Conference Agenda

This paper responds to Network 20’s call for studies examining ‘innovative methodologies that embrace materiality, relationality and spatial affordances’ across diverse educational environments. Traditionally, the design of educational spaces has focused on a range of largely physical components, such as the type and flexibility of furniture, or the availability and use of digital technologies (Damşa et al., 2019; Woolner, 2010). International research on the design of learning environments has examined ‘optimal’ and ‘innovative’ layouts, their alignment with pedagogy, and their impact in terms of learning outcomes, cognitive gains, and the development of particular skills and literacies (Imms et al., 2023; Barrett et al., 2015; van Merrienboer, 2017; Sasson et al., 2022). Arguably, this approach to research and design partly reflects traditional instrumentalist approaches in education, where a focus on ‘what works’ drives policy and practice towards the primary goal of preparing students to be successful contributors to a future workforce (Biesta, 2022). However, these dominant discourses can serve to overshadow the embodied, diverse, and relational ways in which students experience and make sense of their educational spaces (Colombetti, 2014).

This study actively engages with this tension in the conceptual underpinnings of learning space design, through an exploration of methodologies foregrounding the sensing body in the emergence of educational spaces as relational ecologies (Rousell, 2021). A relational lens is important to consider, as the design of educational spaces in the western world continues to reflect dominant monocultural visions that bely the increasingly diverse nature of student cohorts, impacting negatively on young people’s sense of belonging (Brillante & Mankiw, 2015; Calabrese-Barton & Tan, 2020). The role of the body in relation to educational spaces and spatial affordances – technological, digital, material – remains somewhat nebulous (Author 1 et al., 2025), despite expanding literature in the field of embodied education (Kersting et al., 2021). Ultimately, the sidelining of the embodied and the relational in the design of educational spaces narrows opportunities for meaningful participation, by limiting the range of ways that students can understand, explore, and communicate different concepts and connect to their environment. Indeed, students rarely have a say in how their educational spaces are designed and (re)configured (Author 1 et al., 2023), with the result that these spaces are often disconnected from lived experience in place (Author 2 et al., 2025).

As part of an interdisciplinary research project focusing on the role of the senses in science and sustainability education, we collaborated with 18 students and two teachers in a secondary school in the UK over the course of a school year. Drawing on theories of embodiment, multimodality, and sensory ethnography (Kersting et al., 2021; Pink, 2015), a variety of spaces in the school – a ‘standard’ classroom, science classroom, and garden space in the grounds – were re-configured and re-imagined through a priming of sensory exploration. Sessions involved students actively engaging with the materiality of the space (investigating the textures and scent of plants), exploring textures on digital devices with heightened sensory feedback (haptic touch technologies), and experimenting with arts-based approaches (soil painting), with the aim of deepening inquiries and surfacing questions about what it means to participate meaningfully in relation with humans and more than human others in an educational space. Guiding the study was an appreciation that ‘designing’ educational spaces may involve physical alterations but also an acute awareness of how we move, interact, sense, inhabit, and make sense of the space, through and with our bodies. To explore what different encounters and questions may arise through such a reimagining of space, we developed innovative methodologies which brought sensory and embodied experience to the fore.

This research explores Mission-Based Learning (MBL) as an innovative pedagogical approach designed to operationalise broad-based competencies in authentic, socially meaningful contexts. Grounded in experiential learning, MBL organizes learning around purposeful missions or challenges that require students to take responsibility, collaborate, make decisions, and reflect on outcomes.

By emphasizing active participation, problem-solving, and experiential engagement, MBL enables learners to apply knowledge and skills in dynamic, real-world scenarios. This study analyses Yrityskylä Itä-Suomi, a purpose-designed, non-formal, simulation-based learning environment through the lens of MBL examining how it supports student agency and entrepreneurial competencies among sixth-grade learners, and how these competencies transfer across formal and non-formal educational contexts.

Educational systems worldwide are increasingly expected to prepare learners for complex social, economic, and technological environments by developing transversal competencies such as agency, collaboration, creativity, communication, and critical thinking (Trilling & Fadel, 2010). In Finland, these ambitions are embedded in the National Core Curriculum through broad-based competencies (laaja-alainen osaaminen), which emphasise learner agency, entrepreneurship education, and interdisciplinary learning (Finnish National Agency for Education, 2016). While these competencies are conceptually supported in policy, their practical enactment in classrooms and beyond remains uneven. Skills such as entrepreneurship and agency are often misunderstood or underestimated in local curricula due to limited pedagogical guidance for educators (Seikkula-Leino et al., 2019; Ruskovaara & Pihkala, 2015; Lackéus, 2015). This gap is particularly critical in peripheral regions such as North Karelia, where fostering innovation and regional vitality requires equipping students with these future-oriented skills (Regional Council of North Karelia, 2021; Smart Specialisation Strategy of North Karelia, 2022; OECD, 2018). Consequently, there is a growing need for structured, engaging pedagogical approaches that enable students to operationalise these competencies in both formal and non-formal educational environments.

To support this research, the study draws upon key theories: entrepreneurial learning (Kyrö, 2005), experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), agency in education (Leonard, 2017) and social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986). The EntreComp Framework (EntreComp, 2016) guides the operationalisation of entrepreneurial competencies.

The primary objective is to analyze how learning designers conceptualise the relationship between MBL, student agency, and competency development, and how these conceptualisations translate into concrete pedagogical design principles. A secondary objective is to explore the implicit and explicit educational philosophies informing Yrityskylä learning activities, including assumptions about learning, motivation, authenticity, and the role of structure versus autonomy.

By focusing on learning designers’ perspectives, the study addresses a gap in MBL and entrepreneurship education research, which has predominantly emphasised student outcomes rather than pedagogical intent and design logic. Understanding how designers interpret and operationalise agency, and competencies is critical for explaining how MBL functions in practice, and for supporting the transferability of such models to other educational contexts.

Corresponding research questions were formulated to guide empirical inquiry:

RQ1: How do learning designers perceive the role of mission-based learning in fostering student agency, entrepreneurial competencies, and other transversal skills?

RQ2: What pedagogical philosophies and design rationales underpin learning designers’ decisions in the development and implementation of Yrityskylä learning activities?

This study investigates teachers’ perceptions of educational space, furniture, environmental conditions, and professional competences related to the pedagogical use of space, comparing traditional classrooms with Innovative Learning Environments (ILEs). The topic is situated within the growing international and European policy emphasis on student-centred, competency-based education, which increasingly recognises learning environments as key enablers of pedagogical innovation. Despite this attention, there remains a significant lack of empirical, practice-oriented evidence to guide schools and teachers in the effective transformation and pedagogical exploitation of physical learning environments.

The central research question guiding this study is: How do teachers’ perceptions of educational spaces, furniture, environmental conditions, and their own professional competences differ between traditional classrooms and Innovative Learning Environments, and what implications do these perceptions have for sustainable pedagogical innovation? This overarching question is complemented by subsidiary questions addressing (a) which spaces and material elements teachers consider essential for innovation, (b) how frequently different spaces and furniture are used in practice, (c) the barriers teachers encounter when moving beyond the traditional classroom, and (d) teachers’ perceived competence in planning and managing pedagogical use of space.

The primary objective of the research is to analyse and compare teachers’ perceptions across these dimensions in order to identify patterns that can inform evidence-based decision-making in school design, policy, and professional development. Secondary objectives include identifying priority areas for spatial transformation, exploring structural, organisational, and knowledge-related barriers, and examining teachers’ self-perceived competence in the pedagogical use of educational spaces.

The conceptual and theoretical framework integrates perspectives from educational change theory, learning environment research, and architectural pedagogy. The study draws on the conception of Innovative Learning Environments as flexible, technology-enabled spaces designed to support active, collaborative, and student-centred learning, as articulated in international frameworks and policy reports (Blannin et al., 2020; OECD, 2017). It is informed by models of educational change that conceptualise innovation as the interaction between pedagogy, space, and technology, with pedagogy acting as the primary driver of transformation and physical space functioning as an enabling condition rather than a determining factor (Silander & Ryymin, 2015; French et al., 2022). The framework is further grounded in influential pedagogical and architectural traditions that conceptualise space as an active educational agent, including the Reggio Emilia approach, which defines space as the “third teacher” (Edwards et al., 1998), Montessori pedagogy, which emphasises order, autonomy, and intentionally designed learning environments (Lawrence & Stæhli, 2023), and architectural theories that highlight flexibility, interaction, and informal learning through the design of intermediate and shared spaces (Hertzberger, 2008; Mattila, 2015).

The European and international dimension of the study is central to its relevance. The research aligns closely with European Union recommendations on key competences for lifelong learning (European Union, 2018) and with UNESCO’s global agenda for Education for Sustainable Development, both of which stress the importance of learning environments that promote autonomy, collaboration, well-being, and lifelong learning skills (UNESCO, 2017; Scott, 2015a, 2015b). In addition, the study responds to international evidence highlighting the measurable impact of physical learning environments on students’ learning outcomes and well-being (Barrett et al., 2015; Barrett et al., 2016). By providing empirical evidence from a European regional context, the research contributes to the international discourse on how physical learning environments can effectively support pedagogical innovation across diverse educational systems. Its findings are particularly relevant to other European contexts facing similar challenges, such as the adaptation of existing school buildings, the alignment of spatial design with competency-based and student-centred pedagogies, and the need to support teachers through coherent, system-level strategies for educational change (Patrix & Benade, 2018).

Current debates in European education increasingly emphasise the need to address diversity as a defining characteristic of contemporary classrooms rather than as a challenge requiring individualised solutions. This orientation questions homogenising pedagogical models and foregrounds the importance of methodologies capable of engaging with heterogeneity in learners’ cultural backgrounds, learning trajectories and modes of participation (Biesta, 2010; Ainscow, 2020; Florian, 2014). From this perspective, educational quality is closely linked to how pedagogical practices recognise and work with diversity in everyday teaching and learning processes, in line with the objectives of the United Nations’ Agenda 2030 and Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4).

Within research on educational diversity, pedagogical practice is increasingly understood as a central site for responding to learner variability. Rather than relying on technical or compensatory solutions, attention is directed towards methodological coherence, classroom organisation and professional reflection as key factors shaping participation in diverse educational contexts (Ianes & Zagni, 2024; Parrilla, 2002; Parrilla & Susinos, 2014). From this perspective, diversity is approached as an ordinary condition of educational practice, calling for flexible, context-sensitive pedagogical approaches oriented towards shared participation.

In this study, learning corners are conceptualised as pedagogical methodologies rather than as material or spatial arrangements. They are understood as intentional ways of organising learning processes, interactions and participation within the classroom. As a methodological approach, learning corners enable multiple learning pathways and forms of engagement to coexist within shared activities, allowing learners to approach tasks according to their interests, competences and learning rhythms while remaining part of a common learning experience.

Research on innovative pedagogical approaches highlights the relevance of methodologies that promote collaboration, active engagement and the co-construction of knowledge (OECD, 2017; Oblinger, 2006; Woolner, 2010). When enacted as a methodology, learning corners foster interaction among learners, peer collaboration and shared meaning-making—processes that are particularly significant in heterogeneous classrooms. Such approaches support an understanding of diversity as a pedagogical resource rather than as a limitation.

Pedagogical methodologies addressing diversity are also shaped through professional dialogue and collective reflection. In this sense, the development of learning corners in this study is grounded in collaboration and co-construction between primary school teachers and university researchers. This partnership supports the joint design, implementation and reflection of pedagogical practices, enabling theoretical perspectives and classroom experience to inform one another and contributing to context-sensitive methodological development.

By supporting differentiated participation, collaborative learning and reflective practice, learning corners contribute to educational approaches aligned with the aims of SDG 4, promoting equitable and meaningful learning opportunities in diverse classrooms. This paper explores how learning corners function as pedagogical methodologies for engaging with diversity in a primary school context, with particular attention to collaborative co-construction between schools and the university and to how pedagogical design shapes participation in heterogeneous classrooms.