Examining Inclusivity in Flexible Learning Spaces: Expectations, Comfort, and Distractions
Saved in:
| Title: | Examining Inclusivity in Flexible Learning Spaces: Expectations, Comfort, and Distractions |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Sarah T. Zipf (ORCID |
| Source: | Innovative Higher Education. 2025 50(1):277-301. |
| Availability: | Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 25 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Inclusion, Classroom Environment, Classroom Design, Space Utilization, Design Requirements, Educational Facilities Design, Accessibility (for Disabled), Students with Disabilities, Physical Environment, Attention Control, Classrooms |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10755-024-09730-8 |
| ISSN: | 0742-5627 1573-1758 |
| Abstract: | Historically, classrooms have utilized stationary furniture, facing front toward a centralized instructor position, and limiting student-to-student interactions. Such classrooms often stem from design processes that tend to focus on building codes and feedback from investors, architects, and planners, which leaves little input from instructors and students until the end (Britnell, et al., 2009). With little to no input from primary users, classrooms can become less inclusive or inaccessible in a variety of ways, especially for students with disabilities. One way to address this problem is to design flexible learning classrooms so that instructors and students can customize the room. Seemingly more inclusive, we wanted to understand how the physical elements of a flexible classroom create opportunities and barriers for students with disabilities. This mixed-methods study includes data from an online survey, interviews, and digital drawings. We utilized a purposeful sample of students with documented disabilities (n = 16) and used the eight universal design goals as our main coding schema. Results show students carry expectations and predictions about their classrooms based on the layout or arrangement; students' social comfort can override physical comfort, even while expressing medical needs; students might misunderstand certain elements of flexible classrooms; and students can identify ways they were distracted by the room. Institutions and instructors interested in creating more inclusive spaces need to be intentional with flexible learning classrooms so that students can understand and utilize the affordances of these spaces. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1460686 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEOdb6oJC9I-8ZRsO-bYQyRAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDHeodvBGExsyXs-9AgIBEICBm3Yxb1zqgnEVwIZ63NlcMhuboRPhakjsqoGyHbvCUI07KepRABGRqoy4KQztLkPI1TINY-8yEKCR-PXpXUVqKFTCN-CLFdaiVetCm2FkTURKwgoDBSgjlI-4oY8RCeqnuqBT2kKRjGzwA_uHBncFf9Np9Oz9SItz4ZvsN0mM1xHGPUQ3KLfynpwoqy3A-FOLdzJpuygNzD_iG5UJ Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0183073346;ihe01feb.25;2025Feb19.02:50;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183073346-1">Examining Inclusivity in Flexible Learning Spaces: Expectations, Comfort, and Distractions </title> <p>Historically, classrooms have utilized stationary furniture, facing front toward a centralized instructor position, and limiting student-to-student interactions. Such classrooms often stem from design processes that tend to focus on building codes and feedback from investors, architects, and planners, which leaves little input from instructors and students until the end (Britnell, et al., 2009). With little to no input from primary users, classrooms can become less inclusive or inaccessible in a variety of ways, especially for students with disabilities. One way to address this problem is to design flexible learning classrooms so that instructors and students can customize the room. Seemingly more inclusive, we wanted to understand how the physical elements of a flexible classroom create opportunities and barriers for students with disabilities. This mixed-methods study includes data from an online survey, interviews, and digital drawings. We utilized a purposeful sample of students with documented disabilities (n = 16) and used the eight universal design goals as our main coding schema. Results show students carry expectations and predictions about their classrooms based on the layout or arrangement; students' social comfort can override physical comfort, even while expressing medical needs; students might misunderstand certain elements of flexible classrooms; and students can identify ways they were distracted by the room. Institutions and instructors interested in creating more inclusive spaces need to be intentional with flexible learning classrooms so that students can understand and utilize the affordances of these spaces.</p> <p>Keywords: Flexible classrooms; Inclusion; Students with disability; Universal design goals; Education Curriculum and Pedagogy Specialist Studies In Education</p> <p>Copyright comment Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Even when the classroom provides the same environment, students' minds and bodies are different, creating different learning experiences, and potentially creating exclusionary classrooms. Teaching and learning do not happen in a vacuum, as one informs the other. Whether physical or virtual, learning environments promote particular forms of pedagogy and student engagement. Classes held in a stadium-style lecture hall with tiered rows of stationary chairs facing a podium, for example, may result in very different opportunities for equitable and inclusive teaching compared to a flexible space with moveable furniture and no clear 'center' of authority. Understanding the dynamic between physical classroom design and students learning experiences is crucial in addressing inclusivity in classroom design.</p> <p>It stands to reason that a flexible classroom with moveable furniture can easily be modified to accommodate a student who uses a wheelchair, for example, making the room more accessible. But what would it mean to a student with low or no vision to enter a classroom in which furniture has been moved from week to week? What about a student with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who is distracted when unable to sit in the same seat each week? The design of our environments also provides messaging about who is invited and expected to participate in classroom activities—who will 'fit' comfortably within these spaces, who will need to be 'accommodated' or make accommodations themselves, and who will find themselves unable to participate at all. While the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) gives us some guidelines (ADA National Network, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>]), meeting students' needs is a complex process in which compliance and accessibility are often misconstrued to mean inclusion. Although flexible learning environments appear to be a solution for an inclusive design, they can represent an additional challenge for those students with auditory, sensory, or socio-cognitive differences (Benade, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref2">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>We wanted to learn more about what is required to create a fully inclusive physical classroom and aimed to better understand students' perceptions, preferences, and experiences in a flexible classroom. We define flexible learning classrooms (FLCs) as those with moveable furniture, multiple display capabilities, writable surfaces, and no clear "front" to the room. We wanted to learn what students with disabilities said about certain elements and technologies, uncover other aspects of inclusivity, and learn more about fostering inclusivity in an FLC. We started with an understanding of what disability means in an educational context, first by looking more broadly and then orienting our thoughts into a physical classroom and inclusive spaces.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-3">Disability in Educational Contexts</hd> <p>The minority group paradigm suggests society places those with disabilities at a great disadvantage in society (Jones, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref3">26</reflink>]). One in four adult Americans has a disability related to "hearing, vision, cognition, mobility, self-care, and independent living" (Okoro et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref4">31</reflink>]) and the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports that 19% of students identified some type of disability ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref5">30</reflink>]). The advantages or disadvantages extended to people with disabilities are only defined so much as the spaces that we occupy, as an individual's value and functional limitations are shaped by society (see Hamraie, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref6">22</reflink>]). When used medically, the term disability is given meaning as a "less-than" minority status by social conditions (Cluley et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref7">14</reflink>]) and has been determined as a "problem" or an "exception" to average by society based on changing concepts of normalcy (Davis, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref8">17</reflink>]). Society gives and reaffirms meaning to what it means to have a disability today.</p> <p>When used legally, disability carries protected rights related to certain services and places, (Americans with Disabilities Act, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref9">2</reflink>]), including education. Colleges and universities are required to have dedicated efforts and resources to ensure students with disabilities have their needs met. Accommodations are adjustments to how something is done, implying something already exists but changed from the original in response to a specific need or circumstance (Lee, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref10">28</reflink>]). Accommodations are required to be individualized and may include alternative formats, additional time to complete an assignment, scribes, or other resources to meet the needs of the student. Students must file additional paperwork or take additional steps to receive accommodations (Black et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref11">8</reflink>]), which can put "additional burdens on already minoritized [sic] individuals" (Barnett, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref12">5</reflink>], p. 27–28). The reported numbers of students with disabilities are likely underestimated given that students do not always report because of the additional steps. To help alleviate some of this burden, concepts of universal design can be employed.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-4">Universal Design and Universal Design Goals</hd> <p>Universal Design (UD) is a process in which physical and virtual spaces are created that can be used by the largest number of people and promote an "easier, healthier, and friendlier" lifestyle (Steinfeld &amp; Maisel, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref13">38</reflink>], p. 29). UD focuses on the built environment and is meant to be proactive (Crawford &amp; Burgstahler, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref14">16</reflink>]) so modifications for others are unnecessary. Steinfeld and Maisel ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref15">38</reflink>]) suggest that UD really means total inclusion for all. The UD principles and goals provide a set of rules or guides to create items and spaces for most people. UD is guided by seven principles: equitable use, flexibility in use; simple and intuitive use; perceptible information; tolerance for error; low physical effort; and size and space for approach and use (Steinfeld &amp; Maisel, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref16">38</reflink>], p. 72). These ideals and concepts, however, do not have actionable or measurable outcomes. The UD goals, on the other hand, do. The eight goals include: awareness, body fit, comfort, cultural appropriateness, personalization, social integration, understanding, and wellness (Table 1). These eight goals can be mapped to the principles, with a single principle meeting several goals (see Steinfeld &amp; Maisel, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref17">38</reflink>], p. 90, Figs. 4–9), meaning there is no single solution in universal design. Summers and Beers ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref18">40</reflink>]) aligned UD goals to classrooms which is directly related to our study and helped extend the concepts proposed by Steinfeld and Maisel ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref19">38</reflink>]). As Summer and Beers ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref20">40</reflink>]) state, the UD goals help explore the "cognitive, emotional, and cultural needs of diverse students" and expel the myth that suitable design solutions are only available to those with financial means (p. 78). They iterate on the UD goals to create a standardized classroom at their institution in response to changing students' needs and addressing issues of retention (Summer &amp; Beers, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref21">40</reflink>]).</p> <p>Table 1 Universal Design goals defined by previous authors</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;UD GOALS&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Steinfeld and Maisel (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr38"&gt;2012&lt;/xref&gt;, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt;. 90)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Summers and Beers (&lt;xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr40"&gt;2019&lt;/xref&gt;, &lt;italic&gt;p&lt;/italic&gt;. 79)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Awareness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ensuring that critical information for use is easily perceived&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Phones and access to help&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Body Fit&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Accommodating a wide range of body sizes and abilities&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Left and right-handed desks; desks fit a variety of bodies and abilities; additional seating and varying heights&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comfort&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Keeping demands within desirable limits of body function and perception&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Easy to move furniture&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cultural Appropriateness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Respecting and reinforcing cultural values, and the social and environmental contexts for any design project&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Natural materials and windows;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"universally accessible furniture, technology, and aesthetic elements"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Personalization&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Incorporating opportunities for choice and the expression of individual preferences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;"Lets students enjoy a sense of personal space"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social Integration&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Treating all groups with dignity and respect&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Supports communication with "respect and dignity" by providing adequate and acceptable room for individuals and groups&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Understanding&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Making methods of operation and use intuitive, clear, and unambiguous&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Directions for technology use are clear&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wellness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Contributing to health, promotion, avoidance of disease, and protection from hazards&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Ergonomics; pleasant environment (colors and design); ambiance control&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>When used in built spaces, UD guides designers and thinkers into a more inclusive or holistic response. For example, Harvey and Kenyon ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref22">23</reflink>]) used UD when reviewing chairs for a newly designed classroom space, focusing on "equitable use, flexibility in use, low physical effort, and size and space for approach and use" (p. 2). Beyond UD goals, the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) from EDUCAUSE "serves as a way to measure progress toward designing flexible and inclusive learning spaces" (Brandt et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref23">9</reflink>], p. 5). Most relevant to this study are the LSRS credits related to physical inclusion and universal design (7.1) and cognitive inclusion (7.2). Cultural inclusion (7.3) moves beyond the physical to the social standing of what it means to create an inclusive space (Brandt et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref24">9</reflink>]). Somewhat aspirational, how these principles are applied to create multidimensional inclusive spaces is not yet fully understood. UD principles and goals share similarities with Universal Design for Learning (UDL) however the focus of this study was about the physical room and not the learning activities more closely related to UDL.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-5">Inclusive Spaces</hd> <p>Much like the word <emph>diversity</emph> can take on many different concepts (Berrey, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref25">7</reflink>]), <emph>inclusion</emph> does too. No single definition exists which means <emph>inclusion</emph> can be conceptualized as related to politics, identity, or socio-cultural, or rendered from a constellation of "codes" (Qvortrup &amp; Qvortrup, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref26">32</reflink>]). For this study, we define inclusion as a form of belonging, or being considered as part of the group, and not made to feel othered or separated from the dominant group because of documented disability status.</p> <p>Sense of belonging cannot be overstated in higher education, particularly as institutions are continually looking to improve retention and graduation rates. When students do not feel like they belong, they are more likely to "check out" (Strange &amp; Banning, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref27">39</reflink>]). The sense of belonging, or not belonging, can develop from the physical campus and the elements within those settings. What might be exciting and engaging for some students, might be distracting for others (Ashley et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref28">3</reflink>]) depending on ability status. In a physical sense, classrooms can represent the "quality [of] educational experience" students can expect and influence their decision to enroll (Hayes, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref29">24</reflink>], p. 119–120). Students can tell if the institution supports their learning by the types of spaces available.</p> <p>Built environments are external displays of internal sociocultural practices, guided by designer instinct and experience (Hamraie, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref30">22</reflink>]). When people enter spaces, they do so as individuals, and as members of society (Goldhagen, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref31">19</reflink>]); which means expectations of what happens in a space are predefined, either by the built design decisions or by their previous experiences. Any space that "isolates students or distances them (physically or psychologically) is less effective in sustaining a learning community" (Strange &amp; Banning, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref32">39</reflink>], p. 148). Regardless of whether efforts are intentional or not, the psychological impact of being othered or excluded because of disability status in a room can isolate students. Arguably, one way to address these negative impacts is to design flexible spaces, such as classrooms, which give students options to personalize their use.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-6">Flexible Learning Classrooms</hd> <p>Flexible classrooms can be defined in several ways, such as "open learning environments with significant integration of learning and teaching technology," (Chapman et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref33">12</reflink>], p. 41) or a room that has "wall-to-ceiling writable surfaces, multiple projection points, and moveable teaching stations" (Woo et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref34">43</reflink>], p. 31). We define flexible learning classrooms as those with technologies that challenge the traditional notions of instructor-focused pedagogy and shift focus to student-centered pedagogies, through moveable furniture, advanced technologies, and no formal front of the room. Furniture placement invites students into gathering and interacting with each other (Woo et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref35">43</reflink>]) and supports "student agency and personalised [sic] learning" (Benade, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref36">6</reflink>], p. 56). With many elements and technologies, FLCs seem to meet a variety of students' needs and create a more inclusive environment. Although FLCs present flexible options, it is not yet fully understood how students with disabilities experience these types of classrooms.</p> <p>With flexible learning spaces and a focus on creating more inclusive classrooms, we combined UD goals and social constructs of disability for a powerful way to view students' expressed senses of accessibility, physical classroom elements, and what they believe they need in a learning space.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-7">Research Site and Study Design</hd> <p>One institution renovated a classroom in 2016 from stationary furniture with desk returns and a single focal point to a classroom with moveable furniture, acoustic tiles, wireless content-sharing capabilities, and floor-to-ceiling writing surfaces. The VHS cart was replaced by dual projectors, a document camera, a main computer, and three different types of cameras with microphones for wide angle, 360 degrees, and speaker-focused views. Chairs of various heights, sizes, and materials are available, as are tables of different shapes, sizes, and heights to create tiers for multiple sight lines (see Fig. 1). Although prior research has been conducted in this space (see Ramsay et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref37">35</reflink>]) and other FLCs, we were specifically interested in the experiences of students with disabilities.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 The flexible learning. (Photo credit: Leqi Li)</p> <p>This study was exploratory and for that reason, we had broad research questions:</p> <p>What are the expectations of students with disabilities in a flexible learning classroom?</p> <p>What are the preferences of students with disabilities in a flexible learning classroom?</p> <p>What are the perceptions of students with disabilities a flexible learning classroom?</p> <p>Guided by this general question about experiences, we broke the question into three components of expectations, perceptions, and preferences. The study consisted of two parts. First, we invited students to explore the FLC, take an online questionnaire, and create a digital drawing of their ideal classroom. Second, we interviewed students about their experiences and perceptions of FLCs. We found students carry expectations and predictions of classroom activities; that while the classroom offers flexibility and comfort, students are unlikely to personalize the elements; and that some elements are misunderstood and create distractions.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-8">Method</hd> <p>We utilized a two-phased, mixed-methods approach to this study. After approval from our institutional review board, we partnered with an internal unit to send recruitment messages to students with documented disabilities on file. By recruiting this way, we had a zero-probability of recruiting students without documented disabilities. Students were invited to view available dates and times to come to the specific flexible learning classroom. In the first phase, we invited the volunteer students to explore the room, reviewing and trying the various technologies, and then take a brief online questionnaire about the room and its affordances. The questionnaire served as a fast way to collect information about the students' opinions and preferences about the specifics in the room. The Universal Design Goals suggest that elements of spaces are intuitive to users and the questionnaire asked students about their level of understanding of the various elements in the room without influence from the researchers. The questionnaire included items related to students' experience in other classrooms, ranked responses about how accessible the elements in the room were, and other questions about specific technologies. Moreover, the questionnaire included three open-ended responses related to the research questions, important to this study, including "What did you like about the classroom you just explored?", "What didn't you like or find challenging about this classroom?", and "What changes you would recommend we make to this classroom to improve your learning and/or accessibility and why?" The results of this questionnaire offered valuable insights into the thoughts and perceptions of students with disabilities, permitting us to design an interview protocol. For example, students reported certain elements in the room were distracting. We sought a deeper explanation of what was distracting and why in the subsequent interviews where we were able to ask students to clarify their answers.</p> <p>The second phase used the same recruitment process and invited students for a 60-minute interview. No student volunteered for both phases of the study, and we did not have duplicated participants. The interviews were semi-structured as we had identified the initial context of the study and topics related to our research questions but wanted to be able to add or alter questions to clarify students' responses (Glesne, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref38">18</reflink>]). We asked students about their experience in similar rooms, thoughts about the affordances, and to use a digital drawing to describe their ideal classroom layout, using a click-and-drag model to reposition images of furniture and technology (Appendix A). We recorded and transcribed the interviews, cleaned for grammar and ease of reading.</p> <p>A team of two researchers used the definitions of the eight goals of Universal Design goals (Steinfeld &amp; Maisel, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref39">38</reflink>]; Summers &amp; Beers, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref40">40</reflink>]) to code and look for themes and patterns (see Table 1). We added "sensory processing" and felt a separate code was necessary, especially related to described distractions (Ashley et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref41">3</reflink>]). "Wellness," one of the UD goals did not accurately capture what students in this study were saying and we did not want to suggest that a student is unwell (Table 2) (Authors, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref42">4</reflink>]). We created pseudonyms based on the data collection method, (Q = questionnaire, I = interview) and a number, so as to not assign additional characteristics based on names (see Moule, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref43">29</reflink>]) and italicized the names in the text.</p> <p>Two researchers coded the questionnaire responses and interview transcripts using Taguette (Rampin &amp; Rampin, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref44">34</reflink>]), a collaborative online qualitative data analysis tool, and Excel. We coded deductively, based on the expanded concepts of UD Goals (Table 2). As we coded in Taguette, we saw areas where UD goals overlapped. For example, students frequently stated they liked the tables because they had enough writing surfaces for their laptops, water bottles, and paper notes (body fit, personalization) and because it allowed them to interact with others (social integration). Personalization and sensory processing also overlapped, as students were stating their personal preference or choice (personalization) while expressing their thoughts on how their senses might be impacted (sensory processing). Students said they preferred the chairs (personalization) while describing the distracting swivel action (sensory processing). We exported the codes from Taguette to Excel for further examination of the codes and the initial interrater reliability testing showed an unacceptable level of agreement (α = 0.495). The researchers discussed areas of disagreement and recoded responses until an acceptable level of agreement was met (α = 0.929).</p> <p>UD goals are not meant to be singular, as elements can meet more than one goal at a time. Nevertheless, the coding process helped us gather the three main themes for students' expectations, perceptions, and preferences of the FLC.</p> <p>Table 2 Expanded definitions of UD Goals for Coding</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Awareness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Movability of objects/raising chairs and tables; recognizing the opportunities of various elements and technologies&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Body fit&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Body sizes and occupying space, personal space&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comfort&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comfort can change based on activities; can include different types of comfort (e.g. social, academic, physical); sense/feeling for comfort&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Cultural appropriateness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Rules and/or norms of the classroom; expectations of the instructor and student(s); often discipline-specific and learning activity oriented; cultural values extended to include normed behaviors (privileged persons, neurotypical, without disability)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Personalization&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Individual preferences and choice of use&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sensory Processing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Distraction, focus, and ability to hear and see others&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social integration&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interactions of student-student; student - instructor; student-class; recognizing the needs of others and the different needs of others&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Understanding&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Knowing how to raise a table/chair; functional or operational use of elements or technologies&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wellness&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Includes mental, social, emotional, and physical health; identified hazards or dangers&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <p>Fifteen participants provided drawings and one student gave a verbal description of their design. The drawings were uploaded into NVivo qualitative software and grouped by design with additional thematic codes to describe the general layout of the room. For example, furniture arranged in straight rows, creating a front to the classroom were labeled as "rows" and furniture arranged in a fashion perpendicular to where images would be projected were labeled as "columns."</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-9">Participants</hd> <p>In total, sixteen students with documented disabilities, participated in this study. Six students self-disclosed their documented disabilities, either in the online questionnaire or during the interview. Half of the students were seniors (<emph>n</emph> = 8), four were sophomores, three were graduate students, and one was a first-year student. Students represented a variety of academic majors, with seven students in STEM related fields, five in applied sciences, four in humanities, and one student in social science (See Table 3).</p> <p>Table 3 Students pseudonym and characteristics</p> <p> <ephtml> &lt;table frame="hsides" rules="groups"&gt;&lt;thead&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Participant Number&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Academic Standing&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Data Collection Method&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;th align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Self-Disclosed Disability&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/th&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/thead&gt;&lt;tbody&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Humanities&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-2&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Humanities&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;ADHD&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-3&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;First Year&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Chronic neck and back pain&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-4&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sophomore&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-5&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Graduate student&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Applied Sciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-6&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Humanities&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-7&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Applied Sciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-8&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sophomore&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Applied Sciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Neck/spine instability&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Q-9&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Questionnaire&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-10&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Applied Sciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;ADHD, autism&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-11&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-12&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Graduate student&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Applied Sciences&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Learning disability&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-13&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sophomore&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-14&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sophomore&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Social Science&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-15&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Graduate student&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Chronic back problems, ADHD&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;tr&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I-16&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Senior&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;STEM&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Interview&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/td&gt;&lt;td align="left" /&gt;&lt;/tr&gt;&lt;/tbody&gt;&lt;/table&gt; </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0183073346-10">Results</hd> <p>Five themes emerged from the data about students' experiences, perceptions, and preferences of flexible learning classroom affordances. Students expected certain activities to occur in classrooms and want to be able to predict what will happen in their class. They preferred certain aspects of the room, such as the bodily comfort afforded by the chairs, but also find this physical need in conflict with social needs, based on prior educational experiences and normed classroom behaviors. Lastly, students' perceptions of the room meant some affordances were misunderstood and others created distractions.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-11">Students Expected Activities &amp; Predictable Classrooms</hd> <p>Students expressed an expectation of what a classroom should look like, and how it should function, seemingly inspired by their previous experiences and current discipline. For example, <emph>I-15</emph> and <emph>I-14</emph> both expressed the need and use for wall space. However, they used these wall spaces differently. <emph>I-15</emph> explained work takes place outside of the classroom and wall space is needed to hang material up for critiques and discussions. Whereas <emph>I-14</emph> explained: "just go up to one of these whiteboard walls, and like [...] we draw up algorithms or diagrams for like different data structures." <emph>I-15</emph> described her classroom experiences as being more discussion-oriented and <emph>I-14</emph> said his classrooms include more small groups or lectures.</p> <p>Their classroom design was based on what they expected to happen in the class which involved interacting with others. <emph>I-15</emph> wanted her ideal classroom to be: "set up in such a way where we're not looking at each other at the back of each other's heads," (see Fig. 2). <emph>I-14</emph>, on the other hand, talked about the need to connect with peers and work together. He described his room so that "you can always ask with the guy across from you, [...] and it kind of like helps with the with group work a lot. So like the attention is more on your peers than a teacher." <emph>I-14's</emph> design focused on peer-peer interactions, while still attending to the need of the instructor with space at the "front" near the projectors (see Fig. 3).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 I-15 expressed the need to see other students while in seminar and placed the tables together in a large conference-style table</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 3 I-14 created small groups with enough room for the instructor at the "front."</p> <p>The cultural appropriateness code exposed practiced norms and values in the students' responses and drawings. As all participants are in college, it is likely that most have had experience in formal classrooms. <emph>I-16</emph> said: "when you walk into a normal lecture hall, and everything's like very like rigid, almost like you just kind of know, like exactly where you're going, what you're doing how things, how things are going to run." For <emph>Q-2</emph>, the redesigned flexible-use room looked too much like a "cocktail party/reception" and wrote, "I wouldn't get a lot of value from all the chairs and tables scattered around." The implication is a desire for more traditional rows, as shown by his room drawing (see Fig. 4).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 4 Q-2 did not like the idea of setting a classroom up like a "cocktail party" and preferred a more traditional setting like rows</p> <p>Though we saw and heard about more traditionally arranged classrooms, students also recognized the opportunities (awareness) of various elements. Students saw how the room could support engagement and peer interactions. <emph>I-13</emph> shared that in philosophy and theology classes: "we have a lot of talking circles like it's easier to like look at your peers' faces, and like see what they're saying is like hearing a semi-circle or inner circle." <emph>I-13</emph> designed the classroom much like a large conference table, with taller tables available for groups to gather in the corners (see Fig. 5). <emph>I-11</emph> expects to work in groups when sitting at a table with others and said it's "how you introduce yourself to other students get to more social, unlike the table with two chairs." <emph>I-16</emph> also thought the room and the type of furniture "invites like more creativity and group discussion." As these comments demonstrate, the furniture created and encouraged social integration by supporting communication and focus to peers. It was clear from comments that students took clues from furniture arrangements and their previous experience for what to expect in class. These expectations led to predictions about how they engage with their classroom space, especially around how and where they selected their seats.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 5 I-13 placed all the larger tables together to make a conference room table to see everyone in the class</p> <p>For the most part, students said they preferred to sit in the same seat or general location each week. Notably, nearly all students were concerned with being able to see the instructor. For example, <emph>I-12</emph> said she chose her seat because she's "very left eye dominant so I tend to sit on the right side of the class," which is to say her physical needs may be impacted by moving the furniture around but unlikely to meet official accommodation needs.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 6 I-10 ensured students could face the instructor at the "front" of the room</p> <p> <emph>I-10</emph> wanted to face the instructor at the "front" of the room (see Fig. 6) and added:I think if there were no reason behind [moving the furniture], I would find it frustrating. And, to the extent I think most people find it frustrating [...] I think if the Professor was doing it intentionally, I would want to know why. But if every single time I walked in the classroom and it was a different formation, I would kind of be like I would not know where to sit or a would be overwhelming to me.</p> <p> <emph>I-10</emph> self-disclosed that she has Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) which may make her feelings of frustration more consequential to learning outcomes than neurotypical students. <emph>I-15</emph>, also self-disclosed as having ADHD, said she was "a creature of habit, so I like to think these things do the same, even if I'm not sitting in the same exact spot to see a predictable environment when I come in." In a similar sentiment, <emph>I-11</emph> said the distraction of not getting the same seat would impact her learning:[it] doesn't have to be the same seat. It has to be the front, it could be front left, front right, and front center as long as I'm in the front and I'm okay with that, but [...] I'm not gonna have a good day in class because I will be focusing on, like why did I not get the front seat?</p> <p>For at least one student, predictability went the other way. <emph>Q-4</emph> was the only student who had had a class in the room and said "the instructor was anti-technology and just lectured at the front the entire semester," which meant the prediction of using the various elements fell short. In their drawing, <emph>Q-4</emph> included nearly all pieces of furniture and elements in the room, choosing both individual and group work settings (see Fig. 7). Students come to classrooms with certain ideas which means the unpredictability of FLCs could create a barrier to successful learning.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 7 Q-4 was the only student who had previously had class in the room and was the only student to utilize all furniture and technologies in the design</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-12">Preferences for Bodily Comfort Conflict with Social Comfort</hd> <p>Students preferred the lower chairs in the room and seemed to like them because they were comfortable. The chairs move on wheels, swivel, can be raised or lowered, and do not have arms. <emph>I-10</emph> said she was "not used to having chairs like this" and felt as if she could "literally sit here for hours, which is the whole point." <emph>Q-8</emph> shared:When chairs are uncomfortable my back bothers me in class and it is really distracting. Immobile seating can also be a huge issue because I have to turn my head to see the board, which hurts my neck because I have neck instability.</p> <p>Students mentioned how uncomfortable it was to turn their heads to see the instructor. Turning heads and necks for some students with disabilities means moving beyond just physical comfort. As an example, <emph>Q-3</emph> said it was "crucial" to have an ergonomic space because it "can all compound and lead to headaches and migraines," increasing his "productivity and classroom attentiveness." For some students with a disability, comfort is not simply about physical comfort, but medical benefits.</p> <p>Other issues about the chairs were expressed, too. <emph>Q-5</emph> thought about how chair types might impact others and wrote: "I think other options for alternate seating, such as different types of chairs, might be good to encourage students with attention issues and/or sensory issues to feel more comfortable in this sort of environment." FLCs might impact classroom interactions, focus, and attention for students with different sensory processing, like those with neurodivergent conditions, (Ashley et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref45">3</reflink>]). Overall, comfort was very important to students with some recognizing their needs went past simple physical comfort.</p> <p>While students felt the different types of furniture supported body fit, they also shared they did not like the taller tables because they did not conform to the ideals of normal classroom furniture. <emph>Q-6</emph> thought "it was difficult to sit on them as a shorter person and could potentially cause someone to fall." <emph>I-11</emph> said she didn't "want to be kicking the air, because I can't reach the ground." Beyond body fit, the tall tables felt uncomfortable socially. Even those students with self-disclosed back problems recognized the health benefits but still would not sit at them. <emph>Q-8</emph> said the high tables might promote students to move, but that "I may feel weird if I want to move to a standing table during class." <emph>I-15</emph> mentioned her doctor encouraged her to "stand up every half hour [but] I don't really feel comfortable doing that [during class.]" The social aspect here of acceptability or expectation was prevalent when it came to using certain elements, even when physical pain was involved. <emph>I-12</emph> said that:people judge you by the choices you make, and if I really truly like we're miserably in pain on a given day, then I may choose to [sit there]. But I will do it with the knowledge that everyone else in class observes that choice.</p> <p> <emph>I-12</emph>, <emph>I-15</emph>, and <emph>Q-8</emph>, all felt socially uncomfortable doing things for their physical wellbeing which suggests cultural appropriateness influences strong thoughts for students. These feelings may then lead to feelings of exclusion because the choice of the taller tables means going against what is assumed to be socially acceptable.</p> <p>The cultural appropriateness, or what students thought was normed behavior, showed in the classroom designs, too. For example, only three of the classrooms did not locate the instructor space at the "front" of the room (see Figs. 6 and 7). Though the room offers choices, students designed the room according to their previous experience or discipline and not because of their personalized preferences. The students were more likely to select furniture typically found in classrooms, reinforcing social comfort over bodily comfort, even at the sake of their health and wellbeing.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-13">Students' Perceptions of the FLC</hd> <p>Students were interested and recognized the benefits (awareness) of the room's attributes but felt the room was odd. They were aware of the advantages of the movable furniture and various types of chairs; however, cultural norms and expectations of classrooms limited their willingness to move or choose the equipment and furniture to meet their needs and deferred their need for personalization to the instructor. For example, <emph>I-13</emph> felt comfortable moving a chair but would "have to get permission" from the instructor to move a table. <emph>I-16</emph> would not use the whiteboard unless it's encouraged because "I probably wouldn't feel comfortable using it myself, because I feel like I might distract others, and I'd have all eyes on me then." <emph>I-15</emph> shared she noticed different types of tables but did not immediately feel like she could move the tables. She went on to add that there is a balance between taking care of her own needs while not upsetting or disrupting others and shared:[...] people can have disabilities of different natures. You can have mental health disability. You can have physical disability, and sometimes, like anxiety, can come up for students right, and you might need to like, step out of the room, and if you have a way to sit in the back, and you're not being as intrusive or are obvious.</p> <p> <emph>I-15</emph> was not the only student who shared the social implications of caring for her needs in a highly flexible environment. <emph>I-16</emph> said that:if there were [no moveable outlets] by my table, and I was in the middle of the class, and I realized that my computer is about to die, and nobody was using them all the way. I'm probably still not going to get up and do it and move it, which I guess could hurt my overall learning if I was primarily utilizing the laptop.</p> <p>Based on these comments, students perceived a lack of agency to adjust their learning environment to their own needs. While items in this room likely meet the UD goal of personalization, the perception of being allowed, prohibited full use of the classroom.</p> <p>Additionally, students misunderstood how to operate or use everything. In some cases, the researchers had to explain how to use elements, which arguably does not meet the UD goals of understanding and awareness. Notably, students did not realize the walls contained floor-to-ceiling writable surfaces. The tables were also confusing because the adjusting knob on the underside of the table was not readily visible and required students to push hard on the table to engage the pneumatics. For students with low vision, physical mobility issues, or other disabilities, these types of tables might create barriers.</p> <p>We asked students specifically if anything was distracting in the room and students pointed to several attributes. The color scheme created mixed feelings. <emph>Q-2</emph> said the room "feels really sparse, washed out, and bland- almost like a Scandinavian murder mystery series [...] I feel anxious in this room." Whereas <emph>I-10</emph> felt calm and shared: "the color scheme is really good for not feeling distracted. [...] because it's a little bit muted [and] it's soothing. I walked in and I felt a sense of calm and balanced." Although both students self-disclosed ADHD, they had different experiences.</p> <p>Students said being comfortable helped them focus but thought the swivel of the chairs might also be distracting. <emph>I-12</emph> said she's a "fidgety person, but I'm like I can't sit still in chairs like these" and, similarly <emph>Q-6</emph> said "I would find this distracting if I had to sit in a spinning chair for 90 mins." <emph>Q-7</emph> also thought the "classroom setting is very distracting." Students, regardless of documented disabilities status, will have different experiences in the same environment.</p> <p>Likewise, the writing surfaces created some distractions. <emph>I-16</emph> explained that she did not like chalkboards or whiteboards because she knew the material would be erased. <emph>I-14</emph> was distracted by the writing not completely cleaned from the whiteboard; still, he preferred them because they are smoother and you "don't feel much resistance," introducing a tactile component to the element. Likewise, <emph>I-12</emph> said chalkboards are "less of a distraction" because "I just don't have to think about it at all," going on to explain about markers drying out or losing the cap. The students in this study felt other students unaccustomed to writing on the walls would be distracted if the walls were not cleaned between classes.</p> <p>A surprising distraction was the exposed ductwork. <emph>I-11</emph> said that "dealing with different unusual [is distracting]" and <emph>Q-2</emph> said "I would cover the piping, ductwork, and wires. I have ADHD and I found myself getting distracted by tracing the lines of the pipes through the lights." Exposed ductwork is sometimes used for aesthetics, but these tiles allow for easy installation of future technologies. <emph>I-12</emph> shared a little bit more about what it meant to be distracted because of tall chairs, back pain, or being too close to another student:I just don't want to be thinking about my environment, I want to be thinking about the material and I've been thinking about, how cool the chair is, or whether I'm getting motion sick from the chair, or like those are all things that detract from my learning, whereas something that's just regular classroom it's not noticeable. I can fully engage in the material.</p> <p>Likewise, <emph>I-10</emph> said comfort was important "because if you are physically uncomfortable it is very hard to focus on what's going on. And again, especially with people who have sensory needs, it's impossible to focus when you are uncomfortable." For neurodivergent students, that which creates a distraction, and the resulting impact on learning, might be more of a challenge than for a neurotypical student. As Ashley and others ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref46">3</reflink>]) argue, what is potentially a benefit for some students may create barriers for others with sensory processing differences. Students frequently mentioned the impact on their "senses" in the classroom. Although UD goals do not include senses, the ADA covers smells and odors (Labor Law Center, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref47">27</reflink>]) and ambient noise (Acoustical Society of America, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref48">1</reflink>]). Classroom elements that negatively influence students' experiences can create an uninviting environment and run the risk of disengaging students from their learning spaces, which is the opposite of inclusion.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-14">Discussion</hd> <p>To gain a better understanding about how to create more inclusivity in physical classrooms, we asked students with disabilities about their experiences in an FLC, expectations, perspectives, and preferences of an FLC, using the eight universal design goals as guides to understand their responses and summarizing the emerging themes – expectations, perspectives, and preferences. (see Tables 1 and 2). Data from this study show that students carry expectations from previous educational experiences, preferences for bodily and social comfort, and their perceptions of the flexible classroom.</p> <p>Physical spaces bring social practices (Benade, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref49">6</reflink>]) and we found this to be no different from students' prior experience in classroom settings. Students in our study had certain expectations of what a classroom setting looked like and what activities would take place given the arrangement. For example, the digital drawings show students expect group discussion (Fig. 5), small group work (Fig. 3), and lectures (Fig. 4) based on furniture placement and their prior learning experiences. Flexibility is not a single cure-all and recognizes certain configurations work better for different pedagogical purposes (Ramsay et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref50">35</reflink>]) but also reaffirms students' expectations. For students with disabilities, particularly neurodiverse students, an ambiguous or unpredictable classroom, might alter expectations and derail their learning experience and success.</p> <p>People tend to shy away from environments they misunderstand or cannot comprehend (Goldhagen, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref51">19</reflink>]) which was evident in the digital drawings. Nearly all students made a single focal point at the "front" of the room for the instructor, even though FLCs are designed to not have a front. Students repeatedly mentioned how uncomfortable it was to turn in a chair and most ensured their classroom design had chairs facing "front." The observation of students' expectations should not be taken as a critique of the FLC; other studies have shown that FLCs influence students' course selection (Ralph et al., [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref52">33</reflink>]) and promote peer collaboration (Clinton &amp; Wilson, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref53">13</reflink>]). Instead, this observation drives attention to purposeful pedagogy and clear communication of room design so that students can understand the classroom environment.</p> <p>Students in this study gave examples of how the physical environment and furniture impact their learning, unrelated to accommodations or ADA compliance. College Autism Network reports that "accommodations" related to social and sensory needs are not often always readily available (2018). The chairs provide the best example in our study that distractions are not directly located in UD goals; the chairs meet most, if not all, of the eight UD goals and several students with back issues reported medical benefits. Nevertheless, students also talked about distractions to themselves and others, highlighting an implication for students with disabilities in FLCs. Particularly, for students with ASD, their ability to pay attention when faced with distractions is lower than neurotypical persons (Granovetter et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref54">21</reflink>]).</p> <p>Much like what Woo et al. ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref55">43</reflink>]) found, faculty need to be intentional about FLCs. Although students in our study recognized the opportunities and affordances, they deferred to instructors and lacked agency to make changes to their learning environment, even when medically necessary. Because students with disabilities are required to self-report for accommodations, we expected these students to have a clearer understanding of what they needed in a classroom space. We did not expect that, while many of these students had ideas, they were unlikely to make those changes themselves.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-15">Implications</hd> <p>Implications from this study about flexible learning classrooms are aligned to an invitation for use, explicit communication, and future design considerations. The personalization afforded by an FLC is more present than in a traditional classroom (Benade, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref56">6</reflink>]), but the potential is unrealized when a student does not or cannot utilize the affordances of this flexibility. Our study found that students with disabilities have specific expectations and preferences for physical classroom environment and such preferences are heavily influenced by their previous experiences. These expectations shape how they interact with FLCs. Specifically, students expressed a need for predictability and consistency in classroom set ups, which is a misunderstanding of the flexibility options offered by the classroom, and a preference for social comfort over physical comfort. Data in the study show that students recall their previous experiences in classrooms to set their expectations and predictions for class, such as individual or group work depending on the furniture type and arrangement. The drawings and their preferences for more traditional seating options represent how students expect their classrooms to look and function. When students enter a classroom that does not look like their previous classroom experiences, their expectations and predictions about the class might be challenged, creating unknowns, anxiety, or nervous feelings. As described by students in this study, changes can negatively impact their learning, particularly for neurodiverse students. Therefore, it is crucial for instructors to clearly communicate the functions of the classroom elements and be intentional with their use.</p> <p>For instructors, it's helpful to keep students updated ahead of time if they are changing the layout of an FLC, instructors must bring intentional use to the FLC, beyond just moving around the elements (Woo et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref57">43</reflink>]). Like Clinton and Wilson ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref58">13</reflink>]), our students also said they selected their seats so they could see the instructor. Additionally, our students preferred to sit in the same seat and expressed concern if the room changed without notice or explanation. Still, students were not completely opposed to changes, because they recognized the opportunities and affordances of the various elements. Changes to the room require consideration for students with disabilities for several reasons. While no student in our study presented vision impairments or mobility aides, some students may not be able to physically help rearrange the furniture and may feel excluded if asked to help. For other students, rearranging can create a distraction if moved into an unexpected setting.</p> <p>Instructors can create a more inclusive environment by explaining how each element might be used and openly inviting students to change seats, stand, or move to another location in the room when needed. Directly stating classroom expectations that support personalized use of the elements can help instructors set other classroom behavior (Wesp et al., [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref59">42</reflink>]), helping to create different classroom norms and change cultural appropriateness associated with formal learning spaces. In doing so, the social designation of students' needs will not be based on disability, but rather centered on the flexibility and affordances of the room. For example, data showed that students have clear preferences for their seating choices, both in location and style of chair, but that they might have to choose between being socially comfortable or physically comfortable during class. Classroom designs should consider both social and physical aspects to create an inclusive environment. Providing a variety of seating options that cater to different comfort needs and encouraging students to use these options without fear of judgment, can help balance social and physical comfort. Instructors can play a role by normalizing the use of different seating arrangements and promoting a culture of acceptance.</p> <p>About "15–20% of the world's population exhibits some form of neurodivergence," (Staff, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref60">37</reflink>]). As the number of students diagnosed with a neurological condition, continues to increase (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref61">11</reflink>]), colleges and universities must develop practices in areas that fall outside of accommodations and ADA compliance. For example, the Center for Neurodiversity at Rowan University was developed to bring awareness and value to the campus of neurodivergent people and includes resources such as sensory-friendly spaces (Rowan University, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref62">36</reflink>]), and Thomas Jefferson University holds a yearly, interdisciplinary symposium with healthcare, education, and design professionals focused on "addressing all-inclusive ways for inhabiting and perceiving our environments" (Thomas Jefferson, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref63">41</reflink>], para 1).</p> <p>Although students seem to appreciate the flexibility of FLC furniture over more traditional furniture (Woo et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref64">43</reflink>]), students' expectations and perceptions of what happens in their formal learning spaces are learned over the many years in school prior to starting college. When expectations for normed behavior in a classroom are not set, students develop their own which can lead to distractions (Woo et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref65">43</reflink>]) and disruptions. Distractions and disruptions can be more detrimental to some students than others, such as students with anxiety or ASD. To enhance inclusivity, classrooms should be designed with predictable and consistent setups. Regularly changing the layout should be done with prior notice and clear explanations. Instructors can involve students in decisions about classroom arrangements to ensure that changes meet the needs of all learners.</p> <p>Finally, universal design in education "puts a high value on diversity, equity, and inclusion" (Burgstahler, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref66">10</reflink>]) p. 3) and the LSRS 3.0 (Brandt et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref67">9</reflink>]) amplifies the need to bring cognitive and cultural considerations to the design process. However, data collected in this study shows students' expectations, preferences, and perceptions should be taken into consideration. Institutions should support students by offering guidance on how to personalize and use these spaces to meet their individual needs, enhancing their sense of agency and control over their learning environment. This change requires instructors to fully engage with, and have an interest in, collaborating with their students. Orientation sessions or resources that demonstrate how to use the various elements within the FLC would help instructors and students reimagine their classroom, taking full advantage of the opportunities and options provided in a flexible learning environment. While the standards for creating more inclusive classrooms are important steps, students should be involved in the process, too.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-16">Limitations</hd> <p>Students bring multiple identities and dimensions to the classroom and while we chose to center ability in this exploratory and descriptive study, future studies are needed to understand the intersections between ability, race, gender, and other social identities that influence inclusion and sense of belonging. We focused on the experiences of a small number of participants to gain insight into their perceptions of the FLC and lay the conceptual and empirical groundwork for future research. The small number of participants may not fully represent all students. Additionally, most students in the study did not have class experience in the classroom and may find other aspects of the room influential as they interact with and gain knowledge in the room. We will continue along this line of inquiry, using these data to inform a survey for students in this specific classroom, to learn about how first-generation students, adult students, and other identities experience FLCs.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-17">Conclusions</hd> <p>Over the years, the growth of the physical campus has exceeded student enrollment, placing institutions in a precarious financial situation (Gordian, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref68">20</reflink>]). Even with hybrid offerings and decreased enrollments, colleges and universities cannot neglect offering adequate and supportive learning spaces. Classrooms are an outward display of the institution's interest and support for its students and should be updated to reflect contemporary teaching and learning trends. Student demographics are changing, and so too should the classroom environment, making it imperative that classrooms create an inclusive space for all students.</p> <p>The prevailing wisdom of the last several decades has been that formal classrooms that are flexible are good for supporting multiple modalities of teaching and learning. Our investigation began with the question of whether such designs are by extension, inherently and universally, good for all learners. We suspected not, so we began a line of inquiry to explore subgroups of students, beginning with students with disabilities. On the surface, FLCs seem to create more inclusive classrooms, though it is not instinctive or automatic for students who build expectations, preferences, and perceptions from years of prior educational experiences. To be clear, this study was not about accommodations or ADA compliance standards; rather, this was an exploration of what it means to foster inclusivity and move beyond the basics of ADA compliance to consider aspects of physiological, cognitive, and cultural inclusion (Holeton, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref69">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>The use of UD goals to understand how to create more inclusive classrooms is one way for an institution to know how their students' learning is impacted, though more research is needed. For example, can students familiarize themselves with these rooms enough to gain a sense of agency to use and manipulate their space to maximize learning? As institutions endeavor to create more inclusive classrooms, the results of this study show the impact of FLCs that warrant closer inspection. Ultimately, creating an inclusive classroom environment requires careful consideration of the conveyed messages for those who are included and excluded.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-18">Appendix A</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> This room used to have stationary rows and desktop returns that flipped out, all facing a chalkboard, so this was pretty dramatic.</item> <p></p> <item> Have you ever had class in room like this? In high school, college, or somewhere else? What elements are similar?</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything that seems common in classrooms now or expected in this room?</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything in this room that seems unusable or inaccessible to you? Why or in what ways?</item> <p></p> <item> We are interested in learning about the impact a room like this has on your learning. What elements do you see that would have a positive impact and why?</item> <p></p> <item> What elements might have a negative impact and why?</item> <p></p> <item> What elements do you think that impact your ability to see, hear, feel in the classroom?</item> <p></p> <item> The next questions are based on other feedback we've received. When we asked, previous students had mixed reviews about certain elements in this room.</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything you might describe as distracting?</item> <p></p> <item> In general, do you think classrooms are ever too loud?</item> <p></p> <item> Do you like having the same seat each week or would you rather move from week to week?</item> <p></p> <item> What do you think about or how do you determine where to sit for class? Does that change based on the class topic or classroom layout?</item> <p></p> <item> Classrooms are typically around 72 degrees, which means the air is on during the summer and the heat is on during the winter. Do you think about temperature of classrooms? What do you prefer?</item> <p></p> <item> We heard from other students this past year that classes were not entirely inclusive. What does that mean to you? Or what does an inclusive classroom mean to you? Does anything seem exclusionary in this room?</item> <p></p> <item> Is there anything else about this room that you'd like to talk about, good or bad?</item> <p></p> <item> What would you say is the number one thing you need in a classroom to support your learning? Or maybe can you describe what makes an ideal classroom for you?</item> <p></p> <item> If your teacher came in and gave you full control of how you would like to have the furniture, how would you arrange it and why? [directions for digital drawing activity]</item> <p></p> <item> What would it mean to you if you had control over changing the space to meet your needs? Or does anything in this space make you feel like you can change it to meet your needs? Why?</item> <p></p> <item> If you have control over the classroom, what would you do to make it meet your needs/expectations?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0183073346-19">Acknowledgements</hd> <p>A special thank you to John D'Agostino, AIA, LEED AP, of Davies Collaborative, and Leah Zimmerman, for their insight and professional expertise, and to Ali Watts, Ph.D. for her review of an earlier version of this manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-20">Author Contribution</hd> <p>Sarah Zipf and Crystal Ramsay designed the study; Sarah Zipf, Leqi Li, and Gala Campos Oaxaca collected data, conducted analysis, and wrote original draft. All authors contributed to writing and review editing.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-21">Funding</hd> <p>The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-22">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183073346-23">Institutional Review Board</hd> <p>This study received approval from the Pennsylvania State University IRB (approval #20742) on August 10, 2022. All participant information was de-identified and consent was not required. Participant data will not be shared with third parties.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-24">Conflict of Interest</hd> <p>The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.</p> <hd id="AN0183073346-25">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0183073346-26"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref48" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Acoustical Society of America (2017). Disability rights aspects of ambient noise for people with auditory disorders under the americans with Disabilities Act. Conference Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.1121/2.0000657</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> ADA National Network (2022). Top ADA frequently asked questions. https://<ulink href="http://www.adata.org">www.adata.org</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref28" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Ashley, J, Potvin, M, Chabot, M, Beach, C, Montemerlo, S, &amp; Anez, M. (2020). Considering stu-dents' neurodiversity: The next imperative when designing active learning environments. Learning by Design, Spring 2020. https://<ulink href="http://www.learningbydesign.com">www.learningbydesign.com</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref42" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Authors (2024). Diverse voices, inclusive spaces: Exploring the design of flexible learning classroom. [Manuscript submitted for publication.].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref12" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Barnett R. Leading with meaning: Why diversity, equity, and inclusion matter in U.S. higher education. Perspectives in Education. 2020; 38; 2: 20-35. 10.18820/2519593X/pie.v38.i2.02</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref2" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Benade L. Flexible learning spaces: Inclusive by design?. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies. 2019; 54: 53-68. 10.1007/s40841-019-00127-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref25" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Berrey, E. (2015). The enigma of diversity: The language of race and the limits of racial justice. University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref11" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Black R, Weinberg L, Brodwin M. Universal design for learning and instruction: Perspectives of students with disabilities in higher education. Exceptionality Education International. 2015; 25; 2: 1-26. 10.5206/eei.v25i2.7723</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref23" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Brandt, B, Brown, M, Dugdale, S, Finklestein, A, Holeton, R, Johnston, J, Ramsay, C, &amp; Smith, R. E. (2020). Learning space rating system, Version 3. EDUCAUSE. https://<ulink href="http://www.educause.edu/eli/initiatives/learning-space-rating-system">www.educause.edu/eli/initiatives/learning-space-rating-system</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Burgstahler, S. (2013). Introduction to universal design in higher education. In S. Burgstahler (Ed.), Universal design in higher education: Promising practices. DO-IT, University of Washington. https://<ulink href="http://www.washington.edu/doit/book/export/html/2464">www.washington.edu/doit/book/export/html/2464</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2021, Dec 2). Autism visualization tool. https://<ulink href="http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data/index.html">www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data/index.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chapman, A, Randell-Moon, H, Campbell, M, &amp; Drew, C. (2014). Students in space: Student practices in nontraditional classrooms. Global Studies of Childhood, 4(1), 39–48.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clinton V, Wilson N. More than chalkboards: Classroom spaces and collaborative learning attitudes. Learning Environments Research. 2019; 22; 3: 325-344. 10.1007/s10984-019-09287-w</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cluley V, Fyson R, Pilnick A. Theorising disability: A practical and representative ontology of learning disability. Disability and Society. 2020; 35; 2: 235-257. 10.1080/09687599.2019.1632692</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> College Autism Network (2018). Fast Facts. https://collegeautismnetwork.org/home/research/fastfacts/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crawford, L, &amp; Burgstahler, S. (2013). Promoting the design of accessible informal science learning. In S. Burgstahler (Ed.), Universal design in higher education: Promising practices. DO-IT, University of Washington. https://<ulink href="http://www.washington.edu/doit/book/export/html/2464">www.washington.edu/doit/book/export/html/2464</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davis, L. (2013). Introduction: Disability, normality, and power. In L. Davis (Ed.), The Disability studies Reader (4th ed, pp. 1–16). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. (5th ed.). Pearson.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldhagen, S. (2017). Welcome to your world: How the built environment shapes our lives. Harper Collins.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gordian (2024). The state of facilities in higher education: Space, spending and staff [11th ed.] https://<ulink href="http://www.gordian.com/">www.gordian.com/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Granovetter MC, Burlingham CS, Blauch NM, Minshew NJ, Heeger DJ, Behrmann M. Uncharacteristic task-evoked pupillary responses implicate atypical locus ceruleus activity in autism. Journal of Neuroscience. 2020; 40; 19: 3815-3826. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2680-19.2020</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamraie, A. (2012). Universal design research as a new materialist practice. Disabilities Studies Quarterly, 32(4). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v32i4.3246.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harvey, E, &amp; Kenyon, M. (2013). Classroom seating considerations for 21st century students and faculty. Journal of Learning Spaces, 2(1). https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/578.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hayes, T. (2016). Admissions and recruitment marketing. In D. Hossler, B. Bontrager, &amp; Associates (Eds.), Handbook of strategic enrollment management. Jossey-Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Holeton, R. (2020, Feb 28). Toward inclusive learning spaces: Physiological, cognitive, and cultural inclusion and the learning space rating system. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/2/toward-inclusive-learning-spaces</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones SR. Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction. NASPA Journal. 1996; 33; 4: 347-354. 10.1080/00220973.1996.11072421</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Labor Law Center (2016). Fragrance sensitivity a disability under ADA. https://<ulink href="http://www.laborlawcenter.com/education-center/fragrance-sensitivity-a-disability-under-ada/">www.laborlawcenter.com/education-center/fragrance-sensitivity-a-disability-under-ada/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee, A. (n.d.) Accommodations: What they are and how they work. Understood.org. https://<ulink href="http://www.understood.org/en/articles/accommodations-what-they-are-and-how-they-work">www.understood.org/en/articles/accommodations-what-they-are-and-how-they-work</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moule J. Understanding unconscious bias and unintentional racism. Phi Delta Kappan. 2009; 90; 5: 320-326. 10.1177/003172170909000504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics (2018, May). Fast Facts: Students with disabilities. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Okoro, C. A, Hollis, N. D, Cyrus, A. C, &amp; Griffin-Blake, S. (2018, August 17). Prevalence of disabilities and health care Access by disability status and type among Adults. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly, 67(32), 882–887.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Qvortrup A, Qvortrup L. Inclusion: Dimensions of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2018; 22; 7: 803-817. 10.1080/13603116.2017.1412506</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ralph, M, Schneider, B, Benson, D, &amp; Ward, D. (2022). Separated by spaces: Undergraduate students re-sort along attitude divides when choosing whether to learn in spaces designed for active learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 25(2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874221118866</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rampin, R, &amp; Rampin, V. (2021). Taguette: Open-source qualitative data analysis. The Journal of Open Source Software, 6(68), 3522. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03522</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ramsay C, Guo X, Pursel B. Leveraging faculty reflective practice to understand active learning spaces: Flashbacks and re-captures. Journal of Learning Spaces. 2017; 6; 3: 42-53</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rowan University (2022). Center for Neurodiversity. https://sites.rowan.edu/neurodiversity/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Staff, D. C. E. G. (2022). Neurodiversity. National Cancer Institute. https://dceg.cancer.gov/about/diversity-inclusion/inclusivity-minute/2022/neurodiversity</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steinfeld, E, &amp; Maisel, J. (2012). Universal design: Creating inclusive environments. Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strange, C. C, &amp; Banning, J. H. (2015). Designing for learning: Creating campus environments for student success. Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Summers T, Beers M. Ready for equity? A cross-cultural Organizational Framework to Scale Access to Learning-Ready classrooms that Support Student Success. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology. 2019; 8: 76-86. 10.14434/jotlt.v8i1.26889</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomas Jefferson University (2022). 3rd International Neurodiversity &amp; the Built Environment Symposium: PlaceMaking. https://<ulink href="http://www.jefferson.edu/academics/colleges-schools-institutes/architecture-and-the-built-environment/events/neurodiveristy-symposium-PlaceMaking.html?utm%5fsource=jefferson&amp;utm%5fmedium=vanity">www.jefferson.edu/academics/colleges-schools-institutes/architecture-and-the-built-environment/events/neurodiveristy-symposium-PlaceMaking.html?utm%5fsource=jefferson&amp;utm%5fmedium=vanity</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wesp R, Kash M, Sandry J, Patton L. Should Syllabi communicate expectations regarding Appropriate Classroom behaviors?. Syllabus. 2013; 2; 2: 1-10</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woo C, Whitfield T, Britt L, Ball T. Students perceptions of the classroom environment: A comparison between innovative and traditional classrooms. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2022; 22; 1: 31-47</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Sarah T. Zipf; Leqi Li; Gala Campos Oaxaca and Crystal M. Ramsay</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Sarah T. Zipf Sarah T. Zipf research project manager with Teaching &amp; Learning with Technology, at the Pennsylvania State University, studies the impact of learning spaces, learning analytics, Artificial Intelligence, and other educational technologies. Her research interests include online and distance education, educational technology, private/public partnerships, student access and success, and educational equity. Zipf earned a Ph.D. in Higher Education from the Pennsylvania State University.</p> <p>Leqi Li Leqi Li is a Ph.D. student in the College of Education at the Pennsylvania State University. She is currently working as a Graduate Assistant at Library Learning Service and the Augmented and Mobile Learning Research Group. Her research interests include informal science learning, AI in education, and learning analytics.</p> <p>Gala Campos Oaxaca Gala Campos Oaxaca is a doctoral candidate in Educational Psychology at the Pennsylvania State University. Her research emphasis is on academic writing in higher education and the social and cognitive processes involved. She is also interested on how students learn from multiple sources of information.</p> <p>Crystal M. Ramsay Crystal M. Ramsay Senior Director of Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT) at Penn State, leverages TLT's expertise in research, instructional design, modern learning spaces, and creative learning initiatives to innovate with technologies that transform teaching and learning in positive and enduring ways. She is an affiliate faculty member in educational psychology at Penn State and a member of the graduate faculty. Ramsay holds a Ph.D. and a master's degree in educational psychology, as well as master's and bachelor's degrees in curriculum and instruction.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref68"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1460686 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Examining Inclusivity in Flexible Learning Spaces: Expectations, Comfort, and Distractions – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sarah+T%2E+Zipf%22">Sarah T. Zipf</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5208-497X">0000-0001-5208-497X</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Leqi+Li%22">Leqi Li</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gala+Campos+Oaxaca%22">Gala Campos Oaxaca</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Crystal+M%2E+Ramsay%22">Crystal M. Ramsay</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Innovative+Higher+Education%22"><i>Innovative Higher Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 50(1):277-301. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/ – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 25 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classroom+Environment%22">Classroom Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classroom+Design%22">Classroom Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Space+Utilization%22">Space Utilization</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Design+Requirements%22">Design Requirements</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Facilities+Design%22">Educational Facilities Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accessibility+%28for+Disabled%29%22">Accessibility (for Disabled)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physical+Environment%22">Physical Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attention+Control%22">Attention Control</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classrooms%22">Classrooms</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1007/s10755-024-09730-8 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0742-5627<br />1573-1758 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Historically, classrooms have utilized stationary furniture, facing front toward a centralized instructor position, and limiting student-to-student interactions. Such classrooms often stem from design processes that tend to focus on building codes and feedback from investors, architects, and planners, which leaves little input from instructors and students until the end (Britnell, et al., 2009). With little to no input from primary users, classrooms can become less inclusive or inaccessible in a variety of ways, especially for students with disabilities. One way to address this problem is to design flexible learning classrooms so that instructors and students can customize the room. Seemingly more inclusive, we wanted to understand how the physical elements of a flexible classroom create opportunities and barriers for students with disabilities. This mixed-methods study includes data from an online survey, interviews, and digital drawings. We utilized a purposeful sample of students with documented disabilities (n = 16) and used the eight universal design goals as our main coding schema. Results show students carry expectations and predictions about their classrooms based on the layout or arrangement; students' social comfort can override physical comfort, even while expressing medical needs; students might misunderstand certain elements of flexible classrooms; and students can identify ways they were distracted by the room. Institutions and instructors interested in creating more inclusive spaces need to be intentional with flexible learning classrooms so that students can understand and utilize the affordances of these spaces. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1460686 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1460686 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10755-024-09730-8 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 25 StartPage: 277 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Inclusion Type: general – SubjectFull: Classroom Environment Type: general – SubjectFull: Classroom Design Type: general – SubjectFull: Space Utilization Type: general – SubjectFull: Design Requirements Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Facilities Design Type: general – SubjectFull: Accessibility (for Disabled) Type: general – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities Type: general – SubjectFull: Physical Environment Type: general – SubjectFull: Attention Control Type: general – SubjectFull: Classrooms Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Examining Inclusivity in Flexible Learning Spaces: Expectations, Comfort, and Distractions Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sarah T. Zipf – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Leqi Li – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Gala Campos Oaxaca – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Crystal M. Ramsay IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 02 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0742-5627 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1573-1758 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 50 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Innovative Higher Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
