Summary

This case study presents an approach to professional learning for educators preparing to teach in a new building dedicated to flexible, collaborative, technology-enhanced learning and teaching. The approach was designed to expose teaching staff to spaces and pedagogies in active learning that they could then bring to their students’ learning. The CHAT acronym for our pedagogical model – Collaborative, Hands-on and high-tech,  Authentic and active, and Team-based – framed the active learning focuses, and a continuous professional learning framework developed a sustainable model for accommodating staff needs and capabilities from a variety of starting points.

The context

Murdoch is a medium-sized public university in Perth, Western Australia. A new four-story general purpose learning and teaching building opened in February 2023. The learning spaces were designed for the flexibility of contemporary higher education, allowing for experimentation and exploration of new pedagogies, technologies and learner experiences. The building name encapsulates this: Boola Katitjin means ‘lots of learning’ in Noongar, the local Aboriginal language.

Increasing student enrolments, significantly larger classes, and more contemporary pedagogies of active learning were suffering the challenges inherent in our more conventional university classrooms (Donkin & Kynn, 2021; Casanove et al., 2020; Clinton et al., 2019). Boola Katitjin was explicitly designed for active learning in large, flat-floor, collaborative, technology-enhanced classrooms of 60, 90, or 120 seats. While there are computer labs and a virtual- and mixed-reality digital immersive laboratory, this case study focuses on professional learning for the generalist technology-enhanced and collaborative learning classrooms.

These classrooms are technologically integrated for flexible teaching. They all include audio-visual technologies such as roving microphones and speakers, facilitator- and room-tracking cameras, video-streaming for in-room document cameras, interactive whiteboards, and Microsoft Teams integration for hybrid learning. Collaborative Learning rooms feature moveable tables and chairs for flexible room configuration; Tech-Enabled rooms feature fixed, high technology-enabled learning (TEL) student group tables. From these ‘TEL Desks’ students collaborate, present, and share via their own devices or built-in PCs with dual monitors, connect through 180° cameras, microphones and speakers, and control their own learning via interactive AV touchscreen desk panels to view other AV sources around the room.

Professional learning and the active learning framework

These new learning spaces required new practices in active learning, but new practices, especially those integrating contemporary technologies, do not magically occur without professional development (Copridge et al., 2021; Metzger & Langley, 2020; Thomas et al., 2019). Further, such professional development is best framed as learning and authentic (Webster-Wright, 2009). We therefore developed a pedagogical model for active learning using the acronym CHAT (Prosser & Johnston, 2023; Johnston & Prosser, 2023) and combined it with our professional learning framework. While the content focus is on embedding technology-enhanced active learning in teachers’ practices for use in Boola Katitjin, the overarching goal of our model and framework is to bring relevant, authentic professional learning experiences to university educators concomitantly developing their capacity for active learning pedagogies.

Our CHAT Pedagogical Model

The model is informed by research on the importance of familiarisation with new learning and teaching environments (Thomas et al., 2019), the complexities of face-to-face, online, and hybrid needs (Nikolopoulou, 2022; Verdonck et al., 2019), and Laurillard’s (2012) conversational framework for learning design. As Boola Katitjin learning spaces are intended as active learning ecosystems of interactions between people, learning spaces and educational technologies, we focused staff development accordingly on all three realms. They would learn through active learning experiences where room facilities and pedagogical possibilities are brought to life through ‘real-life application, learning by doing and collaborations’ (Hao et al., 2021, p. 110).

Simply, the letters in CHAT bring together a pedagogical model of active learning to teachers that they can experience and then apply with their students:

• C – Collaborative
• H – Hands-on, high-tech
• A – Authentic, active
• T – Team-based

As Copridge, et al. (2021) have shown, well-designed learning and teaching environments can enable collaborative, active learning consistently more effectively than traditional classrooms but only when they are taught by educators who are experienced or trained in such strategies. By experiencing it themselves first as learners we believe teachers are better equipped to engage students in collaborative and authentic active learning experiences.

Accordingly, professional learning brought CHAT to staff through:

1. modelling active learning (facilitators)
2. experiencing active learning (staff)
3. applying active learning (staff with students).

Pilot Phase

Nine pilot teacher ‘champions’ representing 12 units (subjects) in Veterinary Medicine, Humanities, Statistics, Psychology, Exercise Science, and Forensic Science taught for one semester in a 60-seat replica TEL classroom. Professional learning focused on technological and pedagogical applications to support the pilot teachers in designing and teaching in the space (as per TPACK: Petra, Mishra & Koehler, 2025), and for us to identify professional learning needs for all staff for the launch of the building itself. Led by Corneli, et al.’s (2016) principles of peeragogy, the program combined

• collaborative peer learning
• experiential focus
• reflective practice (Schön, 1983).

Professional learning for pilot teachers involved learning technologies, learning and designing new approaches, trialling with feedback and reflective practice.

1. Practice online technologies:
   The Learning Technologist demonstrated the features for familiarity, and then the teachers used them, with one-on-one at-elbow support.
2. Participate in five group active learning workshops:
   Structured around the CHAT model, the Professional Learning Lecturer exposed pilot teachers to active learning approaches, facilitated activity design and lesson plan by participants, and collaboratively explored new, even innovative, pedagogical approaches as student collaborative work and staff team teaching.
3. Engage in peer teaching observation and feedback:
   Peer observations enabled feedback directly related to the new approaches they were trialling. The teachers also asked us to facilitate informal student feedback focus groups.
4. Engage in weekly reflective community of practice scholarly conversations: Participants shared successes and challenges, and develop case-studies based on their learning.

Our study (approved by the Murdoch University Human Research Ethics Committee, Approval 2022/189) with four pilot teachers surprisingly revealed different mindsets. The one who engaged least had already made a pedagogical change in the past, so ‘I didn’t want to try anything new’. Another gradually added technologies and new activities: ‘week by week, I tried to do something different […] we talked about […] Pyramid of Engagement level […]. Those things help me to plan my workshop.’ A third said they were always learning and developing, and the pilot space enabled application of more contemporary technologies: ‘I was interested in how to use the technology […] and a lot of new options’. The fourth was highly collaborative: ‘We worked with [PL Lecturer] and [Learning Technologist] on learning the new technologies, a bit about pedagogies and that helped. [We] discussed a lot, which would be the best […] IT collaboration to bring to life the pedagogical need.’

Professional learning for all

The pilot phase approach informed development of the large scale and sustainable professional learning for all staff in a rapid transition phase. We combined Murdoch’s Continuing Professional Learning Framework (CPLF) with the rich learnings from the pilot phase and the CHAT pedagogical model. The CPLF integrates self-learning (flexible to time and place), group learning (workshops), and transformative learning (curriculum design sessions), to allow staff to engage and reengage at different points as their needs grow, develop, or change.

Self-Learning

We learned from pilot teachers’ varying capabilities and levels of confidence that we needed to develop self-learning resources with an educative overview of technological and pedagogical elements of teaching in the spaces. The transition into Boola Katitjin was complicated by a very short time frame (three weeks) between launch and teaching commencing, so we created highly visual guides. The technological resources included staff Intranet pages with quick learning guides on using the technologies, 360° interactive video-walkthroughs, and a searchable FAQ knowledge base. For active learning, two key resources were developed. These sustainable resources all remain in high use and are updated as required.

Active Learning Activities Resource Collection

This is a downloadable editable resource with templates for ten different active learning activities, including suitability for in-class and technology-enabled delivery for both distributed and synchronous collaboration. Applying Eyal and Gil’s (2020) design pattern diagrammatic approach, we created infographics with step-by-step designs for delivering four of these active learning methods in Collaborative Learning rooms (see Figure 3).

Online Module

The ‘Discovering Teaching in Boola Katitjin’ orientation module in our Learning Management System leads staff to engage actively through three sections: ‘The Pedagogical Approaches’, ‘The Learning Spaces’ and ‘The Learning Technologies’. Each section includes:

• a short video introduction;
• a video interview with Pilot Teachers sharing their experiences, how they adapted their teaching, and their learners’ responses;
• ‘Watch’, ‘Read’, ‘Do’, and ‘Further Learning’ activities;
• embedded interactive H5P activities: e.g. choose appropriate TEL-tools or apply Laurillard’s six learning types (2012);
• downloadable and editable templates for active learning activities and lesson plans;
• 360° video-walkthroughs of actual classrooms and their technologies with interactive navigation ‘hot-spots’ and exploratory ‘pop-ups’.

Anonymous module feedback responses included praise for the thoughtful design and sequencing of learning in the modules, the level of detail in the resources, and the usability of the templates such as the lesson plans. The orientation module remains an active offering, updated annually, and with continuous enrolments. It has even been embedded into our Certificate in Learning and Teaching course for new academic staff and staff starting their teaching journey.

Group Learning

We offered a suite of active learning workshops to build familiarisation and confidence teaching in the learning spaces and using their technologies.

Come and Play

The first intimidating thing for staff about to teach in a building with new technologies and approaches is how it works, then how it works for students, before active learning pedagogies can be fully considered. The ‘Come and Play’ sessions were created to reduce this fear through dual focuses on technological familiarity with practical pedagogical experience via active learning. During this hour-long workshop staff were introduced to the technological and pedagogical elements in round-robin-style guided play-based experiences. Each station had a facilitator (learning designer, learning technologist, pedagogy specialist), and focused on a particular element through an experiential activity (see Figure 4). Educators played with a technological feature as a student, observed and experienced how it was facilitated as a teacher, and were exposed to examples of active learning pedagogy. The buzz in the room, the ‘what ifs’ curiosities and the challenges staff experienced for themselves as students showed the experiential approach was fit to meet our purpose.

Hands-on (high tech, active learning)

Given our learning from pilot teachers and following Thomas et al. (2019), new technologies were the most significant aspect worrying staff. 30-minute mini-sessions for small groups were facilitated in Boola Katitjin rooms, with a short demonstration, time to try it out, and additional time for extended practice or exploring bespoke pedagogical needs. The session three types are:

• Using Podium Facilities
• Using TEL-Desks with Students
• Using TEL-Desks for Groupwork (including hybrid).

These sessions have been sustained for the start of each teaching period since opening and continue to have consistent attendance by new staff and those seeking ‘refreshers’. Staff feedback has captured that they value the flexible professional learning combination of planned group learning opportunities with responsive online self-learning.

Transforming Learning: Active Learning for Pedagogical Design

Plan and Practice sessions

Real pedagogical change comes from dedicated design of curricula with a team of teachers, such as a course or degree. Transforming professional learning starts with a redesign and succeeds through on-going implementation support.

One example is the School of Veterinary Medicine. The School wanted all students to engage in active learning workshops in the 120-seat tech-enhanced rooms. A day-long ‘Plan and Practice’ retreat in Semester 2 of 2022 scaffolded the lecturers through a redesign approach, using active and collaborative learning design activities (Laurillard, 2012) such as storyboarding and peer micro-teaching. Ongoing support was then planned and implemented with learning designers and technologists.

Another case example is the Business School shift to large-class team-teaching. A 90-minute workshop on teaching as a team in TEL classrooms was facilitated. After a short introduction to evidence-based team-teaching approaches (McKenzie et al., 2022; Minett-Smith & Davis, 2020), staff worked in pairs within small groups of six at each TEL Desk to design a 10-minute team-taught micro-lesson to deliver to their desk group, with 15 minutes for preparation and planning using provided active learning resources, and five minutes for peer feedback after each ‘lesson’.

Concluding comments

This case study presents a scalable and sustainable framework and approaches to professional learning where new technologies afford pedagogies for active learning. The approach brings hands-on experiences with active design for teaching and learning as authentic professional learning. The framework enables educators to access continuously the right kind of learning for their needs, wherever their current experience or expertise lies.

Our three key takeaways are:

1. Staff first need to develop familiarity with new technologies to overcome fixed mindsets and fears, regardless of our own excitement for innovative pedagogical opportunities.
2. Pilot ‘champions’ provide rich peer learning as co-learners and co-designers, and the insights inform scaled-up and sustainable professional learning across an institution.
3. A continuous professional learning framework (self, group, and transformative learning) partnered with a pedagogical model relevant to the context is a sustainable, flexible, and scalable approach to authentic staff development.

References

Casanove, D., Huet, I., Garcia, F., & Pessoa, T. (2020). Role of technology in the design of learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 23, 413-427.

Clinton, V., & Wilson, N. (2019). More than chalkboards: classroom spaces and collaborative learning attitudes. Learning Environments Research, 22, 325-344. Copridge, K.W., Uttamchandani, S., & Birdwell, T. (2021). Faculty Reflections of Pedagogical Transformation in Active Learning Classrooms. Innovative Higher Education 46, 205–221.

Donkin, R., & Kynn. M. (2021). Does the learning space matter? An evaluation of active learning in a purpose-built technology-rich collaboration studio. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(1), 133-143. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5872

Eyal, L, & Gil, E. (2020). Design Patterns for Teaching in Academic Settings in Future Learning Spaces. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(4), 1061-1077. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12923

Haigh, N. (2005). Everyday conversation as a context for professional learning and development. International Journal for Academic Development, 10(1), 3-16

Hao, Q., Barnes, B., & Jing, M. (2021) Quantifying the effects of active learning environments: separating physical learning classrooms from pedagogical approaches. Learning Environments Research 24, 109-122.

Johnston, S., & Prosser, A. (2023). ‘Let’s C.H.A.T. Hybrid by Design’. Education Technology Insights, Sep 1. https://education.apacciooutlook.com/cxoinsights/lets-chat-hybrid-by-design-nwid-9807.html

Laurillard, D. (2012). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). Routledge.

McKenzie, S., Hains-Wesson, R., Bangay, S., & Bowtell, G. (2022). A team-teaching approach for blended learning: an experiment. Studies in Higher Education, 47(4), 860-874.

Metzger, K. J., & Langley, D. (2020). The Room Itself is Not Enough: Student Engagement in Active Learning Classrooms. College Teaching, 68(3), 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2020.1768357

Minett-Smith, C., & Davis, C. L., (2020) Widening the discourse on team-teaching in higher education, Teaching in Higher Education, 25(5), 579-594, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2019.1577814

Murdoch University. Boola Katitjin. https://www.murdoch.edu.au/boola-katitjin

Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). Face-To-Face, Online and Hybrid Education: University Students’ Opinions and Preferences. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 2(2).

Petko, D., Mishra, P., & Kohler, M. J., (2025). TPACK in context: An updated model, Computers and Education Open, 8, 100244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100244

Prosser, A., & Johnston, S. (2023). ‘Let’s C.H.A.T. pedagogy for new tech-enabled collaborative classrooms’. Campus Morning Mail, May 14. https://campusmorningmail.com.au/news/lets-chat-pedagogy-for-new-tech-enabled-collaborative-classrooms/

Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Thomas, C. L., Pavlechko, G. M., & Cassady, J. C. (2019). An examination of the mediating role of learning space design on the relation between instructor effectiveness and student engagement. Learning Environments Research, 22, 117-131.

Verdonck, M., Greenaway, R., Kennedy-Behr, A. & Askew, E. (2019). Student experiences of learning in a technology-enabled learning space. Innovations for Education and Teaching International, 56(3), 270-281.

Webster-Wright, A. (2009). Reframing professional development through understanding authentic professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702-709.

About the authors

Dr Ashleigh Prosser, SFHEA, is a Professional Learning Lecturer at Murdoch University (Perth, Western Australia), and researches literature and popular culture. Dr Shannon Johnston, SFHEA, is Head of Professional Learning at Murdoch University, with professional scholarly interest in higher education teaching.

Corresponding author: Ashleigh Prosser, ashleigh.prosser@murdoch.edu.au