Abstract
Affordance theory (Gibson, 1979) has emerged as a perspective embraced by architects and researchers involved with the planning of learning environments. While this perspective can relate to the design of learning environments, this chapter presents a reinterpretation of affordance theory. This reinterpretation locates Gibson’s concept of the niche in the foreground. With this interpretation, school buildings may be understood as comprising a variety of places for learning. These different places inside and outside classrooms can encourage learners to become fully engaged in acquiring knowledge and mastering skills (Lave and Wenger in Situated learning. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1991; Patel in An analysis of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger’s situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Macat International, London, 2018). Hence, this chapter will expand the notion of affordances beyond the concept of objects that an individual picks up by engaging with the physical environment toward a nuanced analysis of the role of the affordance(s) within the context of the social situations that guide the learning process. From this analysis, this chapter will examine twenty-first century Learning Principles. Moreover, twenty-first century Learning Principles will be explored in the context of space, the practice of teaching and learning as well as in relationship to affordance theory and situated learning theory.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altman, I. (1992). A transactional perspective on transitions to new environments. Environment and Behavior, 24(2), 268–280.
Bertucci, A., Conte, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2010). The impact of size of cooperative group on achievement, social support, and self-esteem. The Journal of General Psychology, 137(3), 256–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2010.484448
Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., O’Mara, J., & Loughlin, J. (2011). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes: Literature review. Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. Retrieved from http://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/publ/research/publ/blackmore_learning_spaces.pdf
Bradbeer, C. (2022). ‘Innovative’ teacher collaboration in (Elementary) innovative learning environments (ILEs): Products and potential. In M. Peters & R. Heraud (Eds.), Encyclopedia of educational innovation. Springer.
Byers, T., & Lippman, P. C. (2018). Classroom design should follow evidence, not architectural fads. https://theconversation.com/classroom-design-should-follow-evidence-not-architectural-fads-89861
Carvalho, L., & Yeoman, P. (2018). Framing learning entanglements in innovative learning spaces: Connecting, theory, design and practice. The British Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/ber.3483
Deed, C., Blake, D., Henriksen, J., Mooney, A., Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Fingland, D. (2020). Teacher adaptation to flexible learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 23(2), 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09302-0
Deed, C., & Lesko, T. (2015). Unwalling’ the classroom: Teacher reaction and adaptation. Learning Environments Research, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9181-6
Frelin, A., & Grannas, J. (2020). Teachers’ pre-occupancy evaluation of affordances in a multi-zone flexible learning environment—Introducing an analytical model. Pedagogy, Culture & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2020.1797859
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin.
Gislason, N. (2010). Architectural design and the learning environment: A framework for school design research. Learning Environments Research, 13(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-010-9071-x
Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning and research. American Psychological Association, Inc., 53(1), 5–26.
Heras-Escribano, M., Noble, J., & Pinedo, M. (2013). The only wrong cell is the dead one: On the enactive approach to normativity. In P. Liò, O. Miglino, G. Nicosia, S. Nolfi, & M. Pavone (Eds.), Advances in artificial life, ECAL 2013 (pp. 665–670). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Heras-Escribano, M., Noble, J., & Pinedo, M. (2015). Enactivism, action and normativity: A Wittgensteinian analysis. Adaptive Behavior, 23(1), 20–33.
Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Wooler, P., & McCaughey, C. (2005). The impact of school environments: A literature review. The Design Council. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from www.design-council.org.uk
Lang, J. (1988). Understanding the normative theories of architecture: The potential role of the behavioral sciences. Environment & Behavior, 20(5), 601–632.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge University Press.
Lippman, P. C. (1995). The meaning of constructed objects (Unpublished master’s thesis). The Graduate Center, The City University of New York, New York.
Lippman, P. C. (2002). Understanding activity settings in relationship to the design of learning environments. CAE Net Quarterly Newsletter. AIA Committee on Architecture for Education. http://www.aia.org/pia/gateway/CAE_Net/Vol_3/Just-a-Thought.pdf
Lippman, P. C. (2010). Evidence base design for elementary and secondary schools: A responsive approach to creating learning environments. John Wiley and Sons: Newark, NJ.
Lippman, P. C. (Expected Date of Publication: 2023). Understanding the function of complementary settings in contemporary learning environments. PhD., LA Trobe University, The School of Arts, Sciences & Commerce, Victoria, Australia.
Lippman, P. C., & Mathews, E. (2018). Re-imagining the open classroom. In S. Alterator & C. Deed (Eds.), School space and its occupation: The conceptualisation and evaluation of innovative learning environments (pp. 63–85). Sense Publishers.
Lo Presti, P. (2020). Persons and affordances. Ecological Psychology, 32(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2019.1689821
Martin, S. H. (2002). The classroom environment and its effects on the practice of teachers. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22, 139–156.
Mathews, E., & Lippman, P. C. (2016, June). The physical environments of early childhood centers: A case study in the use of break-out spaces. The International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), 7(2).
Mealings, K. T. (2022). Acoustics and classrooms. In M. Peters & R. Heraud (Eds.), Encyclopedia of educational innovation. Springer.
Nair, P., & Fielding, R. (2005). The language of school design: Design patterns for 21st century schools (p. 33). Designshare.
OECD. (2006). 21st century learning environments. OECD.
Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., & Feldman, M. W. (2003). Niche construction: The neglected process in evolution. Princeton University Press.
Patel, C. (2018). An analysis of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger’s situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Macat International.
Pearlman, B. (2014). Designing new learning environments to support 21st century skills. In J. Blanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn (pp. 117–147). Solution Tree. https://www.solutiontree.com/free-resources/21stcenturyskills/21stcs
PEHKA. (2012). Unpublished responsive research report. Projects for Environmental Health Knowledge and Action, inc. http://pehka.org/
Pocheville, A. (2015). The ecological niche: History and recent controversies. In T. Heams, P. Huneman, G. Lecointre et al. (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary thinking in the sciences (pp. 547–586). Springer. ISBN 978-94-017-9014-7
Postareff, L., Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2015). Factors contributing to changes in a deep approach to learning in different learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 18(3), 315–333.
Rivlin, L. G., & Wolfe, M. (1985). Institutional settings in children’s lives. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. Cognitive development in social context. Oxford University Press.
Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). Cambridge University Press.
Sanoff, H. (1993). Designing a responsive school environment. Children’s Environments, 10(2), 140–153.
Sanoff, H. (2002). Community participation methods in design and planning. Wiley.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
Sommer. R. (1969). Personal space. Prentice-Hall.
Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1997). Rousing minds to life: Teaching and learning in context. Cambridge University Press.
Upitis, R. (2009). Complexity and design: How school architecture influences learning. Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal, 3(2), 1–14.
Venturi, R. (1966). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. The Museum of Modern Art Press. ISBN 0-87070-281-5.
Weinstein, C. S. (1979, Autumn). The physical environment of school: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 49(4), 577–610.
Young, F., Cleveland, B., & Imms, W. (2019). The affordances of innovative learning environments for deep learning: Educators’ and architects’ perceptions. The Australian Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00354-y
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lippman, P.C. (2023). Affordance Theory as a Framework for Twenty-first Century Learning Principles. In: Lippman, P.C., Matthews, E.A. (eds) Creating Dynamic Places for Learning. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8749-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8749-6_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-8748-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-8749-6
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)