4. 5. 4. Engaging in a co-creative play space for learning When transforming the classroom into a play space, students tend to engage more freely, since it provides a safe space to take risks and a welcoming space to hear diverse voices (Gutierrez, Rymes & Larson, 1995; Remmele & Whitton, 2013). When students engage in playful activities, they may become intrinsically motivated, adding to feelings of happiness, learning satisfaction and personal growth (Sutton-Smith, 2001; Csikszentmihalyi, 2014). A good start to creating a play space characterised by a warm and inviting atmosphere is to play music at the beginning of hybrid lectures. Gamification strategies to make learning fun and engaging may include peer evaluations with bonus marks for winning group presentations. Another way to reinforce a playful space is by asking students to draw illustrations on the writable desks of CAT’s Future-Fit venue, mirrored by similar activities for online students. Lastly, give students the authority to co-design assessments by playfully asking them to envisage an imaginary situation where they are the facilitators. Not only do playful imaginary situations develop abstract thought, they also motivate co-participants to engage in a fun non-hierarchical learning environment while nurturing their co-creativeness (Vygotsky, 1967; Lübbert, Heimann & Gonzàlez-Fernàndez, 2021). 5. Listening to student voices: Co-imagining equitable learning experiences by understanding student engagement needs Continuously invite students to co-reflect on their learning preferences by creating welcoming and safe spaces to voice their opinions freely. Applications such as Mentimeter and Slido are valuable in eliciting the anonymous opinions of students who may otherwise be too shy to say what they think. Other methods include informal conversations and online questionnaires not limited to students but also used to solicitopinions from design experts and support staff at CAT. These reflections demonstrate the fact that students, whether on campus or online, felt their class participation had increased and that it had motivated them to attend classes more regularly. Students, regardless of the type of attendance, reported that hybrid classes helped them engage cognitively, behaviourally, and emotionally. Yet, students joining classes in-person felt strongly about not attending online, while those attending online expressed the opinion that in-class attendance did not support their learning. As a result, in-class activities were flexibly co-designed to ensure that both groups could choose how they wanted to interact with the lecturer and each other to suit their learning preferences best. Conclusion Hybrid learning is flexible and conveniently accommodates students’ different learning preferences. However, to engage students simultaneously and equally in different geographic locations requires collaborative problem-solving. By making everyone’s voices feel welcome and valued, co-creativity may bring about agile and innovative design solutions to close the engagement gap between students attending on-campus and remotely. When students feel cared for and their opinions are valued, co-designed hybrid learning spaces are more likely to satisfy students’ emotional, cognitive, and behavioural learning needs. Teaching Innovation for the 21st Century | Showcasing UJ Teaching Innovation Projects 2022 66
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjU1NDYx