Creating Common Ground: Architecture For Tactical Learning and Creative Convergence

Certain environments can inhibit learning and stifle enthusiasm, while others enhance learning or stimulate curiosity. Furthermore, in a world where technological change is accelerating we could ask how might architecture connect resource abundant and resource scarce innovation environments? Innovation environments developed out of necessity within urban villages and those developed with high intention and expectation within more institutionalized settings share a framework of opportunity for addressing change through learning and education. This thesis investigates formal and informal learning environments and how architecture can stimulate curiosity, enrich learning, create common ground, and expand access to education. The reason for this thesis exploration is to better understand how architects might design inclusive environments that bring people together to build sustainable infrastructure encouraging innovation and adaptation to change for years to come. The context of this thesis is largely based on Colin McFarlane’s theory that the “city is an assemblage for learning” The socio-spatial perspective in urbanism, considers how built infrastructure and society interact. Through the urban realm, inhabitants learn to negotiate people, space, politics, and resources affecting their daily lives. The city is therefore a dynamic field of emergent possibility. This thesis uses the city as a lens through which the boundaries between informal and formal logics as well as the public and private might be blurred. Through analytical processes I have examined the environmental devices and assemblage of factors that consistently provide conditions through which learning may thrive. These parameters that make a creative space significant can help suggest the design of common ground environments through which innovation is catalyzed.

UNPROVEN INNOVATION: IPADS IN K-12 ENVIRONMENTS

Nationally, the education sector spends more than 5 billion dollars annually on digital tools, “yet seldom are technology solutions factored into any viable equation for improving student academic achievement” (Moersch, 2014, p. ix). Consider the following case in point: In July 2014, Apple announced that in just 3 years, the company had sold more than13 million iPads to educational institutions worldwide (Cavanagh, 2014). Put into perspective, that represents more than 5.2 billion dollars spent by the education industry to purchase iPads, which is the equivalent of the annual salaries of 89,655 teachers (“High School Teacher: Salary,” 2014). Despite such vast expenditures, there have been very few attempts to evaluate the efficacy of these digital tools on improving academic achievement. This research involved a quantitative data review of participant (student and teacher) survey data to explore one of the country’s largest K-12 iPad implementation undertakings in an effort to identify (a) best practices and (b) lessons learned from implementing the iPad into K-12 educational environments. It should be noted that the school system forming the basis of this research already had administered and collated the surveys used in this study.

Working with Student Teachers: A Mixed Methods Study to Examine the Roles and Self-Identified Dispositions of Cooperating Teachers

A critical component of teacher education is the field experience during which candidates practice under the supervision of experienced teachers. Programs use the InTASC Standards to define the requisite knowledge, skills, and dispositions for teaching. Practicing teachers are familiar with the concepts of knowledge and skills, but they are less familiar with dispositions. Practicing teachers who mentor prospective teachers are underrepresented in the literature, but they are critical to teacher preparation. The research goals were to describe the self-identified dispositions of cooperating teachers, identify what cooperating teachers consider their role in preparing prospective teachers, and explain challenges that cooperating teachers face. Using a mixed methods design, I conducted a quantitative survey followed by a qualitative case study. When I compared survey and case study data, cooperating teachers report possessing InTASC critical dispositions described in Standard 2: Learning Differences, Standard 3: Learning Environments, and Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, but not Standard 6: Assessment and Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration. Cooperating teachers assume the roles of modeler, mentor and advisor, and informal evaluator. They explain student teachers often lack skills and dispositions to assume full teaching responsibilities and recommend that universities better prepare candidates for classrooms. Cooperating teachers felt university evaluations were not relevant to teaching reality. I recommend modifying field experiences to increase the quantity and duration of classroom placements. I suggest further research to detail cooperating teacher dispositions, compare cooperating teachers who work with different universities, and determine if cooperating teacher dispositions influence student teacher dispositions.