Nail, T. What is an Assemblage? in SubStance. Volume 46, Number 1, 2017 (Issue 142). https://bit.ly/2qKVx7F [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Hegel, Georg W. F. The Science of Logic. Humanity Books, 1999. [End Page 37] Google Scholar
Bayne, S. (2004) Smoothness and Striation in Digital Learning Spaces. E-Learning, Volume 1, Number 2, 2004. https://bit.ly/2qBNg6W [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Bitzer, L. (1968) The Rhetorical Situation, Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1, pp. 1-14.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1988) A Thousand Plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
Dickson, C. (2003) Book review: Internet Invention, Kairos, 8(1). Available at: http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/8.1/binder.html?reviews/dickson
Kitto, S. (2003) Translating an Electronic Panopticon, Information, Communication and Society, 6(1), pp. 1-23.
Land, R. & Bayne, S. (2004) Screen or Monitor? Surveillance and Disciplinary Power in Online Learning Environments, in R. Land & S. Bayne (Eds) Education in Cyberspace. London: Routledge Falmer.
LeCourt, D. (1999) Writing (without) the Body: gender and power in networked discussion groups, in K. Blair & P. Takayoshi (Eds) Feminist Cyberscapes: mapping gendered academic spaces. Stamford: Ablex.
Mahoney, R. (2002) Comments on 73 poems. Available at: http://epc.buffalo.edu/ authors/goldsmith/mahoney.html
Massumi, B. (1988) Translator’s Foreword: Pleasures of Philosophy, in A Thousand Plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
Miller, J. H. (1995) Topographies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Moulthrop, S. (1994) Rhizome and Resistance: hypertext and the dreams of a new culture, in G. Landow (Ed.) Hyper/text/theory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Myers, D. (1995) Deleuze-Guattari discussion list. Available at: http://www.dc.peachnet.edu/~mnunes/smooth.html
Nunes, M. (1999) Virtual Topographies: smooth and striated cyberspace, in M.-L. Ryan (Ed.) Cyberspace Textuality: computer technology and literary theory. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Poster, M. (2001a) What’s the Matter with the Internet? Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Poster, M. (2001b) The Information Subject. G+B Arts International.
Reynolds, M. & Trehan, K. (2000) Assessment: a critical perspective, Studies in Higher Education, 25, pp. 267-278. Rosenberg, M.E. (1994) Physics and Hypertext: liberation and complicity in art and pedagogy, in G. Landow (Ed.) Hyper/text/theory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ulmer, G. (1989) Teletheory: grammatology in the age of video. New York: Routledge.
Ulmer, G. (1994) Heuretics: the logic of invention. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ulmer, G. (2003a) Internet Invention: from literacy to electracy. New York: Longman.
Ulmer, G. (2003b) Web supplement to Internet invention. Available at: http://www.nwe.ufl.edu/~gulmer/longman/pedagogy/
WebCT, I. (2002) Leveraging technology to transform the educational experience. Available at: http://www.webct.com/service/ViewContent?contentID=4464759
Carr, J. (2017) Student transitions and liminal spaces. LSE: The Education Blog. https://bit.ly/2H6m6iV [last accessed 26 April 2018]
Bartholomae. D. (1986) ‘Inventing the University’, Journal of Basic Writing, Vol. 5 (1), 4 – 23.
Lea, M (2005) Academic literacies: a pedagogy for course design, Studies in Higher Education, Vol 30 (1), 739 – 736
Lillis, T. (1997) New voices in academia? The regulative nature of academic writing conventions. Language and Education, 11 (3), 182–99.
Lillis, T (2003) ‘An ‘academic literacies’ approach to student writing: drawing on Bakhtin to more from critique to design’ Language and Education 17 (3), 192-207
Meyer, J.H.F. and Land, R. (2006) ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Issues of liminality’ in: Meyer, J.H.F. and Land, R. (eds.), Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge, London, Routledge
Cuthell, J.P., Cych, L., & Preston, C. (2011) Learning in Liminal Spaces. Paper presented at “Mobile learning: Crossing boundaries in convergent environments” Conference, 21–22 March 2011, Bremen, Germany. http://bit.ly/2yx7cOs [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Cook, J., Pachler, N., Bradley, C.. Bridging the Gap? Mobile Phones at the Interface between Informal and Formal Learning. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, North America, 4, Nov. 2009. Available at: http://www.rcetj.org/index.php/rcetj/article/view/34/48. %5Blast accessed 25 April 2018]
Cuthell J., C. Preston, L.Cych, T. Keuchel (2009) iGatherings: from professional theory and practice to praxis in work based teaching and learning WLE Centre, Institute of Education, University of London http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=343&Itemid=85 %5Blast accessed 25 April 2018]
Cuthell, J. P. (2009) Thinking Things Through – Collaborative Online Professional Development. In: Lindberg, J. O & Olofsson, A. D. Online Learning Communities and Teacher Professional Development: Methods for Improved Education Delivery. Hershey, IGI Global.
Kress, G. and T. van Leeuwen. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. Arnold: London.
Lave, J. and E. Wenger (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation: Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive and Computational. Cambridge University Press.
Leask, M. and C. Preston (2011) ICT Tools for Future Teachers: Becta, Coventry. Published http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110125093509/http://research.becta.org.uk/ (To be moved to http://www.ioe.ac.uk)
Levi Strauss, C. (1962), The Savage Mind, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Lifelong Learning Policy. Validation of non-formal and informal learning. European Commission Education and Training http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/doc52_en.htm Last accessed 16.02.11
Lovink, G. (1995), The Media Gesture of Data Dandyism CTHEORY Theory, Technology and Culture, Concordia, Canada http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=136 Last accessed 09.02.11 [20.06.2018]
Miller, G.A. (1956), The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
Pachler, N. & Bachmair, B., Cook, J. (2009). Mobile Learning: Structures, Agency, Practices. New York: Springer.
Pachler, N, C. Preston, J. Cuthell, A. Allen and Pinheiro Torres (2011) The ICT CPD Landscape in England. Becta. http://www.wlecentre.ac.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=363&Itemid=87
Papert, S. (1980), Mindstorms Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas, The Harvester Press, Brighton.
Park, U., Calvo, R.A. (2008) Automatic Concept Map Scoring Framework Using the Semantic Web Technologies. Proceedings of Advanced Learning Technologies, 2008, 238-240. Last accessed 23.02.11 [20.06.2018] from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac?punumber=4561602
Preston, C. (2009). Exploring semiotic approaches to analysing multidimensional concept maps using methods that value collaboration. Handbook of Research on Collaborative Learning Using Concept Mapping. P. Torres and R. Marriott. Hershey, Pennsylvania/USA, Information Science Reference.
Preston, C. (2008). Braided Learning: an emerging practice observed in e-communities of practice. Special Issue: Online Learning Communities in Context. International Journal of Web Based Communities Inderscience Publishers. Guest Editors: Ove Jobring and Piet Kommers (4. 2). www.inderscience.com Last accessed 23.02.11.
Preston, C. (2011 in press) Gaining insight into educators’ understanding of digital technologies: three models for the analysis of multi-dimensional concept maps. Doctorate in International Education, Institute of Education, University of London library.
Preston, C. and J. Cuthell (2011in press) MirandaMods: from practice to praxis in informal professional learning contexts Research on e-learning and ICT in Education: Technological, Pedagogical and Instructional Issues. Springer
Ruíz-Primo, M. (2000) On the Use of Concept Maps as an Assessment Tool in Science: What we have Learned so Far Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 2 (1). Retrieved 27.05.2009 from: http://redie.uabc.mx/vol2no1/contents-ruizpri.html
Veblen, T. (1899), The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York, Macmillan.
Grellier, J. (2013) Rhizomatic mapping: Spaces for learning in higher education. School of Media, Culture and Creative Arts, Curtin University, Perth, Australia. https://bit.ly/2qASM93 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Alvermann, D. E. (2000). Researching libraries, literacies and lives: A rhizoanalysis. In E. A. St Pierre & W. S. Pillow (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 114–129). New York: Routledge.
Anorim, A. C., & Ryan, C. (2005). Deleuze, action research and rhizomatic growth. Educational Action Research, 13(4), 581–593.
Australian Learning and Teaching Council [ALTC]. (2008). The RED report: Recognition, enhancement, development: The contribution of sessional teachers to higher education. Retrieved May 30, 2012 from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-red-report-sessional-teachers-unsw-2008.
Buchanan, I. (2000). Michel de Certeau: Cultural theorist. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Casey, E. S. (2007). Boundary, place, and event in the spatiality of history. Rethinking History, 11(4), 507–512.
Deleuze, G. (1993). The Fold: Leibniz and the baroque. London: Athlone Press. Deleuze, G. (1995). Negotiations, 1972–1990 (M. Joughin, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Geertz, C. (1999). A life of learning: Charles Homer Haskins lecture for 1999. Retrieved May 20, 2012 from http://www.acls.org/Publications/OP/Haskins/1999_CliffordGeertz.pdf.
Giroux, H. A. (2011). Beyond the swindle of the corporate university. In M. Bailey & D. Freedman (Eds.), The Assault on Universities: A Manifesto for Resistance (pp. 145– 156). London: Pluto Press.
Goodley, D. (2007). Towards socially just pedagogies: Deleuzoguattarian critical disability studies. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(3), 317–334.
Gregoriou, Z. (2004). Commencing the rhizome: Towards a minor philosophy of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(3), 233–251.
Grosz, E. (1994). A thousand tiny sexes: Feminism and rhizomatics. In C. V. Boundas & D. Olkowski (Eds.), Gilles Deleuze and the Theater of Philosophy (pp. 187–210). New York: Routledge.
Honan, E. (2004). (Im)plausibilities: A rhizo-textual analysis of policy texts and teachers’ work. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(3), 267–281.
Honan, E. (2007). Writing a rhizome: An (im)plausible methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 20(5), 531–546.
Jove, G. (2011). How do I improve what I am doing as a teacher, teacher educator and action researcher through reflection? A learning walk from Lleida to Winchester and back again. Educational Action Research, 19(3), 261–278.
Kamberelis, G. (2004). The rhizome and the pack: Liminal literacy formations with political teeth. In K. M. Leander & M. Sheehy (Eds.), Spatializing literacy research and practice (pp. 161–197). New York: Peter Lang.
Lather, P. (1997). Drawing the line at angels: Working the ruins of feminist ethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(3), 285–304.
Le Grange, L. (2007). The ‘theoretical foundations’ of community service-learning: From taproots to rhizomes. Education as Change, 11(3), 3–13.
McInnis, C., James, R., & McNaught, C. (1995). First year on campus: Diversity in the initial experiences of Australian undergraduates. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
O’Riley, P. A. (2003). Technology, culture, and socioeconomics. New York: Peter Lang.
Sellers, W., & Gough, N. (2010). Sharing outside thinking: Thinking (differently) with Deleuze in educational philosophy and curriculum inquiry. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 589–614.
INTRODUCTION Thinking with Deleuze in qualitative research Lisa A. Mazzeia * and Kate McCoyb a Department of Leadership Studies, Gonzaga University, 502 E. Boone Avenue, Spokane, WA 99258-2616, USA; b Department of Educational Studies, State University of New York at New Paltz, 800 Hawk Drive, New Paltz, NY 12561, USA Taylor and Francis TQSE_A_500634.sgm (Received 7 June 2010; final version received 9 June 2010) 10.1080/09518398.2010.500634 International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 0951-8398 (print)/1366-5898 (online)
Introduction 2010 Taylor & Francis 235000000September 2010 Dr LisaMazzei firstname.lastname@example.org
‘This special issue that we are calling, ‘Thinking with Deleuze in qualitative research’, presents writings from qualitative researchers across various disciplines and contexts who are attempting to work with these new analytics and practices made possible through their engagement with Deleuzian concepts and processes. These researchers engage epistemological questions and try out methodological practices inspired by thinking with Deleuze in qualitative research. In response to our call for proposals, contributors to this issue are using or thinking with the philosophical concepts and processes of Deleuze, not focusing on them in the abstract, but instead engaging the implications of those concepts and processes for research methodology and ethics in educational research. Keywords: Deleuze and Guattari; qualitative research; methodology.’
Deleuze’s work is characterized not by a fidelity to any master, but by a series of transformations of concepts borrowed from a range of writers from many disciplines. (Tomlinson and Habberjam 1991, 9)
‘In writing of what she terms a ‘(post)critical feminist methodology’, Patti Lather (2007) urges us to ask questions about the limits of our research practices and the kinds of knowledge production enabled and disabled by them. We should try ‘to grasp what is on the horizon in terms of new analytics and practices of inquiry’ (2007, 1). She maintains that aiming for such a post-methodology must shift the debate away from ‘tired epistemological contests’ (Lather 2007) toward an examination of ‘how a discipline works toward creating new phenomena’ (70). As such, the authors in this special issue of the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education are not arguing one epistemological position against another, nor are they attempting to ‘get Deleuze right’, but are straining meanings and representations that may emerge through a rigorous engagement with the work of Deleuze and Guattari toward transformations of research practices and knowledge. In this time of researching situations that we no longer understand, ‘situations which we no longer know how to react to, in spaces which we no longer know how to describe’ (Deleuze 1985/1989, xi), we are hopeful that these writings begin the process of creating a forum for thinking with Deleuze that might help us create a language and a way of thinking that are up to the task.’ [pp 503-504]
‘Deleuze urges that we not: ‘forget that [repetition] is a vertiginous movement endowed with a force: not one which causes the return of the Same in general, but one which selects, one which expels as well as creates, destroys as well as produces’ (Deleuze 1968/2004, 12). Through this repetition, selection, expulsion, creation, destruction, and production, this work might move toward realizing Deborah Britzman’s hope that educational research become ‘unintelligible to itself’ (see Lather 2007, 174n3), that it be a ‘mode of thought that refuses to secure itself with the consolations of foundationalism and nostalgia for presence, the lost object of correct knowledge, the security of understanding’ (Lather 2009, 18). Such thought – and research – interrupts our proclivities toward the easily understood, positing ‘not being understood as an ethical imperative’, in efforts to interrupt knowledge production that ‘maps2 easily onto taken-for-granted regimes of meaning’ (Lather 2007, 85).’ [p 505]
‘The trick is to fashion a map that ‘is detachable, reversible, susceptible to constant modification’, one with ‘multiple entryways’ that produces encounters that come up against and move through these blockages, inhibiting a return to ‘the same’ (1980/1987, 13–14).’ [p 506]
St Pierre, E. A. (1997a). An introduction to figurations: A postcultural practice of inquiry. Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(3), 279–284.
St Pierre, E. A. (1997b). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(2), 175–189.
Stronach, I. (2002). The space is not yet blank: Anthropologies for a future action research. Educational Action Research, 10(2), 291–308. Tuan, Y. F. (1997). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Hall, C. (2013) The impact of new learning spaces on teaching practice. Academic Development Group. RMIT University. Melbourne. http://bit.ly/2ygA0u5 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Andrews, T & Powell, D. 2008, ‘Collaborative Teaching & Learning Centres at the University of Queensland’, in Radcliffe, D, Wilson, H, Powell, D & Tibbetts, B (eds). Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design: proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 45–52, viewed 24 Jan 2012,
Andrews, T & du Toit, L. 2010, Utilising Activity Theory and Illuminative Evaluation as a Theoretical Framework for ACTS Learning Spaces, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne.
Barrett, P & Zhang, Y. 2009, Optimal learning spaces: Design implications for primary schools, SCRI Research Report, Salford Centre for Research and Innovation, University of Salford, Salford, viewed 12 September 2012.
Blackmore, J, Bateman, D, Loughlin, J, O’Mara, J, & Aranda, G. 2011, Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes: Literature Review. Education Policy and Research Division, Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Melbourne, viewed 12 Sept 2012.
Blatchford, P.E, Baines, E, Rubie-Davies, C Bassett & P Chowne, A. 2006, ‘The Effect of a New Approach to Group Work on Pupil-Pupil and Teacher-Pupil Interactions’, Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 98, issue 4, pp. 750-765.
Boethel, M , & Dimock, K.V. 1999, Constructing Knowledge with Technology: A Review of the Literature. TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin.
Brooks, D. 2011, ‘Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning’, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 42, issue 5, pp.719-726. https://bit.ly/2FiM0dy [last accessed 20 June 2018]
“The objective of this research is to identify the relationship between formal learning spaces and student learning outcomes. Using a quasi-experimental design, researchers partnered with an instructor who taught identical sections of the same course in two radically different formal learning environments to isolate the impact of the physical environment on student learning. The results of the study reveal that, holding all factors excepting the learning spaces constant, students taking the course in a technologically enhanced environment conducive to active learning techniques outperformed their peers who were taking the same course in a more traditional classroom setting. The evidence suggests strongly that technologically enhanced learning environments, independent of all other factors, have a significant and positive impact on student learning.”
Brown, M. 2005, ‘Learning Spaces’, in D Oblinger, Educating the Net Generation, Educause, Boulder.
Dane, J. 2004, Designing environments that stimulate student‐centred learning. Paper presented at the Tertiary Education Management Conference, Hobart, 26‐29 September.
Department of Education and Early Childhood 2009, Pedagogy and Space: Transforming Learning through Innovation, Department of Education and early Childhood Development, Melbourne.
Dudek, M. 2000, Architecture of schools: the new learning environments, Architectural Press, Oxford.
Fisher, K. 2002, Re-voicing the classroom: A critical psychosocial spaciality of learning, Rubida Research Pty Ltd. https://bit.ly/2tckHOB [Last accessed 20.06.2018]
‘This article critically reviews the methodologies and methods that have been used for the evaluation of physical learning environments. To contextualize discussion about the evaluation of learning spaces, we initially chart the development of post-occupancy evaluation (POE) for non-domestic buildings. We then discuss the recent evolution of POE into the broader evaluative framework of building performance evaluation. Subsequently, a selection of approaches used to evaluate higher education and school learning environments are compared and critically analyzed in view of contemporary approaches to teaching and learning. Gaps in these evaluative approaches are identified and an argument is put forward for the evaluation of physical learning environments from a more rigorous pedagogical perspective.’ [Abstract]
‘Renewed interest in progressive and constructivist approaches to education have encouraged people to re-examine their assumptions not only about educational provision across all sectors, but also about how best to design and use space for pedagogical activities (Cleveland 2009, 2011; Fisher 2002, 2004, 2005; Jamieson et al. 2005; Radcliffe et al. 2008). Interest in pedagogies that have been informed by the notions associated with experiential learning (Dewey 1966, 1971), critical pedagogy (Friere 1970), situated learning (Lave and Wenger 1991), authentic learning (Newmann 1992), interdisciplinary learning (Beare 2000) and the development of democratic citizens (McLaren 2007) has began to reframe people’s attitudes towards the spaces in which students learn.’ [p 7]
‘The research project also investigated a variety of data-collection methods. In addition to ‘‘typical survey methods’’ (Lee and Tan 2011, p. 10), the report suggested that researchers were ‘‘seeking creative methods to gather data that provide[d] the best fit for the questions at hand’’ (Lee and Tan 2011, p. 10). Some of the ‘creative methods’ that were indentified included observational studies, video and protocol studies, diaries, movement tracking and group activities. The report suggested that, although the use of diverse methods might support data collection that could lead to new understandings about the learning/space nexus, this might also be problematic because few tools were likely to be used in more than one context, or tested in multiple evaluations over time (Lee and Tan 2011).’ [p 13]
‘… a lack of resourcing dedicated to comprehensive evaluations; sensitivity of evaluation processes and findings; a tendency to present spaces positively and without contextual information; limitations in understanding about the purpose and value of evaluation; limiting assumptions about the potential for input from a variety of stakeholders; and the complex nature of evaluation itself.’ [p 14]
Sanoff (2001) also outlined a process that he termed Relating Objectives to Learning to Education (ROLE). ROLE was intended to support pedagogical transformation by involving teachers, students, parents, administrators and designers in ‘‘exploring aspects of the school environment by considering alternative approaches to teaching and learning’’ (p. 23).
‘Sanoff’s contribution to the field of learning environment evaluation shifted the focus of building evaluation in education towards interest in evaluating how learning environments could be used to support pedagogical activities.’ [p 16]
‘The creation of innovative learning environments in higher education settings in particular appears to have encouraged researchers to search for novel evaluation methodologies and methods that can be used to assess the effectiveness of educational facilities in supporting the learning process. This renewed interest in evaluation at the intersection of the physical and the social represents a return to the origins of POE in environmental psychology. It also supports Preiser and Nasar’s (2008) view that a new perspective on building evaluation is currently being developed that favours ‘bottom up’ approaches to evaluation, which value the opinions of the user.’ [p 28 conclusion]
See also: The Emerging Importance of the Affective in Learning Environment Evaluations https://bit.ly/2JSOg27 [last accessed 20.06.2018]
‘Nevertheless, Hargreaves and Fullan (2013) argue that transforming teaching requires building professional capital, a process that is far more complex than data driven models of building business capital. Leadership for transformative change in teaching will be, they say, “a judicious mixture of push, pull, and nudge” (p. 39). The E21LE project hopes to influence the push, pull and nudge factors of pedagogical change through developing frameworks and strategies for evaluation that align practice and space.’ [p 12]
‘There are two common purposes in educational evaluation, which at times are in conflict with one another. Educational institutions often require evaluation data to (1) demonstrate various forms of effectiveness to funders and other stakeholders, (2) provide a measure of performance for marketing purposes and (3) to inform evidence-based policy development. Evaluation in this context is also a professional activity that individual educators may undertake if they intend to review and enhance the learning they are endeavouring to facilitate. Yet, the use of evaluation to drive transformative change in education is highly vexed, particularly in the higher education sector where universities value academic freedom and professional development is largely carried out through conferences and peer-to-peer networks. Any form of top-down organised transformation is hotly contested and indeed commonly resisted or corrupted. To a degree, this is true in schools as well, as teacher professional development is often left to the individual and there is often little compunction for teachers to change the way they practice.’ [pp 12-13]
‘Evaluations can be industry or academe lead. In the realm of evaluating learning environments this can promote evaluations that have a high orientation to objective/ technical aspects (such as post occupancy evaluation in architecture) or those that have a high orientation to abstract/qualitative aspects (such as measures of learning outcomes in education). Certainly, previous approaches to post occupancy evaluations of learning spaces have been less concerned with pedagogy and more focussed on issues related to indoor environment quality, construction and building quality. Conversely, what is often evaluated within pedagogical practice is not only quite varied, but contested in terms of what practices are most highly valued, and rarely if ever do these evaluations cover the places and spaces for learning.’ [p 13]
See also: Educause Learning Space Rating System at: https://bit.ly/2kPgQ6y
Fisher, K. 2005, Research into identifying effective learning environments, Evaluating Quality in Educational Facilities, OECD/PEB.
Gifford, R. 2002, Environmental psychology: Principles and practise, Optimal Books, Colville.
Gislasen, N. 2009, ‘Mapping School Design: A Qualitative Study of the Relations Among facilities Design, Curriculum Delivery, and School Climate’ Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 40, issue 4, pp. 17-34.
Higgins, S, Hall, E, Woolner, P & McCaughey, C. 2005, ‘The Impact of School Environments: A Literature Review’, The Centre for Learning and Teaching, School of Education, Communication and Language Science, Newcastle University.
Hunley, S & Schaller, M. 2006, ‘Assessing Learning Spaces’, in D. Oblinger (ed.), Learning Spaces, pp. 13.1–13.11, Educause, Washington, DC, viewed 9 December 2012,
Huon, G & Sharp, H. 2008, ‘Centre for Teaching and Learning Seminar Room’, in Radcliffe, D, Wilson, H, Powell, D & Tibbetts, B (eds), Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 73-78.
Jamieson, P, Miglis, P, Holm, J & Peacock, J. 2011, ‘Creating new generation learning environments on the university campus’, University 21 network, [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Jamieson, P, Roberts, J & Wakefield, R. 2009, Creating New Generation Learning Environments at RMIT University: Rethinking the Design, Development and Implementation Process. Unpublished discussion paper for RMIT Learning Spaces Advisory Group.
Jamieson, P, Dane, J & Lippman, P. 2005, ‘Moving Beyond the Classroom: Accommodating the Changing Pedagogy of Higher Education’, paper presented to Forum of the Australasian Association for Institutional Research, Innovation and Change in Universities of the 21st Century, Melbourne, viewed 5 December 2012. https://bit.ly/2qWnV7F [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Jamieson, P. 2003, ‘Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning spaces: a role for academic developers’, International Journal for Academic Development, vol. 8, issues 1-2, pp. 119-133.
Jamieson, P, Fisher, K, Gilding, T, Taylor, P & Trevitt, C. 2000, ‘Place and Space in the Design of New Learning Environments’, Higher Education Research & Development, vol. 19, issue 2, pp. 221-236.
Kennedy, G, Dalgarno, B, Bennett, S, Gray, K, Judd, T, Waycott, J, Chang, R, Maton, K, & Krause, K-L. 2009, Educating the Net Generation: Implications for learning and teaching in Australian universities, Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Sydney, viewed 2 December 2012,
Kibby, B. 2012, Digital Deadline,
Kirkup, G & Kirkwood, A. 2005, Information and communications technology (ICT) in higher education teaching: A tale of gradualism rather than revolution. Learning Media and Technology, vol. 30, issue 2, pp.185-199.
Kennewell, S. 2001, Using affordances and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, vol. 10, issues 1-2, pp. 101-116.
Knight, P, & Trowler, P. 2001, Department leadership in higher education. SRHE and Open University, Buckingham. Lee, N & Tan, S & Dixon J. 2011, A comprehensive learning space evaluation model. Australian Learning & Teaching Council, Swinburne University, Melbourne, viewed 14 November 2012
Lefoe, G. 2010, ‘Creating the future: Changing culture through leadership capacity development’, in UD Ehlers and D Schneckenberg (eds.), Changing Cultures in Higher Education. A Handbook for Strategic Change, pp. 109-204, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg.
Leithwood, K & Beatty, B. 2008, Leading with teacher emotions in mind, CA Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks.
Lippincott, J. 2009, ‘Learning spaces: involving faculty to improve pedagogy’, Educause Review, March/April, pp.16-25.
‘If an institution desires more than a facelift or an iconic new building, it should clearly articulate its learning objectives and then place a high priority on including curriculum redesign in the planning process for new learning spaces. Faculty who are genuinely engaged in pedagogy, along with others who are concerned with the teaching and learning aspects of the space, should play a central, not peripheral, role in planning groups. An institution that is serious about making changes in pedagogy, whether or not those changes include technology, should consider the kinds of motivation that faculty might respond to–from an internal grant program for curriculum redesign, to an increase in instructional technologists or other staff, to more frequent or timely workshops, to more reliable day-to-day support for classroom technologies. In addition, a unit or group should be tasked with assessing what is or is not working in the new learning spaces after they are occupied–and with making recommendations for changes.
All of this necessitates a serious investment of resources. In these difficult economic times, administrators at many institutions will likely want to see demonstrable returns on these investments. They may want some evidence that the investments, particularly in classroom technology, are being employed in the ways the planners anticipated and that the investments are creating some improvements in teaching and learning. Faculty may welcome opportunities to rethink their teaching style and the way in which they achieve their learning objectives if the proper supports are put in place. Ideally, with new or renovated learning spaces, formal and informal, all stakeholders can win: faculty can enhance their teaching, students can improve their learning, and administrators can proudly point to the positive results of their investments in physical facilities, new technologies, and support services.’ [pp 24-25]
Lippincott, J. 2006, ‘Linking the Information Commons to Learning’, in D Oblinger (ed.), Learning Spaces, Educause, Washington, DC, viewed 9 November 2012.
Long, G. 2009, Professional development for 21st Century learning and teaching, viewed 8 December 2012.
McGregor, J. 2003, ‘Making Spaces: teacher workshop topologies’ Pedagogy, Culture & Society, vol. 11, issue 3, pp. 353-377.
Oblinger, D. 2005, ‘Leading the Transition from Classrooms to Learning Spaces’, Educause Quarterly, No.1, pp.14-18, viewed 24 August 2012,
Oblinger, D. 2006, ‘Space as a change agent’, in D Oblinger, (ed.), Learning spaces, pp. 1.1-1.4, Washington, DC, Educause, viewed 5 December 2012.
Powell, D. 2008, ‘Evaluation and the Pedagogy-Space-Technology Framework’, in D Radcliffe, H Wilson, D Powell, & B Tibbetts, (eds.), Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 27-29. 26
Prensky, M. 2001, ‘Digital Natives’, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, vol. 9, issue 5, pp. 1-6. Price Waterhouse 2003, Building better performance: An empirical assessment of the learning and other impacts of schools capital investment, Department for Education and Skills, UK.
Radcliffe, D, Wilson, H, Powell, D & Tibbetts B (eds). 2008, Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Radcliffe, D. 2008, A pedagogy-space-technology (PST) framework for designing and evaluating learning spaces, in D Radcliffe, H Wilson, D Powell, & B Tibbetts (eds.), Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 11-15.
Ramaley, J & Zia, L. 2005, ‘The Real Versus the Possible: Closing the Gaps in Engagement and Learning’, Educating the Net Generation, viewed 23 January 2010.
Reushle, S, Kissell, B, Fryer, M & King, D. 2008, ‘Tell us all about it: Establishment of a Technology Enhanced Learning Laboratory’, in D Radcliffe, H Wilson, D Powell, & B Tibbetts (eds). Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 111-114.
Rimer, S. 2009, ‘At M.I.T., Large Lectures Are Going The Way of Blackboard,’ The New York Times online, 12 January 2009, viewed 20 August 2012.
RMIT University 2011, New Generation Learning Spaces for RMIT: A College of Business perspective, RMIT University, Melbourne.
Sztenjnberg, A & Finch, E. 2006, ‘Adaptive use patterns of secondary school classroom environments’, Facilities, vol. 24, issues 13/14, pp. 490-509.
Temple, P. (2007). Learning Spaces for the 21st Century: A review of the literature, Higher Education Academy, London, viewed 6 December 2012.
Thody, A. 2008, Learning landscapes for universities: mapping the field, unpublished, viewed 13 August 2012.
Thomson, P & Blackmore, J. 2006, ‘Beyond the power of one: redesigning the work of school principals’ Journal of Educational Change, vol. 7, issue 3, pp. 161-177.
Tregloan, P. 2008, ‘The Learning Lab: Transforming a Learning Experience,’ Next Generation Learning Spaces Colloquium, University of Queensland, 1-2 October, pp. 131–134.
Wilson, G & Randall, M. 2008, ‘The Pod Room – A Group Learning Space’, in D Radcliffe, H Wilson, D Powell, & B Tibbetts, (eds.). Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp.135-137.
Wilson, H. 2008, ‘The Process of Creating Learning Space’, in D Radcliffe, H Wilson, D Powell, & B Tibbetts (eds). Proceedings of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp19-24.
Walker, JD, Brooks, D & Baepler, P. 2011, ‘Pedagogy and Space: Empirical Research on New Learning Environments’, EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 34, viewed 25 August 2012.
Watson, L. 2007, ‘Building the future of learning’, European Journal of Education, vol. 42, issue 2, pp. 255-263.
Wolff, S. 2003, Design Features of the Physical Learning Environment for Collaborative, Project-based learning at the Community College Level, National Research Center for Career and Technical Education, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
[last accessed 25 April 2018]
Adawi, T. and Kabo, J. (2012) Exploring Threshold Concepts and Liminal Spaces Using Phenomenography: Engineering Students’ Conceptions of Technology as an Example
Fourth Biennial Conference on Threshold Concepts: From personal practice to communities of practice, Trinity College, Dublin, 28-29 June 2012.
Book of Conference Abstracts: page 28-29 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Akkaraju, S. and Wolf, A. (2016) Teaching Evolution: The Blog as a Liminal Space ,
The Journal of Effective Teaching 16 (2), 32-46.
http://www.uncw.edu/jet/articles/Vol16_2/Wolf.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Allen, B. (2012) Creativity as Threshold – Learning and Teaching in a Liminal Space,
Fourth Biennial Conference on Threshold Concepts: From personal practice to communities of practice, Trinity College, Dublin, 28-29 June 2012.
Book of Conference Abstracts: page 72 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Atherton, J., Hadfield, P. and Wolstencroft, P. (2014) Troublesome Thresholds and Limiting Liminality: Issues in Teaching in Vocational Education, Fourth Biennial Conference on Threshold Concepts: From personal practice to communities of practice, Trinity College, Dublin, 28-29 June 2012. Full Paper in Threshold Concepts: From Personal Practice to Communities of Practice, Proceedings of the National Academy’s Sixth Annual Conference and the Fourth Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference [e-publication], Editors: Catherine O’Mahony, Avril Buchanan, Mary O’Rourke and Bettie Higgs, January 2014, NAIRTL, Ireland, ISBN: 978-1-906642-59-4, p 169.
http://www.nairtl.ie/documents/EPub_2012Proceedings.pdf#page=179 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Barton, G. and James, A. (2017) Threshold Concepts, LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® and whole systems thinking: towards a combined methodology, Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (PESTLHE), Special Edition: Threshold Concepts 2017, Eds. Ray Land and Julie Rattray, 12, (2), 249-271. https://bit.ly/2Ht4CJw [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Border, L. L. B. and Thacker Thomas, D. (2014) Traversing the Liminal Space: An Analysis of Graduate Student Responses to Diversity in the Classroom Context, Fifth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Threshold Concepts in Practice, Durham University, Durham, UK, 9-11 July, 2014 Abstract:
https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/abstracts/TC14Abstract57.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Burger, N. (2016) Liminal spaces : the tacit dimension of the doctoral supervisory relationship, PhD thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW, Australia
http://epubs.scu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1480&context=theses [last accessed 21 June 2018]
DasBender, G. (2016) Liminal Space as a Generative Site of Struggle: Writing Transfer and L2 Students, Critical Transitions: Writing and the Question of Transfer. Perspectives on Writing, Editors: Anson, Chris M., & Moore, Jessie L. Fort Collins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse and University Press of Colorado, USA, Chapter 10, pp 277-302
http://wac.colostate.edu/books/ansonmoore/chapter10.pdf [last accessed 21 June 2018]
Felten, P. (2016) On the Threshold with Students, in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 1, pp 3-9, [book details] [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Fister, B. (2015) The Liminal Library: Making Our Libraries Sites of Transformative Learning, LILAC 2015, Newcastle University, UK, 8-10 April 2015
http://barbarafister.com/LiminalLibrary.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
French, E., Bailey, J., van Acker, E. and Wood, L. (2015) From mountaintop to corporate ladder ― what new professionals really really want in a capstone experience!, Teaching in Higher Education: Available on-line October 2015; DOI:10.1080/13562517.2015.1085852.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1085852 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Hawkins, B. and Edwards, G. (2015) Managing the monsters of doubt: Liminality, threshold concepts and leadership learning, Management Learning, 46 (1), 24-43
http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/23/1350507613501736.full.pdf+html [last accessed 21 June 2018]
Hokstad, L. M., Rødne, G., Braaten, B. O., Wellinger, S. and Shetelig, F. (2016) Transformative Learning in Architectural Education: Re-Thinking Architecture and the Education of Architecture, in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 24, pp 321-333, [book details] [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Hobson, J. (2010) Transforming practice: conducting first year students through liminal space by explicitly teaching academic skills, Third Biennial Threshold Concepts Symposium; Exploring transformative dimensions of threshold concepts: The University of New South Wales in collaboration with the University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1-2 July 2010
Kabo, J., Baillie, C. and Reader, J. (2010) A Thousand Plateaus: a visual metaphor for the liminal space, Third Biennial Threshold Concepts Symposium; Exploring transformative dimensions of threshold concepts: The University of New South Wales in collaboration with the University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1-2 July 2010
Keefer, J. (2013) Navigating Liminality: The Experience of Troublesome Periods and Distance During Doctoral Study, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of Lancaster, UK, March 2013.
Keefer, J. M. (2014) Threshold Concepts and Postgraduate Struggles: The Development of a Framework to Support Learners through Doctoral Liminality, Fifth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Threshold Concepts in Practice, Durham University, Durham, UK, 9-11 July, 2014 Abstract:
https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/abstracts/TC14Abstract11.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Keefer, J. M. (2015) Experiencing doctoral liminality as a conceptual threshold and how supervisors can use it, Innovations in Education and Teaching International 52 (1), 17-28: DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2014.981839.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.981839 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Land, R. (2013) Liminality Close-Up, Keynote Speaker Pre-Conference Think Piece for the conference, HECU7, Higher Education Close Up Research Making a Difference, Lancaster University, UK, 21-23 July 2014 https://bit.ly/2Fzt1vo [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Land, R., Rattray, J. and Vivian, P. (2014) Learning in the liminal space: a semiotic approach to threshold concepts, Higher Education: Available on-line to journal subscribers, DOI 10.1007/s10734-013-9705-x.
Land, R. (2014) A Closer Look at Liminality: incorrigibles and threshold capital
Keynote Presentation, Fourth Biennial Conference on Threshold Concepts: From personal practice to communities of practice, Trinity College, Dublin, 28-29 June 2012.
Full Paper: Land, R. and Rattray, J. A Closer Look at Liminality: incorrigibles and threshold capital, in Threshold Concepts: From Personal Practice to Communities of Practice, Proceedings of the National Academy’s Sixth Annual Conference and the Fourth Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference [e-publication], Editors: Catherine O’Mahony, Avril Buchanan, Mary O’Rourke and Bettie Higgs, January 2014, NAIRTL, Ireland, ISBN: 978-1-906642-59-4, pp 1-12.
http://www.nairtl.ie/documents/EPub_2012Proceedings.pdf#page=11 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Land, R. (2015) Facilitating the Academy through Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge, In: On the Facilitation of the Academy, Editors: Elias Westergaard and Joachim S Wiewiura, Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, 2015, ISBN 978-94-6209-972-2 (paperback), ISBN 978-94-6209-973-9 (hardback), ISBN 978-94-6209-974-6 (e-book), Chapter 2, pp 17-29 https://bit.ly/1DNAUbS [last accessed 25 April 2018] Free Preview On the Facilitation of the Academy https://bit.ly/2r2rA34
‘Royle makes a similar point about the positive value of dwelling within states of uncertainty. Intellectual uncertainty is not necessarily or simply a negative experience, a dead-end sense of not knowing, or of indeterminacy. It is just as well an experience of something open, generative, exhilarating, (the trembling of what remains undecidable). I wish to suggest that ‘intellectual uncertainty’ is … a crucial dimension of any teaching worthy of the name. (Royle 2003, 52)’ [p 20]
Land, R. (2016) Toil and Trouble: Threshold Concepts as a Pedagogy of Uncertainty,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 2, pp 11-24, [book details]
Lutz, B., Blakely, B., Rose, K. and Ballard, T. M. (2016) Learning and Reflecting with ISUComm ePortfolios: Exploring Technological and Curricular Places,
Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, Issue Ten, November 28, 2016
https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/learning-and-reflecting-with-isucomm-eportfolios/ [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Maksimović, M. (2015) Research Process as a Liminal Space ― Blurring the Boundaries between Art and Science, 3rd Conference on Arts-Based Research and Artistic Research, Faculty of Fine Arts, University of Porto, 28-30 January 2015
http://3c.nea.fba.up.pt/sites/3c.nea.fba.up.pt/files/FINAL_Research%20Process%20as%20a%20Liminal%20Space%20Maja%20Maksimovic.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Meulemans, Y. N., Carr, A. and Quinonez, T. (2016) Where are They? Using Students’ Reflective Work to Design Curriculum, Assess Learning, and Help them Through Liminality,
Sixth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Thresholds on the Edge, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 15-17 June 2016:
Meyer, J.H.F. and Land, R. (2006) Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Issues of liminality, In: Meyer, J.H.F. and Land, R. (eds.), Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge, London and New York: Routledge, pp 19-32, [book details].
Orsini-Jones, M. (2010) Troublesome Grammar Knowledge and Action-Research-Led Assessment Design: Learning from Liminality, in: Threshold Concepts and Transformational Learning, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Baillie, C., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, pp. 281-299, [book details].
Osmond, J. (2015) Industrial Design and Liminal Spaces, In: Design Pedagogy: Developments in Art and Design Education, (Ed. Mike Tovey), Gower, ISBN: 978-1-4724-1598-1, February 2015, pages 135-146.
https://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open/file/27100721-ad4b-4dd7-8198-162b3dbf1116/1/industrial%20design.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Quinlan, A, Farrell, H. and Hogben, P. (2010) Attending to liminality: Constructing an identity as a student of Architecture through experiential learning,
Third Biennial Threshold Concepts Symposium; Exploring transformative dimensions of threshold concepts: The University of New South Wales in collaboration with the University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, 1-2 July 2010
Rattray, J. (2014) Mediating Liminality: Artefacts as a means of Supporting Threshold Transformations , Fifth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Threshold Concepts in Practice, Durham University, Durham, UK, 9-11 July, 2014
Abstract: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/abstracts/TC14Abstract50.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Rattray, J. (2014) Tools for navigating the liminal tunnel,
Higher Education Close Up Research (HECU7), Making a Difference, Lancaster University, UK, 21st – 23rd July 2014
Rattray, J. (2016) Affective Dimensions of Liminality,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 6, pp 67-76, [book details]
Rattray, J. (2016) Fear and Loathing in Liminality,
Sixth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Thresholds on the Edge, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 15-17 June 2016:
Rattray, J. (2017) Assessing Liminality: The Use of Ipsative Formative Assessment During a Postgraduate Taught Induction Programme to Support the Development of Criticality,
Chapter in Ipsative Assessment and Personal Learning Gain, Exploring International Case Studies, Editor: Gwyneth Hughes, Palgrave Macmillan UK, ISBN: 978-1-137-56501-3 (Print) 978-1-137-56502-0 (Online), pp 149-171
Ravenstahl, M. (2016) Bringing the Apple and Holding Up the Mirror – A Qualitative Study of Student Engagement in Visual Art and the Interrelationship with the Navigation of Liminality, Sixth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Thresholds on the Edge, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 15-17 June 2016:
Rutherford, V. and Pickup, I. (2015) Negotiating Liminality in Higher Education: Formal and Informal Dimensions of the Student Experience as Facilitators of Quality,
In The European Higher Education Area: Between Critical Reflections and Future Policies, Editors: Adrian Curaj, Liviu Matei, Remus Pricopie, Jamil Salmi & Peter Scott, Springer Open, ISBN 978-3-319-18767-9, ISBN 978-3-319-20877-0 (eBook), DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20877-0_44, pages 703-723
Salmona, M., Kaczynski, D. and Wood, L. N. (2016) The Importance of Liminal Space for Doctoral Success: Exploring Methodological Threshold Concepts,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 12, pp 155-164, [book details]
Savin-Baden, M. (2007) Second Life PBL: Liminality, Liquidity and Lurking,
Keynote Speech, Reinventing Problem-based Learning Conference, Republic Polytechnic, Singapore 7-9th March 2007: https://bit.ly/2I3gx21
Savin-Baden, M. (2009) Liquid learning and liminal universities? Shifting Academic complicit-ness in the processes of disempowerment. Paper presented at 6-8th April 2009 DPR8: Power and the Academy, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
Savin-Baden, M. (2017) The fault in our stars: Constellations of Problem-based Learning: Living with the Liminal, Keynote presented at University of Aalborg, AAU Learning Lab, University Teaching Day, Denmark 3-4th May, 2017 http://www.learninglab.aau.dk/digitalAssets/298/298309_keynote-text-maggi-savin-baden.pdf
Shanley, J. and Dalley-Hewer, J. (2017) Journey to Mastersness: the light bulb moment,
Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education [PESTLHE] 12 (1), 2-21. https://bit.ly/2HXBLhE [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Smith, J. (2006) Lost in translation: Staff and students negotiating liminal spaces,
SEDA Annual Conference, Liverpool, 2006. https://bit.ly/2KfkdhO [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Starr-Glass, D. (2013) Threshold Work: Sustaining Liminality in Mentoring International Students, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education 2 (2), Available to journal subscribers on-line, July 2013.
Syed Mohamed, A. T. F., Land, R. and Rattray, J. (2016) Ambivalence, Hybridity and Liminality: The Case of Military Education, in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 7, pp 77-91, [book details]
Taboada, M. B. and Coombs, G. (2013) Liminal moments: designing, thinking and learning,
In Reitan, Janne Beate, Digranes, Ingvild, & Nielsen, Liv Merete (Eds.) Cumulus/2013, 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers: Design Learning for Tomorrow – Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD, Oslo, Norway, 14-17 May 2013
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/63030/1/TaboadaCoombs_LiminalMoments_21FEB2013_submission.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Thacker Thomas, D. and Border, L. L. B. (2017) Diversity as a Threshold Concept: Graduate Student Teachers’ Experiences Negotiating Liminality in the Postsecondary Classroom,
Practice and Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (PESTLHE), Special Edition: Threshold Concepts 2017, Eds. Ray Land and Julie Rattray, 12, (2), 185 204. http://community.dur.ac.uk/pestlhe.learning/index.php/pestlhe/article/view/168/190 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Tucker, V. M. (2014) Learning Experiences in the Novice-Expert Liminal Space,
Fifth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Threshold Concepts in Practice, Durham University, Durham, UK, 9-11 July, 2014
Abstract: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/abstracts/TC14Abstract51.pdf [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Tucker, V. M. (2016) Learning Experiences and the Liminality of Expertise,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 8, pp 93-106, [book details]
Tucker, V. M. (2016) Curriculum on the Edge: Designing for Liminality in Learning Experiences, Sixth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Thresholds on the Edge, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 15-17 June 2016:
https://works.bepress.com/virginia-tucker/12/ [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Waite, M., Mackness, J., Roberts, G. and Lovegrove, E. (2013) Liminal Participants and Skilled Orienteers: Learner Participation in a MOOC for New Lecturers,
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 9 (2), 200-215.
http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/waite_0613.htm [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Webb, A. S. (2016) Threshold Concepts and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 22, pp 299-308, [book details]
White, B. A., Olsen, T. and Schumann, D. (2016) A Threshold Concept Framework for Use Across Disciplines, in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 5, pp 53-63, [book details]
Williams, J. (2014) The design studio as liminal space, Charrette, Journal of the Asssociation of Architectural Educators 1 (1), 61-71.
http://ingentaconnect.com/content/arched/char/2014/00000001/00000001/art00006 [last accessed 25 April 2018]
Wisker, G. (2014) Beyond blockages to ownership, agency and articulation: liminal spaces and conceptual threshold crossing in doctoral learning, Fifth International Biennial Threshold Concepts Conference, Threshold Concepts in Practice, Durham University, Durham, UK, 9-11 July, 2014 Abstract: https://www.ee.ucl.ac.uk/~mflanaga/abstracts/TC14Abstract12.pdf
Wisker, G. (2016) Beyond Blockages to Ownership, Agency and Articulation: Liminal Spaces and Conceptual Threshold Crossing in Doctoral Learning,
in: Threshold Concepts in Practice, Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F. and Flanagan, M.T., (eds), Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei, Chapter 13, pp 165-176, [book details]
Wood, P. (2012) Blogs as liminal space: student teachers at the threshold,
Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 21 (1), 85-99.
Macfarlane, B. (2015) Student performativity in higher education: converting learning as a private space into a public performance. In Higher Education Research & Development Volume 34, – Issue 2. https://bit.ly/2HHwYji [last accessed 1 May 2018]
- Allen, D. (1999). Desire to finish college: An empirical link between motivation and persistence. Research in Higher Education, 40(4), 461–485. doi: 10.1023/A:1018740226006 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
- Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
- Astin, A.W. (2002). Higher education and the cultivation of citizenship. In D. Allman & M.Beaty (Eds.), Cultivating citizens (pp. 91–102). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. [Google Scholar]
- Attwood, R. (2009, September 10). Thanks very much for coming: You shall be rewarded.The Times Higher Education Supplement, p. 6.[Google Scholar]
- Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–228. doi: 10.1080/0268093022000043065
- Ball, S. (2012). The making of a neoliberal academic. Research in Secondary Education, 2(1),29–31. [Google Scholar]
- Barrie, S.C. (2004). A research-based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. Higher Education Research & Development, 23(3), 261–275. doi: 10.1080/0729436042000235391 [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]
- Bean, J.C., & Peterson, D. (1998). Grading classroom participation. In R.S. Anderson & B.W.Speck (Eds.), Changing the way we grade student performance: Classroom assessment and the new learning paradigm (pp. 33–40). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
- Bloxham, S., & Boyd, P. (2007). Developing effective assessment in higher education: A practical guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Bowen, E., Price, T., Lloyd, S., & Thomas, S. (2005). Improving the quantity and quality of attendance data to enhance student retention. Journal of Further and Higher Education,29(4), 375–385. doi: 10.1080/03098770500353714
- Cain, S. (2012). Quiet: The power of introverts in a world that can’t stop talking. London:Penguin. [Google Scholar]
- Case, J., & Gunstone, R. (2003). Going deeper than deep and surface approaches: A study of students’ perception of time. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(1), 55–69. doi:10.1080/1356251032000052320
- Caverley, N., Cunningham, J.B., & MacGregor, J.N. (2007). Sickness presenteeism, sickness absenteeism, and health following restructuring in a public service organization. Journal ofManagement Studies, 44(2), 304–319. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00690.x [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Chanock, K. (2010). The right to reticence. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(5), 543–552. doi:10.1080/13562517.2010.491907
- Conrad, C.F., & Haworth, J.G. (1997). Emblems of quality in higher education: Developing and sustaining high-quality programs. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. [Google Scholar]
- Cooper, C.L. (1998). The changing nature of work. Community, Work and Family, 1(3), 313–317. doi: 10.1080/13668809808414238 [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]
- Ditcher, A.K. (2001). Effective teaching and learning in higher education, with particular reference to the undergraduate education of professional engineers. International Journal of Engineering Education, 17(1), 24–29.
- Entwistle, N.J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. Beckenham: Croom Helm. [Google Scholar]
- Eriksen, T.H. (2001). Tyranny of the moment: Fast and slow time in the information age.London: Pluto Press. [Google Scholar]
- Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Fusaro, M., & Couture, A. (2012). Étude sur les modalités d’apprentissage et les technologies de l’information et de la communication dans l’enseignement. Quebec: Conference Des Recteurs Et Des Principaux Des Universités Du Québec. [Google Scholar]
- Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Graham, C.R., Tripp, T.R., Seawright, L., & Joeckel, G.L. (2007). Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(3), 233–258. doi: 10.1177/1469787407081885
- Hanbury, A., Prosser, M., & Rickinson, M. (2008). The differential impact of UK accredited teaching development programmes on academics’ approaches to teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 33(4), 469–483. doi: 10.1080/03075070802211844 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
- Hancock, D. (2004). Cooperative learning and peer orientation effects on motivation and achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(3), 159–166. doi:10.3200/JOER.97.3.159-168 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Holmes, L. (2004). Challenging the learning turn in education and training. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(8/9), 625–638. doi: 10.1108/03090590410566552
- Hounsell, D. (2011). Graduates for the 21st century: Integrating the enhancement themes.Glasgow: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Retrieved October 12, 2013, from http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/ [Google Scholar]
- Howie, P., & Bagnall, R. (2013). A critique of the deep and surface approaches to learning model. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 389–400. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.733689 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Hyde, C.A., & Ruth, B.J. (2002). Multicultural content and class participation: Do students self-censor? Journal of Social Work Education, 38(2), 241–256.
- Jin, J. (2012). Sounds of silence: Examining silence in problem-based learning (PBL) in Asia. In S. Bridges, C. McGrath, & T. Whitehill (Eds.), Problem-based learning in clinical education: The next generation (pp. 171–185). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Kandlbinder, P., & Peseta, T. (2009). Key concepts in postgraduate certificates in higher education teaching and learning in Australasia and the United Kingdom. International Journal for Academic Development, 14(1), 19–31. doi: 10.1080/13601440802659247 [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]
- Kneale, P. (1997). The rise of the ‘strategic student’: How can we adapt to cope?. In S.Armstrong, G. Thompson, & S. Brown (Eds.), Facing up to radical changes in universities and colleges (pp. 119–130). London: Kogan Page/SEDA. [Google Scholar]
- Kuh, G.D., Cruce, T.M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R.M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. doi: 10.1353/jhe.0.0019
- Lasch, C. (1979). The culture of Narcissism: American life in the age of diminishing expectations.London: Norton Press. [Google Scholar]
- Law, D.W. (2007). Exhaustion in university students and the effect of coursework involvement. Journal of American College Health, 55(4), 239–245. doi:10.3200/JACH.55.4.239-245 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
- Lea, S.J., Stephenson, D., & Troy, J. (2003). Higher education students’ attitudes to student-centred learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’? Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 321–334. doi: 10.1080/03075070309293
- Leufer, T., & Cleary-Holdforth, J. (2010). Reflections on the experience of mandating lecture attendance in one school of nursing in the Republic of Ireland. All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 2(1), 18.1–18.14.
- Livingstone, D., & Lynch, K. (2000). Group project work and student-centred active learning: Two different experiences. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 325–345. doi:10.1080/713696161 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Long, D.D., & Bedard, J.C. (1985). Evaluation of a discussion technique used for both classroom instruction and grade assignment. American Journal of Physics, 53(5), 401–404. doi: 10.1119/1.14188 [Crossref], [Web of Science ®]
- Macfarlane, B. (2013). The surveillance of learning: A critical analysis of university attendance policies. Higher Education Quarterly, 67(4), 358–373. doi: 10.1111/hequ.12016 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
- Macfarlane, B., & Gourlay, L. (2009). The reflection game: Enacting the penitent self.Teaching in Higher Education, 14(4), 455–459. doi: 10.1080/13562510903050244
- Machemer, P.L., & Crawford, P. (2007). Student perceptions of active learning in a large cross-disciplinary classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(1), 9–30. doi:10.1177/1469787407074008 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
- Malcolm, J., & Zukas, M. (2001). Bridging pedagogic gaps: Conceptual discontinuities in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(1), 33–42. doi:10.1080/13562510020029581 [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]
- Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Mascolo, M.F. (2009). Beyond teacher- and learner-centered pedagogy: Learning as guided participation. Pedagogy and the Human Sciences, 1(1), 4–27. [Google Scholar]
- Middlesex University. (2011). Attendance (pre-registration nursing and midwifery) policy. Retrieved March 14, 2012, from unihub.mdx.ac.uk/Assets/attendance.docx [Google Scholar]
- Murray, J. (2012). Performativity cultures and their effects on teacher educators’ work.Research in Teacher Education, 2(2), 19–23. [Google Scholar]
- Nelson, K.J., Quinn, C., Marrington, A., & Clarke, J.A. (2012). Good practice for enhancing the engagement and success of commencing students. Higher Education, 63(1), 83–96. doi:10.1007/s10734-011-9426-y
- Newswander, L.K., & Borrego, M. (2009). Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs. Higher Education, 58(4), 551–562. doi: 10.1007/s10734-009-9215-z [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Nichol, D. (2010). The foundation for graduate attributes: Developing self-regulation through self and peer assessment. Glasgow: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Scotland. Retrieved July 8, 2012, from www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk [Google Scholar]
- Ni Raghallaigh, M., & Cunniffe, R. (2013). Creating a safe climate for active learning and student engagement: An example from an introductory social work module. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(1), 93–105. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.694103
- Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2000). Lurker demographics: Counting the silent. Proceedings of CHI 2000. The Hague: ACM. [Google Scholar]
- Oxfam. (2013). Global citizenship. Retrieved December 12, 2013, fromhttp://www.oxfam.org.uk/education/global-citizenship [Google Scholar]
- Papacharissi, Z. (2012). Without you, I’m nothing: Performances of the self on twitter.International Journal of Communication, 6. Retrieved April 17, 2013, fromhttp://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1484 [Google Scholar]
- Penn State University. (2013). Principles of student participation in academic affairs. Retrieved November 19, 2013, from http://senate.psu.edu/policies/index.html
- Pfaff, E., & Huddlestone, P. (2003). Does it matter if I hate teamwork? What impacts student attitudes towards teamwork. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(1), 37–45. doi:10.1177/0273475302250571 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
- Roddick, M. (2007). Global citizenship perspectives: A case study of the WUSC international seminar. Retrieved March 21, 2012, from devcase.org/documents/global-citizenship-perspectives.pdf
- Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory.London: Constable. [Google Scholar]
- Rose, N. (1990). Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Ross, J. (2011). Traces of self: Online reflective practices and performances in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(1), 113–126. doi:10.1080/13562517.2011.530753 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] [Google Scholar]
- Ross, J. (2012). Performing the reflective self: Audience awareness in high-stakes reflection.Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 219–232.
- Sadler, D.R. (2010). Fidelity as a precondition for integrity in grading academic achievement. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(6), 727–743. doi:10.1080/02602930902977756 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
- Sander, P., Stevenson, K., King, M., & Coates, D. (2000). University students’ expectations of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 309–323. doi: 10.1080/03075070050193433 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]
- Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
- Sheridan, J., Bryan-Kinns, N., Reeves, S., Marshall, J., & Lane, G. (2011). Graffito: Crowd-based performative interaction at festivals (pp. 1129–1134). Proceedings of CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada. New York: ACM. [Google Scholar]
- Simon, N. (2010). The participatory museum. Santa Cruz, CA: Museum. [Google Scholar]
- Skeggs, B. (2009). The moral economy of person production: The class relations of self-performance on “Reality” television. The Sociological Review, 57(4), 626–644. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2009.01865.x
- Steger, M.B. (Ed.). (2009). Globalisms. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc. [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
- University of Bolton. (2011). Student attendance policy. Retrieved September 18, 2012, fromhttp://www.bolton.ac.uk/Students/PoliciesProceduresRegulations/AllStudents/Documents/StudentAttendancePolicy.pdf [Google Scholar]
- University of Hong Kong. (2012). Common core. Retrieved August 28, 2013, fromhttp://commoncore.hku.hk/global-issues/ [Google Scholar]
- University of Leeds. (2011). Attendance monitoring – Policy, guidance and examples of good practice for schools. Retrieved April 14, 2012, fromhttp://www.leeds.ac.uk/rsa/admissionsandregistration/forstaff/attendance.html
- Volet, S., & Ang, G. (1998). Culturally mixed groups on international campuses: An opportunity for inter-cultural learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 17(1), 5–23. doi: 10.1080/0729436980170101 [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]
- Walker, R.A. (2011). Badgering big brother: Spectacle, surveillance, and politics in the flash mob. Liminalities: A Journal of Performance Studies, 7(2), 1–23.
- Wang, Y. (2012). Mainland Chinese students’ group work adaptation in a UK business school. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(5), 523–535. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.658562 [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®]