El espacio en el trabajo por proyectosel caso de los proyectos del Modelo Rubik

  1. García Monge, Alfonso
  2. Pellicer Iborra, Carmen
  3. Jiménez Ruiz, María
  4. Gómez González, Francisco Javier 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Valladolid
    info

    Universidad de Valladolid

    Valladolid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01fvbaw18

Journal:
Revista electrónica interuniversitaria de formación del profesorado

ISSN: 1575-0965

Year of publication: 2023

Issue Title: Laboratorios de investigación en el aula: principios y modelos educativos basados en la evidencia

Volume: 26

Issue: 2

Pages: 37-56

Type: Article

DOI: 10.6018/REIFOP.559421 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Revista electrónica interuniversitaria de formación del profesorado

Abstract

If we understand that education is an embodied and situated process, the importance of the spaces in which it takes place can be deduced. In order to understand the meanings that the participants give about the role of space in the teaching-learning process of project work, a case study is developed by observing and interviewing the teachers and students of three Primary Education centers that develop the Rubik educational model, in which the transformation of spaces for the development of projects plays a fundamental role. The results show that the participation of teachers and students in the transformation of the spaces linked to the development of different projects, would provoke the motivation of the students, guide them towards learning, facilitate memory and trigger different emotional and identity processes. The space would be a cultural mediator, in which experiences, learning and emotions would crystallize.

Bibliographic References

  • Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior. Wadsworth.
  • Anderman, E. M. (2002). School effects on psychological outcomes during adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 795–809. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.4.795
  • Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils' learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013
  • Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Moffat, J., & Kobbacy, K. (2013). A holistic, multi-level analysis identifying the impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning. Building and environment, 59, 678-689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.016
  • Brooks, D. C. (2012). Space and Consequences: The Impact of Different Formal Learning Spaces on Instructor and Student Behavior. Journal of Learning Spaces, 1 (2). http://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/285/282
  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
  • Byers, T., Imms, W., y Hartnell-Young, E. (2018). Evaluating teacher and student spatial transition from a traditional classroom to an innovative learning environment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 156-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.004
  • Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action, and Cognitive Extension. Oxford University Press.
  • Clark, A. & Chalmers, D. (1998). The Extended Mind, Analysis, 58(1), 7–19, https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7
  • Colombetti, G., y Roberts, T. (2015). Extending the extended mind: the case for extended affectivity. Philosophical Studies, 172, 1243-1263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-014-0347-3
  • Dolcos, F., Katsumi, Y., Moore, M., Berggren, N., de Gelder, B., Derakshan, N., Hamm, A. O., Koster, E., Ladouceur, C. D., Okon-Singer, H., Pegna, A. J., Richter, T., Schweizer, S., Van den Stock, J., Ventura-Bort, C., Weymar, M., & Dolcos, S. (2020). Neural correlates of emotion-attention interactions: From perception, learning, and memory to social cognition, individual differences, and training interventions. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 108, 559–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.08.017
  • Dudek, M. (2000). Architecture of Schools. The New Learning Environments. Architectural Press.
  • Fielding, S. (2000). Walk on the left! Children’s geographies and the primary school. In S. Holloway & G. Valentine (Eds). Children’s Geographies: playing, learning, learning. (pp.230-244). Routledge
  • Fombella-Coto, I., Arias-Blanco, J. y San Pedro-Veledo, J. C. (2019). Arquitectura escolar y metodologías docentes en el Siglo XXI: Respuestas a un nuevo paradigma educativo. Revista Inclusiones, 6(4), 65-91.
  • Fraser, B. J. (2012). Classroom learning environments: Retrospect, context and prospect.In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1191–1239). Springer.
  • Ghaziani, R. (2010). School Design: Researching Children’s views. Childhoods Today, 4(1), 1-27.
  • Gibson, J. J. (2014). The ecological approach to visual perception. Psychology press.
  • Goetz, J. P. y Lecompte, M. D. (1988). Etnografía y diseño cualitativo en investigación educativa. Morata.
  • Grannäs, J., & Frelin, A. (2017). Spaces of student support: comparing educational environments from two time periods. Improving Schools, 20(2), 127-142 https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216688547
  • Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29(2), 75- 91. doi: 10.1007/bf02766777 https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF02766777.pdf
  • Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Woolner, P., & McCaughey, C. (2005). The impact of school environments: A literature review. Callaghan, NSW: University of Newcastle. http://www.cfbt.com/PDF/91085.pdf
  • Horne Martin, S. (2002). The Classroom Environment and its effects on the Practice of Theachers. Journal of Environmental Psichology, 22(1-2), 139–156. doi:10.1006/jevp.2001.0239
  • Hunley, S. & Schaller, M. (2006). Assessing Learning Spaces. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces. (pp. 13.1-13.11). EDUCAUSE.
  • Jack, G. (2010). Place Matters: The Significance of Place Attachments for Children's Well-Being. The British Journal of Social Work, 40(3), 755–771, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcn142
  • Jacklin, H. (2004). Discourse, interaction and spatial rhythms: locating pedagogic practice in a material world, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 12(3), 373-398, DOI: 10.1080/14681360400200208
  • JISC (2006). Designing spaces for effective learning. A guide to 21st century learning space design. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISClearningspaces.pdf
  • Kenkmann, A. (2011). Adapting and Designing Spaces: Children and their Schools. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(2), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.425
  • Killeen, J. P., Evans, G. W., & Danko, S. (2003). The Role Of Permanent Student Artwork In Students’ Sense Of Ownership In An Elementary School. Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916502250133
  • Kwon, J., & Iedema, A. (2022). Body and the Senses in Spatial Experience: The Implications of Kinesthetic and Synesthetic Perceptions for Design Thinking. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 864009. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.864009
  • Mandik, P. (2005). Action-oriented representation. In A. Brook and K. Akins (Eds.). Cognition and the Brain: The Philosophy and Neuroscience Movement. Cambridge University Press, 284–305.
  • Markus, T. (1993) Buildings and Power: freedom and control in the origin of modern building types. Routledge
  • Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: the realization of the living. Reidel.
  • McGregor, J. (2004) Space Power and the Classroom. FORUM, 46(1), 13-18. https://doi.org/10.2304/forum.2004.46.1.2
  • McMinn, M., Aldridge, J. & Henderson, D. (2021). Learning environment, self-efficacy for teaching mathematics, and beliefs about mathematics. Learning Environments Research, 24, 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09326-x
  • McRobbie, C. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1993). Associations between student outcomes and psychosocial science environment. The Journal of Educational Research, 87(2), 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1993.9941170.
  • Montessori, M. (1986). La mente absorbente. Ed. Diana
  • Mulcahy, D., Cleveland, B., & Aberton, H. (2015). Learning spaces and pedagogic change: envisioned, enacted and experienced. Pedagogy, Culture y Society, 23(4), 575-595. doi:10.1080/14681366.2015.1055128
  • Nathan, M. J. (2021). Foundations of Embodied Learning: A Paradigm for Education. Routledge.
  • Oblinger, D.G. (2006). Learning Spaces. EDUCAUSE.
  • Painter, S., Fournier, J., Grape, C., Grummon, P., Morelli, J., Whitmer, S., & Cevetello, J. (2013). Research on learning space design: Present state, future directions. Report for Society for College and University Planning. Ann Arbor.
  • Phelan, A. M. (2001). Power and place in teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(5), 583–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-051x(01)00015-4
  • Proshansky, H. & Fabian, A. K. (1987). The development of place-identity in the child. In C.S. Weinstein & T. G. David (Eds), Spaces for Children. The Built Environment and Child Development. (pp.21-40). Plenum Press.
  • Rands, M. L., & Gansemer-Topf, A. M. (2017). The room itself is active: How classroom design impacts student engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(1), 26.
  • Read, M. A., Sugawara, A. I., & Brandt, J. A. (1999). Impact of Space and Color in the Physical Environment on Preschool Children’s Cooperative Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 31(3), 413–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139169921972173
  • Read, C., & Szokolszky, A. (2020). Ecological Psychology and Enactivism: Perceptually-Guided Action vs. Sensation-Based Enaction. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 1270. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01270
  • Satpute, A. B., Kang, J., Bickart, K. C., Yardley, H., Wager, T. D., & Barrett, L. F. (2015). Involvement of Sensory Regions in Affective Experience: A Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1860. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01860
  • Schreuder, E., Van Erp, J., Toet, A., & Kallen, V. L. (2016). Emotional responses to multisensory environmental stimuli: A conceptual framework and literature review. Sage Open, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2158244016630591
  • Siemens, G. (2005). Designing ecosystems versus designing learning. http://www.connectivism.ca/blog/ecosystem
  • Spencer, C. (2005). Place Attachment, Place Identity and the Development of the Child’s Self-identity: Searching the Literature to Develop an Hypothesis. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 14(4), 305-309, DOI: 10.1080/10382040508668363
  • Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. Guilford Publications
  • Stewart, J., Stewart, J. R., Gapenne, O., & Di Paolo, E. A. (Eds.). (2010). Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science. MIT press.
  • Stokols, D. & Altman, I. (1987). Handbook of Environmental Psychology: vol 1. Wiley.
  • Strauss, A. y Corbin, J. (2002). Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Universidad de Antioquia.
  • Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the dis'placement' of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 502-511. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00974.x
  • Tom, S. C. J., Voss, K., & Scheetz, C. (2008). The space is the message: First assessment of a learning studio. EDUCAUS Quarterly, 31(2), 42-52. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2008/5/the-space-is-themessage-first-assessment-of-a-learning-studio
  • Voltz, D. L., & Damiano-Lantz, M. (1993). Developing Ownership in Learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25(4), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005999302500405
  • Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (2017). The embodied mind, revised edition: Cognitive science and human experience. MIT press.
  • Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The qualitative report, 20(2), 134-152.
Data source: Dialnet