Research into the relationship between innovative physical learning environments (PLEs) and innovative psychosocial learning environments (PSLEs) indicates that it must be understood as a network of relationships between multiple psychosocial and physical aspects. Actors shape this network by attaching meanings to these aspects and their relationships in a continuous process of gaining and exchanging experiences. This study used a psychosocial-physical, relational approach for exploring teachers’ and students’ experiences with six innovative PLEs in a higher educational institute, with the application of a psychosocial-physical relationship (PPR) framework. This framework, which brings together the multitude of PLE and PSLE aspects, was used to map and analyse teachers’ and students’ experiences that were gathered in focus group interviews. The PPR framework proved useful in analysing the results and comparing them with previous research. Previously-identified relationships were confirmed, clarified, and nuanced. The results underline the importance of the attunement of system aspects to pedagogical and spatial changes, and of a psychosocial-physical relational approach in designing and implementing new learning environments, including the involvement of actors in the discourse within and between the different system levels. Interventions can be less invasive, resistance to processes could be reduced, and innovative PLEs could be used more effectively.

In order to construct a shared body of knowledge, research involving the relationship between the psychosocial learning environment (PSLE) and the physical learning environment (PLE) needs a commonly-accepted conceptual framework. By means of a thematic literature review, we collected the main aspects of the PSLE and PLE, their definitions and their relations as identified by earlier research. These findings led to a conceptual framework that structures the dimension of the PSLE into the sub-dimensions of personal development, relationships, and system maintenance and change, and the dimension of the PLE into the sub-dimensions of naturalness, individualisation, and stimulation. For each of these sub-dimensions, the framework distinguishes an intended, implemented and attained representation. A conceptual PSLE-PLE Relationship (PPR) model enables relations to be visualised. The review confirms that PSLE and PLE are interrelated in interactions between different sub-dimensions and their representations. However, evidence regarding these relationships is still weak because of the limited number of studies and their methodological limitations.