Article Sidebar

Submitted
Oct 8, 2024
Accepted
Apr 18, 2026
Published
May 5, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 8 Download : 3

Main Article Content

Abstract

Teachers’ practice is increasingly oriented towards designing and working in Innovative Learning Environments (ILE). In-service teachers’ professional development is being designed coherently, sometimes allowing them to experience learning situations in such environments. Two surveys were designed, and validated, to answer to two main questions concerning teachers’ interests and how they evolve once they know ILEs and have this training experience. To get all the information needed, one survey was filled before taking part in the training experience, and the other one after it. 255 answers were received and analyzed to extract several conclusions. Results indicate that teachers, after the training, became increasingly open to embracing more active, participatory methods, integrating more innovative, immersive and interactive technology. They also showed greater interest in how to zone and plan meaningful learning experiences in such environments. Furthermore, the main topics teachers wish to receive further training on relate to designing appropriate learning experiences and selecting suitable methodologies. These findings suggest that engaging teachers in a training experience within an ILE serves as a catalyst for professional development in these topics. The study has implications for both educational administrations and school leaders promoting ILEs.

Keywords

Learning environment Educational Innovation Teacher training Interest Educational Strategies

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The author declares that the submitted to Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society (Je-LKS) is original and that is has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
The author agrees that SIe-L (Italian Society of e-Learning) has the right to publish the material sent for inclusion in the journal Je-LKS.
The author agree that articles may be published in digital format (on the Internet or on any digital support and media) and in printed format, including future re-editions, in any language and in any license including proprietary licenses, creative commons license or open access license. SIe-L may also use parts of the work to advertise and promote the publication.
The author declares s/he has all the necessary rights to authorize the editor and SIe-L to publish the work.
The author assures that the publication of the work in no way infringes the rights of third parties, nor violates any penal norms and absolves SIe-L from all damages and costs which may result from publication.

The author declares further s/he has received written permission without limits of time, territory, or language from the rights holders for the free use of all images and parts of works still covered by copyright, without any cost or expenses to SIe-L.

For all the information please check the Ethical Code of Je-LKS, available at http://www.je-lks.org/index.php/ethical-code

Author Biographies

Amelia R Granda-Pinan, University of Valencia

Amelia R. Granda Piñán holds a degree in Teaching, a Bachelor's in Social and Cultural Anthropology, and a PhD in Education from the University of Valencia.

She currently works as an Associate Professor in the Department of Comparative Education and History of Education at the University of Valencia (since 2022) and as a Permanent Teacher Training Advisor at the Valencia Ministry of Education (Regional Ministry). She coordinates the training offerings in the Valencian Community. Over her 16 years of teaching experience in early childhood and primary education institutions, as well as teacher training centers, she has held roles such as Director, Head of Studies, Secretary, and Cycle Coordinator.

She has published several articles in scientific journals, as well as book chapters, and has presented papers at national and international conferences. She has collaborated with journals conducting peer reviews and has been involved in organizing training events.

She has participated as a member or coordinator in various competitive national and international educational innovation and research projects. She has supervised undergraduate and master's thesis projects.

Her research interests focus on teacher training, innovative pedagogy, educational technology, and educational innovation in innovative learning environments. She has been an ambassador for the Future Classroom by the Ministry of Education of Spain since 2014.

Óscar R. Lozano, University of Valencia

Oscar Lozano holds a degree in Chemical Sciences and a PhD in Science Education from the University of Valencia.

He currently works as an Associate Professor in the Department of Science Education at the University of Valencia (since 2012) and as a Secondary Education Teacher in the Technology specialty (since 2001). Since 2016, he has focused exclusively on his role as a Permanent Teacher Training Advisor at the Valencia Ministry of Education (Regional Ministry).

Previously, he worked as an Associate Professor in the Department of Chemistry at the Polytechnic University of Valencia (2006-2008) and before that in various companies in the chemical industry (1996-2001).

He has published numerous articles in scientific journals, as well as books and book chapters, and has presented a significant number of papers at national and international conferences.

He is a member of the review team for several journals and has participated in the organization and scientific committees of numerous conferences.

He has been involved as a member or coordinator in various competitive national and international educational innovation and research projects.

He has supervised numerous undergraduate and master's thesis projects, as well as doctoral dissertations.

His research interests focus on teacher training, recreational science, health education, and educational innovation.

How to Cite
Granda-Pinan, A. R., & Lozano, Óscar R. (2026). Evolving teacher interests in innovative learning environments: impacts of exposure and implications for professional development. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1136075

References

  1. Beery T. A., Shell D., Gillespie G., & Werdman E. (2013). The impact of learning space on teaching behaviors. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(5), 382-387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2012.11.001
  2. Blannin J., Mahat M., Cleveland B., Morris J., & Imms W. (2020). Teachers as Embedded Practitioner-Researchers in Innovative Learning Environments. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 10(3), 99-116. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.887
  3. Blázquez D. (2016). Métodos de enseñanza en educación física. Enfoques innovadores para la enseñanza de competencias [Teaching methods in physical education. Innovative approaches to teaching skills]. Inde.
  4. Byers T., Imms W., & Hartnell-Young E. (2014). Making the case for space: The effect of learning spaces on teaching and learning. Curriculum and Teaching, 29(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.7459/ct/29.1.02
  5. Byers T., Imms W., & Hartnell-Young E. (2018a). Comparative analysis of the impact of traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning outcomes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.003
  6. Byers T., Imms W., & Hartnell-Young E. (2018b). Evaluating teacher and student spatial transition from a traditional classroom to an innovative learning environment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.004
  7. Cleveland B. (2016). Addressing the spatial to catalyse socio-pedagogical reform in middle years education. In K. Fisher (Ed.), The translational design of schools (pp. 27–49). Sense Publishers.
  8. Educause. (2023). Horizon report. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2023/5/2023-educause-horizon-report-teaching-and-learning-edition
  9. European Schoolnet (27 august 2024). Future Classroom Lab. https://fcl.eun.org/
  10. French R., Mahat M., Kvan T., & Imms W. (2022). Viewing the transition to innovative learning environments through the lens of the burke-litwin model for organizational performance and change. Journal of Educational Change, 23, 115-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09431-5
  11. García Mongue A., Pellicer Iborra C., Jiménez Ruiz M., & Gómez González F. J. (2023). El espacio en el trabajo por proyectos: el caso de los proyectos del Modelo Rubik. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 26(2), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.6018/reifop.559421
  12. Gonzalez-Mohino M., Rodriguez-Domenech M., Callejas-Albiñana A., & Castillo-Canalejo A. (2023). Empowering Critical Thinking: The Role of Digital Tools in Citizen Participation. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), 258-275. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1385
  13. Granda-Pinan, A.R., Roda-Segarra, J., & Mengual-Andrés, S. (2024). Espacios digitales de aprendizaje como prolongación del espacio físico en el contexto de los Entornos Innovadores de Aprendizaje. In Morales Cevallos, M.B., Marín-Marín, J. A., Berbel Oller, P. y Villegas Castro, A. S. (Eds.), Desafíos de la educación contemporánea: perspectivas formativas para una sociedad digital (pp. 86-103). Dykinson. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.17381582
  14. Granda-Pinan, A.R. & Rojo-Bofill, L.M. (2024). Los Entornos Innovadores de Aprendizaje como respuesta a los retos educativos del siglo XXI. Research in Education and Learning Innovation Archives, 32, 22-35. https://doi.org/10.7203/realia.32.27803INTEF (9 September 2024). Aula del Futuro. https://auladelfuturo.intef.es/
  15. Jorion N., Taeyaerts D., & Jeanes W. (2016). Promoting collaboration using team based classroom design. Creative Education, 07(05), 724–729. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.75076
  16. King E., Joy M., Foss J., Sinclair J., & Sitthiworachart, J. (2015). Exploring the impact of a flexible, technology-enhanced teaching space on pedagogy. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52(5), 522-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.896222
  17. Lawshe C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  18. Losada López J.L., & López-Feal Ramil R. (2003). Métodos de investigación en ciencias humanas y sociales [Research methods in human and social sciences]. Thomson-Paraninfo.
  19. Lozano, Ó. R., Granda-Pinan, A. R., & Alameda-Villarrubia, A. (2024). Training on Innovative Learning Environments: Identifying Teachers’ Interests. Education Sciences, 14(6), 601. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060601
  20. Mahat M., Bradbeer C., Byers T., & Imms W. (2018). Innovative Learning Environments and Teacher Change: Defining key concepts. University of Melbourne, LEaRN.
  21. Mcmillan J.H., & Schumacher S. (2001). Research in education: A conceptual introduction. Longman
  22. Nelson D., Bonem E., & Fitzsimmons J. (2023). Instructor Perceptions of Teaching in a New Active Learning Building. Journal of Learning Spaces, 12(1). files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1400289.pdf
  23. ODITE (2022). Informe ODITE sobre tendencias educativas 2022. https://ciberespiral.org/es/informe-odite-tendencias-educativas/
  24. Radcliffe D. (2009). A pedagogy-space-technology (PST) framework for designing and evaluating learning places. In Learning spaces in higher education: Positive outcomes by design. Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium. University of Queensland: Brisbane (pp. 11-16).
  25. Rivera-Vargas P., Calderón-Garrido D., Jacovkis J., & Parcerisa L. (2024). Exploring student and family concerns and confidence in BigTech digital platforms in public schools. Journal of New Approaches in Education Research 13(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44322-023-00003-4
  26. Suárez J, Maiz F., & Meza Pardo M. (2010) Inteligencias múltiples: una innovación pedagógica para potenciar el proceso enseñanza aprendizaje. Investigación y Postgrado, 25(1), 81-94.
  27. Tristán-López A. (2008). Modificación al modelo de lawshe para el dictamen cuantitativo de la validez de contenido de un instrumento objetivo. Avances en medición, 6(1), 37-48.