Jonas Nordquist1,2. 1. Department of Medicine (Huddinge), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Research and Education, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of this review is to map the area around the topic of the relationship between physical space and learning and to then draw further potential implications from this for the specific area of health profession education. METHODS: The nature of the review is a scoping review following a 5-step-model by Arksey & O'Malley. The charting of the data has been conducted with the help of the networked learning landscape framework from Nordquist and Laing. RESULTS: The majority of the research studies on classroom-scale level have focused on how technology may enable active learning. There are no identified research studies on the building-scale level. Hence, the alignment of curricula and physical learning spaces has scarcely been addressed in research from other sectors. In order to 'create a field', conclusions from both case studies and research in related areas must be identified and taken into account to provide insights into health profession education. Four areas have been identified as having potential for future development in health profession education: (i) active involvement of faculty members in the early stages of physical space development; (ii) further development of the assessment strategies for evaluating how physical space impacts learning; (iii) exploration of how informal spaces are being developed in other sectors; and (iv) initiating research projects in HPE to study how informal spaces impact on students' learning. CONCLUSION: Potentially, the results of this scoping review will result in better future research questions and better-designed studies in this new and upcoming academic field of aligning physical learning spaces and curricula in health profession education.
OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of this review is to map the area around the topic of the relationship between physical space and learning and to then draw further potential implications from this for the specific area of health profession education. METHODS: The nature of the review is a scoping review following a 5-step-model by Arksey & O'Malley. The charting of the data has been conducted with the help of the networked learning landscape framework from Nordquist and Laing. RESULTS: The majority of the research studies on classroom-scale level have focused on how technology may enable active learning. There are no identified research studies on the building-scale level. Hence, the alignment of curricula and physical learning spaces has scarcely been addressed in research from other sectors. In order to 'create a field', conclusions from both case studies and research in related areas must be identified and taken into account to provide insights into health profession education. Four areas have been identified as having potential for future development in health profession education: (i) active involvement of faculty members in the early stages of physical space development; (ii) further development of the assessment strategies for evaluating how physical space impacts learning; (iii) exploration of how informal spaces are being developed in other sectors; and (iv) initiating research projects in HPE to study how informal spaces impact on students' learning. CONCLUSION: Potentially, the results of this scoping review will result in better future research questions and better-designed studies in this new and upcoming academic field of aligning physical learning spaces and curricula in health profession education.