Technology-rich innovative learning environments

Full text

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
1
Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments
Jennifer S. Groff
jgroff@mit.edu
February, 2013
This paper was originally written for and funded by the
OECD Innovative Learning Environments project.
INTRODUCTION
Our rapidly changing world has posed the long-standing question to education,
“How can today’s schools be transformed so as to become environments of
teaching and learning that makes individuals lifelong learners and prepare them
for the 21st Century?"
The response to this question is the focus of the OECD project, Innovative Learning
Environments, and has produced a sampling of the rich array of new visions for education
around the world. As one might imagine, many learning environments have looked to
technology in their efforts to redesign teaching and learning. While technology integration
has long been a key area of concern in education, the intersection of technology with our
rapidly transforming educational landscape is framing the nature of technology in education
in profound, new ways. New and emerging technologies are provoking a re-
conceptualization of teaching and learning, while also serving as catalysts for
transformation and innovation.
Successfully preparing all learners with the skills and capacities for 21st century
citizenship—global awareness, creativity, collaborative problem-solving, self-directed
learning—is no small order, and many educational leaders are finding that the traditional
forms of education that have evolved through the end of the last century are simply
inadequate for achieving these goals. At the same time, while our outer world was
transforming, considerable advances have been made in the learning sciences, forcing
educators to reconsider how they approach learning, instruction, and the environments
created to foster these. Finally, dramatic advances in educational technology have inspired
powerful new ways for learners to engage with all kinds of content and activities in their
own self-direct learning experiences. The juxtaposition of these three events creates a very
interesting challenge and opportunity—a space to reconsider, re-imagine, and re-invent
learning environments able to prepare and excel each individual for effective life-long
learning.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
2
THE DRIVE OF TECHNOLOGY FOR SCHOOL CHANGE
While many, if not all, systems of education seek to at least improve and advance (and some
even seek to radically transform), this does not necessarily mean one has to leverage
technology to do so. However, there are several key drivers pushing technology as a key
component for educational system change, and these serve as central reasons that educators
and education stakeholders should consider the growing relevance and implications of
technology and technology-based school innovations (OECD, 2010):
• Technology can perform several key functions in the change process, including
opening up new opportunities that improve teaching and learning—particularly
with the affordance of customization of learning to individual learner needs, which
is highly supported by the learning sciences;
• The skills for an adult life include technological literacy, and people who do not
acquire and master these competencies may suffer from a new form of the digital
divide, which will impact their capacity to effectively operate and thrive in the new
knowledge economy;
• Technology is an integral part to accessing the higher-order competencies often
referred to as 21st Century Skills, which are also necessary to be productive in today’s
society.
The New Millennium Learners (NML) work of the OECD over the last several years has
contributed to these foundational elements, by describing the fundamental nature of
learners in today’s world. Increasingly “connected,” students today are constantly
surrounded by a constellation of digital devices. As described in this work, new millennium
learners’ lives are “highly dependent on technology up to the extent that their social and
cultural practices would not be as they are if digital media were not available anytime,
anywhere to them”; this body of work also describes the educational implications the NML
research, explaining that “students are not only accessing, managing, creating and sharing
knowledge in dramatically different ways as their teachers often do, but also have radically
new expectations regarding what a quality learning experience should be” (Pedro, 2009,
p.2). As a result, students are bringing attitudes, beliefs and perceptions to learning
environments around their own learning experiences there, and the role that technology
should play in it.
Technology Use in Education and the New Digital Divide
Alarmingly though, the PISA found that the frequency of ICT use at home is not paralleled
by use at school, and in most OECD countries, more than 80% of 15 year-olds use computers
frequently yet a majority do not use them much in school (OECD, 2010a). While most
schools are equipped with computers and internet access, this disparity between school and
home use is immense, and suggests that the old digital divide has been replaced with a new
one—those who can develop the appropriate competencies with ICT, often occurring
outside of school. Much of this at-home use is oriented towards entertainment, suggesting
there is an increasing role of schools to help learners engage with and leverage new

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
3
technologies for learning. Exposure, access and fluency with ICT matters, as PISA analysis
demonstrates once socio-economic background is accounted for (OECD, 2010a).
The Opportunity
Once thought of as just a part of ‘resources’, we’ve come to see how technology can be so
much more than that. It can play a key role, and at times a leading role, in all elements of the
teaching and learning environment. Technology can shape, and reshape, who is the learner
and who is the teacher. It can open up knowledge and content that otherwise would be less
accessible, through access to open educational resources for example. It obviously is part of
‘resources’, but it is clearly integral to the ‘organisation’ component insofar as it offers a
critical mediating medium for those relationships of pedagogy and assessment inherent in
organisation.
The depth and breadth of technologies available today affords learning environments much
diversity and opportunity for leveraging ICT as a throughline for educational change.
Intersecting that with the incredible array of learning environments across the globe, we are
left with a spectrum of examples of this—thereby giving us a complex picture of what
technology-rich learning environments are, and could, be. UNESCO’s Institute for
Information Technology has evaluated the degree to which ICT has been integrated in an
educational system by applying ‘Morel’s Matrix’—a model that proposes an educational
system moves between four distinct phases: (a) emerging, (b) applying, (c) integrating, and
(d) transforming (UNESCO, 2003). A given learning environment or education system can
be mapped onto the matrix by being evaluated on various dimensions, such as content,
pedagogy, curriculum, etc. (see Table 1).
Criteria/Phase
Emerging
Applying
Integrating
Transforming
Vision
limited, pragmatic,
dominated by
interested
individuals
driven by ICTs
specialists
driven-by subject
specialists
entire learning community
involved
Learning
Pedagogy
teacher-centred
teacher-centred;
ICTs are separate
subject
learner-centred;
collaborative
critical thinking; preferred
learning styles; collaborative,
experimental
Development
plan and
policies
accidental,
restrictive, no
planned funding
limited; centralized
policies
individual subject plans
for ICTs; permissive
policies
ICTs is integral to overall
school development plan
(budget, professional
development, etc.)
Facilities and
resources
limited and non-
current digital
resources;
restricted access
diverse and varying
in model, platform;
aligned with specific
content and
pedagogies
diffused access to
various digital
resources; supports to
implement these in
various ways
whole school learning and
diverse learning
environments; web-based
learning spaces, distance
education, student self-
management software
Understanding
of curriculum
ICT literacy;
responsibility of
individual teachers
use of software and
applications in
discrete subjects
(isolated)
integrated; resource-
based learning,
problem-solving project
methodology
Virtual and real time
contexts, modeling;
integrated curriculum
delivery via the Web
Professional
Development
individual interest
training on ICT
applications;
unplanned
subject-specific;
evolving
Integrated learning
community; innovative; self-
managed, personal vision
and plan
Community
accidental
some parental and
community
involvement
subject-based
community, providing
occasional guidance;
broad-based learning
community involving families,
business, industry,

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
4
global and local
networked communities
organizations, universities,
etc.; school as a learning
resources for the community
Assessment
responsibility of
individual teacher;
didactic; paper-
and-pencil based
teacher-centred;
subject-focused
learner-centred;
subject-oriented;
integrated; multiple
media to demonstrate
alignment
continuous; holistic, open-
ended, project-based;
learning community
involvement
Table 1. Examples of Stages in Morel’s Matrix (adapted from Centre for Research on Lifelong Learning, 2009).
Evolving ! Transforming ! Reinventing
These stages offer us a lens through which we can observe how ICT has leveraged
incremental and deep change in learning environments (see Figure 1a). The first three stages
represent learning environments using technology to evolve—using technology, at varying
degrees, as a means to make advances towards more digitally-rich, 21st century learning
environment. Schools that seek a more holistic change and dramatically overhaul the
existing environment have leveraged technology to completely transform—where all
elements of the learning environment become new as they drive towards this new vision.
Figure 1a. Stages of ICT Integration in Education. Reprinted from Anderson, J. – UNESCO
Bangkok, 2010; based on Anderson and van Weert (2002) and Majumdar (2005).
Be it big or small, emerging new evidence of technology use or completely transforming
whole learning environments, education systems and schools that fall into these categories
are using technology at varying degrees to move in the direction of the 21st century.
However, there are a number of learning environments going beyond this, to reinvent the
fundamental model that drives their organization of learning and teaching. In this way, they
transcend 'transformation through technology’ because technology is not used as a lever,
but rather, used to appropriately fill in the methods and approaches in their redesign (see
Figure 1b).

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
5
Figure 1b. Stages of ICT Integration in Education to include ‘Reinventing’ / Redesign. Adapted
from Anderson (2010).
TECHNOLOGY EVOLVING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
Meeting this challenge and opportunity for current schools operating in existing systems—
that are inherently bounded by instituted policies and structures—can be quite difficult. For
these schools that wish to make dramatic advances in practice, new technologies and
innovations can be critical levers for small changes that can ultimately lead to bigger change.
Some of the web-based innovations that have become quite pervasive in the larger digital
culture of our world fit seamlessly into current curricular structures and programs, and are
often free and easily accessible. What we describe as ‘first-order’ innovations are prevalent
among many technology-rich learning environments, being implemented under the notion
that by leveraging many of these tools together produces a dramatically different
educational climate. Other technologies are more ‘disruptive innovations,’ appearing on the
periphery of the educational landscape and are just beginning to see their full potential.
These ‘second-order’ innovations are slowly gaining attention and traction in the field, and
will likely see increased development and application over the next decade (see Figure 2).
First-Order Innovations
Second-Order Innovations
blogs, wikis
social networking sites
virtual learning environments (VLE)
laptops, netbooks and tablet PCs
interactive whiteboards
Web apps
digital cameras, scanners, projectors
e-Learning
digital portfolios
augmented reality (AR)
simulations
digital games
console games
remote-response systems
mobile/handheld computing
programming applications
pico projectors
electronic books
Figure 2. Common and emerging innovations of technology-rich Innovative Learning Environments

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
6
Many of these first-order innovations fall in the category of “Web 2.0” technologies—a
collective term for the “social web” representing the online tools that facilitate collaboration,
communication, and interactivity. These tools access many of the key “21st Century Skills”
and represent many of the activities for learners outside of the school. As a result, these
technologies make a natural on-ramp for evolving a learning environment. Yet even more
critically, Web 2.0 technologies embody the perspective of many educational technologists
and theorists that learning best takes place within technology-supported environments
where learners individually and collaboratively consume and create content (Selwyn, 2010).
Evolving Educational Change: A la Carte Method
For traditional learning environments and educational systems, these innovations offer
powerful tools to improve teaching and learning within an existing structure, where other
instructional elements (such as curriculum, assessment, etc.), may not have the freedom to
be altered considerably. While many schools are selecting at least several of these first order
innovations to keep their practice evolving, some schools are integrating an array of these
and more in an effort to become a digital learning environment. Learning environments that
have take the A La Carte approach often started in the ‘emerging’ phase, and have
progressed to the ‘adapting’ and ‘integrating’ phases. Saltash.net Community School (UK)
is an example of one such school, which has gone so far to become digital that they changed
the school’s actual name to match their website address. At Saltash.net, technology can be
found everywhere:
• over 400 workstations, embedded with over 200 software applications
• 90 laptops and 40 netbooks, student-accessible on the school-wide wireless network
• interactive whiteboards
• media suite for video/audio production and editing
• integrated Moodle VLE
• school radio station
Saltash.net uses this technology to power student research projects, collaborations and
inquiry projects with schools located internationally, and conduct learning both in and
beyond the school boundaries. Schools like Saltash.net (UK), St. Paul’s Bay Primary
(Malta), and Crescent Girls’ School (Singapore) are just a few examples of countless
learning environments that have embraced new technologies in such a holistic manner.
These learning environments are weaving technology into the school, evolving the teaching
and learning to provide more opportunities, via contemporary methods, at achieving 21st
century learning aims. Successes and impacts at schools like these are feeding back into the
larger systems in which they are situated, assisting in the further progression of that
educational system and other learning environments within it.
As highlighted by research conducted at many schools such as these, success with
integrating first-order and second-order innovations largely depended on the rigidity or
flexibility of the school curriculum. In fact, many are finding the need to redesign curricula
models that are less prescribed and driven more by learner needs using Web 2.0
technologies; all of this requires educators to expand their visions of pedagogy and learning
(Selwyn, 2010).

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
7
Evolving Educational Change: Technology as Backbone
Other learning environments have latched on to one of these innovations and made the key
catalyst in changing practice. In this approach, the learning environment mostly likely began
their approach in the ‘applying’ or quick often, the ‘integrating’, phase. A prime example of
this approach is demonstrated by the many schools that have engaged in a 1-to-1 laptop
initiative—where every learner in the school is given (or has daily access to) a laptop. In
such learning environments, this certainly drastically changes what types of learning
experiences are possible, and preferable. A prominent example of this is the US state of
Maine’s Learning Technology Initiative, which has been active for nearly a decade and
garnered much attention in the west on the impact of ICT at this level of integration. This
program has grown and evolved over that time, placing varying technologies in the
individual hands of all learners in grades 7-12. The cost versus outcomes for such initiatives
has been the focus of much debate, as is whether programs like this have really achieved the
4th stage, ‘transformation,’ and whether this serves as a strong example of evolutional or
transformational change. Maine’s initiative and other 1-to-1 programs are discussed more
fully in Figure 3 on page 15.
A very different and intriguing example of the impact of embracing one of these innovative
technologies is the sweeping trend of console-gaming in Scottish schools. Scotland has long
been known for its innovative practices and integrated curriculum, so while many of these
Scottish schools were strong learning environments prior to adopting game-based learning
(GBL), this new pedagogy has helped evolve these schools to digital, integrated and
engaging 21st century learning environments. Operating on the belief that console games
afford incredible pedagogical opportunities, Scotland’s Consolarium is a centre that has
supported GBL in more than 20 schools across the country. This government organization
seeks to examine games for educational uses and supports teachers in their exploration of
these technologies. Examples and uses of GBL vary widely—from 4 year olds learning care-
taking and visio-spatial skills with the game EyePet—to using Guitar Hero as the
engagement tool, around which a complex project is built where teams of 13-year-olds form
‘bands’ and manage everything from the bands logo to its touring schedule and budget.
With such a strong, engaging and motivating storyline, teachers have been able to construct
robust interdisciplinary modules where students are gaining digital literacies, collaborative
problem-solving, creativity and many other skills, while interacting with the latest
technologies.
Schools adopting game-based learning are finding increased engagement and motivation
amongst students, greater connections in the curriculum and transfer of learning
demonstrated by students, improvement in collaboration strategies with students, and
dramatic increases in the quality and quantity of student writing—especially amongst boys.
How can a video game do all that? According to the experience of these schools, it comes the
pedagogical approach applied with many of these games, where the game serves as the
hook and storyline to connect the learning objectives and activities defined by the
curriculum. (Groff, Howells & Cranmer, 2012). Games like Guitar Hero are used to set the
stage, where students are placed in groups of four, or ‘bands’, and are charged with the
making their band a success—everything from designing a band logo and first CD cover, to
structuring a budget for the world tour and using online websites to arrange the travel
required to make the tour happen. With the game as a thread line, teachers are reporting

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
8
seemingly endless opportunities to construct and connect rich learning experiences that
connect to the project objectives. Actual game-play time is intermixed throughout each
school week, with less than 5% of class time consumed by this activity—yet that is enough
motivation and engagement to have students taking classroom tasks home to continue their
development, above and beyond class goals. Many schools that have piloted this pedagogy
are so inspired by the success it is quickly becoming the lifeblood of the school, and has led
the Consolarium to consider further ways to integrate and diffuse this technology.
Whether laptops or console games, a powerful technology combined with a strong
pedagogy is a recipe for advanced teaching and learning—and the vast array of innovations
and technologies available and continuing to emerge leaves the potential for endless
possibilities for evolving education. However, as often understood by most educational
technologists, the key is to put the horse before the cart, and understand the type of learning
experiences and therefore pedagogies that are sought, following by asking the question as to
what type of technology can enable that.
Learning environments using the a la carte method might generally find themselves in the
first two stages, ‘emerging’ and ‘applying,’ although it is clear that schools profiled here
have moved to the ‘integrating’ stage. However, systems that use technology as backbone for
the work, more frequently need to engage at stage 3 – integrating – with practices generally
present at stages 1 and 2 being lumped into the work.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFORMING SCHOOLS
Innovative technologies not only have the potential to evolve pedagogical practice, but also
completely transform entire learning environments. When technology is leveraged with a
very strategic vision and change management plan, the results can be revolutionary.
Intermediate School 339 (USA) is one learning environment that has demonstrated this
potential, transforming itself from some of the lowest performing schools in the region, to
one of the most successful. A struggling school in the heart of New York City, Intermediate
School 339 is situated in a difficult community culture—faced low test scores, violence and
gang behavior in school. In 2005, only 9% of students were performing at adequate levels in
mathematics. The school decided to infuse technology into teaching and learning by
supplying every student with a laptop and implementing Google Docs as the main form of
content management. With the laptops, students would complete homework online, manage
their blogs, collaboratively manage data and use teacher-created online platforms to support
project work. Interactive whiteboards in the classroom allow students to seamlessly share
their work with the entire class. After three years, math scores have gone up to 62% and
violence and behavior issues have decreased dramatically. Students have reported increased
motivation to do school work because the technology, and the work, is more stimulating—
resulting in a demonstrated greater investment in their educational journey. Intermediate
School 339’s success is leading the way for school change for other schools in the New York
City area.
The innovative Silverton Primary School (Australia) has a similar story. Faced with
countless challenges and low-performing students, this struggling learning environment
decided to capitalize on the statewide learning revolution led by the government that was

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
9
bringing with it a massive infrastructure investment and embarked on a large-scale
transformation initiative and along with it institute a comprehensive plan for change.
Silverton garnered many of the aforementioned first-order innovations, but Principal Tony
Bryant’s vision didn’t just include technology. He envisioned, and subsequently engineered,
a complete overhaul of every component of the learning environment—from classroom
layout to teacher learning structures and support. Replacing traditional classrooms with
flexible learning centres, students have access to digital music players, voice recorders,
games consoles, digital cameras and notepad computers. They are even charged with the
task of running a 24-hour local FM radio station.
Yet what makes Silverton Primary’s transformation so dramatic is the change initiated in
other critical areas of the learning environment. Along with a strategic teaching and learning
transformation through new learning spaces, new technologies and new curricular
approaches, Silverton Primary instituted a comprehensive teacher change and development
scheme. This included enveloping new teachers in an intensive training program, to
ongoing and long-term programs to support all educators as they continue to improve and
refine their practice. All staff members are involved in a formal “Critical Friends” program
where observation of each other’s teaching is an essential component—videotaping each
other and meeting regularly with Teaching and Learning Coaches and ICT Peer Coaches for
regular feedback. Teachers even partake in action research projects, in order to more deeply
engage in their practice. Today, Silverton Primary is one of 12 global mentor schools in the
Microsoft Innovative Schools program, where they mentor schools in Portugal, the
Netherlands, Ireland, Sri Lanka, Malta and Israel through fortnightly online meetings.
Programs such as these not only help ensure that Silverton Primary’s teachers are
continually improving and refining their craft, but that they grow and evolve as the world
they operate in does as well.
Such dramatic changes in so many areas of the learning environment wouldn’t be possible
without technology. In fact, technology can be used to structure innovations, as well as
innovating – practices and approaches to continually created and testing new methodologies
and ways of doing things – into a learning environment, which is an incredibly powerful
means for approaching transformation. The Shady Hill School in Cambridge,
Massachusetts (USA) used a two-year technology-infusion project – injecting laptops,
projectors and various other digital technologies into the classroom – to also infuse the
practice of innovating into the campus. In the first year of this project as the new technology
was rolling out across campus, 13 teachers were selected to participate in the “Tiger
Team”—a rogue set of teachers scattered across the grade levels charged with creating and
engaging with new ideas for teaching and learning, and vetting them via “innovation
cycles” of testing, reviewing, refining, and disseminating—both good practices, and failures,
with digital technologies. These teachers receive considerable support and training as they
explore innovative practices, and the school rotates who participates on the Tiger Team each
year—systematically developing innovative practices into the very heart of the learning
environment. The school even created its own “teachers-only” space fully decked-out with
new technologies and at least one tech-integration specialist at all times. Affectionately
called The Garage, it was designed to be a free play space, where it was safe for all teachers
to explore, mess up, create and learn with new technologies. These practices not only make
places like Silverton Primary and Shady Hill Innovative Learning Environments, but also
continually Innovating Learning Environments.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
10
There are countless examples of schools, situated in challenging contexts, which have made
leaps and bounds progress by becoming a tech-rich learning environment. When properly
integrated and strategically tied together, technology time and again shows to be a
meaningful and powerful way to engage and motivate students in the learning process, as
well as a means of catalyzing strategic change in pedagogy and practice.
These case studies also demonstrate the power of technology not only to change but also to
continually change by structuring in the very nature of innovating as a collective system.
While they may have started the process at Stage 1 (Emerging) or even Stage 2 (Applying),
they have forged along in their journeys to arrive at Stage 3 (Integrating) and ultimately at
Stage 4, Transformation. Silverton Primary best embodies this evolution amongst the stages,
having gone from a challenging context with little student success, to testing new
technologies to increase student engagement and learning, which ultimately triggered
strategic modification of every element of the learning environment—from curriculum and
time structures, to professional development. Truly, for this school, technology became the
catalyst for completely transforming itself.
REINVENTING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
The examples thus far of leveraging technology to facilitate incremental and transformative
change of existing learning environments is indeed inspirational. Yet what type of learning
is possible beyond the boundaries of existing systems and policies? What is possible when
existing paradigms and old frames of mind can be discarded, and potential new possibilities
take their place? Going back to our original question, How can today’s schools be transformed so
as to become environments of teaching and learning that makes individuals lifelong learners and
prepare them for the 21st Century?, it’s clear that the answers to this question may not come
from existing educational systems. In answering this question, educational innovators and
social entrepreneurs are continuing to reinvent what 21st century learning might look like, as
well as the learning environments to support it. For these reinvented learning environments,
meeting this aim inherently means leveraging technology to do so. Unlike the cases
presented thus far, the learning environments presented in this section did not move along
the stages of ICT Integration to arrive at an innovation place, rather they took to the drawing
boards and designed new environments, strategically, from the ground up. In this way,
technology is not used as a lever to produce changes, great or small. Rather, the learning
environment is strategically designed to align the desired elements and ultimately produce
the desired outcomes, and technology is often found as one of the enablers for that reality.
Over the last several years there has been a steady increase in the approach of redesign of
learning environments—both old and new. What is redesign? It is the strategic and holistic
design of elements in a system to align with our understanding of best practices and current
needs to produce desired outcomes (Groff, 2009). What does this look like in practice? A
prominent example is the work of 2Revolutions, an education design firm in the US that
works with existing learning environments to “unthink school to rethink learning”.
Operating under the belief that the traditional models of schools were designed to meet
needs that no longer suit us, 2Revolutions takes select schools through a process of
rethinking all elements of their current educational model—from classrooms to grades to
curriculum, everything is on the table for redesign. The schools go through a rich process of

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
11
learning about current technologies and pedagogies, as well as innovative best practices,
and ultimately put together a new design where all of the newly designed elements work
together to create a “2.0” version of the learning environment.1
Meeting Students Where They Are, Wherever They Are: Virtual Schools
With an ever-increasing number of struggling students, matched by the challenge of a
growing number'of'students'dropping'out'of'school'or'unable'to'attend'for'various'reasons,'
the' state' of' Florida' faced' a' significant' challenge:' how' to' provide' appropriate' learning'
environments' for' all' learners,' not' just' the' mainstream.' The' agreed' upon' solution' was' to'
create'a' virtual( school'–'one'of'the'first' in' the'world' at' that' time'–' to' be' part' of' the' public'
statewide'education'system.'Since'its'genesis'in'1997,'the'Florida(Virtual(School'(or'FLVS)'
(USA)'has'grown'considerably,'with'more'1400'staff'members'offering'more'than'110'online'
courses'to'students'ages'12K18,'which'are'free'to'Florida'middle'and'high'school'students.
Priority'is'given'to'students'who'need'expanded'access'to'courses'to'meet'their'educational'
goals—such'as'homeKschooled'students'as'well'as'those'at'lowKperforming'schools'or'those'
at' schools' with' limited' offerings.'In' the' 2010K11' school' year' alone,' FLVS' has' served' over'
122,000'students'in'the'United'States'and'57'other'countries.'FLVS’s'success'has'allowed'the'
learning'environment'to'expand'its'model,'offering'courses'to'those'around'the'world'for'a'
tuition' fee,' and' has' inspired' the' creation' of' many' similar' online' learning' platforms,'
particularly' in' other' US' states.' Yet' with' the' success' comes' inherent' challenges,' including'
teacher' training' for' online' course' facilitation,' which' often' requires' more' individualized'
attention'than'is'typically'given'in'a'traditional'learning'environment,'as'well'as'monitoring'
course'quality—which'can'vary'considerably'in'the'diverse'menu'offered'by'FLVS.'
While'the'online'platform'loses'the'social'classroom'component,'learners'gain'considerable'
flexibility'in'how' to' meet'their' learning'goals—making'the real success of the FLVS model
that it allows students to learn at any time, any place, any path, and any pace. This flexibility is
often found to be most successful with independent, motivated learners. Although
individual learners tend to seek out these courses on their own, more and more schools in
Florida and beyond are taking a blended learning approach—mixing traditional classroom
learning with online courses to augment each learner’s individual learning journey. Such an
approach retains the countless benefits of a real-world learning institution, often felt to be a
critical component to any community, while better serving the needs and goals of each
individual learner.
The e-Classroom at Primary School Škofja Loka-City (Slovenia) is an excellent example of
such blending learning for younger learners. The e-Classroom provides a virtual
environment for more diverse activities and differentiated learning opportunities, connected
to classroom study. It provides an additional vehicle for communicating with students, and
1 See http://www.2revolutions.net/future-of-learning.html for more information.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
12
amongst students themselves. This platform has assisted in helping learners acquire key
competencies in numerous content areas as well as critical skills such as communication and
self-initiative.
One of the strongest benefits of an online learning platform is reaching marginalized
populations, such as teenage mothers, those who may be quick to exit school prematurely or
those who have repeatedly failed completing compulsory education. Escola Móvel
(Portugal) is a distance-learning project that provides learners with access to a learning
environment that supports the national curriculum. With the opportunity presented by this
new platform, Escola Móvel has also innovated in other ways as well—including the
creation of new interdisciplinary pedagogies and compulsory tutoring periods, which allow
for the personalization of curriculum, instruction and assessment, thereby increasing the
students’ likelihood of success. Virtual and blended learning models will become
increasingly prevalent in education as educators seek to better individualize learning for all
learners.
Building Learning, One Tile at a Time: LUMIAR Schools (Brazil)
Who needs teachers, classrooms or traditional curricula? Based on the success demonstrated
thus far, Lumiar Schools don’t. The founders of the Lumiar Institute came together to devise
a new approach to education—one where students’ innate capacity to learn is allowed to
flourish, and students will develop the skills and capacities necessary for our knowledge
society. After much planning, designing, and the creation of technological tools, the first
Lumiar School in São Paulo was opened in 2002, built on this fundamental assumption:
learning is the individual building and expanding of competencies and skills. Consequently,
the “curriculum” is a Competency Matrix, which encompasses the learning expectations for
all students. As students engage in various learning projects, the appropriate competencies
are observed, assessed and documented in their Learning Portfolio, which is then used to
help guide selection and adaption of future learning experiences for that learner.
There are no classrooms at Lumiar, just open spaces where student inquiry can take place.
Various types of technologies, including interactive whiteboards and laptops, are the central
tools in these learning spaces. Likewise, there are no teachers in the traditional sense—rather
this role has been divided to two groups at Lumiar: Tutors and Masters. Tutors are the
academic managers for the same group of students, year after year, to monitor and assist
them in their work and development. Masters are employed short-term, are experts in the
areas of research and study embarked upon by the students, and lead a specific project or
unit of enquiry. The Project Database contains a growing set of learning projects to be
facilitated by Masters—the vehicle for helping each student cultivate his or her
competencies.
Without traditional structures such as a formal curriculum and classrooms, how can
teaching and learning be organized and managed over long periods of time? The answer lies
in Lumiar’s lifeblood technology—Mosaic. This complex learning platform developed in
collaboration with Microsoft, connects the Competency Matrix, Project Database, and
Learning Portfolio to assist in mapping the skills and competencies covered in the matrix
over time for each learner. Such an integrated toolset has allowed Lumiar to become
increasingly effective at personalising learning for all. As a result of this impact, the Lumiar

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
13
approach has been well-received by the São Paulo community and the larger educational
field. This preliminary success has led the Lumiar Institute to partner with two additional
schools in the São Paulo area, with plans to continue expanding and developing the Mosaic
model.
Taking Students Everywhere: THINK Global School (International)
How do you build a global citizen? You entrench them in rich learning experiences around
the globe of course. That’s the ambitious aim of THINK Global School (TGS)—a private high
school that travels around the world, providing students with the opportunity to study in
three different international cities each academic year. After extensive design and
development, the school is now ready to officially launch in the fall of 2010. Students were
selected from around the globe to attend this school, and developing global competencies
such as curiosity, tolerance and resilience are the core aims. While TGS has coordinated a
venue at a host school in each city to provide space for classroom study, the world truly is
their classroom—where learning is cultivated by exploring the local culture, contexts, and
challenges of each site. Therefore much learning will take place outside traditional
classroom walls and occur directly “in the field.” In designing TGS, it was clear that being
mobile on both the micro and macro level meant no room for textbooks. Each learner is
equipped with the latest MacBooks and iPhones to record, report and share experiences in
real time via the TGS educational social networking program. Students will be able to access
their content and learning materials anywhere, anytime. Like many professional workers in
today’s business world, these technologies will become extensions of their work and
cognition—essential to completing their academic work. The integration of these tools
provides a seamless connected web of learning that has the potential to become an
internalized extension of their cognitive journey around the world.
~~
These reinvented learning environments are just a handful of the emerging new models of
how learning and education can be achieved in the 21st century. In these examples, one or
(often more) multiple facets of the system have been completely reinvented and redesigned.
Assumptions that a certain element (such as curriculum or assessment) must ‘look’ a certain
way are removed and instead the questions “what do we want to achieve?” followed by
“how might we achieve it?” become the drivers for designing new learning environments.
It’s clear that getting to the answers of the former question are unlikely without technology
being involved in the answers to the latter.
OPPORTUNITIES & CHALLENGES OF EVOLVING, TRANSFORMING, AND
REINVENTING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
Each of these approaches are very different, and bring their own opportunities, benefits,
costs and challenges to a given situation, and therefore each learning environment that seeks
to make change will likely be better suited for one approach versus the others, depending on
their current context, goals, vision for the future, etc.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
14
Learning environments that seek to evolve by integrating or implementing new technologies
and technology-based pedagogies with old ones usually find less resistance from the current
system, as this is the least disruptive of the approaches. Since the professional staff in a
given context generally has a range of aptitude and comfort level with new technologies and
approaches, the evolution approach allows each professional member of the staff to find ‘on
ramps’ to new technologies in a way that is easiest and most accessible to them. For
example, the science teacher may feel most drawn to simulations that relate to her
curriculum, while a primary teacher may personally use Web 2.0 technologies quite
frequently, and therefore see how to easily integrate them into his classroom. While often
more approachable for the organisation as a whole, in some instances this can become an ‘ad
hoc’ endeavor where there is little strategy or synergy across the organisation in the
leveraging of new technologies—unless other supports are put in place, such as a tech-
integration teams who can coordinate the sharing of practices and overall strategy of the
organisation. With or without external supports and strategies, and whether or not a
learning environment takes an a la carte approach by integrating new technologies and
methodologies here and there, or a more systemic approach around one specific initiative
such as game-based learning, the evolutionary approach is often very slow-moving and will
take years to produce extensive change. Additionally, effectiveness of such approaches is
often dictated by institutional factors, such as the rigidity or flexibility of the curriculum
(Selwyn, 2010). As a result, many of these innovations conform to the shape of the existing
system – many times at the detriment to their effectiveness – rather than helping to change
the shape of the existing organisation. The research on one-to-one laptop programs has even
demonstrated, depending on the approach and implementation, even sites where the
primary goal and work is to redesign the other elements of the learning environment using
the laptops as the lever and backbone of the work, the central organisational structures will
not change (Bebell & Kay, 2010).
This, in part, pushes advocacy towards transformative or reinvention of learning
environments—not only as a lever of deep change, but also to successfully integrate new
technologies and 21st Century Skills. As described by Neil Selwyn in the recent OECD
publication, Inspired by Technology, Driven by Pedagogy, “the education technology academic
literature, at least, is increasingly featuring the promotion of reasoned arguments that all of
the structural impediments and challenges to technology (i.e. school) must be removed in
order to facilitate the realization of the digital transformation of education” (OECD, 2010, p.
29). Although not a universally-applying statement, the evidence from observing many
learning environments’ attempts to evolve is that true effectiveness comes from coordinating
and/or redesigning all of the parts of the infrastructure in concert together.
Learning environments that ultimately seek transformation will need a well thought-
through approach to the process, garnering the resources (both human and technical)
needed to support the school’s advancement through the stages, that is, most importantly,
underwritten by a clear and collectively-agreed-upon philosophy of how students do and
will learn there. While no large-scale change project can be inherently planned from the
beginning, what schools like Silverton Primary demonstrate is the creation of steadfast
vision of what the learning environment might become, and an unwavering passion and
commitment to do what it takes to see it through. Detailing this is beyond the scope of this
paper, yet what we wish to underscore is that true transformation is possible, and while
certainly hard work is required, such a goal is within reach for any learning environment.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
15
Yet, what about reinvention? Is this relevant for existing learning environments? Schools like
the RSA Academy (UK) show that it is. Formerly Willingsworth High School, the RSA
Academy is an independent school sponsored by Britain’s Royal Society of the Arts took
over the school in the mid-late 2000s. After having spent the better part of a decade working
on collectively redesigning what a new curriculum might look like that prepared today’s
young people with the competencies needed in the 21st century, they called this curricula
“Opening Minds”, and it became the life-force around which a school was to be designed.
All the organisational structures of the school, such as scheduling and student grouping,
supported the design of the curricula. In 2008, the new Academy opened in the building that
was formerly a public secondary school with great success. Just three years later, the school
opened it new building, designed fully to support the learning experiences shaped by the
Opening Minds curriculum. As of date, student performance has been outstanding with
100% of the school’s students achieving the highest level on their national exams (the GCSE).
The RSA Academy is just one example of what is possible by holistically and cohesively
redesigning all of the elements that interact to create a learning environment, and the
outcomes of the school demonstrate that it was well worth the time and effort.
The Opportunity-Cost of the Investment
Undoubtedly, technology often implies a significant investment, both financial as well as in
human capital. Although there is a general recognition that ICT is pervasive in our world,
and therefore of use to some degree to students, there is still considerable debate amongst
various education stakeholders and policy-makers as to the need and degree of investment
of ICT in education, and the value of the return on that investment. While the learning
environment examples presented may feel like outliers of the mainstream and more than
what is possible/likely for most schools, rather they are holistic depictions of the
implications of ICT observed across many learning environments as illustrated by the
research. Numerous far-reaching analyses of the impact of ICT in education have
demonstrated significant positive outcomes on teaching practices, leadership and school
organisation. The PILOT program in Norway is one such example. This four-year research
study involving over 120 primary and secondary schools showed that the schools handled
the implementation if ICT in very different ways, and numerous positive outcomes
manifested, including increased writing activities and competencies with ICT, and ease of
transition between school levels (for full discussion of the outcomes, see Erstad 2009). This
has, however, been one of the more robust studies of the impact of ICT in education, and the
lack of coherent knowledge base around this has been a central argument in the debate
about ICT (Kikis, Scheuermann & Villalba, 2009). Likewise, connections between home and
school ICT use and student performance on items like the PISA are complex and undefined.
Many have attributed this to the complexities of the dynamics in the system and the need for
more and better methodologies and indicators (Trucano, 2005).

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
16
Additional analyses of extensive investments in ICT in education like those of 1-to-1
programs described in Figure 3 are certainly “cloudy” in their implications. However, this
literature does in fact co-exist with the aforementioned findings of other ICT initiatives,
along with a considerable array of other research studies (more often qualitative) that ICT
can in fact improve children’s knowledge, skills and competencies (Blamire, 2009). In fact, an
in-depth analysis of the available knowledge base of ICT in education has shown that
attainment improves only if certain pedagogical conditions are met (Kulik, 2003)—which
supports the findings described in Figure 3. This debunks the myth that technology itself is a
magic bullet. ICT is often a catalyst for change but does not itself determine the direction for
change (Kikis, Scheuermann & Villalba, 2009). Dubbed the ‘student productivity paradox’
(Peslak, 2005; Hikmet, Taylor & Davis, 2008), it is the observation that technology can be
used for a variety of purposes in education, yet whether that is linked to educational
performance or not depends on the improvements associated with changes in methodology,
which require appropriate technical and pedagogical support (OECD, 2010a).
This reinforces the notion that the philosophy of learning and pedagogical approaches truly
embodied by a learning environment at its core is what ultimately impacts student learning;
however, technology has demonstrated its ability to leverage powerful learning
INDIVIDUAL ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY: A LOOK AT 1-TO-1 PROGRAMS
Many have understood the need for individual use and adoption of technology in learning
environments, and “one-to-one” initiatives – where each student has access to a laptop, tablet, etc.
– have become a popular approach in the past decade. As the name might suggest, they are
expensive and intensive to create, deploy, manage and effectively leverage for increased student
learning. However, the results on their effectiveness have been mixed.
Some positive effects demonstrated have been more engaged learners, observing a decrease in
disciplinary problems, increased technology skills, as well as improved writing and math scores
(Shapley et al. 2009). Yet, for example, it is difficult to differentiate whether these improved scores
came from the use of the technology in teaching and learning, or from the advanced teacher
training that was instituted with the program—or both. Additionally, some large-scale evaluations
have shown disappointing results. For example, five years into the state of Maine’s laptop
initiative (the largest in the United States), showed little effect on student achievement in general
discipline areas such reading; however, the evaluators note that the metrics used did not measure
the “21st Century Skills” that the initiative espouses to promote (Silvernail & Gritter, 2007).
Evaluations from other large-scale initiatives in the US demonstrate mixed results, noting some
improvement in various areas of each of the sites. These conflicting results leave researchers timid
to wholeheartedly endorse large investments in ICT in education, and they reinforce the notion that
these programs are only as effective as the system that is implementing it. In fact, one evaluation
explained, “It is impossible to overstate the power of individual teachers in the success or failure of
1:1 computing” (Bebell & Kay, 2010, p. 47). So, like many other technologies and technology-
initiatives before one-to-one programs, it is much less about the technology and much more about
how it is used. Therefore, the conclusions on one-to-one initiatives are framed well by Bryan
Goodwin (2011, p. 79): “Rather than being a cure-all or silver bullet, one-to-one laptop programs
may simply amplify what's already occurring—for better or worse.”
Figure 3. The insights gained from 1-to-1 initiatives.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
17
methodologies in ways that are much more difficult, or impossible, without it. This is
evidenced countless times by the cases presented here.
The benefits of ICT-driven education outlined in this paper – engagement & motivation,
student-driven learning & inquiry, interactivity & collaboration, personalisation & flexibility, and
innovating – are all enabled and enhanced with ICT. They are of course possible without
ICT—you can still engage and motivate, personalise learning and facilitate collaboration,
without any technology at all. However, at scale, technology greatly increases our
opportunity and capacity for these outcomes. Yet, what affordances and opportunities are
only possible through technology? Some we have identified include:
I. Specific & Alternate Experiences – Some learning experiences are just impossible
(or nearly so) without technology. For example, with new advancements in
simulation technology, every student can have the chance to conduct the dissection
of a pig heart—something that would be very difficult if even possible for every
school to conduct in reality. Or, students could investigate the spill of an unknown
substance on MIT’s campus, as is created by the augmented reality game
Environmental Detectives. Online immersive world’s such The River City Project
allow students to virtually time travel and interact with avatars from a different era
in order to solve a problem.
II. Distant Communication, Connection & Collaboration – Before, student groups
were largely confined to those within proximity—those in your school or local
community, or perhaps another classroom on the other side of the globe with
whom you were a pen pal. Now, however, schools can easily connect to share
information and collaborate via free tools like Skype. A student interested in
studying the migration patterns of a certain bird may have been confined to
personal study before; today they can join an online affinity group and easily get
mentorship from the world’s top expert in this area. New technologies create
connections and collaborations that before would not have been possible.
III. Mobility – Education generally consisted of going to where the learning is; but
today, you can take the learning with you. Schools like THINK Global were
unimaginable just 10 years ago. New technologies are mobile, and free the learner
from being constrained to traditional learning environments—as also evidenced by
augmented reality, where digital information arrives on mobile phones to students
who are in a real-world environment outside of school.
IV. Access – Along the lines of mobility, ICT now brings access to educational
materials and experiences of a richness and kind that previously would not have
been possible, or accessible only in discrete locations (such as a university library).
WHAT TECHNOLOGY BRINGS TO THE TABLE: Richer, Deeper, New learning
The research discussed here explains that when designed and integrated properly, ICT can
be a critical vehicle for accessing what we know to be the keys to deep learning, and the
payoffs come performing new functions and experiences that are reflected in

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
18
transformations of processes (OECD, 2010a). The aforementioned examples of tech-rich
learning environments have demonstrated how the appropriate design and leveraging of
technology has impacted multiple dimensions of learning, teaching and practices in
education:
Engagement & Motivation. Set foot inside any one of these tech-rich learning environments
and the engagement level of students is through the roof. There is extensive evidence that
ICT increases motivation, confidence and engagement (Blamire, 2009). For students, the
technologies listed in Figure 1 are exciting and stimulating in their own right—but even
more so when appropriately linked with their own innate curiosities. Schools like Silverton
Primary and Intermediate School 339 cite this as one of the core reasons student
achievement has risen, and student violence and disruptive behavior has decreased. The
impact of game-based learning in Scotland has demonstrated the same outcome of
dramatically increased engagement and motivation—illustrated by the large extent that
students’ work on academic projects outside of school time, often above and beyond what
was required. Several students involved in this game-based learning initiative even noted
the curious effect of decreased game play at home, explaining that playing games at home
has become less enjoyable than what they do in school because it lacks the collaborative
project associated with the school game play—such as accurately plotting the band’s budget
to ensure success in the Guitar Hero project, or understanding exactly “what was the fish we
came across” while playing Endless Ocean2 in class (Groff, Howells & Cranmer, 2010).
Technology is of course innately eye-catching to most individuals; however it is especially
so to young minds, particularly since these young minds have only known a digital world.
In other words, it’s engaging because it’s what they know, and therefore if much of their
modus operandi in school is not digitally-based, it can be considerably challenging for learners
to stay engaged. To them, there is no world without digital technologies. So it is no wonder
then that students’ engagement and motivation would skyrocket if they suddenly had
ubiquitous, or even semi-ubiquitous, access to digital technologies in their daily life as a
learner.
Student-driven learning & Inquiry. While technology alone may be engaging and
motivating, deep and lasting learning certainly requires more than just exposing students to
such innovations. The way learning experiences are structured with technology is the key,
and clearly it is what the Scottish students were referencing when they described the level of
enjoyment of game-play in classroom versus at home. Dubbed “authentic” learning,
student-driven inquiry is seen as being able to engage learners more deeply on more
complex tasks than other types of pedagogy. More and more research is not only
demonstrating that student-inquiry leads to lasting learning and higher performance, but it
is the pedagogy necessary to access 21st century skills like collaborative problem-solving and
critical thinking (Barron & Darling Hammond, 2010). Such pedagogies are often also
referred to as project- or problem-based learning. While technology is certainly not mandatory
in order to access this kind of pedagogy, it most certainly helps, and in three distinct ways:
tools, means, and mechanism:
2 Endless Ocean is a video game for the Nintendo Wii where the player takes on the role of a scuba diver, progressively
exploring various aspects of ocean life as the player becomes more experienced at scuba diving.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
19
Tools. When conducting a student-driven, inquiry-based project, technology can provide
the tools necessary to complete the investigation. Digital cameras and video recorders
can collect real-time data, while laptops can offer easy access to online searches and
mobile computing. The available toolkit of digital technologies to be used in this way
will continue to grow and better facilitate this pedagogy.
Means. Technology can also be the means of inquiry-based learning—providing a
collaborative working space or mechanism for progressing the work over time—as
individual learners, groups of learners, and collectively as a whole class. A Virtual
Learning Environment (or VLE) is an excellent example of this. An online space where
students can organize their own learning and work, the can also collaborate with others
around a problem or project and collectively grow the knowledge and outputs that
define a true ‘community of learners.’ This is of course the goal of blended learning
environments, where online platforms are purposefully created to augment the real-
world learning experience. Likewise, the THINK Global School is an excellent example
of how technology can be used to provide the tools and means for accessing student-
driven enquiry. The endowed Macbooks and iPhones given to each student will be their
learning tools in the “field” as well as the classroom, and the school-created social
networking and collaboration platform will be the vehicle through which the learning is
managed over time and space as the school travels around the globe.
Mechanism. Finally, technology can be the mechanism upon which inquiry-based
learning is built—creating the on-ramp to the problem or project itself. In the example of
game-based learning supported by the Consolarium in Scotland, the game is most often
not inquiry-based at all, but provides the storyline or context upon which the project and
inquiry are structured. Augmented reality games, online simulations and many other
technologies provide similar mechanisms for structuring inquiry-based learning in a
very engaging, and relevant, way.
Interactivity & Collaboration. Tech-rich learning environments also demonstrate the
increased interaction with technology itself as well as other learners, and the increased
collaboration in the learning process afforded by some digital technologies and pedagogies.
Students working in teams to explore an interactive online simulation or co-construct a wiki
of terms covered in the current lesson is a long ways away from learning from books that
occurs with learners seated in rows; and this type of collaborative learning and construction
is a central skill considered critical for the 21st century. It is akin to what is framed as the
much coveted ‘cooperative learning’—structured team learning that allows for individual
inquiry that is synergistically connected to collaborative learning tasks, which produces
deep, meaningful learning for all students (Slavin, 2010). This type of pedagogy is
increasingly well-documented, and is viewed as a powerful strategy for increasing student
achievement—particularly with 21st century skills and capacities.
Good teaching and learning can produce this type of interactivity and collaboration with
less digital “technologies” but the ever-growing possibilities created by current digital
technologies makes creating this type of study even more accessible to teachers and learners.
Interestingly, many of the teachers involved in the Scottish GBL initiative had received
training on cooperative learning several years prior to using console-games in the classroom,
reporting that the game worked excellently for that pedagogy and that marrying the two

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
20
was a large part of the initiative’s success. As our examples of tech-rich ILEs keep
demonstrating, combining documented learning theory and effective pedagogies with powerful
digital technologies is a recipe for success.
Personalisation & Flexibility. The essence of personalisation has been described as the
system conforming to the learner, rather than the learner to the system (Green et al, 2005).
Learning environments that are oriented towards personalisation are “highly sensitive to
what the different students within it already know and can do, and actively builds on this
sensitivity and knowledge – that is, it is highly adapted to individual differences and gives
tailored and detailed feedback that both challenges the quick learners and supports those
facing difficulties” (Istance & Dumont, 2010, p. 250). As most learning environments have
experienced, this is a very challenging goal. Yet from a learning sciences perspective, it
makes a profound difference, and we should be reminded that learners are already making
personalized learning environments for themselves in their lives outside of school, through
the use of digital technologies (Green et al, 2005). The proliferation of existing digital
technologies, and the prospect of what could be created, provides outstanding possibilities
for personalising education—be it with audio playback of a learner’s tone and pronunciation
that can be played back on a portable MP3 player as a he or she continues to improve their
verbal reading skills, or a customized set of simulations for a given learner, based on their
performance on an online questionnaire designed to test their existing conceptions of science
concepts. Likewise, this personalisation effect is also possible in the area of assessments,
which can also be more sophisticated as a result new advances in ICT-based assessments
(Blamire, 2009).
The potential is immense, yet we are reminded of two caveats: one, investment in ICT does
not directly and automatically correlate to personalised learning; and two, the infusion of
technology into a learning environment can reinforce existing inequities in a given system
(Green et al, 2005). Those withstanding, digital technologies offer an array of means for
engaging with, and continuing to engage with, learning experiences. In learning
environments where a menu of digital technologies is made available and is properly
supported by teachers and learning facilitators, the classroom becomes a flexible learning
environment that is able to adapt and conform to the needs, goals and motivations of each
student. It goes without saying that no technology can replace a teacher, however digital
technologies can be powerful tools to help teachers do their jobs, in a more effective and
personalised way.
Innovating. The day when education no longer needs to reframe – redesign – reinvent itself is
certainly not on the horizon; and indeed, that day may never come, as no organization
remains successful when it stops learning, growing and innovating. Being an innovative
organisation means much more than acquiring the latest technologies or trying a new
approach. It means systematically structuring in programs and practices that promote
healthy change, and new and improved approaches and the ongoing creative and
productive advancement of both individuals and the organisation as a whole. Strategic
‘innovating’ practices include implementing an “innovation cycle” where new ideas are
generated, implemented, tested and the knowledge is disseminated, enabling champions), and
changing professional development programs from receiving knowledge through a workshop
format to creating knowledge through professional enquiry and research programs. For existing
learning environments that seek to become 21st learning environments, integrating such

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
21
practices and programs are the only way to truly achieve transformation (Sutch, Rudd &
Facer, 2008). Technology can help facilitate innovating at the local context by bringing new
ideas to educators, documenting and sharing practices, and connecting with other schools
and professionals around the globe.
Digital Learning. Even if all of these benefits to leveraging technology-rich instruction
weren’t true, there’s still one fundamental reason to pursue developing a technology-rich
learning environment: we live in a digital world. The digital transformation is an unending
tidal wave continuing to change how we work, communicate, play and conduct our daily
lives. Not only is this the world our learners are currently immersed in, it will continue to
progress and the world that is their future will be digital in ways we can’t even begin to
imagine. Learning environments today must be at least partially digital, not only to provide
students with access to the tools and ways of operating that are infused in our world, but
also to engage them in modes of learning that mirror their personal activity. The pedagogies
and learning experiences described thus far connect with numerous cognitive competencies
and capacities, but also with digital literacy—helping to develop critical skills to engaging
with, consuming and producing digital media (Hobbs, 2010).
IMPLICATIONS FOR STAKEHOLDERS
At the very heart of any effective learning environment is learning—rich, deep, applied and
transferable—building the capacity to be a lifelong successful endeavor for every person.
Technology isn’t necessarily an absolute requirement in order to access that goal, but it
clearly can provide incredible support in doing so. As learners move through our learning
environments and education systems, it can be a tremendous challenge to ensure such
learning day in and day out for every learner. Technologies and innovations are an ever
growing set of tools that learning environments cannot ignore—particularly in our digital
world.
Why educational change – with technology – matters
Globally, there is a considerable need for educational systems to rethink their approaches.
Investing in ICT in education goes beyond just making a more efficient or effective means of
delivering education—it can produce an environment that creates and sustains an effective
citizenry (OECD, 2006). The PISA, the OECD-led Programme for International Student
Assessment, which evaluates the quality, equity and efficiency of school systems in some 70
countries, underscores in particular “the need for many advanced countries to tackle
educational underperformance so that as many members of their future workforces as
possible are equipped with at least the baseline competencies and skills that enable them to
participate in social and economic development” (OECD, 2011, p. 3). This relates to the skills
and competencies afforded by technology and digital literacy. The PISA demonstrates that
many of the world’s best-performing education systems are,
• guided by clear and ambitious standards aligned with high-stakes gateways and
instruction systems,
• with a focus on the acquisition of complex,

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
22
• higher-order thinking skills;
• additionally, these systems “have moved from bureaucratic ‘command and
control’ environments towards school systems in which the people at the
frontline have much more control of the way resources are used, people are
deployed, the work is organized and the way in which work gets done” (OECD,
2011, p. 4).
If systems of education seek to continually move in the direction of these characteristics, it
will require systemically rethinking how we structure learning environments that embody
them. Fortunately, the PISA and the examples of innovative learning environments included
here show that there are many on-ramps towards moving in this direction.
Today’s students present a paradox in helping us understand the best practices for moving
forward and enabling their learning. As mentioned previously, the OECD’s work on New
Millennium Learners demonstrates an increasingly digitally-connected population, who use
of new technologies shows a gravitation towards more personalized technology and
experiences (Langridge, 2003). Effectively engaging and supporting today’s students will
mean reaching them in a more personalized manner, through today’s digital technologies.
Additionally, the research evidence suggests that there are varying profiles of how students
interact with and leverage technology for personal and academic use (Pedro, 2009)—only
further reinforcing the need for personalization. However, some research suggests that
higher education students’ technology use in general may be ever-increasing, but their
beliefs about technology use for teaching and learning fall along a wide spectrum, and that
some “students appear far more reluctant to technology adoption in teaching and learning
than their levels of digital media exposure would suggest” (Pedro, 2009, p. 20). In fact,
students’ underlying beliefs about learning and learning experiences can present barriers to
effectively using educational innovations and technologies in the classroom (Groff & Mouza,
2008). Taken together, these two elements initially present a challenge for understanding
how to move forward. However, since the gap between students’ everyday practices with
digital technologies and those they experience in school should not and cannot persist, this
would suggest that they also will need to be brought along on the pedagogical evolution (or
revolution) that a learning environment and system may pursue. As a recent British report
explained, like many educators, “students do not fully understand how ICT and learning
can work together” (Ipsos Mor, 2007, p. 31), and their expectations of learning methods
appear to be influenced more by prior experiences of learning in formal situations than by
students’ personal use of technology outside of educational settings (Littlejohn, Margaryan
& Vojt, 2010). Although they may not have a clear vision of the new future of learning with
digital technologies and they may or may not expect much variation in how we create
learning experiences, it doesn’t mean there isn’t a gap often between their outside of school
way of being in the world and what they experience in schools—as evidenced by challenges
with engagement and motivation (Gutnick, Robb, Takeuchi, Kotler, 2011). Therefore, it is
imperative that students are included in the co-construction of the vision of new learning
environments and their subsequent change work and deployment. In this way, technology
becomes not only a critical means for innovative learning opportunities, it becomes the
vehicle by which learners, educators and all community stakeholders can partake in the
evolution and transformation of the learning environment.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
23
Overall, the dramatic changes in our society due to the impact of technology emphasise the
need for collaborative, public debate and exploration of the implications for learning
environments. As we seek to further digitally-enrich our learning environments, this agenda
should include such items as learners’ diversity, digital literacy, the new digital divides, the
blurring boundaries between formal and informal learning, and the use of technology for
monitoring and assessing learning (OECD, 2012).
Policy-makers
Generally, it has been observed that the broad array of ICT influence in education has had a
systemic impact at the national level, demonstrating a “trickle-up” on national curriculum
and policy. As learning environments continue to evolve, transform or reinvent themselves,
it has forced the focus beyond understanding how we change a single school (meso level) to
both the micro and macro levels—how ICT can deeply impact the transactions between
teachers and learners, and how school systems experience change by implementing ICT
(Erstad, 2009).
The contention over the existence and availability of robust data on the effectiveness of ICT
in education and internationally comparable indicators is still ongoing. Many policy
documents assert that the existing research data is inconclusive and insufficient to draw
effective conclusions, while many other educational technology proponents argue that this
proof does exist and we are wasting valuable time for support students’ transformed digital
learning. Combine this with the diversity of systems and the applications of ICT for
learning, and it leaves a complex and confusing picture for policy-makers. However, we
suggest the policy debate around ICT in education needs re-framing, to focus on more
tailored educational policies and the systemic requirements for educational change. At the
same time, policies must be rethought to support students who are unable to develop the
competencies required to enhance their education by implementing technical skills on their
own; this is what is meant those who argue for addressing the ‘digital use divide’ (OECD,
2010a).
The increasing push of evidence-based policy-making has been a large driver behind
increasing efforts to generate evidence on the impact of ICT in student performance. While
the complexity of the dynamics in this system has been the central reason the field has not
produced more evidence, for or against ICT in this area, we cannot put our educational
systems on hold while we wait for it. As the systems highlighted in this text have
demonstrated, powerful results can be achieved by leveraging technology for learning
environment innovation. At the same time, collectively we will benefit from building what
Johannessen has described as “a sustainable and flexible knowledge base [which] requires a
combination of quantitative and qualitative methods” (2009, p. 17). This intensified focus at
both the micro and macro levels, in context with more evidence-based policy-making, has
raised new national objectives for many systems, including further curriculum
development, solidifying and standardizing technical infrastructure, and national indicators;
Erstad (2009, p. 25) further articulates these as:
• a focus on how ICT can contribute to an increased quality in teaching and
learning;

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
24
• an increased use of new ICT-based means for cooperation and interchange of
knowledge and experience at all levels of the educational system;
• a broad access to learning materials and the development of new and varied
forms of learning in order to stimulate activity, independence and cooperation;
• an increased focus on students’ critical reflection with respect to the use of ICT in
teaching and learning and in society in general;
• an increased focus on how to avoid creating digital divides.
Many of these elements are interrelated and span across levels, therefore developing
analyses that span across these levels will further enhance the knowledge supporting this
work, and avoiding reducing ‘ICT in education’ down to whether or not students learn
better now than before (Erstad, 2009).
Most importantly, these objectives must be pursued in light of the outcomes identify by
PISA discussed earlier; they offer the following policy implications (OECD, 2010a):
• raise awareness among educators, parents and policy-makers of the
consequences of increasing ICT familiarity;
• promote greater computer use at school and experimental research on its effects;
• identify and foster the development of 21st century skills and competencies,
addressing the second digital divide;
• adopt holistic policy approaches to ICT in education; and
• adapt school learning environments as computer ratios improve and digital
learning resources increase.
Policy for meta-knowledge and sustainability, and the need to make learning environments
increasingly adaptive and effective, requires a focus on monitoring and assessing what
works in education and disseminating that information in ways that are meaningful to
teachers and sustainable for scaling-up (OECD, 2010a). Within an unclear picture of what
the future of learning environments looks like, policies that promote flexibility and
innovative-practices for driving this change have been the approach of numerous systems
with considerable success (Fullan, 2011).
Practitioners
Coordinating knowledge and efforts amongst the levels of the system will support and
enable changes at the classroom level. Teachers and students need framework(s) that
support their practical change, be it incremental or transformational, in their everyday work.
Frameworks on digital/ICT literacies have provided this to a certain degree in some
contexts, however for deeper, more systemic change this work needs to be coordinated in
larger initiatives.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
25
At the micro level, individual practitioners can, and many have been, innovating in their
own classrooms and engaging with the evolutionary approach by applying first-order and
second-order innovations in their own practice. While there may be barriers to the
effectiveness of this, some are within an individual educator’s control and can be at least
partially mitigated when embarking on using a new technology for learning (see the i5 tool
in Groff & Mouza, 2008). At the same time, practitioners can work to make innovating a part
of their collaborative professional practice—actively making exploring new ideas, with
colleagues, and vetting them for effectiveness together, will increase the momentum of any
given organisation, exponentially so as the number of participating faculty increases (for
ideas in this area, see Sutch, Rudd & Facer, 2008).
The leadership at the local level of a given learning environment is critical to leading this
change. The taxonomy and examples here offer insights in the path a leader might co-
construct and trail-blaze with their educational community. Collaborating with and learning
from other leaders, operating in both similar and different contexts, can offer vital insights,
ideas, advice and support for an educational change endeavor. Tangibly, it can be useful to
start by assessing where your learning environment currently stands—are the educators in
your school demonstrating emergent use of first-order and/or second-order innovations? Or
do you find that many diverse innovations are already represented? What are your
educators and students visions of what the future of learning could, and should, look like?
The most effective change happens when all stakeholders engage in the change process
together; and that include our students. As noted earlier, students may live in our current
digital world, but they very likely have less of a handle on how that digital climate
translates into transformed learning experiences. Many learners are not as strong at being
self-directed learners, which many believe is the primary goal of education in the 21st
century (OECD, 2010c; Morgan et al., 2008). Together, educators and students can
collaboratively create the destination while cooperatively laying the train track to get there.
Researchers
As tied to the discussion on the implications for policy-makers, researchers are challenged
with facing a new complexity of analysis, and garnering a more holistic picture of the
dynamics of ICT in education. As learning environments continue to evolve, transform or
reinvent themselves, it has forced the focus beyond understanding how we change a single
school (meso level) to both the micro and macro levels—how ICT can deeply impact the
transactions between teachers and learners, and how school systems experience change by
implementing ICT (Erstad, 2009). Better capturing this reality will lead to a deeper, more
nuanced understanding of how we can support learning systems as they seek to move into
the 21st century. A research agenda focused on these areas can have a significant impact on
policy development by creating a more robust picture of the realities of the different levels
of the system and how they will need to be coordinated.
Additionally, the need for better indicators that can be internationally compared will better
support policy-makers in understanding the dynamics of this complexity and impact of
existing policy. Although it must be noted that indicators have their limitations and only
provide information about a specific moment in time, this knowledge provides easy-to-use
data the policy-makers can build on. This might include input indicators, which analyse

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
26
national policy, investment and use of ICT both in school and at home, as well as utilisation
indicators which measure the types and purpose of ICT use for teaching and learning (Kikis,
Scheuermann & Villalba, 2009). Further discussion on indicators and conceptual frameworks
for research are available in the OECD/European Commission Joint Research Centre’s
publication, Assessing the effects of ICT in education: Indicators, criteria and benchmarks for
international comparisons.
Researchers can support the collective movement towards educational transformation by
making the knowledge generated by their research more accessible and usable to
practitioners and policy-makers. Clearly and succinctly communicating the findings and
implications for both policy-makers as well as practitioners, will help close the loop on the
knowledge-generation and implementation cycle.
CONCLUSIONS & FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The trajectory chosen by any system will need to be designed and adapted for the unique
context, goals and visions of that system. While the future is always uncertain, systems of
education can find confidence in their generated pathway if it steers towards what we know
to be effective learning from evidence from the learning sciences. This research is the
foundation of the OECD Innovative Learning Environments (ILE) project, which looked at
the intersection of our robust advancements in the learning sciences and the needs and
demands (both current and projected) of the 21st century, and has generated ‘principles’ for
designing effective learning environments based on this research. These principles are
outlined in the Practitioner Guide3 and explained more deeply in the ILE project’s
foundational reader, The Nature of Learning (2010):
• The learning environment recognises the learners as its core participants, encourages
their active engagement and develops in them an understanding of their own
activity as learners.
• The learning environment is founded on the social nature of learning and actively
encourages well-organised co-operative learning.
• The learning professionals within the learning environment are highly attuned to the
learners’ motivations and the key role of emotions in achievement.
• The learning environment is accurately sensitive to the individual differences among
the learners in it, including their prior knowledge.
• The learning environment devises programmes that demand hard work and
challenge from all without excessive overload.
3 See http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/50300814.pdf

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
27
• The learning environment operates with clarity of expectations and deploys
assessment strategies consistent with these expectations; there is a strong emphasis
on formative feedback to support learning.
• The learning environment strongly promotes “horizontal connectedness” across
areas of knowledge and subjects as well as to the community and the wider world.
One may note that there is no mention of technology in these principles—since of course it is
not a requisite for deep learning. However, as demonstrated by the examples in this paper,
technology may be just a vehicle—but it is a powerful one. And it is a vehicle that is central
to our work and personal lives, as well as society in general. As a vehicle, technology can not
only act as a lever for systemic change in the design of learning environment, it also impacts
teaching and learning at the micro level by creating powerfully different learning
experiences. Therefore, the content that is delivered via this vehicle is immensely important.
Also known as digital learning resources (DLR), content materials such as simulations,
animations and digital textbooks have made incredible strides in the last several decades.
However, we need further development and benchmarking for DLR and their impact on
learning (Johannessen, 2009). DLRs fall in an intersection between technology, pedagogy,
and the private sector, and must be explored, developed and studied in a voracious way in
order to fully realize the potential of digital technology for the very individualized cognitive
act of learning. In this way, DLR shines an important light on the discourse about
technology in education:
We can no longer continue to speak about technology in education in general terms.
It is clear that ICT has a central role in our lives and also our learning. We must get
more specific, exploring how different technologies and resources make significant
gains in key areas that have thus far demonstrating pedagogical challenges. We must
seek to understand how technology and DLRs can make a significant impact on
advancing learners in areas that often prove to be chasms or barriers in their
developmental pathway.
In it’s simplest terms, we live in a digital world, where many of our students are ‘connected’
a majority of the time, and education has not yet caught up. This raises many question,
concerns, and unknowns that should matter to both policymakers and educators—all of
them stemming from the fact that education has the responsibility to equip young people
with the necessary skills and values that will allow them to cope with the challenges that
connectedness is currently posing to them. The imperative for discussion and exploration
around key issues such as learners’ diversity, digital literacy, the new digital divides, the
blurring boundaries between formal and informal learning, and the use of technology for
monitoring and assessing learning must take priority in our work.
Where do you start? You get started. There is no perfect storm coming that will make it
definitively clear the path to forge ahead, and we cannot wait for the barriers and challenges
to this work to be removed. In reality, there is no perfect method that’s right for all, or even
just one, learning environment. There will always be barriers, there will always be failures.
The key is to always be on the alert for those barriers and plan for them as best you can, to
embrace failures and use them as learning opportunities to recalibrate, and engage your
learners on the journey of created digital, technology-rich learning environments.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
28
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. (2010). ICT Transforming Education: Regional Guide. Bangkok: UNESCO.
Anderson, J. and van Weert, T. (Eds). 2002. Information and communication technology in
education: A curriculum for schools and programme of teacher development. Paris, UNESCO.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001295/129538e.pdf (Accessed 28 March, 2010).
Barron, B. & Darling Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches
to learning. In (eds), The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD: Paris,
France.
Bebell, D., & Kay, R. (2010). One to one computing: A summary of the quantitative results from the
Berkshire Wireless Learning Initiative. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(2)
[Online journal]. Retrieved from
http://escholarship.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1222&context=jtla
Blamire, R. (2009). ICT impact data at primary school level: the STEPS approach. In Scheuermann,
F., & Pedro, F. (eds.), Assessing the effects of ICT in education, 199-211. European Union/OECD:
France.
Centre for Research on Lifelong Learning (2009). Conceptual Framework for Studying the Effects of
ICT in Education. Presentation by Friedrich Scheuermann at the International Expert Meeting on ICT
in Education Indicators, Busan, South-Korea, 7-9 July 2009.
Erstad, O. (2009). Addressing the complexity of impact—a multilevel approach towards ICT in
education. In Scheuermann, F., & Pedro, F. (eds.), Assessing the effects of ICT in education,. 21-38.
European Union/OECD: France.
Fullan, M. (2011). Whole system reform for innovative teaching and learning. Report for the Microsoft
ITL Research programme. Retrieved from http://www.itlresearch.com/research-a-reports/2011-itl-
research-findings
Goodwin, B. (2011). One-to-one laptop programs are no silver bullet. Educational Leadership, 68(5),
78-79.
Green, H., Facer, K., Rudd, T., Dillon, P., & Humphreys, P. (2005). Personalisation and Digital
Technologies. A Futurelab report.
Groff, J. (2009). Transforming the Systems of Public Education. Nellie Mae Education Foundation.
Groff, J., Howells, C., & Cranmer, S. (2012). Console game-based pedagogy: A study of primary and
secondary classroom learning through console video games. International Journal of Game-Based
Learning 2(2), 35-54.
Groff, J. & Mouza, C. (2008). A framework for addressing challenges to classroom technology use.
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) Journal, 16(1), 21-46.
Gutnick, A., Robb, M., Takeuchi, L., & Kotler, J. (2011). Always connected: The new digital media
habits of young children. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
Hikmet, N., Taylor, E., & Davis, C. (2008). The student productivity paradox: Technology mediated
learning in schools. Communications of the ACM, 51(9), 128-131.
Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action. The Aspen Institute & The Knight
Foundation.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
29
Ipsos Mori (2008). Great Expectations of ICT: How Higher Education Institutions Are Measuring Up.
London: Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC).
Istance, D. & Dumont, H. (2010). Future directions of learning environments. In OECD, The Nature of
Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD: Paris, France.
Johannessen, O. (2009). In search of the sustainable knowledge base: multi-channel and multi-
method. In Scheuermann, F., & Pedro, F. (eds.), Assessing the effects of ICT in education, 13-20.
European Union/OECD: France.
Kikis, K., Scheuermann, F., & Villalba, E. (2009). A framework for understanding and evaluating the
impact for information and communication technologies in education. In Scheuermann, F., & Pedro,
F. (eds.), Assessing the effects of ICT in education, 69-82. European Union/OECD: France.
Kulik, J. (2003). The Effects of Using Instructional Technology in Elementary and Secondary Schools:
What Controlled Evaluation Studies Say. SRI International: Arlington, VA.
Langridge, J. (2003). The Backyard Blitz Syndrome: The emerging student culture in Australian
Higher Education. Transformations, 7.n.s.
Littlejohn, A., Margaryan, A., & Vojt, G. (2010). Exploring students’ use of ICT and expectations of
learning methods. Electronic Journal of e-Learning (IJEL), 8(1), 13-20.
Morgan, J., Williamson, B., Lee, T., & Facer, K. (2008). Enquiring Minds. Futurelab: Bristol, UK.
Majumdar, S. (Ed.). 2005. Regional guidelines on teacher development for pedagogy-technology
integration. Bangkok, UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Asia and the Pacific.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001405/140577e.pdf
OECD (2012). Connected Minds: Technology and Today’s Learners. Pedró, F. (ed.), Centre for
Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing.
OECD (2011). PISA 2009 Results: Students On Line: Digital Technologies and Performance (Vol. VI).
OECD: Paris, France.
OECD (2010a). Are the New Millennium Learners Making the Grade? Technology Use and
Educational Performance in PISA 2006. OECD: Paris, France.
OECD (2010b). Inspired by Technology, Driven by Pedagogy: A systemic approach to technology-
based school innovations. OECD: Paris, France.
OECD (2010c). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD: Paris, France.
OECD (2008). Innovating to Learn, Learning to Innovate. OECD: Paris, France.
OECD (2006). ICT and Learning: Supporting Out-of-School Youth and Adults. OECD: Paris, France.
OECD & Joint Research Centre- European Commission (2010). Assessing the effects of ICT in
education: Indicators, criteria and benchmarks for international comparisons. Joint Research Centre-
European Commission: Luxembourg.
Pedro, F. (2009). New millennium learners in higher education: Evidence and policy implications.
International conference on 21st century competencies, 21-23 September, 2009. Brussels: OECD.
Peslak, A. (2005). The educational productivity paradox: Studying the effects of increased IT

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
30
expenditures in educational institutions. Communications of the ACM, 48(10), 111-114.
Selwyn, N. (2010). Web 2.0 and the school of the future, today. In, OECD (eds.), Inspired by
Technology, Driven by Pedagogy: A systemic approach to technology-based school innovations.
OECD: Paris, France.
Shapley, K., Sheehan, D., Sturges, K., Caranikas-Walker, F., Huntsberger, B., & Maloney, C. (2009).
Evaluation of the Texas Technology Immersion Pilot: Final outcomes for a four-year study (2004–05
to 2007–08). Austin: Texas Center for Educational Research.
Silvernail, D. L., & Gritter, A. K. (2007). Maine's middle school laptop program: Creating better
writers. Portland: Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation, University of
Southern Maine.
Slavin, R. (2010). Co-operative learning: What makes groupwork work? In (eds.), The Nature of
Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD: Paris, France.
Sutch, D., Rudd, T., & Facer, K. (2008). Promoting Transformative Innovation in Schools. A Futurelab
handbook.
Trucano, M. (2005). Knowledge maps: ICT in education. Washington, DC: infoDev/World Bank.
UNESCO (2003b). Towards policies for integrating information and communication technologies into
education.
Zitter, I., & Hoeve, A. (2011). Hybrid and well-designed: Two guiding perspectives on the road to
learning environments in the 21st century. National Centre for Expertise in Vocational and Training.
ECBO: Netherlands.

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
31
APPENDIX – Annex of Learning Environments
Listed Alphabetically
Consolarium
Games-based Learning
Learning and Teaching Scotland +44 08700 100 297
The Optima, 58 Robertson Street enquiries@LTScotland.org.uk
Glasgow, G2 8DU
UNITED KINGDOM
Learn more at http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/ictineducation/gamesbasedlearning
Crescent Girls’ School
357 Tanglin Road crescentgirl@moe.edu.sg
Singapore 247961 + 65 6475 8711
SINGAPORE
Learn more at http://www.crescent.edu.sg
Escola Móvel
AV. 24 de Julho, 140 - 4º Andar escolamovel@dgidc.min-edu.pt
1399-025 Lisboa 00 351 213934559
PORTUGAL
Learn more at http://www.escolamovel.min-edu.pt
Intermediate School 339
1600 Webster Ave
Bronx, NY 10457 +011 718 583 6767
USA
Maine’s Learning Technology Initiative
23 State House Station stephen.bowen@maine.gov
Augusta ME 04333 +1 207-624-6746
USA
Learn more at http://www.maine.gov/mlti
Lumiar Institute
Rua Dom Aguirre, 438 institute@lumiar.org
Jardim Marajoara - 04671-903 +55 (11) 3576-2100
São Paulo – SP
BRAZIL
Learn more at http://www.lumiar.org

Technology-Rich Innovative Learning Environments by Jennifer S. Groff
32
RSA Academy
Bilston Road
Tipton info@rsaacademy.org
West Midlands, DY4 0BZ +44 0121 556 1351
UNITED KINGDOM
Learn more at http://www.rsaacademy.net
Primary School Škofja Loka–Mesto
Osnovna šola Škofja Loka – Mesto os.sl-mesto@guest.arnes.si
Šolska ulica 1 +386 4 506 00 11
4220 Škofja Loka
SLOVENIA
Learn more at http://www.o-sl-mesto.kr.edus.si
Saltash.net Community School
Wearde Road enquiries@saltash.cornwall.sch.uk
Saltash +44 0 1752 843715
Cornwall, PL12 4AY
UNITED KINGDOM
Learn more at http://www.saltash.net
Shady Hill School
178 Coolidge Hill
Cambridge, MA 02138 +011 617 520 5260
USA
Learn more at http://www.shs.org
Silverton Primary
77-123 Jacksons Road
Noble Park North, VIC 3174 +03 9795 5033
AUSTRALIA
Learn more at http://www.silverton-ps.vic.edu.au
St. Paul’s Bay Primary
Maria Regina College
School Street stpaulsbay.primary.c@gov.mt
St. Paul’s Bay SPB09 + 356 21573194
MALTA
Learn more at http://mrcstpaulsbayprimary.wordpress.com
THINK Global School – Head Office
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 500 info@ThinkGlobalSchool.com
San Francisco, CA 94111 +011 415-315-1593
USA
Learn more at http://www.thinkglobalschool.com