What Factors become Priorities in the Decision-making Process that Influence Administrators of Campus Space to Choose one Type of General-use Classroom over Another?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Current best practice education and design research indicated that flexible general-use teaching spaces, not inflexible row-and-column classrooms, improved student success. Research indicated inflexible classrooms inhibited progressive models of pedagogy by discouraging active learner-centered methods. The focus of this study was the inflexible general-use classroom that was the standard method of teacher-centered education. In this qualitative exploratory, descriptive case study I interviewed administrators in three Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology who were in various ways responsible for the `delivery of classrooms'. I extracted factors that influenced the decisions of participants to prioritize the inflexible classroom model and looked for reasons why the transition to supportive flexible space had been slow to emerge. Factors that stalled space changes included issues of space utilization, faculty preference, technology fatigue and effort. I also explored the colleges' historic use of inflexible classrooms, the characteristics that have maintained their use and barriers that have prevented change as well as the historic and current environmental context in which decisions about classrooms are made. The results show that administrators, for the most part reflect their learner-centered Strategic Plans. However, I discovered a gap in their understanding that inflexible teacher-centered classrooms support one pedagogy model where learner-centered pedagogies are supported by physical spaces that promote flexibility and movement. To ensure inflexible classrooms remained, administrators repeated factors containing misinformation that supported the single priority; to make the most of funding through maximization of space and schedule. Slow transition through insufficient momentum was possible because administrators did not have the design experience or skills to know better. They formed alliances and used factors to argue for the continuance of the row-and-column general-use classroom. This continuance was most evident in two of the three subject colleges. One college in the study was contemplating change while the other two were not. Emergent results showed that although best practices in design and education provided evidence that change from inflexible to flexible general-use classrooms could improve student success, environments continued to adhere to the historic standard row-and-column configuration. I hope to create the momentum for change from inflexible to flexible environments required leadership.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».