This article examines the organisation of collaborative digital methods and data projects in the context of engaged research-led teaching in the humanities. Drawing on interviews, field notes, projects and practices from across eight research groups associated with the Public Data Lab (publicdatalab.org), it provides considerations for those interested in undertaking such projects, organised around four areas: composing (1) problems and questions; (2) collectives of inquiry; (3) learning devices and infrastructures; and (4) vernacular, boundary and experimental outputs.Informed by constructivist approaches to learning and pragmatist approaches to collective inquiry, these considerations aim to support teaching and learning through digital projects which surface and reflect on the questions, problems, formats, data, methods, materials and means through which they are produced.
MULTIFILE
In higher education, design thinking is often taught as a process. Yet design cognition resides in action and design practices. Dewey’s pragmatism offers a solid epistemology for design thinking. This paper describes a design research whereby Dewey’s inquiry served as the foundation for educating students. Three extensive educational case studies are presented whereby a design inquiry was introduced and became part of the curricula. It was found that students and coaches struggled with doubts experienced as a result of the co-evolution of problem and solution, means and ends. Four coping mechanisms were observed: (1) focus on problems, risking analysis paralysis; (2) focus on creative problem-solving, risking unsubstantiated design; (3) focus on means, risking fixation; and (4) focus on future ends, risking hanging on to a dream. By establishing a joint practice and a community of learnersthrough show-andshare sessions, the students establish solid ground.
MULTIFILE
Background: Survivors of lymphoma experience multiple challenges after treatment. However, a lack of knowledge of in-depth experiences of lymphoma survivors in early aftercare persists. Objective: To gain an in-depth understanding of the experiences of lymphoma survivors in early aftercare who have received an aftercare consultation based on evidence-based guideline recommendations, with an advanced practice nurse. Methods: This study used a narrative design. We recruited lymphoma survivors after a best-practice aftercare consultation with an advanced practice nurse. A total of 22 lymphoma survivors and 9 partners participated. Data were collected through narrative interviews and analyzed according to thematic narrative analysis. Results: Six themes emerged: living and dealing with health consequences, coping with work and financial challenges, having a positive outlook and dealing with uncertainty, deriving strength from and experiencing tensions in relationships, getting through tough times in life, and receiving support from healthcare professionals. Conclusions: The stories of lymphoma survivors in early aftercare revealed their experiences of how they coped with a range of challenges in their personal lives. Choosing an aftercare trajectory based on an aftercare consultation that encourages patients to think about their issues, goals, and possible aftercare options may be useful for their transition from treatment to survivorship. Implications for practice: Survivors’ social support and self-management capabilities are important aspects to be addressed in cancer care. An aftercare consultation involving shared goal setting and care planning may help nurses provide personalized aftercare.
The Dutch main water systems face pressing environmental, economic and societal challenges due to climatic changes and increased human pressure. There is a growing awareness that nature-based solutions (NBS) provide cost-effective solutions that simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help building resilience. In spite of being carefully designed and tested, many projects tend to fail along the way or never get implemented in the first place, wasting resources and undermining trust and confidence of practitioners in NBS. Why do so many projects lose momentum even after a proof of concept is delivered? Usually, failure can be attributed to a combination of eroding political will, societal opposition and economic uncertainties. While ecological and geological processes are often well understood, there is almost no understanding around societal and economic processes related to NBS. Therefore, there is an urgent need to carefully evaluate the societal, economic, and ecological impacts and to identify design principles fostering societal support and economic viability of NBS. We address these critical knowledge gaps in this research proposal, using the largest river restoration project of the Netherlands, the Border Meuse (Grensmaas), as a Living Lab. With a transdisciplinary consortium, stakeholders have a key role a recipient and provider of information, where the broader public is involved through citizen science. Our research is scientifically innovative by using mixed methods, combining novel qualitative methods (e.g. continuous participatory narrative inquiry) and quantitative methods (e.g. economic choice experiments to elicit tradeoffs and risk preferences, agent-based modeling). The ultimate aim is to create an integral learning environment (workbench) as a decision support tool for NBS. The workbench gathers data, prepares and verifies data sets, to help stakeholders (companies, government agencies, NGOs) to quantify impacts and visualize tradeoffs of decisions regarding NBS.
