Composing New Narratives, Creating New Spaces: Constructing a Learning Commons with a Wide and Lasting Impact
Justin A. Young, Eastern Washington University
The Writers’ Center and the administrative leadership team that developed the first phase of the Learning Commons are not the only stakeholders who are participating in the ongoing creation of the Commons; other stakeholders are shaped by particular narratives and have their own story to tell. Since this chapter is authored by a stakeholder tied to a specific entity in the Commons, the Writers’ Center, rather than speak for these other stakeholders, it is most fair and accurate to discuss them by describing their dynamic, collaborative relationships to the Center. In other words, this page will attempt to tell their stories through the perspective of the Writers’ Center itself by providing a snapshot of their involvement in the planning of the Commons and/or how the move to the Learning Commons changed or shaped their role on campus, particularly in terms of how the collaborative relationships each entity or group had with the Center have changed.
This section will focus primarily on the two entities central to the development and early evolution of specific Writers’ Center services and programs: the students of EWU, and the Multi-Media Commons. The decision to focus on these entities provides focus to this discussion of collaboration in the Commons, as so many different programs and partners could be discussed. However, one other entity needs to be noted here: the JFK Library itself. The library, of course, was and continues to be the central partner in the Learning Commons project, as its facility literally encompasses the Commons. The previous dean of the library initiated the Learning Commons project by inviting the Writers’ Center to move into the library, and he played a central role in the leading the development of the Commons. The current dean has supported the continued success of Learning Commons, by collaboratively working to identify and share resources and space within the library for use by the Learning Commons as it continues to expand. In fact, numerous sacrifices and compromises were made throughout the Commons development process by library leadership, faculty, and staff. For example, the library was willing to basically give up over half of the space on the main floor of the library; this space had been previously designated for computers (used to search the library catalog) and for books and journals. The library went through the time-consuming and difficult process of identifying and deaccessioning all of the paper copies of resources also held in digital format. This is a step that many libraries would not take. The Learning Commons at EWU would not and could not have happened without the leadership, support, and sacrifices made by the people who comprise the EWU JFK Library.
The students of EWU had and continue to have a prominent role in the development of the Learning Commons, making the Commons a truly student-centered enterprise in the most literal sense. A brief anecdote bears this out. When members of the Learning Commons development team, at an early stage of planning, brought several students on a trip to view and learn from existent learning commons in Washington state, officials at the schools being visited were surprised. They remarked that it was a particularly great idea to bring students and include them in the planning of the Commons; none of the other learning commons that were visited had included students in the planning or development of these spaces.
Students were involved in not only the design of the physical space of the Commons, but also in the conceptual vision of the Commons. Two particular decision points stand out, one in terms of concept, and another in terms of design. The EWU student body president of 2011-12, Eric Palimino, was particularly involved in the planning of the Learning Commons; he was included in the core leadership team tasked with creating the Commons. The work of this group included the development of a mission statement for the Learning Commons. This student leader described his vision of the Commons in a way that influenced both its mission statement and its design. He suggested that the ideal Learning Commons would be, to paraphrase, a comfortable place where students could go beyond what was required of them by their classes. This idea, that the space of the Commons should be inviting and comfortable to students while enabling 
them to push beyond what was comfortable or easy in their work as a student, became central to the vision and design of the Learning Commons.
Figure 14: The Learning Commons offers students a number of spaces that can be used to study comfortably alone, or in groups. Students were involved in choosing all of the furniture.
Students also had a central role in the eventual physical design of the Learning Commons. As noted above, early conceptions of the Commons included the relocation of programs like the Writers’ Center into enclosed spaces, and the creation of temporary or permanent barriers between the various programs that occupied the Commons. At a crucial point in the decision-making process, the core design committee was given the choice between a completely open design for the Commons and a design that included temporary barriers demarcating the areas of the various entities that comprised the Commons. Three students were on the design committee, and the choice between the two designs was first put to them; they decisively chose the open design, and the rest of the committee followed their lead.
It was obvious to the committee that these students had a clear idea of what would be most attractive and useful to fellow students, their perception has certainly been borne out in the student response to the Learning Commons. As noted in another section of this webtext, the Writers’ Center has seen a significant jump in student usage and anecdotal evidence points to the visibility of the Center in the midst of the open space of the Commons as a central factor in this increase. Anecdotal evidence, and feedback from students, also strongly supports another major change: the Writers’ Center, as part of an open Learning Commons, is now part of a space where students want to be. Previously, the Writers’ Center was not a choice destination for students on campus; it wasn’t a place that students who simply wanted a space to study or work together collaboratively with classmates were drawn to. The Writers’ Center just was not a destination for anything other than writing feedback. Now it is a part of a space that students can use in a variety of ways, and student feedback suggests that students appreciate this fact. As one student who was asked about his/her experience at the Writers’ Center and Learning Commons said, “The Writers’ Center was very helpful in helping me focus on my topic in an essay for English 201. The Learning Commons in itself is a very useful source, because even if I didn’t have the opportunity of having a tutor, there are tables full of people studying and learning, when I can go up and ask for help. Also, PLUS groups are very helpful.” This quote reflects the evolution of the Writers’ Center in its new Learning Commons space: this is a student who uses the Writers’ Center and sees value in the support it provides, as well as value in the Center’s location within a space that provides multiple student uses, and close access to other student support services.
The feedback noted above came from an effort, undertaken two years after Learning Commons opened, to learn about current student perception of and usage of the Commons through gathering informal feedback. The feedback gathered suggests that students like the Learning Commons; it is a place they voluntarily want to be. One student, for example said, “You can come in and just be you. You don’t have to worry about being too loud or being too messy.” Another student noted, “I like that even when I come to the learning commons alone to study, I’m not really alone because there are always people studying here, even alone like me.” The last quote is particularly exciting for one major reason: efforts to promote student success depend upon developing a culture of learning on the university campus, what Tagg (2003) would call a pro-learning environment. As noted at the beginning of this section, the original vision of the Learning Commons as articulated by the then-student body president was of a comfortable space that promoted the desire to engage and invest in learning. Feedback from students on the space and even the furniture itself suggests that this vision has been achieved. One student said, “The learning commons is cozy. And even though it is the loudest part of the library, it is still pretty calm and relaxing, enough to study at least. Also, everything is easily accessible …The furniture is very useful, especially the padded chairs because it allows me to sit down and focus in comfort.” Based upon such early responses, the Learning Commons appears to be successfully providing opportunities for engaged, active learning, in an environment that is inviting and comfortable for students.
The Multi-Media Commons (formerly known as the MARS Lab) is the program relocated in the Learning Commons that has worked and will continue to work in closest collaboration with the Writers’ Center. The MMC and the Writers’ Center are in the midst of developing a model of collaboration and integration to create a full-fledged Multiliteracy Center at EWU. Rather than recreate an entire Multiliteracy Center by filling the Writers’ Center with technology and retraining its staff, the decision was made to move the University’s already existent media lab (MARS) to the Commons and co-locate directly next to the Writers’ Center. The effort to collaborate has initiated changes for both entities.
For the MMC, the move into the Commons and the effort to collaborate in the creation of a mulitliteracy center has caused a shift in the Learning Paradigm. Previously, the MARS Lab had defined its work and goals largely in terms of customer service: success for MARS was the story of a satisfied student or faculty customer. Rather than a narrative of learning, or technological literacy, this media lab framed its work chiefly as that of a service provider. With the move to the Commons and the collaboration with the Writers’ Center and the other Commons partners, the process of reconsidering and reframing the MMC’s work in terms of student learning outcomes has begun. Previously, the goal had been to ensure that a student who came to the lab to, for example, use a design application to create a presentation poster or have that poster printed could leave with the task accomplished. Emphasis was placed upon making sure that task or product could be completed, rather than facilitating the learning of the student so that the task could eventually be done independently in the future. One goal of the collaboration between the Writers’ Center and MMC was to create shared student learning outcomes that pertain to technological literacy and, then, to create shared and program specific processes for meeting these goals. The collaboration was ideal. Both programs brought different strengths to the table. The MMC possessed technological expertise, and the Writers’ Center possessed rhetorical expertise. By collaborating to provide student support according to the kind of pedagogical approaches and learning goals used by the Writers’ Center, the two programs should, over time, be able to promote not only functional technological literacy, but also what Selber (2004) called critical and rhetorical technological literacy.