IoT Proto Labs: Cross-border Multidisciplinary Learning Labs in Higher Education

Abstract

Student labs are one promising way to cope with changing requirements from the labor market in the domain of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), but also to keep the field up to date, to start innovations and to advance the STEM domain as such. In these labs, students work together in small groups imitating professional practice of design and technology workers. More insights are needed how to design student labs. In order to effectively enhanced generic competences, such as collaboration, communication, problem solving, critical thinking, and creativity, student labs should be designed as authentic productive learning environments based on three design principles: 1) Realistic, complex task situations, 2) Multidisciplinarity,  and 3) Social interaction. IoT Rapid Proto Labs are examples of such student labs, in which cross-border multidisciplinary teams of students, teachers (coaches), and practitioners jointly develop solutions to challenging IoT applications (Internet-connected objects), add value for enterprises, and strengthen the employability, creativity and career prospects of students.

Keywords

• Student labs,Authentic learning,Higher education,Science,Technology

References

1. Bourgeois, J., Liu, S., Kortuem, G., & Lomas, D. (2018). Towards a domain-specific design platform for wheelchair user well-being. Ubi/Comp/ISWC ’18 Adjunct, October 8-12, 2018, Singapore. Singapore: ACM. Day, S. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (2012) The import of knowledge export: Connecting findings and theories of transfer of learning, Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 153-176. Heijnen, E. (2015). Remixing the art curriculum: How contemporary visual practices inspire authentic art education. Unpublisjed doctoral dissertation, Radboud Universiteit, Nijmegen. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life: New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). S`ıtuated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Lucena, J., Downey, G., Jesiek, B., & Elber, S. (2008). Competencies beyond countries: The reorganization of engineering education in the United States, Europe and Latin America. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), pp 433-447. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning?. Educational Researcher, 4-15. The Telegraph. (2017). University subjects with the highest drop out rate. Published on 19/1/17. . Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationpicturegalleries/11002595/University-degree-subjects-with-the-highest-dropout-rates.html?frame=2344255 accessed 19/1/17 Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E. (2009). A social theory of learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists in their own words (pp. 209-218). Abingdon: Routledge.