Abstract

This study investigates how primary schools in Greece leverage “in-between” common areas (corridors, courtyards, entrances, libraries) as pedagogically meaningful spaces. Using a mixed-method survey with embedded open-ended questions, the study queried teachers to map uses, perceived educational value, and barriers. Participants were in-service primary teachers from diverse school contexts (urban, semi-urban, rural). Quantitative data were collected via a researcher-developed, literature-informed questionnaire that was pilot-tested for clarity and item functioning; qualitative insights came from optional open-ended responses. Internal consistency was estimated with Cronbach’s α. Because the main outcomes were Likert-type single items (ordinal), a normality-based parametric decision rule was not applied; instead, non-parametric tests were used throughout for Likert responses, while χ2  was reserved for categorical variables. Results indicate very high recognition of the learning potential of common areas and widespread -though uneven- use: libraries and courtyards are most often prioritized for socio-emotional aims, while stairwells and canteens are typically deprioritized and seldom selected. Reported barriers cluster around infrastructure/material shortages, time and supervision demands, and local regulations, with some variation by school location. No statistically significant associations were observed between the extent of integration of common areas and the attitudinal items. The study contributes to a practice-oriented typology of spaces/uses and highlights low-cost design and policy levers (zoning, flexible equipment, clear supervision routines) to better integrate common areas as extensions of the classroom.

Keywords

References

• Abidemi, L. A., & Bilikis, L. A. (2023). The impact of government funding on infrastructure improvement and educational performance in rural schools. International Journal of Progressive Research in Engineering Management and Science, 3(12), 593–599.
• Adera, N. (2025). Innovative learning spaces and blended learning: Quest for 21st century competency teaching and learning approaches. In Adera. N. (Ed.), Creating dynamic space in higher education: Modern shifts in policy, competencies, and governance (pp. 139–174). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-6930-2.ch006
• Bailey, S. (2022). Teacher-preparation programs and trauma-informed teaching practices: Getting students to CHILL. Current Issues in Education, 23(3), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.14507/cie.vol23.iss3.2057
• Barrett, P., Treves, A., Shmis, T., & Ambasz, D. (2019). The impact of school infrastructure on learning: A synthesis of the evidence. The World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1378-8
• Bellfield, T., Dyer, E., McAleavey, K. S., & Erskine, B. (2021). Using school corridors to support learning: spatial creativity driving primary education. In Bellfield, T., EDyer, E., Szynalska McAleavey, K., Erskine, B. (Eds.), Sculpting new creativities in primary education (pp. 26–44). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003129714-3
• Bikomeye, J. C., Balza, J., & Beyer, K. M. (2021). The impact of schoolyard greening on children’s physical activity and socioemotional health: A systematic review of experimental studies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 535. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020535
• Bowlin, W. J. (2022). Non-classroom involvement among rural community college students: An application of Tinto and Astin’s models [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Mississippi State University.
• Brasfield, M., Elswick, S., Raines, S., Peterson, C., & Mboge, S. (2024). Slassroom calming corners: peaceful spaces for times of transition. International Journal of the Whole Child, 9(2), 93-111.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rike, & K. E. Urbas (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004
• Caruso, C. C., & Rosenthal, A. (2020). Meeting students where they eat: a qualitative study exploring K-12 student experiences of the school cafeteria. Children, Youth and Environments, 30(1), 101-122. https://doi.org/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.30.1.0101
• Cascio González, E. (2023). Keep calm—this is a judgment-free zone: Teacher perceptions about classroom intervisitations. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 16(2), 226–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-05-2022-0023
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.
• De Victo, E. R., Ferrari, G., da Silva, D. R. P., Ferrero-Hernández, P., Valenzuela, C. F., & Solé, D. (2025). Opportunities for physical activity in the school environment and their association with physical activity and sedentary behavior in Brazilian adolescents. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 9386. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94174-z
• Debabarni, D., & Choudhury, D. (2024). Informal interaction spaces and student-centred learning in architectural schools. Urbanism, Architecture, Constructions, 15(2), 193-214.
• Dimouli, I., Koumparou, D., & Golfinopoulos, S. K. (2024). From school gardens to community oases: fostering environmental and social resilience in urban spaces. Geographies, 4(4), 687-712. https://doi.org/10.3390/geographies4040038
• Dubey, C., & Jadhav, S. (2023). Campus attachment and attendance: The moderating effect of the cafeteria setting's student experience. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 5(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i04.5530
• Dyg, P. M., & Wistoft, K. (2018). Wellbeing in school gardens—The case of the Gardens for Bellies food and environmental education program. Environmental Education Research, 24(8), 1177–1191. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1434869
• Fahed, K. G., & Salim, K. N. (2020). Using non-classroom activities in secondary schools and its effect on learning EFL. Journal of Current Researches on Social Sciences, 10(SE), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.26579/jocress.350
• Hagger, M. S., Cheung, M. W. L., Ajzen, I., & Hamilton, K. (2022). Perceived behavioral control moderating effects in the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology, 41(2), 155. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001153
• Harber, C., & Harber, C. (2021). School buildings (and grounds). In C. Harber (Ed.), Post-Covid schooling: Future alternatives to the global normal (pp. 185–222). Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87824-5_8
• Henriksen, D., & Gruber, N. (2024). System-wide school mindfulness: Addressing elementary students’ social-emotional learning and wellbeing. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1272545. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1272545
• Horton, P., & Forsberg, C. (2020). Safe spaces? A social-ecological perspective on student perceptions of safety in the environment of the school canteen. Educational Research, 62(1), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2020.1715235
• Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Lancaster, S. J., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A. M. (2019). Flexible learning spaces facilitate interaction, collaboration and behavioural engagement in secondary school. PLoS One, 14(10), e0223607 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223607
• Khatimah, H. (2021). Major impact of classroom environment in students’ learning. Journal of Education Review Provision, 1(1), 12-17. https://doi.org/10.55885/jerp.v1i1.42
• La Barbera, F., & Ajzen, I. (2021). Moderating role of perceived behavioral control in the theory of planned behavior: A preregistered study. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 5(1), 35-45. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.83
• Luís, S., Dias, R., & Lima, M. L. (2020). Greener schoolyards, greener futures? Greener schoolyards buffer decreased contact with nature and are linked to connectedness to nature. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 567882 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567882
• Merga, M. K. (2021). Libraries as wellbeing supportive spaces in contemporary schools. Journal of Library Administration, 61(6), 659-675. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2021.1947056
• Metz, M. H. (2023). Classrooms and corridors: The crisis of authority in desegregated secondary schools. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.8501572
• Moreland, D., & Kammer, J. (2020). School and public library collaboration: opportunities for sharing and community connections. Knowledge Quest, 49(1), 41-44.
• Murray, S., & Wills, W. (2021). Institutional spaces and sociable eating: young people, food and expressions of care. Journal of Youth Studies, 24(5), 580-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2020.1748182
• Ogden, H., Upitis, R., Brook, J., Peterson, A., Davis, J., & Troop, M. (2010). Entering school: How entryways and foyers foster social interaction. Children Youth and Environments, 20(2), 150-174. https://doi.org/10.1353/cye.2010.0005
• Poyato-Nunez, M. M., del Carmen Olmos-Gomez, M., & Parra-Gonzalez, M. E. (2024). The educational space and its impact on pedagogical dynamics: teachers' perception of their working environment. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 11(4), 646-654. https://doi.org/10.20448/jeelr.v11i4.6028
• Raney, M. A., Daniel, E., & Jack, N. (2023). Impact of urban schoolyard play zone diversity and nature-based design features on unstructured recess play behaviors. Landscape and Urban Planning, 230, 104632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104632
• Rasmussen, L. R. (2021). Disassembling the in-between? Refigurations of the Danish school corridor 1950–2019. Paedagogica Historica, 57(4), 440-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2019.1669680
• Rosalinda, I., & Garzia, M. (2022). Reggio Emilia's philosophy approach: Environment as a third teacher in child potential development in ECCE institutions. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 9(6), 297–308.
• Sailer, K. (2018). Corridors, classrooms, classification: The impact of school layout on pedagogy and social behaviours. In Ming Tse, Η., Daniels, Η., Stables, Α., Cox, S (Eds.), Designing buildings for the future of schooling (pp. 87–111). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315148366-6
• Sigurðardóttir, A. K., Hjartarson, T., & Snorrason, A. (2021). Pedagogical walks through open and sheltered spaces: a post-occupancy evaluation of an innovative learning environment. Buildings, 11(11), 503. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11110503
• Stadler-Altmann, U., & Hilger, P. (2017). Transferring pedagogical spaces: Schoolyards as learning environments in the perspective of students and teachers. In Benade, L. & Jackson, M. (Eds.), Transforming education: Design & governance in global contexts (pp. 227–244). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5678-9_15
• Turner, S. F., Cardinal, L. B., & Burton, R. M. (2017). Research design for mixed methods: A triangulation-based framework and roadmap. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 243-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115610808
• Van den Bogerd, N., Hovinga, D., Hiemstra, J. A., & Maas, J. (2023). The potential of green schoolyards for healthy child development: a conceptual framework. Forests, 14(4), 660. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14040660
• Wellenreiter, B. R. (2018). Hallways paved with good intentions: Analyzing rules and procedures in non-classroom middle school spaces. Middle School Journal, 49(2), 10-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2017.1413272
• Welsh, R. O. (2021). Economics of urban education: Race, resources, and control in schools. In Richard Milner IV, H. & Lomotey, K. (Eds.), Handbook of urban education (pp. 50–63). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429331435-5
• Williams, D. R., & Dixon, P. S. (2013). Impact of garden-based learning on academic outcomes in schools: synthesis of research between 1990 and 2010. Review of Educational Research, 83(2), 211-235. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313475824
• Wu, X., Kou, Z., Oldfield, P., Heath, T., & Borsi, K. (2021). Informal learning spaces in higher education: Student preferences and activities. Buildings, 11(6), 252. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11060252

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.