Zoekresultaten

Proiectând modele de venituri în artă.

Onze online platformen

Social media and sharing economy platforms do not only disrupt industries. They also bypass democratic institutions. That’s not without risk, because the dominant Silicon Valley based online platforms are designed to create shareholder value, not to strengthen society or democracy. Which is unfortunate, because online platforms – if designed to that purpose – can be uniquely power full tools for organising our networked society.In Amsterdam over 90 neighbourhood networks use online platforms for self organisation. This development accelerated from 2010 on. The networks aim at strengthening social ties and local initiatives and are increasingly involved in some way of democratic innovation. This study is a deep dive into this urban bottom-up-movement. It puts the phenomena of online neighbourhood platforms in a broader societal and economical context. It points at the importance of user owned platforms and data. And it draws conclusions on how society and specifically municipal management can bring this movement to a next level. Ultimately with the potential of growing into an alternative for the Silicon Valley owned online platform ecosystem.

CyberParks - the interface between people, places and technology

Learning in networks Community of Practice: a new approach to entrepreneurial learning

Educational programs teaching entrepreneurial behaviour and knowledge are crucial to a vital and healthy economy. The concept of building a Communities of Practice (CoP) could be very promising. CoP’s are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour (Wenger, McDermott and Snyder, 2002). They consist of a group of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. Normally CoP’s are rather homogeneous. Saxion institute Small Business & Retail Management (SB&RM) started a CoP with entrepreneurs September 2007. Typical in the this community, are the differences between the partners. The Community consists of students, entrepreneurs and members of an institution for higher education. They have different characteristics and they don’t share the same knowledge. Thus, building long-lasting relations can be complicated. Solid relations for longer periods are nevertheless inevitable in using CoP as a mean in an educational concept that takes approximately 4 years. After one year an evaluation took place on the main aspects of a lasting partnership. The central problem SB&RM in Deventer faces is to design the CoP in a way possible members will join and stay for a longer period and in a way it ensures entrepreneurial learning. This means important design characteristics have to be identified, and the CoP in Deventer has to be evaluated to assess whether it meets those design characteristics in an effective and efficient way. The main target of the evaluation is to determine which key factors are important to make sure continuity in partnership is assured and entrepreneurial learning is best supported. To solve the problem, an investigation on how a CoP works, what group dynamics take place, and how this can be measured has to be conducted. Furthermoreusing the CoP as a tool for entrepreneurship means key aspects of entrepreneurial learning have to be identified. After that the CoP in Deventer has to be examined on both aspects. According to literature CoP’s define themselves along three dimensions: domain (indicating what is it about), community (defining how it functions), and practice (indicating what capabilities it has produced) (Wenger, 1998). This leads to meaningful, shared and coordinated activities (Akkerman et al, 2007): Key aspects of a successful CoP lie in both hard and soft sides of creating a partnership. It means on one hand a CoP has to deal with defining their own overall vision, formulating long term goals and targets on the short term. They have to formulate how to achieve those targets and create meaningful activities (reification). On the other hand a CoP has to deal with relations, trust, norms and values (participation). Reification and participation as design characteristic can provide indicators on which the CoP in Deventer can be evaluated. A lasting partnership means joining the CoP and staying. Weick provides us with a suitable model that enables us to do research and evaluate whether the CoP in Deventer is successful or not, Weick’s model of means convergence. To effectively ensure entrepreneurial learning the process in the CoP has to provide or enable actionoriented forms through Project-based activity, accompanied by reflection, with high emotional exposure (or cognitive affection) preferably caused by discontinuities to be suitable as a tool in entrepreneurial learning. Furthermore it should be accompanied by the right preconditions to work effectively and efficiently. The evaluation of the present CoP in Deventer is done by interviewing all participants at the end of the first year of the partnership. In a structured interview, based on literature studies, all participants were separately questioned

How Expert Designers Design

This paper discusses two studies - the one in a business context, the other in a university context - carried out with expert educational designers. The studies aimed to determine the priorities experts claim to employ when designing competence-based learning environments. Designers in both contexts agree almost completely on principles they feel are important. Both groups emphasized that one should start a design enterprise from the needs of the learners, instead of the content structure of the learning domain. However, unlike business designers, university designers find it extremely important to consider alternative solutions during the whole design process. University designers also say that they focus more on project plan and desired characteristics of the instructional blueprint whereas business designers report being more client-oriented, stressing the importance of "buying in" the client early in the process.

Making sustainability work

“Critical Making in Collaboration with Nature”, discusses the outcomes of the Making Sustainability Work project from Fall 2020. With support of CoECI Zaaigelden scheme, the Critical Making learning community put together a group of makers from research, education and industry to explore the implications of designing with natural materials and biological processes, such as biopolymers, fungal composites and bacteria dye. By following a selection of modules from the Fabricademy global training program, participants explored hands-on techniques to create their own design materials and colours from renewable and biodegradable resources and documented their journeys. The shared experience was reflected upon in a series of interviews and essays touching on the following questions: • In what way do unruly natural materials challenge ways of doing and teaching design? • How do grown materials fit into or challenge makers’ goals of sustainability?• What is needed to bring biological processes into communities of practice in the field of design, art and making?• How and when does criticality emerge in the making process? • How do processes of thinking and doing intersect and what is the role of social interactions and collaboration?