Purpose of this studyThis study aims to better understand the deliberate design of student learning in living labs.Theoretical backgroundThe intended purpose of living labs in higher education is to integrate education, research and professional practice and thereby integrate initial learning (of students) and innovation (Schipper, Vos & Wallner, 2022). Yet, the literature shows a divide between innovation focused labs and student focused labs. Innovation focused labs hardly include students (Kalinauskaite, Brankaert, et. al., 2021; Westerlund, Leminen, & Habib, 2018), while student focused labs are framed as sec pedagogical devices, with transferable innovation positioned as a mere by-product of education (Admiraal et al., 2019; McLaughlan & Lodge, 2019). A review of the international literature on higher education living labs calls for both practice and research to be developed to realize the intended integration between initial learning and innovation in living labs (Griffioen & van Heijningen, 2023).A way to follow up on that call is to better position students in living lab practices. Students’ learning experiences in living labs are so far rather weakly framed compared to their learning in traditional, transmissive educational settings such as lectures. One of the differences is that the relationships in living labs are more open to initiative and have shown to require more autonomy in students (Barnett & Coate, 2005, p. 34). This asks of students to take on other roles and of lecturers that they tailor their pedagogical practices to student learning in the lab setting (McLaughlan & Lodge, 2019). Moreover, students and lecturers collaborate with professional partners in labs, adding to the complexity of labs as learning environments.Following Markauskaite and Goodyear (2017) can be said that living labs that include students bring together three discourses in their collaborative practices: a professional discourse linked to practice, a pedagogical discourse for learning structures and an accountability discourse for assessment. Each having their own artefacts and practices, and not all focused to student learning. In these situations, “[p]ractice is not always committed to more abstract student assignments […] and professionals do not always have time to work with students or feel lacking in capability to construct an assignment.”, and “[i]t is a challenge to create a shared interest besides the individual interests of the participants” (Huber et al. 2020, p. 5-6).This poster studies how student learning in living labs comes about in professional, pedagogical and assessment practices as perceived by students, lecturers and professionals.Research design, methodologySettingThis project takes place in the Social Professions Faculty of a single applied university in The Netherlands. Undergraduate students in different bachelor programs follow part of their education in labs. Seven social learning settings in two labs are analyzed in the project as a whole, this poster reports findings in the first lab with three social learning settings.The labs included in this multiple case study showed willing to improve their student learning through analysis and collaborative re-design. Labs were eligible when students had to collaborate with professionals and citizens to solve a real-life issue, as part of their education in the lab.SampleThe poster reports findings in the first case lab that consisted of three classes of 20 fourth year undergraduate students (N=60 in total) and their three lecturers (N=3). They collaborated with local community workers to improve the process of citizens making use of municipal public services, an assignment assigned by the regional ombudsman.MethodThe researcher participated in the lab team in the preparation and execution of the lab work and captured insights on reflective memo’s throughout the project. Based on evaluations of the previous year and ambitions for the coming year, adjustments were made to improve student learning and collaboration in the lab.Pre and post descriptions were captured of the professional, pedagogical and assessment practices in the lab, based on documents of educational and professional materials (e.g. study guide, assignments, meeting notes, flyer of national ombudsman), field notes and memo’s. Descriptions of the practices were checked with students, lecturers and professional partners.The perceptions of the practices of students, lecturers and professionals were collected after implementation through semi-structured interviews (N=3 lecturers; 9 students, and 3 professional partners). The interview guide focused on interviewees experiences and perceptions of their lab work, their collaboration and student learning in the lab, triangulating their perceptions of the professional, pedagogical and assessment practices and artefacts in the lab (Markauskaite & Goodyear, 2017).Coding and analysisIn this study, thematic analysis of the interviews is conducted (Braun & Clarke, 2022). This analysis is informed by the conceptual lens of professional practices, pedagogical practices, assessment practices, and their corresponding artefacts, in professional higher education (Markauskaite & Goodyear, 2017). Deductive coding for present and absent activities and artefacts and for the different actors’ perceptions of those activities and artefacts is complemented with inductive codes and themes.FindingsAt the time of submission, data collection in the first lab with three social learning settings is nearly finished, and implementation in a second set of four labs is work in progress. The data of the first lab will be analyzed in the period between submission and the CHER2024 conference.Practical/social implications:The proposed analysis will result in an understanding of the dynamics of practices and learning in the lab, from multiple perspectives. This understanding will be translated into design principles for balanced professional, pedagogical and assessment practices in this lab. Furthermore, this project has resulted in lab practices to improve student learning in three living labs.Originality/value of posterThis study offers a perspective on and understanding of practices and student learning in higher education living labs. It responds to a call for development of practice and research of higher education living labs, based on a review of international literature, so labs can realize the intended integration between initial learning and innovation in living labs (Griffioen & van Heijningen, 2023).Keywords: living labs, lab practices, design principles, collaboration
This extended abstract introduces the work of the Netherlands AI Media and Democracy lab, especially focusing on the research performed from an AI/computer science perspective at CWI, the Netherlands National Research Center for Mathematics and Computer Science in Amsterdam. We first provide an overview of the general aims and set-up of the lab, and then focuses in on the research areas of the 3 research groups at CWI, outlining there are of research and expected research contributions in the areas between AI and media & democracy
Sport for development (SFD) initiatives have faced numerous criticisms around the focus on individual-level (micro) outcomes and lack of integration at the community (meso) and structural (macro) levels. As a result, there is growing recognition that programmes need to find ways to work with and engage a wide range of community members and stakeholders through more inclusive, participatory approaches. One such approach is known as Living Labs. In the following conceptual article, we present the Sport and Social Cohesion Lab (SSCL) project, which implemented a Living Lab approach in various sport-based programmes from four different European countries. The main components of the Living Lab framework are presented, and practical insights are derived from the project. In addition, the unique and sometimes critical role of sport is reflected upon in relation to the Living Lab context. Through this, this article provides practitioners and academics with potential building blocks to implement Living Labs and/or embed participatory approaches in sport and physical activity contexts and social settings more generally.
De 2SHIFT SPRONG-groep is een samenwerkingsverband van HAN University of Applied Sciences en Fontys Hogescholen. Onze ambitie is het vergroten van eerlijke kansen op gezond leven. Dit doen we door het vormgeven en versterken van gemeenschappen als fundament voor het creëren van eerlijke kansen op gezond leven. Vanuit deze gemeenschappen wordt in co-creatie gewerkt aan structuur (i.e. systeem), sociale en technologische innovaties. Deze ambitie sluit aan bij de centrale missie KIA Gezondheid en Zorg om bij te dragen aan goede gezondheid en het verkleinen van sociaaleconomische gezondheidsverschillen. Ook draagt het bij aan deelmissie 1. het voorkomen van ziekte, waarbij wij uitgaan van het concept Positieve Gezondheid en Leefomgeving. Én het zorgt voor het verplaatsen van ondersteuning en zorg naar de leefomgeving (deelmissie 2), doordat gemeenschappen hiervoor een stevig fundament vormen. De gemeenschap is geoperationaliseerd als een samenwerking tussen inwonersinitiatieven (i.e. informele actoren) én professionals vanuit wonen, welzijn, zorg en gemeenten (i.e. formele actoren) die bestuurlijk en beleidsmatig worden ondersteund. Toenemend wordt een belangrijke rol en meer verantwoordelijkheid toebedeeld aan inwoners en wordt de noodzaak van sectoroverstijgende, inclusieve samenwerking tussen deze actoren in lokale fieldlabs benadrukt. 2SHIFT start daarom in vier fieldlabs: twee dorpen en twee wijken in (midden-)stedelijke gebieden, waar in vergelijking met groot-stedelijk gebied (zoals Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Den Haag en Utrecht) andere dynamieken en mechanismen een rol spelen bij het creëren van eerlijke kansen op een gezond leven. Om impact in onderwijs en praktijk te realiseren werken we nauw samen met studenten, docenten én met inwoners, professionals, bestuurders en beleidsmakers uit wonen, welzijn, zorg en gemeenten én landelijke kennispartners (“quadruple helix”). 2SHIFT brengt transdisciplinaire expertise én verschillende onderzoeksparadigma’s samen in een Learning Community (LC), waarin bestaande kennis en nieuwe kennis wordt samengebracht en ontwikkeld. Over 8 jaar is 2SHIFT een (inter)nationaal erkende onderzoeksgroep die het verschil maakt.
Recycling of plastics plays an important role to reach a climate neutral industry. To come to a sustainable circular use of materials, it is important that recycled plastics can be used for comparable (or ugraded) applications as their original use. QuinLyte innovated a material that can reach this goal. SmartAgain® is a material that is obtained by recycling of high-barrier multilayer films and which maintains its properties after mechanical recycling. It opens the door for many applications, of which the production of a scoliosis brace is a typical example from the medical field. Scoliosis is a sideways curvature of the spine and wearing an orthopedic brace is the common non-invasive treatment to reduce the likelihood of spinal fusion surgery later. The traditional way to make such brace is inaccurate, messy, time- and money-consuming. Because of its nearly unlimited design freedom, 3D FDM-printing is regarded as the ultimate sustainable technique for producing such brace. From a materials point of view, SmartAgain® has the good fit with the mechanical property requirements of scoliosis braces. However, its fast crystallization rate often plays against the FDM-printing process, for example can cause poor layer-layer adhesion. Only when this problem is solved, a reliable brace which is strong, tough, and light weight could be printed via FDM-printing. Zuyd University of Applied Science has, in close collaboration with Maastricht University, built thorough knowledge on tuning crystallization kinetics with the temperature development during printing, resulting in printed products with improved layer-layer adhesion. Because of this knowledge and experience on developing materials for 3D printing, QuinLyte contacted Zuyd to develop a strategy for printing a wearable scoliosis brace of SmartAgain®. In the future a range of other tailor-made products can be envisioned. Thus, the project is in line with the GoChem-themes: raw materials from recycling, 3D printing and upcycling.
Electrohydrodynamic Atomization (EHDA), also known as Electrospray (ES), is a technology which uses strong electric fields to manipulate liquid atomization. Among many other areas, electrospray is currently used as an important tool for biomedical applications (droplet encapsulation), water technology (thermal desalination and metal recovery) and material sciences (nanofibers and nano spheres fabrication, metal recovery, selective membranes and batteries). A complete review about the particularities of this technology and its applications was recently published in a special edition of the Journal of Aerosol Sciences [1]. Even though EHDA is already applied in many different industrial processes, there are not many controlling tools commercially available which can be used to remotely operate the system as well as identify some spray characteristics, e.g. droplet size, operational mode, droplet production ratio. The AECTion project proposes the development of an innovative controlling system based on the electrospray current, signal processing & control and artificial intelligence to build a non-visual tool to control and characterize EHDA processes.
