Currently, various higher education (HE) institutes develop flexible curricula for various reasons, including promoting accessibility of HE, the societal need for more self-regulated professionals who engage in life-long learning, and the desire to increase motivation of students. Increasing flexibility in curricula allows students to choose for example what they learn, when they learn, how they learn, where they learn, and/or with whom. However, HE institutes raise the question of what preferences and needs different stakeholders have with regard to flexibility, so that suitable choices can be made in the design of policies, curricula, and student support programs. In this workshop, we focus on student preferences and share recent insights from research on HE students' preferences regarding flexible education. Moreover, we use participants’ expertise to identify new (research) questions to further explore what students’ needs imply for several domains, namely curriculum-design, student support that is provided by educators/staff, policy, management, and the professional field. Firstly, a conceptual framework on flexible education and student’s preferences will be presented. Secondly, participants reflect in groups on student personas. Then, discussion groups have a Delphi-based discussion to collect new ideas for research. Finally, participants share the outcomes on a ‘willing wall’ and a ‘wailing wall’.
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
The Future of Design Education working group on sustainability developed recommendations for integrating sustainability into higher education design curricula. The recommendations provide a foundation for design instruc- tion, using well-established evidence-based tools, methods, and mindsets that apply to professional practice and support designers as advocates for environmental and social responsibility. The document identifies core ideas for sustainable design, organized under a set of topics. These topics include sustainability fundamentals; circular economy; whole systems thinking; sus- tainable innovation strategies; impact assessment, and laws and standards; and communication, collaboration, and leadership. A summary table cap- tures each idea, along with corresponding discussion and learning outcomes (things students should know and do). Recommendations are tailored to three levels of study: for all design students, students expecting to practice in sustainable design, and students in elective or advanced study. Resources for such study are also included.
The pace of technology advancements continues to accelerate, and impacts the nature of systems solutions along with significant effects on involved stakeholders and society. Design and engineering practices with tools and perspectives, need therefore to evolve in accordance to the developments that complex, sociotechnical innovation challenges pose. There is a need for engineers and designers that can utilize fitting methods and tools to fulfill the role of a changemaker. Recognized successful practices include interdisciplinary methods that allow for effective and better contextualized participatory design approaches. However, preliminary research identified challenges in understanding what makes a specific method effective and successfully contextualized in practice, and what key competences are needed for involved designers and engineers to understand and adopt these interdisciplinary methods. In this proposal, case study research is proposed with practitioners to gain insight into what are the key enabling factors for effective interdisciplinary participatory design methods and tools in the specific context of sociotechnical innovation. The involved companies are operating at the intersection between design, technology and societal impact, employing experts who can be considered changemakers, since they are in the lead of creative processes that bring together diverse groups of stakeholders in the process of sociotechnical innovation. A methodology will be developed to capture best practices and understand what makes the deployed methods effective. This methodology and a set of design guidelines for effective interdisciplinary participatory design will be delivered. In turn this will serve as a starting point for a larger design science research project, in which an educational toolkit for effective participatory design for socio-technical innovation will be designed.
The BECEE initiative represents a transformative collaboration between four leading European HEIs—Hanze University of Applied Sciences (HUAS), Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), South East Technological University (SETU), and Universiteti "Aleksandër Moisiu" Durrës (UAMD). Our consortium embodies the essence of BECEE and the EIT Knowledge Triangle Model because it also comprises of 4 industry partners (KPN, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, Innofuse, Zurich, Switzerland, Dungarvan Enterprise Centre, South East, Ireland, and Linda Laboratory, Durrës, Albania) bringing together partners from education, research, and business who are equally committed to collaborate on innovation action plans to fostering balanced collaborative entrepreneurship ecosystems in our respective regions. This consortium, therefore, is strategically designed to pool diverse strengths, creating a synergetic force for innovation and entrepreneurship that transcends the capabilities of any single organisation.
“Empowering learners to create a sustainable future” This is the mission of Centre of Expertise Mission-Zero at The Hague University of Applied Sciences (THUAS). The postdoc candidate will expand the existing knowledge on biomimicry, which she teaches and researches, as a strategy to fulfil the mission of Mission-Zero. We know when tackling a design challenge, teams have difficulties sifting through the mass of information they encounter. The candidate aims to recognize the value of systematic biomimicry, leading the way towards the ecosystems services we need tomorrow (Pedersen Zari, 2017). Globally, biomimicry demonstrates strategies contributing to solving global challenges such as Urban Heat Islands (UHI) and human interferences, rethinking how climate and circular challenges are approached. Examples like Eastgate building (Pearce, 2016) have demonstrated successes in the field. While biomimicry offers guidelines and methodology, there is insufficient research on complex problem solving that systems-thinking requires. Our research question: Which factors are needed to help (novice) professionals initiate systems-thinking methods as part of their strategy? A solution should enable them to approach challenges in a systems-thinking manner just like nature does, to regenerate and resume projects. Our focus lies with challenges in two industries with many unsustainable practices and where a sizeable impact is possible: the built environment (Circularity Gap, 2021) and fashion (Joung, 2014). Mission Zero has identified a high demand for Biomimicry in these industries. This critical approach: 1) studies existing biomimetic tools, testing and defining gaps; 2) identifies needs of educators and professionals during and after an inter-disciplinary minor at The Hague University; and, 3) translates findings into shareable best practices through publications of results. Findings will be implemented into tangible engaging tools for educational and professional settings. Knowledge will be inclusive and disseminated to large audiences by focusing on communication through social media and intervention conferences.
