learning environment examples in education

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Health & Nursing

Courses and certificates.

• Bachelor's Degrees
• View all Business Bachelor's Degrees
• Business Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Healthcare Administration – B.S.
• Human Resource Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration
• Marketing – B.S. Business Administration
• Accounting – B.S. Business Administration
• Finance – B.S.
• Supply Chain and Operations Management – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree (from the School of Technology)
• Health Information Management – B.S. (from the Leavitt School of Health)

Master's Degrees

• View all Business Master's Degrees
• Master of Business Administration (MBA)
• MBA Information Technology Management
• MBA Healthcare Management
• Management and Leadership – M.S.
• Accounting – M.S.
• Marketing – M.S.
• Human Resource Management – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration (from the Leavitt School of Health)
• Data Analytics – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Information Technology Management – M.S. (from the School of Technology)
• Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed. (from the School of Education)

Certificates

• Supply Chain
• Accounting Fundamentals
• View all Business Degrees

Bachelor's Preparing For Licensure

• View all Education Bachelor's Degrees
• Elementary Education – B.A.
• Special Education and Elementary Education (Dual Licensure) – B.A.
• Special Education (Mild-to-Moderate) – B.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary)– B.S.
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – B.S.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– B.S.
• View all Education Degrees

Bachelor of Arts in Education Degrees

• Educational Studies – B.A.

Master of Science in Education Degrees

• View all Education Master's Degrees
• Curriculum and Instruction – M.S.
• Educational Leadership – M.S.
• Education Technology and Instructional Design – M.Ed.

Master's Preparing for Licensure

• Teaching, Elementary Education – M.A.
• Teaching, English Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Teaching, Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Science Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• Teaching, Special Education (K-12) – M.A.

Licensure Information

• State Teaching Licensure Information

Master's Degrees for Teachers

• Mathematics Education (K-6) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Middle Grade) – M.A.
• Mathematics Education (Secondary) – M.A.
• English Language Learning (PreK-12) – M.A.
• Endorsement Preparation Program, English Language Learning (PreK-12)
• Science Education (Middle Grades) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Chemistry) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Physics) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Biological Sciences) – M.A.
• Science Education (Secondary Earth Science)– M.A.
• View all Technology Bachelor's Degrees
• Cloud Computing – B.S.
• Computer Science – B.S.
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – B.S.
• Data Analytics – B.S.
• Information Technology – B.S.
• Network Engineering and Security – B.S.
• Software Engineering – B.S.
• Accelerated Information Technology Bachelor's and Master's Degree
• Information Technology Management – B.S. Business Administration (from the School of Business)
• View all Technology Master's Degrees
• Cybersecurity and Information Assurance – M.S.
• Data Analytics – M.S.
• Information Technology Management – M.S.
• MBA Information Technology Management (from the School of Business)
• Full Stack Engineering
• Web Application Deployment and Support
• Front End Web Development
• Back End Web Development

3rd Party Certifications

• IT Certifications Included in WGU Degrees
• View all Technology Degrees
• View all Health & Nursing Bachelor's Degrees
• Nursing (RN-to-BSN online) – B.S.
• Nursing (Prelicensure) – B.S. (Available in select states)
• Health Information Management – B.S.
• Health and Human Services – B.S.
• Psychology – B.S.
• Health Science – B.S.
• Healthcare Administration – B.S. (from the School of Business)
• View all Nursing Post-Master's Certificates
• Nursing Education—Post-Master's Certificate
• Nursing Leadership and Management—Post-Master's Certificate
• Family Nurse Practitioner—Post-Master's Certificate
• Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner —Post-Master's Certificate
• View all Health & Nursing Degrees
• View all Nursing & Health Master's Degrees
• Nursing – Education (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Family Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (BSN-to-MSN Program) – M.S. (Available in select states)
• Nursing – Education (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Leadership and Management (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Nursing – Nursing Informatics (RN-to-MSN Program) – M.S.
• Master of Healthcare Administration
• MBA Healthcare Management (from the School of Business)
• Business Leadership (with the School of Business)
• Supply Chain (with the School of Business)
• Accounting Fundamentals (with the School of Business)
• Back End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Front End Web Development (with the School of Technology)
• Web Application Deployment and Support (with the School of Technology)
• Full Stack Engineering (with the School of Technology)
• Single Courses
• Course Bundles

Apply for Admission

Admission requirements.

• New Students
• WGU Returning Graduates
• WGU Readmission
• Enrollment Checklist
• Accessibility
• Accommodation Request
• School of Education Admission Requirements
• School of Business Admission Requirements
• School of Technology Admission Requirements
• Leavitt School of Health Admission Requirements

Additional Requirements

• Computer Requirements
• No Standardized Testing
• Clinical and Student Teaching Information

Transferring

• FAQs about Transferring
• Transfer to WGU
• Transferrable Certifications
• Request WGU Transcripts
• International Transfer Credit
• Tuition and Fees
• Financial Aid
• Scholarships

Other Ways to Pay for School

• Tuition—School of Business
• Tuition—School of Education
• Tuition—School of Technology
• Tuition—Leavitt School of Health
• Your Financial Obligations
• Tuition Comparison
• Applying for Financial Aid
• State Grants
• Consumer Information Guide
• Responsible Borrowing Initiative
• Higher Education Relief Fund

FAFSA Support

• Net Price Calculator
• FAFSA Simplification
• See All Scholarships
• Military Scholarships
• State Scholarships
• Scholarship FAQs

Payment Options

• Payment Plans
• Corporate Reimbursement
• Current Student Hardship Assistance
• Military Tuition Assistance

WGU Experience

• How You'll Learn
• Scheduling/Assessments
• Accreditation
• Student Support/Faculty
• Military Students
• Part-Time Options
• Virtual Military Education Resource Center
• Student Outcomes
• Return on Investment
• Students and Gradutes
• Career Growth
• Student Resources
• Communities
• Testimonials
• Career Guides
• Skills Guides
• Online Degrees
• All Degrees
• Explore Your Options

Admissions & Transfers

• Admissions Overview

Tuition & Financial Aid

Student Success

• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Military and Veterans
• Commencement
• Careers at WGU
• Advancement & Giving
• Partnering with WGU

3 Types of Learning Environments

• Classroom Strategies
• See More Tags

Think back to some of the classroom environments you’ve encountered on your educational path. During your childhood, the learning environments you engaged in may have been vibrant and colorful, with a desk layout that allowed for flexibility and creativity. Your high school and college learning environments likely emphasized the head of the classroom or lecture hall to direct your attention, with rows of desks facing forward or seats arranged around a central point.

Whether you signed in online or studied in a physical classroom, these learning environments likely had a profound effect on your primary, secondary, and post-secondary education experiences.

What Is a Learning Environment?

While a learning environment is most commonly a classroom, it’s more generally a space where students can feel safe and supported in their pursuit of knowledge and be inspired by their surroundings.

In addition to aesthetics, instructors can shape a learning environment by the way they teach and the atmosphere they create in the classroom. They can influence student learning by encouraging student participation and engagement. Doing so helps nurture positive and constructive feedback that supports exploration, community among peers, and diversity. Studies have shown that positive learning environments help increase student focus, motivation, and retention of information.

As students continue to grow and evolve as learners, the environments in which they learn evolve as well. Learning environments change over time, adapting to student needs. This means that teachers must continually optimize their learning environments to help students meet their educational goals.

What Are the Different Types of Learning Environments?

Learning environments can be categorized into three different types—or “landscapes”—which include the following:

• Physical environment
• Psychological environment
• Emotional environment

This section explores each of these landscapes and how they differ from one another.

Physical Environment

A physical learning environment encompasses all the tangible aspects of a learning space. This includes the physical layout and design of classrooms, from vibrant and playful settings in elementary schools to more structured arrangements in colleges and universities. Physical environments also extend to home and distance-learning setups, where creating a distinct and comfortable learning space free from distraction has become increasingly important.

The recent COVID-19 pandemic prompted many students to engage in online learning environments, which, in turn, has caused teachers to implement tools like digital learning experience management systems and online courses.

Psychological Environment

An effective psychological environment encourages students to engage with the curriculum and each other in ways that enhance their personal and professional development. By building trust with students and fostering a safe, inviting space, teachers can create a positive learning environment where students have more opportunities to participate, ask questions, and receive feedback.

This type of environment can enable students to take risks or make mistakes more confidently, without fear of rejection. Learners are more likely to feel comfortable and valued in well-nurtured psychological environments.

Emotional Environment

School can be stressful at any age, which is why students need a positive emotional environment that supports their educational path. Part of creating a psychological environment’s safe space means addressing the emotional environment’s need for self-expression and the freedom to express emotions.

By supporting students’ emotional needs, teachers can help enhance their students’ emotional intelligence, boosting their confidence and self-esteem. Some ways that teachers can maintain a thriving emotional learning environment include establishing routines that students can rely on, encouraging diversity, and celebrating student achievements.

How Can I Create a Better Learning Environment?

There are several things that parents and teachers can do to create better learning environments for their children and students. Below are some useful tips.

• Parents can outfit children with a personalized learning space where they can remotely attend classes with all necessary supplies, comfortable seating, a strong internet connection, and more.
• Teachers can share upcoming lesson plans with parents by providing them with course materials, reading assignments, and other resources.
• If a student is facing difficulty, parents and teachers can collaborate on ways to support the student, whether it’s through updated teaching methods, one-on-one tutoring, or counseling.
• Parents and teachers can make study time or homework more fun with music, timed contests and drills, scents that jog the memory, or other unique learning approaches.

In the Classroom

• Teachers might consider the layout of the classroom and how it supports student learning. Is there a better way to position desks so that everyone can see what’s going on at the front of the room? Would semicircles instead of rows create more face-to-face engagement and camaraderie? Don’t be afraid to try new things.
• Teachers may encourage students to take part in creating their own learning environment. For example, students might create artwork to decorate the walls or be involved in open forums where they can ask questions or express concerns. Students will likely feel more connected to their environment if they have a hand in shaping it.
• Teachers can employ one or more of the five most common educational theories to adapt lessons to individual students and their unique learning needs.

By creating positive and engaging learning environments, teachers and parents can lend their students the physical, psychological, and emotional support they need to thrive and be successful in school, the workplace, and beyond.

Want to learn more? The WGU School of Education offers more than two dozen online, accredited bachelor’s and master’s degrees for current and aspiring teachers eager to prepare students for promising careers. These programs are designed by industry experts and can prepare you to implement healthy learning environments for a diverse range of students with different learning styles.

In addition, WGU’s competency-based education model means that you advance through coursework as quickly as you show mastery of the material, so you can potentially graduate faster and save money. Get started today.

Ready to Start Your Journey?

HEALTH & NURSING

Recommended Articles

Take a look at other articles from WGU. Our articles feature information on a wide variety of subjects, written with the help of subject matter experts and researchers who are well-versed in their industries. This allows us to provide articles with interesting, relevant, and accurate information. 

{{item.date}}

{{item.preTitleTag}}

{{item.title}}

The university, for students.

• Student Portal
• Alumni Services

Most Visited Links

• Business Programs
• Student Experience
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Student Communities

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Shaping a Positive Learning Environment

Several years ago, American surgeon, author, and public health researcher Atul Gawande experimented with using a two-minute checklist in operating rooms in eight different hospitals. One unexpected result was that a round of team-member introductions before surgery lowered the average number of surgical complications by 35%. Learning names and building a positive environment at the outset of this short-term medical community experience made huge impacts on their ability to function effectively together. How might we apply this and other community-building principles to establish positive learning environments that facilitate student learning?

Learning is an emotional process—we feel excitement when learning a new skill, embarrassment about mistakes, and fear of being misunderstood. Fostering positive emotions in your classroom will motivate students to learn, while negative emotions such as stress and alienation will inhibit their learning.

Research tells us students learn better when they are part of a supportive community of learners. When you create a positive learning environment where students feel accepted, seen, and valued, they are more likely to persist in your course, in their majors, and at the university.

In How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching , Susan Ambrose et al. address the many and complex factors that influence learning environments, including intellectual, social, emotional, and physical (2010).

They offer a few key takeaways for educators:

Learning doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Your classroom community is made up of individuals with diverse identities, backgrounds, and experiences; the act of learning is intertwined with a variety of socioemotional influences.

Classroom climate is determined by both intentional and unintentional actions, and by both explicit and implicit messages. And their impact on students is not always obvious. Seemingly well-meaning or unimportant choices and remarks can have unintended effects on student learning.

The good news: You have more control over the learning environment in your courses than you might guess. If you know how learning environments influence student learning, you can employ a variety of strategies to consciously shape a welcoming and inclusive classroom.

Sense of Belonging in College

In a welcoming and inclusive classroom, students are more likely to feel a sense of belonging . A sense of belonging is a basic human need. That is,  everyone  needs to belong. In the college context, sense of belonging refers to whether or not students feel respected, accepted, valued, included, cared for, and that they matter—in your classroom, at the university, or in their chosen career path (Strayhorn, 2012).

Although everyone needs to belong, students’ feelings of comfort in your class largely depends on their identities and experiences (Strayhorn, 2012; Walton & Cohen, 2007). Being the only student, or one of a few, of a particular identity group can lead students to feel detached, apathetic, or reluctant to participate. They may feel marginalized by the course content or by other students’ comments.

Indeed, research shows that minoritized students tend to report a lower sense of belonging than their peers (Johnson et al., 2007; Strayhorn, 2008a). Academic performance or preparation can also raise or lower students’ perceived sense of belonging (Hoops, Green, Baker, & Hensley, 2016; Strayhorn, 2008b; Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs, & Hawley, 2014). Particularly for minoritized students, academic struggle can be internalized as a sign that they do not belong (Walton & Cohen, 2007).

Research by DeSurra and Church in 1994 provides a spectrum for understanding learning environments that ranges from explicitly marginalizing, where the course climate is openly hostile and cold, to explicitly centralizing, where multiple perspectives are validated and integrated into the course. While this particular research was based on sexual orientation, the earliest research on learning environments—the “chilly climate studies”—focused on gender and had similar findings (Hall, 1982; Hall & Sandler, 1984; and Sandler & Hall, 1986). These early studies demonstrated that marginalization of students does not require an openly hostile environment. Rather, the accumulation of microaggressions alone can adversely impact learning. Later studies showed similar effects based on the race and ethnicity of students (Hurtado et al., 1999; Watson et al., 2002).

Diversity and Inclusion 

Students, like all of us, are complex human beings—they have a gender, race, class, nationality, sexual orientation, and other axes of identity. These overlapping identities mean that an individual may face multiple barriers at once to feeling welcome in your class. Rather than thinking your course should support “a” student of color or “a” student with a disability, craft a learning environment that is welcoming to as many students—and their complexities—as possible. 

Students struggling with sense of belonging are less engaged. They may sit in the back of class, be inattentive during lecture, or avoid participation in discussion or group activities. They may even skip class or show up late more often than others. However, sense of belonging is not static but dynamic, and it can fluctuate with transitions from class to class, year to year, or situation to situation. For example, a student who feels they belong in your course today may suddenly doubt they belong if they score poorly on an exam tomorrow. Therefore, it is important to continually observe students’ behavior and support their belonging throughout the term.

Sense of belonging affects students’ academic engagement and motivation, as well as their emotional wellbeing. The bottom line is this: Students who feel they belong are more likely to succeed.

For more insight into college students’ sense of belonging, watch this engaging TEDx talk by Ohio State professor Dr. Terrell Strayhorn.

In Practice

You want all students to feel they belong in your course. What concrete strategies can you use to shape a positive learning environment?

Set a positive tone from the start

Simple efforts to establish a welcoming atmosphere in the early days and weeks of class can help students feel more comfortable, included, and confident.

Use positive language in your syllabus . Your syllabus is the first impression students have of your course. Framing policies and expectations in friendly and constructive language, rather than with strong directives or punitive warnings, can increase students’ comfort.

Get to know students and help them get to know each other . On the first day, ask students their preferred names and pronouns and facilitate icebreaker activities to build community. Use Namecoach in CarmenCanvas to have students record the pronunciation of their names and set their pronouns. Surveys and polling, such as through Top Hat , are great ways to informally assess students’ motivations, learning goals, and prior knowledge early in the course.

Be warm, friendly, and present . Greet students when they enter the class, make yourself available before and after class, and set up office hours. Share your enthusiasm about the course and relevant personal experience—this can humanize you and increase students’ connection to the material.

Share positive messages about student success . Show students you believe in their capacity to succeed. Avoid negative statements such as, “Only 1 in 4 of you will pass this class.” Instead, normalize academic struggle and assure students they can master difficult content with effort.

Online Instructor Presence

Strong instructor presence in online courses has been shown to increase participation, facilitate knowledge acquisition, and foster a healthy learning community. When teaching online, you can make meaningful connections to students through video introductions, online office hours, and regular and planned communication. Read more about online instructor presence .

Foster open discourse and communication

Meaningful class discourse requires more than a friendly demeanor. Be prepared to address complex issues, difficult questions, and conflict in collaborative ways.

Develop a classroom agreement . Involve students explicitly in shaping the learning environment. Help them craft a (potentially living) document that outlines community norms and ground rules for respect, civil discourse, and communication.

Resist “right” answers . Encourage discussion that promotes critical thinking rather than simple consensus. Invite students to offer their perspectives before sharing your own, and guide them to consider multiple viewpoints and avenues to solving problems.

Respond to classroom conflict . Consider how you will frame controversial content or “hot topics” in your course. Rather than avoiding these conversations, plan in advance how to facilitate a productive and civil discussion. Refer students back to the ground rules they laid out in the classroom agreement. See Calling in Classroom Conflict for more information. 

Get feedback from students . Provide opportunities for students to give frequent anonymous feedback on your course—and show you value their input by acting on it. Surveys or exit slips, in addition to conventional midterm feedback, can bring to light issues that affect students’ sense of belonging or inhibit their learning.

Create an inclusive environment

Embrace multiple perspectives, ways of learning, and modes of expression so all students feel included and supported.

Choose inclusive course content . Do the authors of your course materials represent the spectrum of identities of people in your field? Of students in your class? Who is depicted in the readings and videos you assign? Include course material representing diverse identities, perspectives, and experiences to help all students connect to your content.

Use a variety of teaching methods . Incorporate multiple strategies that appeal to various abilities and preferences: lecture, whole-group and small-group discussion, think-pair-share, in-class writing exercises, case studies, role-playing, games, technology tools, and more. And don’t limit yourself to conventional “texts”—film and video, podcasts, and guest lectures are all engaging ways to present content.

Provide assignment options . Support student success by offering multiple modes to complete assignments. Options range from traditional, such as papers, presentations, and posters, to creative, such as websites, blogs, infographics, games, videos, and podcasts. Allow both individual and group work options, when feasible.

Make space for differing participation . Fear of being called on can hinder students’ comfort and motivation. Encourage, but don’t force, participation during in-class discussions, and acknowledge introverted students when they contribute. Consider alternate ways students can share ideas, such as via written reflections, online discussion posts, and lower-pressure think-pair-shares. Giving students time to reflect on “big questions” before discussion can also increase their confidence to speak up.

Organize your course to support students

The structure and content of your course, in addition to how you deliver it, are key to creating a supportive course climate.

Communicate learning outcomes . Being explicit about what you want students to do—and why it matters—can increase their motivation. Discuss the purpose of your course and its relevance to their lives, tell them what you will cover at the beginning of each class, and share a rationale for all assignments.

Be transparent and efficient with grading . Create student-friendly rubrics that lay out clear expectations for all assignments. Grade and return student work in a timely manner, with actionable feedback that helps them understand their progress and areas for improvement.

Ensure course materials are accessible . When content is accessible , students with vision, auditory, motor, and cognitive disabilities can successfully navigate, use, and benefit from it. Using heading structures in documents, providing alternate text for images, and captioning videos are a few practices that make your course material accessible, as well as more clear and user-friendly for everyone.

Share resources . In addition to extended material on your course subject, link students to helpful resources for mental health, stress, and learning assistance.

Carmen Common Sense

Consult Carmen Common Sense , a student-authored list of ten solutions to a student-friendly course, to learn how to build a supportive learning environment in Carmen.

Icebreaker Activities

Tips for learning student names, addressing offensive comments in class.

Students are more likely to succeed in positive learning environments where they feel a sense of belonging.

There is no singular or perfect learning environment. Every class you teach is a unique community made up of individuals with diverse identities, backgrounds, and experiences. A number of strategies can help you foster a classroom climate that is welcoming, inclusive, and responsive to their needs.

Set a positive tone from the start through your syllabus, community-building activities, a warm demeanor, and constructive messages about student success.

Foster open discourse and communication through classroom agreements, addressing complex issues and conflict productively, and collecting regular feedback from students.

Create an inclusive environment by choosing diverse and representative course material, using a variety of teaching methods, and providing options for assignments and participation.

Organize your course to support students by making your goals, rationale, and expectations for the course and assignments clear, ensuring materials are accessible, and providing resources to support students’ wellbeing.

• Office of Diversity and Inclusion (website)
• Teaching for Racial Justice (website)
• Classroom Climate: Creating a Supportive Learning Environment (website)
• Encouraging a Sense of Belonging (video)
• Namecoach for Instructors (guide)

Learning Opportunities

Ambrose, S. A., & Mayer, R. E. (2010).  How learning works: seven research-based principles for smart teaching . Jossey-Bass.

DeSurra, C. J., & Church, K. A. (1994). Unlocking the Classroom Closet Privileging the Marginalized Voices of Gay/Lesbian College Students . Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, LA. Distributed by ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED379697

Hall, R. (1982). A classroom climate: A chilly one for women?. Association of American Colleges. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED215628

Hall, R., & Sandler, B. (1984). Out of the classroom: A chilly campus climate for women?. Association of American Colleges. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED254125

Hoops, L. D., Green, M., Baker, A., & Hensley, L. C. (2016, February). Success in terms of belonging: An exploration of college student success stories. The Ohio State University Hayes Research Forum, Columbus, OH.

Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1999). Enacting diverse learning environments: Improving the climate for racial/ethnic diversity in higher education. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education in cooperation with Association for the Study of Higher Education. The George Washington University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED430514

Johnson, D. R., Soldner, M., Leonard, J. B., Alvarez, P., Inkelas, K. K., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., & Longerbeam, S. D. (2007). Examining Sense of Belonging Among First-Year Undergraduates From Different Racial/Ethnic Groups.  Journal of College Student Development ,  48 (5), 525–542. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2007.0054

Sandler, B., & Hall, R. (1986). The campus climate revisited: Chilly for women faculty, administrators, and graduate students. Association of American Colleges. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED282462

Strayhorn, T. L. (2008). Sentido de Pertenencia: A hierarchical analysis predicting sense of belonging among Latino college students.  Journal of Hispanic Higher Education ,  7 (4), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192708320474

Strayhorn, T. L. (2009). Fittin' In: Do Diverse Interactions with Peers Affect Sense of Belonging for Black Men at Predominantly White Institutions?  NASPA Journal ,  45 (4).  https://doi.org/10.2202/0027-6014.2009

Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology ,  92 (1), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82

Watson, L. W., Person, D. R., Rudy, D. E., Gold, J. A., Cuyjet, M. J., Bonner, F. A. I., … Terrell, M. C. (2002).  How Minority Students Experience College: Implications for Planning and Policy . Stylus Publishing.

Whitt, E. J., Edison, M. I., Pascarella, E. T., Nora, A., & Terenzini, P. T. (1999). Women's perceptions of a "chilly climate" and cognitive outcomes in college: Additional evidence.  Journal of College Student Development, 40 (2), 163–177. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ590847

Zumbrunn, S., Mckim, C., Buhs, E., & Hawley, L. R. (2014). Support, belonging, motivation, and engagement in the college classroom: a mixed method study.  Instructional Science ,  42 (5), 661–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9310-0

Related Teaching Topics

Creating an inclusive environment in carmenzoom, supporting student learning and metacognition, search for resources.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Appendix 1: Building an effective learning environment

A.2 What is a learning environment?

A.2.1 definition.

‘Learning environment  refers to the diverse physical locations, contexts, and cultures in which students learn. Since students may learn in a wide variety of settings, such as outside-of-school locations and outdoor environments, the term is often used as a more accurate or preferred alternative to classroom, which has more limited and traditional connotations—a room with rows of desks and a chalkboard, for example. The term also encompasses the culture of a school or class—its presiding ethos and characteristics, including how individuals interact with and treat one another—as well as the ways in which teachers may organize an educational setting to facilitate learning…..’

The Glossary of Educational Reform , 29 August, 2014

This definition recognises that students learn in many different ways in very different contexts. Since learners must do the learning, the aim is to create a total environment for learning that optimises the ability of students to learn. There is of course no single optimum learning environment. There is an infinite number of possible learning environments, which is what makes teaching so interesting.

A.2.2 Components of an effective learning environment

Developing a total learning environment for students in a particular course or program is probably the most creative part of teaching. While there is a tendency to focus on either physical institutional learning environments (such as classrooms, lecture theatres and labs), or on the technologies used to to create online personal learning environments (PLEs), learning environments are broader than just these physical components. They will also include:

• the characteristics of the learners;
• the goals for teaching and learning;
• the activities that will best support learning;
• the assessment strategies that will best measure and drive learning
• the culture that infuses the learning environment.

Figure A.2.2 illustrates one possible learning environment from the perspective of a teacher or instructor. A teacher may have little or no control over some components, such as learner characteristics or resources, but may have full control over other components such as choice of content and how learners will be supported. Within each of the main components there are a set of sub-components that will need to be considered. In fact, it is in the sub-components (content structure, practical activities, feedback, use of technology, assessment methods, and so on) where the real decisions need to be made.

I have listed just a few components in Figure A.2.2 and the set is not meant to be comprehensive. For instance it could have included other components, such as developing ethical behaviour, institutional factors, or external accreditation, each of which might also affect the learning environment in which a teacher or instructor has to work. Creating a model of a learning environment then is a heuristic device that aims to provide a comprehensive view of the whole teaching context for a particular course or program, by a particular instructor or teacher with a particular view of learning. Once again, the choice of components and their perceived importance will be driven to some extent by personal epistemologies and beliefs about knowledge, learning and teaching methods.

Lastly, I have deliberately suggested a learning environment from the perspective of a teacher, as the teacher has the main responsibility for creating an appropriate learning environment, but it is also important to consider learning environments from the learners’ perspectives. Indeed, adult or mature learners are capable of creating their own, personal, relatively autonomous learning environments.

The significant point is that it is important to identify those components that need to be considered in teaching a course or program, and in particular that there are other components besides content or curriculum.  Each of the key components of the learning environment I have chosen as an example are discussed briefly in the following sections, with a focus on the components of a learning environment that are particularly relevant for a digital age.

Activity A.2 Influencing a learning environment

• Why do you think I focused on learning environments from a teacher’s perspective rather than a learner’s perspective?
• In order to create the learning environment for HIST 305 in Scenario E, Ralph Goodyear carefully considered the learning environment he wanted to create and ones he had little or no control over.  What components do you think he had little or no control over?
• What would you add (or remove) from the learning environment in Figure A.2.2?
• Figure A.2.2 focuses on a learning environment from a teacher’ perspective. Could you design a similar model of a learning environment from the perspective of a learner? What would be the main differences?
• Does thinking about the whole learning environment overly complicate the teaching endeavour? Why not just get on with it?

Teaching in a Digital Age Copyright © 2015 by Anthony William (Tony) Bates is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Created by the Great Schools Partnership , the GLOSSARY OF EDUCATION REFORM is a comprehensive online resource that describes widely used school-improvement terms, concepts, and strategies for journalists, parents, and community members. | Learn more »

Learning Environment

Learning environment refers to the diverse physical locations, contexts, and cultures in which students learn. Since students may learn in a wide variety of settings, such as outside-of-school locations and outdoor environments, the term is often used as a more accurate or preferred alternative to classroom , which has more limited and traditional connotations—a room with rows of desks and a chalkboard, for example.

The term also encompasses the culture of a school or class—its presiding ethos and characteristics, including how individuals interact with and treat one another—as well as the ways in which teachers may organize an educational setting to facilitate learning—e.g., by conducting classes in relevant natural ecosystems, grouping desks in specific ways, decorating the walls with learning materials, or utilizing audio, visual, and digital technologies. And because the qualities and characteristics of a learning environment are determined by a wide variety of factors, school policies, governance structures, and other features may also be considered elements of a “learning environment.”

Educators may also argue that learning environments have both a direct and indirect influence on student learning, including their engagement in what is being taught, their motivation to learn, and their sense of well-being, belonging, and personal safety. For example, learning environments filled with sunlight and stimulating educational materials would likely be considered more conducive to learning than drab spaces without windows or decoration, as would schools with fewer incidences of misbehavior, disorder, bullying, and illegal activity. How adults interact with students and how students interact with one another may also be considered aspects of a learning environment, and phrases such as “positive learning environment” or “negative learning environment” are commonly used in reference to the social and emotional dimensions of a school or class.

For related discussions, see learner , learning experience , and learning pathway .

Alphabetical Search

Managing the Learning Environment

Who's Doing This at UT?

Stephanie Cawthon , Educational Psychology, investigates issues of equity and access in education from multiple vantage points. She has found teaching to be as much about facilitating dialogue and shared critical thinking as it is about providing opportunities to learn the facts and procedural knowledge needed to gain expertise in a field. Both go hand in hand.

How Can I Do This?

The learning environment is not merely a background variable. Teaching is most effective when the physical, virtual, and cultural spaces of the classroom are conducive to both personal and social learning.

Whether your course is lecture-based or emphasizes group-discussion, think about modifying the physical space so students can engage with you, the content, and each other.

• Examine the size and shape of the room, the arrangement of desks and chairs, and the classroom technology.
• Think about how you can utilize the space during class: move between rows, lecture from the back, and encourage students to choose different seats throughout the semester.
• Even in lecture halls, consider ways to encourage student movement: have students turn around for partner activities, or assign groups and organize them in different sections of the classroom.

Whether you teach online or face-to-face, it is important to think about how technology can increase student interaction with you, each other, and the course content.

• Consider social media (i.e., Twitter and Facebook) as a way to engage students with course content and communicate about course processes.
• A blog is useful if you want your students to compile individual posts.
• If you want your students to develop a written product as a group, try a Wiki! A wiki is an asynchronous communication tool that allows users to access and edit information at any time.
• Creating your own instructional videos that students can view at home can free up class-time for group work or higher order application of content.

“That is, the headspace of the people who inhabit the learning environment...In the same way that we can talk about furniture in physical space, we can talk about furniture in cultural space: valued behaviours, routines, self-concept, the way the students and teachers think about what they’re doing and why they’re there” (Collis, 2016).

• Get to know your students. Different students will enter your course with a variety of diverse identities, experiences, and (mis)perceptions about the content and the learning process (Hoidn, 2016, p. 84).
• Establish guidelines for interaction early and often. Students and faculty play a role and have a responsibility in creating positive classroom environments.
• Provide choices. Vary your instructional strategies, allow students to access content using a variety of means, and encourage them to demonstrate their knowledge in multiple ways.
• Encourage collaboration. Create opportunities for students to work together. Additionally, connect students to the campus community (resources, events, etc).
• Engage in collaboration. Talk with your colleagues, your students, and the FIC to get feedback about creating and managing your learning environment.
• "The behaviors that support the development of an effective learning environment need to be determined collectively whenever possible” (Saunders, 2012).

Why Is This Important?

The learning environment can produce conditions and mediate relationships that can positively influence student cognitive, social, emotional, and mental well-being, and increase student receptivity to you, content, exchange in the classroom, student motivation and study habits, and learning (Hess & Smythe, 2004).

Research shows that purposeful modifications to course design and formal learning environments leads to “increased levels of conceptual understanding, especially among the top tier of students, improved problem-solving skills, attitudes and class attendance rates and a reduction in both the overall and at-risk student failure rates” (Beichner et al, 2007; Brooks, 2010).

• An effective learning environment is created by intentional design choices about how an activity, course, or curriculum will lead to desired outcomes for student learning regardless of student differences.
• In order to maintain interest in a learning area, manage a working knowledge of it, and eventually master it, students need opportunities and environments that support reflection, practice, constructive feedback, and collaboration.
• Learn more about course design

Research shows that if instructors provide a learning environment where students feel emotionally supported, comfortable and free to express opinions, and connected to the learning community, students demonstrate more interest in subjects, are more likely to internalize tasks, have reduced learning apprehension and may even be less likely to engage in academic dishonesty (Müller & Louw, 2004; Ellis, 2004; Bouville, 2010; DiPietro, 2012; Barr, 2016).

• The climate of the learning environment is important for social and academic adjustment—especially for underrepresented students (Reid and Radhakrishnan, 2003; Malcom and Feder, 2016).
• “Student’s self-reports of their learning and of their learning efficiency were significantly related to their personal perceptions of the learning environment” (Ellet, Loup, Culross, McMullen & Rugutt, 2002; Henard & Leprince-Ringuet, 2008).

Effective learning environments are about "developing proactive ways to prevent problems from occurring in the first place while creating a positive learning environment" (Weimer, n.d.).

• Incivilities that are not addressed properly not only negatively impact learning within the course in which it is experienced, but may also negatively influence a student's success at an institution (Hirschy & Braxton, 2004).
• Think about ways to handle disruptions before they occur. Certain classroom management issues that resurface every semester. Have different strategies for response ready.
• Establish rules of engagement early. Provide students with examples of (un)acceptable behavior to clarify expectations. Share your pet peeves and encourage students to share theirs.
• Read more about disruptions and ways to resolve them in this handout from UNC Charlotte

Practicing Self-Care

Maintaining focus and energy during busy days teaching and learning online

Inclusive Teaching and Learning

How might you best create opportunities for all students to connect with you, the course material, and each other?

Instructional Strategies

Engagement is essential for learning.

Starting Strong

Whether you are teaching your first class, teaching a new class, or teaching a new semester of a class you've taught for years, no class is the same.

Become an Insider

Sign up today to receive premium content.

What Is a Modern Learning Environment?

Education has shifted dramatically in recent decades — from an emphasis on fact memorization through “drill and kill” and “sage on the stage” teaching styles to a focus on higher-order thinking and future-ready skills such as critical thinking and problem solving . Along the way, schools have raced to incorporate technology, first through stand-alone computer labs, and then through one-to-one device initiatives and massive networking upgrades. But in many cases, the K–12 classroom itself has remained stubbornly static , with students sitting in rows of desks and a teacher delivering instruction at a whiteboard or projector screen at the front of the room.

The concept of the modern learning environment is beginning to change with school districts attempting to align their physical spaces with contemporary pedagogical philosophy . In a modern learning environment, flexible classroom spaces organically integrate technology, helping teachers to better engage students and facilitate the mix of independent, small-group and whole-class learning that is now viewed as essential to student success.

Typically, a modern learning environment incorporates three key elements: connected devices (such as notebooks, tablets or even smartphones); audiovisual tools (including projectors and touch-screen displays); and purposeful furniture that allows students to learn in different ways at different times (such as standing desks, collaborative workstations and connected seating).

SIGN UP : Get more news from the EdTech newsletter in your inbox every two weeks!

Today's Classrooms Embrace Tech in All Aspects of Learning

While the concept of outfitting classrooms with connected devices is certainly not new, the reality is that student devices are often not put to their highest use , precisely because they are sometimes seen as an afterthought — or an “add-on” — rather than as tools that are essential to teaching and learning. Most school buildings predate the tablets and laptops that students are using by several decades, and although school leaders have done their best to incorporate technology into instruction, they have been aiming at a moving target. For a time, many schools relied on laptop carts, but this solution was cumbersome, with teachers unsure of when they would have access to the technology, and whether the computers would be powered up when they needed them.

Some districts have found success with bring-your-own-device policies, but others have found it nearly impossible to manage a computing environment where every student has a different device. Even in districts that have invested in one-to-one programs, leaders have sometimes been disappointed by lackluster adoption, found it difficult to continue funding the programs over time or failed to make the networking upgrades necessary to ensure a high level of performance.

By contrast, modern learning environments are designed with the assumption that students will have constant access to connectivity — and are supported by the back-end technology and teacher training necessary to ensure that student devices play a central role in the classroom.

Similarly, audiovisual solutions in a modern learning environment directly support student learning and engagement.

Depending on grade level and instructional goals, these solutions may include interactive whiteboards , document cameras , multitouch digital displays, projectors and even microphone lanyards for soft-spoken teachers in larger classrooms. The key is not to implement any single audiovisual tool with a one size-fits-all approach, but rather to outfit classrooms with the solutions that will best help teachers reach their students .

FOLLOW US : EdTech: Focus on K–12 is now on Pinterest! Discover smart ways to use tech in the classroom.

Flexible Furniture Provides High-Impact Benefits

Finally, while classroom furniture may seem like a decidedly low-tech solution, it can be a high-impact tool that literally puts students in the right learning posture. A modern learning environment requires a flexible and agile physical setup that will accommodate both independent and group work, and one where students can learn in ways that make them feel comfortable and help them focus.

Perhaps the simplest example of this is the standing desk , which gives students a break from sitting all day, heightens alertness and even helps burn calories. Other types of convertible furniture quickly transform from individual workstations into group gathering spaces . In the business world, adults move around throughout their workdays, going from ergonomic chairs in their offices to conference tables to quiet corners, depending on the task at hand. It’s important that kids be allowed to do the same. Many furniture options now come equipped with USB or three-prong charging ports , helping students to keep their devices powered up throughout the day.

For more information on the benefits of modernizing the classroom, take a look at the CDW whitepaper, " A Modern Learning Environment ."

• Personalized Learning

Related Articles

Unlock white papers, personalized recommendations and other premium content for an in-depth look at evolving IT

Copyright © 2024 CDW LLC 200 N. Milwaukee Avenue , Vernon Hills, IL 60061 Do Not Sell My Personal Information

• Skip to content
• Skip to search
• Staff portal (Inside the department)
• Student portal
• Key links for students

Other users

• Forgot password

Notifications

{{item.title}}, my essentials, ask for help, contact edconnect, directory a to z, how to guides.

• Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation

Best practices – creating a positive learning environment

This publication was originally published 01 May 2020.

• 2020 creating a positive learning environment (PDF 71 KB)

Explicit teaching

• Clearly show students what to do and how to do it (for example, providing explanation videos, hard/soft copy worked examples or completed exemplars).
• Explain the purpose and relevance of all tasks (for example, providing visual lesson outlines, learning intentions, the activities or key instructions, and the success criteria for the lesson).

Manage cognitive load

• Cut out inessential information.
• Present all the essential information together.
• Simplify complex information by presenting it both orally and visually.
• Encourage students to visualise concepts and procedures that they have learnt .

Support routines

• Provide daily to-do lists and day schedules.
• Have students submit work regularly.

Active supervision

• Check-in daily with students.

Collaboration

• Draw on collective teacher expertise (for example, co-plan lessons, share best practice models and resources).
• Regularly inform parents and carers of their child’s progress, learning expectations and learning goals.

Maintain high expectations

• Be clear about what is expected of students (for example, student behaviour and tasks).
• Provide effective feedback that includes constructive and actionable steps on how students can improve.
• Encourage student personal best goal setting.

Support student wellbeing

• Encourage student feedback and suggestions to help students feel connected to their learning.
• Engage students in positive self-talk, discuss issues when they arise and encourage students to ask for help.
• Provide tips on how students can manage their time effectively.
• Promote emotional safety through preventative strategies, such as teaching students self- regulation (for example, breathing and meditation exercises).

Support a safe online/remote learning environment

• Provide students and parents with information on respectful, responsible and safe use of digital devices.
• Clearly communicate procedures for staff, parents and carers to report concerns or online bullying.
• Practical guides for educators

Business Unit:

• Prodigy Math
• Prodigy English
• Is a Premium Membership Worth It?
• Promote a Growth Mindset
• Help Your Child Who's Struggling with Math
• Parent's Guide to Prodigy
• Assessments
• Math Curriculum Coverage
• English Curriculum Coverage
• Game Portal

13 Ways to Create a Positive Learning Environment in Your Classroom

Written by Joshua Prieur, Ed.D.

Teachers! Get more ways to promote positive learning with Prodigy Math, a game-based learning adventure for grades 1 to 8.

• Teaching Strategies
• What is a positive learning environment

Why is a positive learning environment important?

13 ways to create a positive learning environment in your classroom, create a positive learning environment to help students love learning.

Consider for a moment where you work or learn best. 

Where are you? What does the room you’re in look like? What are the things you do to set yourself up for success? 

All of the things you surround yourself with — a great cup of coffee or an up-tempo Spotify playlist — play a part in how you work or learn. They’re all tied to the environment you choose to best prime yourself for success.

As an educator, the same thing applies in a school or a classroom. Your goal is to create a positive classroom and school environment that will set your learners up for success.  

But there are a few challenges. How can you help students to feel safe, valued, and respected? What can you do to help set the framework for positive relationships to flourish?

Read on to find out 13 strategies that’ll help you build a positive learning environment that students and fellow staff members alike are excited to be a part of.

What is a positive learning environment?

Having a positive learning environment takes much more than having a classroom with positive posters on the wall ( although that’s one of the many strategies that can be used! ). It means truly understanding and supporting the needs of students and colleagues in multiple ways.

For example, having clearly established classroom rules will help set the tone for a healthy learning environment where students know what is expected of them. Having that structure in place will help students feel safe, allow you to really understand their needs, and promote positive well-being. This applies to students at all levels — elementary, middle, and high school, too!

One thing to keep in mind is that creating a positive learning environment isn’t something you create once and leave as-is . It requires renewed attention every school year. 

What is the difference between a positive and negative learning environment?

To really dig into the differences of a positive and negative learning environment, let’s start with some positive learning environment examples:

• Students feel safe to come to school without feeling like they have to act like someone else for acceptance
• When students feel safe in their environment, they’re more willing to take risks in their learning without fear of failing– sometimes we learn best when we fail!
• A true community exists. Students and staff members alike are more engaged and excited to interact with one another under positive circumstances.

In a negative learning environment, you’re going to see more undesirable behaviors such as:

• High levels of student frustration , likely leading to increased disciplinary rates. This could be mitigated by clear classroom management strategies .
• A disconnect between members of the community (ie. staff, students, and parents/guardians), leading to tension and less involvement from parents/guardians in the school environment. High levels of parent involvement have a direct impact on positive learning environments.
• High levels of stress for teachers leading to burnout and anxiety, which research has shown can even cause a physiological anti-stress hormone response in students. Practicing self-care techniques can be a great way to de-stress.

Read on to find out even more about why having a positive learning environment is crucial!

Having a positive learning environment in place takes a great deal of thought and consideration, but there are major benefits that’ll pay off for the hard work that goes into it. For example:

• Research has shown that academic performance is likely to increase
• Students will be more likely to support other students with disabilities
• There will be an increase in positive interactions between students, staff, and parents/guardians
• Stakeholders will appreciate that you take mental health just as seriously as you take student achievement
• Students are more likely to take ownership of their learning experience (also known as self-regulated learning)
• You’ll set the tone for a great school year from the very first week as you build an environment conducive to student development

What can you do to help jumpstart your work in this area? 

Keep reading to learn some strategies that you can easily implement to create an environment that’ll build a tightly-knit school community with a positive learning environment at the center of it all.

As an educator, you’ve likely already taken several steps to build a positive environment in your classroom and your school. Read on for 13 steps that can help take that work one step further!

1. Build positive relationships with students and parents

Building positive relationships with students and parents is critical, and it starts on the first moment of the first day of school each year. 

This means getting to know each of your students’ unique personalities including their likes, dislikes, strengths, and areas of opportunity. Putting the time in early will help you support students both individually and as a whole group.

One strategy to build rapport with students is to greet them as they arrive in the classroom each day. While it takes a bit of extra work on the front end to make sure the lesson is ready-to-go (including an activity for them to start up on the board!) greeting students as they arrive shows that you care and helps you to read their body language from the moment they arrive each day.

To help build a strong relationship with parents, take the time to communicate with them about the good and the bad that you see in the classroom. There are tons of awesome apps for teachers that you can use, like Remind to easily share information. 

Sending a quick note about the success that a child had in class that day can go a long way to let the child know that you see the great things they’re doing and also help parents/guardians feel like they’re in the loop for their child’s life at school.

2. Foster student connections

There are lots of great ways for you to help foster positive student connections as a way of helping improve students’ sense of belonging, increase engagement , and establish a caring classroom culture.

 Here are two quick strategies that you can implement with relative ease:

• Listen to the chatter going on between students before class . They’ll often talk with one another about things they’re passionate about. That information can help you learn things to ask them about that will help you forge a really strong bond. If by listening you learn that a student does ballet, you can ask the student more about it the next time you see them.
• Implement highly-personalized lessons to help students feel special. For example, if you’re creating a sample response to a writing prompt, you could opt to include a student’s name and the hobby you know they like. This strategy works really well as a way to highlight and motivate and engage learners who are often reluctant to participate!

3. Outline classroom rules for positive behavior

Having high expectations for your students is so important as you shape the norms for student behavior and lay the foundation for student success. To do this, you’ll need to have clear classroom rules and techniques at-the-ready from the first moment of the first day.

One pro tip is to frame your classroom rules in a positive manner. For example, instead of saying “don’t disrespect other students” you instead say, “All students in class will be respected at all times.” This positive framing, while small, can make a huge difference as you are showing that the expectation is tied to positive behavior.

4. Use positive reinforcement

Positive reinforcement is a great way to build intrinsic motivation and help promote positive student work habits. 

There are two great strategies that you can use here:

• Recognize when students put forth a ton of effort, even if they don’t show 100% mastery. Sometimes failing is when we learn best, so praising students’ effort to persevere can go a long way to help them build the muscle not to give up in the face of a challenge and implement problem-solving strategies.
• Take the time to celebrate even the smallest of wins for learners who are sometimes reluctant to participate in class. Providing praise for a job that’s well done goes a long way towards building trust and helping students feel seen. This, in turn, will increase the likelihood that they’ll do it again.

5. Ensure content is culturally relevant

Every class is unique thanks to the cultural diversity that each student brings to the group.

Since each student has a different lived experience and cultural background, teachers can honor those differences by implementing culturally responsive teaching strategies . These include: integrating relevant word problems, using media that positively depict a range of cultures, and bringing in guest speakers from different backgrounds.

A recent research study found that when teachers implement contextual learning strategies test scores can improve by more than 44%.

6. Keep a positive mindset

Anyone who has been a teacher knows just how exhausting the job can be. 

Taking time for yourself can be a real challenge with the demands that exist both inside and outside of school. That said, it’s highly recommended that you work to find some time, even just a few minutes to implement some self-care techniques as a means of helping you maintain a positive mindset.

Finding time each day, even just a few minutes when you first arrive at school, can make a huge difference and prepare you to face any challenges that come your way head-on and with a positive mindset.

7. Create a comfortable physical environment

Having a positive classroom environment for your students to learn in (and for you to teach in!) goes a long way towards helping build an awesome classroom climate. The physical environment includes everything from the way things are organized to what is on the walls.

Add a splash of color to your classroom with posters that include positive messages that can both motivate students and encourage positive behavior. For example, a poster that reads, “Expect to be accepted for who you are” reinforces the notion that all students belong in the classroom community you’ve created. It’s also a great reference point to draw students’ attention to if the behaviors you’re seeing aren’t aligned to that principle.

Are you a teacher who travels from classroom to classroom with a cart? Many teachers who travel opt to cover the front or sides of their cart with a poster that includes positive messaging. That gives you the opportunity to add a personal touch to any classroom you share and reinforce the beliefs you want to prioritize.

8. Stay informed on educational research

As a scholarly practitioner, it’s great to keep up-to-speed with research that could help to inform your practice and provide insights you can use to create a positive learning environment.

  For example, researchers recently outlined findings that show that the level of parent participation had a direct impact on positive learning environments. One strategy to implement would be to strategize with colleagues or school administration about additional ways to get the parent and guardian community engaged with activities at school. 

You may even consider participating in events like PTA meetings or events if you aren’t already as a way to contribute to a positive and collaborative school climate (which also has an impact on student motivation and achievement! ).

Doing this can also help you to stay in the know with emerging areas of best practice for you to take advantage of as you build your yearly professional growth plan . A recent study shows the link between professional development, teachers’ practices in class, and student achievement. 

An easy way to stay updated on education research outcomes that could help shape your learning environment is to sign up for Edutopia’s newsletter called " The Research Is In" .

9. Prioritize social emotional learning 

The well-being of students and teachers alike has been pushed to the forefront recently– and for good reason. While perhaps easier said than done, having positive mental health is critical. 

Social emotional learning (or SEL for short) can help students understand emotions and navigate an uncertain world.

There are some wonderful resources available for teachers to implement SEL strategies in their classroom. For example, building mindfulness activities into the classroom is just one of 25 different SEL strategies that can be implemented without a ton of lift — but with huge benefits for students in class.  

Helping students learn and navigate new emotions will help them to bring their best self to the classroom and contribute positively to the learning environment.

10. Plan lessons with motivation in mind

Building lesson and unit plans with student motivation in mind helps spark excitement and joy into the learning environment. That’s why Prodigy believes so firmly in our philosophy of education, “Motivation First!” . 

Weave topics that students are passionate about, or finding ways to make topics that aren’t the most exciting much more fun and interactive.

Integrating game-based learning activities like Prodigy Math can be a great way to help have fun and engage with you and their peers in class while they learn how to multiply fractions. Leverage students’ natural inclination for games and integrate learning right into it!

11. Provide personalized feedback on assignments

Going that extra mile to show students that you truly care about their performance and effort can help to motivate students and foster a positive connection. Personalizing feedback for students is a great way to take a moment and highlight some of the great work students do and the areas for improvement.

Let’s say for example students have completed a short writing assignment for you. You’ve spent some time correcting the spelling and grammar of the work, and left some great notes in the margin. To take it one step further, write a personalized note in the top corner of the assignment by using their name, “Dear Jack, …” and highlighting some of the great things they did and some areas for improvement. Leaving a personalized note instead of a plain grade increases the likelihood that they’ll look at what you said and internalize the feedback you’ve given.

12. Share the love

There are lots of incredible things happening in your classroom each and every day. But unless you’re in the room, it’s tough to know what’s happening (ever asked a kid, “what did you do in school today?” when they come home? They seem to always have a tough time remembering …).

To help keep parents/guardians updated, you can take to social media or your classroom website to help share the amazing things that you’re doing with your students. Be sure to keep in mind your school/district’s policies and permission from parents/guardians to use their child’s photo online. As long as you’re aligned with those policies and know which students have permission, you’re a-ok to share snapshots of the cool things you’re doing to help parents/guardians see what’s going on in class.

Bonus tip! Want to foster a positive environment among your colleagues? Leave a handwritten note for personnel on staff at your school (ie. other teachers, administrative assistants, administrators, custodians, etc.) and place it in their mailbox. Who doesn’t love getting mail with a little kudos? 

The two minutes you’ll take to write the note will help others feel so appreciated. Perhaps they’ll even start doing it for others!

13. Find time for fun!

Sometimes, the pressure to focus solely on purely academic material can mount (here’s looking at you, testing season …) and it can lead to burnout.  

Find some time to use some games in your classrooms that include learning and naturally weave in some fun in a way that your students will definitely appreciate. There are few things more fulfilling than hearing students laughing while they’re having fun and working together while learning at the same time.

Having a positive learning environment in your classroom and at your school will set your students up to thrive. In fact, you’ll be setting the stage to help every student to love learning– which is our mission here at Prodigy Education. 

Taking a few steps to expand the great things you’re already doing to create a positive learning environment (including leveraging game-based learning tools like Prodigy Math ) could go a really long way to help build a learning community that’ll transcend the walls of your school.

Prodigy Math helps make learning an adventure for students with game-based skill practice for grades 1 to 5. Plus, your free teacher account comes with tools that help you differentiate for every student and find more ways to support their learning. 

• Educational and developmental psychology

Learning Environments: Definitions, Types, and Characteristics

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

What are the key elements of a positive learning environment? Perspectives from students and faculty

Shayna a. rusticus.

Department of Psychology, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, 12666 72 Ave, Surrey, BC V3W 2M8 Canada

Tina Pashootan

The learning environment comprises the psychological, social, cultural and physical setting in which learning occurs and has an influence on student motivation and success. The purpose of the present study was to explore qualitatively, from the perspectives of both students and faculty, the key elements of the learning environment that supported and hindered student learning. We recruited a total of 22 students and 9 faculty to participate in either a focus group or an individual interview session about their perceptions of the learning environment at their university. We analyzed the data using a directed content analysis and organized the themes around the three key dimensions of personal development, relationships, and institutional culture. Within each of these dimensions, we identified subthemes that facilitated or impeded student learning and faculty work. We also identified and discussed similarities in subthemes identified by students and faculty.

Introduction

The learning environment (LE) comprises the psychological, social, cultural, and physical setting in which learning occurs and in which experiences and expectations are co-created among its participants (Rusticus et al., 2020 ; Shochet et al., 2013 ). These individuals, who are primarily students, faculty and staff, engage in this environment and the learning process as they navigate through their personal motivations and emotions and various interpersonal interactions. This all takes place within a physical setting that consists of various cultural and administrative norms (e.g. school policies).

While many studies of the LE have focused on student perspectives (e.g. Cayubit, 2021 ; Schussler et al., 2021 ; Tharani et al., 2017 ), few studies have jointly incorporated the perspectives of students and faculty. Both groups are key players within the educational learning environment. Some exceptions include researchers who have used both instructor and student informants to examine features of the LE in elementary schools (Fraser & O’Brien, 1985 ; Monsen et al., 2014 ) and in virtual learning and technology engaged environments in college (Annansingh, 2019 ; Downie et al., 2021 ) Other researchers have examined perceptions of both groups, but in ways that are not focused on understanding the LE (e.g. Bolliger & Martin, 2018 ; Gorham & Millette, 1997 ; Midgly et al., 1989 ).

In past work, LEs have been evaluated on the basis of a variety of factors, such as students’ perceptions of the LE have been operationalized as their course experiences and evaluations of teaching (Guo et al., 2021 ); level of academic engagement, skill development, and satisfaction with learning experience (Lu et al., 2014 ); teacher–student and student–peer interactions and curriculum (Bolliger & Martin, 2018 ; Vermeulen & Schmidt, 2008 ); perceptions of classroom personalization, involvement, opportunities for and quality of interactions with classmates, organization of the course, and how much instructors make use of more unique methods of teaching and working (Cayubit, 2021 ). In general, high-quality learning environments are associated with positive outcomes for students at all levels. For example, ratings of high-quality LEs have been correlated with outcomes such as increased satisfaction and motivation (Lin et al., 2018 ; Rusticus et al., 2014 ; Vermeulen & Schmidt, 2008 ), higher academic performance (Lizzio et al., 2002 ; Rusticus et al., 2014 ), emotional well-being (Tharani et al., 2017 ), better career outcomes such as satisfaction, job competencies, and retention (Vermeulen & Schmidt, 2008 ) and less stress and burnout (Dyrbye et al., 2009 ). From teacher perspectives, high-quality LEs have been defined in terms of the same concepts and features as those used to evaluate student perspective and outcomes. For example, in one quantitative study, LEs were rated as better by students and teachers when they were seen as more inclusive (Monsen et al., 2014 ).

However, LEs are diverse and can vary depending on context and, although many elements of the LE that have been identified, there has been neither a consistent nor clear use of theory in assessing those key elements (Schönrock-Adema et al., 2012 ). One theory that has been recommended by Schönrock-Adema et al. ( 2012 ) to understand the LE is Moos’ framework of human environments (Insel & Moos, 1974 ; Moos, 1973 , 1991 ). Through his study of a variety of human environments (e.g. classrooms, psychiatric wards, correctional institutions, military organizations, families), Moos proposed that all environments have three key dimensions: (1) personal development/goal direction, (2) relationships, and (3) system maintenance/change. The personal development dimension encompasses the potential in the environment for personal growth, as well as reflecting the emotional climate of the environment and contributing to the development of self-esteem. The relationship dimension encompasses the types and quality of social interactions that occur within the environment, and it reflects the extent to which individuals are involved in the environment and the degree to which they interact with, and support, each other. The system maintenance/change dimension encompasses the degree of structure, clarity and openness to change that characterizes the environment, as well as reflecting physical aspects of the environment.

We used this framework to guide our research question: What do post-secondary students and faculty identify as the positive and negative aspects of the learning environment? Through the use of a qualitative methodology to explore the LE, over the more-typical survey-based approaches, we were able to explore this topic in greater depth, to understand not only the what, but also the how and the why of what impacts the LE. Furthermore, in exploring the LE from both the student and faculty perspectives, we highlight similarities and differences across these two groups and garner an understanding of how both student and faculty experience the LE.

Participants

All participants were recruited from a single Canadian university with three main campuses where students can attend classes to obtain credentials, ranging from a one-year certificate to a four-year undergraduate degree. Approximately 20,000 students attend each year. The student sample was recruited through the university’s subject pool within the psychology department. The faculty sample was recruited through emails sent out through the arts faculty list-serve and through direct recruitment from the first author.

The student sample was comprised of 22 participants, with the majority being psychology majors ( n  = 10), followed by science majors ( n  = 4) and criminology majors ( n  = 3). Students spanned all years of study with seven in their first year, three in second year, five in third year, six in fourth year, and one unclassified. The faculty sample consisted of nine participants (6 male, 3 female). Seven of these participants were from the psychology department, one was from the criminology department and one was from educational studies. The teaching experience of faculty ranged from 6 to 20 years.

Interview schedule and procedure

We collected student data through five focus groups and two individual interviews. The focus groups ranged in size from two to six participants. All sessions occurred in a private meeting room on campus and participants were provided with food and beverages, as well as bonus credit. Each focus group/interview ranged from 30 to 60 min. We collected all faculty data through individual interviews ranging from 30 to 75 min. Faculty did not receive any incentives for their participation. All sessions were conducted by the first author, with the second author assisting with each of the student focus groups.

With the consent of each participant, we audio-recorded each session and transcribed them verbatim. For both samples, we used a semi-structured interview format involving a set of eight open-ended questions about participants’ overall perceptions of the LE at their institution (see Appendix for interview guide). These questions were adapted from a previous study conducted by the first author (Rusticus et al., 2020 ) and focused on how participants defined the LE, what they considered to be important elements of the LE, and their positive and negative experiences within their environment. Example questions were: “Can you describe a [negative/positive] learning [students]/teaching [faculty] experience that you have had?”.

We analyzed the data using a directed content analysis approach (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005 ) that used existing theory to develop the initial coding scheme. We used Moos’s (Insel & Moos, 1974 ; Moos, 1973 , 1991 ) framework and its three dimensions of personal development, relationships, and system maintenance/change to guide our analysis. During the analysis phase, we renamed the system maintenance/change dimension to ‘institutional setting’ as we felt it was more descriptive of, and better represented, the content of this theme.

We analyzed student and faculty data separately, starting with the student data, but used the same process for both. First, we randomly selected two transcripts. We each independently coded the first transcript using the broad themes of personal development, relationships and institutional setting, and developed subcodes within each of these themes, as needed. We then reviewed and discussed our codes, reaching consensus on any differences in coding. We then repeated this process for the second transcript and, through group discussions, created a codebook. The first author then coded the remaining transcripts.

When coding the faculty data, we aimed to maintain subcodes similar to the student data while allowing for flexibility when needed. For instance, within the personal development theme, a subcode for the student data was ‘engagement with learning’, whereas a parallel subcode for the faculty data was ‘engagement with teaching’.

We present the results of the student and faculty data separately. For both, we have organized our analysis around the three overarching themes of personal development, relationships and institutional setting.

Student perspectives of the learning environment

Personal development.

Personal development was defined as any motivation either within or outside the LE that provide students with encouragement, drive, and direction for their personal growth and achievement. Within this theme, there were two subthemes: engaging with learning and work-life balance.

Engagement with learning reflected a student’s desire and ability to participate in their learning, as opposed to a passive-learning approach. Students felt more engaged when they were active learners, as well as when they perceived the material to be relevant to their career goals or real-world applications. Students also said that having opportunities to apply their learning helped them to better understand their own career paths:

I had two different instructors and both of them were just so open and engaging and they shared so many personal stories and they just seemed so interested in what they were doing and what I was like. Wow, I want to be that. I want to be interested in what I’m learning. (G6P1)

A common complaint that negatively impacted student motivation was that instructors would lecture for the entire class without supporting materials or opportunities for students to participate.

I’ve had a couple professors who just don’t have any visuals at all. All he does is talk. So, for the whole three hours, we would just be scrambling to write down the notes. It’s brutal...(G7P2)

Trying to establish a healthy work-life balance and managing the demands of their courses, often in parallel with managing work and family demands, were key challenges for students and were often sources of stress and anxiety. For instance, one student spoke about her struggles in meeting expectations:

It was a tough semester. For the expectations that I had placed on myself, I wasn’t meeting them and it took a toll on me. But now I know that I can exceed my expectations, but you really have to try and work hard for it. (G6P1)

Achieving a good work-life balance and adjusting to university life takes time. Many students commented that, as they reached their third year of study, they felt more comfortable in the school environment. Unfortunately, students also noted that the mental and emotional toll of university life can lead to doubt about the future and a desire to leave. One student suggested more support for students to help with this adjustment:

I think school should give students more service to help them to overcome the pressure and make integration into the first year and second year quicker and faster. Maybe it’s very helpful for the new students. (G7P4)

Relationships

Relationships was the second dimension of the LE. Subthemes within this dimension included: faculty support, peer interaction, and group work. Most students commented on the impact that faculty had on their learning. Faculty support included creating a safe or unsafe space in the classroom (i.e. ability to ask questions without judgement, fostering a respectful atmosphere), providing additional learning material, accommodating requests, or simply listening to students. Students generally indicated that faculty at this university were very willing to offer extra support and genuinely cared for them and their education. Faculty were described as friendly and approachable, and their relationships with students were perceived as “egalitarian”.

I think feeling that you’re safe in that environment, that anything you pose or any questions that you may have, you’re free to ask. And without being judged. And you’ll get an answer that actually helps you. (G1P4)

While most students felt welcome and comfortable in their classes, a few students spoke about negative experiences that they had because of lack of faculty support. Students cited examples of professors “shutting down” questions, saying that a question was “stupid”, refusing requests for additional help, or interrupting them while speaking. Another student felt that the inaction of faculty sometimes contributed to a negative atmosphere:

I’ve had bad professors that just don't listen to any comment or, if you suggest something to improve it which may seem empirically better, they still shut you down! That’s insane. (G2P2)

The peer interactions subtheme referred to any instances when students could interact with other students; this occurred both in and out of the classroom. Most often, students interacted with their peers during a class or because of an assignment:

I think the way the class is structured really helps you build relationships with your peers. For example, I met S, we had several classes with each other. Those classes were more proactive and so it allowed us to build a relationship… I think that’s very important because we’re going to be in the same facility for a long time and to have somebody to back you up, or to have someone to study with…”. (G1P4)

However, other students felt that they lacked opportunities to interact with peers in class. Although a few participants stated that they felt the purpose of going to school was to get a degree, rather than to socialize with others, students wanted more opportunities to interact with peers.

The final subtheme, group work, was a very common activity at this school. The types of group work in which students engaged included classroom discussions, assignments/projects, and presentations. Many students had enjoyable experiences working in groups, noting that working together helped them to solve problems and create something that was better than one individual’s work. Even though sometimes doing the work itself was a negative experience, people still saw value in group work:

Some of the best memories I’ve ever had was group work and the struggles we've had. (G2P2) I don’t like group work but it taught me a lot, I’ve been able to stay friends and be able to connect with people that I’ve had a class with in 2nd year psych all the way up till now. I think that’s very valuable. (G6P1)

Almost all students who spoke about group work also talked about negative aspects or experiences they had. When the work of a group made up a large proportion of the final grade, students sometimes would have preferred to be evaluated individually. Students disliked when they worked in groups when members were irresponsible or work was not shared equally, and they were forced to undertake work that other students were not completing.

A lot of people don’t really care, or they don’t take as much responsibility as you. I think people have different goals and different ways of working, so sometimes I find that challenging. (G7P2)

Institutional setting

The third overarching theme was the institutional setting. Broadly, this theme refers to the physical structure, expectations, and the overall culture of the environment and was composed of two key subthemes: importance of small class sizes; and the lack of a sense of community.

Small class sizes, with a maximum of 35 students, were a key reason why many students chose to come to this institution. The small classes created an environment in which students and faculty were able to get to know one another more personally; students felt that they were known as individuals, not just as numbers. They also noted that this promoted greater feelings of connectedness to the class environment, more personalized attention, and opportunities to request reference letters in the future:

My professors know my name. Not all of them that I’m having for the first time ever, but they try… That means a lot to me. (G6P4)

Several students also said that having smaller class sizes helped them to do well in their courses. The extra attention encouraged them to perform better academically, increased their engagement with their material, and made them feel more comfortable in asking for help.

Having a sense of belonging was a key feature of the environment and discussions around a sense of community (or lack thereof) was a prominent theme among the students. Students generally agreed that the overall climate of the school is warm and friendly. However, many students referred to the institution as a “commuter school”, because there are no residencies on campus and students must commute to the school. This often resulted in students attending their classes and then leaving immediately after, contributing to a lack of community life on campus.

What [other schools] have is that people live on campus. I think that plays a huge role. We can’t ignore that we are a commuter school… They have these events and people go because they’re already there and you look at that and it seems to be fun and engaging. (G4P1)

Furthermore, students commented on a lack of campus areas that supported socialization and encouraged students to remain on campus. While there were events and activities that were regularly hosted at the school, students had mixed opinions about them. Some students attended the events and found them personally beneficial. Other students stated that, although many events and activities were available, turnout was often low:

There isn’t any hanging out after campus and you can even see in-events and in-event turnout for different events… It is like pulling teeth to get people to come out to an event… There are free food and fun music and really cool stuff. But, no one’s going to go. It’s sad. (G5P1)

Faculty perspectives on the learning environment

Similar to the student findings, faculty data were coded within the three overarching themes of personal development, relationships, and institutional setting.

Personal development reflected any motivation either within or outside the LE that provided faculty with the encouragement, drive, and direction for their personal growth and engagement with teaching. Within this dimension, there were two main subthemes: motivation to teach and emotional well-being.

As with any career, there are many positive and negative motivating factors that contribute to one’s involvement in their work. Faculty generally reported feeling passionate about their work, and recounted positive experiences they have had while teaching, both personally and professionally. While recollecting positive drives throughout their career, one instructor shared:

It’s [teaching in a speciality program] allowed me to teach in a very different way than the traditional classroom… I’ve been able to translate those experiences into conferences, into papers, into connections, conversations with others that have opened up really interesting dialogues…. (8M)

Faculty also reported that receiving positive feedback from students or getting to see their students grow over time was highly motivating:

I take my teaching evaluations very seriously and I keep hearing that feedback time and time again they feel safe. They feel connected, they feel listened too, they feel like I'm there for them. I think, you know, those are the things that let me know what I'm doing is achieving the goals that I have as an educator. (1F) Being able to watch [students] grow over time is very important to me… I always try to have a few people I work with and see over the course of their degree. So, when they graduate, you know I have a reason to be all misty-eyed. (2M)

Emotional well-being related to how different interactions, primarily with students, affected instructors’ mental states. Sometimes the emotional well-being of faculty was negatively affected by the behaviour of students. One instructor spoke about being concerned when students drop out of a class:

A student just this last semester was doing so well, but then dropped off the face of the earth… I felt such a disappointing loss… So, when that happens, I'm always left with those questions about what I could have done differently. Maybe, at the end of the day, there is nothing I could've done, nothing. It's a tragedy or something's happened in their life or I don't know. But those unanswered questions do concern-- they cause me some stress or concern. (1F)

Another instructor said that, while initially they had let the students’ behaviour negatively affect their well-being, over time, they had eventually become more apathetic.

There are some who come, leave after the break. Or they do not come, right, or come off and on. Previously I was motivated to ask them ‘what is your problem?’ Now I do not care. That is the difference which has happened. I do not care. (4M)

This dimension included comments related to interactions with other faculty and with students and consisted of three subthemes: faculty supporting faculty; faculty supporting students; and creating meaningful experiences for students.

Most faculty felt that it was important to be supported by, and supportive to, their colleagues. For instance, one instructor reported that their colleagues’ helpfulness inspired them to be supportive of others:

If I was teaching a new course, without me having to go and beg for resources or just plead and hope that someone might be willing to share, my experience was that the person who last taught the course messaged me and said let me know if anything I have will be useful to you… When people are willing to do that for you, then you’re willing to do that for someone else….(7M)

Many faculty members also spoke about the importance of having supportive relationships with students, and that this would lead to better learning outcomes:

If you don't connect with your students, you're not going to get them learning much. They're not; they're just going to tune out. So, I think, I think connection is critical to having a student not only trust in the learning environment, but also want to learn from the learning environment. (3M)

Facilitating an open, inviting space in the classroom and during their office hours, where students were comfortable asking questions, was one way that faculty tried to help students succeed. Faculty also spoke about the value of having close mentorship relationships with students:

I work with them a lot and intensively…and their growth into publishing, presenting, and seeing them get recognized and get jobs on their way out and so forth are extraordinary. So, being able to watch them grow over time is very important to me. (2M)

Faculty also noted that occasionally there were instances when students wanted exceptions to be made for them which can create tensions in the environment. One instructor spoke about the unfairness of those requests arguing that students need to be accountable to themselves:

The failure rate, …it was 43%. I do not know if there is any other course in which there is a 43% failure rate. So, I do not want to fail these students, why? Instructors want these students to pass, these are my efforts […], and there are also the efforts of these students and their money, right? But, if a student doesn’t want to pass himself or herself, I cannot pass this student, that’s it. (4M)

Faculty were generally motivated to provide memorable and engaging experiences for students. These included providing practical knowledge and opportunities to apply knowledge in real-world settings, field schools, laboratory activities, group discussions, guest speakers, field trips, videos and group activities. They were often willing to put in extra effort if it meant that students would have a better educational experience.

Creating meaningful experiences for students was also meaningful for faculty. One faculty member said that faculty felt amazing when the methods that they used in their courses were appreciated by students. Another faculty member noted:

This student who was in my social psychology class, who was really bright and kind of quirky, would come to my office, twice a week, and just want to talk about psychology … That was like a really satisfying experience for me to see someone get so sparked by the content. (9F)

This third theme refers to the physical structure, expectation, and overall culture of the environment and it consisted of two subthemes: the importance of small class sizes, and the lack of a sense of community.

The majority of the faculty indicated that the small class sizes are an integral feature of the LE. The key advantage of the small classes was that they allowed greater connection with students.

Your professor knows your name. That’s a huge difference from other schools. It’s a small classroom benefit. (6F)

Similar to the students, nearly all the faculty indicated that a sense of community at the institution was an important part of the environment, and something that was desired, but it currently was lacking. They spoke about various barriers which prevent a sense of community, such as the lack of residences, a dearth of events and activities at the university, the busy schedules of faculty and students, the commuter nature of the school, and characteristics of the student population:

When I complain about the commuter campus feeling that occurs with students, we suffer from that too at a faculty level… People are just not in their offices because we work from home… And that really also affects the culture… We come in. We do our thing. We meet with students. And then we leave… I encounter so many students in the hallway who are looking for instructors and they can’t find them. (9F)

These findings have provided insight into the perspectives of both students and faculty on the LE of a Canadian undergraduate university. We found that framing our analysis and results within Moos’ framework of human environments (Insel & Moos, 1974 ; Moos, 1973 , 1991 ) was an appropriate lens for the data and that the data fit well within these three themes. This provides support for the use of this theory to characterize the educational LE. Within each of these dimensions, we discuss subthemes that both facilitated and hindered student learning and commonalities among student and faculty perspectives.

Within the personal development dimension, both students and faculty discussed the importance of engagement and/or motivation as a facilitator of a positive LE. When students were engaged with their learning, most often by being an active participant or seeing the relevance of what they were learning, they saw it as a key strength. Other studies have also identified engagement as a feature of positive LEs for populations such as high-school students (Seidel, 2006 ), nursing students (D’Souza et al., 2013 ) and college students taking online courses (e.g. Holley & Dobson, 2008 ; O’Shea et al., 2015 ). Faculty who reported being motivated to teach, often felt that this motivation was fueled by the reactions of their students; when students were engaged, they felt more motivated. This creates a positive cyclic pattern in which one group feeds into the motivation and engagement levels of the other. However, this can also hinder the LE when a lack of engagement in one group can bring down the motivation of the other group (such as students paying more attention to their phones than to a lecture or faculty lecturing for the entire class period).

Emotional climate was another subtheme within the personal development dimension that was shared by both students and faculty although, for students, this was focused more on the stress and anxiety that they felt trying to manage their school workloads with their work and family commitments. The overall emotional climate of the school was generally considered to be positive, which was largely driven by the supportive and welcoming environment provided by the faculty. However, it was the negative emotions of stress and anxiety that often surfaced as a challenging aspect in the environment for students. Past research suggests that some types of stress, such as from a challenge, can improve learning and motivation, but negative stress, such as that reported by our participants, is associated with worsened performance and greater fatigue (LePine et al., 2004 ).

For faculty, their emotional state was often influenced by their students. When things were going well for their students, faculty often shared in the joy; however, when students would disappear without notice from a class, it was a source of disappointment and self-doubt. For other faculty, the accumulation of negative experiences resulted in them being more distant and less affected emotionally than they had been earlier in their career. This diminishing concern could have implications for how engaged faculty are in their teaching, which could in turn influence student engagement and harm the LE.

The relationships dimension was the most influential aspect of the environment for both students and faculty. While both groups felt that the relationships that they formed were generally positive, they also reported a desire for more peer connections (i.e. students with other students and faculty with other faculty). Students commented that it was a typical experience for them to come to campus to attend their classes and then leave afterwards, often to work or study at home. Many of the students at this school attend on a part-time basis while they work part- or full-time and/or attend to family commitments. While this is a benefit to these students to have the flexibility to work and further their education, it comes at loss of the social aspect of post-secondary education.

The one way in which student–peer relationships were fostered was through group work. However, students held both positive and negative views on this: the positive aspect was the opportunity to get to know other students and being able to share the burden of the workload, and the negative aspect was being unfair workloads among team members. When group dynamics are poor, such as unfair work distribution, having different goals and motivations, or not communicating effectively with their groups, it has been shown to lead to negative experiences (Rusticus & Justus, 2019 ).

Faculty also commented that it was typical for them and other faculty to come up to campus only to teach their classes and then leave afterwards. They noted that their office block was often empty and noted instances when students have come looking for faculty only to find a locked office. Overall, faculty did report feeling congenial with, and supported by, their peers. They also desired a greater connection with their peers, but noted that it would require effort to build, which many were not willing to make.

Finally, student–faculty relationships were the most-rewarding experience for both groups. Students saw these experiences as highly encouraging and felt that they created a safe and welcoming environment where they could approach faculty to ask questions and get extra support. However, in some cases, students had negative experiences with faculty and these had an impact on their self-esteem, motivation and willingness to participate in class. Students’ negative experiences and feedback have been shown to result in declined levels of intrinsic motivation, even if their performance ability is not low (Weidinger et al., 2016 ).

Within the third dimension, institutional setting, a key strength was the small class sizes. With a maximum class size of 35 students, this created a more personal and welcoming environment for students. Students felt that their instructors got to know their names and this promoted more opportunities for interactions. Faculty concurred with this, indicating that the small classes provided greater opportunities for interactions with their students. This enabled more class discussions and grouped-based activities which contributed to a more engaging and interactive educational experience for students and faculty. For students, not being able to hide in the crowd of a large lecture hall, as is common in other university settings, encouraged them to work harder on their studies and to seek help from their instructor if needed.

Finally, both students and faculty commented that the lack of a sense of community was a negative aspect of the LE. This institution is known as a commuter school and both groups reported that they would often attend campus only for school/work and would leave as soon as their commitments were done. This limits opportunities to interact with others and could also potentially impact one’s identity as a member of this community. While both groups expressed a desire for more of a community life, neither group was willing to put in much effort to make this happen. Others have also found that sense of community, including opportunities to engage and interact with others, is important in LEs (e.g. Sadera et al., 2009 ). Schools with more activities and opportunities for student involvement have reports of higher satisfaction for both academic and social experiences (Charles et al., 2016 ).

Limitations

Because this study is based on a relatively small sample at a single university, there is a question of whether the findings can be applied to other departments, universities or contexts. However, it is a strength of this study that both student and faculty perceptions were included, because few past studies have jointly looked at these two groups together using qualitative methods. The use of focus groups among the student groups might have limited the openness of some participants. We also acknowledge that the analysis of qualitative data is inevitably influenced by our roles, life experiences and backgrounds. (The first author is a faculty member and the second and third authors were fourth year students at the time of the study.) This might have impacted our approach to the interpretation of the data compared with how others might approach the data and analysis (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008 ). However, the analysis involved consultation among the research team to identify and refine the themes, and the findings are presented with quotes to support the interpretation. Finally, because experiences were self-reported in this study, they have the associated limitations of self-report data. Despite these limitations, we believe that our findings add to what is known about LEs by capturing multiple perspectives within the same environment.

Future directions

Because our sample was comprised of students across multiple years of their program, some of our findings suggest that upper-level students might have different perceptions of the LE from lower-level students (e.g. work/life balance, access to resources, and overall familiarity with the environment and resources available). However, because the small sample sizes within these subgroups prevent any strong conclusions being made, future researchers might want to explore year-of-study differences in the LE. Additionally, the data collected for this study occurred prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and the mandatory switch to online teaching and learning. Future researchers might want to consider how this has impacted student and faculty perceptions of the LE regarding their personal motivation, the nature and quality of the relationships that have formed with peers and faculty, and the culture and norms of their institution.

This study increases our understanding of LEs by incorporating data collected from both students and faculty working in the same context. Across both groups, we identified important aspects of the LE as being high levels of engagement and motivation, a positive emotional climate, support among peers, strong faculty–student relationships, meaningful experiences, and small class sizes. Students identified negative aspects of the LE, such as certain characteristics of group work and struggles with work–life balance. Both faculty and students identified a lack of a sense of community as something that could detract from the LE. These findings identify important elements that educators and researchers might want to consider as they strive to promote more-positive LEs and learning experiences for students.

Appendix: Interview guide

[Faculty] Tell me a little bit about yourself. For instance, what department you are in, how long you have been teaching at KPU, what courses you teach, why you were interested in this study

• When I say the word learning environment, what does that mean to you?
• Probe for specific examples
• Relate to goal development, relationships, KPU culture
• Probe for factors that made it a positive environment
• Probe for factors that made it a negative environment
• How would you describe an ideal environment?
• Probe for reasons why
• Probe for how KPU could be made more ideal
• What recommendations would you give to the Dean of Arts regarding the learning environment? This could be changes you would recommend or things you recommend should stay the same.
• Do you have any final comments? Or feel there is anything about the learning environment that we have not addressed?

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Annansingh F. Mind the gap: Cognitive active learning in virtual learning environment perception of instructors and students. Education and Information Technologies. 2019; 24 (6):3669–3688. doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-09949-5. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolliger DU, Martin F. Instructor and student perceptions of online student engagement strategies. Distance Education. 2018; 39 (4):568–583. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2018.1520041. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cayubit RFO. Why learning environment matters? An analysis on how the learning environment influences the academic motivation, learning strategies and engagement of college students. Learning Environments Research. 2021 doi: 10.1007/s10984-021-09382-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Charles CZ, Fischer MJ, Mooney MA, Massey DS. Taming the river: Negotiating the academic, financial, and social currents in selective colleges and universities. Princeton University Press; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• D’Souza MA, Venkatesaperumal R, Radhakrishnan J, Balachandran S. Engagement in clinical learning environment among nursing students: Role of nurse educators. Open Journal of Nursing. 2013; 31 (1):25–32. doi: 10.4236/ojn.2013.31004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Sage; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Downie S, Gao X, Bedford S, Bell K, Kuit T. Technology enhanced learning environments in higher education: A cross-discipline study on teacher and student perceptions. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice. 2021; 18 (4):12–21. doi: 10.53761/1.18.4.12. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dyrbye LN, Thomas MR, Harper W, Massie FS, Jr, Power DV, Eacker A, Szydlo DW, Novotny PJ, Sloan JA, Shanafelt TD. The learning environment and medical student burnout: A multicentre study. Medical Education. 2009; 43 (3):274–282. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03282.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fraser BJ, O'Brien P. Student and teacher perceptions of the environment of elementary school classrooms. The Elementary School Journal. 1985; 85 (5):567–580. doi: 10.1086/461422. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gorham J, Millette DM. A comparative analysis of teacher and student perceptions of sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes. Communication Education. 1997; 46 (4):245–261. doi: 10.1080/03634529709379099. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo JP, Yang LY, Zhang J, Gan YJ. Academic self-concept, perceptions of the learning environment, engagement, and learning outcomes of university students: Relationships and causal ordering. Higher Education. 2021 doi: 10.1007/s10734-021-00705-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Holley D, Dobson C. Encouraging student engagement in a blended learning environment: The use of contemporary learning spaces. Learning, Media and Technology. 2008; 33 (2):139–150. doi: 10.1080/17439880802097683. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research. 2005; 15 :1277–1288. doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Insel PM, Moos RH. Psychological environments: Expanding the scope of human ecology. American Psychologist. 1974; 29 :179–188. doi: 10.1037/h0035994. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• LePine JA, LePine MA, Jackson CL. Challenge and hindrance stress: Relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004; 89 (5):883–891. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.883. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin S, Salazar TR, Wu S. Impact of academic experience and school climate of diversity on student satisfaction. Learning Environments Research. 2018; 22 :25–41. doi: 10.1007/s10984-018-9265-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lizzio A, Wilson K, Simons R. University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education. 2002; 27 :27–52. doi: 10.1080/03075070120099359. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lu G, Hu W, Peng Z, Kang H. The influence of undergraduate students’ academic involvement and learning environment on learning outcomes. International Journal of Chinese Education. 2014; 2 (2):265–288. doi: 10.1163/22125868-12340024. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Midgley C, Feldlaufer H, Eccles JS. Student/teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and after the transition to junior high school. Child Development. 1989; 60 (4):981–992. doi: 10.2307/1131038. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Monsen JJ, Ewing DL, Kwoka M. Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, perceived adequacy of support and classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research. 2014; 17 :113–126. doi: 10.1007/s10984-013-9144-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moos RH. Conceptualizations of human environments. American Psychologist. 1973; 28 :652–665. doi: 10.1037/h0035722. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moos RH. Connections between school, work and family settings. In: Fraser BJ, Walberg HJ, editors. Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences. Pergamon Press; 1991. pp. 29–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Shea S, Stone C, Delahunty J. “I ‘feel’ like I am at university even though I am online.” Exploring how students narrate their engagement with higher education institutions in an online learning environment. Distance Education. 2015; 36 (1):41–58. doi: 10.1080/01587919.2015.1019970. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rusticus SA, Justus B. Comparing student- and teacher-formed teams on group dynamics, satisfaction and performance. Small Group Research. 2019; 50 (4):443–457. doi: 10.1177/1046496419854520. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rusticus, S. A., Wilson, D., Casiro, O., & Lovato, C. (2020). Evaluating the quality of health professions learning environments: development and validation of the health education learning environment survey (HELES). Evaluation & the health professions, 43 (3), 162–168. 10.1177/0163278719834339 [ PubMed ]
• Rusticus SA, Worthington A, Wilson DC, Joughin K. The Medical School Learning Environment Survey: An examination of its factor structure and relationship to student performance and satisfaction. Learning Environments Research. 2014; 17 :423–435. doi: 10.1007/s10984-014-9167-9. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sadera WA, Robertson J, Song L, Midon MN. The role of community in online learning success. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2009; 5 (2):277–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schönrock-Adema J, Bouwkamp-Timmer T, van Hell EA, Cohen-Schotanus J. Key elements in assessing the educational environment: Where is the theory? Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2012; 17 :727–742. doi: 10.1007/s10459-011-9346-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schussler, E. E., Weatherton, M., Chen Musgrove, M. M., Brigati, J. R., & England, B. J. (2021). Student perceptions of instructor supportiveness: What characteristics make a difference? CBE—Life Sciences Education , 20 (2), Article 29. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Seidel T. The role of student characteristics in studying micro teaching–learning environments. Learning Environments Research. 2006; 9 (3):253–271. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.08.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shochet RB, Colbert-Getz JM, Levine RB, Wright SM. Gauging events that influence students’ perceptions of the medical school learning environment: Findings from one institution. Academic Medicine. 2013; 88 :246–252. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827bfa14. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tharani A, Husain Y, Warwick I. Learning environment and emotional well-being: A qualitative study of undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Education Today. 2017; 59 :82–87. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.09.008. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vermeulen L, Schmidt HG. Learning environment, learning process, academic outcomes and career success of university graduates. Studies in Higher Education. 2008; 33 (4):431–451. doi: 10.1080/03075070802211810. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weidinger AF, Spinath B, Steinmayr R. Why does intrinsic motivation decline following negative feedback? The mediating role of ability self-concept and its moderation by goal orientations. Learning and Individual Differences. 2016; 47 :117–128. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2016.01.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

A scoping review of the questionnaires used for the assessment of the perception of undergraduate students of the learning environment in healthcare professions education programs

• Open access
• Published: 29 April 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Banan Mukhalalati 1 ,
• Ola Yakti 1 &
• Sara Elshami 1  

364 Accesses

Explore all metrics

The learning environment (LE) includes social interactions, organizational culture, structures, and physical and virtual spaces that influence the learning experiences of students. Despite numerous studies exploring the perception of healthcare professional students (HCPS) of their LE, the validity evidence of the utilized questionnaires remains unclear. This scoping review aimed to identify questionnaires used to examine the perception of undergraduate HCPS of their LE and to assess their validity evidence. Five key concepts were used: (1) higher education; (2) questionnaire; (3) LE; (4) perception; and (5) health professions (HP). PubMed, ERIC, ProQuest, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies developing or adapting questionnaires to examine LE. This review employed the APERA standards of validity evidence and Beckman et al. (J Gen Intern Med 20:1159–1164, 2005) interpretation of these standards according to 5 categories: content, internal structure, response process, relation to other variables, and consequences. Out of 41 questionnaires included in this review, the analysis revealed a predominant emphasis on content and internal structure categories. However, less than 10% of the included questionnaires provided information in relation to other variables, consequences, and response process categories. Most of the identified questionnaires received extensive coverage in the fields of medicine and nursing, followed by dentistry. This review identified diverse questionnaires utilized for examining the perception of students of their LE across different HPs. Given the limited validity evidence for existing questionnaires, future research should prioritize the development and validation of psychometric measures. This will ultimately ensure sound and evidence-based quality improvement measures of the LE in HP education programs.

Similar content being viewed by others

Developing a clinical teaching quality questionnaire for use in a university osteopathic pre-registration teaching program.

Validity of the scan of postgraduate educational environment domains (SPEED) questionnaire in a rural general practice training setting

Barriers to obtaining reliable results from evaluations of teaching quality in undergraduate medical education

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Improving the learning experience of students in healthcare profession education programs (HPEPs) has been a demanding process in the healthcare professions education (HPE) (Carr et al., 2015 ). Indeed, HPEPs (e.g., pharmacy, medicine, nursing, and health sciences) are expected to prepare graduates with fundamental competencies, skills, and professional attributes and qualifications (Carr et al., 2015 ). Healthcare professional educators believe that the theoretical and clinical experiences that the students gain in their learning environment (LE) can significantly impact their attitudes, knowledge acquisition, skills development, and behaviors (Genn, 2001 ; Lizzio et al., 2002 ; Pimparyon, 2000 ). This is particularly important because the competencies of healthcare professionals influence patients' safety and ultimately health outcomes (Dunne et al., 2006 ).

The learning environment (LE) refers to the interactive combination of physical settings, educational resources, instructional approaches, and interpersonal dynamics that impact the learning journeys and experiences of students (Closs et al., 2022 ). According to Maudsley, a LE exists wherever and whenever students congregate, and it contains a variety of elements that support good instruction and serve as the curriculum's context (Maudsley, 2001 ). Hoidn ( 2016 ) argues that the LE demonstrates how various curricular components have an impact on students (Hoidn, 2016 ). Several studies have pointed out the important role that the LE has on the satisfaction and self-confidence of students (Al Ayed & Sheik, 2008 ; Lizzio et al., 2002 ; Wach et al., 2016 ; White, 2010 ). Therefore, accrediting bodies have increased their focus on the quality of the LE, highlighting that HPEPs are responsible for facilitating a positive LE, which supports the learning and professional development of students (Council, 1998 ; Education, 2009 ; Rusticus et al., 2020 ). Moreover, improving the LE has been recognized as a key standard in the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) standards, which aim to ensure continuous quality improvement of medical education programs (Council, 1998 ).

According to (Genn, 2001 ), the crucial aspect lies in how students perceive their LE. The perception of students of their learning environment (LE) involves how learners perceive and make sense of the various elements, conditions, and factors that make up their educational surroundings (Genn, 2001 ). The perception can be enhanced by improving the motivation of students towards their learning and their interpersonal relationships, developing effective teaching strategies, and increasing the availability of infrastructure facilities (Genn, 2001 ). Additionally, enhancing the compliance of the higher education providers with cultural and international administrative standards within the physical environment is crucial for shaping a positive perception of the learning environment (Brown et al., 2011 ; Rawas & Yasmeen, 2019 ). Medical educators argue that the perception of students of their LE is one of the determinants of their academic and professional outcomes, therefore, assessing it is essential (Genn, 2001 ; Roff & McAleer, 2001 ).

Many educational institutes have investigated the perception of students of their LE regionally and internationally (Al Ayed & Sheik, 2008 ; Al-Hazimi et al., 2004a , 2004b ; Lizzio et al., 2002 ; Rothman & Ayoade, 1970 ). In that regard, several studies indicated that the perception of students of their LE is affected by several factors, such as the gender of students and their academic achievement, as well as the curriculum content and the teaching styles (Cerón et al., 2016 ; Lokuhetty et al., 2010 ; Pimparyon, 2000 ). In a study conducted by a medical school that utilizes problem-based learning as a teaching strategy, first-year students exhibited neutral perception toward their LE, possibly due to their excitement upon entering the medical college; however, as they progressed in their study, they become more critical of the educational environment, indicating a shift in their perceptions over time (Nosair et al., 2015 ). Ahmed et al. ( 2018 ) argued that the perception of students of their LE and the factors that affect this perception should be assessed using reliable and comprehensive approaches (Ahmed et al., 2018 ). The approaches that have been used in the literature were quantitative (Rusticus et al., 2020 ) or qualitative (Britt et al., 2022 ; Fego et al., 2022 ) assessments. Quantitative assessment involves using validated and reliable questionnaires (RoffS et al., 1997 ; Rusticus et al., 2014 , 2020 ), which should be ideally selected based on their comprehensiveness, quality, and validity evidence (Kishore et al., 2021 ). Furthermore, a key aspect to consider while assessing the comprehensiveness and robustness of a questionnaire is its theoretical foundation (Schönrock-Adema et al., 2012 ; Klein, 2016 ), because it reveals the key determinants of the measured outcome (Schönrock-Adema et al., 2012 ). Therefore, a review of the literature is required to identify the questionnaires used to assess the perception of students of their LE and to compare the quality of those questionnaires. The American Psychological and Educational Research Associations (APERA) have established standards for validity evidence, encompassing five key dimensions: (1) Content, (2) Response Process, (3) Internal Structure, (4) Relation to Other Variables, and (5) Consequences (Eignor, 2013 ). Content validity focuses on the development process and theoretical foundation of questionnaires. The response process centers on the analysis, accuracy, and thought processes related to respondents. Internal structure primarily addresses the reliability and factor analysis used to confirm the data structure of questionnaires. Relations to other variables examine the potential correlation between assessment scores and theoretically predicted outcomes or measures of the same construct. Consequences primarily describe the impact of assessment consequences on the validity of the score interpretation (Eignor, 2013 ).

The theoretical foundation/framework underpinning the questionnaire is a critical factor influencing its content validity, and hence its robustness (Beckman et al., 2005 ). Multiple theories and frameworks have been employed to ascertain the primary factors influencing the perceptions of students of their learning environment in the literature. Predominantly, experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984 ), which emphasizes the central role that experience plays in the learning process, distinguishing this theory by its focus on experiential elements. Another common theory is the social theory (Bandura & Walters, 1977 ), which posits that individuals learn not only through direct experience but also by observing and imitating the behaviors of others. It also highlights the dynamic interaction between cognitive processes, environmental influences, and behavioral outcomes, and offers insights into how individuals acquire new behaviors through social interactions. Moos's framework (Moos, 1973 , 1991 ) is the most commonly applied framework in the literature. Moos's renowned framework stands out for its emphasis on the interplay of environmental and interpersonal factors shaping individual experiences. Moos's conceptual model provides a nuanced perspective on the multifaceted influences that contribute to an individual's development and experiences, offering valuable insights into the realms of personal growth, social dynamics, and systemic adaptability (Moos, 1973 , 1991 ).

Several systematic reviews were conducted to identify and compare the questionnaires that are used to examine the perception of healthcare professional students of their LE (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ; Hooven, 2014 ; Irby et al., 2021 ; Mansutti et al., 2017 ). These systematic reviews, however, were specific to one profession (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ; Hooven, 2014 ; Irby et al., 2021 ; Mansutti et al., 2017 ) or one setting (i.e., clinical versus preclinical). Only one systematic review, published in 2010, assessed the perception of students at a multidisciplinary level, including medicine, nursing and dentistry (Soemantri et al., 2010 b). However, several newly developed questionnaires have been published after 2010 (Leighton, 2015 ; Rusticus et al., 2020 ; Shochet et al., 2015 ), including those emerged as a result of changes in the LE in the last years with the integration of artificial intelligence and virtual learning, and the development of educational and information technologies (Isba et al., 2020 ; Leighton, 2015 ; Rusticus et al., 2020 ; Shochet et al., 2015 ; Thibault, 2020 ). In that regard, no previous reviews included those newly developed questionnaires and examined the theoretical foundations of the developed questionnaires (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ; Hooven, 2014 ; Irby et al., 2021 ; Mansutti et al., 2017 ; Soemantri et al., 2010 ). Therefore, to overcome the potential gaps in the literature, this study aims to provide an up-to-date identification of questionnaires used to examine the perception of undergraduate healthcare professional students of their LE and to assess the quality of those identified questionnaires. The main objectives of this scoping review are to 1) categorize questionnaires used to assess the LE as perceived by undergraduate healthcare professional students based on development strategy, profession, and the setting; 2) identify the most commonly used questionnaires; 3) assess the validity evidence of the identified questionnaires; and 4) assess the theoretical foundation of the included questionnaires.

Protocol and Registration

This scoping review is compliant with the 2018 PRISMA statement for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) (Tricco et al., 2018 ). The protocol for this scoping review was registered at RESEARCH REGISTRY and is available online at: [ https://www.researchregistry . com/browse-the registry#registryofsystematicreviewsmetaanalyses/registryofsystematicreviewsmetaanalysesdetails/ 60070249970590001bd06f38/] with the number [reviewregistry1069].

Eligibility criteria

This review aimed to identify articles that assess the perception of undergraduate healthcare professional students of their LE. While there is no universally established definition for healthcare professional educational programs or a standardized list of included educational professional programs, the researchers categorized these programs as educational programs associated with specific professions, namely, medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, nursing, and allied health. The term "allied health personnel" in PubMed's MeSH is utilized to define allied health, and relevant professions listed under this MeSH term. Studies were included if the following criteria were met: (1) used a questionnaire that was originally developed to assess LE in HPE; (2) focused on undergraduate students only, or both undergraduate and postgraduate students; (3) aimed to describe a questionnaire development, or to analyze the psychometric measures of a questionnaire, or to describe the utilization of a questionnaire; (4) published as research articles; and (5) published in peer-reviewed journals.

Studies were excluded if they (1) used a questionnaire that was not developed to assess LE in HPE; (2) focused on postgraduate students only; (3) did not describe the development, validity evidence, or the utilization of a questionnaire (i.e. studies that used only qualitative methods); (4) not research articles (e.g., theses and dissertations, conference papers, and abstracts); or (5) not published in peer-reviewed journals.

Information sources

An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, ERIC, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library databases. The search was conducted between 1st July 2022 and 31st July 2022. Additional articles were identified from the reference lists of the identified articles and from other relevant reviews.

Search strategy

The search strategy was developed by the research team (BM, OY, and SE), who are academics with expertise in pharmacy education and HPE research. The search strategy was revised by the Head of the Research and Instruction Section of the library at Qatar University, who has extensive expertise in health science, education, pharmacy, and medical databases.

Five main concepts were used “learning environment”, “healthcare professions”, “higher education”, “questionnaire”, and “perception”. Several keywords were identified for each concept (Appendix 1) and were matched to database-specific indexing terms. The identified concepts were combined using Boolean connectors (AND) and the keywords were combined using a Boolean connector (OR). The search results were then imported into EndNote version 9 and duplicates were identified and removed. The search was restricted to the English language, but no restriction was applied to the year of publication. A filter for peer-reviewed articles was used only when available. The detailed search strategy is demonstrated in Appendix 1.

Selection of evidence sources

Two researchers (BM and OY) conducted the title/abstract screening for the identified articles. and excluded articles that are irrelevant to the research question based on the article title and abstract. Differences were resolved by a discussion with the third researcher (SE). The full-text screening was done by two investigators (OY and SE) who assessed the eligibility of the studies independently. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus via meetings and discussions. After the completion of the full-text screening, one researcher (OY) categorized the included questionnaires based on their utilization in the study into the following categories (originally developed questionnaires, adopted questionnaires, or adapted questionnaires). Studies that adopted a previously developed and validated questionnaire were not included in the data extraction of this scoping review, because they did not provide additional data about the development of the questionnaire or about the validity evidence of the questionnaire. However, the number of adoptions per questionnaire was recorded to address objective two of this review which is to identify the most commonly used questionnaires. In addition to the original development studies, adaptation studies that conducted psychometric measures testing, other than those done on the original development studies, were included in the data extraction.

Data charting process and data items

Two researchers performed the data extraction independently using a data collection EXCEL sheet to tabulate data extracted from the included articles. The extracted data included the title of the manuscript, name of authors, year of publication, country where studies were conducted, aim and objectives of the research, study design, and study setting (i.e., clinical, preclinical, or both). Moreover, data related to the identified questionnaires were extracted, including the type of the questionnaire (i.e. new, adapted, or adopted), description of the domains and content, healthcare profession of which the research was conducted, and validity evidence of the questionnaire (including the use of theory or a theoretical framework in questionnaire development). Before the data extraction sheet was fully implemented, two investigators (SE and OY) piloted it using a sample of the articles from the review to determine its applicability, identify potential issues, and make the required changes. Piloting the data extraction sheet helped to improve the consistency and dependability of data extraction. Following successful piloting, the full data extraction was carried out using the data extraction sheet by the two investigators independently.

Assessment of the psychometric properties of the included questionnaires

Studies that describe the development or assess the psychometric properties of questionnaires should ideally be based on high standards of methodological quality to be regarded as a legitimate and trustworthy instrument (Beckman et al., 2005 ). Data about the psychometric properties of the included questionnaires were collected, summarized, and assessed using the American Psychological and Education Research Associations (APERA) standards of validity evidence: (1) Content, (2) Response Process, (3) Internal Structure, (4) Relation to Other Variables, and (5) Consequences (Eignor, 2013 ), and using Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation of these standard categories (Beckman et al., 2005 ). Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation of these standard categories has been previously applied in various systematic reviews (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ; Fluit et al., 2010 ); including one systematic review that assessed the validity evidence of questionnaires that assess the perception of healthcare professional students of their LE(Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ), aligning with the focus of this study. According to the assessment framework proposed by Beckman et al. ( 2005 ), each standard category was assigned a rating of N, 0, 1, or 2. The overall rating for each assessment tool was determined by calculating the total number of ratings corresponding to each standard category. However, it's important to note an overlap between "N" and "0″ ratings, where both can contribute to a zero-weight total score, despite their distinct interpretations. In response to this, the authors adopted a modified scoring system for the total sum score: "N" was treated as zero, "0″ as one, "1″ as two, and "2″ as three. Evaluating the theoretical basis of questionnaires was included in the total validity score, as part of APERA standards of validity evidence, under the ‘content’ category, where mentioning whether the questionnaire development was based on a theoretical basis and/or defining how this theoretical basis was applied/utilized would significantly change the score for the”content validity”. The definitions of Beckman et al. Table 1 summarizes the definitions of psychometric measures assessed by the Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) criteria and the interpretation of scores.

Out of 5723 articles retrieved from databases, 1517 articles were duplicates and were removed. After the title/abstract screening of 4206 articles, 3723 articles were irrelevant studies and excluded. This resulted in 483 articles eligible for full-text screening. After the full-text screening, 359 articles adopted previously developed questionnaires and were excluded because they did not provide any data about the psychometric properties of the adopted questionnaire. In addition, 72 articles were excluded for other reasons (i.e., were not conducted in HPE, did not include undergraduate students, assessed a specific aspect of the LE only, such as assessed LE of a specific course in the curriculum, did not provide data about the questionnaire development/ validation). Moreover, reviewing the reference lists of the eligible articles identified an additional six articles. This resulted in 52 articles eligible for data extraction; 41 articles were the original articles for the development of the questionnaires, and 11 articles were adaptation studies that tested one or more of the psychometric measures of the questionnaire. Figure  1 illustrates the PRISMA flowchart of the article selection process.

PRISMA flowchart of the article selection process

Summary of the identified questionnaires

After the full-text screening, 41 questionnaires in the included articles were identified for data extraction. Table 2 provides a summary of the included questionnaires. The identified questionnaires in the included articles were divided into 3 categories, according to their development strategy. The first category included questionnaires developed based on a theoretical framework/theory, such as the Health Education Learning Environment Survey (HELES) (Rusticus et al., 2020 ), and the Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI) (Dornan et al., 2012 ). The second category included adapted questionnaires, such as the Medical School Learning Environment Survey (MSLES) (Marshall, 1978) and the Dental Student Learning Environment Survey (DSLES) (Henzi et al., 2005 ). The third category included questionnaires developed through Delphi processes/ expert opinions, such as the Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM) questionnaire (Roff et al., 1997 ).

The majority of the identified questionnaires in the included articles were originally developed for one profession and, hence, were suitable to examine aspects specific to the context of that profession. For example, a total of 22 questionnaires out of the 41 identified questionnaires were specific to the medical profession. DREEM was originally developed for the medical profession, was the most adopted questionnaire across the medical profession and other HPs (Fig.  2 ), and it was translated into more than 5 languages (Al-Hazimi et al., 2004a , 2004b ; Andalib et al., 2015 ; Demiroren et al., 2008 ; Dimoliatis et al., 2010 ; Miles et al., 2012 ). Fourteen questionnaires were developed specifically for the nursing profession, with CLES + T being the most widely adopted and translated into multiple languages (Johansson et al., 2010 ; Tomietto et al., 2012 ; Vizcaya-Moreno et al., 2015 ). For the dentistry profession, only two questionnaires were identified: DECLEI and DSLES, where DSLES was adopted more in subsequent dentistry profession studies than DECLEI. Only a few questionnaires were originally developed to evaluate the perception of multidisciplinary students of their LE. However, some questionnaires that were originally developed for a specific profession were utilized to evaluate the perception of students of their LE in other professions. For example, although (e.g., DREEM) was initially administered among medical students, it was also pilot-tested in the nursing profession, in the original development study (Roff et al., 1997 ) and then was adopted in the dental (Ali et al., 2012 ), health-sciences (Sunkad et al., 2015 ), and nursing professions (Abusaad et al., 2015 ). Regarding the setting for which the identified questionnaire in the included articles was developed, some questionnaires were developed to evaluate the perception of students of their LE in the clinical setting (e.g., the Clinical Learning Environment Inventory (CLEI) and MCPI), while others were used to evaluate the perception of students of their LE in both non-clinical and clinical settings (e.g., DREEM). Table 4 summarizes the identified questionnaires based on the settings of the LE and the profession.

Total validity evidence scores versus the number of adoptions of the included questionnaires

The psychometric properties of the identified questionnaires

Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the questionnaires in the included articles was conducted using the five standard categories of APERA standards of validity evidence: content validity, response process, internal structure, relation to other variables, and consequences (Eignor, 2013 ), and using Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation of these standard categories (Beckman et al., 2005 ). Content validity and internal structure categories were reported and assessed in most of the questionnaires, while the response process and relation to other variables measures were reported and assessed in a smaller number of studies. Only one questionnaire; the Preclinical Learning Climate Scale (PLCS) provided data on the five psychometric measures (Yılmaz et al., 2016 ). Furthermore, the PLCS has the highest Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) total validity score among other questionnaires, followed by the Johns Hopkins Learning Environment Scale (JHLES). Evaluating the validity evidence of the questionnaires in the included articles based on the profession for which they were originally developed demonstrated that Clinical Learning Environment Quick Survey (CLEQS) (Simpson et al., 2021 ), followed by DREEM (Roff et al., 1997 ) scored the highest among the questionnaires developed for the medical profession. Whereas the Clinical Learning Environment, Supervision and Nurse Teacher (CLES + T) Scale (Saarikoski et al., 2008 ), the Clinical Learning Environment and Supervision (CLES) instrument (Saarikoski & Leino-Kilpi, 2002 ), and the Clinical Learning Environment Diagnostic Inventory (CLEDI) (Hosoda, 2006 ) scored the highest among questionnaires developed for the nursing profession, followed by the Clinical Learning Environment Comparison Survey (CLECS) (Leighton, 2015 ). Evaluating the validity evidence of the questionnaires developed for the dentistry profession indicated that DECLEI had a higher validity evidence score than DSLES. Finally, the MSLES (Marshall, 1978 ) followed by the Healthcare Education Micro-Learning Environment Measure (HEMLEM) (Isba et al., 2020 ) scored the highest among questionnaires developed for multidisciplinary. Table 3 provides a summary of the validity evidence of the identified questionnaires in the included articles.

Figure  2 demonstrates the relationship between the validity evidence score of each questionnaire and the frequency of subsequent use (adoption) of the questionnaire. The adoption of the majority of the identified questionnaires in subsequent studies was limited, with DREEM, CLES + T, CLEI, CLES, JHLES, and MSLES being the most frequently adopted questionnaires. Notably, although PLCS had the highest validity evidence score among all identified questionnaires, it was not adopted in subsequent studies. While DREEM was the most frequently adopted questionnaire, it ranked ninth in the validity evidence score.

Framework use

Less than half of the identified questionnaires in the included articles (n = 15/41) were developed based on a theory or a theoretical framework, such as the JHLES, HELES, and CLEI questionnaires. The most commonly used theory in the development of the questionnaires was the experiential learning theory which emphasizes learning through experience and reflection (Kolb, 1984 ). Additionally, Moos's framework, known for its focus on environmental and interpersonal factors influencing individuals, was the most commonly used theoretical framework (Moos, 1973 ). The theoretical frameworks and theories utilized are summarized in Table  2 .

This scoping review aims to identify questionnaires used to examine the perception of undergraduate healthcare professional students of their LE and to assess the validity evidence of those identified questionnaires. This review resulted in identifying original or adapted questionnaires used to assess the perception of undergraduate healthcare professional students of their LE and in providing an assessment of their validity evidence. This review shed light on the most frequently reported psychometric properties for developing and validating questionnaires that were used to assess the perception of healthcare professional students of their LE in HPEPs, as well as on the trends of adopting LE questionnaires across different HPEPs (Table  4 ).

The findings of this review suggested that DREEM was the most commonly used questionnaire for examining LE in medical profession and across different professions, and was widely adopted in various countries and cultures worldwide (Dimoliatis et al., 2010 ; Soemantri et al., 2010 ). This finding aligns with the results of Colbert-Getz et al.’s ( 2014 ) systematic review (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ), which argued that DREEM, initially developed by international students in Dundee University Medical School, achieved widespread usage as these students implemented it in their respective institutions (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ). Moreover, Colbert-Getz et al. ( 2014 ) claimed that researchers usually choose DREEM, because it is one of the oldest and most widely adopted questionnaires (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ). This prompts researchers to adopt DREEM to facilitate comparisons of their findings on students' perceptions of their learning environment with other institutions that have employed the same questionnaire before (Miles et al., 2012 ). It is worth noting that despite the length of DREEM questionnaire (50 items), the questions are generally easy to comprehend, which could have potentially facilitated its popularity and spread.

This review demonstrated that the majority of the questionnaires have limited validity evidence, where ‘content validity’ and ‘internal structure’ were the most reported validity evidence categories of APERA standards. Furthermore, the majority of the questionnaires did not have a thorough assessment of the ‘response process’, ‘relation to other variables’, and the ‘consequences’ categories. This finding is consistent with Colbert-Getz et al.’s ( 2014 ) systematic review of studies in medical education, which utilized APERA standards and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ). Moreover, this finding is in line with Mansutti et al.’s ( 2017 ) systematic review of studies in nursing education, which utilized the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) tool (Mansutti et al., 2017 ) to evaluate the methodological quality of the psychometric properties of instruments developed to assess the clinical LE in the nursing education (Mansutti et al., 2017 ). The COSMIN tool facilitates a more comprehensive assessment of both psychometric properties and research methods, organized into distinct dimensions labeled in alignment with the property being evaluated. This includes internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity (including face validity), structural validity, hypotheses testing (including convergent validity), criterion validity, cross-cultural, responsiveness, interpretability, and generalisability of the findings. Mansutti et al.’s ( 2017 ) systematic review revealed that concept and construct validity were inadequately addressed and infrequently evaluated by the nursing student population. Whereas, some properties, such as reliability, measurement error, and criterion validity, were rarely considered (Mansutti et al., 2017 ). Limited validity evidence of the developed questionnaires continues to be a challenge in the health literature (Bai et al., 2008 ; Hirani et al., 2013 ). This challenge was explained by Boateng et al. ( 2018 ) who argued that the process of instrument development and validation is complex and requires knowledge and skills in sophisticated statistical analysis methods (Boateng et al., 2018 ). However, several graduate programs in behavioral and health sciences do not adequately account for those statistical analysis methods in training and educating their students (Boateng et al., 2018 ).

In this review, PLCS demonstrated the highest validity evidence on the five APERA standards categories among all questionnaires (Yılmaz et al., 2016 ). PLCS was developed in 2016, and hence it was not identified in Soemantri et al.’s ( 2010 ) (Soemantri et al., 2010 ) and in Colbert-Getz et al.’s ( 2014 ) (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ) systematic reviews. In 2010, Soemantri et al. systematic review utilized three types of validity assessment (i.e., content, criterion-related, and construct) and argued that DREEM is the best questionnaire for examining the perception of undergraduate medical students of their LE (Soemantri et al., 2010 ). However, Soemantri et al.’s approach to evaluating the content, criterion-related, and construct validities did not include essential psychometric properties, such as response process, internal structure, and consequences. Consequently, DREEM received a higher score in Soemantri et al.’s review compared to the current review, where a relatively lower validity evidence score was assigned, adhering to APERA standards and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation. In Colbert-Getz et al.’s ( 2014 ) systematic review (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ), Pololi and Price's ( 2000 ) questionnaire (Pololi & Price, 2000 ) received the highest validity evidence score using APERA standards; however, Colbert-Getz et al. did not take the category ‘consequences’ into consideration (Colbert-Getz et al., 2014 ). Thus, Pololi and Price's ( 2000 ) questionnaire obtained a lower validity evidence score in the current review, aligning with APERA standards and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation. CLES + T received the highest validity evidence among questionnaires developed for the nursing profession in the current review as well as in Mansutti et al.’s ( 2017 ) systematic review (Mansutti et al., 2017 ), which utilized the COSMIN tool for evaluating research methods and psychometric properties of instruments designed to assess the clinical LE in the nursing education (Mansutti et al., 2017 ). The consistency between Mansutti et al.’s ( 2017 ) systematic review and the current review potentially suggests the applicability of the use of APERA standards and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation for the psychometric testing assessment of questionnaires in HPE.

The utilization of theory or theoretical framework in questionnaire development ensures that the research findings are theory-driven, which enhances their robustness and rigor (Schönrock-Adema, 2012 ; Stewart & Susan Klein, 2016 ). This review revealed that less than fifty percent of the included articles, (17/41), utilized a theory or a theoretical framework in the questionnaire development process. This finding was supported by other studies that indicated that the development of questionaries for examining the perception of healthcare professional students of their LE usually lacks solid grounding on theoretical frameworks. This was justified by Schnrock-Adema et al. by the lack of consensus about the most suitable framework to assess the LE (Schönrock-Adema, 2012 ). Remarkably, the development of both DREEM, which is the most commonly used questionnaire and PLCS, which is the most valid questionnaire was not grounded on a theoretical basis. The findings of this scoping review suggest that the two most frequently utilized theories and theoretical frameworks in the development of the questionnaires in the included articles were Kolb’s ( 1984 ) experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984 ), and Moos’s ( 1973 , 1991 ) learning environment framework (Moos, 1973 , 1991 ), respectively. According to Kolb ( 1984 )’s experiential learning theory, learning and knowledge development takes place through engagement with the real-world environment (Abdulwahed, 2010 ), which further highlights that the LE plays an indispensable role in the learning process and significantly influences the learning experience, performance, and learning outcome of students (Kolb, 1984 ). Moos’s ( 1973 , 1991 ) learning environment framework provided an integrated system approach, which analyzes the LE and the LE effect on learning experiences and outcomes holistically (Moos, 1973 , 1991 ). Moos’s framework is composed of three elements: ‘personal development’, ‘relationships’, and ‘system maintenance and change’ (Insel & Moos, 1974 ; Moos, 1973 , 1991 ). The ‘personal development’ element comprises the opportunities within an environment and the capacity for personal growth and self-esteem improvement. The ‘relationship’ element involves the extent to which individuals deal with and support each other in an environment. The ‘system maintenance and change’ element represents the environmental physical dimension, in terms of clarity and transparency to change within an institutional structural setting (Insel & Moos, 1974 ; Moos, 1973 , 1991 ). In the current review, Kolb’s ( 1984 ) experiential learning theory and Moos’s ( 1973 , 1991 ) learning environment framework were utilized for developing questionnaires that were intended to be used in clinical, experiential learning settings, such as HEMLEM (Isba et al., 2020 ) and CLEI (Chan, 2001 ; Chan, 2003 ), as well as in those that were intended to be used in both, clinical and academic settings such as JHLES (Shochet et al., 2015 ) and HELES (Rusticus et al., 2020 ).

Limitations and strengths

This is the first review that provides a comprehensive and critical assessment of questionnaires that are used to assess the perception of undergraduate students of their LE in HPEPs, with no restriction to profession, or setting. Moreover, this review is unique in indicating whether a theory or a theoretical framework was utilized in the development of the questionnaire.

Nevertheless, a few limitations should be recognized when interpreting the findings of this review. Although the use of the APERA standards of validity evidence provided a valuable assessment of the quality of the included questionnaires, other reviews have used more detailed and comprehensive criteria (Mansutti et al., 2017 ), such as the COSMIN tool. Using the COSMIN tool in this review was not practical because of its cognitively demanding nature. Another point that should be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings of this review is the total validity score. Adopting the APERA lens for validity assessment and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation assumes equal weight for all five evidence sources and disregards potential differences in their significance, which depends on the specific use context of the assessment. A more flexible and nuanced approach to validity arguments is provided by Kane's framework, which enables prioritization according to the assessment's purpose and inferences as well as a personalized focus on pertinent data (Cook et al., 2015 ; Kane, 2006 , 2013 ). Kane's framework would be an invaluable resource for educators seeking a more thorough and context-sensitive knowledge of assessment validity. Again, the cognitively demanding nature of Kane's framework rendered its application impractical for this review. An additional limitation is that this review did not report the interrater reliability for scoring the sources of validity evidence for each questionnaire. This could have been beneficial in providing valuable insights into the consistency of judgments among reviewers and understanding the potential limitations of using the adopted methodology. Nevertheless, an attempt was made during the data extraction stage to enhance the interrater reliability of the validity evidence assessment of the questionnaires by piloting the data extraction sheet on a sample of the included articles. It is worth mentioning, however, that challenges in consistently measuring and evaluating evidence for specific APERA categories of validity evidence may result from the scarcity of reported evidence related to those categories (Beckman et al., 2005 ). Furthermore, the search in this review was limited to three databases, possibly leading to the exclusion of significant articles exclusive to other databases. Nonetheless, a comprehensive review of the reference lists in the included articles was conducted to identify relevant studies. Finally, restricting the search to English-language publications has potentially resulted in excluding valuable research articles published in other languages, which could affect the generalizability and comprehensiveness of the findings of this scoping review.

Conclusions

This scoping review provided an overview of the available questionnaires in the HPE literature to assess the perception of undergraduate students of their LE. The review also provided a summary of the validity evidence and theoretical basis of the identified questionnaires. A total of 41 questionnaires were identified in the included articles for different HPEPs. The results suggested that DREEM, CLES + T, and CLEI were the most commonly used questionnaires, while PLCS followed by JHLES had the highest total validity evidence score, using the APERA standards of validity evidence and Beckman et al. ( 2005 ) interpretation of these standard categories. Moreover, this review demonstrated that only a few questionnaires in the included articles were designed using a theoretical foundation. Furthermore, the findings of this research suggested that the newly developed questionnaires that are theoretically driven had well-established validity evidence. Therefore, a culture of developing and validating questionnaires according to high standards and best practices needs to be adopted and reinforced by healthcare professional educators to ensure the rigor of studies conducted to improve the quality of the LE. Furthermore, the investigators of the current review strongly advocate for a shift from adopting questionnaires based on the wide spread of use to that based on validity and reliability evidence, as well as to contribute to establishing the psychometric measures of the newly developed ones. Finally, this review did not reveal any questionnaire that was specifically developed to assess the perception of students of their LE in some of the major HPEPs such as pharmacy or biomedical sciences. Consequently, healthcare professional educators and scholars are encouraged to examine the common aspects of the LE within their respective health professions, and ultimately plan to investigate those common aspects across various HPEPs in order to understand how they influence the perception of students of their learning experiences and outcome.

Abdulwahed, M. (2010). Towards enhancing laboratory education by the development and evaluation of the" TriLab": a triple access mode (virtual, hands-on and remote) laboratory © Mahmoud Abdulwahed.

Abusaad, F. E. S., Mohamed, H. E. S., & El-Gilany, A. H. (2015). Nursing students’ perceptions of the educational learning environment in pediatric and maternity courses using DREEM questionnaire. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (29), 26–32.

Google Scholar  

Ahmad, M. S., Bhayat, A., Fadel, H. T., & Mahrous, M. S. (2015). Comparing dental students’ perceptions of their educational environment in Northwestern Saudi Arabia. Saudi Medical Journal, 36 (4), 477–483. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.4.10754

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmed, Y., Taha, M. H., Al-Neel, S., & Gaffar, A. M. (2018). Students’ perception of the learning environment and its relation to their study year and performance in Sudan. International Journal of Medical Education, 9 , 145.

Al Ayed, I., & Sheik, S. (2008). Assessment of the educational environment at the College of Medicine of King Saud University. Riyadh. EMHJ-Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 14 (4), 953–959.

AlHaqwi, A. I., Kuntze, J., & van der Molen, H. T. J. B. M. E. (2014). Development of the clinical learning evaluation questionnaire for undergraduate clinical education: factor structure, validity, and reliability study. BMC Medical Education, 14 (1), 1–8.

Al-Hazimi, A., Al-Hyiani, A., & Roff, S. (2004a). Perceptions of the educational environment of the medical school in King Abdul Aziz University, saudi Arabia. Medical Teacher, 26 (6), 570–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590410001711625

Al-Hazimi, A., Zaini, R., Al-Hyiani, A., Hassan, N., Gunaid, A., Ponnamperuma, G., Karunathilake, I., Roff, S., McAleer, S., & Davis, M. (2004b). Educational environment in traditional and innovative medical schools: A study in four undergraduate medical schools. Education for Health-Abingdon-Carfax Publishing Limited., 17 (2), 192–203.

Ali, K., McHarg, J., Kay, E., Moles, D., Tredwin, C., Coombes, L., & Heffernan, E. J. E. J. O. D. E. (2012). Academic environment in a newly established dental school with an enquiry-based curriculum: perceptions of students from the inaugural cohorts. European Journal of Dental Education, 16 (2), 102–109.

Andalib, M., Malekzadeh, M., Zahra, A., Daryabeigi, M., Yaghmaei, B., Ashrafi, M., Rabbani, A., & Rezaei, N. (2015). Evaluation of educational environment for medical students of a tertiary pediatric hospital in tehran, using DREEM questionnaire. Iranian Journal of Pediatrics, 25 , e2362. https://doi.org/10.5812/ijp.2362

Bai, Y., Peng, C.-Y.J., & Fly, A. D. (2008). Validation of a short questionnaire to assess mothers’ perception of workplace breastfeeding support. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 108 (7), 1221–1225.

Ballouk, R., Mansour, V., Dalziel, B., & Hegazi, I. (2022). The development and validation of a questionnaire to explore medical students’ learning in a blended learning environment. BMC Medical Education, 22 (1), 1–9.

Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory . Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Beckman, T. J., Cook, D. A., & Mandrekar, J. N. (2005). What is the validity evidence for assessments of clinical teaching? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20 (12), 1159–1164.

Billett, S. (2002). Workplace pedagogic practices: Co–participation and learning. British Journal of Educational Studies, 50 (4), 457–481.

Bloom, B. S. J. E. A. Q. (1966). Stability and change in human characteristics: Implications for school reorganization. Educational Administration Quarterly, 2 (1), 35–49.

Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6 , 149.

Britt, L. L., Ball, T. C., Whitfield, T. S., & Woo, C. W. (2022). Students’ perception of the classroom environment: a comparison between innovative and traditional classrooms. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 22 (1), 31–17.

Brown, T., Williams, B., & Lynch, M. (2011). The Australian DREEM: Evaluating student perceptions of academic learning environments within eight health science courses. International Journal of Medical Education, 2 , 94.

Carr, S. E., Miller, S. J., Siddiqui, Z. S., & Jonas-Dwyer, D. R. (2015). Enhancing Capabilities in health professions education. International Journal of Medical Education, 6 , 161–165. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5641.060c

Cerón, M. C., Garbarini, A. I., & Parro, J. F. (2016). Comparison of the perception of the educational atmosphere by nursing students in a Chilean university. Nurse Education Today, 36 , 452–456.

Chan, D. S. (2001). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in assessing hospital learning environments. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 38 (4), 447–459.

Chan, D. S. (2003). Validation of the clinical learning environment inventory. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25 (5), 519–532.

Chuan, O. L., & Barnett, T. (2012). Student, tutor and staff nurse perceptions of the clinical learning environment. Nurse Education in Practice, 12 (4), 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2012.01.003

Closs, L., Mahat, M., & Imms, W. (2022). Learning environments’ influence on students’ learning experience in an Australian faculty of business and economics. Learning Environments Research, 25 (1), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-021-09361-2

Colbert-Getz, J. M., Kim, S., Goode, V. H., Shochet, R. B., & Wright, S. M. (2014). Assessing medical students’ and residents’ perceptions of the learning environment: Exploring validity evidence for the interpretation of scores from existing tools. Academic Medicine, 89 (12), 1687–1693.

Collins, A., & Kapur, M. (2006). Cognitive apprenticeship (Vol. 291). na.

Cook, D. A., Brydges, R., Ginsburg, S., & Hatala, R. (2015). A contemporary approach to validity arguments: A practical guide to K ane’s framework. Medical Education, 49 (6), 560–575.

Council, E. (1998). International standards in medical education: Assessment and accreditation of medical schools’–educational programmes. A WFME Position Paper. Medical Education, 32 (5), 549–558.

Damiano, R. F., Furtado, A. O., da Silva, B. N., Ezequiel, O. D. S., Lucchetti, A. L., DiLalla, L. F., & Lucchetti, G. (2020). Measuring students’ perceptions of the medical school learning environment: translation, transcultural adaptation, and validation of 2 instruments to the Brazilian Portuguese language. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 7 , 2382120520902186.

Demiroren, M., Palaoglu, O., Kemahli, S., Ozyurda, F., & Ayhan, I. H. (2008). Perceptions of students in different phases of medicai education of educational environment: Ankara university facuity of medicine. Medical Education Online, 13 (1), 4477. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v13i.4477

Dimoliatis, I. D., Vasilaki, E., Anastassopoulos, P., Ioannidis, J. P., & Roff, S. (2010). Validation of the Greek translation of the Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM). Education for Health (abingdon, England), 23 (1), 348.

Dornan, T., Muijtjens, A., Graham, J., Scherpbier, A., & Boshuizen, H. (2012). Manchester clinical placement index (MCPI) conditions for medical students’ learning in hospital and community placements. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 17 , 703–716.

D’Souza, M. S., Karkada, S. N., Parahoo, K., & Venkatesaperumal, R. (2015). Perception of and satisfaction with the clinical learning environment among nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 35 (6), 833–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.02.005

Dunn, S. V. (1995). The development of a clinical learning environment scale. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22 (6), 1166–1173.

Dunne, F., McAleer, S., & Roff, S. (2006). Assessment of the undergraduate medical education environment in a large UK medical school. Health Education Journal, 65 (2), 149–158.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random house.

Education, L. (2009). Liaison committee on medical education (LCME) standards on diversity. In: American Association of Medical Colleges, Washington, DC.

Eignor, D. R. (2013). The standards for educational and psychological testing. In K. F. Geisinger, B. A. Bracken, J. F. Carlson, J.-I.C. Hansen, N. R. Kuncel, S. P. Reise, & M. C. Rodriguez (Eds.), APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology (pp. 245–250). Test theory and testing and assessment in industrial and organizational psychology: American Psychological Association.

Farrell, G. A., & Coombes, L. (1994). Student nurse appraisal of placement (SNAP): an attempt to provide objective measures of the learning environment based on qualitative and quantitative evaluations. Nurse Education Today, 14 (4), 331–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/0260-6917(94)90146-5

Fego, M. W., Olani, A., & Tesfaye, T. (2022). Nursing students’ perception towards educational environment in governmental Universities of Southwest Ethiopia: A qualitative study. PLoS ONE, 17 (3), e0263169.

Fluit, C. R., Bolhuis, S., Grol, R., Laan, R., & Wensing, M. (2010). Assessing the quality of clinical teachers: A systematic review of content and quality of questionnaires for assessing clinical teachers. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 25 (12), 1337–1345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1458-y

Fouad, S., El Araby, S., Abed, R. A. R. O., Hefny, M., & Fouad, M. (2020). Using item response theory (IRT) to assess psychometric properties of undergraduate clinical education environment measure (UCEEM) among medical students at the faculty of medicine, Suez Canal University. Education in Medicine Journal, 12 (1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2020.12.1.3

Genn, J. M. (2001). AMEE medical education guide no. 23 (Part 2): Curriculum, environment, limate, quality and change in medical education: a unifying perspective. Medical Teacher, 23 (5), 445–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120075661

Gruppen, L. D., Irby, D. M., Durning, S. J., & Maggio, L. A. (2019). Conceptualizing learning environments in the health professions. Academic Medicine, 94 (7), 969–974.

Gu, Y. H., Xiong, L., Bai, J. B., Hu, J., & Tan, X. D. (2018). Chinese version of the clinical learning environment comparison survey: Assessment of reliability and validity. Nurse Education Today, 71 , 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.09.026

Gustafsson, M., Blomberg, K., & Holmefur, M. (2015). Test-retest reliability of the clinical learning environment, supervision and nurse teacher (CLES+ T) scale. Nurse Education in Practice, 15 (4), 253–257.

Henzi, D., Davis, E., Jasinevicius, R., Hendricson, W., Cintron, L., & Isaacs, M. (2005). Appraisal of the dental school learning environment: The students’ view. Journal of Dental Education, 69 (10), 1137–1147.

Hirani, S. A. A., Karmaliani, R., Christie, T., Parpio, Y., & Rafique, G. (2013). Perceived breastfeeding support assessment tool (PBSAT): Development and testing of psychometric properties with Pakistani urban working mothers. Midwifery, 29 (6), 599–607.

Hoidn, S. (2016). Student-centered learning environments in higher education classrooms . Springer.

Hooven, K. (2014). Evaluation of instruments developed to measure the clinical learning environment: An integrative review. Nurse Educator, 39 (6), 316–320. https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0000000000000076

Hosoda, Y. J. (2006). Development and testing of a clinical learning environment diagnostic inventory for baccalaureate nursing students. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56 (5), 480–490.

Hutchins, E. B. (1961). The 1960 medical school graduate: His perception of his faculty, peers, and environment. Journal of Medical Education, 36 , 322–329.

Insel, P. M., & Moos, R. H. (1974). Psychological environments: Expanding the scope of human ecology. American Psychologist, 29 (3), 179.

Irby, D. M., O’Brien, B. C., Stenfors, T., & Palmgren, P. J. (2021). Selecting instruments for measuring the clinical learning environment of medical education: A 4-domain framework. Academic Medicine, 96 (2), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000003551

Isba, R., Rousseva, C., Woolf, K., Byrne-Davis, L. J. B., & m. e. (2020). Development of a brief learning environment measure for use in healthcare professions education: the Healthcare Education Micro Learning Environment Measure (HEMLEM). BMC Medical Education, 20 (1), 1–9.

Jaffery, A. H., & Kishwar, M. J. P. A. F. M. J. (2019). Student’s perception of educational environment and their academic performance; are they related? Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal, 6 , 1267.

Jeffries, P. (2020). Simulation in nursing education: From conceptualization to evaluation. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Jessee, M. A., Russell, R. G., Kennedy, B. B., Dietrich, M. S., & Schorn, M. N. J. N. E. (2020). Development and Pilot Testing of a Multidimensional Learning Environment Survey. Nurse Educator, 45 (5), E50–E54.

Jeyashree, K., Shewade, H. D., & Kathirvel, S. (2018). Development and psychometric testing of an abridged version of Dundee ready educational environment measure (DREEM). Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 23 (1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12199-018-0702-7

Jiboyewa, D., & Umar, M. A. (2015). Academic achievement at the university of Maiduguri: A survey of teaching-learning environment. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (36), 146–157.

Johansson, U. B., Kaila, P., Ahlner-Elmqvist, M., Leksell, J., Isoaho, H., & Saarikoski, M. J. (2010). Clinical learning environment, supervision and nurse teacher evaluation scale: psychometric evaluation of the Swedish version. Journal of Education and Practice, 66 (9), 2085–2093.

Johnson, H. C. (1978). Minority and nonminority medical students’ perceptions of the medical school environment. Academic Medicine, 53 (2), 146–157.

Junaid Sarfraz, K., Tabasum, S., Yousafzai, U. K., & Fatima, M. (2011). DREEM on: validation of the dundee ready education environment measure in Pakistan. JPMA-Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 61 (9), 885.

Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. Educational Measurement, 4 (2), 17–64.

Kane, M. T. (2013). Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50 (1), 1–73.

Kishore, K., Jaswal, V., Kulkarni, V., & De, D. (2021). Practical guidelines to develop and evaluate a questionnaire. Indian Dermatology Online Journal, 12 (2), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.4103/idoj.IDOJ_674_20

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experience as the source of learning and development . Prentice Hall.

Kossioni, A., Lyrakos, G., Ntinalexi, I., Varela, R., & Economu, I. J. E. J. O. D. E. (2014). The development and validation of a questionnaire to measure the clinical learning environment for undergraduate dental students (DECLEI). European Journal of Dental Education, 18 (2), 71–79.

Krupat, E., Borges, N. J., Brower, R. D., Haidet, P. M., Schroth, W. S., Fleenor, T. J., & Uijtdehaage, S. J. A. M. (2017). The Educational Climate Inventory: measuring students’ perceptions of the preclerkship and clerkship settings. Academic Medicine, 92 (12), 1757–1764.

Leighton, K. (2015). Development of the Clinical learning environment comparison survey. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, Academic Medicine, 11 (1), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.11.002

Leighton, K., Kardong-Edgren, S., Schneidereith, T., Foisy-Doll, C., & Wuestney, K. A. (2021). Meeting undergraduate nursing students’ clinical needs: A comparison of traditional clinical, face-to-face simulation, and screen-based simulation learning environments. Nurse Educator, 46 (6), 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0000000000001064

Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27 (1), 27–52.

Lokuhetty, M. D., Warnakulasuriya, S. P., Perera, R. I., De Silva, H. T., & Wijesinghe, H. D. (2010). Students’ perception of the educational environment in a Medical Faculty with an innovative curriculum in Sri Lanka.

Mansutti, I., Saiani, L., Grassetti, L., & Palese, A. (2017). Instruments evaluating the quality of the clinical learning environment in nursing education: A systematic review of psychometric properties. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 68 , 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2017.01.001

Marshall, R. E. J. J. O. M. E. (1978). Measuring the medical school learning environment. Academic Medicine, 53 (2), 98–104.

Maudsley, R. F. (2001). Role models and the learning environment: Essential elements in effective medical education. Academic Medicine, 76 (5), 432–434. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200105000-00011

Mikkonen, K., Elo, S., Miettunen, J., Saarikoski, M., & Kääriäinen, M. J. J. O. A. N. (2017). Development and testing of the CALD s and CLES+ T scales for international nursing students’ clinical learning environments. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 73 (8), 1997–2011.

Miles, S., Swift, L., & Leinster, S. J. (2012). The dundee ready education environment measure (DREEM): A review of its adoption and use. Medical Teacher, 34 (9), e620–e634. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.668625

Moore-West, M., Harrington, D., Mennin, S., & Kaufman, A. (1986). Distress and attitudes toward the learning environment: Effects of a curriculum innovation. Research in medical education : Proceedings of the … annual Conference. Conference on Research in Medical Education, 25 , 293–300.

Moos, R. H. (1973). Conceptualizations of human environments. Am Psych, 28 (8), 652.

Moos, R. H. (1991). Connections between school, work, and family settings. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 29–53). Pergamon Press.

Newton, J. M., Jolly, B. C., Ockerby, C. M., & Cross, W. M. J. J. O. A. N. (2010). Clinical learning environment inventory: factor analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66 (6), 1371–1381.

Nosair, E., Mirghani, Z., & Mostafa, R. M. (2015). Measuring students’ perceptions of educational environment in the PBL program of Sharjah Medical College. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 2 , S29926.

Orton, H. D. (1979). Ward learning climate and student nurse response Sheffield Hallam University (United Kingdom).

Oyira, E. J., Obot, G., & Inifieyanakuma, O. J. G. J. O. P. (2016). Academic dimension of classroom learning environment and students’ nurses attitude toward schooling. Global Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 22 (2), 255–261.

Parry, J., Mathers, J., Al-Fares, A., Mohammad, M., Nandakumar, M., & Tsivos, D. (2002). Hostile teaching hospitals and friendly district general hospitals: Final year students’ views on clinical attachment locations. Medical Education, 36 (12), 1131–1141. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01374.x

Pimparyon, S. M. C., Pemba, S., Roff, S., & P. (2000). Educational environment, student approaches to learning and academic achievement in a Thai nursing school. Medical Teacher, 22 (4), 359–364.

Pololi, L. H., Evans, A. T., Nickell, L., Reboli, A. C., Coplit, L. D., Stuber, M. L., Vasiliou, V., Civian, J. T., & Brennan, R. T. J. A. P. (2017). Assessing the learning environment for medical students: an evaluation of a novel survey instrument in four medical schools. Academic Psychiatry, 41 (3), 354–359.

Pololi, L., & Price, J. (2000). Validation and use of an instrument to measure the learning environment as perceived by medical students. Teaching & Learning in Medicine, 12 (4), 201–207.

Rawas, H., & Yasmeen, N. (2019). Perception of nursing students about their educational environment in College of Nursing at King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences. Saudi Arabia. Medical Teacher, 41 (11), 1307–1314.

Roff, S., & McAleer, S. (2001). What is educational climate? Medical Teacher, 23 (4), 333–334.

Roff, S., McAleer, S., Harden, R. M., Al-Qahtani, M., Ahmed, A. U., Deza, H., Groenen, G., & Primparyon, P. (1997). Development and validation of the dundee ready education environment measure (DREEM). Medical Teacher, 19 (4), 295–299. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421599709034208

Rosenbaum, M. E., Schwabbauer, M., Kreiter, C., & Ferguson, K. J. (2007). Medical students’ perceptions of emerging learning communities at one medical school. Academic Medicine, 82 (5), 508–515. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31803eae29

Rothman, A. I., & Ayoade, F. (1970). The development of a learning environment: A questionnaire for use in curriculum evaluation. Academic Medicine, 45 (10), 754–759.

Rusticus, S. A., Wilson, D., Casiro, O., & Lovato, C. (2020). Evaluating the quality of health professions learning environments: Development and validation of the health education learning environment survey (HELES). Evaluation & the Health Professions, 43 (3), 162–168.

Rusticus, S., Worthington, A., Wilson, D., & Joughin, K. (2014). The Medical School Learning Environment Survey: An examination of its factor structure and relationship to student performance and satisfaction. Learning Environments Research, 17 (3), 423–435.

Saarikoski, M., Isoaho, H., Leino-Kilpi, H., & Warne, T. J. I. J. O. N. E. S. (2005). Validation of the clinical learning environment and supervision scale. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship . https://doi.org/10.2202/1548-923X.1081

Saarikoski, M., Isoaho, H., Warne, T., & Leino-Kilpi, H. J. I. J. O. N. S. (2008). The nurse teacher in clinical practice: developing the new sub-dimension to the clinical learning environment and supervision (CLES) scale. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45 (8), 1233–1237.

Saarikoski, M., Leino-Kilpi, H. J. I., & j. O. N. S. (2002). The clinical learning environment and supervision by staff nurses: developing the instrument. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 39 (3), 259–267.

Salamonson, Y., Bourgeois, S., Everett, B., Weaver, R., Peters, K., & Jackson, D. (2011). Psychometric testing of the abbreviated Clinical Learning Environment Inventory (CLEI-19). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67 (12), 2668–2676. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05704.x

Sand-Jecklin, K. (2009). Assessing nursing student perceptions of the clinical learning environment: Refinement and testing of the SECEE inventory. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 17 (3), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.1891/1061-3749.17.3.232

Schön, D. J. P. (1983). The reflective practitioner. 116(6), 1546-1552

Schönrock-Adema, J., Bouwkamp-Timmer, T., van Hell, E. A., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2012). Key elements in assessing the educational environment: Where is the theory? Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 17 (5), 727–742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9346-8

Shochet, R. B., Colbert-Getz, J. M., Levine, R. B., & Wright, S. M. (2013). Gauging events that influence students’ perceptions of the medical school learning environment: Findings from one institution. Academic Medicine, 88 (2), 246–252. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31827bfa14

Shochet, R., Colbert-Getz, J., & Wright, S. (2015). The Johns Hopkins learning environment scale: Measuring medical students’ perceptions of the processes supporting professional formation. Academic Medicine . https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000706

Simpson, D., McDiarmid, M., La Fratta, T., Salvo, N., Bidwell, J. L., Moore, L., & Irby, D. M. J. J. O. G. M. E. (2021). Preliminary Evidence supporting a novel 10-item clinical learning environment quick survey (CLEQS). Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 13 (4), 553–560.

Soemantri, D., Herrera, C., & Riquelme, A. (2010). Measuring the educational environment in health professions studies: A systematic review. Medical Teacher, 32 (12), 947–952.

Stewart, D., & Klein, S. (2016). The use of theory in research. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 38 (3), 615–619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-015-0216-y

Strand, P., Sjöborg, K., Stalmeijer, R., Wichmann-Hansen, G., Jakobsson, U., & Edgren, G. (2013). Development and psychometric evaluation of the undergraduate clinical education environment measure (UCEEM). Medical Teacher, 35 (12), 1014–1026. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2013.835389

Sunkad, M. A., Javali, S., Shivapur, Y., & Wantamutte, A. J. J. E. E. H. P. (2015). Health sciences students’ perception of the educational environment of KLE University. India as Measured with the Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)., 12 (12), 37.

Tackett, S., Abu Bakar, H., Shilkofski, N., Coady, N., Rampal, K., & Wright, S. (2015). Profiling medical school learning environments in Malaysia: a validation study of the Johns Hopkins Learning Environment Scale. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions . https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.39

Thibault, G. E. (2020). The future of health professions education: Emerging trends in the United States. FASEB Bioadv, 2 (12), 685–694. https://doi.org/10.1096/fba.2020-00061

Tomietto, M., Saiani, L., Cunico, L., Cicolini, G., Palese, A., Watson, P., & Saarikoski, M. (2012). Clinical learning environment and supervision plus nurse teacher (CLES+ T) scale: testing the psychometric characteristics of the Italian version. Giornale Italiano Di Medicina Del Lavoro Ed Ergonomia, 34 (2), 72–80.

Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., & Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169 (7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

Vizcaya-Moreno, M. F., Pérez-Cañaveras, R. M., De Juan, J., & Saarikoski, M. J. I. J. O. N. S. (2015). Development and psychometric testing of the clinical learning environment, supervision and nurse teacher evaluation scale (CLES+ T): The Spanish version. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52 (1), 361–367.

Wach, F.-S., Karbach, J., Ruffing, S., Brünken, R., & Spinath, F. M. (2016). University students’ satisfaction with their academic studies: Personality and motivation matter. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 55.

Wakeford, R. E. (1981). students’ perception of the medical school learning environment: a pilot study into some differences and similarities between clinical schools in the UK Assess & Eval in High Educ. Assessment in Higher Education, 6 (3), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293810060303

Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity . Cambridge University Press.

White, C. (2010). A socio-cultural approach to learning in the practice setting. Nurse Education Today, 30 (8), 794–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.02.002

Yılmaz, N., Velipasaoglu, S., Sahin, H., Başusta, N., Midik, O., Budakoglu, I., Mamakli, S., Tengiz, F., Durak, H., Ozan, S., & Coskun, O. (2016). A De Novo Tool to Measure the Preclinical Learning Climate of Medical Faculties in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16 , 1–14. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.1.0064

Yusoff, M. S. B. (2012). Stability of DREEM in a sample of medical students: A prospective study. Education Research International . https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/509638

Download references

Open Access funding provided by the Qatar National Library. This research work was supported by Qatar University Internal Grant [QUCG-CPH-22/23–565].

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Clinical Pharmacy and Practice Department, College of Pharmacy, QU Health, Qatar University, PO Box 2713, Doha, Qatar

Banan Mukhalalati, Ola Yakti & Sara Elshami

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: [Banan Mukhalalati]; Methodology: [Banan Mukhalalati, Ola Yakti, Sara Elshami]; Formal analysis and investigation: [Banan Mukhalalati, Ola Yakti, Sara Elshami]; Writing—original draft preparation: [Ola Yakti]; Writing—review and editing: [Banan Mukhalalati, Ola Yakti, Sara Elshami]; Funding acquisition: [Banan Mukhalalati]; Resources: [Banan Mukhalalati]; Supervision: [Banan Mukhalalati].

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Banan Mukhalalati .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Ethical approval

Not required for this review paper.

Consent to participate

Additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 41 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mukhalalati, B., Yakti, O. & Elshami, S. A scoping review of the questionnaires used for the assessment of the perception of undergraduate students of the learning environment in healthcare professions education programs. Adv in Health Sci Educ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-024-10319-1

Download citation

Received : 26 November 2023

Accepted : 18 February 2024

Published : 29 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-024-10319-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Learning environment
• Health professions education programs
• Perceptions
• Questionnaires
• Validity evidence
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Top 30 Outdoor Learning Examples

Jul 15, 2023

Outdoor learning has emerged as a powerful educational tool, transcending traditional classrooms. This article explores 30 diverse examples of outdoor education, providing educators, parents, and learners with a range of ideas to integrate nature-based experiences into their educational journey. These examples showcase the transformative potential of outdoor learning, fostering curiosity, critical thinking, and a deep connection with the natural world.

From scientific explorations of ecosystems to historical reenactments, these outdoor experiences engage learners beyond textbooks. They also promote environmental stewardship, cultivating a generation that values sustainability and conservation.

By highlighting accessible and adaptable outdoor learning opportunities, this article empowers educators irrespective of location or resources. The benefits of outdoor education extend beyond knowledge acquisition, encompassing improved mental and physical health, creativity, problem-solving skills, and social-emotional development.

Best Examples of Outdoor Learning

Outdoor learning is a valuable educational approach that takes place outside the traditional classroom setting, allowing students to engage with their environment and learn through firsthand experiences. Below are some excellent examples of outdoor learning activities, each explained in a detailed and professional manner:

Nature Walks and Field Trips Nature walks and field trips provide students with an opportunity to explore the natural world and gain a deeper understanding of their surroundings. Whether visiting a local park, nature reserve, or botanical garden, students can observe and interact with various plants, animals, and ecosystems. Through guided activities and discussions, educators can foster curiosity, critical thinking, and environmental awareness.

Gardening and Horticulture Engaging in gardening and horticultural activities allows students to develop a range of skills while connecting with nature. Through planting, nurturing, and harvesting plants, students learn about biology, ecosystems, and the importance of sustainable practices. Gardening also promotes responsibility, teamwork, and patience, as students must care for and maintain their plants over time.

Science Experiments and Investigations Outdoor environments offer a wealth of opportunities for conducting hands-on science experiments and investigations. Students can explore topics such as weather patterns, soil composition, biodiversity, and ecological interactions. By actively participating in data collection, analysis, and interpretation, students develop scientific inquiry skills and a deeper understanding of scientific concepts.

Mapping and Orienteering Mapping and orienteering activities provide students with a chance to navigate and explore their surroundings using maps, compasses, and other tools. Through this process, students develop spatial awareness, map reading skills, and the ability to navigate using landmarks. Additionally, mapping and orienteering foster problem-solving, decision-making, and collaboration as students work together to reach specific destinations.

Outdoor Art and Creative Expression Outdoor spaces offer a dynamic and inspiring setting for artistic expression. Students can engage in activities such as nature-inspired drawing, painting, photography, or sculpture. These activities encourage students to observe and appreciate the beauty of the natural world while expressing their creativity and emotions. Outdoor art also provides opportunities for interdisciplinary connections, where students can explore the intersection of art, science, and the environment.

Environmental Stewardship Projects Engaging in environmental stewardship projects empowers students to make a positive impact on their local communities and the environment. Examples include organizing clean-up events, creating recycling initiatives, or designing and implementing sustainable practices within the school. Through these projects, students develop a sense of responsibility, environmental ethics, and a deeper understanding of their role in preserving the planet.

Outdoor Physical Education Outdoor physical education activities promote holistic development, combining physical fitness with natural surroundings. Students can participate in sports, games, and team-building activities in open spaces or natural settings. This approach encourages physical fitness, enhances motor skills, fosters social interaction, and promotes an appreciation for the benefits of an active lifestyle.

Outdoor Experiential Learning Experiential learning in outdoor settings involves engaging students in hands-on, immersive experiences. This can include survival skills training, camping trips, or outdoor adventure programs. Through these experiences, students develop resilience, problem-solving abilities, and teamwork skills, while also fostering an appreciation for nature and an understanding of their own capabilities.

Citizen Science Projects Engaging students in citizen science projects allows them to contribute to real scientific research while learning about the environment. Students can participate in activities such as bird watching, butterfly monitoring, or water quality testing. By collecting and analyzing data, students develop scientific skills, critical thinking, and a sense of environmental stewardship.

Outdoor Literature Circles Literature circles conducted in outdoor settings offer a unique and immersive experience for students. Reading and discussing literature related to nature or outdoor themes in a natural environment can deepen their connection to the text and inspire creativity. Students can engage in reflective discussions, analyze literary elements, and make connections between the literature and their surroundings.

Historical and Cultural Site Visits Visiting historical and cultural sites outdoors allows students to connect with the past while exploring significant landmarks and artifacts. Field trips to museums, archaeological sites, or historical landmarks provide opportunities for students to deepen their understanding of history, culture, and societal development. Engaging in guided discussions and interactive activities at these sites enhances students’ appreciation for heritage and historical context.

Outdoor Team-Building and Leadership Activities Engaging students in outdoor team-building and leadership activities fosters cooperation, communication, and problem-solving skills. Activities such as ropes courses, trust-building exercises, or problem-solving challenges can be conducted in outdoor settings. These activities promote resilience, self-confidence, and empathy, while also cultivating essential interpersonal and leadership qualities.

Outdoor Music and Performing Arts Outdoor spaces provide unique opportunities for students to explore music and performing arts. Whether it’s playing instruments, singing, or performing theatrical productions, students can showcase their talents while embracing the natural surroundings. Outdoor music and performing arts activities offer a platform for self-expression, creativity, and collaboration, while fostering an appreciation for the arts.

Astronomy and Stargazing Outdoor spaces provide an excellent setting for studying the night sky and exploring astronomy. Students can learn about celestial bodies, constellations, and planetary movements through stargazing activities. Observing and documenting astronomical phenomena, such as meteor showers or lunar phases, helps students develop scientific inquiry skills and a sense of wonder about the universe.

Outdoor Geology and Rock Collecting Outdoor environments offer opportunities for students to explore the fascinating world of geology. By examining rocks, minerals, and fossils, students can learn about Earth’s geological processes and the formation of different rock types. Engaging in hands-on activities like rock collecting, geological mapping, and identifying rock formations helps students develop observational skills and an understanding of Earth’s geological history.

Environmental Photography and Videography Outdoor environments provide stunning backdrops for students to capture and document their surroundings through photography or videography. Students can learn composition techniques, experiment with lighting, and tell visual stories about the environment. This activity promotes artistic expression, enhances observation skills, and encourages students to document and raise awareness about environmental issues.

Outdoor Cooking and Nutrition Cooking and nutrition activities conducted outdoors provide students with a practical and enjoyable learning experience. Students can learn about healthy food choices, food preparation techniques, and the environmental impact of food production. Engaging in outdoor cooking activities, such as preparing meals using local ingredients or growing and harvesting produce, promotes culinary skills, teamwork, and an understanding of sustainable food systems.

Outdoor Environmental Surveys and Assessments Students can actively participate in conducting environmental surveys and assessments in outdoor settings. They can measure and analyze factors such as air quality, water quality, or biodiversity in a specific area. Through data collection and interpretation, students gain a deeper understanding of environmental issues and the importance of environmental monitoring and conservation efforts.

Outdoor Language and Literacy Activities Language and literacy skills can be developed in outdoor environments through various activities. Students can engage in nature journaling, where they observe and describe the natural world, or participate in outdoor storytelling sessions. Additionally, creating outdoor poetry or writing projects inspired by the surroundings fosters creativity, communication skills, and an appreciation for nature’s influence on language and literature.

Environmental Debate and Discussion Outdoor spaces offer an ideal setting for engaging in lively debates and discussions centered around environmental topics. Students can explore current environmental issues, analyze different perspectives, and present their arguments in an outdoor forum. This activity cultivates critical thinking, research skills, and the ability to articulate opinions while fostering a deeper understanding of environmental challenges and potential solutions.

Outdoor Reflection and Mindfulness Outdoor environments provide a peaceful and serene backdrop for students to engage in reflection and mindfulness activities. Through guided meditation, journaling, or sensory awareness exercises, students can develop self-awareness, emotional regulation, and a sense of connection with nature. These activities promote well-being, stress reduction, and the cultivation of a positive mindset.

Outdoor Social Studies and Cultural Immersion Outdoor environments offer opportunities for students to explore social studies and cultural concepts firsthand. They can visit historical landmarks, cultural sites, or local communities to learn about diverse cultures, traditions, and historical events. Engaging in guided discussions and interactive activities in these outdoor settings deepens students’ understanding of social studies and promotes cultural appreciation and empathy.

Outdoor Wildlife Observation and Tracking Engaging in wildlife observation and tracking activities allows students to develop an understanding of animal behavior, habitats, and ecosystems. Students can use binoculars, cameras, or field guides to identify and document various species they encounter. This activity fosters curiosity, patience, and ecological awareness while promoting a sense of responsibility towards wildlife conservation.

Outdoor STEM Challenges Outdoor STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) challenges provide hands-on opportunities for students to apply STEM concepts in real-world scenarios. Students can design and construct structures, create simple machines, or solve engineering problems using natural materials. These challenges encourage critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, and the application of scientific principles.

Outdoor Water Exploration and Study Outdoor water exploration activities allow students to investigate the properties and importance of water. They can study aquatic ecosystems, conduct water quality testing, or engage in water conservation initiatives. By actively participating in water-related experiments and investigations, students develop scientific inquiry skills, ecological literacy, and a sense of responsibility towards water resources.

Outdoor Entrepreneurship and Business Ventures Engaging students in outdoor entrepreneurship and business ventures allows them to apply their knowledge and skills in real-world contexts. Students can set up and manage small businesses, such as a farmers’ market, a plant nursery, or an outdoor adventure program. This activity promotes entrepreneurial thinking, financial literacy, and hands-on experience in running a business.

Outdoor Survival Skills Training Engaging students in outdoor survival skills training allows them to develop essential life skills while fostering resilience and self-reliance. Students can learn skills such as fire-building, shelter construction, navigation, and wilderness first aid. This activity promotes problem-solving, critical thinking, and adaptability while instilling confidence and a deeper connection with nature.

Outdoor Environmental Journalism Outdoor environments provide an excellent backdrop for students to explore environmental journalism and storytelling. Students can conduct interviews, write articles, or create multimedia projects that raise awareness about environmental issues and conservation efforts. This activity fosters research skills, media literacy, and the ability to communicate environmental messages effectively.

Outdoor Archaeology and Paleontology Engaging students in outdoor archaeology and paleontology activities allows them to explore the history of the Earth and its inhabitants. Students can participate in archaeological digs or fossil hunting expeditions to uncover artifacts and fossils. This hands-on experience promotes scientific inquiry, critical thinking, and an appreciation for cultural heritage and Earth’s geological past.

Outdoor Service Learning Projects Engaging in outdoor service learning projects allows students to contribute to their communities while applying classroom knowledge. Students can participate in activities such as environmental restoration, community gardening, or designing accessible outdoor spaces. This activity promotes civic engagement, social responsibility, and a deeper understanding of community needs and sustainable practices.

Outdoor Sensory Exploration Outdoor spaces provide a rich sensory environment for students to explore and engage their senses. Students can participate in sensory walks, where they focus on observing and describing the sights, sounds, smells, textures, and tastes in nature. This activity promotes mindfulness, sensory awareness, and the appreciation of the natural world’s beauty and diversity.

Outdoor Coding and Robotics Outdoor spaces can serve as a creative playground for students to explore coding and robotics. Students can program and control robots to navigate through obstacle courses or interact with the natural environment. This activity promotes computational thinking, problem-solving, and the integration of technology with the outdoors.

Outdoor Mathematics Activities Mathematics can come alive in outdoor environments through various activities. Students can engage in geometry by identifying and measuring angles in architectural structures or natural objects. They can collect and analyze data related to distances, heights, or volumes. Additionally, mathematical concepts such as patterns, symmetry, and proportions can be explored through the observation of natural phenomena.

Outdoor Historical Reenactments Outdoor historical reenactments allow students to immerse themselves in significant historical events. Students can research, plan, and reenact historical scenes, bringing history to life. This activity promotes historical understanding, empathy, and the development of historical analysis and interpretation skills.

Benefits of Outdoor Learning

In recent years, educators and researchers have recognized the powerful impact that outdoor learning can have on students’ academic, social, and emotional development. Embracing the natural environment as a classroom, outdoor learning offers a refreshing departure from traditional indoor education, fostering a unique blend of experiential and hands-on learning opportunities. This section delves into the manifold benefits of outdoor learning, shedding light on how it enhances the educational experience and promotes holistic growth in learners of all ages.

• Engaging and Multi-Sensory Learning Outdoor learning immerses students in a dynamic and ever-changing environment, stimulating their senses and fostering a deeper connection with the subject matter. Unlike the confines of a classroom, the great outdoors provides a wealth of sensory experiences, allowing learners to see, hear, smell, touch, and even taste aspects of their surroundings. This multi-sensory engagement not only enriches learning but also improves information retention and comprehension, as students form lasting associations between concepts and real-world experiences.
• Encouraging Curiosity and Inquiry The outdoor environment inherently sparks curiosity, inviting students to explore and discover the wonders of the natural world. Whether observing a crawling insect, investigating the life cycle of plants, or deciphering the complexities of ecosystems, outdoor learning nurtures a sense of wonder and encourages students to ask questions, seek answers, and engage in critical thinking. By fostering curiosity and inquiry, this approach cultivates a love for lifelong learning, empowering students to become active seekers of knowledge.
• Promoting Health and Well-being Spending time outdoors has numerous physical and mental health benefits for students. Research suggests that exposure to natural environments can reduce stress, improve concentration, and enhance overall well-being. Outdoor learning allows students to breathe in fresh air, soak up vitamin D from sunlight, and engage in physical activities that promote fitness and motor skills development. Additionally, being in nature promotes mental relaxation, rejuvenation, and a sense of connectedness, contributing to improved mental health and resilience.
• Enhancing Social Skills and Collaboration Outdoor learning creates an ideal setting for developing social skills and fostering collaboration among students. Working together to solve challenges, navigating unfamiliar terrain, and engaging in group activities build teamwork, communication, and interpersonal skills. Students learn to negotiate, share responsibilities, and value diverse perspectives, all while building lasting bonds with their peers. The natural environment often provides opportunities for cooperative learning and problem-solving, promoting a sense of collective achievement and mutual support.
• Environmental Awareness and Stewardship Exposure to the outdoors nurtures a deep appreciation and understanding of the natural world, instilling a sense of environmental responsibility and stewardship. Outdoor learning encourages students to engage in ecological studies, learn about sustainable practices, and develop a profound respect for the delicate balance of ecosystems. By connecting with nature firsthand, students develop a sense of personal responsibility to protect and preserve the environment, paving the way for environmentally conscious citizens and future leaders.

Outdoor learning offers a multitude of benefits that extend beyond the traditional classroom setting. By embracing the natural environment as a dynamic and experiential learning space, educators and parents can foster holistic growth and development in students and children. The integration of outdoor learning into educational practices holds immense potential for creating transformative educational experiences.

For teachers and parents interested in incorporating outdoor learning into their approach, several key recommendations can guide their efforts. Firstly, recognizing the educational value of natural spaces such as parks, gardens, and nature reserves is crucial. These areas can serve as alternative classrooms, providing students with hands-on experiences that connect them with the natural world.

Nurturing curiosity and encouraging inquiry-based learning is another important aspect of outdoor education. By prompting students to ask questions and engage in critical thinking about their surroundings, educators and parents can cultivate a sense of wonder and promote deep learning. Encouraging students or children to document their observations and findings through journals, drawings, or photography further enhances their connection with the subject matter.

Collaborative learning is a valuable aspect of outdoor education. Designing activities that require teamwork, collaboration, and communication among students or children fosters social skills and a sense of collective achievement. Through cooperative projects and problem-solving tasks, learners develop important interpersonal skills that will serve them well in their future endeavors.

Ensuring safety and appropriate supervision during outdoor learning activities is of paramount importance. By conducting thorough risk assessments, providing necessary safety equipment, and adhering to local regulations and guidelines, teachers and parents can create a secure and nurturing learning environment.

Engaging with local resources and experts adds depth and authenticity to outdoor learning experiences. Tapping into the knowledge and expertise of nature centers, environmental organizations, or professionals in the field enhances students’ understanding and connection to the natural world . Collaborating with these resources can enrich the educational journey and provide valuable opportunities for students or children to learn from experienced individuals.

Furthermore, involving parents and the community in outdoor learning initiatives creates a sense of shared responsibility and reinforces the value of these experiences. Organizing field trips, nature walks, or volunteer activities that encourage family participation and community engagement strengthens the impact of outdoor learning and broadens its reach.

By implementing these recommendations, educators and parents can create meaningful and engaging outdoor learning experiences for students or children. The benefits of outdoor learning encompass academic engagement, social skill development, environmental awareness, and overall well-being. Through the power of nature, we have the opportunity to inspire a lifelong love for learning and cultivate a generation that values and protects the world around them.

Below, you can watch a very insightful video about the benefits of outdoor learning.  

Read also: Top 100 Essential Travel Items

The Most Popular on BitGlint

• Gene-Editing Babies: 20 Pros and Cons to Consider

The topic of gene-editing babies is one that stirs a lot of discussion and debate. It's about scientists using...

Top 30 Individual Autonomy Examples & Why It Matters

Individual autonomy, the capacity to make one's own decisions and govern oneself, stands as a cornerstone of personal...

• Top 20 Cultural Hybridization Examples & Definition

Cultural hybridization is a fascinating phenomenon where different cultures blend to create something entirely new and...

Top 20 Moral Subjectivism Examples & Definition

Moral subjectivism asserts that ethical judgments and moral values are based on individual preferences and...

Top 20 Dualism Examples & Definition

Dualism, a concept deeply rooted in philosophy, theology, and psychology, refers to the existence of two distinct,...

Top 30 Symbolic Archetypes Examples & Their Meaning

Symbolic archetypes are the building blocks of storytelling, weaving deep significance and universal themes into...

Top 20 Pluralism Examples & Definition

Pluralism represents the fabric of a society woven with varied threads – different beliefs, cultures, and...

Get Inspired with BitGlint

AI-powered Personalization & All You Need to Know About It

Top 30 Imperfect Things That Are Beautiful

30 Examples of Perspective: Diverse Viewpoints Explored

UK Citizenship: A Comprehensive Guide How To Get It

Top 20 Benefits of Having a Mentor in Your Life

Top 30 Self-Care Morning Rituals

Top 20 Disadvantages of Credit Cards

30 Best Examples How Can Nature Inspire Us

Top 30 Authoritarianism Examples: Definition & Guide

Guide to Growing Organic Vegetables at Home - 10 Tips

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Recent Articles

• Private Schools: 30 Pros and Cons to Consider
• Genetic Elites vs. The Rest: A New Form of Inequality?
• 30 Best Moral Dilemma Examples

• Our Mission

8 Ways to Create a Supportive Work Environment for Teachers

Improving teachers’ work-related mental health requires a commitment to transforming their workplace culture.

How can school leaders create an environment where teachers feel supported? Many teachers are stressed and burned out and experience work-related mental health challenges such as depression and anxiety. These struggles lead many to leave the profession , creating a downward spiral that is critically impacting the quality of public education. The more teachers leave the profession, the more challenging the job is for those who stay behind.

Addressing this problem takes more than well-intentioned gestures, such as annual care packages or single-day well-being fairs. Instead, school leaders need to create and sustain a safe and supportive work environment every day of the school year. This involves changing structures, policies, and practices that impact teachers’ daily lives to address some of the root causes of stress. The goal is to foster and sustain a work environment that is more welcoming and conducive to personal and professional growth.

8 Steps to Create a Safe and Supportive Work Environment

1. Start with educators’ voices. Trying to address educator well-being without educator voice is a losing proposition. The first step for creating a more supportive work environment is to engage staff in discussions. Staff’s input and insights will help you develop a road map. Ask your staff to develop a list of glows and grows pertaining to their current work environment. The glows are the structures, policies, and practices that are working for them now—you want to keep those! The grows are recommendations about changes they would like to see. As you lead this activity, it’s good to emphasize the need for realistic and sustainable changes. 

2. Encourage and enable self-care. Much has been written about the importance of self-care among educators . If you ask teachers, they will tell you they know how to care for themselves; they just don’t know when , given all the responsibilities they juggle. In a safe and supportive work environment, teachers are provided encouragement, time, and space to care for themselves. This includes encouraging teachers to develop a self-care plan and share their plan with a colleague who can become their accountability partner.

3. Share the responsibility of caring for students. A large source of stress among teachers, particularly at the elementary school level, is carrying the enormous burden of their students’ well-being. Your staff may suffer from compassion fatigue —physical and mental exhaustion caused from caring for others who are suffering. This happens when teachers are overwhelmed by the care they provide to students who themselves struggle with mental health challenges. To address this, adopt a coordinated approach to supporting students’ well-being among teams of teachers and counselors to reduce the burden carried by a single educator.

For example, using Multi-Tiered Systems of Support to promote student well-being will help your staff identify struggling students, work with student support teams to identify additional supports, and share the responsibility for caring for students with colleagues.

4. Promote relational care. An important element of a safe and supportive work environment is one in which educators feel supported by their colleagues. Education leaders can support relational care by creating opportunities for educators to feel supported and in turn support their colleagues. These can include building formal or informal mentoring programs, allocating time for regular collaborative planning, and enabling teachers to observe each other as a way to share best practices.

5. Maintain open and consistent two-way communication. In a positive work environment, staff feel trusted, respected, and informed. Nothing says trust and respect more than putting in place mechanisms to communicate with staff and to allow staff to communicate back to school leaders. You can do this through a combination of formal mechanisms, such as weekly newsletters, and informal mechanisms, such as being visible and available to teachers in staff lounges and at departmental meetings.   

6. Create efficient systems and processes. A critical factor impacting educator well-being is time—or rather, time scarcity. Ensuring that the systems and processes that educators are required to be part of are as efficient as possible can save educators precious time. For example, schools form a wide range of teams, committees, and task forces for different purposes. Each effort involves regular meetings, which in turn can suck time and energy.

Use a tool, such as this Working Smarter Matrix , to examine the work that each group is doing and to reduce duplication of efforts, eliminate groups that are not high priority, and maximize staff time. Other examples of efficiencies include using data management systems that allow educators to quickly look at multiple data sources at once, storing useful documents on well-organized and easily accessible online folders, and beginning to explore AI solutions to reduce the staff’s tasks .

7. Promote a culture of appreciation. Your supportive words and actions are invaluable. Launch and sustain mechanisms to demonstrate appreciation and encourage staff to demonstrate appreciation to each other. For example, highlight staff achievements and actions every day by having an online “thank you” book, where you share notes for staff and staff write notes of appreciation for each other. It is important to keep in mind, though, that the goal is to create an ongoing culture of appreciation, not to isolate expressions of appreciation to specific events or times of the year such as end-of-year celebrations.

8. Offer pathways to professional growth. In the business world, it is widely known that professional development can boost job satisfaction and employee engagement . The field of education is no different. Professional learning can help your staff build confidence and increase excitement at work. In addition, offering opportunities for professional growth says to staff that your district is willing to invest in them, creating a stronger sense of belonging. And of course, teachers’ professional growth also benefits students.

Fostering professional growth can vary from offering formal opportunities, such as professional development workshops, to creating professional learning communities that can sustain learning and give staff time to connect with each other. Other examples of professional development include shadowing or externship opportunities to learn from colleagues with different roles. 

These eight critical steps toward a safe and supportive work environment take time, effort, and organizational changes. Though challenging, they are worth it. Furthermore, they are all interrelated—they all involve making a cultural shift toward attention to individual needs, positive relationships, and a sense of community. Successfully achieving these cultural shifts has the potential to promote educator well-being, retain amazing educators in schools and in the profession, and ultimately strengthen public education.

Are computers or books best for educating children?

C ommentators often pit books against computers as the best learning tools, but both are great in different circumstances. The debate distracts from the real problem in education — poverty.The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates said that writing things down would make people forgetful. Now, thousands of years later, we're in the fortunate position of being able to discuss Socrates' thinking, precisely because it was written down.

Commentators often say the written word -- books -- are best and that computers negatively impact learning, almost for the same reasons that Socrates was against writing things down: forgetfulness, when memory is a cornerstone of learning. You may wonder: What have people got against new technologies?

As more and more classrooms shift from print to digital books and other materials, researchers are looking into the impact on children's learning.

The field is new and the evidence is mixed -- there is no scientific consensus on whether books or digital devices are better for a child's learning.

One studyin elementary schools in Honduras, for example, found that substituting laptops for textbooks did not make a difference in student learning in the end -- it was neither positive nor negative.

But isn't it common sense that both forms of learning -- print and digital -- can be effective, or not, depending on the individual and the situation? Let's dig a little deeper.

Early learning rewires the brain

It's important to consider neuroscience here because it can help educators choose which tools to use at different stages of a child's development.

And neuroscientists have shown us that learning, and the formation of memory, physically rewires the brain.

The brain is "plastic" -- it grows and prunes connections between neurons as we form memories, learn and forget. This is true at all ages, but the brain is particularly plastic during childhood.

The brain's plasticity is massively dependent on our experiences and environment.

Studies have shown that the richer our learning environment is during childhood, we don't just learn more "stuff," but we also change the way our brains learns new things for the rest of our lives.

The best example here is language learning. Children learn a second language very easily compared to adults, because their brain is more plastic.

What's more, adults who learnt two languages in childhood can learn a third language much quicker than adults who learned only one language in childhood -- their brain has been trained to learn languages.

At the other end of the spectrum, sensory deprivation during childhood permanently changes the brain for the worse. Children deprived of different experiences -- less touch and interaction with adults, for instance, fewer sights and sounds, and little access to learning -- can develop smaller brains. These changes often cannot be reversed later in life.

Benefits of richer learning experiences

What does this mean for education? Children need to be exposed to as many different types of learning tools as possible, both digital and physical.

It might mean turning to books and handwriting to form lasting knoweldge on something.

Studiesshow that the act of writing requires the brain to be an active participant in the note-taking process, but that the brain is less active when typing, so writing by hand commits more of the material to memory.

Or using digital learning platforms could mean a much richer experience: a richness of animated movies, reward-based educational apps, virtual classrooms, and AI tools like ChatGPT, to motivate students to learn in interactive ways.

Research shows digital technology is effective in enhancing literacy and numeracy skills, manual dexterity, and visuospatial working memory when used in a learning context.

The beneficial outcomes of this influences all areas of a child's learning, including language, functional literacy, maths, science, general knowledge, creative thinking -- the list goes on.

Computers: Impact on physical and mental health

There are negatives linked to digital technologies, as well. Some studies show computers can have a negative impact on attention, and that children use computers passively instead of as an active learning tool that engages the brain. But it's not yet clear whether these negative impacts are short-term or long-lasting.

Some studies also suggest that over-use of computers affects physical and mental health. But that may have more to do with sitting in one place for a long time, rather than the computers themselves.

That's why running outside or kicking a ball around is vital for children's development, and their academic performance, too.

The real issue in education is poverty

There are many factors at play in a child's education. Their home environment is just as important as the materials and devices they use for learning. One of the biggest problems in education is poverty -- poor access to books and computers.

This issue became apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic, when children from disadvantaged backgrounds had less access to computers or books at home during times when schools were closed.

A UK-based survey, for instance, found that a third of students in deprived areas did not have adequate access to home learning tools during the pandemic.

The effect was a decline in their academic performance. Learning outcomes in high school-aged children have fallen in recent years, and it's more due to socioeconomic factors than anything else, according to studies. It's a trend seen around the world and has been associated with poor access to richer educational tools.

Edited by: Zulfikar Abbany

Copyright 2024 DW.COM, Deutsche Welle. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.