What do we need to consider when designing and researching student learning in Challenge-Based Learning?

Challenge-Based Learning has become specifically popular in higher engineering education. CBL addresses the key characteristics of future engineering programs by embracing authentic, active learning, offering choice in problem-solving and learning practices as well as enabling training in interdisciplinary teamwork and decision-making. This responds to the desire of many students for a sense of meaning in their education. Just as with many other educational innovations, we see a large variety of many different initiatives under the CBL label which is why much research is being conducted on the characteristics of CBL implementation. But the goal for researching different characteristics of CBL experiments is to, in the long run, understand whether CBL influences student learning, and in which way, since prior research suggests positive effects of such active learning approaches. In this short paper we present a framework for capturing the prerequisites, context, process and outcomes of student learning in Challenge-Based Learning. We take a close look at CBL as an educational concept in contrast to the prior ways in which student learning has been described. We put forward a heuristic analytical framework that will allow researchers and educators to capture the different aspects of the CBL process and context that could guide further education innovation and research to foster student learning gain in CBL

Entrepreneurship at the interface of design and science:Toward an inclusive framework

\u3cp\u3eEntrepreneurship scholars are increasingly interested in conducting work at the interface of design and science. However, a consistent methodological framework for this type of work is missing. In this paper, we therefore develop such a framework. First, three examples of entrepreneurship scholarship at the design-science interface are outlined. From these examples, we infer two key characteristics of design science (DS). For one, research outputs not only include theoretical constructs and models, but also values, principles and practices. In addition, creative design and scientific validation are complementary and equivalent research activities in DS. Whereas design and validation are legitimate research approaches in their own right, we conclude that the interaction between the two can drive the continual renewal of the entrepreneurship field and unlock the potential of an inclusive body of knowledge that is both rigorous and relevant.\u3c/p\u3

Understanding the innovation adoption process of construction clients

Although the role of clients in stimulating construction innovation seems to be controversial, little has been known about their innovation adoption behaviour. This paper presents first results of an ongoing research project the aim of which is to shed more light on the adoption processes of construction clients. We build up a conceptual framework that describes innovation adoption as a communication process. Furthermore, we highlight and discuss the main findings of a case about the adoption of a temporary construction for the maintenance of a motorway bridge. Thus far we conclude from our findings that a more accelerated diffusion of construction innovation requires that the client has a thorough understanding of the problem an innovation is intended to solve. Furthermore, there must be improved dissemination and availability of information about similar solutions applied in previous projects and, for large-scale structural changes, ideas must be considered either in advance or at an early stage of a project

Designing as practice : purposive interventions to develop shared understanding

No abstrac

Configuring collective digital-technology usage in dynamic and complex design practices

\u3cp\u3eDigital-technology usage in dynamic and complex work practices is a core phenomenon in innovation research. There are, however, few detailed analyses of how people organize the use of digital tools in their work practices. We aim to offer more insight into how individual actors use digital technology, how these actors organize its use in collectives, and how they organize their work with that of other actors in order to realize collective-level goals. We implemented a qualitative research design, based on interviews in architectural firms complemented with observations and archival data. By analyzing interactions of multiple individual actors with digital technology, we found that actors organize usage in collectives through activities that we call configuring-in-use and reflecting; and that they combine these two organizational activities in order to realize collective-level goals. We identify the combination of these organizational activities as configurational usage. We contribute to literature on the usage of pervasive digital technology by providing a detailed empirical investigation of organized usage of digital technology. Furthermore, we refine the conceptualization of configurational usage, improving understanding of core processes of digital innovation.\u3c/p\u3

CM : becoming a technology firm

Founded in 2000 as a Short Message Service (SMS) marketing company for discos (clubs), CM evolved into a technology provider for SMS services. By 2008, CM was market leader in The Netherlands, a position won by offering high quality services at low prices. In 2010, the founders of the company were looking for different growth opportunities. Should they develop new products and/or expand internationally? Did they need to attract external funding? Or should they continue to focus on their core technology and home market

Open innovation in the European space sector:existing practices, constraints and opportunities

\u3cp\u3eTo enhance innovative output and societal spillover of the European space sector, the open innovation approach is becoming popular. Yet, open innovation, referring to innovation practices that cross borders of individual firms, faces constraints. To explore these constraints and identify opportunities, this study performs interviews with government/agency officials and space technology entrepreneurs. The interviews highlight three topic areas with constraints and opportunities: 1) mainly one-directional knowledge flows (from outside the space sector to inside), 2) knowledge and property management, and 3) the role of small- and medium sized companies. These results bear important implications for innovation practices in the space sector.\u3c/p\u3