Just what and how eight experienced teachers in four coaching dyads learned during a 1-year reciprocal peer coaching trajectory was examined in the present study. The learning processes were mapped by providing a detailed description of reported learning activities, reported learning outcomes, and the relations between these two. The sequences of learning activities associated with a particular type of learning outcome were next selected, coded, and analyzed using a variety of quantitative methods. The different activity sequences undertaken by the teachers during a reciprocal peer coaching trajectory were found to trigger different aspects of their professional development.
Just what and how eight experienced teachers in four coaching dyads learned during a 1-year reciprocal peer coaching trajectory was examined in the present study. The learning processes were mapped by providing a detailed description of reported learning activities, reported learning outcomes, and the relations between these two. The sequences of learning activities associated with a particular type of learning outcome were next selected, coded, and analyzed using a variety of quantitative methods. The different activity sequences undertaken by the teachers during a reciprocal peer coaching trajectory were found to trigger different aspects of their professional development.
In het project “ADVICE: Advanced Driver Vehicle Interface in a Complex Environment” zijn belangrijke onderzoeksresultaten geboekt op het gebied van het schatten van de toestand en werklast van een voertuigbestuurder om hiermee systemen die informatie geven aan de bestuurder adaptief te maken om zo de veiligheid te verhogen. Een voorbeeld is om minder belangrijke informatie van een navigatiesysteem te onderdrukken, zolang de bestuurder een hoge werklast ervaart voor het autorijden en/of belangrijke informatie juist duidelijker weer te geven. Dit leidt tot een real-time werklast schatter die geografische informatie meeneemt, geavaleerd in zowel een rijsimulator als op de weg. In de ontwikkeling naar automatisch rijden is de veranderende rol van de bestuurder een belangrijk (veiligheids) onderwerp, welke sterk gerelateerd is aan de werklast van de bestuurder. Indien rijtaken meer geautomatiseerd worden, wijzigt de rol van actieve bestuurder meer naar supervisie van de rijtaken, maar tevens met de eis om snel en gericht in te grijpen indien de situatie dit vereist. Zowel deze supervisie als interventietaak zijn geen eenvoudige taken met onderling een sterk verschillende werklast (respectievelijk lage en (zeer) hoge werklast). Of een goede combinatie inclusief snelle overgangen tussen deze twee hoofdtaken veilig mogelijk is voor een bestuurder en hoe dit dan het beste ondersteund kan worden, is een belangrijk onderwerp van huidig onderzoek. De ontwikkeling naar autonoom rijden verandert niet alleen de rol van de bestuurder, maar zal ook de eisen aan het rijgedrag van het voertuig beïnvloeden, de voertuigdynamica. Voor de actieve bestuurder kunnen snelle voertuigreacties op bestuurdersinput belangrijk zijn, zeker voor een ‘sportief’ rijdende bestuurder. Indien dit voertuig ook automatische rijtaken moet uitvoeren, kan juist een meer gelijkmatig rijgedrag gewenst zijn, zodat de bestuurder ook andere taken kan uitvoeren. Dit stelt eisen aan vertaling van (automatische) input naar voertuigreactie en aan de voertuigdynamica. Mogelijk wil zelfs een sportieve bestuurder een meer comfortabel voertuiggedrag tijdens automatisch rijden. Eveneens voor deze twee voertuigtoestanden, menselijke of automatische besturing, moet gezocht worden naar een goede combinatie inclusief (veilige) overgangen tussen deze twee toestanden. Hierbij speelt de werklast en toestand van de bestuurder een doorslaggevende rol. In de geschetste ontwikkelingen in automatisch rijden kunnen de onderzoeksresultaten van ADVICE een goede ondersteuning bieden. Veel van deze ontwikkelingen worstelen met het schatten van de werklast van de bestuurder als cruciaal (veiligheids) aspect van automatisch rijden. De ADVICE resultaten zijn echter gepresenteerd voor beperkt publiek en gepubliceerd op conferenties, waarvan de artikelen veelal slechts tegen betaling toegankelijk zijn. Daarnaast zijn dergelijke artikelen gelimiteerd in aantal pagina’s waardoor de over te dragen informatie beperkt is. Om een betere doorwerking van ADVICE aan ‘iedereen’ te realiseren en tevens de mogelijkheden hiervan in de toekomst van automatisch rijden te plaatsen, willen wij top-up gebruiken om hierover een artikel te schrijven en dit in een peer-reviewed Open Access tijdschrift online toegankelijk te maken. Hierdoor wordt de informatie voor iedereen, gratis toegankelijk (open access), is de inhoud uitgebreider aan te geven (tijdschriftartikel) en is de inhoud en kwaliteit goed en relevant voor het vakgebied (peer-reviewed).
De afgelopen twee decennia is er veel meer aandacht ontstaan bij onderzoekers en beleidsmakers voor het begrip co-creatie. Bijna altijd wordt de rol van co-creatie als positief en essentieel gezien in een proces waarin maatschappelijke of publieke uitdagingen worden onderzocht en opgelost (zogenaamde sociale innovatie). Het meeste onderzoek naar deze twee begrippen is kwalitatief van aard en gebaseerd op ‘case studies’.In zijn promotieonderzoek kijkt Peter Broekema naar de rol van co-creatie binnen sociale innovatie in Europese samenwerkingsprojecten. In zijn eerste artikel heeft hij de begrippen co-creatie en sociale innovatie tussen 1995 en 2018 binnen de EU geanalyseerd en geconcludeerd dat beide begrippen steeds breder gebruikt worden en samen met het begrip impact zijn getransformeerd tot een beleidsparadigma.In het tweede artikel keek Peter Broekema hoe beide begrippen doorwerken in specifieke subsidieoproepen en hoe consortia deze begrippen toepassen en samenwerken. Hierbij bleek dat er weliswaar verschillende typen consortia bestaan, maar dat zij geen specifieke co-creatiestrategie hadden.In zijn laatste twee artikelen zal hij gedetailleerd kijken naar een aantal EU projecten en vaststellen hoe de samenwerking is verlopen en hoe tevreden de verschillende partners zijn met het resultaat. Peter Broekema maakt hiervoor gebruik van projecten waarin hij zelf participeert (ACCOMPLISSH, INEDIT en SHIINE).EU beleidsparadigma van sociale innovatie in combinatie met co-creatie en impact. Co-creatie vindt vaak binnen eigen type stakehodlers plaatsAbstractSocial innovation and co-creation are both relatively new concepts, that have been studied by scholars for roughly twenty years and are still heavily contested. The former emerged as a response to the more technologically focused concept of innovation and the latter originally solely described the collaboration of end-users in the development of new products, processes or services. Between 2010-2015, both concepts have been adapted and started to be used more widely by for example EU policymakers in their effort to tackle so called ‘grand societal challenges’. Within this narrative – which could be called co-creation for social innovation, it is almost a prerequisite that partners – especially citizens - from different backgrounds and sectors actively work together towards specific societal challenges. Relevance and aimHowever, the exact contribution of co-creation to social innovation projects is still unclear. Most research on co-creation has been focussing on the involvement of end-users in the development of products, processes and services. In general, scholars conclude that the involvement of end-users is effective and leads to a higher level of customer satisfaction. Only recently, research into the involvement of citizens in social innovation projects has started to emerge. However, the majority of research on co-creation for social innovation has been focusing on collaborations between two types of partners in the quadruple helix (citizens, governments, enterprises and universities). Because of this, it is still unclear what co-creation in social innovation projects with more different type of partners entails exactly. More importantly however, is that most research has been based on national case studies in which partners from different sectors collaborate in a familiar ‘national’ setting. Normally institutional and/or cultural contexts influence co-creation (for example the ‘poldermodel’in the Netherlands or the more confrontational model in France), so by looking at projects in a central EU and different local contexts it becomes clear how context effects co-creation for social innovation.Therefore this project will analyse a number of international co-creation projects that aim for social innovation with different types of stakeholders in a European and multi-stakeholder setting.With this research we will find out what people in different contexts believe is co-creation and social innovation, how this process works in different contexts and how co-creation contributes to social innovation.Research question and - sub questionsThe project will answer the following question: “What is the added value of co-creation in European funded collaboration projects that aim for social innovation?” To answer the main question, the research has been subdivided into four sub questions:1) What is the assumed added value of co-creation for social innovation?2) How is the added value of co-creation for social innovation being expressed ex ante and ex post in EU projects that aim specifically for social innovation by co-creation?3) How do partners and stakeholders envision the co-creation process beforehand and continuously shape this process in EU projects to maximise social innovation?4) How do partners and stakeholders regard the added value of co-creation for social innovation in EU projects that that aim for social innovation?Key conceptsThe research will focus on the interplay between the two main concepts a) co-creation and b) social innovation. For now, we are using the following working definitions:a) co-creation is a non-linear process that involves multiple actors and stakeholders in the ideation, implementation and assessment of products, services, policies and systems with the aim of improving their efficiency and effectiveness, and the satisfaction of those who take part in the process.b) social innovation is the invention, development and implementation of new ideas with the purpose to (immediately) relieve and (eventually) solve social problems, which are in the long run directed at the social inclusion of individuals, groups or communities.It is clear that both definitions are quite opaque, but also distinguish roughly the same phases (ideation/invention, development, implementation and assessment) and also distinguish different levels (products/services, policies and systems). Both concepts will be studied within the policy framework of the EU, in which a specific value to both concepts has been attributed, mostly because policymakers regard co-creation with universities and end-users almost as a prerequisite for social innovation. Based on preliminary research, EU policies seem to define social innovation in close reation with ‘societal impact’, which could defined as: “the long lasting effect of an activity on society, because it is aimed at solving social problems”, and therefore in this specific context social innovation seems to encompasses societal impact. For now, I will use this working definition of social innovation and will closely look at the entanglement with impact in the first outlined paper.MethodologyIn general, I will use a qualitative mixed method approach and grounded theory to answer the main research question (mRQ). In order to better understand the added value of co-creation for social innovation in an EU policy setting, the research will:SubRQ1) start with an analysis of academic literature on co-creation and social impact. This analysis will be followed by and confronted with an analysis of EU policy documents. SubRQ2) use a qualitative data analysis at nineteen EU funded projects to understand how co-creation is envisoned within social innovation projects by using the quintuple helix approach (knowledge flows between partners and stakeholders in an EU setting) and the proposed social innovation journey model. By contrasting the findings from the QDA phase of the project with other research on social innovation we will be able to find arachetypes of social innovation in relation with the (perceived) added value of co-creation within social innovation. SubRQ3) These archetypes will be used to understand the process of co-creation for social innovation by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.SubRQ4) The archetypes will also be used to understand the perceived added value by looking closely at behavioural interactions within two social innovation projects. This close examination will be carried out by carrying out interviews with key stakeholders and partners and participant observation.ImpactThe project will contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between co-creation and social innovation on different levels:a) Theoretical: the research will analyse the concepts of co-creation and social innovation in relation to each other by looking at the origins of the concepts, the adaptation in different fields and the uptake within EU policies;b) Methodological: a model will be developed to study and understand the non-lineair process of co-creation within social innovation, by focusing on social innovation pathways and social innovation strategies within a quintuple helix setting (i) academia, ii) enterprises and iii) governments that work together to improve iv) society in an v) EU setting);c) Empirical: the project will (for the first time) collect data on behavioural interactions and the satisfaction levels of these interactions between stakeholders and partners in an EU project.d) Societal: the results of the research could be used to optimize the support for social innovation projects and also for the development of specific funding calls.
Background:Many business intelligence surveys demonstrate that Digital Realities (Virtual reality and Augmented Reality) are becoming a huge market trend in many sectors, and North America is taking the lead in this emerging domain. Tourism is no exception and the sector in Europe must innovate to get ahead of the curve of this technological revolution, but this innovation needs public support.Project partnership:In order to provide labs, startups and SMEs willing to take this unique opportunity with the most appropriate support policies, 9 partner organizations from 8 countries (FR, IT, HU, UK, NO, ES, PL, NL) decided to work together: regional and local authorities, development agencies, private non-profit association and universities.Objective of the project:Thanks to their complementary experiences and know-how, they intend to improve policies of the partner regions (structural funds and regional policies), in order to foster a tourist channeled innovation in the Digital Realities sector.Approach:All partners will work together on policy analysis tasks before exchanging their best initiatives and transferring them from one country to another. This strong cooperation will allow them to build the best conditions to foster innovation thanks to more effective structural funds policies and regional policies.Main activities & outputs:8 policy instruments are addressed, among which 7 relate to structural funds programmes. Basis for exchange of experience: Reciprocal improvement analysis and 8 study trips with peer-review of each partner’s practices. Video reportages for an effective dissemination towards other territories in Europe.Main expected results:At least 16 good practices identified. 8 targeted policy instruments improved. At least 27 staff members will transfer new capacities in their intervention fields. At least 8 involved stakeholders with increased skills and knowledge from exchange of experience. Expected 17 appearances in press and media, including at European level.
