1998). In the cognitive tools approach, information is not encoded in educational communications
which are then used to transmit knowledge to students. Indeed, with cognitive tools, the need for formal
instructional systems design processes are reduced. Instead of specialists such as instructional designers
shaping students' learning via prescribed communications and interactions, media and technology are given
Kirsten van der Vaart
20
directly to learners to use for representing and expressing what they know. Reevey (1998) stated: “Learners
themselves function as designers using media and technology as tools for analysing the world, accessing and
interpreting information, organizing their personal knowledge, and representing what they know to others.”
Technology in practice Bradwell (2009) stated that “technology is at the heart of the institutional change within universities.”
Universities are now just one source among many for ideas, knowledge and innovation. That seems to threaten
their core position and role, but in this new world of learning and research, there are also great opportunities.
Universities are often at the leading edge in the use of technology for research, but academics have been much
slower to develop technology within the teaching function of their own universities (Daniel,1998).
Technologies and new forms of communication had influence on learning and teaching processes, practices
have already been incorporated and become natural parts of the student experience. Now we take reading on-
screen for granted, and in the developed world most reading is probably already electronic (Kasdorf, 2003).
This shift to computer screens, it is possible to claim, is already a shift of knowledge, learning and human
engagement (Zandvliet & Fraser, 2005). Similarly, Kress argues that this “new media age” the screen has
replaced the book as the dominant medium of communication modes (image, audio, video). Nowadays,
laptops are used in the similar way as books, students are not bounded to space anymore. Lipincott (2006),
observed that today’s students mix academic and social activities while using technologies; sending emails, play
computer games, writing papers, accessing assignments, upload videos or making use of social media networks
are a mix of ordinary activities of students at one moment. Some see their multitasking as a troublesome lack
of ability to concentrate, but it is a logical strategy for students who grew up in a world with media in many
formats at their fingertips 24 hours a day.
Nowadays, also in classrooms technological devices and methods playing an important role. Examples of these
various types of technologies are computers in the classrooms, class website, class blogs and wikis (online
group discussions), wireless classroom microphones, mobile devices (clickers, smartphones) (Trambley, 2010),
interactive whiteboards, online media (streamed video websites), digital games and podcasts. Although
podcasts are a relatively new phenomenon in classrooms, especially on college campuses, studies have shown
the differences in effectiveness between a live lecture versus podcast are minor in terms of the education of
the student (Biocchi, 2011). The use of these (new) technologies within teaching methods, make distance
learning possible.
Summary
The history of “Educational technology, can be traced back to the time when tribal priests systemized bodies of
knowledge and early cultures invented pictographs or sign writing to record and transmit information”
(Saettler, 1990). In ancient Greece, they used the term “techne” to refer the process of applying practical art of
instruction. During the Middle Age instruction for technologies are developed which was really a new method
of structuring and presenting materials that helped set the style of scholastic education. In the 19th
century
effective technological developments where made including includes the production of textbooks, use of
blackboards and improvements in writing implements like pen and ink. Photography was invented, giving a way
to movement called “visual instruction”. In the 20th
century, visual media, audio-visual media texts, educational
films and programmed learning through a machine was developed. In the WWII the government encouraged
the development of computers, to produce firing tables. Federal funds supported many large-scale projects in
mainframe computer-assisted instruction (CAI) in schools, colleges and universities through the middel of the
70’s (TCET,2010). In 1975 the first personal computer was developed and in the 80’s the first laptops arrived. In
1990 the HTML-coding and World-Wide Web (WWW) was developed by Tim Berners- Lee, he made it possible
to connect computers all over the world.
Today, the prevailing paradigm in the regular school system is computer-mediated communication method
Kirsten van der Vaart
21
(CMC), where the primary form of interaction is between students and instructors, mediated by the computer
(Tremblay, 2010). Integrated learning systems (ILS) are used nowadays to utilize computer networks to
combine comprehensive educational “courseware” with centralized management tools. As computers have
become more and more common in education, researchers have begun to explore the impact of software as
cognitive tools in schools and universities (Jonassen & Reeves, 1996). Universities are often at the leading edge
in the use of technology for research, but academics have been much slower to develop technology within the
teaching function of their own universities (Daniel,1998). Technologies and new forms of communication had
influence on learning and teaching processes, practices have already been incorporated and become natural
parts of the student experience. Now we take reading on-screen for granted, and in the developed world most
reading is probably already electronic (Kasdorf, 2003). Lipincott (2006), observed that today’s students mix
academic and social activities while using technologies, what is a logical strategy for students who grew up in a
world with media in many formats at their fingertips 24 hours a day. Nowadays, also in classrooms
technological devices and methods playing an important role. The use of these (new) technological devices
within teaching methods, make distance learning possible.
3.3 Spatial aspects
History of university buildings
Universities initially emerged as institutions in Paris and Bologna at the end of the 11th
century. They evolved
from the cathedral schools and continued the tradition of the preservation of knowledge that had previously
been the responsibility of cloisters. In the 12th
century, when university blossomed up, the structure and
education was still based on a cloister. Later on in the 13th
century closed block designs were altered in the first
universities in England, this model was used worldwide (Altbach , 1998). These universities developed to meet
the new needs of urban society for professional training, such as medicine and civil law, and had no permanent
buildings. They operated from existing buildings, usually no larger than the size of a city block. Where
necessary, universities were divided among several unconnected buildings located in different parts of the city.
As the number of students increased and more fields of study were added, it became necessary to build
buildings to house university activities at one location. The creation of permanent structures marked the
establishment of the university as an independent institution (Cobban, 1992).
The university remained relatively unchanged from the Middle Ages until the late 18th
and early 19th
centuries,
when religion lost its dominant force and the European universities became institutions of modern learning and
research. The Morril Act of 1862 changed the mission of higher education by creating universities who provide
practical education for the new industrial society. Jefferson developed a more open an spatial model evolved in
America, instead of the cloistered character of European colleges. He developed pavilions with living spaces
upstairs and classrooms downstairs, the old Latin term ‘campus’ was used again. From the end of the 19th
century in Britain, architects and their educational clients began to understand the need to provide buildings
that met defined educational needs: modernism had arrived. From this point onwards, we may begin to think
of university spaces as engaging learners and teachers in the social processes that constitute learning (Temple,
2007)
At the beginning of the 20th
century, universities blossomed throughout the world. Their organizational
structures changed as additional fields of knowledge gave rise to the division of universities into different
faculties and departments. However, in contrast to earlier periods when higher education remained largely a
private enterprise in most countries, World War I strengthened the ties between the university and the state.
During the WWI the state increased its financial support; in return academics provided research in support of
the war effort. Universities no longer conducted research for their own sake, but tried to develop applied
research for the benefit of society. In the WWII there has been an increasing demand for higher education and
Kirsten van der Vaart
22
the need for educated workers was raised. This resulted in a worldwide expansion of universities and the
number of students was growing (Temple, 2007). Later on in the 20th
century the facilities within and around
the universities changed to an increasingly complex organization, Kerr (1990) used the term “multiversity” for
these complex universities. The designers radically changed their minds and designed new single large and
concentrated buildings “megastructures” (Banham, 1978), but it never worked out well because of the large
size and the inflexibility of the building, expansion or interchange of the activities was not possible. This model
was there for abandoned in the late 90s. (Hashimshony & Haina, 2006)
3.3.1 Current spatial aspects
Campus architecture is now seen as a means of delivering an institutional strategy (Kenny, Dumont & Kenney,
2006) and as an important marketing tool in increasingly market-oriented higher education systems (Edwards,
2000). The ‘iconic’ building seems now to be feature of every current campus master-planning project. When
the English ‘polytechnics’ gained university status in 1992, one possible difficulty was thought to be that these
buildings are not look like universities; environmentally, they remain a leap away from a university campus
culture, because buildings and purposes were seen here as being interdependent. New universities might not
function as old universities did, because they did not look like them (Price, 1992).
Around the world, the vast majority of university buildings are simply functional standard units, constructed to
the designs and standards of other comparable buildings of their place and time: they have no grand message
to send (Temple, 2007). More recent thinking on “flexible” learning spaces – spaces in which different groups
may be undertaking different activities simultaneously and which lend themselves to a variety of uses (Chism,
2006; JISC, 2006) – campus and building design can be used to facilitate learning, particularly informal learning.
On the basis that much effective learning takes places as a result of interactions between students, designs
need to provide a variety of spaces in which they can work and socialise together (Kuh et al., 2005). However,
cost-driven pressures in higher education to maximise space utilisation may have the unintended effect of
reducing the opportunities for informal learning (Temple, 2007).
It has been proposed that the physical form of the university is important in supporting its integrated nature,
intellectually and socially, and that it is according to Temple & Barnett (2007); “the preservation and
development of this integrated form, with its dense network of connections, that provides the management
and planning challenges in higher education and which supports institutional effectiveness”. Physical space and
intellectual space (for teaching, learning, and research) may, then, be connected through the operation of
social networks. There is an interplay between the type of science carried out and the social and physical
organisation within which it takes place: “space is not intellectually neutral” (Temple, 2007).
Kornberger & Clegg (2003) suggest that spatial arrangements importantly affect the ways in which
organisations operate, and that an “architecture of complexity” should be sought. They argue for “generative”
buildings, ones designed by, or at least with, the people who live or work in them. They contrast these with
“monumental” buildings, ones imposed on their inhabitants by outsiders. Kornberger & Clegg propose that
such buildings should be designed with “heterotopia” in mind. Heterotopia is defined by this researchers as: “A
space for experimentation and temptation, where discussions about existing orders of things and discourses
can happen, a place where one can hear voices that are not normally heard, where one could restructure an
organization’s image of reality”. According to Temple this sounds as a promising agenda for learning space
design, but other than some suggestions these authors do not offer a clear view what a heterotopia building
look or feel like. A recent development of creating flexible areas within the University of Sussex, contributed to
tensions among academic staff, with complaints about working in ‘a call centre-type environment’ (Baty, 2007)
Libraries have received the most consideration the last decades regarding their changing roles in enabling
learning. The library has traditionally been thought of as being at the heart of a university – and often placed
their physically. Despite the growth of on-line services, the demand of physical libraries is reduced (King, 2000).
Particularly in teaching-oriented universities, the learning resource centre places the emphasis on space and
Kirsten van der Vaart
23
computer-based access, rather than on books and shelves. Universities now need to think of providing an
exciting and flexible space in which students can study at their own pace and time, while using a variety of
learning styles’(Edwards, 2000). In an experiment of JISC (2006) they reported that today’s students mix
academic and social activities, especially on computers, this emerged universities to adjust their traditional
academic libraries to more computer-based space.
Brown & Lippincott (2003), focus on the places and spaces where students can collaborate. More learning is
taking place outside of the class time than ever before. With an increased emphasis on collaboration and group
projects, students are learning in small groups outside the classroom. Often they need spaces equipped with
access to network connections as well as spaces that facilitate group interaction. The may seek these spaces in
dorms, libraries, computing centers and in campus coffee bars. Effective learning takes place as a result of
interactions between students, designs need to provide a variety of spaces for them to work and socialize in
together (Kuh et al., 2005).
There is a general agreement amongst academics about the value of social learning opportunities which has led
to a more varied curriculum and the promotion of a range of different types of learning activities both inside
and outside of formal classroom contact time, and has been shown to make up the bulk of the university
educational experience and methods (Boyer, 1987). Also McConnell & Alexander (2012) confirms that most
learning happens in more informal environments, what results in positive learning outcomes.
Summary
In the 11th
century the first universities blossomed up, where for centuries the education was based on a
cloister and where religion was the main subject of education. The university remained relatively unchanged
from the Middle Ages until the late 18th
and early 19th
centuries, when religion lost its dominant force and the
European universities became institutions of modern learning and research. In the 20th
century the World War I
changed the aim of the universities, because the states increased their financial support ; in return academics
provided research in support of the war effort. Universities no longer conducted research for their own sake,
but tried to develop applied research for the benefit of society. In the WWII there has been an increasing
demand for higher education and the need for educated workers was raised. This resulted in a worldwide
expansion of universities and the number of students was growing (Temple, 2007). Since that time different
buildings design where experimented, but not with great results. Many researchers argue about the impact of
the spatial design of universities, to which extent the space is related to education? According to Temple (2007)
it is surely the case that, around the world, the vast majority of university buildings are simply functional
standard units, constructed to the designs and standards of other comparable buildings of their place and time:
they have no grand message to send. While Chism (2006) and JISC (2006) more recent thinking on “flexible”
learning spaces – spaces in which different groups may be undertaking different activities simultaneously and
which lend themselves to a variety of uses – has suggested how campus and building design can be used to
facilitate learning, particularly informal learning. While Kornberger & Clegg (2003) argue the importance of
“generative” buildings, ones designed by, or at least with, the people who live or work in them. They contrast
these with “monumental” buildings, ones imposed on their inhabitants by outsiders. King (2000) comments on
the heart of the internal spatial design of universities that libraries have received the most consideration the
last decades regarding their changing roles in enabling learning. Particularly in teaching-oriented universities,
the learning resource centre places the emphasis on space and computer-based access, rather than books on
shelves. Universities now need to think of providing an exciting and flexible space in which students can study
at their own pace and time, while using a variety of learning styles’(Edwards, 2000). Universities acknowledge
the shift from learning within classrooms, to anywhere like, dorms, libraries and campus coffee bars, but the
practical adjustments are difficult to make. The university of Sussex developed ‘flexible’ learning spaces, but
ended with complaints about working in ‘a call centre-type environment’ (Baty, 2007). The universities need to
find a balance in the use of space in- and outside the classrooms, McConnell & Alexander (2012) confirms most
learning happens in more informal environments, what results in positive learning outcomes.
Kirsten van der Vaart
24
3.4 Conclusion This chapter answers the first specific research question: Q1.1 What is a traditional university buildings design?
Since the 11th
century until 2012 important changes are happened in the educational, technological and spatial
aspects of universities. The most important educational changes are; from religion based teaching, where focus
was teacher-centred – to a student-centred focus where problem-based learning is leading. These changes are
related to the technological aspects, because the introduction of computers, internet and new methods of
(digital) communicating led to an technological impact in educational methods. Where first universities where
meant as a physical place for learning, a virtual teaching world becomes more important. Students can work at
home and communicate with classmates and teachers via new communicating technologies, this enables the
students to study and work (e.g. group assignments) whenever and wherever they want. Consequently, this
leads to changes in the spatial usage. Nowadays, learning happen outside the classrooms more than ever.
All these changes lead to a reformation of universities. Decreased funding of the government and an increased
diversity of students compliments these incremental changes within universities. Therefore we conclude that;
many factors influence the design of a (traditional) university. Also building design and teaching methods of
universities are diverse in a more web-based or student-centred method and a classic or modern design.
Student-centred learning and new technologies changed the use of the spatial design of universities. More
flexible, social and virtual spaces are created (e.g. libraries, campus coffee bars and computer areas) or need to
be created with a balanced design between the virtual world and the physical place of a university.
4. 21st century learning spaces This chapter will answer the research questions: Q1.2 What are the characteristics of new ways of learning with
regard to the built environment? And the third: Q1.3 Is there a need to adapt new ways of learning to stay
attractive for (new) students?
At first we define what a 21st century learning environment is according to the literature and why universities
need to adapt new aspects in their learning environment. Later on we discuss the several aspects that are
involved with a 21st
century learning space.
According to the Partnerships for 21st
century skills, new learning spaces are synergistic system of systems that:
- Creates learning practices, human support and physical environments that will support the teaching
and learning of 21st century skill outcomes
- Supports professional learning communities that enable educators to collaborate, share best
practices, and integrate 21st century skills into classroom practice
- Enables students to learn in relevant, real world 21st century contexts (e.g., through project-based or
other applied work)
- Allows equitable access to quality learning tools, technologies, and resources
- Provides 21st century architectural and interior designs for group, team, and individual learning.
- Supports expanded community and international involvement in learning, both face-to-face and
online
Such an environment fosters learning tailored to the needs and wants of the individual. This sort of learning
occurs anytime and anyplace, when and where the learner desires. It takes place in a context of relevance, “just
in time,” rather than “just in case.” And such learning offers “just what I need” – that is, the opportunity to
acquire knowledge and skills through learning strategies that are personalized and adapted to the learners own
learning styles and preferences.
If we look to the criticism about the current learning environments; universities are alert to the need for
renewal (Daniel, 1998, Bradwell, 2009, and Foster, 2000), They are aware of the criticisms frequently levelled
at the higher education that does not accommodate the volume and variety of student demand; universities do
Kirsten van der Vaart
25
not give value for money; teaching methods are inflexible; the quality of higher education is haphazard; and
the sense of academic community is disappearing. Daniel (1998) also stated that technology, which has already
made a dramatic impact in most areas of human endeavour, is a key to renewal of higher education. In this
chapter we elaborate on new educational, technological and spatial trends of the future of universities.
4.1 Educational aspects Nowadays, the traditional teaching and learning on campus takes place within specific physical settings that are
integral to the process. The traditional, teacher-centred and didactic instruction of universities has been
embedded in the constructed environment of the campus, particularly the lecture theatres and other formal
classrooms. However, these same facilities now threaten to impede the implementation of more student-
centred and flexible learning approaches being introduced in higher education worldwide (Temple, 2007).
The increasing integration of communication and information technologies (CITs), together with the shift to
more student-centred and flexible learning approaches, is changing the way teaching and learning is
experienced within universities. These changes affect the teacher’s role, increase students’ responsibility for
own learning, alter the ways students interact and communicate, and shape the demands and expectations of
what the on-campus experience should be. (Jamieson, 2003).
To create a 21st
century learning environment some important aspects and trends needs to be elaborated to
adjust on new ways of learning. Here these aspects and trends are presented.
Students The number of part-time students who undertake distance learning, is likely to grow significantly in the
foreseeable future (Slater, 2005), in 2009 two out of five students are studying part-time. Part-time
enrolments will continue to increase as a result of assumed increase in the population aged 30-39 years
(Bradwell, 2009). Not only the number of part-time students will grow, also the number of fulltime students
will expand worldwide. For the national sake, in 2020 universities and higher education in the Netherlands will
probably grow with 25 to 40% more students (part- and fulltime students) compared to 2007 (VSNU, 2011). We
are likely to see an increase in the class mix of the student population along with changing birth rates among
different social classes and the possibilities to study abroad are more flexible. A major factor will be the rising
numbers of international students, this will bring additional demands beyond teaching. Universities need to
think of the diversity of students and their way of teaching, requiring what same have called a ‘learner need’
approach (Bradwell, 2009). Teaching becomes more individual to meet the diversity among students and to
develop skills. 21st century skills become important to be successful in future work. Although there are various
opinions about these skills, Pink (2006) mentioned: information and media literacy skills, communication skills,
critical and systems thinking, problem identification, formulation and solution, creativity and intellectual
curiosity, interpersonal and collaborative skills, self-direction, accountability and adaptability and social
responsibility as important skills. Students skills and needs are broaden which means that a reaction of
teachers cannot fail to appear.
Teachers
The role of the teacher change towards facilitator and motivator who should arrange that students can learn.
Furthermore they become planners, coaches and managers, participants and guides who manage students and
provide help whenever needed. Teachers should be able to actively integrate ICT in their lessons to increase
attractiveness and active learning (Cox, 2011). “New information technologies will allow the teacher to use new
educational methods and give learners more independence. One of the teacher’s fundamental roles is to guide
and to survey the learning process”. Teachers should be able to convert the enormous amount of information
available on the web to knowledge and learning materials for students. Wheeler (2001) mentioned three
reasons why the role of teachers must change: (1) new technologies; (2) current methods or means become
obsolete (think of overhead projectors or chalkboards) and (3) current forms of assessments become
superfluous. The future function of teachers does not only consist out of knowledge transfer but also on
Kirsten van der Vaart
26
organizing and arranging that students can learn.
Learning method
According to Marmot Associates (2006), lecture based teaching methods have become unfashionable. In their
research problem-based teaching based methods are more affective for students to achieve 21st
century skills.
Not only problem based teaching methods become more important, web-based instruction learning is at least
as effective as lecture based teaching methods (Astleitner, 2003).
The student of today arrives at a university, whether direct from school or after some years out of school,
having already assimilated the internet and connectivity into their everyday lives, that demands new learning
and teaching techniques (Bradwell, 2009). Nowadays, technologies are even available at primary schools. In the
Netherlands the concept of a “Steve Jobsschool” is introduced at primary schools. The concept of this school is;
children and parents are not bounded to restricted times, the parents decide when their child go to school.
Teaching will not happen in classical settings, but children will use their iPads (touchscreen tablets) to get
access to their learning materials and do their schoolwork somewhere in the building. Teachers are there to
stimulate and support the children (Brasser, 2012). At primary schools web-based teaching is already
introduced, to follow this method at higher education a better affiliation is made between the three levels of
schools. In the future students do not know other methods than learning with technologies. Another aspect of
new learning methods is the attention to the role of active, independent and self-directed learning, earlier
noticed as student-centred learning methods (Simon et al., 2000). The process to focus more at the needs of
the students has started decades ago, while this decade the student-centred method receive more attention.
The reason for this attention is the broadening acceptance of the internet and the emergence of various
technological developments. The student-centred method is a method that still need physical attendance of
teachers and students, while the methods problem- and web based centred teaching methods are made it
possible to learn outside the physical location at any place and time. To develop a well-balanced student-
centred learning method, Keefe & Jenkins (2000), stated aspects that are necessary:
A dual teacher role of coach and adviser;
Diagnosis of relevant student learning characteristics which include developmental level; cognitive/learning style and prior knowledge/skills;
Culture of collegiality in school characterized by constructivist environment and
Collaborative learning arrangements;
Interactive learning environment characterized by small school or small class sizes; thoughtful conversation; active learning activities and authentic student achievement, personalized learning;
Flexible scheduling and pacing, but with adequate structure and
Authentic assessment
Teachers have a large and responsible role in personalized education and can make the concept a success or
disaster (Kearney, 1991 and Waldeck, 2007). Students are more positive and learn better in small settings
where they know others more personal than larger groups in which they feel anonymous (Kuh, et al., 2005). It
is important to find a balance between the physical student-centred method and the less physical attended
problem- and web based teaching method. Blended learning methods are methods that mix face-to-face
contact with technological aspects. Blended learning might seem a threat to universities (since both can be
done outside universities), but it can also emphasize their importance. The noise of information and knowledge
needs filtering; students need guidance and expertise; student-centred learning. The students need the ‘brand
value’ of institutions and the validation they provide. (Temple, 2007)
Kirsten van der Vaart
27
Summary
The increasing integration of communication and information technologies (CITs), together with the shift to
more student-centred and flexible learning approaches, is changing the way teaching and learning is
experienced within universities. These changes affect the teacher’s role, increase students’ responsibility for
own learning, alter the ways students interact and communicate, and shape the demands and expectations of
what the on-campus experience should be. (Jamieson, 2003). Not only the roles of the stakeholders are
changing, the population of students on universities change too. We are likely to see an increase in the class
mix of the student population along with changing birth rates among different social classes and the
possibilities to study abroad are more flexible. The number of part-time students who undertake distance
learning, is likely to grow significantly in the foreseeable future (Slater, 2005).
Teaching becomes more individual to meet the diversity among students and to develop skills. 21st century
skills become important to be successful in future work. The role of the teacher change towards facilitator and
motivator who should arrange that students can learn. Furthermore they become planners, coaches and
managers, participants and guides who manage students and provide help whenever needed. The reason why
the role of teachers must change: (1) new technologies; (2) current methods or means become obsolete (think
of overhead projectors or chalkboards) and (3) current forms of assessments become superfluous. The future
function of teachers does not only consist out of knowledge transfer but also on organizing and arranging that
students can learn. Another change is noticed in the teaching methods; lecture teaching methods have become
unfashionable (Marmot Associates, 2006). Research problem-based teaching based methods are more
affective for students to achieve 21st
century skills. Not only problem based teaching methods become more
important, web-based instruction learning is at least as effective as lecture based teaching methods (Astleitner,
2003).At primary schools web-based teaching is already introduced, to follow this method at higher education
a better affiliation is made between the three levels of schools. To develop a well-balanced student-centred
learning method, Keefe & Jenkins (2000), stated aspects that are necessary: A dual teacher role of coach and
adviser; Diagnosis of relevant student learning characteristics which include developmental level;
cognitive/learning style and prior knowledge/skills; Culture of collegiality in school characterized by
constructivist environment and Collaborative learning arrangements; Interactive learning environment
characterized by small school or small class sizes; thoughtful conversation; active learning activities and
authentic student achievement, personalized learning; Flexible scheduling and pacing, but with adequate
structure and Authentic assessment. Teachers have a large and responsible role in personalized education and
can make the concept a success or disaster (Kearney, 1991 and Waldeck, 2007).
4.2 Technological aspects As we presented earlier there is much attention for technologies in education of students, this section will go
deeper into the technological aspects in the learning environment.
The current interest in technologies in educational environment is a relatively upcoming phenomenon,
especially fuelled by developments in the Internet since the WWW was created in 1992.
Embedding of technologies
Technology can help, for in most aspects of education, people now assume that more and better technologies
during studies means higher quality. Better technology usually means greater cost-effectiveness as well
(Bradwell, 2009; Daniel, 1998). This must be a central purpose of academic renewal for the 21st
century. It is
the most difficult challenge of renewal for universities to accept, for two main reasons. First, there has indeed
been a good correlation between available resources and the rankings of universities in quality assessment
exercises, a web-based teaching system. The second factor that makes academics reluctant to give priority to
Kirsten van der Vaart
28
cost-effectiveness is the monumental function of universities. The noble ideals of the academy have always
attracted the support of the wealthy: kings, queens, bishops, merchants and industrialists, who wanted their
memories to live on in the names of campus buildings and professorial titles (Daniel, 1998). Daniel (1998),
discuss the item of technologies of being physical attended at a university and the two factors that influence
technologies of universities, he states; “The e-university would largely replace the physical campus – or at least,
by the way of meeting future growth in demand for higher education – with distance learning of various kinds
superseding face-to-face learning and the balance between the resources and image of a university”. JISC
(2006) elaborates on the embedding of technology into learning and teaching spaces that it is likely to be an
evolutionary process rather than a revolutionary one, physical attendance become less in the future. To be
careful of the resources a university contains, considering technological requirements at the early stages of
planning will ensure that maximum benefit can be obtained from the investment. Starting by establishing
pedagogic aims, then review the design and the technological infrastructure in the whole institution to ensure
that the aims can be achieved.
Although the increase in web-based teaching methods represents challenges of organisational and
technological change which involve all parties within a university (e.g. academic staff, support staff,
administrative and management staff) the introduction of ICT into learning and teaching carries with it
different emphases for each party within the university. As the educational landscape changes through
widening participation, the increased use of ICT and continuing financial, the wider institutional context of the
provision of information services becomes increasingly relevant (Foster et al., 2000)
Teaching with technologies
In education, especially, the advent of the computing age has brought with it a radical disruption of the
pedagogical foundations of teachers' work. The use of computer technology and the growing access to
educational resources through the Internet are requiring educators to rethink how they teach and to help
students to prepare for life and work in the coming decades. Educators are beginning to make progress, but
there still are many obstacles to be overcome before schools effectively can prepare the majority of students
for the technological world of the 21st century. It is clear that teachers must be educated more thoroughly
about technology, the impact throughout society, and about how it can be used in teaching. Most teachers are
not adequately prepared yet to make use of exciting new educational technologies because neither their
teacher education programs nor their schools have provided sufficient time or incentives for them to learn.
Universities have learned, though, that technology training will be an on-going necessity. New technology
applications such as web-based conferencing and help-desks can either allow them to create communities of
practice where they can seek out technical assistance and moral support. This process of learning how to teach
the teachers (and the teachers of teachers) helps to implement professional development programs in
educational technology for teachers (Smith, 1999)
Mlearning
Advances in computer technology, intelligent user interfaces, context modelling applications and recent
developments in the field of wireless communications, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, wireless LAN and the global
wireless technologies such as GPS, GPRS, 3G and satellite systems have created a wide array of new
possibilities for technology in universities. When these technologies started to be used in conjunction with
mobile computers a new learning paradigm, mobile learning, emerged. Mobile learning, or m-learning, has
been defined as learning that takes place via such wireless devices as mobile phones, personal digital assistants
(PDAs), or laptop computers. When considering mobility from the learner’s point of view rather than the
technology’s, it can be argued that mobile learning goes on everywhere – for example, students revising for
exams on the bus to school, doctors updating their medical knowledge while on hospital rounds, language
students improving their language skills while travelling abroad. All these instances of formal or informal
learning have been taking place while people are on the move. A definition of mobile learning should therefore
be widened to include: Any sort of learning that happens when the learner is not at a fixed, predetermined
Kirsten van der Vaart
29
location, or learning that happens when the learner takes advantage of the learning opportunities offered by
mobile technologies. Mlearning can be used to enhance current instructional activities or to enable new
activities. The mode of use depends a lot on the nature of the software application and on the teacher’s
intentions. To integrate mobile technologies in the classroom, teachers need to research available software
and peripherals and find applications that are appropriate for their classes (Lehner, 2002, Soloway, 2002,
Smith, 2003, BECTA, 2003). With mobile technologies, teaching and classroom management/administration
need no longer be two unconnected tasks: the teacher has instant, dynamic access to student data and can
respond flexibly to patterns that are revealed minute-by-minute (Lehner 2002, BECTA, 2003).
Mlearning is not only used in 21st century learning spaces, but also in the work related environment. In the
Netherlands several companies introduced, ‘new ways of working’, this way of working is based on four main
pillars; (1) employees make their own choice on where and when to work; (2) output-oriented leadership; (3)
encouraging unlimited access and connectivity to knowledge, experience and information and (4) a flexible
relationship between manager and employee (Baane, et al., 2010). The use of mobile technologies make it
possible to work everywhere and whenever the employees want. Literature about pros and cons of new ways
of working is scarce. However, some companies did research to the advantages of the new ways of working in
their own organization and found: higher satisfaction of employees and customers, improved perceived
performance of employees, improved cooperation between employees, better use of available knowledge,
sustainable entrepreneurship by the organization, a lower absenteeism and savings on housing, travelling, ICT
and cleaning (Baane, et al., 2010). Advantages for society are a decrease of CO2 emission and e.g. less road
maintenance because employees travel less by car (are not obligatory to work at the office). New ways of
working gives an incentive for the economy due to rivalry and innovation (a higher percentage of women who
are working and less absenteeism). Downsides are costs for unoccupied workplace, risks of unacceptable
workplaces at home and a declining balance between work and private life which might increase incidences of
burn outs or other physical illnesses. When Mlearning is used at the education level, graduates have knowledge
of this phenomenon and are likely to adjust easily in equivalent work situations.
Summary
Embedding of technology into learning and teaching spaces it is likely to be an evolutionary process rather than
a revolutionary one, physical attendance become less in the future. To be careful of the resources a university
contains, considering technological requirements at the early stages of planning will ensure that maximum
benefit can be obtained from the investment. Starting by establishing pedagogic aims, then review the design
and the technological infrastructure in the whole institution to ensure that the aims can be achieved (JISC,
2006). In education, the advent of the computing age has brought with it a radical disruption of the
pedagogical foundations of teachers' work. The use of computer technology and the growing access to
educational resources through the Internet are requiring educators to rethink how they teach and to help
students to prepare for life and work in the coming decades. Educators are beginning to make progress, but
there still are many obstacles to be overcome before schools effectively can prepare the majority of students
for the technological world of the 21st century.
Nowadays we use mobile devices every day, to use mobile devices in the learning space, the term; Mlearning is
defined. A definition of mobile learning include: Any sort of learning that happens when the learner is not at a
fixed, predetermined location, or learning that happens when the learner takes advantage of the learning
opportunities offered by mobile technologies. Mlearning can be used to enhance current instructional activities
or to enable new activities. Mlearning is not only used in 21st century learning spaces, but also in the work
related environment. In the Netherlands several companies introduced, ‘new ways of working’, this way of
working is based on four main pillars; (1) employees make their own choice on where and when to work; (2)
output-oriented leadership; (3) encouraging unlimited access and connectivity to knowledge, experience and
information and (4) a flexible relationship between manager and employee (Baane, et al., 2010). The use of
mobile technologies make it possible to work everywhere and whenever the employees want. When Mlearning
Kirsten van der Vaart
30
is used at the education level, graduates have knowledge of this phenomenon and are likely to adjust easily in
equivalent work situations.
4.2 Spatial aspects New spaces of value and knowledge, like the virtual world, are emerging as resources are channelled to looser
groups of researchers and learners, groups which do not need the associated set-up and overhead costs of
large institutional environments. Knowledge is no longer restricted within the boundaries of universities and
higher education facilities. These institutions no longer have a monopoly on where good ideas come from, nor
of how information and knowledge is used and where it is accessed. This does not mean that we can do
without such institutions. They, too, have to be open to new spaces of learning and research. They have an
important role in helping such spaces flourish. Universities are becoming partners in learning and research
rather than sole providers. People need their resources, they look to their expertise and their recognition to
validate learning. Their reputations, networks and spaces are a driving force for research and collaboration.
Universities will not disappear, either into the virtual world or out of existence. They are present in new places,
in new ways (Bradwell, 2009). Learning spaces in higher education has not historically attracted a great deal of
attention from learners or researchers: teaching and learning in higher education has, implicitly, generally been
considered as taking place independently of the spaces in which it was located (Keohane, 2006). In the last
decade learners and researchers notice the need of adjusted teaching spaces because of the accessibility of
technologies in the teaching spaces. University boards notice the need of spatial renewals through the
innovations at the educational market, this market become more competitive and it is important to provide an
innovative learning space to be attractive for students (Edwards, 2000; Bickle, 2001). Nowadays, the
technical/administrative specialism of university space planning is concerned with determining the appropriate
amount of space to be provided for defined academic, administrative and other purposes, and maximizing its
use once provided, by using various space management techniques (Abramson and Burnap, 2006, SMP 2006).
As currently the average cost of space in higher education – taking into account, capital, depreciation,
maintenance and operating costs – is nearly 200 dollar per M2 (SMP, 2006), achieving the most effective use of
this valuable resource must be clearly a key management task in all higher education institutions, especially
while funding become more problematic for universities. Flexibility in design is sought in new or remodelled
specialist spaces, to allow new scientific or other curriculum approaches to be implemented readily (Temple,
2008)
The design of new learning spaces
Discussions of the student-centred approach have naturally tended to focus on issues of pedagogy, the
curriculum and related matters, rather than on the physical environment. As we already acknowledged the
needs and demands of students also changed and the wider variety of social and educational backgrounds,
some researchers found that these new approaches should carry out in the design. In particular, teaching and
learning should drive design, rather than vice versa (Jamieson et al., 2000, Jamieson, 2003). There are
opportunities when new building or remodelling takes place to provide learning spaces that seem likely to
improve the experience of learning and teaching by applying intelligent design, probably at minimal extra cost
(Temple, 2007). This is now already seen in new lecture theatre designs, where curved spaces can bring the
lecturer and audience closer together, and where the use of swivelling seats can allow the lecturer to move
from a large-group session, to multiple small-group sessions and back to a large group (JISC, 2006). Seven types
of learning spaces could be identified in higher education;
- Group teaching and learning, where flexible furniture arrangements were needed to accommodate
groups of varying sizes, using varying layouts, preferably in square rather than rectangular rooms.
(SFC, 2006)
- Simulated environments, where practical learning can take place in technological subjects, requiring
space for observation as well as for performing the task in hand.
- Immersive environments, such as highly interactive virtual environments (HIVE), with advanced ICT,
Kirsten van der Vaart
31
possible in many subjects but more likely to be found in scientific or technological ones.
- Peer-to-peer environments, where informal learning can take place, in cyber cafes.
- Clusters, where student group work can take place, for example in learning centres
- Individual work, in quiet areas
- External work, areas outside the building suitable for individual or small group activity (SFC, 2006).
The SFC study did not consider the lecture theatre as a modern learning space. However, despite the many
doubts surrounding the traditional lecture as an effective means of learning, another study also proves that still
staff and students think new modern lecture theatres are need to be built (Barnett and Temple, 2006). The
popularity of lecture theatre designs is probably because of the traditional pedagogic practices, “old self-
understandings and sets of values live within the new” (Barnett, 2000).
The popularity of lecture theatre designs is probably because of the traditional pedagogic practices, “old self-
understandings and sets of values live within the new” (Barnett, 2000). Especially the setting of the lecture
theatres had great attention, more creative designs (horseshoe-shaped layouts and better eye contact, for
example), and easier to use technology. These improvements may partly account for the lecture’s continues
popularity (SMG, 2006). These types are leasing to demands for more flexible and highly-serviced spaces, and
the blurring of the boundary between academic and social areas, buts seems unlikely to diminish the overall
net demand for space. Increased student load and more problem based learning methods are likely to require
more small-group work, and therefore more small rooms, for groups of 10-25 people (SMG, 2006)
Academic offices are also about to change, individual academic offices in most universities were provided on
the assumption that they would be used for tutorial teaching of perhaps two to four students at a time.
However, tutorial groups are often instructed in the classrooms, or smaller group work rooms. Where new
building or major remodelling takes place, the individual academic office may be replaced with a shared office
for perhaps three to six staff, or even flexible work spaces will exist. There then needs to be a set of
conveniently-located small, medium-sized rooms or open plant spaces, which can be used for meetings and
small-group teaching (SMG, 2006). To relocate all separate administrative offices to a single, large open- plan
office, can lead to space reduction of one-third and provide a ‘one-stop-shop’ for students (SMG, 2006)
The changing physical design features on their own may not be enough to achieve improved learning
outcomes: a change in the whole pattern of university organisation may be needed to make the new learning
spaces work properly (JISC, 2006, Temple, 2007). Further research of Jamieson et al. (2003) led to several
guidelines to improve the university space use by activities.
- Design space for multiple uses concurrently an consecutively: New learning environments need to
allow for multi-functionality, this includes both teacher –and student centred approaches, as well as
formal scheduled classes and informal student use. Formal locations need to accommodate informal
requirements
- Design to maximise the inherent flexibility within each space: Because of the need of multi-
functionality within a class session, it must be possible to quickly reorganise the available site for a
particular activity.
- Design to make use of the vertical dimension in facilities: Instead of only focussing on the function and
fit of the floor space, make use of the walls and ceilings (sound absorbing).
- Design to integrate campus functions: The availability of facilities that provide access to food and
drink, communal areas for informal interaction, and comfortable furnishing would help to merge
social interaction and individual activities. Focus also on outdoor classrooms, verandas, arcades.
- Design features and functions to maximise teacher and student control: Reliance on centrally provided
technical support.
- Design to maximise alignment of different curricula activities: The diverse range of faculties,
disciplines, curricula and non-academic activities evident on a university campus requires a variety of
Kirsten van der Vaart
32
learning settings, both formal and informal. All disciplines need to be separately interrogated to
determine how the learning objectives are currently achieved.
- Design to maximise student access to, and use and ownership of, the learning environment: Student –
centred methods require facilities which are available at all times. The propensity for institutional and
standardised architecture should be avoided, encourage critical thinking and development of
individuals. If faculties placed at a central place, students will use these spaces often, a sense of
ownership and responsibility can exist (Jamieson et al., 2003)
Another study present that learning, what still is one of the core aspects in universities, takes best place in
quiet, comfortable, temperature controlled, well-lit spaces, natural colours (beige, off-white, yellow) and
certain scents can aid problem solving (DfES, 2002). The need for these spaces and designs need to be
considered in a 21st century learning space.
Learners and teachers
Recent studies tried to find evidence from the end-users of the impact of the physical environment in
universities. Some findings of Flutters research (2006) are: students like a reasonable basic level of
maintenance – cleanliness, decoration, repairing broken windows and so on. Student and researchers do not
search or demand for new designs or facilities within the universities, but when they are adjusted finding
resulted positive, these two factors led to improved educational outcomes. Flutters (2006), found that
students demands according social meeting places are changed. Nowadays, students mix their social life with
their learning activities, with or without technologies (e.g. laptops, mobile phones), the need for social meeting
spaces is raised. An earlier research presents that 80% of the students time on campus is spent informally
outside scheduled classes. Current on-campus teaching facilities are under-utilised when not scheduled for
formal classes, leaving students to work in libraries or cafes not generally designed for large numbers of
students working collaboratively. This is a situation that is both pedagogically and economically untenable
(Radloff, 1998)
Most students place emphasis on the teaching abilities and subject expertise of the staff, tutorial support,
library and ICT facilities, social connections and other matters directly related in students’ mind to teaching and
learning, rather than on physical facilities (Wiers-Jenssen et al., 2002). It seems that the academic researchers
and teachers are tends to highlight perceived needs in the physical environment more than learners do. This
may because staff members spend a larger proportion of their lives in these spaces than any given student, and
may have higher expectations, based on their former experiences. To the staff, the buildings are a type of
home; to students, they are merely places to come to for limited periods for a specific purpose (Bean, 2005)
Technologies and space
The rapid change of technologies led to a new space use within universities. The spread of wireless networking
has led to further change: one account suggest that “What we’re starting to see is the emergence of spaces
that are designed around human rather than technological needs. Nowadays, spaces become pleasant and
have a nice ambience to them, and you can just use your wireless laptop there, but the space is not built
around that because it can have multiple functions. Technology has not made large demands on learning space
designs, wireless enabled laptops and wireless networks means that any university space, inside or outside, can
now quite easily be used for ICT-based learning method. Although for some spaces there will be special
demands for display screens, cabling and so on, this will be a small part of the total demand. Flexibility in space
design, allowing adaption to new uses at reasonable cost, will be more useful than spaces designed expressly
for technologies. (Temple, 2007)
Sustainability
Environmental sustainability has become a significant feature in university buildings, teaching and research in
recent years: around the world, new courses have been developed and a large number of university research
units have been created in this field. Since 2005 sustainability became a hot topic in the world of building
Kirsten van der Vaart
33
designs. Insofar as sustainability issues will require architects and designers give greater attention to reducing
energy demands in new buildings by providing natural light and ventilation, and minimizing the requirements
for mechanical heating and cooling systems. As is proposed in several sustainable guideline reports, then
impacts on learning spaces are likely to by entirely beneficial. Sustainable design and operational practices may
also provide examples of the campus being a tangible expression of institutional values: this may in turn,
contribute to a more cohesive and effective learning community (Temple, 2007).
Historically, research, and action within American colleges and universities have reflected the national public
conversation. As Kerr (2001) articulates, “As society goes, so goes the university; but also, as the university
goes, so goes society” (p. 194). Kerr’s statement suggests an obligation on the university’s behalf to carefully
heed the national public dialogue in order to examine it, but it also suggests the university’s critical role in
leading change. The social and public purpose of higher education has been a historical pillar of the American
university’s mission (King & Mayhew, 2004; Zemsky, Wegner, & Massy, 2005; Merkel & Litten, 2007). Many
higher education institutions have already recognized that they must play a role in creating a more sustainable
future. The Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future (ULSF), which includes over 350
universities, issued the following statement about the centrality of sustainability in higher education: “We
believe that the success of higher education in the 21st century will be judged by our ability to put forward a
bold agenda that makes sustainability and the environment a cornerstone of academic practice” (Report and
Declaration of the Presidents Conference, 1990). Over the past two decades, over 1,000 university leaders,
presidents, and vice chancellors have committed their institutions to change toward sustainability. Beyond
public purpose, many institutional benefits exist in pursuing sustainability. Blackburn (2007) highlighted the
following benefits: strategic positioning as an ethical institution; bolstering relations with the community;
enhancing students’; prospects as employers are increasingly interested in sustainability; attracting students,
private donors, and government funders who care about sustainability; and cost-savings through waste
reduction by collecting separate and energy conservation.
Many institutions have only engaged in small and incremental steps on their path toward sustainability.
Despite the enormous efficiencies that can be garnered from adopting a more sustainable culture, few colleges
and universities have achieved such a culture (Sharp, 2002). For example, many institutions start the
sustainability journey with waste reduction or energy efficiency improvements, but then do not move beyond
this low-hanging fruit (Senge, 2008). A more comprehensive approach may be needed started at renovations
our at the start of new building plans.
Summary
Universities are becoming partners in learning and research rather than sole providers. Universities
reputations, networks and spaces are a driving force for research and collaboration. Universities will not
disappear, either into the virtual world or out of existence. They are present in new places, in new ways
(Bradwell, 2009). To find a balanced space layout of universities there are opportunities when new building or
remodeling takes place to provide learning spaces that seem likely to improve the experience of learning and
teaching by applying intelligent design, probably at minimal extra cost (Temple, 2007). Seven types of learning
spaces could be identified in higher education; Group teaching and learning spaces, simulated environments,
immersive environments, peer-to-peer environments, clusters, individual works spaces, external work spaces
outside the building (SFC, 2006). The changing physical design features on their own may not be enough to
achieve improved learning outcomes: a change in the whole pattern of university organization may be needed
to make the new learning spaces work properly (JISC, 2006, Temple, 2007). Several guidelines to improve the
university space use by activities are; Design space for multiple uses concurrently an consecutively, design to
maximize the inherent flexibility within each space, design to make use of the vertical dimension in facilities:,
design to integrate campus functions, design features and functions to maximize teacher and student control:,
design to maximize alignment of different curricula activities, design to maximize student access to, and use
Kirsten van der Vaart
34
and ownership of, the learning environment: (Jamieson et al., 2003)
Environmental sustainability has become a significant feature in university buildings, teaching and research in
recent years: around the world, new courses have been developed and a large number of university research
units have been created in this field. Since 2005 sustainability became a hot topic in the world of building
designs. Many higher education institutions have already recognized that they must play a role in creating a
more sustainable future. Beyond public purpose, many institutional benefits exist in pursuing sustainability.
Blackburn (2007) highlighted the following benefits: strategic positioning as an ethical institution; bolstering
relations with the community; enhancing students’; prospects as employers are increasingly interested in
sustainability; attracting students, private donors, and government funders who care about sustainability; and
cost-savings through waste reduction by collecting separate and energy conservation. Nowadays, many
institutions have only engaged in small and incremental steps on their path toward sustainability. Despite the
enormous efficiencies that can be garnered from adopting a more sustainable culture, few colleges and
universities have achieved such a culture (Sharp, 2002).
4.4 Conclusion This chapter answers the second and third specific research questions: Q1.2 What are the characteristics of
21st century learning space with regard to the technological and spatial environment? Q1.3 Is there a need to
adapt the learning space environment in universities for (new) students?
(Q1.2) Embedding technology in the learning space is an on-going process, happening all over the world in all
levels of studies. It starts by establishing pedagogic aims, then review the design and the technological
infrastructure in the whole institution to ensure that the aims can be achieved (JISC, 2006). At the beginning of
this decade we saw computers making it entrance into the university buildings. Space and organization was
needed to embed the computers and the technological knowledge. Nowadays, the use of computers in the
learning space has increased and also mobile devices make more and more its entrance, because of the
introduction of Wi-Fi. The use of mobile devices in the learning space, is often termed; Mlearning and is
defined as “Any sort of learning that happens when the learner is not at a fixed, predetermined location, or
learning that happens when the learner takes advantage of the learning opportunities offered by mobile
technologies”. The use of mobile devices has different demands than computers in the learning space.
Informal seating’s, learning cafes, workspaces outside the building and the ability to recharge mobile device are
needs. In common there is a need for spatial flexibility. Because of the technological accessibility, not only
spaces where students can work individually or in small groups need to be adjusted, also the classrooms and
offices of the staff need more attention (e.g. more technology in the classrooms and shared offices).
Classrooms need to be flexible, so different activities (with or without) technologies can be done e.g. group
work, individual places, creative spaces need to be created with movable furniture. Single offices need
attention too. Research proved the occupancy rate for the use of offices is low. Therefore flexible work
spaces, open plans or shared offices can be facilitated, it may save space and thus costs.
(Q1.3) Research showed that students (and teachers) do not demand for new designs of facilities within the
universities, but when they are adjusted students are often positive. It is also shown that students demands
according social meeting places are raised. Students spend 80% of their time on campus in an informal setting
outside classes. Traditional university building consists for the major part of classrooms and halls, so
adjustments for informal seating are needed.
University boards notice the need of spatial renewals through the innovations at the educational market. This
market becomes more competitive and it is important to provide an innovative learning space to be attractive
for students (Edwards, 2000; Bickle, 2001). As showed in 2006, the average cost of space in higher education is
nearly 200 dollar per M2 (SMP, 2006), achieving the most effective use of this valuable resource must be clearly
a key management task in all higher education institutions, especially while funding become more problematic
Kirsten van der Vaart
35
for universities.
Another reason that there is a need to adapt to a 21st
century learning space, is the attendance rate of
students. As showed earlier research, the population of the part time students will raise at universities, the
ability to study abroad is easier and due to the technologies students can study when and wherever they want.
It can be concluded that less students will visit the universities daily, less space is needed.
Kirsten van der Vaart
36
5. Methodology
This chapter contains data collection methods (5.1), the selection of universities, buildings and persons (5.2) a description of the selected universities can be found in section 5.3. In section 5.4 the results of the checklists of the universities are presented, the results of the associated interviews of the checklists are presented in section 5.5, the variance analyses is presented in 5.6, the view of the selected experts in section 5.7 and a conclusion can be found at the end of the chapter in section 5.8.
5.1 Data Collection A key issue checklist is the main resource in this research, combined with interviews with informants of the
universities. Individual people have been chosen as a kind of resource to acquire qualitative data from different
universities in the Netherlands and from experts (see section 5.2). Three kinds of accessing methods are used
to extract data from these resources, namely interviewing, questioning the checklist and observation.
Questioning is a suitable method to gain data about universities of which degree they adjust on new ways of
learning. To gain in-depth information about the university, individual face-to-face interviews are conducted
with a follow up of the checklist. With a semi-structured interview, in-depth information is provided on the
delineated subjects; spatial and technological aspects of the university building, of the literature research. By
semi-structured we mean, at first some general questions are asked, the answers to these questions lead to
new questions to clarify or further explain the interviewees point of view. To use semi-structured questions in-
depth information is gathered. The second part of the interview the checklist is used. Structured questions are
used for the checklist, to check the perception of the interviewee about information on the research variables
that found in literature. Questions related to the learning spaces are asked to clarify later on which
interventions the university should overcome. This will give a view how the university is aligned to the new
ways of learning and will help to answer the last four specific research questions and the main research
question.
The other technique to extract data from the universities is a key issue checklist. These checklists are filled in
during a visit at the universities, by interviewing the (facility) manager of the university and by observing in the
buildings. According to (Verschuren & Doorewaard, 2010) is ‘observation a design method to identify the
problems that can arise when people interact with products, services and environments’. Because observation
methods are not the main method to extract data, the method is used to add the expertise of the researchers
on the validity of the answers by the interviewee. The main part of the checklist will be answered by the
interviewee and can be checked by walking around the building (observing).
The results of the key issues checklist is used as the strength of the research to see in which degree the
universities current adjust on new ways of learning. By using the dichotomous method the information is
analysed in a quantitative way by measuring the results of the checklist in percentages. The method that is
used for this quantitative research is by putting weight on the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ variables. If the answer is ‘yes’ the
weight will be 1, and if the answer is ‘no’ the weight will be 0. The key issue checklist will have at least a
maximum score >65 and a minimum score of 0. The results of all the answers in the list will be added, this will
give an absolute result, i.e. 36 points. The score of adjustment to new ways of learning can be calculated in
percentages by: 36/65 x 100 = 55,4%. The research variables; educational, technological and spatial aspects are
the three main sections in this checklist. The second checklist consist of the additional aspects; stakeholders,
organisation and sustainability. The percentages will not only be measured in total, but also measured per
aspect. This give a view to which extent per aspect(s) adjust to the new ways of learning.
After completing the in-depth interviews with the universities and the observations, the results are analysed
and interviews with experts are held. The purpose of these interviews is to validate the results of the and to
elaborate on possible interventions.
Kirsten van der Vaart
37
5.2 Selection of universities, buildings and persons
Universities
The 14 universities in the Netherlands can be divided in certain types, these are: general, technical and
specialized universities. The universities of Leiden, Utrecht, Groningen, Nijmegen, Amsterdam (2x), Rotterdam,
Tilburg, Maastricht and Breukelen are broad, general universities; they provide the most general studies and
offered nearly the same studies. The universities of Delft, Eindhoven and Twente (Enschede) are the technical
universities; where the overall focus is on technologies. The university of Wageningen is a specialized
universities that focus on life science, food and environment (VSNU, 2011).
We focus on universities who provide studies in the field of social sciences, from all three types, to which
extent the universities in the different types adjust new ways of learning. By making this distinction a
comparison of the social sciences building(s) between the different types can be made. We set up conditions to
see if a university is suitable; there need to be a specific social science faculty and building, so the sample is the
same.
The universities of Tilburg and Twente (Enschede) are chosen by random sampling. The choice of the
specialized university is Wageningen, because this university the only specialized university in the Netherlands.
The (selected) universities are presented in table 1.
General universities Technical universities Specialized universities
Leiden
Utrecht
Groningen
Nijmegen
Amsterdam (VU)
Amsterdam (OU)
Rotterdam
Tilburg
Maastricht
*Breukelen
Delft
Eindhoven
Twente (Enschede)
Wageningen
Table 1: Universities
* The university Breukelen is ruled out in this research, because this university is an enterprise and have a
commercial point of view.
Buildings
The buildings that will be investigated in the checklist are chosen by faculty; social sciences. Some universities
will have more than one building were the social sciences faculties are established, for this reason the most
representative building will be investigated. The choice of the most representative building should be made by
the university itself. The reason for this is that universities will (probably) choose the building with the most
technological and spatial innovations. We found it interesting to search for the differences that the (facility)
managers of the universities have about their building, compared to the information found in literature study
(checked by key issue checklist). The chosen building will give a view to which extent the university adjusted
new ways of learning.
- Enschede: Ravelijn building
Kirsten van der Vaart
38
- Wageningen: Forum building
- Tilburg: Prisma building
In section 5.3 information of the university (buildings) are presented.
Persons
The persons who will be interviewed are divided in two groups. The first group are (facility) managers of
universities, who are selected by the universities. These resources are grouped as the interviewees within the
universities. The second group; experts, is a group that have their expertise in the field of education, spatial
and technological aspects.
Experts Interviewee university
- ir. W. van `t Hoog, Senior project manager at
Hevo. Expert in the field of spatial and design
of sustainable (university) buildings.
- Mr. E. Bomas, Senior Project Manager
Innovation at Kennisnet, together with Mr. F.
Evers, Program manager Primary education
at Kennisnet. They are experts in the fields of
innovative education and technologies within
education.
- Mr. M. Mobach (WUR), expert in the field of facility management.
- Mr. H.B. Kok (WUR), expert in the field of facility management.
- Wageningen, Mrs. L. Zeeuwen, location
manager of the Forum building
- Enschede, Mrs. M. Drewes, teamleader
facilities of the Ravelijn building
- Tilburg, Mrs, M. Peeters, policy employee
Real Estate of the campus Tilburg
Table 2: Experts and the field of the experts that will be interviewed
5.3 Universities As explained in section 5.2 universities are selected by type of university. In this section information is provided
about the three selected universities.
5.3.1. University of Twente (Enschede)
The building that is investigated at the university of Twente is the Ravelijn building. In this building the faculty
of management & governance is situated, a social science study. The plans for Ravelijn started in 2006, when
the university saw and exponential growth in student numbers. They start to build in 2008 and Ravelijn was
ready to use at the end of 2010. The architect of the university had a clear direction of the purpose of the
building, the theme was ‘to meet’, he expressed this in small offices (10m2) for the staff and in the middle of
every wing of the building he designed meeting rooms and informal settings, so that people get out of the
office to meet each other. The materials used for the design are stone, copper, wood and a lot of glass, the
colours used are grey, white and red. The building is placed in the middle of the campus and is reachable by
public transport, parking lots are further away to stimulate public transport or to come by bike. The building
consists of college rooms, meeting spaces (formal and informal), computer spaces, a small catering facility,
offices for staff- and academics and a front-office that serves for three other buildings.
Kirsten van der Vaart
39
Fig. 7; impression of the university of Twente
5.3.2. University of Wageningen
The building that is investigated at the Wageningen university is the Forum building, that was finished in 2007.
In this building are 60-70% of the bachelor students situated with a social science study. Further there is also a
part of the college van Hall Larenstein and some biological spaces are provided at the top floors. The architect
was commissioned to build a monolith in a green landscape. He expressed this in a design that looks like a
castle. Around the ‘castle’, there are some ponds and the entrance has enormous columns what look like a
castle gate. Inside the building there are many open spaces, balconies and layers. The materials that are used
are glass, stone and a lot of wood and natural colours. The building consist of many facilities, according to Mrs.
Zeeuwen, location manager; ‘You can do whatever you like in this building, the only thing you can’t do, is
sleeping’. The buildings consist of many college rooms, meeting spaces, computer spaces, a large catering
facility, offices for staff (not for academics), a front-office, bookshop, cafe, bike shed (under the ground) and a
large library.
Fig. 8; impression of the university of Wageningen
5.3.3 University of Tilburg
The building that is investigated at the university of Tilburg is the Prisma building, that dates from the 70’s. A
few years ago, they combined the building next to Prisma with the existing Prisma building and they use it now
as one building for the social sciences. The buildings where build in the 70’s to serve as temporary buildings,
but ended as the base building for the social sciences. 2 years ago plans where finished to demolish the
buildings and build a complete new building. This plans stopped because of the economic crisis the university
suffered. The real estate managers took another look on the buildings and decided to make a plan to renovate
the oldest parts of the buildings. At this moment they are busy to replace the students temporary elsewhere on
the campus during the renovation, that will start soon. The building is surrounded by forest and is centred on
the university campus. In the building the catering facility is already renovated, but the other spaces are still
dated from the 70’s. The design of the building is overall a low-rise building, with one computer space, several
class rooms, staff offices and a catering facility. After they fused the buildings, the university removed the
front-office, because of needed space. According to Mrs M. Peeters, real estate employee, the building is not
representative and many complaints are coming in daily. There is no library situated in the building, because 2
Kirsten van der Vaart
40
years ago they renovate the central library, that is situated across the Prisma building.
Fig. 9; impression of the university of Tilburg
5.4 Results checklist In this section we present the results of the checklists that are used at the three universities. The key issue
checklist that is used is divided in two parts. The first part exists of the ‘core aspects’ and the second part exists
of the ‘additional aspects’ of new ways of learning. In section 1.4 the core research aspects where found as
educational, technological and spatial, to test these in practice a distinction between technology and
technology in the learning space is used. In the literature study we found literature about the additional side
aspects of new ways of learning and how to adjust this to a university in the 21st
century. These aspects are the
stakeholders; the people who use the building, organisation; how to manage new ways of learning and the last
aspect; sustainability; a trend that become more important, concerns the lifetime of a green environment. To
give a valid view, the core aspects are measured together with the additional aspects.
In the tables 3 and 4 the results of the core and additional checklists are presented.
Kirsten van der Vaart
41
Table 3: Results of the core checklist
Core ChecklistTwente Wageningen Tilburg
Educational
1. Student-centered and problem based teaching method 1 1 1
2. Stimulate and provide group work 1 1 1
3. Blended learning 1 1 1
4. Flexible scheduling 0 1 0
5. Provide all information and courses in English 0 1 0
6. Extracurricular courses in using specialized technologies for students 1 1 1
7. Provide courses in technologies for staff ? 1 1 1
8. Provide information for stakeholders about technologies? 1 1 1
9. The courses during a period are in the same building 0 0 0
10. Small classes for personalized education 0 0 0
Subscore % 60,0% 80,0% 60,0%
Spatial/design aspects
1. Flexible (movable) furniture in classrooms 0 0 1
2. Informal seatings in halls 1 1 1
3. Maximum use of natural l ight 1 1 0
4. Sound-absorbing materials 1 1 0
5. Specialised lightning considered for the activity in that area 1 1 0
6. Ability of partittions that are tackable 1 1 0
7. Shared offices for academics (for 3-6 persons) instead of single rooms 0 0 0
8. Shared offices for administrative activities instead of single rooms 1 1 1
9. Library that consists of quiet study areas and space for group work 0 0 0
10. Flexible workspaces 1 0 0
11. Quiet study areas 0 1 0
12. Areas outside the building suitable for learning activities 1 1 1
13. Learning cafe 0 0 0
14. Welcoming entrance 1 1 0
15. Small spaces that can be reserved for group work 0 0 0
16. Group work spaces provided with presentation devices 0 0 0
Subscore % 56,3% 56,3% 25,0%
Technology in the learning space
1. Make use of intranet (blackboard etc.) to provide course information 1 1 1
2. Use electronic books (e-books) 1 1 1
3. Use video conferencing via internet provided by the university 0 0 0
4. Digital l ibrary per faculty 0 0 0
5. Students producing knowledge online in databases 1 1 0
6. Class video- or audio recordings available online 1 1 0
7. Live streaming of classes via intranet 1 0 0
8. Use of electronic whiteboards in class 1 0 0
9. Use technologies for presentation during class 1 1 1
10. Digital connection to l ibrary 1 1 1
11. A calendar for teachers who are available online for questioning 0 0 0
12. A calendar for study advisors who are available online for information 0 1 0
13. Use of social media to give students feedback 1 1 1
14. Online examining 0 0 0
15. Online assessment (e.g. upload reports via intranet) 1 1 1
16. Integrated software system 1 1 0
Subscore % 69% 62,5% 37,5%
Technological aspects
1. Wireless internet available in and around the university 1 1 1
2. Link electronic devices to receive direct updates 0 0 1
3. Touchscreens provided in the building for information 0 0 0
4. Digital information provided on screens in halls 1 1 1
5. Recharging mobile devices in the library/classroom/learning cafe 0 0 0
6. Self-service book machines 0 0 0
Subscore % 33% 33% 50,0%
Kirsten van der Vaart
42
Table 4; results of the additional checklist
5.4.1. Description of the results
This chapter presents the results of the checklist in line with the 7 aspects of the core and additional checklists.
At first the results of the core checklists are presented below.
Education
The universities; Twente and Tilburg have the same score of 60% on this aspect, the university of Wageningen
scores 80%. All universities adapt the items; ‘Student centred learning methods’, ‘Group work is stimulated’,
‘Blended learning (face-to-face teaching combined with technologies)’ is adapted. At every university there is a
‘Possibility to follow extracurricular courses (e.g. Endnote or SPSS)’ and ‘Information and courses about
technologies for staff is provided by the universities’. None of the universities provide 75% of the classes of a
‘Course in one building’ and there are no ‘Small class sizes for personalized learning’. The items; ‘Provide all
information in English’ and ‘Flexible scheduling’ are only adjusted at the Wageningen university.
Spatial/design
At this aspect the universities of Wageningen and Twente results with both a score of 63,5% and the university
of Tilburg scores 25%. ‘Flexible (movable) furniture in classrooms’ is only adjusted in at the university of Tilburg.
In all universities there are at least three ‘Informal seating’s’. The university of Twente and Wageningen make
‘Maximum use of natural light in every room’, use ‘Sound-absorbing materials’, ‘Specialised lightning that can
be adjusted for the activity at that moment’ and ‘Tackable partitions’ to divide rooms in sub-spaces. The
universities do not make use for at least 80% of ‘Shared offices for academics’ (in the Forum building of
Wageningen university are no academic offices), but all universities ‘Share all administrative offices’. The
universities Twente and Tilburg do not consist of an library of the investigated buildings, both universities have
a central library on the campus. In these library multiple activities are possible. The Wageningen university do
Additional ChecklistTwente Wageningen Tilburg
Stakeholders
1. Stocktaking of demands and needs of students and teachers 1 1 1
2. Local communities make use of the university 1 1 0
3. Communicate with other universities to broaden study programs? 1 1 1
4. Parttime students 0 0 0
Subscore % 75% 75% 50%
Organisation
1. Plan for continuous sustainable ICT renewal 1 1 1
2. Include students in developing green/sustainable plans 1 1 1
3. Evaluate spatial renewals in the building by surveys 1 1 1
4. University provide information about funding and support online 1 1 1
5. Opening hours of the building at least from 8.00 until 20.00 hour 1 1 1
6. Library opening 24 hours a day 0 0 0
Subscore % 83% 83% 83%
Sustainability
1. Programmed systems to monitor water use 1 1 0
2. Programmed systems to monitor energy use 1 1 1
3. Sustainable investments 1 1 0
4. Recycling toners, cartridges, paper and hardware 1 1 1
5. Separate waste collection (plastic, paper, metal) 1 1 0
6. Recycle ICT-generated heat 0 0 0
7. Catering facil ity that serves sustainable food/drinks 0 0 0
Subscore % 83% 83% 28,6%
Total score % 64,6% 66,2% 36,9%
Kirsten van der Vaart
43
have a library within the investigated building, it only consists of quiet study areas. The university of Twente is
the only one of the three universities that consists of ‘Flexible workspaces’ and only Wageningen university
consists of ‘Quiet study areas. None of the universities consists of a ‘’Learning café’ (the university of Tilburg
has three learning café’s on the campus, but not in the Prisma building), ‘Small spaces that can be reserved for
group work’ and ‘Group workspaces provided with presentation devices’. The entrance of the universities of
Wageningen and Twente are welcoming and all universities consist of ‘Areas outside the building’, where
students can study or work (in groups).
Technology in the learning space
This aspect exists of 16 items concerning the technologies that are provided in the learning spaces of the
universities. The university of Twente results with the highest score of 69%, the second highest score is 62,5 %
for the Wageningen university and the university of Tilburg scores 37,5%. All universities score positive on the
items; ‘Make use of intranet to provide course information’, ‘Use electronic books (e-books)’, ‘Use technologies
for presentations during class’, ‘Digital connection to library’ and the possibility for ‘Online assessment’ is also
possible at all universities. None of the universities make (full) use of ‘Videoconferencing via internet provided
by the university’, a ‘Digital library per faculty’, ‘A calendar for teachers who are available online for
questioning’ and ‘Online examining’ is not possible. The universities of Twente and Wageningen use ‘Class
video- or audio recordings available online’, ‘Students producing knowledge online in a database’ and make use
of an ‘Integrated software system’. The university of Twente is the only university who use ‘Live streaming of
classes via intranet’ and use for more than 50% ‘Electronic whiteboards in class’. Wageningen university is the
only university who make use of ‘A calendar for study advisor who are available online for questioning’.
Technological aspects
At this aspect we tested the general technological aspects in within the universities. The university of Tilburg
results with the highest score of 50%, the universities of Twente and Wageningen score both 33%. All
universities make use of ‘Wireless internet’ and provide ‘Digital information on screens in the halls’. Only the
university of Tilburg make use of ‘linking electronic devices to receive direct updates’. None of the universities
make use of ‘Touchscreens in the building’, ‘A self-service book machine’ and there are no possibilities to ‘Load
mobile devices in at least two places; library, classrooms or learning café’. The universities of Twente and
Tilburg do not consists of a library nor a learning café in the building, this question is not valid in these cases.
The next three aspects are aspects of the additional checklist.
Stakeholders
This aspect consist only of 4 items, what results in a score of 75% for the universities of Twente and
Wageningen and a score of 50% for the university of Tilburg. All universities scored positive on the items;
‘Stocktaking of demands and needs of students and teachers’ and ‘Communicate with other universities to
broaden study programs’. None of the universities have possibilities for part time students and the universities
of Twente and Wageningen make use of ‘Local communities’ to expand their scientific knowledge.
Organisation
At this aspect all universities score 83% on the same items. These items are; ‘Continuous sustainable ICT
renewal’, ‘Include students in developing green/sustainable plans’, ‘Evaluate spatial renewals by surveys’,
‘Provide online information of funding and support’ and have ‘Opening hours of the building at least from 8.00
until 20.00 hour’. The only item where all universities score negative is about the ‘Library opening 24 hours a
day’.
Sustainability
At the last aspect of the additional checklist the universities of Twente and Wageningen score 83% and the
university of Tilburg score 28,6%. All universities use a ‘Programmed system to monitor energy use’ and
‘Recycle toners, cartridges and hardware’. The universities of Twente and Wageningen use a ‘Programmed
Kirsten van der Vaart
44
system to monitor the water use’, make ‘Sustainable investments’ and ‘Separate waste collection’. None of the
universities ‘Recycle ICT- generated heat’ and do not consist of a ‘Catering facility that serves for at least 50%
sustainable food/drinks’.
5.5 Results of the interviews of the universities
5.5.1 Results of the interview of the university of Twente
In this section we discuss the results of the interview, tour and the checklist of the university of Twente. The
interview was held with Mrs M. Drewes, teamleader facilities of the Ravelijn building at the university of
Twente.
The university saw an exponential growth in student numbers, for this reason the Ravelijn building is realized in
2010. As presented in section 5.3.1 the purpose and theme of the building was ‘to meet’. This results in a
design with small offices (10m2) and meeting rooms and informal seating’s in every wing of the building. The
materials within the building are based on the colours, feelings and products of the nature, this is done by light
from the ceiling and wooden frames. During the visit the grey colour and glass walls overruled the nature
colours.
After constructing the building, a problem was found, what results in climate problems. Research found out
that multiple leaks in the frontage of the buildings caused this problem. As Mrs M. Drewes stated: ‘After the
heat scan we noticed the problem was dramatic, heat flows are continue coming into the building, but leaves
even quicker. You can’t imagine how many heat we lose, we try to work on a solution now’. This problem was
detected by the system that monitor the energy use. The university is satisfied with the programme for
detecting the leak, but a solution is not found yet, while they are a university who focus on technics and
developed an own heat protected system together with the local community. The university focussing on
sustainability and try to use this all over the campus. They also use a programmed system to monitor the
energy use and sustainable investments are made in several fields, e.g. automatic light sensors. The university
developed a sort of ‘cold circle’, this circle store solar energy and will use it again to heat the buildings. For
every new investments sustainability will be included.
The educational teaching spaces are divided in two types of rooms; ‘pool’ -and ‘year’ rooms. The so-called
‘pool’ rooms can be reserved by teachers of different faculties and is done by a scheduler, the ‘year’ are rented
by the social science faculty. During the visit Mrs M. Drewes showed a special poolroom. Before the building
was designed the university asked the stakeholders about their wishes, the teachers demanded for horse-
shaped classrooms, so they construct two of these rooms. In practice, these horse-shaped rooms are not used
as they were supposed, teachers placed an extra table on the side and do not use the innovative setting.
Further, the building is not designed for every activity of students or teachers, but is designed as a part of the
campus. There is no library, quiet study places and the catering facility is small, students can go to one of the
other buildings on the campus visit these places. The purpose of this building is ‘to meet’ others, work in
groups and follow courses with a maximum size of 90 students. This year the facilities group noticed that the
major part of the offices of the staff and academics where empty most part of the day. They calculated the
hours of attendance and reorganised the offices, 110 academics and staff members are placed extra in the
offices. A part of the offices are shared, but the different groups within the faculties need to adjust, this is still
not done much. The facilities group decided not to let student rent small group work rooms. Mrs M. Drewes
states; ‘We know the students, by knowing I mean, they will rent the whole year some rooms, so there is still a
small number of rooms available. We also did not placed presentation devices in the group work rooms,
because they will break it’.
The university of Twente use multiple online technologies in the learning space. Over 50% of the courses will be
recorded and also more than 50% of the courses can be followed by live streaming via the universities intranet.
Everywhere on the campus is Wi-Fi internet available, authenticated and not authenticated and e-books are
Kirsten van der Vaart
45
promoted. The facilities group notice that there is more need for power points in the building, they are
discussing it at the moment, but at the moment the university will not realise this because of the high
investment cost.
5.5.2 Results of the interview of the university of Wageningen
In this section we discuss the results of the interview, tour and the checklist of the university of Wageningen.
The interview was held with Mrs L. Zeeuwen, location manager of the Forum building at the university of
Wageningen.
The university saw a growth in student numbers of the social sciences, explicitly the number of bachelor
students where growing. For this reasons the Forum building is realized in 2007. As presented in section 5.3.2
the purpose and theme of the building was to place a monolith building in a green landscape, a sort of castle.
Inside the building there are many open spaces, balconies and layers, with accents on natural materials and
stone. The building is a part of a campus, but provides almost all activities what the stakeholders need.
After constructing the building the university noticed details that needs adjustment. In the beginning the users
complains about the climate in the building. After the complaints Mrs L. Zeeuwen did research about this
subject and concluded that it is normal that the climate in the buildings is not optimal in the beginning, it takes
at least 3 years to have a good climate. After multiple complains the facility team was thinking about solutions
to improve the climate, when the plans were made, the complains stopped, so only small adjustments were
made. Another problem were complains about the heat in the computer rooms. Students did some research
about the heat in the rooms, it results that the measured norms were conform the rules. To serve and adjust
the PC rooms better, the facilities team removed the ‘older’ computer cases with new small cases. This results
in less heat and the complains stopped. Further, the university make use of a so-called ‘heat-cold’ storage,
together with energy saving lightning, this saves 70% of the energy use in the last 3 years.
The educational learning environment is based on meeting each other. There are multiple spaces to sit, eat and
learn. The building consists of two catering facilities and a library. The library will adjust their spaces to create
more study places. The university notice that there is more need for individual study places in the library,
students take more often their own laptops and search for places in the library with power points. The facilities
team already created more power points, but wants to create more study places by removing archive cabinets.
At first there were possibilities to work in groups, but they removed these spaces, because of the need for
more individual study places. Some rooms are adjustable for different activities, walls between computer
rooms can be removed, to give practical’s to bigger groups and some big college rooms can be used for theatre
performances. The facility teams provided partitions for multiple activities in one room, but this was not
helpful. They moved the partitions to the balconies, where open spaces are divided for group work spaces. The
balconies are situated in the middle of the building in an open atrium, this caused noise disturbance while
students working individual in silence. To use the partitions for the group work spaces, the problems were
solved. The university do not make use of movable or flexible furniture, according to Mrs L. Zeeuwen; ‘It is not
about the furniture you use, but about the materials where you can adapt the space to use it for multiple
activities, like partitions or extra beamers’. The university provides over 25% of quiet study places, but have
minimal rooms for group work. Students cannot reserve rooms for group work, because Mrs L. Zeeuwen thinks
this costs too much time. The administrative offices are shared, there are no offices for academics available in
the building, they are situated at the Leeuwenborch building.
The technologies within the universities are not optimal yet. There are possibilities for videoconferencing, only
at 4 computers in the building. Electronic whiteboards are used in some classrooms, but still minimal. Renting
of e-books is coming up and recently an online calendar of available study advisors in online. There are screens
in the hall to provide information and wireless internet is available around the building. There are no
touchscreens available and the possibilities to recharge mobile devices are not serving the needs. According to
Mrs. L. Zeeuwen it is not needed to provide more power points, she thinks there are enough, while literature
Kirsten van der Vaart
46
research show the increasing needs for this.
Further, the university include students to develop green and sustainable plans, this is in line with the
specialization of the university; life sciences. The students and researchers work often together with the local
community, an example of a project is; Food Valley, a weekend full of sustainable food innovations. The
university make use of programmed systems to monitor energy and water, separate waste and sustainable
investments are important for Wageningen university.
5.5.3 Results of the university of Tilburg
In this section we discuss the results of the interview, tour and the checklist of the university of Wageningen.
The interview was held with Mrs M. Peeters , policy employee real estate of the Tilburg campus and of the
Prisma building at the university of Tilburg.
As presented in section 5.3.3 the Prisma building dates from the 70’s and serves as a temporary building, but
ended as the base building for the social sciences. Demolishing plans were made 2 years ago, the plans stopped
because of the economic crisis. At this moment they are busy to replace the students temporary elsewhere on
the campus and renovation will start soon. The catering facility is already renovated and the building is fused
with another building to offer more space for students. According to Mrs M. Peeters, ‘the building is not
representative and many complaints are coming in daily’. Some other weaknesses of the building is pests,
climate and the maintenance, a strength of the building is the renovated catering facility and the green
environment around the building.
The university adapt student-centred, problem based teaching methods and blended learning, according to
Mrs M. Peeters, blended learning is not used optimal yet, the majority of the teachers still use chalkboards
during classes. There is a possibility to follow extracurricular classes and also information and courses about
technologies are available.
The design of the building is overall a low-rise building, with grey colours and daylight is used minimum. After
the combination of the two buildings, the front-office is removed, this results in a small and unwelcoming
entrance. There are informal seating’s realized in the halls and the catering facility and the major part of the
furniture is flexible. A learning café is not situated in the building, but can be found in three other places on the
campus. There is no library situated in the building, because there is one central library on the campus. This
library consist of places with different functions, quiet study places and group work spaces are created. In the
building are approximately 500 employees situated, who share offices together. There are no flexible
workspaces in the building, most of the student work in the computer room or at different buildings on the
campus. According to Mrs M. Peeters ‘the design of the building is old and needs renewal in the design’.
The technological service ‘SpiTs’ is situated in the Prisma building, they try to renew most of the technologies in
the building and around the campus. The internet is accessible via Wi-Fi all over the campus and the SpiTs
group is busy to make plans to record courses and put them online. For the new building they try to use the m2
efficient as possible by recording classes college rooms, this can minimize classroom sizes. According to Mrs M.
Peeters it is hard to pervade this idea in the mind of the teachers. We give acknowledgement to the teachers to
start with recording classes, but teachers give resistance to this idea. They think that students will not come to
the classes anymore and will lose the feeling of real teaching. The idea that there is a screen between student
and teacher is not accepted with the major part of the teachers. In some buildings at the university the SpiTs
group provided electronic whiteboards and use touchscreens for information. The university do have the
possibility to link mobile devices to receive updates of the university network.
During the first plans of the new building for the social sciences students are asked to investigate the needs and
demands of students. Some examples of the demands are; a place to meet, the design needs to be light and
open, clear routing, a central entrance, front-office, contact with the ‘green’ environment outside, sustainable,
multifunctional, informal meeting spaces, flexible furniture, enough power points, eat/drink and study at the
Kirsten van der Vaart
47
same space, ‘living room idea’, partitions to divide rooms and the possibility to follow classes at home
(Tubergen, 2010). These aspects are according literature demands of a 21st
century learning space and
according to Mrs M. Peeters; ‘the opposite of what we have now’.
The sustainability aspects are not implemented in all suggested elements of the checklist. There is no
programmed system to monitor water use and sustainable investments are not made. Toners, cartridges,
hardware, paper and plastic are recycled, only the metal is not collected separate. The university includes
students in developing green and sustainable plans, to use the scientific knowledge of the student in practice.
5.6 Variance analyses As we present earlier in this chapter, variances between the three universities is present. In this section we
discuss the variances of the different aspects in the universities.
Core checklist
The university of Wageningen scores the highest at the educational aspects. Compared to the other two
universities Wageningen offers flexible scheduling and all information and courses are in English. All
universities state that they are an international university, only one provide courses in English.
At the spatial and design aspects the variance between Twente/Wageningen is remarkable compared to Tilburg
university (25% compared to 56,3 % of the other two universities). During the interviews the interviewee of the
university of Tilburg showed that the building of the social sciences on the campus is very old, this results in the
lower score of this aspect. Another remarkable item is that Twente university is the only university who provide
flexible workspaces for staff and students, while all universities share all administrative offices already. The
Wageningen university is the only building that has a library and focussing on quiet study areas (over 25%),
group work is not available in the library, while the other universities offer different kind of space activities in
their central libraries. The universities of Twente and Tilburg make use of different functions all over the
campus, while Wageningen university try to provide all activities in one building.
Considering the technological aspects of the universities the university of Twente results in the highest score of
the technological aspects in the learning space (69%) and the university of Tilburg results in the highest score of
the general technological aspects (50%). Innovative is the live streaming of classes at the Twente university,
because none of the other universities provides live streaming, which is an upcoming trend. None of the
universities implemented the technologies complete, at most of the items the universities using pilots or
provide only the functions in small amounts (electronic whiteboards, video conferencing, touchscreens). None
of the universities use online agendas of teachers for students to ask questions, only Wageningen university
provides this for study advisors. The reason why Tilburg university have a higher score on the general
technological aspects is because the students can link their mobile devices to the university network to receive
updates. Notable is that the university do not use an integrated software system, this means students cannot
log in on every computer on the campus, even in the newer buildings. The scores of this aspects have the mean
of the lowest scores of the core checklist
Additional checklist
At the first aspect of this checklist the variance between the scores is not high. The university of Wageningen
and Twente make use of the local communities to share their knowledge and implement these to the society,
while the university of Tilburg do not have that strong connections with their community. At the second aspect
of the additional checklist; organisation, all universities score 83% at the same items. All universities are
opened at least 12 hours a day, none of the universities opens it library 24 hours a day. At the last aspect of this
checklist; sustainability, the results of Twente/Wageningen (both 83%) are remarkable higher than the
university of Tilburg (28,6%). The Tilburg university prepare plans for a new social sciences building, until that
time the investments, waste collecting and the water use are not organised sustainable.
Kirsten van der Vaart
48
5.7 Results of the interviews with the experts In this chapter the results of the experts are presented. The goal of the interview with the experts are to
receive the knowledge and their view on the 21st
century learning spaces, in the field of their expertise. The
educational and technological views are discussed by Mr F. Evers and Mr E. Bomas of Kennisnet and the view of
the spatial aspect is given by Mr W. Van ‘t Hoog, senior project manager at Hevo. All experts are approached by
email and asked to share their vision on the 21st
century learning space. After replying all interviewees received
an email with; the results of the investigated universities, a compact version of the research so far and
questions related to their field of research. The interviewees of Kennisnet where interested in a face-to-face
interview, which resulted in a brain storm session about the future. During this meeting no structured
questions were asked, new ideas presented by the interviewees the researcher related to the future of
universities. Mr van ‘t Hoog replied by email, with comments and advises at the checklist. In section 5.7.1 the
results of the educational and technological are given and in section 5.7.2 the results of the spatial aspect are
given.
5.7.1 Results experts view on the educational and technological aspects
In this section we discuss the views of the experts Mr E. Bomas and Mr F. Evers on the educational and
technological aspects. The purpose of the interview was to discuss the several innovations and learning
methods that are going on and how a 21st
century learning space will look like in 10 years.
The focus of Kennisnet is to function as a guide for primary schools, high schools and practical oriented studies,
how they can adjust new technologies in (new) learning methods. Last year they developed a so-called ‘21st
century skills’ format. This format is developed with students and experts in the field of education and
technologies, according to them the 21st
century skills that students need are:
- Communication
- Collaboration
- ICT knowledge
- Creativity
- Critical thinking
- Problem solving skills
- Social and cultural skills (incl. citizenship)
To possess these skills, the learning environment needs to be adjusted. According to Mr E. Bomas and Mr. F.
Evers, the ‘flipped-classroom’ method, is an ongoing process that is partly adapted in universities and can help
to develop these skills. The idea of the flipped classroom is to present the preparation for the courses online, so
during a class teachers expect already a base of knowledge of the students. The students can prepare in their
own time and in their own learning speed and teachers can check if students did prepare or not. During class
the tutorial part can be shortened and the teachers can focus more on the cognitive developments of the
students and the group work. This will give more space for questions and personalized attention of the
teachers.
Both interviewees acknowledge that at primary schools it is easier to change the learning environment then at
high schools. At the primary schools, the classes are smaller, teachers are less, more integration and the
content of the subjects are easier to combine. In high schools or in higher education they notice, that teachers
are more focused on their field of expertise and it is harder to integrate studies. Mr. E. Bomas, stated; ‘I think
that there are also possibilities to use more integration within universities, but it has to do with the creativity of
the school. At primary schools we go outside and learn in nature how trees grow, but this creativity can also be
adapted in higher education, to focus more on the research of the projects, problem-based learning’. Students
of nowadays need to be creative and independence. A good example of an innovation of Kennisnet is ‘learning-
Kirsten van der Vaart
49
analytics’. This innovative method concerns the developments of the students and marks at an exam become
less important. The idea is that technologies can help in developing the cognitive state of the students.
Computer programs are built for students to practice their subjects, if students do well exercises get more
difficult and the other way around. Teachers are able to see in this programs what the strengths and the
weaknesses are of the students. It can give a general view of the level of the students and it give the teacher
the possibilities to adapt their courses at the knowledge of the students. Technologies can help to adaptive and
personalized learning progress.
Problems that exists in these learning environments are the changing roles of the teachers and with the laws
and regulations. If students need to prepare more at home and teachers are function more as a coach, the base
of studies change. The hours teachers spend to present the materials online, are less than teaching a full day,
multiple discussions are going on this subject.
Mr. E. Bomas elaborates on some scenario’s in the future; ‘I think the focus of the place of university become
less important and the integration of universities all over the world gets more important. I see in 10 years an
integration between (inter) national universities, that students have the chance to follow online courses at any
university and that examination will be online and every student has a personalized learning path’. Mr. F. Evers
thinks a scenario where universities and higher education providers are integrated more. He see already an
integration of both levels, ‘popular professional oriented studies are already provided on universities.
Previously the norm of higher educated students in the Netherlands was 5%- 10%, now the government focus
on 50% of the people are higher educated. This is why the level of universities became lower and integrations
between the universities and higher education is already going on’. According to Mr. E. Bomas, studies need to
be more specialized, so students can learn a base knowledge, that can be expanded by a study while they are
working in a company. The disadvantage of this is when a company goes bankrupt, persons need start studying
again to specialize for another company.’
5.7.2 Results experts view spatial
In this section the results of the experts view on the spatial aspects are presented. Mr ir. W. van `t Hoog, Senior
project manager at Hevo. Expert in the field of spatial and design of sustainable (university) buildings, is
approached to give his view bout the spatial developments and about the investigated universities.
In common, Mr. van ‘t Hoog see not significant differences between the checklists and the interviews. He
presented his view of importance at the checklists at the different universities. The items of importance
according to Mr van ‘t Hoog are presented here.
High importance level
- Shared offices for academics (for 3-6 persons) instead of single rooms
- Flexible workspaces
- Quiet study areas
- Small spaces that can be reserved for group work
- Group work spaces provided with presentation devices
The weight of the presented importance items are taken into account in the discussion and conclusion.
Mr van ‘t Hoog expect that students of this century will work for the most time at home and log in on the
university network to follow online courses and namely for contact with the co-workers of the groups they
work in. According to Mr. van ‘t Hoog, students will still go the universities, but with a different purpose.
Students are coming to the university to have contact with their teachers one-on-one. An important issue is the
ability to reach the universities, students must be able to reach the university quickly from the city-centre. He
has his doubts about the campus ideas outside of the city, because it can ‘isolate’ students. The idea of the
Wageningen university to build a castle, where all facilities are included, have not he’s preferences. Mr van ‘t
Hoog argues; ‘It is probably better to integrate a city in the middle of a (big) city-centre, then to place a campus
Kirsten van der Vaart
50
somewhere outside the centre, because students are less flexible.’
6. Conclusion and discussion In this chapter we will conclude and discuss the results of the checklists , interviews, observations and
literature research. In these conclusions and discussions the questions Q1.4 What educational interventions are
needed to adapt in a 21st century learning space? Q1.5 What spatial interventions are needed to adapt to a
21st century learning space? Q1.6 What technological interventions are needed to a 21st century learning
space? Q1.7 To what extent do universities currently have adapted their learning environments to a 21st
century learning space? are answered.
After analysing all three universities by checklist, tour/observation and interview several conclusions can be
drawn from our findings. The total score of the university of Twente is 64,2%, Wageningen 66,2% and Tilburg
36,9% of a total of 100%. Before concluding the meaning of the results, a distinction between the universities
need to be made. The buildings of the universities of Twente and Wageningen are relatively new buildings
(2010,2007), whereas the building of the Tilburg university dates from the 70’s. Therefore the university of
Tilburg do not score high at the spatial/design aspect of the research (25%), it does not mean the scores on the
other aspects should be low either. In literature research we found that technology has not made many
demands on the size of renewal of learning space designs, but about the organization of the technological
adjustments in the learning space. Wireless enabled laptops and wireless networks means that any university
space, inside or outside, can now quite easily be used for ICT-based learning methods and the use of
technologies (Temple, 2007). Other results of the literature study show a need of specific design and spatial
needs to adapt on a 21st
century learning space, most of these spaces are areas who can use flexible for
different (technological driven) activities (e.g. provide open study spaces or classrooms based on technologies).
These needs are not certainly asked in the core checklist, so we can conclude that the older design of the
Prisma building at the university of Tilburg can be measured separately from the technological aspects in the
checklist. While concluding this, the scores of the university of Tilburg at the aspects; technology in the learning
space and technology are also relatively low (37,5% and 50%). For the results of the core checklists of the
university of Tilburg it means that they are only adapt their technological learning environment for 43,75%.
This result show that the possibility to adjust technologies in the learning space is not fully used, because the
adjustments on the checklist are predominantly answered with ‘no’. We showed that there is no relation
between the spatial and technological aspects and still results stay relatively low, which shows not enough
technological adjustments. Some interventions about technology in the learning space can be made, without
adjusting spatial aspect. If the university starts with audio-visual recording, live streaming and video
conferencing, technologies in the learning space will be upgraded already.
Not only the university of Tilburg can make small interventions towards audio-visual possibilities, also the
university of Wageningen do not use live streaming. During the interview at the university of Tilburg, Mrs M.
Peeters stated; “It is hard to pervade the idea of taping classes in the mind of teachers. Teachers think that
students will not come to classes anymore and that they will lose the feeling of real teaching “. These thoughts
may have a negative effect on recording classes. At the Wageningen university the teachers were also anxious
towards recording their classes, but in practice it works efficiently. Teachers thought students would attend the
classes more online than in real life, but the occupancy rate is the same as before the use of audio-visual.
Students experience these service positive. In the literature we found that live streaming of classes is already
integrated at several universities in the United Stated and the United Kingdom(JISC, 2006). Literature proves
this service is upcoming and will become more important in a 21st
century learning space. As the experts of
Kennisnet, Mr E. Bomas stated; ‘At primary schools web-based lectures are integrated and used more often,
we use the flipped-classroom. For young learners it is normal to prepare their classes at home via online
videos”. To let the teachers realize the effect of recording/live streaming classes, they can visit the
Wageningen university or university of Twente, to see the service in practice and to hear the experiences of
Kirsten van der Vaart
51
students. Practice experiences may help to change the mind-set of the teachers of the university of Tilburg. An
interesting intervention for all universities in the Netherlands, is to elaborate with each other and Kennisnet
about the future of web-based teaching, the possibilities, current use and trends.
If we look to the educational aspects of the checklist at the universities, only at the university of Wageningen
all information is provided in English, while all three stated on the website and during the interview that they
are an international oriented university. In literature study we found that more students go abroad, universities
will become more international oriented and the language need to be English. Also the experts of Kennisnet
foresee in the future more integration of following online courses between universities all over the world,
where also the mean language is English. These findings are in contrast with the results of the university of
Twente and Tilburg, where the majority of classes are given in Dutch. The investigated universities presents
they are an international oriented university, while they not use the main world language in the learning space.
This shows that the university of Twente and Tilburg are not developed to an international university, while
they present they are. These universities should not present that they are international. An intervention for the
universities of Twente and Tilburg can be; adjust all information and courses in English, to become an
international oriented university.
About the spatial aspects it is remarkably that all three universities share the offices for the administrative
functions, but academics do not share their offices (if they were situated in the building) and there is a lack of
flexible workspaces. We can conclude that universities start with sharing offices of the staff, but it does not
mean this is directly a move towards a 21st
century learning space. At the university of Twente they use shared
offices to place all staff members, because there is a lack of space and they noticed that not all offices are used
all day. It is not based on the theory of SMG (2006), to provide a non-stop-shop for students. We can conclude
that at the university of Twente shared offices are used to save costs and place all staff and not to provide a
service for students. An intervention the university of Twente should overcome is to place related services for
students together, it will improve the accessibility for students to gather information at one place.
As we saw in literature, it became normal to bring mobile devices into universities, none of the investigated
universities provide enough space or power points to use these mobile devices. If we look to the Forum
building of the Wageningen university, they already created some extra work spaces and power points, but in
the new building that is under construction, still not enough power points are created. According to Mrs L.
Zeeuwen, the need for this service will not be that high, while literature proves that there is a need. During the
interview, Mrs L. Zeeuwen stated that the university will create more study areas. An intervention the
university can overcome is to do an investigation about the needs of the number of power points and create
more. Also at the university of Twente there are less power points. According to literature it is important to
provide a learning space with enough technologies to make it possible to study, so also the university of
Twente should investigate the number of needs of power points.
The expert in the field of spatial university designs, Mr van ‘t Hoog, shows in his results the most importance
spatial aspects of the checklist within universities. The aspects with a high importance level are: shared offices
for academics, flexible work spaces, quiet study areas small spaces that can be reserved for group work and
group work spaces provided with presentation devices. Results are presented in table ?.
7. Shared offices for academics (for 3-6 persons) instead of single rooms 0 0 0
10. Flexible workspaces 1 0 0
11. Quiet study areas 0 1 0
15. Small spaces that can be reserved for group work 0 0 0
16. Group work spaces provided with presentation devices 0 0 0 Table: ? First column results of Twente, second; Wageningen, third; Tilburg
The scores on these items are relatively low. The university of Twente is the one that provides flexible
Kirsten van der Vaart
52
workspaces and the university of Wageningen is the one that focus on quiet study areas (20% - 25% of the
building). None of the investigated universities have the possibility for group work spaces, what is rated by the
expert as an important item. The experts of Kennisnet also suggested that an important item to adapt on a 21st
century learning space is flexible workspaces, where different activities can happen in one room. These should
contain; quiet study areas, spaces for group work and practice oriented areas. If we look at the literature
research multiple research confirm the need of flexible workspaces, an example of Temple (2007) “There are
opportunities when new building or remodelling takes place to provide learning spaces that seem likely to
improve the experience of learning and teaching by applying intelligent and flexible design, probably at
minimal extra cost “. These flexible spaces are needed to combine the curricula and non-curricula activities of
the students and staff. We can conclude that a 21st
century space needs multiple flexible workspaces in a
university building, while none of the investigated universities provide such spaces. An intervention for all three
investigated universities is; change traditional settings of rooms to more flexible workspaces. Practical
interventions can be; use partitions or replace solid walls to stackable walls if the rooms are small. Also open
spaces like the seating’s at catering facilities can be used to work flexible.
If we look to the sustainability aspects of the additional checklist we can conclude that all the universities of
Wageningen and Twente adjust sustainability more in their environment than Tilburg university (83%, 83% and
28,6% for Tilburg university). Sustainability is a common trend in the 21st
century learning environment, but is
worldwide not used optimal. In literature we found for example; “Many institutions start the sustainability
journey with waste reduction or energy efficiency improvements, but then do not move beyond this low-
hanging fruit”(Senge, 2008). Although the universities of Twente and Wageningen score relatively high on this
aspect, a more comprehensive approach may be needed. An intervention for these universities could be; reuse
ICT generated heat. Tilburg university may adjust sustainable aspects with starting renovations our at the start
of the new building plan (Senge, 2008). All three universities may improve their catering facility with
sustainable products.
Overall, in this research we can conclude that Wageningen university and the university of Twente adapted
some of the adjustments of a 21st
century learning space and the university of Tilburg did this only slightly. Now
we can discuss the purpose of the adjustments the universities made. According to Mr Evers; “The adjustments
that were made to the investigated universities, where probably done with the idea of ‘we got some money
left for it, so let’s do this adjustment’, but not with the purpose to invest in the learning environment”’.
Kennisnet notice that many universities adjust some ideas of a 21st
century learning space, but mostly with the
intention to save costs and to provide a ‘nice building’, not for the need of the students. At primary schools this
focus is changing towards more 21st
century learning environments, while universities stay behind. This
argument is confirmed within the relatively new buildings of the universities of Twente and Wageningen. Most
spaces within the buildings are designed for teaching or studying, but not for the mixed activities and needs of
the students (e.g. learning café, flexible workspaces). The Forum and Ravelijn building exists for major part of
the vision of the architects and of the board of the universities view; to have a good-looking building at minimal
costs to attract students. We can conclude that the mind-set of these universities are slightly moving towards
the change in the learning environment, especially changes at technologies in the learning spaces are
upcoming, but they are not adjusted yet to a 21st
century learning space.
These conclusions answers the specific research questions Q1.4 until Q1.7. The main reason question: “What
technological-spatial interventions can and do Dutch universities commit to make their learning environment fit
to a 21st
century learning space?” answer is derived from the results of the specific research questions. To
make a learning environment within universities fit to a 21st
century learning space, universities need to create
flexible workspaces for students; learning café, small spaces for group work, spaces with multiple purposes at
the same time, quiet study areas and shared offices (non-stop-shop). These spatial interventions need to be
combined with the technology in the learning space; electronic whiteboards, live streaming (and recording) of
classes, Mlearning, enough power points, use of technologies in the class by teachers and web-based learning.
Kirsten van der Vaart
53
Important for the technological aspects is a transparent intranet with the needed possibilities ( e.g. online;
library (e-books), agenda of study advisors/teachers and easy access to the needed information students need),
the adjustment of all stakeholders within a university and their environment.
7. Managerial implications In this chapter we go in-depth of the managerial implications of the needed interventions, what this research
mean for the universities in practice and in section 8.1 further research will be explained.
As already presented at the end of chapter 6, results show there is a need for flexible workspaces, combined
with innovative technologies and suitable web-based and student-centred teaching methods. To adjust the
three variables; education, spatial and technology in the learning space, a well-balanced combination between
these three variables is needed to provide a 21st
century learning space. In the investigated universities there is
some awareness and adjustment of the three variables. To create an environment that fits within a university
the awareness of the need of adjustment must be present. These awareness can be enlarged considering the
the additional variables; stakeholders, organisation and sustainability. These additional variables are needed to
apply the ‘balance’ between the three core variables; education, spatial and technology. Universities in the
Netherlands can use this research to improve their adjustments.
Awareness
At first universities needs a some stakeholders at the board of the university that are aware of the need of
adjustment of the learning space. To help changing the mind-set and to create the awareness of the board
members, results of this research (checklist, result investigated universities) and further research (e.g. JISC
(2006), Temple, (2007), Jamieson (2000,2003) or other sources from the reference list) can be used. The
‘stakeholders’ is the important variable at this phase, because they need to get the adjustment done. It is
useful to ask the stakeholders within the university (learners, teachers, staff) about their needs and to connect
with the local community for collaboration (sustainable projects) and general awareness in the environment of
the learning space.
Focus
If the awareness is present, the role of ‘organization’, will enlarge. To implement the awareness a group of
mixed stakeholders (teachers, students, experts in the fields of the core variables, facility managers, staff,
architects, constructors and the local community) needs to be established. They need to organize subgroups of;
educational, spatial and technological aspects and need to integrate their ideas and plans. To test how far
these variables are adjusted to a 21st
century learning space, the checklist in annex ? can be used to measure
the level of adjustment.
Education
At the educational aspect a focus is needed on methods; web-based teaching, student-centred teaching,
problem-based methods. The second focus needs to be on the stakeholders; more international students,
organise workshops for teachers (changing role teachers advisor/coach), change of student time and
network with universities and student organisations. Information: provide everything in English, online
information, share with local communities and other stakeholders. Integrate technologies in the education:
Mlearning, virtual learning environment, needed technologies educational software (information Kennisnet,
annex ? for interview). Spaces: adjustable spaces for teaching.
Technologies
Consider the needed technologies for the educational aspects: methods, materials and (online) information.
Provide in materials for audio-visual services, innovative teaching technologies (e.g. electronic whiteboards)
Wi-Fi network, accessibility of the network/intranet, Mlearning and adjustments for technologies in the spaces.
Develop, use and introduce sustainable technologies in- and outside the learning space (programmes to
Kirsten van der Vaart
54
monitor energy- and water use, generate ICT heat)
Spatial
Use the elements presented at the parts of this chapter about educational and technologies and create flexible
workspaces. Create a learning café, library (consist of different activities such as group work and quiet study
spaces), provide informal seating’s, provide spaces outside the university and of campus to function as study
space, share offices and create flexible workspaces (with enough power points in whole building). Several
guidelines to improve the university space use by activities are; Design space for multiple uses concurrently an
consecutively, design to maximize the inherent flexibility within each space, design to make use of the vertical
dimension in facilities:, design to integrate campus functions, design features and functions to maximize
teacher and student control:, design to maximize alignment of different curricula activities, design to maximize
student access to, and use and ownership of, the learning environment. Design spaces with durable materials
and sustainable technologies (automatic light sensors, stone floors, natural lightning), contract architect from
the beginning of the processes, to create the awareness and need of the function of a 21st
century learning
space.
Implications
Develop an integrated plan with the educational, technological and spatial needs. Create awareness of the plan
under all stakeholders and start with renewals in the core variables, make decisions (renovate/new building,
incremental/radical innovations) and start the plan to fit the learning environment in a 21st
century learning
space.
7.1 Further research We have done research at three out of the 14 universities situated in the Netherlands at the three different
types (general; Tilburg, technical; Twente, specialized Wageningen). To give an overall view of the fit of
universities in the Netherlands to a 21st
century learning environment, further research is needed. Research is
needed in more universities of the general and technical universities. Also the research is done qualitatively at
universities in the Netherlands, because there is a lack of literature of the adjustments to a 21st
century
learning environment in the Netherlands. Neither are there qualitative results about the adjustment of
universities, this needs further research.
This research can use as base to check the adjustment of a university. For further implementation of new ways
of learning in a 21st
century additional information about the research variables, university itself and
environment is needed.
Kirsten van der Vaart
55
Reference
Ackoff, R.L. & Greenberg, D (2008), Turning Learning Right Side Up: Putting Education Back on Track. Publishing as Prentice Hall, Upper Sadle River, New Jersey. Altbach, P.G. (1988). Forum Comparative Perspectives on Higher Education for the Twenty-first Century. Higher Education Policy 11 (4): 346-56 Astleinter, H. (2003) WEB-BASED INSTRUCTION AND LEARING: what do we know from experimental research? Towards the virtual university: international online perspectives.
Banham, R. (1976). Megastructure: Urban Futures of the Recent Past. London: Thames and Hudson
Barr, R.B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning. Change, 27(6), 13-25
Baty, P. (2007). ‘Open-plan risk to collegiality’. The times higher education supplement. March 16th
, p.2.
Beck, R.H. (2009). The Three R’s Plus: What Today’s Schools are Trying to Do and Why. U of Minnesota Press. Pp. 3-6.
BECTA (2003). What the research says about portable ICT devices in learning and teaching. 2003. Retrieved on
03-04-2012, from: http://www.becta.org.uk/research/reports/docs/wtrs_porticts.pdf
Bennet, S. (2006). First Questions for Designing Higher Education Learning Spaces. The Journal of Academic
Librarianship. Volume 33, number 1, 14-26
Bickle, P. (2001). Architecture Australia, 90, 48–51.
Biocchi, M. (2011). "Games in the Classroom". Gaming in the Classroom. http://educationtech.ca/2011/03/24/games-in-the-classroom/. Retrieved 24 March 2012.
Blackburn, W.R. (2007). The sustainability handbook. Washington, DC: Environmental Law Institute. Bradwell, P. (2009). The edgeless university: Why higher education must embrace technology. Demos, London.
Brasser, B. (2012) Ipad-basisschool komt dichterbij. Published at the free newspaper; Metro Netherlands. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://www.metronieuws.nl/nieuws/ipad.../SrZlcA!boEtEQWVHHxH2/
Brown, M. (2005). “Learning Spaces”, in Educating the Net Generation, D. G. Oblinger and J. L. Oblinger, eds. Retrieved January 12, 2012, from http://www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces/6072
Brown M.B., Lippincott, J.K. (2003). Learning spaces: More than Meets the Eye. Educase quarterly, number 1, 2003.
Bruinsma, M. (2003), “Effectiveness of higher education: factors that determine outcome of “university education”, PhD thesis, Rijksuniversiteit, Groningen. Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Chism, N. (2006). Challenging traditional assumptions an rethinking learning spaces. In Learning spaces, ed. D. Oblinger. Washingon, DC: Educause
Cobban, A.B. (1992). Universities: 100-1500. In The Encyclopedia of Higher Education, eds. B.R. Clark and G.R. Neave, 1245-51. Oxford: Pergamon
Cox, A.M. (2011). Students’ Experience of University Space: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Sheffield University. Volume 23, number 2. 197-207
Daniel, J. (1998). Mega-universities and knowledge media: technology strategies for higher education. London:
Kirsten van der Vaart
56
Kogan Page.
Dearing R., (1996) Report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (London, DfEE publications centre). Retrieved on 20
th of March 2012. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/ncihe/
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi. pp. 1–5.
Dronkers, J. (1993). Educational Reform in the Netherlands: Did It Change the Impact of Parental Occupation and Education? Sociology of Education, Vol 66, No. 4 (Oct., 1993), 262-277 DUO (2012) Wetsvoorstel “Studeren is investeren”. Retrieved on 20th of March 2012. http://www.ib-
groep.nl/particulieren/themas/overheidsplannen_voor_studiefinanciering.asp#Overzicht_maatregelen_wetsvo
orstel_‘Studeren_is_investeren’
Edwards, B. (2000). Uniersity architecture. London: Spon Press Filius, R. & Kresin, F. (2010). ICT als ondersteuning van onderwijs, opleiden en leren: wat staat ons te wachten?
In Handboek effectief opleiden. 58-89
Foster, J. (2000). "Virtual Universities – Institutional Issues for Information Professionals". Jonathan Foster, looks at the institutional implications of networked approaches to learning. Ariadne, issue 25, Sep 2000
Fort, M. (2006). Educational Reforms Across Europe: A Toolbox for Empirical Research. First edition. University
of Padova
Greenwood, P. M. (2007). Functional plasticity in cognitive aging: Review and hypothesis. Neuropsychology, 21, 657–673. JISC. (2006). Designing Spaces for Effective Learning – A Guide To 21
st Century Space Design. Retrieved January
11, 2012, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/learningspaces.pdf
Hashimshony, R. & Haina, J. (2006). Designing the University of the Future. Society for College and University
Planning (SCUP). Planning for Higher Education.
Hunley S. &Schaller M. (2009) Assessment: The Key to Creating Spaces That Promote Learning. EDUCAUSE
Review, vol. 44, no. 2 (March/April 2009): 26-36
Hutchinson, L. (2003) Clinical review ABC of learning and teaching. Educational environment. Published at 12
April, 2003.
Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P., & Trevitt, A. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning
environments. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 221-236
Jamieson, P., (2003). ‘Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning spaces: a role for academic
developers’. International Journal for Academic Development, 8, 119-33.
Jansen, E.P.W.A. (1996), “Curriculumorganisatie en studievoortgang” (“Curriculum organisation and study progress”), PhD thesis, GION, Groningen. Kearney, P. (1991) College Teacher Misbehaviors: What Students Don. Communication Quarterly39(4):309-24. Keefe, J.W., & Jenkins, J.M. (2000) Personalized instruction: Changing classroom practice. Larchmont: Eye On Education, Inc. Kerr, C. (1995). The Uses of the University. 4
th edition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Kerr, C. (2001). The uses of the university. 3th
edition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kirsten van der Vaart
57
King, H. (2000). The academic library in the 21
st century – what need for a physical place? International
Association of Technological University Libraries (IATUL), Brisbane, Australia
King, P. & Mayhew, M. (2004). Theory and research on the development of moral reasoning among college students. Higher Educaton: Handbook of Theory and Research, 19, 375-440. Kok, H.B., Mobach, M.P., Omta, O.S.W.F. (2011) The added value of facility management in the educational
environment. FM in the educational environment. Journal of Facilities Management, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 249-265
Kuh, G., Kinzie. J., Schuh, J., Whitt. E. (2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bas
Lefebvre, H. (2010). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell
Lehner, F., H. Nösekabel, et al. (2002). Wireless E-Learning and Communication Environment - WELCOME at the
University of Regensburg. 2002. Retreived on 03-04-2012: http://www-
mobile.uniregensburg.de/freiedokumente/Submission/WELCOME.pdf
Lippincot, J. (2006). ‘Linking the information commoncs to learning’. In D. Oblinger (ed.), learning spaces.
Washington, DC: Educause
Marmot Associates (2006). Spaces for learning: A review of learning spaces in further and higher education.
Retrieved March 26th
, 2012. Hhtp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/Resources/external-resources/sfc-spaces-for-
learning
MCEETYA (2008). Learning spaces framework. Learning in an online world. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (Australia and New Zealand). McConnell, J., & Alexander, K. (2012). A servicescape for learning: theoretical foundations and practical implications. 11
th EuroFM Research Symposium: Added Value delivered by FM.
McGrath, D. (2003). Artifacts and Understanding. Learning & Leading with Technology, Feb. 2003. Vol. 30, No. 5
McParlan, M., Noble, L.M., Livingston, G. (2004). The effectiveness of problem-based learning compared to traditional teaching in undergraduate psychiatry. Medical education 2004, 38; 859-867. Blackwell Publishing ltd.
Merkel, J. & Litten, L. (2007). The sustainability challenge. New Directions for Institutional Research, 134, 7-25.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. (Reissued in soft cover, 1991. Translated into Swedish and Korean.)
Milne, Andrew J. (2006). “Designing Blended Learning Space to the Student Experience.” Chapter 11 in Oblinger, D. (ed.). Learning Space Design. Retrieved January 23, 2012, from http://www.educause.edu/learningspacesch11
Monahan, T. (2002) “Flexible Space and Built Pedagogy: Emerging IT Embodiments,” Inventio, vol. 4, no. 1. More, J. (2005). Seven recommendations for creating sustainability education at the university level A guide for change agents. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 326-339. Emerald Group Publishing Limited National Academy of Education (2009). Standards, assessments and accountability. Education policy white paper.
Oblinger, D.G. (2006). Learning Spaces. Educause. Retrieved March 6th, 2012.
Kirsten van der Vaart
58
www.educause.edu/LearningSpaces O’Malley, C., Vavoula, G., Glew, J., Sharples, M., Lefrere, P. (2003) WP 4 – GUIDELINES FOR LEARNING/TEACHING/TUTORING IN A MOBILE ENVIRONMENT. MOBIlearn/UoN,UoB,OU/D4.1/1.0 Osterbeek, H. & Webbink D, (2004). Wage Effects of an Extra Year of Lower Vocational Education: Evidence from a Similtaneous Change of Compulsory School Leaving Age and Program Length. Unpublished, March 2004.
Partnership for 21st
century skills, (2009). 21st
century Learning Environments.
Pink, D.H. (2006) A whole new mind. United States of America: Riverhead Books. Plug, E. J. S.(2001) Season of Birth, Schooling and Earnings. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22:641– 660. Rees, W. (2003), “Impeding sustainability? The ecological footprint of higher education”, Planning for Higher Education, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 88-98. Reeves, T. C. (1998). The Impact of Media and Technology in Schools
Richey, R.C. (2008). Reflections on the 2008 AECT Definitions of the Field. TechTrends. 52(1) 24-25
Saettler, P. (1990). The evolution of american educational technology. Englewood, CO; Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Schuddeboom, J. (2011), De Luie Leraar; Joost van Oort flipt de classroom. Retrieved January 13, 2012 http://jordenschuddeboom.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/joost-van-oort-flipt-de-classroom/ Senge, P. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York: Doubleday. Sharp, L. (2002). Green campuses: The road from little victories to systemic transformation. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(2), 128-145. Simons, R.J., van der Linden, A.A.M., van der Linden, J., & Duffy, T. (2000) New learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer academics publishers. Slater, J. (2005). Spent force or revolution in progress?: eLearning after the eUniveristy Oxford: Higher
education Policy Institute
Smith, L. (1999). The future of technology in teaching – teachers need to learn more about teaching computer
skills. USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), March 1999.
Smith, T. (2003). Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) in Education (CSD2724): Joint Information Systems Committee.
Soloway, E., Norris, C., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., and Marx, R. (2001). Log on education: Handheld devices are ready-at-hand. CACM 44(6), pg 15-20.
Sun associates (1997). A Project-Based Learning Activity About Project-Based Learning. Updated at 3-2-2012. Retrieved on 6 March 2012. http://www.sun-associates.com/lynn/pbl/pbl.html#3 TCET, (2010). History of educational technology by the Texas Center for Educational Technology. Rertrieved on 20 May 2012. http://www.tcet.unt.edu/weblibrary2/overview/?id=33&PHPSESSID=1f41402407f2621f9827509fa7a8d6e8 Temple, P. & Barnett R. (2007). Higher education space: Future directions. Planning for Higher education. 36(1),
Kirsten van der Vaart
59
5-15 Temple, P. (2007). Learning spaces for the 21
st century: A review of the Literature, Higher education Academy,
New York. Temple, P (2008). Learning spaces in higher education: an under-researched topic. London Review of Education, Routledge, London. Volume 6, number 3, November 2008, 229-241.
The United States Chamber of Commerce and the center for American Progress (2007). Joint Platform for Education Reform. Center for American Progress.
Toynbee Wilson, (2002). “HEFCE Strategic Plan 206-11”, Higher Education Funding Council, UK.
Tremblay, E. (2010) "Educating the Mobile Generation – using personal cell phones as audience response systems in post-secondary science teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 2010, 29(2), 217-227. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.". http://editlib.org/p/32314. Retrieved at 29-03-2012.
Vaus de, D. (2001). Research design in social research, SAGE Publications Ltd
Verschuren, P. & Doorewaard, H. (2010). Designing a research project. 2nd edition, Boom Lemma publishers.
VSNU (2011). Alle 14 universiteiten. Retrieved on 10th
of January 2012).
http://www.vsnu.nl/Universiteiten/Alle-universiteiten.htm
Waldeck, J. (2007). Answering the question: Student perceptions of personalized education and the construct’s
relationship to learning outcomes. Communication Education 56(4):409-432
Wheeler, S. (2001) Information and communication technologies and the changing role of the teacher. Journal of Educational Media 26(1):7-17.
Whiteside, A. and Fitzgerald, S. (2008). Designing Spaces for Active Learning. Retrieved January 23, 2012, from http://www.informedesign.umn.edu/_news/jan_v07r-pr.2.pdf
Wordcloud, http://stevevosloo.com/2008/11/
Yin, R.K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Third Edition, Applied Social Research Methods
Series, Vol 5
Zemsky, R., Wegner, G. & Massy, W. (2005). Remaking the American university: Marketsmart and mission-centered. Pitscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Kirsten van der Vaart
60
Annex 1: Key issue checklist
Checklist Tilburg University
Core aspects of a 21st century learning space
Education aspects Yes No
1. Student-centred and problem based teaching method Students are instructed to solve and study by themselves, instead of only learning from
books
2. Stimulate and provide group work Teachers are instructed to give at least one group work assignment during a course
3. Blended learning Face-to-face communication mixed with ICT during a course
4. Flexible scheduling Students have the choice in at least 75% of the periods to choose their courses
5. Provide all information and courses in English
6. Extracurricular courses in using specialized technologies for students At least one course in: how to use Endnote or the statistical program SPSS
7. Provide courses for teachers, librarians, researchers and other staff about technologies?
At least one course how to deal with the intranet and additional software
8. Provide information for teachers, librarians, researchers and other staff about technologies?
There is at least one channel (e.g. papers or intranet) how to use the technologies
within the university
9. The courses during a period are in the same building At least 75% of the courses are in the same building
10. Small classes for personalized education Classrooms or courses for maximum 30 students for at least one course in a period
Design/spatial aspects Yes No
1. Flexible (movable) furniture in classrooms Easily transferable furniture that is certificated
2. Informal seating’s in halls At least 3 lounge places in the building (e.g. couch or flexible chairs for relaxing)
3. Maximum use of natural light Every room has at least one side full of windows or ceiling windows
Kirsten van der Vaart
61
4. Sound-absorbing materials At floors, walls and ceilings (at least 2 of these items)
5. Specialised lightning considered for the activity in that area At least one example of an area or room in the building that can be shown
6. Ability of partitions that are tackable Sound absorbing panels available in open learning spaces
7. Shared offices for academics (for 3-6 persons) instead of single rooms At least 80% of the offices need to be shared
8. Shared offices for administrative activities instead of single rooms All administrative offices need to be shared with at least 2 persons
9. Library that consists of quiet study areas and space for group work At least 2 different activity spaces in the library
10. Flexible workspaces At least one area with flexible workspaces who can be used by staff and teachers
11. Quiet study areas At least a number of spaces for 10% of the number of students that officially are
located in the building
12. Areas outside the building suitable for individual or small group activities Show at least one spot outside that is suitable (e.g. pick nick tables)
13. Learning cafe where it is possible to eat/drink and learning, but also available for group work
Show the possibility for these activities in the café
14. Welcoming entrance The building has a front-office in the entrance, signs for routing are presented at the
front
15. Small spaces that can be reserved for group work At least a number of spaces for 10% of the number of students that officially are
located in the building, small spaces are at least for 4 persons.
16. Group work spaces provided with presentation devices (e.g. beamer, electronic whiteboard)
Technology in the learning space Yes No
1. Make use of intranet (blackboard etc.) to provide course information Every course need to have their own page on the intranet
2. Use electronic books (e-books) The university provides software and literature for e-books
3. Use video conferencing via internet provided by the university Video conferencing must be possible on every computer within the university
Kirsten van der Vaart
62
4. Digital library per faculty Share and upload knowledge by the university (reports, articles etc.) per faculty
5. Students producing knowledge online in databases At least 1 online channel
6. Class video- or audio recordings available online At least for 50% of a course
7. Live streaming of classes via intranet At least for 50% of a course
8. Use of electronic whiteboards in class At least for 50% of a course (e.g. during practical’s)
9. Use technologies for presentation during class At least the possibility to present on a beamer
10. Digital connection to library
(e.g. to reserve books, papers or extend loan duration)
11. A calendar for teachers who are available online for feedback and questions At least one teacher for a course
12. A calendar for study advisors who are available online for information and questions
At least one study advisor
13. Use of social media to give students feedback At least for internships or studies outside the university (e.g. facebook, msn, twitter,
skype or other social media programs)
14. Online examining The availability for students who follow an internship or course outside the university
15. Online assessment (e.g. upload reports via intranet) At least for every course
16. Integrated software system
Technological aspects Yes No
1. Wireless internet available in and around the university Authenticated
2. Link electronic devices (e.g. mobile to university network) to receive direct updates
3. Touchscreens provided in the building for information At least nearby the entrance
4. Digital information provided on screens in halls
5. Possibility for recharging mobile devices in the library, classroom and learning cafe
At least 1 power-point per 2 students in 2 of the named areas
Kirsten van der Vaart
63
6. Self-service book machines (a machine that is used in libraries to pick electronic the selected books out of the
digital catalogue)
Checklist
Additional aspects of a 21st century learning space
Stakeholders Yes No
1. Stocktaking of demands and needs of students and teachers (e.g. in technologies, education, spatial preferences)
2. Local communities make use of the university The knowledge of the research what is done in the university will be used in local
projects, give one example
3. Communicate with other universities (inter)national to broaden study programs of students?
At least one website page on the intranet must show the connection between
universities
4. Part-time students Students who follow only distance learning (no physical attendance)
Organisation Yes No
1. Plan for continuous sustainable ICT renewal At least every half year the plan will be discussed and renewed
2. Include students in developing green/sustainable plans At least include students with a study background that focus on sustainability
3. Evaluate spatial renewals in the building by surveys At least evaluate after a renewal with a survey among students and staff randomly
4. University provide information about funding and support online At least on website page on the university website provides information about funding
and support
5. Opening hours of the building at least from 8.00 until 20.00 hour Outside working hours is the building accessible with a university card
6. Library opening 24 hours a day Outside working hours is the library accessible with a university card
Sustainability
1. Programmed systems to monitor water use
2. Programmed systems to monitor energy use
Kirsten van der Vaart
64
3. Sustainable investments At least one example of sustainable investments (higher costs investment than not
sustainable investment)
4. Recycling toners, cartridges, paper and hardware At least 2 of the named items will be recycled
5. Separate waste collection (plastic, paper, metal) Show it
6. Recycle ICT-generated heat Show it
7. Catering facility that serves sustainable food/drinks At least 50% of the assortment needs to have sustainable certificates (e.g. Fair Trade,
Max Havelaar)
Kirsten van der Vaart
65
Annex 2: Interview University of Twente
Persoon: Mevr. Martine Drewes
Functie: Facilitair teamleider Universiteit Twente
Locatie: Ravelijn gebouw, Enschede
Tijd/data: 10.30 – 12.00 uur, 25 april 2012
1. Hoe lang bent u al werkzaam als facilitair teamleider?
2. Wat is uw achtergrond? (studie, werk)
3. Wanneer is dit gebouw opgeleverd?
4. Hoe lang heeft de bouw geduurd?
5. Hoe lang hebben de voorbereidingen geduurd? Welke partijen betrokken?
6. Wat waren de richtlijnen voor dit gebouw?
7. Welke faculteiten zitten hier gevestigd?
8. Hoeveel studenten zitten er in dit gebouw?
9. Voldoen de richtlijnen aan het gebruik in de praktijk? (constructief, technologisch, facilitair)
10. Sterktes van het gebouw?
11. Zwaktes van het gebouw?
Checklist introduceren en doorlopen met mevrouw Drewes, opmerkingen noteren, vragen om rondleiding.
MD: Toen ik binnenkwam was de functie als teamleider nog niet ontwikkeld, toen heb ik heel veel functies
gedaan zoals inkoop en verschillende projecten. Ondertussen groeide al wel de huismeesters door als
teamleiders, maar je merkte toch wel duidelijk een niveau verschil. Na een tijdje kwam er alsnog weer een
functie vrij als facilitair teamleider waarnaar ik heb gesolliciteerd, en daar ben ik toen voor aangenomen. En
afgelopen anderhalf jaar is de functie heel erg gegroeid, we zijn nu met 4 teamleiders over de hele campus. De
functie is veel meer ontwikkeld op tactisch niveau.
MD: Zelf heb ik ook facility management op Saxion in Deventer gevolgd. Ik wou eigenlijk niet in de facilitaire
wereld werken, maar toch vind ik het wel erg leuk. Ik heb nog getwijfeld om een master te volgen, maar ik zag
hier geen toegevoegde waarde in.
Kirsten: Introduceren van opdracht
Kirsten: Ik geloof dat de bouw in 2010 is opgeleverd?
MD: Ja inderdaad eind 2010
Kirsten: Hoe lang heeft de bouw geduurd?
MD: Lastig te zeggen, want de sloop van het oude gebouw heeft langer geduurd, omdat er vleermuizen in het
oude gebouw zaten. Zelf was ik toen nog niet werkzaam hier, maar volgens mij zijn de plannen in 2006
gemaakt en is uiteindelijk het pand in 2008 gesloopt en is de bouw gestart.
MD: We hebben heel veel bouwplannen tegelijk gemaakt, dus het is moeilijk te zeggen hoe lang de plannen
voor Ravelijn heeft geduurd.
Kirsten: En welke bedrijven waren betrokken bij de nieuwbouw?
MD: De universiteit heeft een eigen vastgoed groep opgericht, Drienerlo vastgoedgroep, omdat er meerder
Kirsten van der Vaart
66
nieuwbouwplannen nodig waren, hebben we hier een apart bedrijf voor opgericht, om dit zo goed mogelijk te
laten verlopen. Dit bedrijf is begin dit jaar weer opgeheven en geïntegreerd in facilitaire diensten en het
vastgoed beheer.
Kirsten: En in deze vastgoed groep, welke partijen waren hierin betrokken? Was de facilitaire dienst hier ook al
in betrokken vanaf het begin, of pas later?
MD: In dit traject zijn wij als FM vrij laat ingestapt, in 2009 ben ik zelf in dit plan ingestapt en toen was het
facilitaire team nog maar net een paar maanden ingetreden, dus de bouw was al begonnen. Eigenlijk vind ik dat
we eerder aan de tafel moeten zitten qua functioneel gebouw, maar met techniek zaten we er wel eerder bij.
Kirsten: En waren er verder nog bepaalde richtlijnen opgesteld voor het ontwerp van dit gebouw?
MD: Jazeker, heel duidelijk; ontmoeten. De architect heeft samen met de faculteit overlegd. De kantoren zijn
daarom ook vrij klein gehouden, maximaal 10m2, zodat hier niet veel overlegd kan worden. Daarom is er in
elke vleugel en verdieping een middenstrook gebouwd, met daarin ontmoetingsplaatsen, voor zowel
vergaderingen als informele gesprekken, deze dienen ook als werkplekken voor studenten. Dit is gedaan om de
mensen uit de kantoren te krijgen en te ontmoeten. Alleen bepaalde kantoren voor hoogleraren en HR zijn
ingericht met een mogelijkheid om gesprekken te voeren, omdat dit nog wel eens gevoelige zaken betreft. Dat
zijn de uitzonderingen.
Kirsten: En qua design? Was dit ook het doel ontmoeten?
MD: Nou nee niet speciaal. De architect heeft dit ontwerp bedacht en hij houd erg van natuurtinten en kleuren.
Je kunt dit zien in de houten kozijnen, maar ook in het vele lichtinval, dat kan je straks tijdens de rondleiding
wel zien. In het middenstuk is veel koper en er is veel rust met grijs en rode kleuren en beton.
Kirsten: Welke faculteit zit hier precies?
MD: Faculteit management en bestuur, en deze faculteit is de laatste jaren erg gegroeid. Daarom zijn we nu
moeten uitwijken naar een ander gebouw. Daarom is er een bezettingsonderzoek gedaan en door nieuwe
normen kunnen er nu nieuwe werkplekken worden gecreëerd.
Kirsten: En als je verder kijkt naar het gebouw in de praktijk, zijn er daar nog problemen in? Qua geluid of
klimaat etc.?
MD: Er is een probleem in de bouw geconstateerd, we hebben al heel lang een klimaatprobleem. In de zomer
was het heel koud of juist weer heel heet, dus dat klopt niet. We hebben ruimtevoelers in elke ruimte voor
warmtes en dit was soms maar 3 graden. Nu blijkt dat er een lek in gevel is, we hebben een warmte scan
gemaakt van het gebouw en nu blijkt dat dit echt dramatisch is. De warmte stromen komen continue in het
gebouw maar verdwijnen ook weer, door een lekke gevel. Nu wordt er naar een oplossing gezocht om dit op te
lossen. Het is echt schrikbarend hoeveel warmte verloren gaat. Verder zijn er nog fouten in de vloeren, de
vloeren waren niet in de was gezet terwijl dit wel beloofd was, na het inhuizen kwamen we hier pas achter. In
de vakanties hebben we dit elke keer gedaan, maar het is zoveel extra werk. Ook het koper geeft problemen,
alles zie je erop, dit is een hel om schoon te maken.
Kirsten: Oke, dit waren de algemene vragen, graag zou ik nu verder willen gaan met de opgestelde checklist die
u heeft ontvangen. Vind u het goed als we deze nu doornemen?
MD: Qua, onderwijs weet ik niet zo heel veel. Ik weet wel dat er nu een nieuw onderwijssysteem wordt
bedacht, er komen bijvoorbeeld 4 blokken van 10 weken, dit geeft een hele impact in het gebruik. Zo wordt het
bindend studieadvies strenger en het projectonderwijs wordt steeds meer gestimuleerd. In 2013 gaan we
hiermee starten. Verder wordt er een pilot gedaan nu bij de faculteit biologie naar project gerelateerd
Kirsten van der Vaart
67
onderwijs.
Kirsten: Maar wordt er nu al project onderwijs toegepast?
MD: Dit verschilt heel erg per faculteit. In deze faculteit heb je ‘pool’ zalen en ‘jaargang’ zalen. De
poolgangzalen worden gereserveerd door de docenten, zij geven aan hoeveel tijd en zalen ze nodig hebben en
dit wordt algemeen ingeroosterd. De jaargang zalen zijn van de faculteit zelf, structureel huurt, deze zetten ze
zelf ook in. In die ruimtes zijn ook scheidingswanden zodat de docent langs kan lopen. Dus deze faculteit
gebruikt al redelijk probleem gestuurd leren, het grootste deel wel.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder groepswerk gestimuleerd?
MD: Ja de meeste vakken zijn zo ingericht?
Kirsten: Wordt er gebruik gemaakt van blended learning?
MD: Ja, er zijn 2 zalen waar computers aanwezig zijn en soms dienen de studenten laptops mee te nemen
tijdens lessen
Kirsten: En als je kijkt naar de roostering, hebben studenten de vrijheid om elk semester of periode hun eigen
vakken in te delen?
MD: Dat denk ik niet, volgens mij staan deze vast. (later via het informatiecentrum van de universiteit Twente
te horen gekregen dat dit inderdaad niet mogelijk is.)
Kirsten: Wordt alle informatie in het Engels aangeboden?
MD: Nee, volgens mij niet.
Kirsten: Want zijn de lessen hier ook voornamelijk in het Nederlands?
MD: Ja, het merendeel wel, de boeken zijn wel eens in het Engels, maar verder blijven we best veel lessen en
informatie verstrekken in het Nederlands. Ook in het nieuwe leermodel worden wel enkele bachelor brede
vakken aangeboden in het Engels, maar nog lang niet alle vakken.
Kirsten: Zijn er extra lessen aanwezig om SPPS of Endnote te volgen.
MD: Ja, ik weet dat deze aanwezig zijn
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook nog lessen aanwezig voor medewerkers te leren omgaan met (nieuwe)
technologieën?
MD: Nou een voorbeeld is de digitale whiteboarden, toen we deze gingen introduceren hebben we de
medewerkers benaderd om een cursus te volgen hierin, maar hier is geen enkele medewerker op afgekomen.
Kirsten: Oke, dus eigenlijk worden er wel cursussen of lessen in gegeven maar wordt er geen gebruik van
gemaakt?
MD: Ja, dat klopt en dat is erg jammer. Maar verder kan op verzoek ook extra informatie worden verkregen.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder informatie verstrekt over de technologieën?
MD: Ja, op onze website van het facilitaire bureau hebben we een link waarin alle zalen staan weergegeven en
met welke apparatuur en faciliteiten waar deze zalen over beschikken. Verder is er in elke zaal een a4tje
aanwezig waarin duidelijke instructies van de apparatuur staat weergegeven, een soort handleiding en meest
Kirsten van der Vaart
68
voorkomende vragen. Tevens wordt er ook verwezen voor extra vragen naar het facilitaire bureau.
Kirsten: En tijdens lesperiodes, hebben studenten dan voor 75% lessen in dit gebouw of ook elders?
MD: Dat is lastig te zeggen, waarschijnlijk hebben ze in meerdere gebouwen les. De grootste zaal waar dit
gebouw over beschikt is voor 90 studenten, dus voor basis vakken kunnen ze hier al niet terecht. We hebben
natuurlijk hier een campus, dus daar wordt niet op gestuurd.
Kirsten: Zijn er ook kleine klassen aanwezig voor maximaal 30 studenten?
MD: Nee, dit zijn wel grotere klassen.
Kirsten: Oke, dan gaan we nu verder naar het volgende onderdeel, de ruimtelijke aspecten. Zoals de meubels
zijn deze makkelijk te verplaatsen en gecertificeerd bijvoorbeeld?
MD: Nee, deze meubels zijn al vrij oud, we hebben het grootste deel meegenomen uit de oude gebouwen.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder loungeplekken in het gebouw, minimaal 3?
MD: Jazeker, we hebben meerdere banken geplaatst in de hallen en straks tijdens de rondleiding zal je zien dat
we ook informele zitjes hebben ingericht met keukentjes, waar er gewerkt kan worden maar ook kan men hier
rustig zitten.
Kirsten: Oke helder, en wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt van maximale lichtinval?
MD: Jazeker, zoals je waarschijnlijk al hebt gezien is het hele dak van glas, waardoor het hele atrium al licht
vangt. Verder zitten de kantoren aan de zijkanten gevestigd, waardoor er altijd lichtinval aanwezig is. We
hebben alleen een zaal middenin, waar gaan lichtinval is, maar deze gaat verbouwd worden, omdat ook het
design niet helemaal naar wens is. Verder hebben we nog wel een paar ruimtes die licht ontvangen via het
atrium.
Kirsten: Oke, en wordt er verder nog gebruikt gemaakt van instelbare ventilatie of warmte per ruimte?
MD: Nou dit wordt wel gebruikt in de gespreksruimtes, niet in de zalen. De ventilatie is gebaseerd op een
aantal maximaal personen. Een probleem wat hierbij ontstond was bijvoorbeeld in de computerzalen. Deze
zalen waren oorspronkelijk niet gebouwd voor computers, maar pas na de bouw kwamen we erachter dat deze
hiervoor nodig waren. Maar nu wordt daar geklaagd over de warmte van de computers en in de zalen, maar dit
is ook logisch omdat die ruimtes hiervoor niet gebouwd zijn.
Kirsten: Is er verder in de bouw gebruik gemaakt van geluid-absorberende materialen, zoals voor de vloeren,
wanden of plafonds?
MD: Ja, dit zijn flexibele wanden en daar is op gerekend, ook de vloeren.
Kirsten: En wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt in een bepaalde ruimte van speciale lichten? Zoals een
theaterruimte bijvoorbeeld?
MD: Voor dit gebouw is het heel simpel, er zijn alleen maar collegezalen en kantoren. De lichten in de
collegezalen kunnen we gedimd worden, hier is wel rekening mee te houden.
Kirsten: Ik zag al dat er liften aanwezig waren in dit gebouw, hoeveel liften zijn er? En is er ook een roltrap?
MD: Nee, er is geen roltrap aanwezig, wel zijn er 4 liften in het gebouw.
Kirsten van der Vaart
69
Kirsten: Wordt er verder nog gebruik gemaakt van geluidswerende panelen om ruimten te scheiden?
MD: Ja, zoals in deze ruimtes is dit ook te zien, we kunnen de wanden eruit halen om grote zalen te maken.
Verder worden er ook nog kleine wandjes gebruikt om groepswerk te scheiden.
Kirsten: Worden de werkruimtes van de hoogleraren en academici gedeeld voor ongeveer 80% van de
ruimten?
MD: Dat is heel verschillend per vakgroep. We hebben nu met de verhuisbeweging een vlekkenplan gemaakt
per faculteit. We hebben gekeken naar het aantal werkuren van de personen, is dit boven 0,5 fte dan hebben
ze recht op een werkplek, daaronder niet. Zo hebben we onze m2 bepaalt en hebben we de vlekken per
afdeling verdeeld, daarna mogen de faculteiten spelen hoe ze de afdelingen inrichten.
Kirsten: Maar als je dan over het algemeen kijkt, zijn er dan nog veel kantoorruimtes apart voor academici
ingericht?
MD: Ja, dit gebeurd nog heel veel. Maar ook uitzonderlijk dat sommige hoogleraren het totaal niet uit maakt. Je
ziet wel heel veel ruimten van de promovendi gezamenlijk, maar de administratie deelt wel hun werkplekken,
dit ligt wel aan de vakgroepen zelf.
Kirsten: En als je kijkt naar de bieb, zijn daar dan 2 verschillende soorten activiteiten mogelijk zoals werken in
groepen en werken in stilte?
MD: Nou, in dit gebouw hebben we geen bibliotheek, maar in het gebouw hiernaast is een grote centrale
bibliotheek en daar zijn verschillende activiteiten mogelijk. Daar zijn stilteruimtes en open ruimtes, maar de
bibliotheek is dus gecentraliseerd, het campus idee.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook flexibele werkplekken waar medewerkers bijvoorbeeld hun laptop kunnen inpluggen
en kunnen werken?
MD: Nou, niet a la het nieuwe werken laat ik maar zeggen. Er zijn wel echt flexplekken, maar dat ligt weer aan
de vakgroepen. Maar binnen dit gebouw zijn er wel zeker flexplekken aanwezig.
Kirsten: Oke, zijn er verder nog stilteruimtes aanwezig in dit gebouw?
MD: Nee, deze zijn hier niet aanwezig, niet in dit gebouw. Dan moeten de studenten naar de bibliotheek.
Kirsten: Oke, zijn er buiten dit gebouw ook werkplekken zoals picknick tafels waar studenten aan kunnen
werken in groepswerk?
MD: Ja, er zijn zeer veel voorzieningen om buiten te zitten en waar ze neer kunnen ploffen om groepswerk uit
te kunnen oefenen, dit is verspreid over de hele campus en hebben ze ook Wi-Fi. We hebben hier blijkbaar de
snelste Wi-Fi van de wereld.
Kirsten: Is er een catering faciliteit aanwezig in dit gebouw?
MD: Ja, over 2 weken gaat deze in gebruik, op 7 mei.
Kirsten: Oke, is er verder ook een Learning café aanwezig, waar studenten kunnen eten/drinken maar ook
kunnen leren?
MD: Nee, dat is er wel in een ander gebouw in de Menza, dat is hier 100 meter vandaan.
Kirsten: De volgende vraag kan ik eigenlijk zelf al beantwoorden; ik zag namelijk al dat jullie een front-office
Kirsten van der Vaart
70
hier in het begin hebben en de bewegwijzering is duidelijk.
MD: Ja, klopt.
Kirsten: zijn ver verder nog kleine ruimtes die gereserveerd kunnen worden door studenten om in
groepsverband te werken?
MD: Nee, ze kunnen ze niet reserveren, maar er zijn wel ruimtes aanwezig. De medewerkers kunnen dit wel
reserveren, we hebben deze afweging gemaakt omdat we de studenten goed kennen. Met de studenten goed
kennen bedoel ik; ze reserveren dan het gehele jaar sommige ruimtes waardoor er minder beschikbaar zijn
voor de rest. Studieverenigingen mogen ook reserveren. Verder zijn er wel veel kleinere ruimtes aanwezig,
maar die kunnen niet gereserveerd worden.
Kirsten: Oke, in die groepsruimtes zijn daar beamers of andere elektronische presentatie middelen?
MD: Nee, zeker niet, dit hebben we bewust gedaan.
Kirsten: Waarom als ik vragen mag?
MD: Deze materialen zijn duur en zeer sloopgevoelig en dan zijn we erg druk met repareren.
Kirsten: Is er voor de studenten een intranet aanwezig?
MD: Ja, studenten halen volgens mij alle informatie van internet voor hun lessen etc.
Kirsten: Voorziet de universiteit in software en lesstof voor electronic books?
MD: Ja, dat wordt hier best veel gedaan. De bibliotheek stelt dit beschikbaar.
Kirsten: Is het mogelijk op elke computer op de universiteit om video-conferencing te gebruiken?
MD: Nou, op dit moment is het al wel mogelijk op sommige computers, maar we zijn bezig met een pilot onder
de medewerkers. Ik weet dat ze het verder willen uitbreiden, omdat het goed werkt.
Kirsten: Weet je of er verder nog een digitale bieb beschikbaar is per faculteit, waar studenten hun rapporten
of informatie kunnen uploaden?
MD: Hmm, die vraag vind ik lastig. Maar als ik erover nadenk weet ik vrijwel zeker dat dit niet per faculteit
verschillend is, maar dat er wel een algemene database bestaat.
Kirsten: Kunnen studenten ook hun informatie uploaden in een database?
MD: Ja, dit is wel mogelijk.
Kirsten: Weet je of de lessen worden opgenomen via video of audio, zodat studenten dit online terug kunnen
kijken?
MD: Ja, dit wordt al veel gedaan. Dit was eerst een pilot, maar nu wordt het echt veel gebruikt.
Kirsten: Weet je of er de mogelijkheid is om live lessen te volgen via intranet?
MD: Jazeker, dit kan bij alle opnames.
Kirsten: Weet je of er elektronische whiteboards worden gebruikt tijdens de lessen?
Kirsten van der Vaart
71
MD: Jazeker.
Kirsten: Zijn er elektronische middelen aanwezig in de leslokalen zodat er presentaties gegeven kunnen
worden? Beamers)
MD: Ja, dat is aanwezig. Ze kunnen zelfs nog projectors huren als ze willen.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om via internet connectie te krijgen met de bieb, om bijvoorbeeld boeken te
bestellen of verlengen?
MD: Ja, dit kan. Wij als medewerkers kunnen dit ook.
Kirsten: Is er een gratis cursus aanwezig om je Engels te verbeteren?
MD: Dit durf ik niet te zeggen. Ik weet dat er wel cursussen aanwezig zijn, maar niet precies hoe en wat. Dit zou
je kunnen navragen bij het studie centrum of website.
Kirsten: Is er een kalender aanwezig waarin studenten online kunnen overleggen met hun docenten?
MD: Nou, dat lijkt me niet. Elke docent werkt volgens mij anders.
Kirsten: Is dit er voor studie adviseurs?
MD: Weet ik niet.
Kirsten: Wordt er gebruik gemaakt van social media om studenten feedback te geven? Bijvoorbeeld wanneer
studenten een langere tijd op stage zijn?
MD: Volgens mij niet. Misschien wel.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om bij afwezigheid tentamens online te kunnen maken?
MD: Weet ik niet, volgens mij zou dit alleen op uitzondering kunnen.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om online je documenten te uploaden voor assessments?
MD: Ja, dit is mogelijk.
Kirsten: Oke, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het deel van de technologie. Ik had zelf al gemerkt dat er hier
draadloos netwerk, Wi-Fi, overal aanwezig is, maar is dit ook beveiligd?
MD: Het kan beide, je kan een guest account aanvragen.
Kirsten: Kun je ook je mobiel linken aan het intranet van de universiteit bijvoorbeeld om nieuwe updates te
ontvangen?
MD: Nee, dat is niet mogelijk.
Kirsten: Zijn er touchscreens aanwezig om informatie te verkrijgen?
MD: Nee, deze zijn er niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er beeldschermen in de hallen aanwezig die de studenten en bezoekers van informatie voorzien?
MD: Ja, in dit gebouw wel, niet in alle gebouwen.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om je mobiele apparatuur op te laden in bijvoorbeeld een lesruimte, bieb of
Kirsten van der Vaart
72
Learning café?
MD: Ja, maar een basis. Geen 20 man kunnen hier tijdens colleges hun telefoon opladen bijvoorbeeld. Er zijn
wel stopcontacten in de muren, maar lang niet zoveel. We merken dat er steeds meer vraag naar komt en hier
lopen ook discussies over, maar dit is een te grote investering op dit moment om dit aan te passen. Er zijn wel
meer dan voorheen, maar nog niet genoeg.
Kirsten: Is er hardware aanwezig die documenten en informatie bewaard tijdens storingen en stroomuitval?
MD: Ja, als mensen op het netwerk wel. Op hun eigen laptops niet natuurlijk.
Kirsten: Wordt er al gebruik gemaakt van een self-service book machine? Dit is een machine die uit het
magazijn automatisch de ingevoerde boeken voor de persoon ophaalt?
MD: Nee, helaas niet. Het zou wel leuk zijn, haha.
Kirsten: Oke, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het tweede deel van de checklist, de bijkomende aspecten.
Dit zijn de aspecten die te maken hebben met de drie pijlers: educatie, technologie en ruimte. Hierin worden
de aspecten; organisatie, de stakeholders en de duurzaamheid behandeld. Allereerst beginnen we met de
stakeholders. Voordat dit gebouw tot stand kwam, is er toen rekening gehouden met de wensen en eisen van
de eindgebruikers? Is hier onderzoek naar gedaan?
MD: Ja, die zijn zeker meegenomen in diverse werkgroepen. Waarschijnlijk is niet alles gerealiseerd maar wel
veel. Zoals een lagerhuis opstelling in een paar college zalen.
Kirsten: Wordt er gecommuniceerd en samengewerkt met de gemeente Enschede? Bijvoorbeeld projecten,
voor de gemeente?
MD: Ja, daar staan we bekend om. Ze werken samen met de gemeente voor een warmte kracht centrale. Een
ander voorbeeld is het facilitair bedrijf zelf. Een hoogleraar werkt samen met de gemeente om optimalisatie te
kunnen krijgen in facilitaire processen. Vooral binnen de universiteit wordt hier veel mee geëxperimenteerd. Er
is ook heel veel kennis op duurzaamheid gebied.
Kirsten: Wordt er contact onderhouden met internationale en nationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld lessen
of minor te volgen elders?
MD: Ja, er wordt wel mee samengewerkt, maar dit staat niet op de site.
Kirsten: Zijn er studentenorganisaties aanwezig, die studenten helpen in contact te komen met nationale of
internationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld een minor of stage te volgen?
MD: Jazeker, Integrand bijvoorbeeld.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om parttime te studeren? Zodat er geen fysieke aanwezigheid van de student
hoeft te zijn?
MD: Er zijn wel een paar vormen van, maar ze moeten wel af en toe aanwezig zijn.
Kirsten: Is er een continue plan aanwezig om de ICT te vernieuwen?
MD: Ja, we zijn er continu mee bezig, ook door het nieuwe onderwijsmodel. De bewustwording hiervan is heel
groot. Misschien heeft het niet altijd evenveel vaart, maar zoals nu wordt het intranet vernieuwd.
Kirsten: Worden studenten betrokken bij plannen voor een groenere universiteit?
Kirsten van der Vaart
73
MD: Ja, we zijn er wel mee bezig. Een project is bijvoorbeeld de duurzame campus.
Kirsten: Worden ruimtelijke vernieuwingen getest door het houden van enquêtes of vragenlijsten?
MD: Ja, we doen elke 2 jaar een klanttevredenheidsonderzoek, dat geld dan voor alle gebouwen. Het is een on-
going onderwerp, vooral omdat het gebouw nog niet zo lang in gebruik is. Per gebouw krijgen we hier de
gegevens van aangeleverd.
Kirsten: Is er dagelijks een handyman aanwezig?
MD: Ja, de interne dienst is hier aanwezig
Kirsten: Geeft de universiteit informatie over de funding?
MD: Nou, we hebben hier een student union, dit is een studentenclub die ook een gebouw en sportvereniging
beheerd. Zij kijken naar het belang van de studenten. Ze opereren vanuit de universiteit en zijn zelfstandig.
Kirsten: Zijn de openingsuren van het gebouw van 8.00 tot 20.00 uur? Of tenminste 12 uur per dag geopend?
MD: Officieel van 8 tot 6, maar ze kunnen met de pas 24 uur per dag in het gebouw. Ze moeten dit dan wel op
aanvraag doen en ook duidelijk een handtekening voor zetten. Andere gebouwen zijn wel langer open, zoals
die bieb tot 10 uur, en nog een ander gebouw tot 12 uur.
Kirsten: Is de bieb 24 uur per dag geopend?
MD: Nee, helaas niet, dit zouden ze graag willen.
Kirsten: Zijn er programma’s aanwezig om het watergebruik te monitoren?
MD: Ja
Kirsten: Is dit ook aanwezig voor energie?
MD: Ja
Kirsten: Kun je een voorbeeld geven van een duurzame investering van dit gebouw?
MD: Ja, specifiek voor dit gebouw hebben we lichtsensoren in de ruimtes. Op de campus zelf wordt hier ook
veel mee gedaan, we hebben een koude cirkel, deze slaat de warmte op en deze warmte wordt weer opnieuw
gebruikt. Als er nu nieuwe projecten zijn, wordt er direct gekeken hoe duurzaam we dit kunnen doen.
Kirsten: Worden toners, cartridges, papier en hardware gerecycled?
MD: Ja, dit gaat via het chemisch afval. Deze processen gaan via externe bedrijven.
Kirsten: Wordt papier, plastic en blik apart ingezameld?
MD: Ja, alles wordt apart ingezameld en afgevoerd.
Kirsten: Wordt de warmte van pc’s gerecycled?
MD: Nou lastig, ik denk van niet.
Kirsten: Heeft de catering faciliteit in dit gebouw een duurzaam assortiment?
MD: Nou, we zijn er wel mee bezig zoals de koffie van Max Havelaar en recyclebare bekers, maar ik denk niet
Kirsten van der Vaart
74
dat het gehele assortiment voor 50% duurzaam is. Ik denk wel dat dit eraan zit te komen.
Annex 3: Interview Wageningen University
Persoon: Mevr. Ludy Zeeuwen
Functie: Hoofd- en locatiemanager Forum gebouw
Locatie: Forum gebouw, Wageningen universiteit
Tijd/data: 13.00 – 14.30 uur, 27 april 2012
1. Hoe lang bent u al werkzaam als hoofd- en locatie manager?
LZ: Ja, klopt ik ben locatiemanager. Daarbij horen alle faciliteiten, ik zorg dat het gebouw open is en dat alles
werkt en het ondersteunende personeel ook zijn werk hierin kunnen doen. Eigenlijk ben ik facilitair manager. Ik
ben hier werkzaam vanaf het begin, begin april 2007. Formeel zijn we per september in gebruik gegaan. Per
september 2006, ben ik al werkzaam officieel als locatiemanager.
2. Wat is uw achtergrond? (studie, werk)
LZ: Ik werkte eerst in een bibliotheek, met maar een klein stuk beheer.
3. Wanneer is dit gebouw opgeleverd?
LZ: In april begonnen we dat de zalen al waren ingericht. De oplevering was een paar maanden daarvoor.
4. Hoe lang heeft de bouw geduurd?
LZ: Ongeveer 3 jaar, ik zou het nog even nazoeken
5. Hoe lang hebben de voorbereidingen geduurd? Welke partijen betrokken?
LZ: Architect; Quist, bouwadviesbureau, wij als facilitair bureau onder leiding van een bouwpastoor en aan het
einde facilitair. April 2006 is mijn baas hierbij geweest. Verder waren er verschillende aannemers aanwezig. Zelf
zit ik nu ook al in het facilitaire team voor de nieuwbouw van Orion. Voor Wageningen was dit de eerste bouw
waar meerdere onderwijsrichtingen samenkwamen en Wageningen heeft nog nooit eerder zo’n groot gebouw
neergezet.
6. Wat waren de richtlijnen voor dit gebouw?
LZ: Ja, de architect heeft de opdracht gekregen om een monoliet gebouw neer te zetten in een landschap. Hij
dacht hierbij aan een kasteel, er kwam ook nog eens water omheen en de voorkant zijn eigenlijk 2 grote
toegangspoorten. Hij dacht er ook aan dat het kasteel eigenlijk het centrum is van de bedrijvigheid in een
omgeving. Want eigenlijk kan je hier alles doen, behalve slapen. Verder zijn er veel natuurlijke elementen
gebruikt, beton, glas en we hebben gewerkt met een greenkalk systematiek. Dit heeft te maken met het
besparen van energie en duurzaam bouwen. Zo maken we gebruik van een warmte- koude opslag, veel
gloeilampen, lichtinval, spaarknoppen op kranen en wc’s.
Kirsten: Dus eigenlijk al duurzaam bouwen?
LZ: Ja dat ook, maar het is ook goedkoper. We hebben nu binnen 3 jaar al 70% op energie bespaard, dus dit is
een grote besparing.
Kirsten van der Vaart
75
7. Welke faculteiten zitten hier gevestigd?
LZ: Nou niet echt faculteiten. Er zitten hier circa 60 a 70% van de bachelor studenten hier.
8. Hoeveel studenten zitten er in dit gebouw?
LZ: Gemiddeld zitten hier 2000 a 3000 studenten per week.
9. Voldoen de richtlijnen aan het gebruik in de praktijk? (constructief, technologisch, facilitair)
LZ: Nou het klimaat is erg lastig. Want in een nieuw gebouw, heeft het toch enkele jaren tijd nodig om het
klimaat goed in te regelen. Dit kost veel tijd. We hebben veel klachten over het klimaat gehad. Maar
uiteindelijk valt het mee. We hebben wel een probleem gehad, met de warmte in de computerzalen. We
hebben toen besloten dat we de schachten open wouden maken en daar de warmte uit weg laten geleiden,
maar eigenlijk toen we dit wouden doorzetten, hebben we geen klachten meer gehad, dus hebben we dit nog
even uitgesteld. Zoiets kost namelijk erg veel geld en tijd. We weten niet waarom we geen klachten meer
krijgen. Misschien omdat we dingen hebben bijgesteld en vervangen, of mensen zijn klacht moe.
Kirsten: Dit was echt de warmte van de computers?
LZ: Ja, inderdaad. We hebben in deze onderwijsvrije week, de kasten voor de computer vervangen en de kleine
kastjes toegepast. Volgend jaar kunnen we rond deze tijd weer meten. Maar volgens het Beta deel zitten we
nog goed volgens de normen. En volgens het Gamma deel merken we van de studenten dat alleen bij
binnenkomst de zalen warm zijn, maar dit kan ook komen door het harde fietsen. Ze willen over het algemeen
wel iets meer frisse lucht binnen hebben, maar de zalen zitten binnen in het gebouw, dus dit kan niet.
Kirsten: Oke, en verder dus geen echte problemen?
LZ: Nou in sommige zalen hadden we schuine vloeren, die hebben we als trappetjes gemaakt, dit zit fijner. Ook
hebben we flexibele tafeltjes gemaakt in de college zalen en we hebben ze dieper gemaakt en ook rekening
gehouden met de dikkere medemens. Ook was 1 grote zaal volgens de docenten te diep, hierin hebben we als
oplossing verhogingen in aangebracht.
Kirsten: En verder waren er geen facilitaire problemen? Liften of smalle gangen?
LZ: Nou niet echt, alleen dat volgens de studenten de liften te traag zijn. Maar we twijfelen hierover, want vaak
om 5 voor half 9 komt iedereen pas binnen, dus tja.. maar dit hangt toch wel samen met gedrag. We nemen
het wel in acht in Orion, het kan beter, maar het is geen grote probleem. Verder zouden we alleen nooit meer
kiezen voor zoveel witte muren, omdat dit geen succes is. We hebben vorig jaar alle muren opnieuw moeten
witten.
10. Sterktes van het gebouw?
LZ: De vormgeving. We merken tijdens voorlichtingsdagen dat studenten dit wel meenemen in een studie
keuze. Een ander feit is dat we veel bachelor onderwijs bij elkaar hebben, dat je elkaar kan ontmoeten. We
hebben nu 10 van de 16 studieverenigingen in huis, dit worden er 13 a 14, omdat we plek gaan vrij maken
dankzij Orion. Dit zorgt voor korte lijnen.
Kirsten: Dus het gebouw is eigenlijk best veel gericht op ontmoeten?
LZ: Jazeker, als je wil kan je hier elke dag van 8 tot half 11 zijn om je dingen te doen wat je wil. De bibliotheek
willen wel meer doen aan het ontmoeten. Ze zijn al wel veel bezig om dit te verbeteren. Ze willen eventueel
kasten eruit halen, om meer studie plekken te maken.
Kirsten van der Vaart
76
Kirsten: Maar er zijn nog best veel computerruimtes aanwezig in dit gebouw?
LZ: Ja, maar het kan nog meer. We merken dat de studieplekken om de bol in de bibliotheek juist steeds voller
zitten, waar geen pc’s staan, maar er is wel aansluiting voor pc’s etc. We hebben ook al meer stopcontacten
aangebracht. In Orion is de eis dat er voor 30% aan stopcontacten aanwezig moet zijn.
11. Zwaktes van het gebouw?
Hiervoor al benoemd.
Checklist introduceren en doorlopen met mevrouw Zeeuwen, opmerkingen noteren, vragen om rondleiding.
Interview
Kirsten: Wordt er nu al project onderwijs toegepast?
LZ: Ja dat gebeurd veel, maar ik weet hier niet veel van. Waarschijnlijk weet je dit zelf beter. Ik weet niet alles,
ik geef alleen wat opmerkingen over de vragen van dit onderdeel educatie is dat goed?
Kirsten: Ja hoor. Als je kijkt naar de roostering, hebben studenten de vrijheid om elk semester of periode hun
eigen vakken in te delen?
LZ: Ja dit kan.
Kirsten: Wordt alle informatie in het Engels aangeboden?
LZ: Ja
Kirsten: Zijn er extra lessen aanwezig om SPPS of Endnote te volgen.
LZ: Ja, dit wordt bij de bibliotheek gedaan, zoals Endnote en information literacy.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook nog lessen aanwezig voor medewerkers te leren omgaan met (nieuwe)
technologieën?
LZ: Nou het wordt wel aangekondigd maar niet specifiek, bijna niemand let hier op. Maar het ligt er vooral aan
wat je eigen baas goed vind. Opleidingen wordt vooral gestimuleerd. Je kan altijd als medewerker op zoek gaan
naar verschillende cursussen.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder informatie verstrekt over de technologieën?
LZ: Ja er zijn vluchtplannen, op elke docentendesk zit een sticker met hoe de beamer werkt en hoe de camera
werkt. Verder ligt er een a4tje, de ene kant van ICT en de andere kant van ons. We controleren in elke
onderwijsvrije periode of dit nog compleet.
Kirsten: En tijdens lesperiodes, hebben studenten dan voor 75% lessen in dit gebouw of ook elders?
LZ: Nou, 60% van het bachelor onderwijs vind het plaats. Maar als nog hebben we zalen in technotron, atlas
etc. Maar de studenten hebben inderdaad niet in hetzelfde gebouw les. Dit komt door de roostering, omdat we
elk jaar afhankelijk zijn van de aantallen. Als Orion er straks is, dan vinden voornamelijk de lessen hier plaats.
Eigenlijk willen we ook de Dreijen sluiten, maar doordat we een nieuwe grote groei verwachten kan dit
waarschijnlijk niet.
Kirsten: Oke, want Wageningen wordt steeds bekender toch?
LZ: Ja, het is een tijd slechter gegaan door de BSE en de varkensziekte etc. Maar daarna wou Wageningen af
Kirsten van der Vaart
77
van het landbouw imago en hebben ze de naam veranderd in ‘the university for life sciences’. Daarna is er veel
korte concrete reclames gemaakt in de krant en zijn de mobiele practica opgesteld. De ouders van de
studenten lezen dit voornamelijk en als studenten niet weten wat ze willen, zien ouders WUR voornamelijk als
goede universiteit.
Kirsten: Oke, dan gaan we nu verder naar het volgende onderdeel, de ruimtelijke aspecten. Zoals de meubels
zijn deze makkelijk te verplaatsen en gecertificeerd bijvoorbeeld?
LZ: Gedeeltelijk, de collegezalen zijn allemaal vast. Maar we hebben ook andere lokalen waar veel flexibele
meubels aanwezig zijn. In Orion, hebben we hier verder over nagedacht, dat een PC zaal kan switchen, niet
andersom.
Kirsten: Maar in verhouding wordt binnen het Forum dus nog niet zoveel flexibel meubilair toegepast?
LZ: Nee, eigenlijk niet. Maar, we missen het ook niet. Het gaat uiteindelijk niet zo om het meubilair, maar of je
de functie van de ruimte kan aanpassen.
Kirsten: Ja, daar gaat het ook een beetje om; kun je je meubilair aanpassen zodat de ruimte een andere functie
krijgt.
LZ: Nee, dat kan niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder loungeplekken in het gebouw, minimaal 3?
LZ: Ja, deze zijn er, we hebben Agra en Rodium, op de bruggen en bij de liften.
Kirsten: Oke helder, en wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt van maximale lichtinval?
LZ: Je kent het gebouw, dus je weet er is overal veel licht inval.
Kirsten: Oke, en wordt er verder nog gebruikt gemaakt van instelbare ventilatie of warmte per ruimte?
LZ: Nee, niet alle ruimten. Sommige wel.
Kirsten: Is er verder in de bouw gebruik gemaakt van geluid-absorberende materialen, zoals voor de vloeren,
wanden of plafonds?
LZ: Ja, in de verticale muren, zijn sommige voegen juist niet gevoegd, om het akoestiek te verbeteren. De
vloeren van natuursteen is natuurlijk lastig. Maar de muren en plafonds zijn dit wel.
Kirsten: En wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt in een bepaalde ruimte van speciale lichten? Zoals een
theaterruimte bijvoorbeeld?
LZ: Ja, dat is er wel. In C222, hadden we ooit bedacht dat hier ook de ruimte als theater gebruikt kan worden.
Hier is speciale theaterverlichting aangebracht. Ook de digitale en gewone borden kunnen worden aangepast.
Ook in de bibliotheek past het licht zich automatisch aan, aan de lichttoevoer van buiten. Hierdoor is het licht
goed afgestemd en wordt er energie bespaard.
Kirsten: Ik weet al dat er liften aanwezig zijn in dit gebouw en roltrappen.
LZ: Ja, dat klopt, 2 roltrappen en 3 liften, als enige in Wageningen.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder nog gebruik gemaakt van geluidswerende panelen om ruimten te scheiden?
LZ: Ja, we hebben verschillende. We hebben zalen met vouwwanden, de PC en practicumzalen. Ook de beamer
Kirsten van der Vaart
78
en de presentatiemiddelen kunnen worden aangepast, dat via 1 pc beide beamers geregeld kan worden.
Verder hebben we poster borden, geluidswerende wandjes. Ze zijn wel aangeschaft om groepsruimtes in
tweeën te delen, maar onderzoek wees uit dat dit niet hielp. Nu worden ze op de balkons gebruikt.
Kirsten: Worden de werkruimtes van de hoogleraren en academici gedeeld voor ongeveer 80% van de ruimten?
LZ: Die zitten hier niet. Alleen de docenten van Hall Larenstein. Deze werken allen in grote gezamenlijke
ruimten.
Kirsten: En voor de administratieve functies?
LZ: Ja, kijk maar om je heen. We delen kantoren voor de administratieve ruimten.
Kirsten: En als je kijkt naar de bieb, zijn daar dan 2 verschillende soorten activiteiten mogelijk zoals werken in
groepen en werken in stilte?
LZ: Ja, er zijn wel verschillende ruimtes. Maar eigenlijk zijn het alleen maar stilteplekken. Het waren
groepsplekken, maar deze zijn veranderd in extra stilteplekken. Naar mijn idee zijn er voldoende plekken waar
studenten buiten de bibliotheek kunnen studeren.
Kirsten: Maar zoals ik zelf weet is het altijd best rumoerig in de bibliotheek, waar ligt dit aan dan?
LZ: Nou, dat ligt aan die bol middenin. Deze zorgt onbewust voor veel geluidsruis in de bibliotheek. Maar het is
ook echt zonde dat onze ruimte beneden niet goed kunnen gebruiken. Je weet dat we hier beneden een grote
ruimte hebben, maar we kunnen er niets mee doen, optredens ofzo, want het geluid gaat het hele gebouw
door.
Kirsten: Ja, zo gauw je het gebouw ook binnenkomt, vind ik dat je al een rumoerig geluid hoort.
LZ: Ja, dat klopt. We kregen daarom ook klachten van de studenten die veel op de balkons werkten. Ze vonden
het te rumoerig, daardoor hebben we hier nu ACT groepen neergezet en deze hebben hier blijkbaar geen last
van. Maar we hebben ook onderzoek gedaan, hierin kwam naar voren wanneer we juist de rumoerige ruis
willen weghalen, we geluid moeten toevoegen.
Kirsten: Oke, en wat kan ik me daarbij voorstellen als ik mag vragen?
LZ: Nou je kunt er een box neerzetten, met muziek als zee geluiden bijvoorbeeld.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook flexibele werkplekken waar medewerkers bijvoorbeeld hun laptop kunnen inpluggen
en kunnen werken?
LZ: Nee, dat hebben we niet. In het nieuwe FB gebouw, Actio, hebben we dat al wel toegepast, want daar
gebruikten we het nieuwe werken en dat doen we hier nog niet. Maar ik zie het hier ook niet zo snel gebeuren,
want dan moeten we gaan verbouwen. Misschien wel dat in de toekomst meer kasten verdwijnen.
Kirsten: Maar merken jullie hier bijvoorbeeld ook dat de ouderen meer moeite hebben in het Actio gebouw?
LZ: Nou, daar merken we eigenlijk geen verschil tussen jong en oud. Het gaat meer om de functie van deze
ruimten en de personen. Als ik bijvoorbeeld vertrouwelijke gesprekken wil voeren, dan moet ik ergens anders
naar toe, dat vind ik af en toe wel een nadeel. Maar in Actio, merken we niet dat het leeftijd gerelateerd is.
Kirsten: Oke, zijn er verder nog stilteruimtes aanwezig in dit gebouw?
LZ: Ja, dit zijn veel plekken binnen de bibliotheek. Dit is ongeveer 25% van het gebouw.
Kirsten van der Vaart
79
Kirsten: Dus deze 10% wordt wel behaald?
LZ: Jazeker, dit halen we makkelijk.
Kirsten: Oke, zijn er buiten dit gebouw ook werkplekken zoals picknick tafels waar studenten aan kunnen
werken in groepswerk?
LZ: Ja, we hebben buiten wel veel picknicktafels, dus dit kan. We zouden er graag nog meer bij willen hebben.
Kirsten: Is er een catering faciliteit aanwezig in dit gebouw?
LZ: Ja, dat weet je.
Kirsten: Oke, is er verder ook een Learning café aanwezig, waar studenten kunnen eten/drinken maar ook
kunnen leren?
LZ: Nee, dat hebben we niet. We hebben wel een soort grand café, maar dit wordt niet beschouwd als Learning
Café. En verder ja we hebben hier een front-office hier in het begin hebben en de bewegwijzering is duidelijk.
Kirsten: zijn ver verder nog kleine ruimtes die gereserveerd kunnen worden door studenten om in groepsverband
te werken?
LZ: Ja deze zijn er wel, maar niet zo veel. En deze gaat via de roostering. We hebben niet een aantal
groepsruimten, die vrij gebruikt voor groepen kunnen worden gebruikt.
Kirsten: Maar kunnen studenten dit reserveren?
LZ: Nou, dit is wel lastig. We doen dit eigenlijk niet, omdat we dan de gehele dag bezig zijn om ruimtes voor
studenten te zoeken. Als ze bij ons aan de balie komen dan kunnen ze in het rooster kijken wanneer en waar
een lokaaltje vrij is en die kunnen ze dan gebruiken. Maar reserveren willen we liever niet en doen we eigenlijk
niet, het kost teveel tijd.
Kirsten: Oke, in die groepsruimtes zijn daar beamers of andere elektronische presentatie middelen?
LZ: Nee groepsruimten hebben alleen whiteboards en pc´s.
Kirsten: Is er voor de studenten een intranet aanwezig?
LZ: Ja, dat weet je, Black board.
Kirsten: Voorziet de universiteit in software en lesstof voor electronic books?
LZ: Ja, dat kan hier in de bibliotheek. Je kan ze niet kopen, wel lenen. Maar dit is nog niet voor alles mogelijk,
het komt wel steeds meer in de bibliotheek.
Kirsten: Is het mogelijk op elke computer op de universiteit om video-conferencing te gebruiken?
LZ: We hebben het wel, we hebben er 4. IT wil het heel graag op elke pc, maar dat hebben we nu nog niet.
Kirsten: Weet je of er verder nog een digitale bieb beschikbaar is per faculteit, waar studenten hun rapporten of
informatie kunnen uploaden?
LZ: Nee, dit is algemeen.
Kirsten: Kunnen studenten ook hun informatie uploaden in een database?
Kirsten van der Vaart
80
LZ: Ja zeker, bij de bibliotheek is dit mogelijk.
Kirsten: Worden er verder lessen opgenomen via video of audio, zodat studenten dit online terug kunnen kijken?
LZ: Ja, dat kan zeker.
Kirsten: Ook voor 50% van de lessen
LZ: Nee, dat zeker niet.
Kirsten: Weet je of er de mogelijkheid is om live lessen te volgen via intranet?
LZ: Nee, dat kan niet.
Kirsten: Weet je of er elektronische whiteboards worden gebruikt tijdens de lessen?
LZ: Ja deze worden gebruikt, maar geen 50%.
Kirsten: Zijn er elektronische middelen aanwezig in de leslokalen zodat er presentaties gegeven kunnen worden?
(Beamers)
LZ: Ja, alle zalen hebben een beamer, behalve de groepsruimten.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om via internet connectie te krijgen met de bieb, om bijvoorbeeld boeken te
bestellen of verlengen?
LZ: Ja.
Kirsten: Is er een gratis cursus aanwezig om je Engels te verbeteren?
LZ: Het is er wel, maar niet gratis.
Kirsten: Is er een kalender aanwezig waarin studenten online kunnen overleggen met hun docenten?
LZ: Nee, die hebben dit niet.
Kirsten: Is dit er voor studie adviseurs?
LZ: Ja, dit is net nieuw.
Kirsten: Wordt er gebruik gemaakt van social media om studenten feedback te geven? Bijvoorbeeld wanneer
studenten een langere tijd op stage zijn?
LZ: Ja, dat is wel mogelijk maar dit is ook meer afhankelijk van de student en studie adviseur.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om bij afwezigheid tentamens online te kunnen maken?
LZ: Nee, dit kan niet.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om online je documenten te uploaden voor assessments?
LZ: Ja, dit kan via Blackboard en Eduweb.
Kirsten: Oke, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het deel van de technologie. Ik weet dat er hier draadloos
netwerk, Wi-Fi, overal aanwezig is, maar is dit ook beveiligd?
Kirsten van der Vaart
81
LZ: Jazeker.
Kirsten: Kun je ook je mobiel linken aan het intranet van de universiteit bijvoorbeeld om nieuwe updates te
ontvangen?
LZ: Nee, dat is er niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er touchscreens aanwezig om informatie te verkrijgen?
LZ: Nee, wel infocasts. Narrow casting.
Kirsten: Zijn er beeldschermen in de hallen aanwezig die de studenten en bezoekers van informatie voorzien?
LZ: Jazeker.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om je mobiele apparatuur op te laden in bijvoorbeeld een lesruimte, bieb of
Learning café?
LZ: We hebben het wel, maar zoveel halen we nog niet. Maar dit hebben we eigenlijk ook nog niet echt gedaan
voor Orion.
Kirsten: Is er hardware aanwezig die documenten en informatie bewaard tijdens storingen en stroomuitval?
LZ: Ja, dat is er.
Kirsten: Oke, en wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt van een self service book machine
LZ: Nee, we hebben wel een transportsysteem. Ze worden opgehaald en bij de balie gebracht, maar dit is
verder niet echt te betalen.
Kirsten: Oke, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het tweede deel van de checklist, de bijkomende ruimte.
Hierin worden de aspecten; organisatie, de stakeholders en de duurzaamheid behandeld. aspecten. Dit zijn de
aspecten die te maken hebben met de drie pijlers: educatie, technologie en Allereerst beginnen we met de
stakeholders. Voordat dit gebouw tot stand kwam, is er toen rekening gehouden met de wensen en eisen van de
eindgebruikers? Is hier onderzoek naar gedaan?
LZ: Ja, bij Forum is hier naar gekeken. We willen er vanaf dat elke leerstoelgroep of richting hun eigen gebouw
heeft. We hebben gesproken met de voorlichter van de docenten, hier is veel rekening mee gehouden.
Kirsten: Wordt er gecommuniceerd en samengewerkt met de gemeente Wageningen? Bijvoorbeeld projecten,
voor de gemeente?
LZ: Jazeker, food 4 u, was een soort project met de gemeente.
Kirsten: Wordt er contact onderhouden met internationale en nationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld lessen of
minor te volgen elders?
LZ: Ja, ongetwijfeld
Kirsten: Zijn er studentenorganisaties aanwezig, die studenten helpen in contact te komen met nationale of
internationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld een minor of stage te volgen?
LZ: Jazeker, Integrand, AIESEC.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om parttime te studeren? Zodat er geen fysieke aanwezigheid van de student
Kirsten van der Vaart
82
hoeft te zijn?
LZ: Hmm, nou ik denk dat ze af en toe wel aanwezig moeten zijn.
Kirsten: Is er een continue plan aanwezig om de ICT te vernieuwen?
LZ: Ja, in principe wel.
Kirsten: Worden studenten betrokken bij plannen voor een groenere universiteit?
LZ: Jazeker, als je kijkt naar Orion, hebben we bijvoorbeeld ook studenten gevraagd, met een achtergrond
hierin natuurlijk, om mee te denken om energie te besparen.
Kirsten: Worden ruimtelijke vernieuwingen getest door het houden van enquêtes of vragenlijsten?
LZ: Ja, we houden jaarlijks KTO´s.
Kirsten: Is er dagelijks een handyman aanwezig?
LZ: Ja, de facilitaire dienst heeft hier huismeesters lopen.
Kirsten: Geeft de universiteit informatie over de funding?
LZ: Ja, op de website is hier wel het een en ander over te vinden.
Kirsten: Zijn de openingsuren van het gebouw van 8.00 tot 20.00 uur? Of tenminste 12 uur per dag geopend?
LZ: Ja, we zijn elke dag nog langer open zelfs. Maar buiten kantooruren is het gebouw alleen toegankelijk met
je WUR pas. We zijn zelfs in het weekend open op zaterdag en zondagmiddag.
Kirsten: Is de bieb 24 uur per dag geopend?
LZ: Nee, dat helaas niet. Digitaal natuurlijk wel, maar de bibliotheek is net zo lang geopend als het gebouw zelf.
Kirsten: Zijn er programma’s aanwezig om het watergebruik te monitoren?
LZ: Ja, deze zijn aanwezig. In het gebruik merk je het bijvoorbeeld al, dat er een automatische stop op de
kranen in de toiletten aanwezig zijn, dit bespaard veel water.
Kirsten: Is dit ook aanwezig voor energie?
LZ: Ja, dat is er ook. Zoals ik in het begin al zei hebben we al 70% energie bespaard in 3 jaar tijd, door gebruik te
maken van warmte en koude opslag en ook door het gebruik van gloeilampen etcetera.
Kirsten: Kun je een voorbeeld geven van een duurzame investering van dit gebouw?
LZ: Zoals de natuurstenen vloer, deze aanschaf was duur, maar op langer termijn behalen we hier veel voordeel
mee, omdat deze wel 30 jaar meegaat. Verder zoals de antwoorden hiervoor, hebben natuurlijk ook veel geld
gekost, maar levert wel weer meer op.
Kirsten: Worden toners, cartridges, papier en hardware gerecycled?
LZ: Ja, dat wordt extern gedaan.
Kirsten: Wordt papier, plastic en blik apart ingezameld?
Kirsten van der Vaart
83
LZ: Ja, we scheiden alles hier.
Kirsten: Wordt de warmte van pc’s gerecycled?
LZ: Nee, dit is iets wat erg veel geld kost.
Kirsten: Heeft de catering faciliteit in dit gebouw een duurzaam assortiment?
LZ: Nee, ze zijn er wel meer mee bezig, maar zoveel wordt nog niet gedaan.
Kirsten: Oke, dan waren dit de vragen, hartelijk dank voor uw antwoorden en informatie. Als het goed is had u
nog een informatieboekje over het Forum, heeft u deze nog voor mij?
LZ: Jazeker.
Kirsten van der Vaart
84
Annex 4: Interview Tilburg University
Persoon: Mevr. Marloes Peeters
Functie: Beleidsmedewerker van Real Estate Management
Locatie: Simon building, universiteit Tilburg
Tijd/data: 11.00 – 13.00 uur, 1 mei 2012
1. Kirsten: Hoe lang bent u al werkzaam als beleidsmedewerker Real Estate Management?
MP: Vanaf dat ik afgestudeerd ben. Eerst deed ik veel huisvesting, in 2006 werd ik projectleiding van de
huisvesting. Vanaf afgelopen maand ben ik pas officieel beleidsmedewerker en ik beheer de ruimtes van de
campus.
Kirsten: Wordt er nog nieuwbouw gepleegd?
MP: Nou, eigenlijk gaan we meer renoveren, er is nog veel te renoveren. We willen dat men efficiëntere
omgaat met de m2. We zijn nu in de fase om alles af te stemmen met het college van bestuur. Volgend jaar
komt hier meer uitsluitsel over.
2. Kirsten: Wat is uw achtergrond? (studie, werk)
MP: Facility management in Rotterdam. We zijn nu eigenlijk veel bezig met de m2, en niet met het onderwijs.
Daardoor mis je de aansluiting heel erg met onderwijs en fm.
3. Kirsten: Wanneer is dit gebouw opgeleverd?
MP: Nou dit gebouw is eigenlijk heel oud. We hebben 2 panden gecombineerd, het zijn eigenlijk 2 aparte
gebouwen. Dit zijn de gebouwen die het oudste zijn en die eigenlijk voor nood waren gebouwd. Dit stamt al uit
de jaren 70. We wouden de gebouwen eigenlijk slopen 2 jaar geleden, maar daar zijn we mee gestopt toen de
bezuinigingen kwamen. Daarna zijn we gaan kijken of het wel echt nodig is en of we niet een deel kunnen
renoveren. We maken nu een vlekkenplan, om te kijken of de studenten niet in een nieuwer gedeelte van het
gebouw kan en een deel in Tias. Dit gebouw is dus eigenlijk niet representatief, maar hier zitten ze wel
gehuisvest. We hebben verder geen collegezalen voor specifieke faculteiten, maar deze zitten over de hele
campus.
Kirsten: Maar volgens mij zit er ook nog een deel in het Cobbenhagengebouw als ik het goed las?
MP: Nou, dan is onze site niet goed up-to-date, want dit gebouw wordt nu gerenoveerd.
4. Kirsten: Wat waren de richtlijnen voor dit gebouw?
MP: Dat is al te lang geleden
5. Kirsten: Welke faculteiten zitten hier gevestigd?
MP: Social sciences
6. Kirsten: Sterktes van het gebouw?
MP: Ze vinden het algemeen wel fijn dat ze midden in het groen zitten, overal om het gebouw heen is bos. Er
zijn veel dieren, konijnen vogels etc. We hebben wel de hal en het restaurant laten opknappen, wat nu leuke
Kirsten van der Vaart
85
plekken zijn geworden.
7. Kirsten: Zwaktes van het gebouw?
MP: Onderhoud, klimaat, ongedierte. Ik zou je de plattegrond laten zien, hoe de campus en hoe het gebouw
eruit ziet. Het gebouw bestaat uit 6 vertakkingen laagbouw een deel hoogbouw en uit 2 delen. We zijn dus nu
aan het bekijken hoe we het kunnen renoveren, waarschijnlijk willen we de 6 vertakkingen slopen en
nieuwbouw plegen en de rest renoveren.
Kirsten: En zijn er al definitieve plannen voor de nieuwbouw?
MP: Nou niet speciaal. De bedoeling was 2014, maar we hopen dat we eerder kunnen starten met renovatie.
Kirsten: Hoeveel studenten zitten er dan?
MP: Studenten weet ik niet zo goed, er zijn wel 500 medewerkers.
Checklist introduceren en doorlopen met mevrouw Peeters opmerkingen noteren, vragen om rondleiding.
Kirsten: Oké, dit waren de algemene vragen, graag zou ik nu verder willen gaan met de opgestelde checklist die
u heeft ontvangen. Vind u het goed als we deze nu doornemen?
MP: Jazeker, ik had het al een beetje doorgenomen.
Kirsten: Wordt er nu al project onderwijs toegepast?
MP: Ja, dat doen ze wel veel hier. Ze werken ook meer in kleine groepen.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder groepswerk gestimuleerd?
MP: Ja, dat doen ze wel.
Kirsten: Wordt er gebruik gemaakt van blended learning?
MP: Nou, dat valt me heel erg tegen. Er worden nog heel veel schoolborden gebruikt.
Kirsten: En als je kijkt naar de roostering, hebben studenten de vrijheid om elk semester of periode hun eigen
vakken in te delen?
MP: Nee, dat kan niet.
Kirsten: Wordt alle informatie in het Engels aangeboden?
MP: Nee, volgens mij niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er lessen in SPSS of Endnote?
MP: Ja in Endnote
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook nog lessen aanwezig voor medewerkers te leren omgaan met (nieuwe)
technologieën?
MP: Ja, deze zijn er wel.
Kirsten: Wordt er verder informatie verstrekt over de technologieën?
Kirsten van der Vaart
86
MP: Ja dat is er wel.
Kirsten: En tijdens lesperiodes, hebben studenten dan voor 75% lessen in dit gebouw of ook elders?
MP: Dat denk ik niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er ook kleine klassen aanwezig voor maximaal 30 studenten?
MP: Nee, volgens mij niet.
Kirsten: Oké, dan gaan we nu verder naar het volgende onderdeel, de ruimtelijke aspecten. Zoals de meubels
zijn deze makkelijk te verplaatsen en gecertificeerd bijvoorbeeld?
MP: Ja in Prisma is hier veel rekening mee gehouden.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder loungeplekken in het gebouw, minimaal 3?
MP: Ja, het restaurant, de hal en een pantry.
Kirsten: Oké helder, en wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt van maximale lichtinval?
MP: Nee, dat is absoluut niet zo. Een gedeelte wel.
Kirsten: Oké, en wordt er verder nog gebruikt gemaakt van instelbare ventilatie of warmte per ruimte?
MP: Nee, dit is heel erg.
Kirsten: Is er verder in de bouw gebruik gemaakt van geluid-absorberende materialen, zoals voor de vloeren,
wanden of plafonds?
MP: Nee, dit was een noodgebouw.
Kirsten: En wordt er wel gebruik gemaakt van geluid-absorberende scheidingswanden?
MP: Nee, net zoals het antwoord op de vorige vraag. Dit is ooit een noodgebouw geweest. Het meubilair is wel
dusdanig gerenoveerd, maar er zijn geen scheidingswandjes.
Kirsten: En wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt in een bepaalde ruimte van speciale lichten? Zoals een
theaterruimte bijvoorbeeld?
MP: Nee, dit is er niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er liften of roltrappen aanwezig?
MP: Nou er is 1 lift aanwezig, dus nee 2 wordt hier niet gehaald.
Kirsten: Worden de werkruimtes van de hoogleraren en academici gedeeld voor ongeveer 80% van de ruimten?
MP: Nee.
Kirsten: Maar wordt dit wel voor de nieuwbouw gedaan?
MP: Ja, hier wordt dan wel rekening mee gehouden, we hebben flexibele ruimtes.
Kirsten: En voor de administratieve functies?
Kirsten van der Vaart
87
MP: Nee, sommige wel, maar grotendeels niet.
Kirsten: En als je kijkt naar de bieb, zijn daar dan 2 verschillende soorten activiteiten mogelijk zoals werken in
groepen en werken in stilte?
MP: Nou we hebben 1 centrale bieb. Maar de algemene bibliotheek heeft wel verschillende ruimtes met
verschillende activiteiten.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder ook flexibele werkplekken waar medewerkers bijvoorbeeld hun laptop kunnen inpluggen
en kunnen werken?
MP: Wel op de campus gedeeltelijk, maar niet in het Prisma gebouw. Dit is wel weer mogelijk in de bieb, want
daar hebben we stilteruimtes, groepsruimtes et cetera, voor allerlei verschillende activiteiten.
Kirsten: Oké, zijn er verder nog stilteruimtes aanwezig in dit gebouw?
MP: Nou in Prisma dus niet, maar bij de bibliotheek wel.
Kirsten: Dus deze 10% wordt wel behaald?
MP: In de bibliotheek zeker, maar niet in het Prisma gebouw. Maar mocht dit nodig zijn in de nieuwbouw dan
maken we dit. In de nieuwbouwplannen, zijn hier wel plekken voor gereserveerd.
Kirsten: Maar hoe werken studenten daar nu?
MP: Er is 1 computerzaal, waar de studenten gebruik van kunnen maken, maar ze gebruiken veel andere
gebouwen.
Kirsten: Oké, zijn er buiten dit gebouw ook werkplekken zoals picknick tafels waar studenten aan kunnen
werken in groepswerk?
MP: Ja, dit hebben we over de gehele campus
Kirsten: Is er een catering faciliteit aanwezig in dit gebouw?
MP: Ja
Kirsten: Oke, is er verder ook een Learning café aanwezig, waar studenten kunnen eten/drinken maar ook
kunnen leren?
MP: Niet in Prisma, maar wel in Goosens, Dante en het Monsieur gebouw.
Kirsten: Is er verder een front-office en goede bewegwijzering aanwezig?
MP: Nou vanaf dat we het 2e pand erbij hebben gevoegd is dit erg onduidelijk geworden. Het front-office is
eruit gesloopt, dus dit hebben we ook niet.
Kirsten: zijn ver verder nog kleine ruimtes die gereserveerd kunnen worden door studenten om in
groepsverband te werken?
MP: In het Prisma gebouw, zitten 4 of 5 kamers die ze kunnen reserveren. Maar dit geld niet voor 10%. Verder
over de campus kunnen ze ook geen lokalen reserveren. Maar we hebben hier ook eigenlijk geen vraag naar,
we hebben dit wel gerealiseerd in de bibliotheek maar deze kunnen niet worden gereserveerd. Maar daarom
zal deze vraag ook wel niet zo groot zijn. Want we hebben geluisterd naar de studenten een deel stilteruimte,
wat eerst in de hele bibliotheek was, maar ze wouden graag ook ruimtes waar je meer kan overleggen en in
Kirsten van der Vaart
88
groepswerk kan werken.
Kirsten: Oke, in die groepsruimtes zijn daar beamers of andere elektronische presentatie middelen?
MP: Nee, dit is niet aanwezig, alleen wel wat computers.
Kirsten: Is er voor de studenten een intranet aanwezig?
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Voorziet de universiteit in software en lesstof voor electronic books?
MP: Ja, dat is ook sterk in opkomst, maar er is al vrij veel beschikbaar.
Kirsten: Is het mogelijk op elke computer op de universiteit om video-conferencing te gebruiken?
MP: Die is er wel, maar niet overal mogelijk.
Kirsten: Weet je of er verder nog een digitale bieb beschikbaar is per faculteit, waar studenten hun rapporten of
informatie kunnen uploaden?
MP: Nee, dat denk ik niet.
Kirsten: Kunnen studenten ook hun informatie uploaden in een database?
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Worden er verder lessen opgenomen via video of audio, zodat studenten dit online terug kunnen kijken?
MP: We zijn er mee bezig, maar nog niet zo veel.
Kirsten: Voor 50% van de lessen?
MP: Nee
Kirsten: Weet je of er de mogelijkheid is om live lessen te volgen via intranet?
MP: Nee, dit kan nog niet. Kijk we zitten er voor de nieuwbouw wel over na te denken of we dit niet kunnen
doen. We willen de m2 zo efficiënt mogelijk gaan gebruiken, maar dit dringt vaak nog niet tot de docenten
door. Als we aangeven dat we veel lessen willen opnemen, zodat de zalen niet zo groot gemaakt hoeven te
worden, krijg je erg veel weerstand. Je merkt dat de docenten erg veel gevoel bij het lesgeven hebben, daarom
willen ze ook nog veel schoolborden en ze snappen niet dat je dit ook kan doen op een video. Het idee dat er
een scherm tussen student en docent zit, zien de docenten echt nog niet gebeuren.
Kirsten: En toch gebeurd het al wel veel in universiteiten
MP: Ja dat denk ik ook. Het is wel lastig natuurlijk omdat iedereen anders wil lesgeven en op hun manier willen
doen.
Kirsten: Maar verwacht je dat er dan minder studenten naar de lessen komen?
MP: Ja, dat denk ik wel.
Kirsten: Weet je of er elektronische whiteboards worden gebruikt tijdens de lessen?
MP: Ze worden wel eens op de campus gebruikt, maar niet in Prisma.
Kirsten van der Vaart
89
Kirsten: Zijn er elektronische middelen aanwezig in de leslokalen zodat er presentaties gegeven kunnen worden?
(Beamers)
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om via internet connectie te krijgen met de bieb, om bijvoorbeeld boeken te
bestellen of verlengen?
MP: Ja
Kirsten: Is er een gratis cursus aanwezig om je Engels te verbeteren?
MP: Vanuit het talencentrum worden er wel veel taalcursussen aangeboden en deze zijn gratis.
Kirsten: Is er een kalender aanwezig waarin studenten online kunnen overleggen met hun docenten?
MP: Dit betwijfel ik.
Kirsten: Is dit er voor studie adviseurs?
MP: Nee, alleen telefonisch of bij de student desk
Kirsten: Wordt er gebruik gemaakt van social media om studenten feedback te geven? Bijvoorbeeld wanneer
studenten een langere tijd op stage zijn?
MP: Dat is per faculteit verschillend, dat kan je wel navragen.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om bij afwezigheid tentamens online te kunnen maken?
MP: Nee.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om online je documenten te uploaden voor assessments?
MP: Ja, dat kan.
Kirsten: Oké, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het deel van de technologie. Ik zie dat er hier draadloos
netwerk, Wi-Fi, overal aanwezig is, maar is dit ook beveiligd?
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Kun je ook je mobiel linken aan het intranet van de universiteit bijvoorbeeld om nieuwe updates te
ontvangen?
MP: Ja, dat kan.
Kirsten: Zijn er touchscreens aanwezig om informatie te verkrijgen?
MP: Nee, we zijn er wel mee bezig maar we hebben het nog niet.
Kirsten: Zijn er beeldschermen in de hallen aanwezig die de studenten en bezoekers van informatie voorzien?
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Is er de mogelijkheid om je mobiele apparatuur op te laden in bijvoorbeeld een lesruimte, bieb of
Learning café?
MP: Ja, we hebben overal extra veel stopcontacten aangebracht. In het café en de bieb wel, in de collegezalen
Kirsten van der Vaart
90
bewust niet.
Kirsten: Is er hardware aanwezig die documenten en informatie bewaard tijdens storingen en stroomuitval?
MP: Ja, dat is er wel en voor meer vragen kan je bij Spits terecht.
Kirsten: Oké, en wordt er verder gebruik gemaakt van een selfservice bookmachine
MP: Nee, wij hebben poppetjes daarvoor.
Kirsten: Oké, dan wil ik nu graag verder gaan met het tweede deel van de checklist, de bijkomende ruimte.
Hierin worden de aspecten; organisatie, de stakeholders en de duurzaamheid behandeld. aspecten. Dit zijn de
aspecten die te maken hebben met de drie pijlers: educatie, technologie en Allereerst beginnen we met de
stakeholders. Voordat dit gebouw tot stand kwam, is er toen rekening gehouden met de wensen en eisen van de
eindgebruikers? Is hier onderzoek naar gedaan?
MP: Ja, dat hebben we gedaan voor de nieuwbouw. In Prisma veranderen we nu helemaal niets meer, we
wachten totdat de sloop komt. We zeggen tegen de klanten als er een klacht komt: sorry, we kunnen er niets
aan doen.
Kirsten: Wordt er gecommuniceerd en samengewerkt met de gemeente Tilburg? Bijvoorbeeld projecten, voor
de gemeente?
MP: Ja, ook in de nieuwbouwplannen worden wel de wensen van studenten meegenomen. Maar verder delen
we de kennis eigenlijk nog niet genoeg. We luisteren wel naar hun meningen, maar we laten ons niet door ze
adviseren. Dat vind ik eigenlijk nog wel ver gaan.
Kirsten: Wordt er contact onderhouden met internationale en nationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld lessen of
minor te volgen elders?
MP: Weet ik niet, dat kan je navragen.
Kirsten: Zijn er studentenorganisaties aanwezig, die studenten helpen in contact te komen met nationale of
internationale universiteiten om bijvoorbeeld een minor of stage te volgen?
MP: Ja, dat hebben ze.
Kirsten: Is er ook de mogelijkheid om parttime te studeren? Zodat er geen fysieke aanwezigheid van de student
hoeft te zijn?
MP: Nee.
Kirsten: Is er een continue plan aanwezig om de ICT te vernieuwen?
MP: Ja, daar hebben we Spits voor binnen Prisma. Ze kijken nu ook bijvoorbeeld heel erg hoe zij zichzelf
kenbaar kunnen maken en hoe ze de studenten beter kunnen ondersteunen. Hier gebruiken ze ook een
adviseur voor, maar er is waarschijnlijk wel geld tekort om alle plannen te realiseren.
Kirsten: Worden studenten betrokken bij plannen voor een groenere universiteit?
MP: Ja, binnen verschillende activiteiten wel. Daar is ook een groep voor opgericht die betrokken zijn bij de
nieuwbouwplannen.
Kirsten: Worden ruimtelijke vernieuwingen getest door het houden van enquêtes of vragenlijsten?
Kirsten van der Vaart
91
MP: Ja, een voorbeeld is, zoals de nieuwe catering faciliteit is geëvalueerd.
Kirsten: Is er dagelijks een handyman aanwezig?
MP: Ja, we hebben huismeesters aanwezig.
Kirsten: Geeft de universiteit informatie over de funding?
MP: Ja, dat wordt volgens mij wel gedaan, dat kan je wel nakijken
Kirsten: Zijn de openingsuren van het gebouw van 8.00 tot 20.00 uur? Of tenminste 12 uur per dag geopend?
MP: Ja, langer zelfs.
Kirsten: Is de bieb 24 uur per dag geopend?
MP: Nee, maar wel tot ’s avonds half 11.
Bij het volgende onderdeel ‘sustainability’ zijn antwoorden gebruikt uit een toegestuurde mailing vanuit
mevrouw Peeters met aanvullende antwoorden
Kirsten: Zijn er programma’s aanwezig om het watergebruik te monitoren?
MP: Nee, op de gehele campus niet.
Kirsten: Is dit ook aanwezig voor energie?
MP: Ja, dit hebben we per pand gedaan.
Kirsten: Kun je een voorbeeld geven van een duurzame investering van dit gebouw?
MP: Nou voor Prisma niet, maar voor de rest eigenlijk ook niet zo.
Kirsten: Worden toners, cartridges, papier en hardware gerecycled?
MP: Ja.
Kirsten: Wordt papier, plastic en blik apart ingezameld?
MP: Papier en blik wel, maar plastic niet.
Kirsten: Wordt de warmte van pc’s gerecycled?
MP: Nee, dit wordt niet gedaan.
Kirsten: Heeft de catering faciliteit in dit gebouw een duurzaam assortiment?
MP: Nou, ze hebben 1 lijn wat wel fair trade is.
Kirsten: Oké, dan waren dit de vragen, hartelijk dank voor uw antwoorden en informatie.
MP: Ja en voor de open vragen kan je zo op de site kijken, hier staat veel info op, maar het studiecentrum helpt
je ook mee.
Kirsten: Maar ik merk dat er dus wel veel beperkingen zijn door geld, klopt dit?
MP: Ja, dat klopt. Dat is bij ons nu wel een groot probleem. Het is verder ook jammer dat de social sciences
Kirsten van der Vaart
92
daar zitten gevestigd, want dit gebouw is niet representatief.
Kirsten: Zijn er verder nog innovatieve dingen wat wel wordt gedaan?
MP: Ja, een learning café, en we hebben erg veel naar de studenten geluisterd, dat is ook erg sterk. In het
Goosens gebouw hebben we ook een learning center gebouwd wat erg goed is. We proberen als fm erop te
letten dat ze integrale software gebruiken. Maar nu wordt vaak per faculteit en per gebouw nog apart software
systeem gedaan.
Kirsten: Maar is er een integraal systeem?
MP: Nee, dat wordt dus niet gedaan en dat proberen wij echt te stimuleren. Bij de bieb wordt dit wel gedaan,
het begint dus wel te komen. Maar vooralsnog in Goosens wat ook nog maar een paar jaar geleden is
gerenoveerd, gebruiken ze nog geen integraal systeem, het is alleen beschikbaar voor die faculteiten. Maar we
proberen het wel erg te stimuleren, en ook het flexibele werktijden.
Kirsten: En zijn er verder nog andere behoeftes?
MP: We merken dat ook de studenten het nog lastig vinden om ruimtes te delen, vooral bij de
studieverenigingen merken we dit. Verder hebben studenten een rapport gemaakt over de ideeën voor de
nieuwbouw, deze zou ik je even toesturen. Zij geven daar ook duidelijk aan wat ze van Prisma nu vinden en wat
ze verwachten van het nieuwe gebouw. Je merkt ook erg, dat we vaak dingen creëren, waar naar wordt
gevraagd, maar wat eigenlijk helemaal niet nodig is. We doen nou ook onderzoek naar de bezettingsgraad van
de kamers van de academici, want vaak zijn ze niet aanwezig, we proberen hier nu een plan voor te bedenken.
Want willen we wel dat iedereen veel thuiswerkt? En als docenten echt veel diploma’s hebben, verdienen zij
ook geen eigen kamer? Dit zijn vraagstukken wat nu erg spelen, maar dit nemen we allemaal mee voor de
nieuwbouw.
Kirsten van der Vaart
93
Annex 5: Interview with Mr E. Bomas and Mr F. Evers
Organisatie: Kennisnet
Doel: visie vanuit experts op 21st century learning environments, om tot aanbevelingen te komen voor de
onderzochte universiteiten.
Datum/tijd: 4 juni 2012, 10.00 – 11.00 uur
Voorstellen, Frank en Erwin laten zien wat hun hebben ontwikkeld. Ze hebben een zogenaamde 21st century
skills map ontwikkelt voor het onderwijs, waarin de verwachte skills staan weergegeven van de leerlingen.
Kirsten: ‘Want als ik het goed begrijp richten jullie je voornamelijk op het primaire onderwijs (po), voortgezet
onderwijs (vo) en MBO?’
Frank: ‘Ja, dat klopt. Erwin en ik zijn voornamelijk bezig met het ontwikkelen van innovaties in educatie in het
po en vo. Maar we richten ons ook algemeen op innovaties in het onderwijs.’
Frank: ‘Maar het is ook al meer ingevoerd in het basisonderwijs, we hebben laatst een presentatie gegeven op
het vo, daar wordt meer gericht op vakgerichte inhoud, het traditionele onderwijs en op de vakgeleerde
docenten, zij zien 21st century skills meer als bijzaak. Maar in het po zie je toch dat innovaties beter worden
geaccepteerd. Daarin kunnen vakken beter worden geïntegreerd en zijn ruimdenkend. In het basis onderwijs
zijn sommige scholen specifiek bezig met de skills, in het vo zie je ook wel dat scholen vernieuwend onderwijs
gaan geven, zoals in een van de nieuwste scholen, met nieuwe concepten maar niet qua skills. Het komt wel
meer terug, omdat ze minder in klassen denken en veel dingen via laptops doen. Je ziet dus wel wat
ontwikkelingen in het vo, maar ik denk dat de ontwikkelingen in het po ook meer benoemd zijn.
Kirsten: Ik ben dan zelf bezig voor universiteiten, maar ik merk inderdaad dat het op de basisscholen al veel
meer begint, zoals de Steve Jobsschool. Ik vind het zelf bijvoorbeeld wel interessant in hoever we hier in gaan,
wat is jullie visie hierop?
Frank: ‘Nou de Steve Jobsschool is echt ontstaan uit het idee van; hoe kun je een school maken zonder dat je
daadwerkelijk een gebouw nodig hebt. Het oorspronkelijke idee is hiervan al heel lang bezig, er zitten 2 mensen
hier achter die ook daadwerkelijk een BRIN nummer proberen aan te vragen, zonder dat er ook daadwerkelijk
een adres is, wat eigenlijk een heel absurde situatie is. Want BRIN nummers bestaan er om een gebouw te
financieren.’
Kirsten: ‘Ja, dat is inderdaad dan wel een apart verschijnsel. Het is dan echt out of the box thinking. Vragen
naar de achtergrond van Erwin en Frank.
Erwin: ‘We zijn 10 jaar geleden echt een stichting geworden door de introductie van internet, docenten wisten
hier niet zo goed wat ze ermee aan moesten. Ze kwamen voornamelijk met vragen naar ons toe, terwijl de
laatste jaren wij juist erg aanbodgericht werken. Hierin kwamen eerst vooral veel vragen over de ICT, dus niet
alleen de educatie en sinds een jaar of 8 zijn we nu een officiële zelfstandige stichting. Maar we werken deels
vraaggestuurd, we hebben namelijk ook een functie om innovaties te ontwikkelen. Zelf werk ik hier nu 4 jaar
met een achtergrond van innovatie management en heb ook bij een elearning bedrijf gewerkt. Zelf heb ik ook
een opdracht gedaan tijdens mijn afstuderen over het creatief inrichten van ruimten. Verder heb ik vorig jaar
een project gedaan 21Learners. Hierin heb ik samen met een groep studenten gebrainstormd over wat nou
daadwerkelijk 21st century skills moeten zijn.
Kirsten van der Vaart
94
Kirsten: “Oke, dus daar is dit model waarschijnlijk ook uit voortgekomen?’
Erwin: ‘Ja inderdaad’
Frank: ‘Ja ik zal me ook even voorstellen, ik ben progamma manager bij de afdeling expertise ontwikkelingen en
ondertussen werk ik hier al 5 jaar. Ik heb eerst bij de afdeling primair onderwijs gewerkt, maar deze is
opgegaan in een andere afdeling, daar heb ik ondertussen wel een groot netwerk opgezet in het po, waardoor
we als organisatie een goede binding met het veld hebben. We hebben deze netwerken in verschillende lagen
benaderd, zowel in de praktijk maar als op bestuursniveau. Nu zit ik meer aan de kant van de expertise en
kennisontwikkelingen, mijn gebieden zijn voornamelijk ICT om in passend onderwijs in te zetten. Mijn vorige
baan was bij een uitgeverij. Verder ben ik bezig met de 21st century learning skills en media kennis.
Kirsten; ‘Nou klinkt allemaal interessant, leuke onderwerpen. Ik zal mezelf ook even voorstellen en master
thesis uitleggen, verwachtingen van interview duidelijk maken.
Erwin: ‘Oke helder, ik vond het inderdaad interessant om je onderwerp door te lezen en ben ook zeker
benieuwd naar je gehele literatuur onderzoek en totale scriptie.’
Kirsten: ‘Oke, ik zou jullie dan ook graag willen vragen wat jullie nu echt als innovatie in de learning
environments zien, wat er gebeurd en wat er gaat gebeuren, misschien over 10 jaar.’
Erwin: “Nou over innovaties kunnen Frank en ik wel een redelijk beeld schetsen, maar als je het daadwerkelijk
over gerichte innovaties binnen universiteiten hebt, dan kunnen we je niet helpen, maar algemene innovaties
spelen toch wel door in het hele onderwijs.’
Kirsten: ‘Nee, precies, een algemene visie is ook zeker interessant om te horen’.
Erwin: ‘Ik heb zelf bijvoorbeeld ook wel gestudeerd aan de universiteit van Delft, daar heb ik een heel creatieve
opleiding gedaan en verschillende aspecten daarvan zie ik nog steeds wel als effectieve en innovatieve ideeen.
Ik heb dat afstudeerproject over creativiteit gedaan, daar in heb ik onderzoek gedaan naar de verschillende
ruimtes en waar komen creatieve processen het beste tot hun recht. Zo ben ik bijvoorbeeld bij IDO terecht
gekomen in de VS, ik weet niet of je het kent, het is een bekend ontwikkelingsbureau voor bijvoorbeeld Apple
muizen etcetera. En zij hebben een hele filosofie op de ruimten en dat kwam erg duidelijk terug in mijn
afstudeerproject, dus daar kan ik wel wat over vertellen.
Frank: ‘Ja we kunnen zeker wel het een en ander over innovaties vertellen. Als je ook bijvoorbeeld kijkt naar de
antwoorden in je vragenlijst, dat geeft duidelijk weer dat er nergens echt duidelijk opnieuw wordt gedisingd.
Daarom zijn wij hier op aarde als kennisnet, hoe kunnen we doelstellingen en hoe kunnen we nieuwe
gebouwen veranderen. Maar daar denken we heel erg bij na hoe kunnen we nou optimaal gebruik maken van
het gebouw en de technologien, dat zie je dus niet terug uit de antwoorden. Het algemene beeld wat ik uit de
antwoorden van de checklists kan halen is van ‘oja, deze aspecten hebben we wel want daar hadden we
toevallig ooit eens geld voor’, we hebben een digibord, maar er niet bij nagedacht dat we hierbij ook lessen
kunnen delen. Of een ander voorbeeld: dat studenten daar ook zelf materialen voor zouden kunnen
ontwikkelen, de hele gedachte van samenwerken en ontwikkelen zit niet binnen de scholen, terwijl deze
technologien en toepassingen juist daar de mogelijkheid toe geven. En wat je daarin op dit moment ziet is de ;
flipped-classroom. Ik heb het idee aan de hand van jou vragen dat dit ook steeds meer gaat gebeuren op
universiteiten. Bij de flipped-classroom is het idee dat de instructies online beschikbaar worden gezet en dat
colleges online beschikbaar zijn, dus dat leerlingen eigenlijk het verhaal van de college al weten.
Kirsten: ‘Dus het flipped-classroom idee is eigenlijk dat door online voorbereiding thuis door de leerlingen, dat
ze al voorbereid zijn voor de les die gaat komen’?
Kirsten van der Vaart
95
Frank: ‘Ja precies, zodat je dan beter kan verdiepen.
Kirsten; ‘Maar waar komt het idee, de naam zeg maar van flipped-classroom dan vandaan?’
Frank; “Nou, het oude idee is dat je op school bent en instructie krijgt om mee aan de slag te gaan zonder
student. Nu flippen we het, zodat je thuis al voorbereid en juist in de klas verder gaat en verdiept in de stof.
Erwin: ‘Het grootste voordeel is dat je dus op je eigen tempo kan leren, je kan terugspoelen, zo vaak teruglezen
als je wilt en het doen wanneer je zelf wilt. De docent kan zien welke leerlingen wel of niet de filmpjes hebben
bekeken en gaan dan met de opdracht in de klas. De docent kan op deze manier veel gerichter instructies
geven, dus het is veel meer maatwerk wat dan mogelijk is.
Frank: ‘Ja en als je dit dus nou goed wilt realiseren dat moet je goed naar je fundamentele inrichting kijken. Je
moet bekijken wat je als school belangrijk vind en dat de mind set van de docenten hierin veranderd, want
sommige docenten denken van; ja dan neem ik een keer een les op en kan ik het 10x afspelen, is dat wel wat ik
wil. Dit is een andere manier van lesgeven. Het is dus niet zomaar een idee van ergens technologie in plaatsen,
maar dat je echt anders gaat nadenken met de hele school. En de grap hiervan is dat dit eigenlijk in elk
schoolgebouw kan, want de gebouwen die nu worden gebouwd gaan toch gauw 50 a 100 jaar mee en die zijn
allemaal de laatste 20 jaar gebouwd. Deze gebouwen gaan dus nog wel heel wat jaren mee, de scholen moeten
dus wel gaan kijken hoe ze dit gaan doen binnen de gebouwen en hoe ze dat kunnen realiseren.
Kirsten: Daar heb je dus veel flexibiliteit voor nodig.
Frank+Erwin: Ja zeker.
Kirsten: ‘Wat ik bijvoorbeeld zelf ook heb gemerkt tijdens de interviews met de universiteiten, bij de
nieuwbouw van het Ravelijn gebouw aan de universiteit van Twente, werd door de docenten gevraagd om een
college zaal met Lagerhuisopstelling. Dit om interactiever les te geven, meer discussies uit te lokken enzovoort.
De architect heeft hiervoor ook daadwerkelijk 2 zalen voor gebouwd, maar wat je dan in de praktijk ziet is dat
de docenten het toch niet zo een fijne manier vinden om les te geven en toch maar weer een tafeltje links
voorin de klas hebben geplaatst. Je merkt dus dat docenten graag mee willen gaan in interactieve vormen van
leren, maar dat toch het implementeren en het durven uitvoeren ervan niet wordt gedaan. In deze situatie is
het natuurlijk interessant om een manier te vinden hoe je deze mensen wel zover hierin kan krijgen, cursus
training etc.
Erwin; ‘Nee, dat is wel een grappig voorbeeld. Het begint natuurlijk niet met het realiseren van ruimten, maar
zoiets moet eerst duidelijk tussen de oren doordringen. Verder voordat ik het vergeet heb ik nog een leuk
voorbeeld van het Cor Laar college in Nijkerk. De onderbouw leert op een totaal andere manier, ze zitten niet
meer in klassen maar in grote ruimten, met veel ICT en waar echt vraag gestuurd leren wordt toegepast
worden. Hierin zie je duidelijk de verschillende activiteiten wat binnen deze ruimten plaatsvindt. Zo zijn er
plekken voor stilte en ruimten voor groepswerkplekken. Alles is heel erg open en waarin goed gefaciliteerd
wordt, hierin zie je dus goed hoe de filosofie van de school tot uiting wordt gebracht. Daar hebben we ook
filmpjes van op ons netwerk, dat is echt een school die hun filosofie echt doortrekt in hun gebouw. In een
andere school heb ik ook nog wel een leuk voorbeeld in het vo. Een van de natuurkunde docenten is erg bezig
met nieuwe leeromgevingen, hij richt zijn klassen daar ook duidelijk op in. Hij zet de voorbereidingen van de
lessen online als filmpjes en hij bekijkt voor elke les wie wel of niet de filmpjes hebben gekeken. En voor de
studenten die de informatie nog niet hebben bekeken, gaan in een groepje apart zitten om als nog voor te
bereiden op de werkopdrachten. De andere leerlingen gaan dan al aan de slag met experimenten of
opdrachten. Het is verder wel een normale school, maar deze docent wou er graag mee experimenteren.
Kirsten: Ja dat is inderdaad interessant. Als ik nu dit idee in het hogere onderwijs probeer te plaatsen zou dit
natuurlijk wel moeilijker gaan. Want universiteiten zijn veel massaler, meer studenten, geen vaste klassen,
Kirsten van der Vaart
96
daarin zou je niet goed kunnen checken als docent welke student heeft de informatie wel of niet gezien. Maar
ik denk wel dat hier iets voor de toekomst in zit en daar kunnen docenten het niveau van de lessen op
aanpassen.
Erwin: Jazeker, bij Col laar is dat dus echt duidelijk ook ruimtelijk vormgegeven, dat is echt leuk om te zien. Je
voelt ook meteen dat het een creatieve omgeving is, waar leerlingen leren op verschillende plekken, erg
varrierend.
Frank: ‘Een ander voorbeeld is bijvoorbeeld nog de witte ring. Zij hebben een concept bedacht, ze behandelen
per jaar 7 aspecten. Ze hebben hierin 3 stamgroepen gemaakt, er bestaan geen klassen meer, maar
leerpleinen, themaruimtes, laboratoria en restaurantpleintjes. Op deze plekken kunnen de kinderen eten
wanneer ze willen en hoeven niet meer te wachten tot pauzes. De witte ring gaat hier ook ver in.
Erwin: ‘Een collega van ons is naar een interessant project geweest in San Diego; hightechhigh, hier wordt veel
project/probleemgericht gewerkt, een soort van werkplaats, met verschillende ondersteuningen. Dat is
natuurlijk ook de filosofie van 21st century skilss, dat je pas echt leert als je problemen gaat aanpakken door
bijvoorbeeld een project te maken en dan tegen de werkelijke problemen aanloopt. Het is natuurlijk niet zo dat
je de kernvakken moet loslaten, maar je kan juist de vakken integreren. Een vb hiervan is, de mariaschool in
Boven-Leeuwen; zij doen onderzoekend leren, een bepaalde methodiek. Ze hebben bijvoorbeeld een project
als Sinterklaas; de vraag aan de leerlingen is dan om zelf onderzoek te gaan doen om de achtergrond hiervan te
achterhalen. Zo kijken ze naar geschiedenis en taalkundig, dit noemen ze OGO, onderzoek gericht onderwijs.
Kirsten:’Oke, interessant. Waar ik zelf ook nog aan zat te denken is dat de laatste tijd veel gefocused wordt op
samenwerken, zelfstandig-project gericht werken, maar dat er juist ook weer veel wordt gericht op de student
zelf. Dit is eigenlijk een aparte soort integratie, want studenten worden heel vrij gelaten maar er wordt ook
weer heel veel op de individuele student gericht, hoe denken jullie daar over?
Erwin: ‘Ja, dat snap ik. Het is eigenlijk student gerelateerd wanneer de studenten zelf de vragen kunnen stellen
en aan de slag kunnen gaan en ook hun vrijheid hebben in onderzoekswerk. Je merkt dat wanneer de
leerlingen in groepen werken, juist iedereen een rol heeft en daar de kwaliteiten van de leerlingen naar boven
komt. En hierbij kan de ICT in ondersteunen. Zo het collaar voorbeeld, ze doen een project, maar krijgen niet
een cijfer op het werk dat ze inleveren, maar reflecteren. Ze moeten telkens hun leerdoelen en bevindingen
van invullen en daar beoordeeld de docent ook op. Daardoor wordt het een breder beeld qua ontwikkeling.
Kirsten; ‘Oke dus in de nieuwe leervormen wordt er juist veel meer op de ontwikkeling van het kind gelet.’
Erwin: Ja precies, wat snapt een leerling wel of wat niet. Learning-analytics is hier een goed voorbeeld van. Als
je digitaal de ontwikkelingen en de interacties van de leerlingen bijhoudt, kan je een beter beeld schetsen. Zo
worden bijvoorbeeld rekenprogrammas gebruikt, waarin de leerlingen sommen moeten maken, hoe beter ze
worden hoe moeilijker de sommen worden. Dit registreerd en analyseerd de resultaten voor de docenten,
waardoor de docent direct de ontwikkelingen, sterktes en zwaktes van de leerling kan zien.
Kirsten: ‘Dit kan je dus eigenlijk ook doortrekken naar het lesgeven. Als de docent merkt dat een groot deel van
de kinderen moeite heeft met een bepaald onderdeel kan hij/zij hier wat meer in uitleggen, of weer aparte
groepjes maken.
Frank: ‘Als je dit nog breder trekt, kun je dus ook de docenten beoordelen. Je kan zien welke cijfers de
docenten geven of welke aanpak ze gebruiken,dit is voor docenten wel een spannende ontwikkeling, waardoor
het niveau kan worden bepaald en docenten kunnen feedback ontvangen.
Kirsten; ‘maar je kan natuurlijk ook veel meer zien wat het niveau is van de leerlingen, daarin kan je de lessen
op aanpassen. Verder had je het nog over een ontwikkeling; augmented reality?
Kirsten van der Vaart
97
Erwin: ‘Ja, dat is op het gebied van technologie, maar niet perse nieuw. Het gaat er meer om hoe je de
technologische middelen het beste kan gebruiken in de lessen. Gebruik maken van video’s, GPS, wiki’s erbij
betrekken om het onderwijs te verrijken. Het is niet een erg sterk voorbeeld. Zelf vind ik learning analytics of
adaptief lesmateriaal grotere ontwikkelingen.
Kirsten: ‘Maar als je door deze technologieën de verschillende niveaus kan beoordelen, dan krijg je natuurlijk
ook een grotere diversiteit binnen de leergroepen, dit zie je denk ik voornamelijk op het bo, omdat daar het
onderwijs nog niet gericht op het niveau is, wordt hier al iets mee gedaan?
Frank: ‘Nou niet helemaal, je merkt toch dat een groep of klas wel echt benaderd wordt in zijn geheel, de
ontwikkelingen om te werken met verschillende niveaus en groepen binnen de klassen is vooral nu bezig. De
ene groep heeft meer begeleiding nodig dan de andere. Er wordt wel meer gekeken, vooral nu het adaptieve
leren meer naar voren komt. Er wordt meer gekeken welke lesstof er het beste wij welke leerling past. Dit is
wel een ideaalbeeld van schoolbesturen. Optimaal onderwijs bieden waardoor de talenten van de leerlingen
ook optimaal tot uiting komen in plaats van de lesstof. Maar het is best lastig om dit alles toe te passen, want
de inspectie en de regelgeving geeft niet altijd mee. Want als een docent filmpjes online zet en minder lesgeeft,
dan worden de lesuren niet gehaald, de inspectie is hier nu druk mee bezig.
Kirsten: Ja ik snap dat dit gebeurd. Maar als je kijkt naar de ontwikkelingen dan houdt een docent zich dus
straks veel meer bezig met het de reflecties van de leerlingen dan het lesgeven, daarin gaan natuurlijk ook veel
uren zitten, maar dat is misschien lastiger te bewijzen.
Frank: Ja de rol van leraren veranderd veel meer als piloot of coach in plaats van iemand die erg begaan is met
kinderen. Hierin zijn nu veel discussies over. Het gaat er nog steeds om inzicht te krijgen in de ontwikkeling van
de kinderen en niet alleen maar in het staren naar computerschermen. Door de technologie kunnen docenten
juist veel meer inzicht krijgen in de leerlingen, waardoor gymleraren ook als Nederlands docent kan
functioneren.
Kirsten: Maar als ik denk aan het combineren van vakken voor docenten, moet ik zelf gauw denken aan een
Jenaplan school waar ik zelf ook op heb gezeten. Hier had ik alleen voor rekenen en Engels een andere docent,
verder werkte we eigenlijk erg zelfstandig. In het begin van de week kregen we weektaken die aan het einde
van de week af moeste zijn, en mijn docent was tegelijkertijd ook mijn gymleraar.
Erwin: ‘Oke, maar dit merkte we op het vo.’
Kirsten; ‘oke op die manier. Maar als ik eigenlijk nu een beetje kan samenvatten wordt er meer gedaan aan
nieuwe leermethodes op het po dan in het vo?
Frank: Niet zozeer meer, want we zien in alle beide richtingen veranderingen en ontwikkelingen.
Erwin: Je merkt gewoon in het vo dat het lastiger is omdat je daar te maken hebt met vak docenten.
Frank: in het po zie je de rol van docent veranderen, niet meer welke volgende opdracht de leerlingen maken,
want dat beslist de computer, maar juist het begeleiden van het proces. En wanneer grijp je in? Als leerlingen
achterblijven, je pleegt dan in een later stadium interventies. In po willen ze misschien meer gaan specialiseren
om meer vakkennis te hebben en in het vo is het juist andersom, met het zelfde doel; integreren. Ja en toch
denk ik dat de leerstof en sfeer binnen pos wat homogener en kleiner is dan het vo.
Kirsten: En wat zien jullie nog meer als ontwikkelingen over een paar jaar, ruimtelijk of technisch etc. misschien
ook meer richting universiteiten?
Erwin; Hmm ja, ik denk dat je toch wel gaat naar een meer open werkplaats gaat, ik denk dat een deel van de
klaslokalen vervalt. Ik denk dat het wel goed is dat scholen blijven bestaan als werkelijke plek, waar men zich
Kirsten van der Vaart
98
kan concentreren en kan studeren. Maar dat de school wel meer naar buiten moet gaan, waar het logisch is om
het op die bepaalde plek te doen.
Kirsten; Meer de leerruimte betrekken om de creativiteit te stimuleren?
Erwin: Ja precies, ik denk dat inderdaad meer aan een soort open werkplaats, met verschillende
ondersteuningen, zoals concentratieplekken.
Kirsten: Dus eigenlijk een soort brainstormruimtes bedenken?
Erwin: Ja een soort markt, met verschillende doelen en ideeen in groepen binnen 1 ruimte, dit wekt interesse
op, een soort kruisbestuiving. De leerlingen gaan bij elkaar shoppen, het zijn allemaal kleine oefeningetjes wat
resulteert in een integraal geheel. Bijvoorbeeld het uitwerken van ideeen op papier, daar wordt weer op taal
gelet. Ik denk dat daar leerlingen heel veel van leren, tenminste dat is mijn visie.
Kirsten: Ja die visie vind ik juist wel interessant de creativiteit stimuleren. Maar ik zit dan ook weer een
koppeling te maken naar het universitaire onderwijs, hoe kun je zo een praktijk gerichte methode ook laten
werken binnen een meer theoretisch gerichte leerweg? Zoals op de universiteit heb je nog meer vakgerichte
vakken.
Erwin: Hmm lastig,
Frank: Nou ik deed zelf toegepaste wiskunde. Ik merkte dat we daar in kleine groepen zaten en dat we daarin
zelf dingen konden aandragen. Dus meer interactie van ons, maar ook van de docenten doordat het onderwijs
gepersonaliseerd was ipv 500 man. Hier zaten we ook meer in kantoorruimtes, maar ook nog collegezalen.
Erwin: Ik denk dat dit ook wel nodig blijft. Een plek waar je kan leren moet beschikbaar blijven, collegezalen
zullen blijven bestaan.
Frank: Kijk het doen van onderzoeken is een heel belangrijke vaardigheid wat je op de uni onder de knie moet
krijgen. Door de aandacht op vakken binnen universiteiten, moet je natuurlijk ook nog je onderzoekend
vermogen uitbreiden, want je wil natuurlijk een kritische onderzoeker worden. Daar zie ik nog wel
mogelijkheden om te integreren binnen universiteiten. Daar is weinig aandacht voor volgens mij nu en dat
komt denk ik door de massaliteit. In kleinere groepen is integratie makkelijk.
Kirsten: Als ik dan zo kijk naar mijn eigen universiteit. Wij hebben juist erg flexibele roostering, leerlingen
kunnen zelf kiezen wanneer ze welke vakken volgen. Ik denk dat het voor docenten daarom ook wel erg lastig
is om een inschatting te maken van de klassen grootte, want dit gebeurd vaak pas een paar weken voordat het
nieuwe blok begint.
Erwin: Ja, inderdaad. Maar als ik nu nog weer even kijk naar over 10 jaar en nu. Ik denk dat we dan zeker
allemaal beschikken over een electronic device, waar je overal toegang op internet hebt. Verder stel ik me voor
dat ook op de universiteiten veel meer wordt gedaan aan weblectures, losse leerblokjes via Itunes. Dat je
eigenlijk alle informatie en leerstoffen van internet kan halen van alle universiteiten van de wereld. Dat je daar
ook colleges van kan volgen. Dat je veel meer naar een model gaat, waar alllerlei modules beschikbaar is. En
wat mooi zou zijn, is dat hier een zogenaamde taal is, dat je alsware als LEGO blokjes alles op elkaar kan
passen. Dat hier iedereen zijn eigen pad kiest, dat je vakken over de hele wereld kan volgen overal.
Frank: Ik denk dat je echte universiteiten krijgt. Je merkt ook op universiteiten dat de beroepsgerichte studies
steeds massaler en populairder worden. Ik denk dat hbo en universiteiten veel meer gaan fuseren. Dat je veel
meer beroepsgerichte opleidingen krijgt, dit is al redelijk gaande. Maar dat ook de gewone opleidingen blijven
bestaan. Je ziet bijvoorbeeld dat op veel hbo’s dat de minor wordt afgeschaft, ze willen weer naar de kerntaak
van de opleiding terug. De hbo’s zijn de laatste jaren echt uitgedijd, steeds meer leerlingen moeten de
Kirsten van der Vaart
99
mogelijkheid hebben om de universiteit te volgen.
Erwin: Ik heb nog een ander scenario. Ik vind een inspirerend voorbeeld het st. Johns college. Ze hebben daar
een heel breed curriculum. Het gaat er daar om dat mensen zelfstandig leren denken, niet om welk vak ze
doen. Ze beginnen vanaf de geschiedenis van de wiskunde, bij biologie gingen ze de bergen in. Het idee is
zelfstandig de hele ontwikkeling versneld doormaken. Ze hadden daarna een basis, maar daarna moesten ze
nog echt gaan studeren. Maar diegene die daar zijn afgestudeerd zijn uiteindelijk ook gewoon doktoren, of
werkt bij de NASA, ze hebben allen nog een master gedaan. Je ziet tegenwoordig veel meer beroepen van de
toekomst, maar deze weten we nog niet. Ik zie wel voor me dat we constant moeten blijven leren, de wereld
veranderd zo snel qua technologie dat je wel bij moet blijven. Maar zo gauw je bij een bedrijf gaat werken, heb
je toch altijd wel een interne opleiding nodig. Misschien heb je er meer aan als theoretische basis nodig, en dat
je daarna bij een bedrijf gaat werken en dat zij vervolgens weer in jou investeren. Want veel bedrijven zeuren
dat het niet goed aansluit, eigenlijk bedrijven universiteiten langzaam aan het overnemen, omdat zij ze willen
scholen aan de hand van hun leerprocessen. Dat is erg veranderlijk, maar ik denk dat dit beter binnen een
bedrijf gedaan kan worden. Maar het veraderlijke hiervan is natuurlijk wel weer, dat studenten erg specifiek
worden opgeleid en dat wanneer een bedrijf failliet gaat, je kennis te specifiek is. Maar dat zijn gewoon
scenario’s.
Kirsten: Oke, interessant. Wat ik me nog wel afvraag, denken jullie dat door de nieuwe technologieën,
studenten minder naar universiteiten gaan?
Erwin: Dat weet ik niet, durf ik niet te zeggen. Je ziet wel dat kenniswerk erg is toegenomen. Als je kijkt naar de
doelstellingen van Nederland, 50% moet tegenwoordig hoog opgeleid zijn, dan zie je toch wel dat
universiteiten en hogescholen onder druk worden gezet. Daardoor is langzaam maar zeker wel het niveau
gedaald.
Frank: Ja, precies, en daardoor krijg je nou denk ik ook die beweging dat universiteiten met hogescholen
fuseren.
Erwin: Je ziet wel dat daardoor het niveau is gedaan.
Frank: En dus krijg je university-colleges, zoals Nyenrode. Maar ik denk dat studenten nog wel naar de
universiteiten komen, maar met andere doelen, het gaat met om de interactie.
Erwin: Je komt niet meer naar school om met zn allen in een collegezaal te zitten, dat kan je thuis doen, want
dat kan je dan veel efficiënter doen.
Frank: Nou ik weet niet zozeer of dit efficiënter is, wanneer er tijdens een college een discussie ontstaat, leer je
hier veel van, en dat kan je op de online lessen vaak weer niet terugzien, waardoor je misschien wel een deel
voor je tentamen mist. Ik denk dat daar nog wel een soort oplossing voor gevonden dient te worden. Want
door discussies ga je kritisch denken en is meer dan kennisoverdracht.
Erwin: wat ik zelf nog wel als leuke ontwikkeling heb ervaren bij het st. Johns college is de ontwikkeling van
werken in groepen en geen cijfers krijgen. Studenten moesten elke keer essays schrijven voor punten, en daar
eerst over discussiëren. Wanneer studenten geen voorbereidingen hadden gedaan, konden ze ook niet
deelnemen aan de discussies, dus iedereen was verplicht om zich voor te bereiden.
Kirsten: dus eigenlijk zullen veel nieuwe leermethodes gebaseerd zijn op het pro-actieve karakter van de
student. Nu wordt er veel meer al van studenten al verwacht, op voorbereidingen.
Frank/Erwin: Ja dat is het zeker. Ken je verder het t-pack model?
Kirsten van der Vaart
100
Kirsten: Nee
Erwin: Oke, want dat is eigenlijk bijna hetzelfde model als jij hebt ontwikkeld maar dan vanuit het perspectief
van de docent.
Recommended