"Form follows function."
~L. Sullivan
At the time of this writing, we are well into the second decade of the 21st century. The world has changed significantly since the Industrial Age upon which much of the current education paradigm is based. Many everyday tasks can be automated or otherwise infused with technology, information is more readily accessible via the internet, individuals can choose to be more connected to more people and communities than ever before. Robinson (2010) explains that education must adapt or risk being viewed as irrelevant in the modern world. People have a broad spectrum of information needs that is frequently interdisciplinary in nature. One long-term implication for libraries that are rebranding themselves as learning commons is that, while many users may choose to work in digital spaces, there is still a physical location associated with the learning commons that must flexible enough to support a wide range of information access behaviors.
A fair amount of attention is directed at the usage of space in the learning commons. The word “space” may also invoke the notion of a “makerspace.” Weisgrau (2015) states that “neither of these spaces can replace the other.” TLs who take a broad view of the library as a place for learning will recognize that people who come to the library come with a variety of needs and purposes. The physical and virtual learning commons must be flexible enough to support many possibilities.
In fact, the first item on Loertscher and Koechlin’s (2014) “defining characteristics of a successful learning commons” is that it provides “a collaborative physical and virtual environment that invites and ignites participatory learning.” A common characteristic of the examples provided by Holland (2015) reflects “transparent learning hubs” where learning, exploration, and collaboration can be openly observed to “[combine]...an Apple Genius Bar and a Starbucks.” There is also an effort to provide a virtual element to the learning commons with digital content and collaboration tools (making the virtual learning commons accessible beyond the physical space and hours of operation).
The TL must anticipate how learners will use the physical and digital space available. How does the learning commons accommodate the following frequent usages of the space?
Let's try an exercise. Use this Poll Everywhere survey to rank the most common configurations needed for your learning commons. (The survey results and a reflection appear at the bottom of this web page.)
A fair amount of attention is directed at the usage of space in the learning commons. The word “space” may also invoke the notion of a “makerspace.” Weisgrau (2015) states that “neither of these spaces can replace the other.” TLs who take a broad view of the library as a place for learning will recognize that people who come to the library come with a variety of needs and purposes. The physical and virtual learning commons must be flexible enough to support many possibilities.
In fact, the first item on Loertscher and Koechlin’s (2014) “defining characteristics of a successful learning commons” is that it provides “a collaborative physical and virtual environment that invites and ignites participatory learning.” A common characteristic of the examples provided by Holland (2015) reflects “transparent learning hubs” where learning, exploration, and collaboration can be openly observed to “[combine]...an Apple Genius Bar and a Starbucks.” There is also an effort to provide a virtual element to the learning commons with digital content and collaboration tools (making the virtual learning commons accessible beyond the physical space and hours of operation).
The TL must anticipate how learners will use the physical and digital space available. How does the learning commons accommodate the following frequent usages of the space?
- Independent reading/study
- Small groups
- Large groups / Presenters
- Comfort / Lounge
- Virtual Spaces
- User-determined configurations
Let's try an exercise. Use this Poll Everywhere survey to rank the most common configurations needed for your learning commons. (The survey results and a reflection appear at the bottom of this web page.)
The ranking survey is intended to help you think about how your patrons use the space. Patron needs and wants frequently change, which underscores the importance of flexibility when possible. It’s unlikely that a high school library will have the luxury of separating spaces by floor the way that USF does.
But it is worth noting how each area is labeled with a “sound level.” In a one room high school learning commons that also houses the library, the TL should make an effort to accommodate patrons’ various purposes while recognizing that activities often have differing sound levels. How can the TL arrange the learning commons spaces in the most responsive manner? Technology tools like Google Drawing can be used to make a simple floor plan like this one that make it possible to experiment with different furniture arrangements without actually having to move the furniture. The aforementioned RoomStyler is a more robust (and more complex) tool that can even render 3D views. Try to create a plan that will provide as much distance as possible between higher volume activities like a makerspace and lower volume activities like independent study.
But it is worth noting how each area is labeled with a “sound level.” In a one room high school learning commons that also houses the library, the TL should make an effort to accommodate patrons’ various purposes while recognizing that activities often have differing sound levels. How can the TL arrange the learning commons spaces in the most responsive manner? Technology tools like Google Drawing can be used to make a simple floor plan like this one that make it possible to experiment with different furniture arrangements without actually having to move the furniture. The aforementioned RoomStyler is a more robust (and more complex) tool that can even render 3D views. Try to create a plan that will provide as much distance as possible between higher volume activities like a makerspace and lower volume activities like independent study.
Survey Results and Reflection (As Promised)
After you submit your reflection, you'll have the option to view previous responses.
|
|
References
Holland, B. (2015, January 14). 21st-century libraries: the learning commons. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/21st-century-libraries-learning-commons-beth-holland
Loertscher, D. & Koechlin, C. (2014, March/April). Climbing to excellence: Defining characteristics of successful learning commons. Knowledge Quest, 42(4). Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/knowledgequest/docs/KQ_MarApr14_ClimbingtoExcellence.pdf
Robinson, K. (2010, October). Ken Robinson: Changing education paradigms [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms?language=en
Weisgrau, J. (2015, September 24). School libraries and makerspaces: Can they coexist? [Web log]. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/school-libraries-makerspaces-coexist-josh-weisgrau
University of South Florida Libraries. (n.d.) Floor plans. Retrieved from http://www.lib.usf.edu/about/floor-plans/
Loertscher, D. & Koechlin, C. (2014, March/April). Climbing to excellence: Defining characteristics of successful learning commons. Knowledge Quest, 42(4). Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aaslpubsandjournals/knowledgequest/docs/KQ_MarApr14_ClimbingtoExcellence.pdf
Robinson, K. (2010, October). Ken Robinson: Changing education paradigms [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_changing_education_paradigms?language=en
Weisgrau, J. (2015, September 24). School libraries and makerspaces: Can they coexist? [Web log]. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/blog/school-libraries-makerspaces-coexist-josh-weisgrau
University of South Florida Libraries. (n.d.) Floor plans. Retrieved from http://www.lib.usf.edu/about/floor-plans/