“It Helps if You Think of Yourself as a Radio Presenter!” A Lefebvrian Commentary on the Concerns, Conflicts and Opportunities of Online Block Teaching

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated shifts in how higher education provision is offered. In one UK institution block teaching was introduced. This way of teaching and learning has brought new challenges and opportunities for staff and students. To date, little research or theoretical discussion has investigated how this hybrid approach or differences between tutors and student can arise in the use of online teaching spaces (OTS) within a block-teaching format. The present paper focuses on the institution-wide implementation of an online block-teaching model at Manchester Metropolitan University in the United Kingdom. With a specific emphasis on observations and reflections on the experiences of undergraduate students’ and staff by one of the authors from the Department of Psychology who employed an online block teaching approach (6 weeks) from the beginning of block 1 during the academic year 2020/21. We provide a novel methodological advancement of Lefebvre’s (1991) Trialectic of Space to discuss how students and tutors jointly produce and experience learning and teaching within an online block teaching approach. Pre-existing behavioural, cognitive and emotional experiences of using online spaces, contribute to the curriculum, student-tutor and student-student dialogue. We also highlight the importance of community within an online block teaching approach. Applications of the Lefebvrian model (1991) to present pedagogical approaches along with avenues of future research are considered.

The Impact of Physical, Mental, Social and Emotional Dimensions of Digital Learning Spaces on Student’s Depth of Learning: The Quantification of an Extended Lefebvrian Model

“…

Despite the widespread implementation of digital learning spaces (DLS) generally in Higher Education and for COVID-19 social distancing guidelines, a coherent and unified quantification of core aspects of the DLS on student learning has remained elusive. Therefore, this work extends the earlier work of Harkin and Nerantzi (2021), where we employed Lefebvre's (1991) Trialectic of Space to explain physical, mental, and social aspects of the DLS. In the present paper, we now quantify Lefebvre's original dimensions (physical, mental, social) and an Extended Lefebvrian Model (ELM; adding emotional experiences) on the depth of learning (DoL) of 188 university students at an undergraduate and postgraduate level.

…”

“…When we consider the narrow focus on the DLS in the extent literature alongside the fact that few studies have examined the physical, mental, social, and emotional aspects in unison, we argue that this justifies the present extension of our previous work (Harkin & Nerantzi, 2021), where we provided a unique and unified tripartite explanation of the DLS (see Figure 1). Specifically, we conceptualised the DLS within a Lefebvrian (1991) construction of space comprising physical, mental and social elements, each with their unique demands and impacts on student experience and learning.…”

“…We proposed that within the DLS, a bidirectional relationship exists between the learner and the digital space. One where the DLS affects the learner and simultaneously the capacities, perceptions and experiences of the learner shape the DLS (Harkin & Nerantzi, 2021). Thus, the present paper provides the next logical extension to this, one where we standardise the main elements of the DLS within a coherent and Extended Lefebvrian model (i.e., physical, mental, social, and emotional factors) and quantify their impact on student depth of learning (DoL).…”

“…Despite the widespread adoption of digital learning spaces (DLS) in response to the COVID-19 crisis (Carrillo & Flores, 2020;Harkin & Nerantzi, 2021;Nerantzi & Chatzidamianos, 2020) and generally within education over the last twenty years (Allen & Seaman, 2017), a coherent and unified quantification of key aspects of the DLS on student learning has remained elusive (see Martin, Sun, & Westine, 2020). We attribute this to the multifaceted nature of the DLS as observed across Higher Education (HE), a complexity reported in descriptive, qualitative and quantitative accounts (Henry, 2020).…”

“…Of interest and in contrast to previous research, they found that community factors such as engagement with tutors and peers did not predict academic performance. Lastly, Harkin and Nerantzi (2021) highlighted that several hidden factors influence the learning of students within the DLS, wherein: "The human aspect of student engagement is unknown and often hidden behind the veil of the computer screen in online sessions" (p. 30).…”