Learning Spaces in Context-Aware Educational Networking Technologies in the Digital Age

  • Valéry PsychéEmail author
  • Ben K. Daniel
  • Jacqueline Bourdeau
Part of the Lecture Notes in Social Networks book series (LNSN)


This chapter introduces the concept of learning space in the twenty-first century and considers the various contexts in which learning occurs. The increasing growth of digital educational networking technologies has contributed to the need to create and support various forms of learning spaces. These technologies have also transformed the way students engage and interact off- and online. Contemporary learning, as we know, is no longer limited to physical learning spaces. Instead, students engage in various learning spaces. Others extensively leverage opportunities afforded by social network platforms as tools for collaborative and self-directed learning. Students use social networking technologies to engage with content, connect with peers within their social networks and communicate with their teachers. With the increasing prevalence of these technologies, researchers and educators are provided with new opportunities to extend learning from physical spaces to virtual spaces and optimise pedagogical strategies that can support adaptive learning. Our goal in this chapter is to explore the extent to which understanding of learning spaces and contexts contribute to designing better student engagement and possibly better learning outcomes.


Learning space Learning context Context-aware educational technologies Educational networking 





National Research Agency


Computer-supported collaborative learning


Context-Aware Intelligent Tutoring System


Collaborative Distance Learning


Design-based research


Quebec Research Fund in Society and Culture


Intelligent tutoring system


Learning spaces


Massive open online course


Technology Enhanced and Teaching in Context



We want to thank Roger Nkambou for the CAITS architecture, Christine Richard for the figure of the learning scenario and the whole team of the TEEC project for providing the foundations as well as the experimentations of Context-Aware Collaborative Learning Systems. We also thank the following research funding agencies for supporting our work: ANR and FRQSC.


  1. Alterator, S., & Deed, C. (2013). Teacher adaptation to open learning spaces. Issues in Educational Research, 23(3), 315.Google Scholar
  2. Anjou, C., Forissier, T., Bourdeau, J., Mazabraud, Y., Nkambou, R., & Fournier, F. (2017, June). Elaborating the context calculator: A design experiment in geothermy. In International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (pp. 513–526). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arndt, P. A. (2012). Design of learning spaces: Emotional and cognitive effects of learning environments in relation to child development. Mind, Brain, and Education, 6(1), 41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Google Scholar. Axelrod, S., & Paluska, J.Google Scholar
  5. Bazire, M., & Brézillon, P. (2005, July). Understanding context before using it. In International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (pp. 29–40). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, S. A., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Glesinger Hall, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC horizon report: 2017 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from
  7. Beemer, J., Spoon, K., He, L., Fan, J., & Levine, R. A. (2018). Ensemble learning for estimating individualized treatment effects in student success studies. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(3), 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bennett, S. (2007). First questions for designing higher education learning spaces. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(1), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bettini, C., et al. (2010). A survey of context modelling and reasoning techniques. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 2010, 6(2), 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Biddix, J. P. (2011). “Stepping stones”: Career paths to the SSAO for men and women at four-year institutions. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(4), 443–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bourdeau, J. (2017, June). The DBR methodology for the study of context in learning. In International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context (pp. 541–553). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bourdeau, J., Forissier, T., Mazabraud, Y., & Nkambou, R. (2015). Web-based context-aware science learning. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion (pp. 1415–1418). Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland: Association for Computer Machinery (ACM). Scholar
  13. Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach: Proceedings of the Second Sussex Conference, 1977 (Vol. 722). Springer Science & Business Media. New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  14. Brézillon, P. (2011). Context and explanation in e-collaborative work. In B. K. Daniel (Ed.), Handbook of research on methods and techniques for studying virtual communities: Paradigms and phenomena (pp. 285–302). IGI Global. Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  15. Brooks, D. C. (2012). Space and consequences: The impact of different formal learning spaces on instructor and student behaviour. Journal of Learning Spaces, 1(2), n2.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, M. B., & Lippincott, J. K. (2003). Learning spaces: More than meets the eye. Educause Quarterly, 36(1), 14–17.Google Scholar
  17. Chou, C. Y., Lai, K. R., Chao, P. Y., Lan, C. H., & Chen, T. H. (2015). Negotiation based adaptive learning sequences: Combining adaptivity and adaptability. Computers & Education, 88, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. CIBER Group. (2008). Information behaviour of the researcher of the future (CIBER Briefing paper; 9). London.Google Scholar
  19. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daniel, B. K. (2017). Enterprise lecture capture technologies and value to student learning. International Journal of Information & Communication Technologies in Education, 6(2), 23–36. Scholar
  21. Daniel, B. K. (2019). Big data and data science: A critical review of issues for educational research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 101–113. Scholar
  22. Deed, C. (2017). Adapting to the virtual campus and transitions in ‘school-less’ teacher education. In D. J. Clandinin & J. Husu (Eds.), Sage international handbook of research in teacher education. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Dey, A. K., Abowd, G. D., & Salber, D. (2001). A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Human-Computer Interaction, 16(2–4), 97–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ejigu, D., Scuturici, M., & Brunie, L. (2007, March). An ontology-based approach to context modelling and reasoning in pervasive computing. In Fifth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerComW’07) (pp. 14–19). IEEE.Google Scholar
  25. Erstad, O. (2014). The expanded classroom–Spatial relations in classroom practices using ICT. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 9(01), 8–22.Google Scholar
  26. Fletcher, A. K. (2018). Help seeking: Agentic learners initiating feedback. Educational Review, 70(4), 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Forissier, T., et al. (2013). Modeling Context Effects in Science Learning: The CLASH Model. In P. Brézillon, P. Blackburn, & R. Dapoigny (Eds.), CONTEXT 2013 (pp. 330–335). Springer. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.Google Scholar
  28. Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Griffith, J., Vercellotti, M. L., & Folkers, H. (2019). What is in a question? A comparison of student questions in two learning spaces. Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences & Disorders, 3(1), 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hong, H. Y., Scardamalia, M., Messina, R., & Teo, C. L. (2015). Fostering sustained idea improvement with principle-based knowledge building analytic tools. Computers & Education, 89, 91–102. Scholar
  32. Hood, N., Littlejohn, A., & Milligan, C. (2015). Context counts: How learners’ contexts influence learning in a MOOC. Computers & Education, 91, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hung, H. T., & Yuen, S. C. Y. (2010). Educational use of social networking technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(6), 703–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jansen, B. A. (2010). Internet filtering 2.0: Checking intellectual freedom and participative practices at the schoolhouse door. Knowledge Quest, 39(1), 46–54.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Hall, C. (2016). NMC horizon report: 2016 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved October 23, 2019 from
  36. Kickmeier-Rust, M. D., & Firtova, L. (2018, June). Learning Analytics in the Classroom: Comparing Self-assessment, Teacher Assessment and Tests. In International Conference in Methodologies and intelligent Systems for Techhnology Enhanced Learning (pp. 131–138). Springer, Cham.Google Scholar
  37. Kovanović, V., Joksimović, S., Gašević, D., & Siemens, G. (2017). Digital learning design framework for social learning spaces. In Joint Proceedings of the Workshop on Methodology in Learning Analytics (MLA) and the Workshop on Building the Learning Analytics Curriculum (BLAC) co-located with 7th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK 2017). Central Europe.Google Scholar
  38. Lavoué, É., Molinari, G., Prié, Y., & Khezami, S. (2015). Reflection-in-action markers for reflection-on-action in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning settings. Computers & Education, 88, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  40. Lin, J. W., & Lin, H. C. K. (2019). User acceptance in a computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment with social network awareness (SNA) support. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 100–115.Google Scholar
  41. Matthews, K. E., Andrews, V., & Adams, P. (2011). Social learning spaces and student engagement. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2), 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2014). Learning with big data: The future of education. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  43. McCarthy, J. (1993). Notes on formalizing context. Proceeding IJCAI’93 Proceedings of the 13th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 555–560). Chambery, France — August 28 - September 03, 1993.Google Scholar
  44. Milne, A. J. (2006). Designing blended learning space to the student experience. In Learning spaces. Washington, DC: Educause.Google Scholar
  45. Miraoui, M. A (2018). Context-aware smart classroom for enhanced learning environment. Retrieved on 23 Oct 2019 from
  46. Muñoz-Cristóbal, J. A., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Martínez-Monés, A., Prieto, L. P., Jorrín-Abellán, I. M., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2015, September). Bucket-Server: A system for including teacher-controlled flexibility in the management of learning artefacts in across-spaces learning situations. Paper presented at the Tenth European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL 2015), Toledo, Spain.Google Scholar
  47. Muñoz-Cristóbal, J. A., Gallego-Lema, V., Arribas-Cubero, H. F., Martínez-Monés, A., & Asensio-Pérez, J. I. (2017). Using virtual learning environments in bricolage mode for orchestrating learning situations across physical and virtual spaces. Computers & Education, 109, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Munoz-Cristobal, J. A., Prieto, L. P., Asensio-Perez, J. I., Jorrín-Abellán, I. M., Martínez-Mones, A., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2013, September). Sharing the burden: Introducing student-centred orchestration in across-spaces learning situations. In Paper Presented at the 8th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL), Paphos, Cyprus.Google Scholar
  49. Oblinger, D. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8. Retrieved 23 Oct 2019 from
  50. Oblinger, D. (2005). Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces. Educause Quarterly, 28(1), 14–18.Google Scholar
  51. Oblinger, D., & Lippincott, J. K. (2006). Learning spaces. Boulder, Colo,.: EDUCAUSE, c2006. 1 v.(various pagings): illustrations. Retrieved on 23 Oct 2019 from
  52. Osborne, J. (2013). The 21st-century challenge for science education: Assessing scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5) (pp. 1–6). UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  54. Psyché V., Anjou C., Fenani W., Bourdeau J., Forissier T., & Nkambou R. (2018). Ontology-Based Context Modelling for Designing a Context-Aware Calculator. Workshop on Context and Culture in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2018.Google Scholar
  55. Ramsay, C. M., Guo, X., & Pursel, B. K. (2017). Leveraging faculty reflective practice to understand active learning spaces: Flashbacks and re-captures. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(3), 42–53.Google Scholar
  56. Schwartz, D. L., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. D. (1999). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. In Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 183–213). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  57. Schwier, R. A., Morrison, D., & Daniel, B. K. (2009). A preliminary investigation of self-directed learning activities in a non-formal blended learning environment. Online Submission. Available
  58. Scott, K. S., Sorokti, K. H., & Merrell, J. D. (2016). Learning “beyond the classroom” within an enterprise social network system. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 75–90. Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Selman, G., Cooke, M., Selman, M., & Dampier, P. (1998). The foundations of adult education in Canada (2nd ed.). Toronto, ON: Thompson Educational Publishing.Google Scholar
  60. Selwyn, N. (2012). Making sense of young people, education and digital technology: The role of sociological theory. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Smith, C. (2017). The influence of hierarchy and layout geometry in the design of learning spaces. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(3), 59–67.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  62. Sottilare, R. A., Baker, R. S., Graesser, A. C., & Lester, J. C. (2018). Special Issue on the Generalized Intelligent Framework for Tutoring (GIFT): Creating a stable and flexible platform for Innovations in AIED research. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(2), 139–151.Google Scholar
  63. Starr-Glass, D. (2018). Building learning spaces. In Online course management: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (p. 241). Pennsylvania, USA: IGI Global. Hershey.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stockless, A. (2018). Digital education: learning by opening the walls of the class. Revue Internationale sur le numérique en éducation et communication,, 1(1), P3–P5. Retrieved on 06-02-2019 from
  65. Temple, P. (2008). Learning spaces in higher education: An under-researched topic. London Review of Education, 6(3), 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Thomas, H. (2010). Learning spaces, learning environments and the dis ‘placement’ of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 502–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Leeuwen, A., Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Brekelmans, M. (2014). Supporting teachers in guiding collaborating students: Effects of learning analytics in CSCL. Computers & Education, 79, 28–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. VanLehn, K. (2016). Regulative loops, step loops and task loops. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vercellotti, M. L. (2018). Do interactive learning spaces increase student achievement? A comparison of the classroom context. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(3), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wilson, G., & Randall, M. (2012). The implementation and evaluation of a new learning space: A pilot study. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Woolf, B. P. (2010). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Morgan Kaufmann. Burlington, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  72. Xi, L., Yuan, Z., Yun Qui, B., & Chiang, F. K. (2017). An investigation of university students’ classroom seating choices. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(3), 13–22.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valéry Psyché
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ben K. Daniel
    • 2
  • Jacqueline Bourdeau
    • 1
  1. 1.TÉLUQ University, Montréal (Québec)QuébecCanada
  2. 2.Otago UniversityDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations