Creating future-proof learning environments A study on educational objectives and conceptual decision-making 2 European Real Estate Society (ERES) 2015

Creating future-proof learning environments

A study on educational objectives and conceptual decision-making

2

European Real Estate Society (ERES) 2015

22nd Annual Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June 24th – 27th

Theme N: Real Estate Education ● Session: N-6 ● Location: Taskisla Room 106

Dr. Pieter C. le RouxLecturer: Operations Management

Academy of Hotel & Facility Management

NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences

Barbara GrafGraduate student

Academy of Hotel & Facility Management

NHTV Breda University of Applied Sciences

22nd ERES Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June 24 th - 27th, 2015

Creating future-proof learning environments

Content:

1. Context of the study

2. Methodological approach

3. Outcomes & conclusions

4. The next step

3

4



1-1. NHTV Campus 2018:

• NHTV:– 5 academies (4 locations– 7500 students– 328 teaching staff

• Aim:• To create a shared value in

form of a community that ‘everyone wants to belong to’

• Optimal, high-quality, state-of-the-art learning & working environment

?

5



1-2. Problem statement:

• Management challenge:– Creating a shared value in the

form of a community

• Business challenge:– Making conceptual choices for

a suitable physical and virtual learning environment

• Educational challenge:– Combine new didactical

methods with the new student

1-3. Research question:

“What conceptual choices need to be taken

for the design of the physical and virtual

learning environment of the new NHTV campus?”


2. Methodological approach

6

2-1. Conceptual framework:

NHTV Theory Implementation

NHTVStudent-centered

learningImplementation

Educational vision

Didactic methods

NHTV culture

NHTV requirements

Number of spaces

Number of students / staff

Technological requirements

The “Net-Generation”

Learning community

Information technologies

Types of learning spaces

Design aspects

Sustain & support aspects

Assessment aspects

Result

Conceptual choices for

physical and virtual learning environment of the new NHTV campus 2018

Conceptual decision-making

support framework



3-1. Design process for learning environments:

7

(Beckers, 2013)

physical

ind

ivid

ual



3-2. Teaching staff & student needs survey:

Teaching staff

Subject Students

Rank A. Learning styles Rank

n/a Individual learningGroup learning

E-learningProject-based learning

Field tripsReal-life assignments

123

8




Teaching staff Subject Students

Rank B. Didactic methods Rank

1324

Project-based tutoringFace-to-face tutoringPeer-to-peer tutoring

E-learning / distance learning

1234

C. Technological objects

1243-5

LaptopWi-Fi

SmartphoneTablet

Developer kitsTeaching aids

12345-

9





Rank D. Study materials Rank

132

Digital sourcesHard-copy literature

Virtual sources (Ted talk, video, etc.)

123

10





Rank E. Preferred learning spaces Rank

-3-4-12

5

HomeSemi-quiet spaces at school

Quiet spaces at schoolSocial & external spaces at school

LibraryGeneral teaching / learning spaces

Virtual environmentOther (train/ bar / Starbucks)

Other (excursions)

12334--5-

11



3-3. Outcomes – Teaching staff & student needs survey:

1. Group teaching / learning

2. Simulated environments

3. Immersive environments

4. Peer-to-peer & social learning

5. Learning clusters

6. Individual learning

7. External spaces

1. Learning through reflection

2. Learning by doing

3. Learning through conversation

12

Types of learning spaces

Ways of learning



3-3. Outcomes – Teaching staff & student needs survey:

13

(Beckers, 2013)



3-4. Design aspects for learning environments:

• General design strategies:

14

Interactive designFlexible design

Focused design Informal design




• Design strategies for creating / facilitating optimal flexibility :

15

Responsive design

Mobile design Open designConnected

design




• Design strategies for building / strengthening a sense of community:

16

Accommodating design

Adaptive design Tiered designVersatile design



3-5. Recommendations – Future learning environments:

• 1 overall physical and virtual learning environment for all academies

• Implementation of all 7 learning space typologies:– Facilitation of student-

centered learning aspects– Space efficiency through

sharing learning spaces

• External and entrance spaces as academy heart for exchanging knowledge & social interaction: – Interaction and cooperating

under all academies, students and teaching staff

• Creation of learning community:– Sharing knowledge– The social context

17



3-5. Recommendations – Future learning environments:

• Technological requirements:– Current level of provision– Be ready for “big data” trends– Wearables

• Virtual learning environment:– Enables that learning could

occur anywhere and at anytime at the future NHTV campus

18


4. The next step

4-1. Supporting decision-making – “House of Quality”:

• What is HoQ?– Quality Function Deployment

(QFD) \– Translates customer

requirements data into targets to be met by new (product) design

– Uses amatrix format to capture a number of issues that are vital to the planning process

19


4. The next step

4-2. Conceptual understanding of the HoQ:

20


4. The next step

4-2. Conceptual understanding:

21

1 2 6 4

3

5

7

1. Customer needs i.t.o.:– Ways of learning– Space types

2. Impact of customer (dis)satisfaction

3. Design attributes associated with the different space types

4. Customer perception of the space types

5. Interrelatedness of the design attributes

6. Strength of the impact

7. List of priorities for supporting conceptual decision-making


4. The next step

4-3. Application of the NEN 8021 to the HoQ:

22

4

“Valuation of user

requirements and

performanceof non-

residential buildings”


4. The next step

4-3. Application of the NEN 8021 to the HoQ:

23

“Valuation of user

requirements and

performanceof non-

residential buildings”


4. The next step

4-4. Application of Kano’s model for

24

Tan, K. C., & Shen, X. X. (2000). Integrating Kano's model in the planning matrix of quality function deployment. Total quality management, 11(8), 1141-1151.

Dr. Pieter C. le RouxLecturer: Operations ManagementInternational Corporate Real Estate & Facility Management

[email protected]

Thank you

25

European Real Estate Society (ERES) 2015

22nd Annual Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, June 24th – 27th

Documents

Creating future-proof learning environments A study on educational objectives and conceptual decision-making 2 European Real Estate Society (ERES) 2015