ZoekresultatenZoekresultaten
Volg ons op
Volg ons op
Types
0Instelling
26Bestandstype
9Taal
5Publicatiejaar
12Thema's
14Producttype
14Publicaties met bestand / URL
2Projectstatus
3In Nordic countries, as well as in the Netherlands, schools have high school autonomy. In schools there are both horizontal and vertical working relations and all teachers and school principals within a school are expected to take responsibility for collaborative-innovation practices (CIP). In this paper, we describe a study investigating how both horizontal and vertical working relations relate to CIP. We used longitudinal questionnaire (2036 teachers, 157 schools) and interview data (53 teachers, 20 schools). These data were gathered in Dutch schools participating in the large-scale ‘LeerKRACHT’ program. The results show that teachers perceive horizontal and vertical factors to enhance CIP. Furthermore, especially school principals and coach-teachers seem to be able to strengthen horizontal and vertical factors which leads to more CIP. We discuss implications for research and schools in the Netherlands and beyond. Schools operate in demanding and rapidly changing environments. As a result, teachers and school principals are expected to continuously improve their school practices to maintain the quality of the education they provide. In literature on school development, change, and reform, there is an increasing emphasis on investigating how various educational interventions turn out. Some of these studies highlighted that interventions are sometimes an isolated activity of one teacher or a small group of teachers According to Vangrieken et al. in education, a strong-rooted culture of individualism, autonomy, and independence appears to be dominant. A ‘culture of collaboration’, however, has many advantages. This is also shown in research traditions of whole-school improvement. It can result in more ‘school democracy’ and more appropriate ideas and solutions for the challenges faced by schools. A growing number of schools have begun to initiate types of teacher collaboration, such as ‘professional learning communities’ and ‘data teams’. Such collaborations of teachers in schools can be called horizontal working relations. Researchers from Nordic countries for instance studied the horizontal forms of accountability and responsibility in schools. Consequently, international scholars have called for more ‘networked’ and ‘collaborative’ approaches. In the organizational literature, the notion of collaborative innovation is used for such approaches, which is characterized by both horizontal and vertical working relations. This notion fits within the broader field of school development research that approaches development as a collaborative process as well. Here both teachers’ working relations (horizontal) and working relations between teachers and school principals are studied (vertical). Studying both fits with the culture of The Netherlands and Nordic countries, which are found to be in the same cultural clusters, appreciating team-oriented and participative leadership, including horizontal and vertical working relations. However, in daily school practice it seems that breaking with the individualistic culture and changing to more collaborative-innovation practices is hard. We have an unique opportunity to study the relationship between horizontal and vertical working relations and the degree of collaborative-innovation practices (CIP). Since, in the Netherlands there is a large-scale program called LeerKRACHT that aims to stimulate CIP in schools (LeerKRACHT means “Learning force” and also “Teacher” in Dutch). The program expects from both teachers and school principals to collaborate and share resources, knowledge, and ideas and it thus asks for at least one manner of working together. The program is used by over a thousand schools in the Netherlands, and the data used in the current paper are gathered as part of a larger research project in which this program was evaluated. We study the degree of CIP in primary, secondary, and vocational schools with a mixed method approach both at the start and when working on collaborative-innovation practices in a structured way with the program ‘leerKRACHT’.
LINK
Background
Interprofessional collaborative practices (IPCP) are considered to be a crucial factor in the optimal support of young children (3–6 years) with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) in inclusive early childhood education and care (ECEC).
Aims
To investigate IPCP in interventions using a collaborative approach for young children with SLCN in ECEC, by identifying mechanisms within IPCP and how these mechanisms relate to specific context factors and professional and child-related outcomes.
Methods
A realist review of 22 empirical intervention studies, published between 1994 and 2019, was conducted to synthesise context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations, combining context factors, IPCP mechanisms and outcomes at staff and child level.
Main Contribution
Reciprocal IPCP mechanisms were reported together with interprofessional intervention practices, whereas one-directional IPCP mechanisms were restricted to gains in professional development. Our review further suggests that collective ownership of intervention goals, combined with personal cooperation and communication skills of staff, is vital for inclusive practices and functional communication of children with SLCN.
Conclusion
Our review has revealed indications for effective IPCP mechanisms, context factors at staff level, and positive outcomes for the professional development of staff working with children with SLCN. In addition, our findings support a link between IPCP and child-related outcomes regarding speech, language and communication development. Future studies should increase our insight into how practitioners, children and families profit from daily collaborative practices.
WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS
What is already known on this subject
Interventions using a collaborative approach for young children (3-6 years) with SLCN in ECEC are considered to be part of the optimal support of these children.
What this paper adds to existing knowledge
Conducting a realist review of 22 empirical studies on collaborative intervention offered the possibility to identify specific context factors, IPCP mechanisms and professional and child-related outcomes and to synthesise CMO configuations. Findings suggest multiple routes from effective delivery of SLCN services to improvement of speech, language and communication development, supporting the suggested beneficial function of collaboration between multiple professions. Collective ownership of intervention goals, combined with personal cooperation and communication skills of staff, seems to be vital for inclusive practices and functional communication of children with SLCN. Reciprocal IPCP mechanisms were reported together with interprofessional intervention practices, whereas one-directional IPCP mechanisms were restricted to gains in professional development.
What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?
High-quality collaborative intervention for children with SLCN in requires awareness of and critical reflection on IPCP mechanisms in order to improve outcomes for both professionals and children. Both, institutional structural support and individual communicative and cooperative skills are required to increase interprofessional collaboration with the aim to meet the needs of every individual child with SLCN.
DOCUMENT
Collaborative learning is not a new teaching and learning approach; it has been around since the 1970s and is an evidence-based practice that has been proven to be effective time after time. Therefore, instead of reinventing the wheel or only relying on best practices or anecdotal evidence of what works and what doesn’t, especially when designing Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) environments, educators might find it useful to make use of existing collaborative learning instructional design elements. These elements have been scientifically proven to be effective and can be applied in both the physical and online international classroom.
LINK
The Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship professorship focuses on the collaborative paradigm in economic transformation - the ways diverse organizations in globalvalue chains innovate and act in partnerships to address ecological and social grand challenges. Collaboration with multiple and diverse stakeholders is complex and challenging. Stakeholders have different interests, may compete with each other, or are just not ready to move as fast or as radically as others. Yet, we know that grand challenges are too complex and systemic for any one organization to address alone. Business leaders have an important role to play in transforming economic ecosystems and catalysing change among stakeholders and industry actors. They must move from linear thinking, where sustainability is a market for green or social products, to circular and inclusive thinking, where regeneration of natural ecosystems occurs and economic profits are equally distributed.The Collaborative Innovation and
Entrepreneurship professorship aims to contribute knowledge, support organizations, and facilitate learning about collaborative organizational forms and practices - what we call collaborative organizing - for a more sustainable, regenerative and thriving 21st century economic system.
DOCUMENT
Horizontal collaborative purchasing (HCP) has often been cited as a way for hospitals to address the challenges of the rising healthcare costs. However, hospitals do not seem to utilize horizontal collaborative purchasing on any large scale, and recent initiatives have had mixed results. Focusing on Dutch hospitals, in this paper we present major impediments for collaborative purchasing, resulting in a first component of our proposed electronic horizontal collaborative purchasing model for hospitals; as a second component it contains a collaborative purchasing typology. A first validation round with hospital purchasing professionals, described separately in Kusters and Versendaal (2011), confirmed four applicable purchasing types and fourteen salient collaborative purchasing impediments. The model is operationalized by including possible information technology (IT) solutions that address the specific fourteen impediments. This model is validated through methodological triangulation of four different validation techniques. We conclude that IT has the potential to support, or overcome, the impediments of HCP. The validation also reveals the need to distinguish between more processrelated, as opposed to social-related, obstacles; the immediate potential for IT solutions is greater for the process-related impediments. Ultimately, we conclude that the collaborative epurchasing model (e-HCP) and implementation roadmap can be used by healthcare consortia, branche organizations, partnering healthcare institutes and multi-site healthcare institutes as a means to help identifying strategies to initiate, manage and evaluate collaborative purchasing practices
DOCUMENT
This study highlights tensions and challenges experienced by language teachers in CLIL contexts. Using an example from the Netherlands, it explores the pedagogical and collaborative practices of Teachers of English in Bilingual streams (TEBs). The study shows how, using formal and practical theories, pedagogical and collaborative practices were formulated and used to investigate the beliefs and practices of language teachers in bilingual settings. The paper presents the operationalisation of 36 practices for TEBs and reports on an online survey investigating TEBs’ stated beliefs and practices. The findings suggest this set of practices has potential, both as a professional development tool for language teachers in bilingual education settings, and for further research. Results of the online survey revealed that the disciplinary identity of most Dutch TEBs leads to a focus on language, communication, literature, and language arts. TEBs are not necessarily aware of, and do not automatically consider, possibilities for expanding their own pedagogical practices in relation to subject-specific language or supporting and collaborating with their subject teacher colleagues. We suggest that policy guidelines, curricula development and teacher education programmes should pay more attention to the unique position of language teachers in these settings.
DOCUMENT
Educational innovations often tend to fail, mainly because teachers and school principals do not feel involved or are not allowed to have a say. Angela de Jong's dissertation shows the importance of school principals and teachers leading 'collaborative innovation' together. Collaborative innovation requires a collaborative, distributed approach involving both horizontal and vertical working relationships in a school. Her research shows that teams with more distributed leadership have a more collaborative 'spirit' to improve education. Team members move beyond formal (leadership) roles, and work more collectively on school-wide educational improvement from intrinsic motivation. De Jong further shows that school principals seek a balance in steering and providing space. She distinguished three leadership patterns: Team Player, Key Player, Facilitator. Team players in particular are important for more collaborative innovation in a school. They balance between providing professional space to teachers (who look beyond their own classroom) and steering for strategy, frameworks, boundaries, and vision. This research took place in schools working with the program of Foundation leerKRACHT, a program implemented by more than a thousand schools (primary, secondary, and vocational education). The study recommends, towards school principals and teachers, and also towards trainers, policymakers, and school board members, to reflect more explicitly on their roles in collaborative innovation and talk about those roles.
DOCUMENT
Purpose of this study
This study aims to better understand the deliberate design of student learning in living labs.
Theoretical background
The 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, methodology
Setting
This 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.
Sample
The 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.
Method
The 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 analysis
In 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.
Findings
At 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 poster
This 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
Our study elucidates collaborative value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks in a context of sustainability. Collaborative networks that focus on innovative solutions for grand societal challenges are characterized by a multiplicity and diversity of actors that increase the complexity and coordination costs of collective action. These types of inter-organizational arrangements have underlying tensions as partners cooperate to create collaborative value and compete to capture or appropriate value on a private or organizational level, resulting in potential and actual value flows that are highly diffuse and uncertain among actors. We also observe that network participants capture value differentially, often citing the pro-social (e.g. community, belonging, importance) and extrinsic benefits of learning and reputation as valuable, but found it difficult to appropriate economic or social benefits from that value. Differential and asymmetric value appropriation among participants threatens continued network engagement and the potential collective value creation of collaborative networks. Our data indicates that networked value creation and capture requires maintaining resource complementarity and interdependency among network participants as the network evolves. We develop a framework to assess the relational value of collaborative networks and contribute to literature by unpacking the complexities of networked value creation and private value capture in collaborative networks for sustainability.
DOCUMENT
The benefits of collaborative purchasing are many, yet in the healthcare sector, in particular at hospitals, it is still uncommon. In this paper we identify major impediments for collaborative purchasing, resulting in a first component of our proposed collaborative e-purchasing model for hospitals; as a second component it contains a collaborative purchasing typology. After analysis of a first validation round with hospital purchasing professionals, the results show four applicable purchasing types and fourteen collaborative purchasing impediments that are perceived as important for hospitals. The model is further extended by possible IT solutions, identified by experts, addressing the specific fourteen impediments. We conclude that the collaborative e-purchasing model can be used by healthcare consortia, branche organizations, partnering healthcare institutes and multi-site healthcare institutes as a means to help identifying strategies to initiate, manage and evaluate collaborative purchasing practices.
DOCUMENT
