Abstract
Current environmental and societal challenges increasingly require students in higher education to develop boundary-crossing competence. That is, the ability to effectively operate, communicate and co-create knowledge in a transdisciplinary context. However, little experience is available in how to design such programmes. The current chapter presents a case study in the development of an M.Sc. in International Security Management. We share our experiences with a design approach that can be characterised as transdisciplinary and team-based educational design in a blended setting that includes the use of online synchronous communication.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For further discussion of wicked problems, see the chapter by Rodrigues and de Sousa.
- 2.
For more information, see https://www.ism-ka.eu/.
- 3.
Please see the book’s foreword for more information about the International Security Management - Knowledge Alliance (ISM-KA) network.
- 4.
Integrated Learning Design Environment 2—ILDE2 is a community platform for learning design (https://www.upf.edu/web/tide/tools/ilde2).
References
Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.
Anderson, L., Ellwood, P., & Coleman, C. (2017). The impactful academic: Relational management education as an intervention for impact. British Journal of Management, 28, 14–28.
Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Dimitriadis, Y., Prieto-Santos, L. P., Hernández-Leo, D., & Mor, Y. (2014). From idea to VLE in half a day: METIS approach and tools for learning co-design. In F. J. García-Peñalvo (Ed.), Proceedings of the second international conference on technological ecosystems for enhancing multiculturality (pp. 741–745). New York, US: ACM.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: One concept, two hills to climb. In S. C. Tan, J. S. Hyo, & J. Yeo (Eds.), Knowledge creation in education (pp. 35–52). Singapore: Springer.
Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Schmid, R. F., Tamim, R. M., & Abrami, P. C. (2014). A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: from the general to the applied. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26(1), 87–122.
Bower, M., & Vlachopoulos, P. (2018). A critical analysis of technology-enhanced learning design frameworks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(6), 981–997.
Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351–364.
Cremers, P. H. M., Wals, A. E. J., Wesselink, R., & Mulder, M. (2016). Design principles for hybrid learning configurations at the interface between school and workplace. Learning Environments Research, 19(3), 309–334.
Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & Van Aken, J. E. (2008). Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organization Studies, 29(3), 393–413.
DeRosa, D. M., & Lepsinger, R. (2010). Virtual team success. A practical guide for working and leading from a distance. San Francisco, US: Jossey-Bass.
Gaebel, M., Zhang, T., Bunescu, L., & Stoeber, H. (2018). Trends 2018: Learning and teaching in the European higher education area. https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/trends-2018-learning-and-teaching-in-the-european-higher-education-area.pdf. Accessed September 20, 2019.
Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco, US: Jossey-Bass.
Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105.
Giesbers, B., & Van den Doel, M. (2020). Blended co-design of education: Way of working report. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339627001_Blended_co-design_of_education_Way_of_working_report. Accessed September 20, 2019.
Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., & Gijselaers, W. (2014). A dynamic analysis of the interplay between asynchronous and synchronous communication in online learning: The impact of motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 30(1), 30–50.
Gulikers, J., & Oonk, C. (2019). Towards a rubric for stimulating and evaluating sustainable learning. Sustainability, 11(4), 969. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11040969.
Heller, R. (2010). A cost-benefit analysis of face-to-face and virtual communication: Overcoming the challenges (CAHRS White Paper). Ithaca, US: Cornell University, ILR School, Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies.
Hernández-Leo, D., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Derntl, M., Prieto, L. P., & Chacón, J. (2014). ILDE: Community environment for conceptualizing, authoring and deploying learning activities. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (pp. 490–493). Cham: Springer.
Hrastinski, S. (2008). The potential of synchronous communication to enhance participation in online discussions: A case study of two e-learning courses. Information & Management, 45(7), 499–506.
McTighe, J., & Thomas, R. S. (2003). Backward design for forward action. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 52–55.
Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? Internet and Higher Education, 18(1), 15–23.
Orphanides, A. G. (2012). Challenges in European higher education. Higher Learning Research Communications, 2(2), 3–7.
Rehm, M. (2013). Unified yet separated: Empirical study on the impact of hierarchical positions within communities of learning (Doctoral dissertation). https://www.merit.unu.edu/training/theses/REHM_Martin.pdf. Accessed September 20, 2019.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
Salmon, G., & Wright, P. (2014). Transforming future teaching through “Carpe Diem” learning design. Education Sciences, 4(1), 52–63.
Spanjers, I. A. E., Könings, K. D., & Leppink, J. (2015). The promised land of blended learning: Quizzes as a moderator. Educational Research Review, 15(1), 59–74.
Tu, C., & McIsaac, S. M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice. Boston, US: Harvard University Press.
Acknowledgements
This work has been funded by EACEA, under the Erasmus + Knowledge Alliances ISM-KA project 575734-epp-1-2026-1-NL-EPPKA2-KA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giesbers, B., van den Doel, M., Wever, K. (2021). Blended Co-design of Education: The Case of an Executive Master’s in Security Management. In: Jacobs, G., Suojanen, I., Horton, K., Bayerl, P. (eds) International Security Management. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42523-4_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42523-4_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-42522-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-42523-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)