Binnen het project Future-Proof Retail werden acht labformules ontworpen en getest. Het EHBR(etail) lab bleek een van de drie succesformules te zijn: alle betrokken stakeholders hebben deze vorm van samenwerking beoordeeld als heel positief. Tussen 2018 en 2020 vonden zes edities van het lab plaats in verschillende gemeenten in Zuid-Holland. Hierbij had De Haagse Hogeschool de leiding. Onder regie van de opleiding Ondernemerschap & Retail Management werden derde jaarsstudenten via een minor ingezet. De bedoeling van deze handleiding is om te zorgen voor een opschaling van het EHBR(etail) lab in meerdere Nederlandse regio’s en in samenwerking met andere hogescholen en mbo-onderwijsinstellingen. Hierbij is het belangrijk om te realiseren dat de regierol niet alleen specifieke expertise en ervaring in businessmanagement vraagt, maar ook een serieuze investering in tijd en geld. Bovendien is intensieve inzet van hbo-studenten nodig: twee dagen per week gedurende een semester, of minimaal een onderwijsblok van tien weken. Tijdens het living lab worden retailers geactiveerd en kan er een nieuw of aangepast businessmodel ontstaan. Zowel voor individuele retailers of een heel winkelgebied. De verschillende vragen die wor den opgepakt in een EHBR(etail) lab, zijn veel breder dan de vragen bij andere labs. Het inhoudelijke proces is compleet anders dan bij een Hype lab en Lab Circularity, namelijk iteratief - hierbij verwij zen wij graag naar de handleidingen van deze twee labs. Studenten doen met de eerste (hulp)vraag van de individuele retailer of van een heel winkelgebied als startpunt een empathisch onderzoek naar de omgeving. Ze gaan op zoek naar de vraag achter de vraag: wat is nu eigenlijk het probleem of de uitdaging van de ondernemer of het collectief? In het EHBR(etail) lab werken hbo-studenten, bij voorkeur samen met mbo-studenten, met onder zoekers en het bedrijfsleven aan innovatief onderzoek. Dat gebeurt in een zogenaamde quadruple helix-omgeving (zie figuur 1). In cocreatie ontwikkelen de verschillende partijen praktische tools. Gemiddeld nemen vijf tot twintig retailers deel aan een lab. Samen met de studenten doen ze bijvoorbeeld onderzoek naar de relevantie van de deelnemende retailers voor bestaande en nieuwe klanten. De studenten lichten bestaande businessmodellen inclusief ‘customer journey’ door. Het lab werkt in sprints van zes à tien weken, en de deelnemers hanteren de methode van design thinking. Het succes van het lab bleek namelijk in grote mate samen te hangen met de design-thinking skills van de betrokken studenten en docenten. Studenten die in labs het probleem van ondernemers en medewerkers konden herkaderen (het probleem áchter het probleem boven tafel wisten te krijgen), konden veel waarde toevoegen aan het leerproces van de ondernemer. Zeker omdat zij volgens design thinking verbeterplannen ook concreet konden toepassen en uittesten in experimenten.
DOCUMENT
Over the last decade, sport and physical activity have become increasingly recognised and implemented as tools to foster social cohesion in neighbourhoods, cities and communities around Europe. As a result, numerous programmes have emerged that attempt to enhance social cohesion through a variety of sport-based approaches (Moustakas, Sanders, Schlenker, & Robrade, 2021; Svensson & Woods, 2017). However, despite this boom in sport and social cohesion, current definitions and understandings of social cohesion rarely take into account the needs, expectations or views of practitioners, stakeholders and, especially, participants on the ground (Raw, Sherry, & Rowe, 2021). Yet, to truly foster broad social outcomes like social cohesion, there is increasing recognition that programmes must move beyond interventions that only focus on the individual level, and instead find ways to work with and engage a wide array of stakeholders and organisations (Hartmann & Kwauk, 2011; Moustakas, 2022). In turn, this allows programmes to respond to community needs, foster engagement, deliver more sustainable outcomes, and work at both the individual and institutional levels. The Living Lab concept - which is distinguished by multi-stakeholder involvement, user engagement, innovation and co-creation within a real-life setting - provides an innovative approach to help achieve these goals. More formally, Living Labs have been defined as “user-centred, open innovation ecosystems based on a systematic user co-creation approach, integrating research and innovation processes in real-life communities and settings” (European Network of Living Labs, 2021). Thus, this can be a powerful approach to engage a wide array of stakeholders, and create interventions that are responsive to community needs. As such, the Sport for Social Cohesion Lab (SSCL) project was conceived to implement a Living Lab approach within five sport for social cohesion programmes in four different European countries. This approach was chosen to help programmes directly engage programme participants, generate understanding of the elements that promote social cohesion in a sport setting and to co-create activities and tools to explore, support and understand social cohesion within these communities. The following toolkit reflects our multi-national experiences designing and implementing Living Labs across these various contexts. Our partners represent a variety of settings, from schools to community-based organisations, and together these experiences can provide valuable insights to other sport (and non-sport) organisations wishing to implement a Living Lab approach within their contexts and programmes. Thus, practitioners and implementers of community-based programmes should be understood as the immediate target group of this toolkit, though the insights and reflections included here can be of relevance for any individual or organisation seeking to use more participatory approaches within their work. In particular, in the coming sections, this toolkit will define the Living Lab concept more precisely, suggest some steps to launch a Living Lab, and offer insights on how to implement the different components of a Living Lab.
DOCUMENT
Moral food lab: Transforming the food system with crowd-sourced ethics
LINK
Described are the results of an investigation in the appreciation of distance learning, limited to a case study with an online lab-experiment. Together with other educational institutes and companies Fontys University of Applied Sciences participated in a number of projects in which distance learning courses were developed. Some courses have been integrated in the regular curriculum. Our study was set up to get insight into the appreciation of students for this way of learning, especially concerning online lab-experiments. By using surveys and interviews after the students accomplished either a regular course or a distance learning course on the same object we tried to get a better understanding of how students used the course and appreciated it. Also we wanted to know whether an online lab-experiment is more or less effective than a regular one. Preliminary data analyses have shown that the appreciation of an online lab-experiment is dependent on a number of items, like the educational contents of the experiment itself, the way accompanying theory is presented, possibilities of doing the experiment in an alternative way, the organization around the experiment etc. It appears also that students give serious suggestions on developing other online lab-experiments.
DOCUMENT
Within paediatric palliative care, it is essential for families and providers to have open, equal, and trusting relationships. In practice, however, building relationships can be challenging. Investing in better understanding the differences in each other's frames of reference and underlying values seems important. Wonder Lab practices provide a space to explore these differences by focusing together on life phenomena in curious and Socratic ways. Wonder Labs were organised with parents, healthcare professionals, and students involved in Dutch paediatric palliative care. The aim of this study was to develop an understanding of how participants experienced participating in Wonder Labs. We conducted twenty in-depth interviews with Wonder Lab participants and used inductive thematic analysis for data interpretation. Five themes were identified: Slowing down, Appreciating stories, Becoming vulnerable, Opening up and diving in, and Reframing perspectives. Participating in Wonder Labs allowed mothers, healthcare professionals, and students to contribute to deepening experiences and gain an expanded understanding of what is at play in caring for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. Through working in pluralised groups, frames of reference and understandings complemented each other and could change. Participants often adopted a more open attitude towards others involved in care after participating and adapted day-to-day practices. Deliberating within paediatric palliative care on sensitive issues and their underlying personal and professional beliefs and values must be part of working together, without specific care situations being the catalyst. This may foster the mutual understanding needed in searching for quality of life, death, and bereavement.
MULTIFILE
Amsterdam as a lab. That is what Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences' three fieldlabs and its many partners have in mind. Functional illiteracy, debts, learning deficiencies or problems caused by extreme precipitation: the city contains plenty of tough issues, demanding novel approaches in which co-creation and participation by residents, social organizations and knowledge institutions are basic principles.In the fieldlabs, people try to change current practices by working with, instead of for or on behalf of those whom it concerns. But how to achieve effective learning environments between parties? How to encourage stakeholder participation in complex issues? And how to build new relations and roles?
DOCUMENT
poster voor de EuSoMII Annual Meeting in Pisa, Italië in oktober 2023. PURPOSE & LEARNING OBJECTIVE Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies are gaining popularity for their ability to autonomously perform tasks and mimic human reasoning [1, 2]. Especially within the medical industry, the implementation of AI solutions has seen an increasing pace [3]. However, the field of radiology is not yet transformed with the promised value of AI, as knowledge on the effective use and implementation of AI is falling behind due to a number of causes: 1) Reactive/passive modes of learning are dominant 2) Existing developments are fragmented 3) Lack of expertise and differing perspectives 4) Lack of effective learning space Learning communities can help overcome these problems and address the complexities that come with human-technology configurations [4]. As the impact of a technology is dependent on its social management and implementation processes [5], our research question then becomes: How do we design, configure, and manage a Learning Community to maximize the impact of AI solutions in medicine?
DOCUMENT
Described are the results of a study that was set up to get insight into the appreciation of students for distance learning, especially concerning online lab-experiments. We wanted to know whether an online lab-experiment is more or less effective than a regular one and how it can be used in IPD-projects. Preliminary data analyses have shown that the appreciation of an online lab-experiment is dependent on a number of items, like the educational contents of the experiment itself, the way accompanying theory is presented, possibilities of doing the experiment in an alternative way, the organization around the experiment etc. It appears also that students give serious suggestions on developing other online lab-experiments and the way to use it in IPD-projects. A description is given of the web-based experiment "cube measurement", which is carried out using a remotely operated robot and image processing functions. The students' appreciation is discussed and suggestions are given on how comparable experiments can contribute to work in an IPD environment.
DOCUMENT
This report presents research on success factors of learning communities with a case study of the Innovation Lab Hanze International Business Office (further – Innovation Lab HIBO) at Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen, the Netherlands. The research project is a part of the broader research programme on innovation of education and the success factors of learning communities carried on by a number of researchers at Hanze University of Applied Sciences Groningen (further – Hanze University AS).In answering the main research question on success factors of learning communities and, specifically, the Innovation Lab HIBO, two sub-questions were formulated: the first deals with school level expectations about the Innovation Lab HIBO, whereas the second explores what are the institutional expectations and guidelines regarding living labs at Hanze University AS. The research focus is on formalised expectations about the goals and outcomes of living labs, as attaining the established goals and outcomes would testimony a successful activity of a living lab. The factors that facilitate or determine whether the goalsand outcomes of living labs are achieved are therefore the success factors.The analysis of both school level expectations about the Innovation Lab HIBO and the institutional expectations and guidelines regarding living labs reveals a number of success factors, conditions, and preconditions. As these do not coincide, it is argued that finding the right balance between local, school level, expectations and the institutional goals is crucial for the successful performance of living labs. Another important factor for successful performance of the living lab and, specifically the Innovation Lab HIBO, is development of a learning community. This process would require strengthening of an open organisationalculture and facilitation of exchange of ideas and learning process.The research project was carried on in the period from February 1, 2020, till August 30, 2020. From September 2020 the follow up research is planned into operationalization of success factors, definition of performance criteria, performance evaluation, development of suggestions for improvement of performance, and development of a blueprint for the establishment of innovation labs.
DOCUMENT
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
DOCUMENT
