Engineering students have to learn to create robust solutions in professional contexts where new technologies emerge constantly and sometimes disrupt entire industries. The question rises if universities design curricula that enable engineering students to acquire these cognitive skills. The Cynefin Framework (Kurtz & Snowden, 2003; Snowden & Boone, 2007) can be used to typify four complexity contexts a system or organisation can be found in: chaos, complex, complicated and obvious.The Cynefin framework made it possible to create the research question for a case-study: To what extend does the Business Engineering curriculum enable bachelors to find business solutions in the complexity contexts of the Cynefin framework? The results show that 80% of the methods are suitable for complicated contexts and no distinction is made between contexts. This means students are taught to approach most contexts in the same way and are not made aware of differences between the contexts. Making sense of the methods in the curriculum with the Cynefin framework was insightful and suggestions for improvement and further research could be substantiated
DOCUMENT
Industrial Design Engineering [Open] Innovation (IDE) is a 3-year, English taught, VWO entry-level, undergraduate programme at The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS). The IDE curriculum focuses on the fuzzy front end of (open) innovation, sustainable development, and impact in the implementation phase of product-service design. The work field of Industrial Design Engineering and Open Innovation, like many other domains, is growing increasingly more complex (Bogers, Zobel, Afuah, Almirall, Brunswicker, Dahlander, Frederiksen, Gawer, & Gruber, 2017). Not only have the roles of designers changed considerably in the last decades, they continue to do so at increasing speed. Therefore, industrial design engineering students need different and perhaps more competencies as young professionals in order to deal with this new complexity. Moreover, in our transitional society, lifelong learning takes a central position (Reekers, 2017). Students need to give their learning path direction autonomously, in accordance with their talents and interests. IDE’s Quality & Curriculum Committee (QCC) realized in 2015 there is too much new knowledge to address in a 3-year programme. Instead, IDE students need to learn how to become temporary experts in an array of topics, depending on the characteristics of each new project they do (see Textbox 1). The QCC also concluded that more than just incremental changes to the current curriculum were needed; thus, the idea for a flexible, choice-based semester approach in the curriculum was born: ‘Curriculum M’ (Modular). A co-creational approach was applied, in which teaching staff, students, alumni, prospective students, industry (including the (international) social profit sector), and educational advisors collaborated to develop a curriculum that would allow students to become not just T-shaped (wide basis, one expertise) professionals, but U- or W-shaped professionals, with strong links to other disciplines.
DOCUMENT
Due to fast and unpredictable developments, professional education is challenged with being responsive, which demands a rethinking of conventional curriculum development approaches. Yet, literature on curriculum development falls short in terms of recognising how to react rapidly and adequately to these new developments. This study focuses on curriculum development initiatives at the school level in a Dutch university of applied sciences. Open interviews were held with 29 curriculum developers to explore how they define and give substance to developing curricula for new, changing or unpredictable professions. These 29 participants were involved in seven curriculum development trajectories. Four themes were detected: (1) curriculum developers are in favour of open, flexible and authentic curricula; (2) the context in which the curriculum development takes place and the different roles and responsibilities of curriculum developers are challenging; (3) curriculum developers feel insufficiently equipped to carry out their tasks; and (4) involving stakeholders is necessary but results in a “viscous” social–political process. Responsive curriculum development requires a great deal of flexibility and adaptability from curriculum developers. Yet, in our study, “institutional concrete” is found to severely hinder responsive curriculum development processes. To be responsive, such processes need to be supported and institutional barriers need to be removed.
DOCUMENT
In the midst of continuous health professions curriculum reforms, critical questions arise about the extent to which conceptual ideas are actually put into practice. Curricula are often not implemented as intended. An under-explored aspect that might play a role is governance. In light of major curriculum changes, we explored educators' perspectives of the role of governance in the process of translating curriculum goals and concepts into institutionalized curriculum change at micro-level (teacher-student). In three Dutch medical schools, 19 educators with a dual role (teacher and coordinator) were interviewed between March and May 2018, using the rich pictures method. We employed qualitative content analysis with inductive coding. Data collection occurred concurrently with data analysis. Different governance processes were mentioned, each with its own effects on the curriculum and organizational responses. In Institute 1, participants described an unclear governance structure, resulting in implementation chaos in which an abstract educational concept could not be fully realized. In Institute 2, participants described a top-down and strict governance structure contributing to relatively successful implementation of the educational concept. However it also led to demotivation of educators, who started rebelling to recover their perceived loss of freedom. In Institute 3, participants described a relatively fragmentized process granting a lot of freedom, which contributed to contentment and motivation but did not fully produce the intended changes. Our paper empirically illustrates the importance of governance in curriculum change. To advance curriculum change processes and improve their desired outcomes it seems important to define and explicate both hard and soft governance processes.
LINK
This curriculum on social mentoring is the result of a collaboration of a diverse group of academics, practitioners and students from around the world and was developed and facilitated as part of the Erasmus Plus Project “Mentoring for Social Inclusion in Europe: Sharing Knowledge and Building Capacity” (Ment4EU). It was implemented for the first time in Europe as a cross-organisational effort with a transdisciplinary approach as a blended intensive program with 30 participants from the partner countries joined by a further 220 students, practitioners and academics from NHL Stenden and the Netherlands for plenary sessions. The intended group of learners for this course are students, lecturers, researchers, academics and practitioners (mentors and program managers/coordinators of mentoring programs) interested in learning about mentoring for social inclusion and who are active in the fields of social work, youth work, sociology, health care, community work, management and organization, and related fields of practice and study programs. The weight of the program is 5 ECTS. This curriculum was developed as part of the Erasmus Plus Cooperation Partnership in Higher Educatoin “Mentoring for Social Inclusion in Europe: Sharing Knowledge and Building Capacity” (Ment4EU), as part of WP3_A2 Training Capacity in higher education institutions, project number 2023-1-AT01-KA220-HED-000158214
DOCUMENT
This short paper describes the first prototyping of a self-evaluation process of Curriculum Agility at a Faculty of Technology in Sweden. The process comprises guided, semi-structured, individual interviews at different organisational levels within the faculty, a joint narrative based on those interviews, prioritizing development strategies per level, and jointly mapping them on importance and implementation time. The self-evaluation is part of and based on the research on the principles of Curriculum Agility. The results show the interplay in timely curriculum change for futureproof engineering education between the teaching staff, the systems and the people who control the systems. The self-evaluation brings together the different perspectives and perceptions within the faculty and gives insight in how those affect he willingness towards and occurrence of curriculum development. This work in progress indicates how doing such a qualitative self-evaluation paves the road for transparent strategic dialogues on a holistic level about what to give attention and organize differently.
DOCUMENT
Due to fast and unpredictable developments, professional education is challenged with being responsive, which demands a rethinking of conventional curriculum development approaches. Yet, literature on curriculum development falls short in terms of recognising how to react rapidly and adequately to these new developments. This study focuses on curriculum development initiatives at the school level in a Dutch university of applied sciences. Open interviews were held with 29 curriculum developers to explore how they define and give substance to developing curricula for new, changing or unpredictable professions. These 29 participants were involved in seven curriculum development trajectories. Four themes were detected: (1) curriculum developers are in favour of open, flexible and authentic curricula; (2) the context in which the curriculum development takes place and the different roles and responsibilities of curriculum developers are challenging; (3) curriculum developers feel insufficiently equipped to carry out their tasks; and (4) involving stakeholders is necessary but results in a “viscous” social–political process. Responsive curriculum development requires a great deal of flexibility and adaptability from curriculum developers. Yet, in our study, “institutional concrete” is found to severely hinder responsive curriculum development processes. To be responsive, such processes need to be supported and institutional barriers need to be removed.
LINK
Explicit language objectives are included in the Swedish national curriculum for mathematics. The curriculum states that students should be given opportunities to develop the ability to formulate problems, use and analyse mathematical concepts and relationships between concepts, show and follow mathematical reasoning, and use mathematical expressions in discussions. Teachers’ competence forms a crucial link to bring an intended curriculum to a curriculum in action. This article investigates a professional development program, ‘Language in Mathematics’, within a national program for mathematics teachers in Sweden that aims at implementing the national curriculum into practice. Two specific aspects are examined: the selection of theoretical notions on language and mathematics and the choice of activities to relate selected theory to practice. From this examination, research on teacher learning in connection to professional development is proposed, which can contribute to a better understanding of teachers’ interpretation of integrated approaches to language and mathematics across national contexts.
DOCUMENT
Due to the variegated nature of the teaching profession system, different actors operating in this system (teachers, school leaders, policy makers) are inevitably intertwined and assumably influence each other’s sensemaking processes, especially when system-wide educational change occurs. Gaining insight into how different actors in the teacher profession system make sense of educational change is important, as it might hamper or enable the system's adaptive capacity. That is why we stretched Coburn’s model of collective sensemaking from a teacher-team lens to include different actors and focus on their interpersonal dynamics during sensemaking processes. Performing a conceptual review, we synthesized 87 articles which focus on collective sensemaking of the following actor groups: (1) teachers (micro), (2) school leaders (meso), and/or (3) district/state/national leaders, policy makers, professional development providers, curriculum developers, researchers, community members, and parents (macro). In the results we describe how actors’ involvement varied due to different role distributions and role perceptions of actors. In addition, four contextual factors influencing the interpersonal dynamics were distinguished that were closely related to leadership practices that enable actors to compare the change with their own beliefs and (organizational) practices. We describe three mechanisms which explain how actors valuate a change (valuating), how they are owning this change (owning), and which is shaped by gatekeeping of sensegivers in their social context (gatekeeping).
LINK
This open access book is a valuable resource for students in health and other professions and practicing professionals interested in supporting effective change in self-management behaviors in chronic disease, such as medication taking, physical activity and healthy eating. Developed under the auspices of the Train4Health project, funded by the Erasmus+ program of the European Union, the book contains six chapters written by international contributors from different disciplines. This chapter sets the stage for the remaining book, by introducing the Train4Health project and by explaining how the learning outcomes presented in subsequent chapters have been derived and linked with content of the book. Firstly, the Train4Health interprofessional competency framework to support behaviour change in persons self-managing chronic disease is briefly presented. This European competency framework was the starting point for developing the learning outcomes-based curriculum, which is succinctly addressed in the subsequent section. Finally, practical considerations about the Train4Health curriculum are discussed, including opportunities and challenges for interprofessional education.
LINK
