Unveiling the power of social interactions: A systematic review of student experiences in informal learning space
Vol 9, Issue 1, 2024, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 390 (Abstract) 364 (PDF)
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the role that social interaction plays in informal learning environments on the part of students, it provides implications for understanding student experiences in informal learning spaces and for policymakers to incorporate more opportunities for social interaction in informal learning spaces. The PRISMA statement was followed when conducting a systematic search of Scopus and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases to identify relevant studies published within the past decade. Search strategies for informal learning spaces and social interactions included a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary. On the basis of predefined inclusion criteria, twelve studies were selected for analysis, including articles published in English and Chinese, scientific articles published in peer-reviewed journals, and studies that examined student experiences in informal learning spaces and social interaction. Among the findings of this study are a description of informal learning spaces, a conceptualization of social interaction, as well as the positive impact of social interaction on student learning and engagement. Based on the results of the study, educators and policymakers need to create environments that foster social interactions that are inclusive and engaging. The study identifies gaps in the literature and suggests directions for future research, including the exploration of a broader range of informal learning spaces and the investigation of specific design elements that optimize student experiences.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Xu Y, Wu F, Shi L, et al. Comparative study of informal learning spaces in colleges based on the occurrence probability of informal learning. In: Proceedings of SPIE 12590, Third International Conference on Computer Vision and Information Technology (CVIT 2022); 19–21 Feb 2023; Beijing, China.
2. Ramsay CM, Robert J, Sparrow J. Promoting pedagogical agility in learning spaces: Toward a comprehensive framework of faculty support and innovation. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology 2019; 8(1): 60–75. doi: 10.14434/jotlt.v8i1.26747
3. Hassinger-Das B, Zosh JM, Hansen N, et al. Play-and-learn spaces: Leveraging library spaces to promote caregiver and child interaction. Library & Information Science Research 2020; 42(1): 101002. doi: 10.1016/j.lisr.2020.10100
4. Berman N. A critical examination of informal learning spaces. Higher Education Research & Development 2020; 39(1): 127–140. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2019.1670147
5. Quinnell KO. Student Perception of Informal Learning Spaces Using Gibson’s Theory of Affordances [PhD thesis]. Mercer University; 2015.
6. Vanichvatana S. Informal learning spaces for undergraduate business school: A Bangkok private university case study. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology 2018; 71–79.
7. Wu X, Kou Z, Oldfield P, et al. Informal learning spaces in higher education: Student preferences and activities. Buildings 2021; 11(6): 252. doi: 10.3390/buildings11060252
8. Schweer T, DeFrain E. The heart and living room of campus: A mixed-methods comparison of two informal learning spaces at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. International Journal of Undergraduate Research and Creative Activities 2020; 12(1): 1–14. DOI: 10.7710/2168-0620.0272
9. Orr M, Poitras E, Butcher KR. Informal learning with extended reality environments: Current trends in museums, heritage, and tourism. In: Geroimenko V (editor). Augmented Reality in Tourism, Museums and Heritage. Springer; 2021. pp. 3–26.
10. Chang-Tik C, Goh JN. Social and cognitive dimensions of collaboration in informal learning spaces: Malaysian social science students’ perspectives. Interactive Learning Environments 2023; 31(2): 609–623. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2020.1799029
11. Degner, M, Moser S, Lewalter D. Digital media in institutional informal learning places: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education Open 2022; 3: 100068. doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100068
12. Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Wiley-Blackwell; 2011.
13. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 2021; 372: n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
14. Zhou J, Lam E, Au CH, et al. Library café or elsewhere: Usage of study space by different majors under contemporary technological environment. Library Hi Tech 2022; 40(6): 1567–1581. doi: 10.1108/lht-03-2021-0103
15. Hong S, Kim Y, Yang E. Indoor environment and student productivity for individual and collaborative work in learning commons: A case study. Library Management 2022; 43(1/2): 15–34. doi: 10.1108/lm-06-2021-0055
16. Molloy CB. O’Donnell and Tuomey’s University Architecture: Informal learning spaces that enhance user engagement. Architecture and Culture 2021; 9(1):98–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/20507828.2020.1794711
17. He T, Tu L. Campus public space: From the flow corridor to the deep social practice field (Chinese). Shanghai Education 2021; 16: p. 34–37. doi: CNKI:SUN:SHJZ.0.2021-16-011
18. DeFrain E, Hong M. Interiors, affect, and use: How does an academic library’s learning commons support students’ needs? Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2020; 15(2): 42–68. doi: 10.18438/eblip29677
19. Matthews KE, Andrews V, Adams P. Social learning spaces and student engagement. Higher Education Research & Development 2011; 30(2): 105–120. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2010.512629
20. Zhang J, Ding D, Liu C, et al. Privacy and interaction preferences of students in informal learning spaces on university campus. Facilities 2022; 40(9/10): 638–655. doi: 10.1108/f-11-2021-0119
21. Cheng Q, Peng L. The future development trend of learning commons. New Building 2020; (1): 93–97. doi: 10.12069/j.na.202001093
22. Liu Y, Li Y. Research on the design of shared study room space based on non-interactive relationship (Chinese). Art Education Research 2022; 22: 96–98. doi: CNKI:SUN:MSJY.0.2022-22-033
23. Sheng Q, Liu N, Lu Y. Social analysis and enlightenment of learning space in foreign university libraries. Library 2020; (11): 88–94.
24. Xu W, Zhang H, Sukjairungwattana P, Wang T. The roles of motivation, anxiety and learning strategies in online Chinese learning among Thai learners of Chinese as a foreign language. Frontiers in Psychology 2022; 13: 962492. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.962492
25. Yu Z, Xu W, Sukjairungwattana P. A meta-analysis of eight factors influencing MOOC-based learning outcomes across the world. Interactive Learning Environments 2022; 1–20. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2022.2096641
26. Du Y, Grace TD, Jagannath K, Salen-Tekinbas K. Connected play in virtual worlds: communication and control mechanisms in virtual worlds for children and adolescents. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 2021; 5(5): 27. doi: 10.3390/mti5050027
27. Yu Z, Sukjairungwattana P, Xu W. Bibliometric analyses of social media for educational purposes over four decades. Frontiers in Psychology 2023; 13: 1061989. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1061989
28. Adams Becker S, Cummins M, Davis A, et al. NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. New Media Consortium; 2017.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v9i1.1867
(390 Abstract Views, 364 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Ziqing Liu, Wei Xu
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/