Place-people-practice-process: Using sociomateriality in university physical spaces research

References

• Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (2nd ed.). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
   Google Scholar
• Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., Loughlin, J., O’Mara, J., & Aranda, G. (2011). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes: Literature Review. Melbourne: State of Victoria (Department of Education and Early Childhood Development). Retrieved from https://www.deakin.edu.au/arts-ed/efi/pubs/deecd-reports-blackmore-learning-spaces.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (2005). Habitus. In J. Hillier & E. Rooksby (Eds.), Habitus: A sense of place (pp. 44–49). Hants: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Boys, J. (2011). Towards creative learning spaces: Re-thinking the architecture of post-compulsory education. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, M. (2005). Learning spaces. In D. Oblinger & J. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation. Boulder: EDUCAUSE. Retrieved May 02, 2013, from http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/bookshelf/272/
   Google Scholar
• Cleveland, B., & Fisher, K. (2014). The evaluation of physical learning environments: A critical review of the literature. Learning Environments Research, 17(1), 1–28.10.1007/s10984-013-9149-3
   Google Scholar
• Connell, R. (2006). Southern theory: Social science and the global dynamics of knowledge. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dane, J. (2015). Time to stop building lecture theatres. Melbourne: Woods Bagot. Retrieved March 20, 2016, from https://issuu.com/woods_bagot/docs/time_to_stop_building_lecture_theat
   Google Scholar
• Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) technique: A guide to its use. Retrieved from https://www.kepa.fi/tiedostot/most-significant-change-guide.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Denscombe, M. (2007). The good research guide: For small-scale research projects (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dovey, K. (1999). Framing places: Mediating power in built form. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203267639
   Google Scholar
• Dovey, K., & Fisher, K. (2014). Designing for adaptation: The school as socio-spatial assemblage. The Journal of Architecture, 19, 43–63. doi:10.1080/13602365.2014.882376
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenwick, T. (2011). Reading educational reform with actor network theory: Fluid spaces, otherings, and ambivalences. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43, 114–134.10.1111/j.1469-5812.2009.00609.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenwick, T. (2015). Sociomateriality and learning: A critical approach. In D. Scott & E. Hargreaves (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of learning (pp. 83–93). London: Sage.10.4135/9781473915213
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, K. (2004). Revoicing classrooms: A spatial manifesto. FORUM, 46, 36–38.10.2304/forum
   Google Scholar
• Fox, R. & Lam, P. (2012). Balancing context, pedagogy and technology on learning space designs: Opportunities amidst infrastructural developments in Hong Kong. In M. Keppell, K. Souter, & M. Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education (pp. 72–85). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.10.4018/978-1-60960-114-0
   Google Scholar
• Grellier, J. (2013). Rhizomatic mapping: Spaces for learning in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 32, 83–95.10.1080/07294360.2012.750280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickey, A. (2012). Cities of signs: Learning the logic of urban spaces. Minding the Media: Critical Issues for Learning and Teaching, 5. New York, NY: Peter Lang. ISBN 978-1-4331-1120-4.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt, L., Huijser, H., & Sankey, M. (2012). Learning spaces for the digital age: Blending space with pedagogy. In M. Keppell, K. Souter, & M. Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education (pp. 182–197). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.10.4018/978-1-60960-114-0
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson, P. (2003). Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning spaces: A role for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development., 8, 119–133. doi:10.1080/1360144042000277991
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P., & Trevitt, A. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning environments. Higher Education Research and Development., 19, 221–236.10.1080/072943600445664
   Google Scholar
• Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2008). New learning: Elements of a science of education. Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511811951
   Google Scholar
• Keppell, M., Suddaby, G., & Hard, N. (2011). Good practice report: Technology-enhanced learning and teaching. Australian Learning and Teaching Council Limited (ALTC) Final Report. Retrieved from: http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-good-practice-report-technology-enhanced-learning-and-teaching-2011
   Google Scholar
• Kincheloe, J. (2003). Critical ontology: Visions of selfhood and curriculum. JCT. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing., 19, 47–64.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale, S. (1983). The qualitative research interview. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 14, 171–196.10.1163/156916283X00090
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, N., & Tan, S. (2011). A comprehensive learning space evaluation model. Strawberry Hills: Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S., & Guba, E. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences revisited. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 97–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Massey, D. (2005). For space. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mulcahy, M. D. (2013). Turning around the question of ‘transfer’ in education: Tracing the sociomaterial. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45, 1276–1289.10.1080/00131857.2013.763592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulcahy, D., Cleveland, B., & Aberton, H. (2015). Learning spaces and pedagogic change: Envisioned, enacted and experienced. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23, 575–595.10.1080/14681366.2015.1055128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oblinger, D. (2005). Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 1, 14–18. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/leading-transition-classrooms-learning-spaces
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W., & Scott, S. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 433–474.10.1080/19416520802211644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peshkin, A. (2000). The nature of interpretation in qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 29, 5–9.10.3102/0013189X029009005
   Google Scholar
• Pouler, P. (1994). Disciplinary society and the myth of aesthetic justice. In B. Scheer & W. Preiser (Eds.), Design review: Challenging urban aesthetic control (pp. 175–186). London: Chapman and Hall.10.1007/978-1-4615-2658-2
   Google Scholar
• Radcliff, D., Wilson, H., Powell, D., & Tibbetts, B. (2008). Designing next generation places of learning: Collaboration at the pedagogy-space-technology nexus. Australian Learning and Teaching Council Limited (ALTC) Final Report. Retrieved from: http://www.olt.gov.au/project-designing-next-generation-places-uq-2006
   Google Scholar
• Reushle, S. (2012). Designing and evaluating learning spaces: PaSsPorT and design-based research. In M. Keppell, K. Souter, & M. Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education (pp. 87–101). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.10.4018/978-1-60960-114-0
   Google Scholar
• Smyth, D. (1994). Understanding country. The importance of land and sea in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander societies. Key Issue Paper No.1. Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1994. Retrieved August 08, 2016, from http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/IndigLRes/car/1993/1/5.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=understanding%20country
   Google Scholar
• Soja, E. (1980). The socio-spatial dialectic. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 70, 207–225. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1980.tb01308.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souter, K., Riddle, M., Sellers, W., & Keppell, M. (2011). Spaces for knowledge generation. ALTC Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-spaces-knowledge-generation-framework-designing-student-learning-environments-future-2011
   Google Scholar
• Steel, C., & Andrews, T. (2012). Re-imagining teaching for technology-enriched learning spaces: An academic development model. In M. Keppell, K. Souter, & M. Riddle (Eds.), Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education (pp. 242–265). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.10.4018/978-1-60960-114-0
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, M. (2012). Understanding learning: Theories and critique. In L. Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learner-centred approach (pp. 3–20). Camberwell: ACER Press.
   Google Scholar
• St. Pierre, E. A. (2011). Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 611–625). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. (2009, February 5). Taking student retention seriously: Rethinking the first year of university. Keynote speech delivered at the ALTC FYE Curriculum Design Symposium, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Whitehouse, H., Watkin Lui, F., Sellwood, J., Barrett, M., & Chigeza, P. (2014). Sea country: Navigating Indigenous and colonial ontologies in Australian environmental education. Environmental Educational Research, 20, 56–69.10.1080/13504622.2013.852655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: A pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20, 1–17. doi:10.3402/rlt.v20i0.14431
   Google Scholar