Orit Avdiel, Ina Blau E5 At the same time, interactive audiovisual technologies-such as virtual and augmented realityenable students to view content from multiple perspectives and organize knowledge more effectively, particularly with abstract concepts. These tools enhance learning outcomes and selfefficacy while increasing students’ motivation and interest (Hu et al., 2025; Papaioannou et al., 2023). Moreover, they support collaborative learning by allowing shared outputs to be viewed simultaneously across multiple displays and by providing group screens that facilitate equitable participation (Dehdary et al., 2024; Yesil & Aras, 2024). However, FLS alone do not generate meaningful pedagogical change (Sánchez-López et al., 2025); effective integration still relies on teachers’ techno-pedagogical knowledge to use these tools appropriately (Dehdary et al., 2024). Theoretical Frameworks To address the research aims, this study employed several theoretical frameworks. The study applied the e-CSAMR model (Shamir-Inbal & Blau, 2021), which evaluates both the level of technology use and the level of technology-supported collaboration in teaching and learning. Following the SAMR framework (Puentedura, 2014), technology integration is described across four levels: Substitutiondigital replacement without change; Augmentation-adding functional improvements to the existing task; Modification-redesigning the task in a meaningful way with the support of technology, and Redefinition- creation of tasks impossible without technology. In parallel, the model defines three levels of collaborative learning (Blau, 2011; Salmons, 2008): Information sharing- exchanging ideas or knowledge; Cooperation- dividing roles to produce a shared outcome, and Collaboration -joint work on both process and outcome. As a complement, to clarify the pedagogical rationale behind the use of these tools, the study applied Jonassen’s Mindtools framework (Jonassen, 2020), which identifies three approaches: learning from technology -practice tasks, guided exercises, or content delivered through the tool, learning about technology -understanding how digital tools operate, and learning with technology using technology as a partner for exploration and knowledge construction. To reach the study aims, we explored the following research questions: 1. What is the level of technology integration within FLS according to the e-CSAMR framework in this context? Which pedagogical approaches are reflected in these environments according to Mindtools framework? 2. According to the e-CSAMR model, what are the levels of collaboration among pedagogical teams, if any, in these FLS? Do these environments encourage the highest level of teamwork between educators? 3. According to the e-CSAMR model, what are the levels of collaboration among learners, if any, in these FLS? Do these environments promote the highest level of teamwork between learners? Methodology The study employed a multiple case study approach (Yin, 2018), guided by the principles of the mixed-methods design (Creswell, 2021). Data collection included triangulation between 15 semistructured interviews and 7 non-participatory observations of lessons conducted in FLS. Participants were teachers who taught several lessons, or taught regularly, within an FLS. They included homeroom teachers and subject teachers such as mathematics and English as a second language, with varied years of teaching experience. The learning spaces were diverse in layout and equipment. Some included fully mobile furniture, while others had fixed arrangements. Seating options were diverse, ranging from high, low, and focus chairs to more uniform arrangements. Configurations included transparent walls, movable partitions, built-in amphitheater seating, and quiet rooms. In addition, furniture elements such as large round collaborative tables, sofas,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk0MjAwOQ==