D3.4: Report on educational strategy, year 2

A new way of doing education will be important to cultivate the competences needed to deal with the challenge of sustainability in agrifood and forestry systems. Overall, the new educational approach is characterised by 1) a shift from theory to phenomenon and action as the starting point for the learning process (‘experiential learning’, ‘action learning’) and 2) a shift from knowledge to competence as the focus of the educational activities. The Nextfood project aims at contributing to these shifts by facilitating according to a master manual worked out by the project (deliverable D2.2) a transition to action learning in twelve educational cases in Africa, India and Europe. Simultaneously, research is done according to an action research protocol (deliverable D2.1) on the case transition process and on effects of action learning on students and involved stakeholders. The present report on the implementation of this educational strategy in the twelve cases focus on:
(1) the case development process (main challenges and supporting forces associated with implementation of the Nextfood approach)
(2) the students’ experiences and learning outcomes (their development of key competences and transition to an experiential learning mode)
(3) benefits of involving non-university stakeholders (their learning outcomes and contributions)
The cases have collected data on the development and implementation of the intended educational activities. In a separate section of the case development reports (deliverable D2.6), the cases have been asked to report on how these data were collected, the analysis process, what the data indicate and whether there were any significant factors influencing the validity and reliability of the findings. These data form the basis for the findings reported in this document.
Data on the process of implementing action learning showed that a major challenge is to build an understanding of the need for interdisciplinary, systems-oriented, self-directed, group and peer action learning having as primary focus the training of key competences needed for sustainable development. To a varying degree this has been experienced in several cases with academic institutions, teachers, students and off-campus stakeholders involved in the education. This indicates a need for a shift in culture and mindset at several levels to remove the formal and practical obstacles identified and to create a favourable environment and motivation for a different kind of learning and assessment strategy. Although the reported challenges outnumbered the supporting forces, the latter included interest and support for systems-oriented action learning among institutions at various levels of governments and educational institutions and among individual stakeholders and commercial actors. Several scientific reports also strongly support the implementation of this approach.
Data from the students’ self-assessment and information extracted from their reflection documents suggested a variable effect of action learning on the students’ self-development of key competences. Possible causal relationships have not been explored so far, but it seems likely that the extent to which the action-learning approach has been implemented in a case, plays an important role. So do probably also factors such as pre-knowledge about and motivation for action learning among teachers, students and other stakeholders involved.
4
When it comes to students’ transition in mindset and mode of learning, there was indication that reflection was valued as a competence on which development of all the others depend, and several students praised the effect improved reflection competence had on their lives outside university. In several cases, students that came into the course with expectations to gain certain pieces of knowledge or technical skills, gradually focused less on those aspects and more on developing the core competences. Further, several cases reported increasing enthusiasm about action learning among students, but also examples of students that had the same questions after the course as they had before. The causal factors for this variability are probably similar to those mentioned above regarding competence development but were not investigated.
Information about involving non-university stakeholders strongly suggests that they consider their interaction with students as useful learning opportunities enabling them to see their situation in different perspectives, that students were perceived as partners with important knowledge, and that the process of experience sharing worked in both directions. Similarly, their contributions are highly valued by course facilitators and students.