Learning utility of smart school learning space: the impact of spatial factors via visual stated preference method

References

• Ahern, A. A., and N. Tapley. 2008. “The Use of Stated Preference Techniques to Model Modal Choices on Interurban Trips in Ireland.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 42 (1): 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2007.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aminpour, F. 2022. “From the Child’s Perspective: How the Layout of Outdoor School Environments Shapes Conflict Between Children’s Self-Directed Play.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 79:101727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101727.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, K., and J. C. Whitehead. 2015. “Predictive Validity of Stated Preference Data: Evidence from Mountain Bike Park Visits Before and After Trail System Expansion.” Applied Economics Letters 22 (9): 730–733. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2014.972541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attaran, M., N. Alias, and S. Siraj. 2012. “Learning Culture in a Smart School: A Case Study.” Procedia - Social & Behavioral Sciences 64:417–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.049.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, J., and H. Oppewal. 2022. “The Effects of Floor Plan Representations on Preferences for Apartments.” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 38 (2): 727–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-022-09966-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrera-Hernández, L. F., M. A. Sotelo-Castillo, S. B. Echeverría-Castro, and C. O. Tapia-Fonllem. 2020. “Connectedness to Nature: Its Impact on Sustainable Behaviors and Happiness in Children.” Frontiers in Psychology 11:276. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett, P., F. Davies, Y. Zhang, and L. Barrett. 2015. “The Impact of Classroom Design on pupils’ Learning: Final Results of a Holistic, Multi-Level Analysis.” Building & Environment 89:118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belaïd, F., and C. Massié. 2022. “What are the Salient Factors Determining the Usage of Heating Energy Sources in France? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Model.” Energy and Buildings 273:112386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellizzi, M. G., C. Forciniti, and G. Mazzulla. 2021. “A Stated Preference Survey for Evaluating Young Pedestrians’ Preferences on Walkways.” Sustainability 13 (22): 12434. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benoit, A. 2018. “Investigating the Impact of Interactive Whiteboards in Higher Education: A Case Study.” Journal of Learning Spaces 7 (1): 76–90.
   Google Scholar
• Byers, T., W. Imms, and E. Hartnell-Young. 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung, S. K. S., L. F. Kwok, K. Phusavat, and H. H. Yang. 2021. “Shaping the Future Learning Environments with Smart Elements: Challenges and Opportunities.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 18 (1): s41239-021-00254–1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00254-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheu, R. L., M. Valdez, S. Kamatham, and R. Aldouri. 2011. “Public Preferences on the Use of Visualization in the Public Involvement Process in Transportation Planning.” Transportation Research Record 2245 (1): 17–26. https://doi.org/10.3141/2245-03.
   Google Scholar
• Cho, E., Y. H. Cho, M. M. Grant, D. Song, and Y. Huh. 2020. “Trends of Educational Technology in Korea and the U.S.: A Report on the AECT-Korean Society for Educational Technology (KSET) Panel Discussion.” TechTrends 64 (3): 357–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00493-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creative Commons Polska [WWW Document]. 2012. “Digital School Program with Open Textbooks Approved by Polish Government!” Accessed November 24, 2022. https://creativecommons.pl/2012/04/digital-school-program-with-open-textbooks-approved-by-polish-government/.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, D., D. Jindal-Snape, C. Collier, R. Digby, P. Hay, and A. Howe. 2013. “Creative Learning Environments in Education—A Systematic Literature Review.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 8:80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devotra [WWW Document]. 2015. “Devotra Smart Classroom.” Accessed August 19, 2023. https://www.devotra.nl/project-references/.
   Google Scholar
• Dillon, P. 2007. Turning Peases West Inside Out: Flexible Educational Environments for Developing Possibilities and Pedagogies. England: Creative Partnerships Durham Sunderland.
   Google Scholar
• Dubin, J. A., and D. L. McFadden. 1984. “An Econometric Analysis of Residential Electric Appliance Holdings and Consumption.” Econometrica 52 (2): 345. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gest, S. D., and P. C. Rodkin. 2011. “Teaching Practices and Elementary Classroom Peer Ecologies.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 32 (5): 288–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2011.02.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghonoodi, A., and L. Salimi. 2011. “The Study of Elements of Curriculum in Smart Schools.” Procedia - Social & Behavioral Sciences 28:68–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.014.
   Google Scholar
• Gislason, N. 2015. “The OPEN PLAN HIGH SCHOOL Educational Motivations and Challenges.” In School Design Together, edited by P. Woolner, 101–119. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• GOV.UK [WWW Document]. 2018. “Area Guidelines and Net Capacity.” Accessed November 24, 2022. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/area-guidelines-and-net-capacity.
   Google Scholar
• Gros, B. 2016. “The Design of Smart Educational Environments.” Smart Learning Environments 3 (1): 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0039-x.
   Google Scholar
• Ha7ggar, P., E. Ampatzi, D. Potoglou, and M. Schweiker. 2022. “Information Sharing Preferences within Buildings: Benefits of Cognitive Interviewing for Enhancing a Discrete Choice Experiment.” Energy and Buildings 258:111786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111786.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassan, M., and B. Geys. 2016. “Who Should Pick Up the Bill? Distributing the Financial Burden of Technological Innovations in Schools.” Computers & Education 94:193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, G.-J. 2014. “Definition, Framework and Research Issues of Smart Learning Environments - a Context-Aware Ubiquitous Learning Perspective.” Smart Learning Environments 1 (1): 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0004-5.
   Google Scholar
• Iraganaboina, N. C., and N. Eluru. 2021. “An Examination of Factors Affecting Residential Energy Consumption Using a Multiple Discrete Continuous Approach.” Energy and Buildings 240:110934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.110934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jebril, T., and Y. Chen. 2021. “The Architectural Strategies of Classrooms for Intellectually Disabled Students in Primary Schools Regarding Space and Environment.” Ain Shams Engineering Journal 12 (1): 821–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, S., and L. Peng. 2022. “Classroom Perception in Higher Education: The Impact of Spatial Factors on Student Satisfaction in Lecture versus Active Learning Classrooms.” Frontiers in Psychology 13:941285. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.941285.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Joy, M., J. Foss, E. King, J. Sinclair, J. Sitthiworachart, and R. Davis. 2014. “Incorporating Technologies into a Flexible Teaching Space: Incorporating Technologies ….” British Journal of Educational Technology 45 (2): 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang, W. C., 2016. “Smart Learning Environment Model for Secondary Schools in Malaysia: An Overview Making a Difference in Malaysian Edu [WWW Document].” http://www.slideserve.com/reuel/smart-learningenvironment-model-for-secondary-schools-in-malaysiaan-overview-making-a-difference-in-malaysian-edu.
   Google Scholar
• Kariippanon, K. E., D. P. Cliff, S. L. Lancaster, A. D. Okely, and A.-M. Parrish. 2018. “Perceived Interplay Between Flexible Learning Spaces and Teaching, Learning and Student Wellbeing.” Learning Environments Research 21 (3): 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-017-9254-9.
   Google Scholar
• Kariippanon, K. E., D. P. Cliff, A. D. Okely, and A.-M. Parrish. 2020. “The ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of Flexible Learning Spaces: A Complex Adaptive Systems Analysis.” Journal of Educational Change 21 (4): 569–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09364-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasraian, D., S. Adhikari, D. Kossowsky, M. Luubert, G. B. Hall, J. Hawkins, K. Nurul Habib, and M. J. Roorda. 2021. “Evaluating Pedestrian Perceptions of Street Design with a 3D Stated Preference Survey.” Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science 48 (7): 1787–1805. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320946050.
   Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D., S. A. Brown, and L. Pizza. 2023. “Don’t Bug Me!: The Role of Names, Functions, and Feelings in Shaping Children’s and adults’ Conservation Attitudes About Unappealing Species.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 87:101990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.101990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, C. E., M. R. Tight, F. C. Hodgson, and M. W. Page. 2011. “A Comparison of Three Methods for Assessing the Walkability of the Pedestrian Environment.” Journal of Transport Geography 19 (6): 1500–1508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levinson, D., K. Harder, J. Bloomfield, and K. Carlson. 2006. “Waiting Tolerance: Ramp Delay Vs. Freeway Congestion.” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 9 (1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2005.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, C., L. Sun, X. Jing, Y. Zhang, X. Meng, C. Jia, and W. Gao. 2022. “How Correlated Color Temperature (CCT) Affects Undergraduates: A Psychological and Physiological Evaluation.” Journal of Building Engineering 45:103573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103573.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looi, C.-K., P. Seow, B. Zhang, H.-J. So, W. Chen, and L.-H. Wong. 2010. “Leveraging Mobile Technology for Sustainable Seamless Learning: A Research Agenda.” British Journal of Educational Technology 41 (2): 154–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00912.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lovreglio, R., E. Dillies, E. Kuligowski, A. Rahouti, and M. Haghani. 2022. “Exit Choice in Built Environment Evacuation Combining Immersive Virtual Reality and Discrete Choice Modelling.” Automation in Construction 141:104452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2022.104452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, J., Y. Meng, H. Timmermans, and A. Zhang. 2021. “Modeling Hesitancy in Airport Choice: A Comparison of Discrete Choice and Machine Learning Methods.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 147:230–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2021.03.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacLeod, J., H. H. Yang, S. Zhu, and Y. Li. 2018. “Understanding students’ Preferences Toward the Smart Classroom Learning Environment: Development and Validation of an Instrument.” Computers & Education 122:80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, A., U. Fuhrer, and T. Hartig. 2000. “Effects of Classroom Seating Arrangements on Children’s Question-Asking.” Learning Environments Research 2 (3): 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009901922191.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, H., and W. Zhang, 2016. “Residents’ Recreation Preference of the Vehicle Campsite in Beijing Based on the Stated Preference Method.” In: 2016 International Conference on Smart City and Systems Engineering (ICSCSE). Presented at the 2016 International Conference on Smart City and Systems Engineering (ICSCSE), 14–17. Hunan, China: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSCSE.2016.0014
   Google Scholar
• Mogas Recalde, J., R. Palau, N. Lorenzo Gales, and R. Gallon. 2020. “Developments for Smart Classrooms: School Perspectives and Needs.” International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning 12 (4): 34–50. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2020100103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monchambert, G. 2020. “Why Do (Or don’t) People Carpool for Long Distance Trips? A Discrete Choice Experiment in France.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 132:911–931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.12.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nambiar, M. K. R., N. Mohd nor, K. Ismail, and S. Adam. 2017. “New Learning Spaces and Transformations in Teacher Pedagogy and Student Learning Behavior in the Language Learning Classroom.” 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 3L (4): 29–40. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2304-03.
   Google Scholar
• Newton, C., S. Backhouse, A. Aibinu, B. Cleveland, R. Crawford, D. Holzer, P. Soccio, and T. Kvan. 2018. “Plug N Play: Future Prefab for Smart Green Schools.” Buildings 8 (7): 88. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8070088.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omidinia, S., M. Masrom, and H. Selamat. 2012. “DETERMINANTS of SMART SCHOOL SYSTEM SUCCESS: A CASE STUDY of MALAYSIA.” International Journal of Academic Research 4 (4): 107–115. https://doi.org/10.7813/2075-4124.2012/4-4/B.16.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, E. T., and K. Ruthven. 2010. “The Distinctiveness and Effectiveness of Science Teaching in the Malaysian ‘Smart school’.” Research in Science & Technological Education 28 (1): 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140903513557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, J. C., M. H. Chung, and E. K. Rhee. 2011. “Field Survey on the Indoor Environment of Elementary Schools for Planning of Environment Friendly School Facilities.” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering 10 (2): 461–468. https://doi.org/10.3130/jaabe.10.461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, L., Y. Deng, and S. Jin. 2022. “The Evaluation of Active Learning Classrooms: Impact of Spatial Factors on Students’ Learning Experience and Learning Engagement.” Learning Experience and Learning Engagement Sustainability 14 (8): 4839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084839.
   Google Scholar
• Perdomo, M., A. Rezaei, Z. Patterson, N. Saunier, and L. F. Miranda-Moreno. 2014. “Pedestrian Preferences with Respect to Roundabouts—A Video-Based Stated Preference Survey.” Accident Analysis & Prevention 70:84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.03.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perks, T., D. Orr, and E. Al-Omari. 2016. “Classroom Re-Design to Facilitate Student Learning: A Case Study of Changes to a University Classroom.” Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 16 (1): 53–68. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v16i1.19190.
   Google Scholar
• Pettigrew, T. F. 1998. “INTERGROUP CONTACT THEORY.” Annual Review of Psychology 49 (1): 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radcliffe, D. 2008. “A Pedagogy-Space-Technology (PST) Framework for Designing and Evaluating Learning Places.” Learning spaces in higher education: Positive outcomes by design: Proceedings of the next generation learning spaces, University of Queensland, Brisbane, 2008. Vol.1., pp. 11–16.
   Google Scholar
• Rezaei, A. 2020. “Groupwork in Active Learning Classrooms: Recommendations for Users.” Journal of Learning Spaces 9 (2): 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Shimokura, R., K. Yanagiawa, and S. Sasaki. 2023. “Spatial Organisation of “Therapeutic” Spaces for Autistic Children in Special Schools: Lessons Learnt from the United Kingdom Experience.” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering 22 (2): 620–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2022.2047982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shi, Y., H. Yang, J. Zhang, Q. Pu, and H. H. Yang, 2020. “A Meta-Analysis of Students’ Cognitive Learning Outcomes in Smart Classroom-Based Instruction.” In: 2020 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET). Presented at the 2020 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), 8–12. Bangkok, Thailand: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET49818.2020.00012
   Google Scholar
• Sitthiworachart, J., M. Joy, E. King, J. Sinclair, and J. Foss. 2022. “Technology-Supported Active Learning in a Flexible Teaching Space.” Education Sciences 12 (9): 634. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12090634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sleegers, P., N. Moolenaar, M. Galetzka, A. Pruyn, B. Sarroukh, and B. van der Zande. 2013. “Lighting Affects students’ Concentration Positively: Findings from Three Dutch Studies.” Lighting Research & Technology 45 (2): 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153512446099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart Schools NY [WWW Document]. 2014. Smart Schools NY. Accessed August 19, 2023. https://www.ny.gov/programs/smart-schools-ny.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, C. 2017. “The Influence of Hierarchy and Layout Geometry in the Design of Learning Spaces.” Journal of Learning Spaces 6 (3): 59–67.
   Google Scholar
• Suárez-Guerrero, C., C. Lloret-Catalá, and S. Mengual-Andrés. 2016. “Teachers’ Perceptions of the Digital Transformation of the Classroom Through the Use of Tablets: A Study in Spain.” Comunicar Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación 24:81–89. https://doi.org/10.3916/C49-2016-08.
   Google Scholar
• Tapia-Fonllem, C., B. Fraijo-Sing, V. Corral-Verdugo, G. Garza-Terán, and M. Moreno-Barahona. 2020. “School Environments and Elementary School Children’s Well-Being in Northwestern Mexico.” Frontiers in Psychology 11:510. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terzieva, V., S. Ilchev, and K. Todorova. 2022. “The Role of Internet of Things in Smart Education.” IFAC-Papersonline 55 (11): 108–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.08.057.
   Google Scholar
• UNESCO [WWW Document]. 2010. “Singapore: Future Schools | ICT in Education Policy Toolkit.” Accessed November 24, 2022. https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/singapore-future-schools.
   Google Scholar
• UNESCO [WWW Document]. 2014. “iTec: Designing the Future Classroom | ICT in Education Policy Toolkit” Accessed November 24, 2022. https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/itec-designing-future-classroom.
   Google Scholar
• van den Berg, J., R. Appel-Meulenbroek, A. Kemperman, and M. Sotthewes. 2020. “Knowledge workers’ Stated Preferences for Important Characteristics of Activity-Based Workspaces.” Building Research & Information 48 (7): 703–718. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2020.1726169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bogerd, N., S. C. Dijkstra, K. Tanja-Dijkstra, M. R. de Boer, J. C. Seidell, S. L. Koole, and J. Maas. 2020. “Greening the Classroom: Three Field Experiments on the Effects of Indoor Nature on students’ Attention, Well-Being, and Perceived Environmental Quality.” Building and Environment 171:106675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhetsel, A., R. Kessels, T. Zijlstra, and M. Van Bavel. 2017. “Housing Preferences Among Students: Collective Housing versus Individual Accommodations? A Stated Preference Study in Antwerp (Belgium).” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 32 (3): 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-016-9522-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., D. E. H. Tigelaar, J. Luo, and W. Admiraal. 2022. “Teacher Beliefs, Classroom Process Quality, and Student Engagement in the Smart Classroom Learning Environment: A Multilevel Analysis.” Computers & Education 183:104501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wannarka, R., and K. Ruhl. 2008. “Seating Arrangements That Promote Positive Academic and Behavioural Outcomes: A Review of Empirical Research.” Support for Learning 23 (2): 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2008.00375.x.
   Google Scholar
• Woodward, E., and M. P. Zari. 2018. “Reconnecting children with nature: biophilic primary school learning environments 14.” ZEMCH 2018 International Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 2018. 581–593 .
   Google Scholar
• Yang, L. 2018. “Modeling the Mobility Choices of Older People in a Transit-Oriented City: Policy Insights.” Habitat International 76:10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.05.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaseen, F. R., and F. A. Mustafa. 2022. “Visibility of Nature-Connectedness in School Buildings: An Analytical Study Using Biophilic Parameters, Space Syntax, and Space/Nature Syntax.” Ain Shams Engineering Journal 14 (5): 101973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101973.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeo, S., P. Taylor, and M. Kulski. 2006. “Internationalising a Learning Environment Instrument for Evaluating Transnational Online University Courses.” Learning Environments Research 9 (2): 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-006-9008-6.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, M. 2021. “Examining Social Learning in an Active Learning Classroom Through Pedagogy-Space-Technology Frame-work.” Journal of Learning Spaces 10 (1): 15–26.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, Z.-T., M.-H. Yu, and P. Riezebos. 2016. “A Research Framework of Smart Education.” Smart Learning Environments 3 (1): 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0026-2.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, P. A., R. L. Pierce, L. Stallings, and D. Largent. 2018. “Classroom Interaction Redefined: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Moving Beyond Traditional Classroom Spaces to Promote Student Engagement.” Journal of Learning Spaces 7 (1): 45–61.
   Google Scholar