Universities are facing new challenges that pose various demands for developing learning environments. These challenges are related to different pedagogical approaches, the use of information and communications technology (ICT), the diversification of student populations, and new expectations related to working life. This study focused on university students’ perceptions of preferred learning environments and their thoughts about the best learning environments for the higher-education level. The main data consisted of answers to open questions from 230 students. Additionally, a questionnaire was used to gain an overall picture of students’ experiences in the current learning environment. Five main themes emerged: characteristics of the campus; available resources; flexibility of learning opportunities; pedagogy; and implementation of ICT in education. Further, two larger perspectives were highlighted. One was the need for informal learning environments (where students can study alone or with peers or just hang out). The second perspective pertains to the flexibility of learning, demonstrating the need for learning environments that allow participation without the need to come to the campus for face-to-face meetings. The need for resources (particularly ICT and the support and availability of teaching personnel) was also highlighted. The study provides important perspectives for developing appropriate learning environments for higher education.

Flipped classrooms have become widely adopted in educational settings (e.g., in higher education) worldwide. However, there is a need for more precise understanding of the ingredients for student satisfaction in a flipped setting. The aim of this paper was to investigate university students’ experiences of the factors that create a successful flipped course. Ten measures were used to investigate the hypothesized factors affecting satisfaction, which were chosen based on the results from previous flipped classroom studies and higher educational research. These measures were grouped into three dimensions: (1) pedagogical (five measures), (2) social (three measures), and (3) technological (two measures). Exploratory factor analysis was run to analyze the adequacy of the instruments. Results revealed that the factor structure was as expected and that the instruments measuring all ten factors of teaching and learning in a flipped classroom were adequate. Furthermore, confirmatory factor analysis was used to formally operationalize the hypothesized latent constructs, and to build a structural equation model for predicting the student satisfaction of a flipped classroom. In the end, seven factors were found to predict student satisfaction with flipped courses. The highest predictor was guidance from the dimension of pedagogy, and the second-best predictor was experienced teaching for understanding. The results, limitations, and conclusion are discussed in terms of key issues and the development of a flipped classroom pedagogical design for higher education.

The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the change from physical spaces to learning environments by examining how, and through which processes, learning spaces are transformed, produced and developed. For this purpose, we used a comparative ethnography approach and collected observation material from two Finnish schools at different development phases. The material was supplemented by focus-group interviews with teachers and individual interviews with principals. The results suggest that no ready-made models exist which fit into a new context. Rather, practices are constructed in physical spaces through active negotiations and meaning- making in three cyclic interaction processes (i.e., interaction between teachers, interaction between students and teachers, and interaction between students). Hence, through cyclic processes with strong support from teachers, students managed to find tools to build learning environments suited to their needs, which further enabled the expansion of learning environments inside and outside school walls. Nevertheless, changes in practices required an overall change in every aspect of the school. Focusing on the processes of change, results provide information from a systemic perspective on how schools can manage continuous change when developing physical spaces into learning environments.