Adding Value to Open and Distance Learning Programmes …
453
(Graczyk 2015). On the contrary, more effort generally seems to be required to
obtain engagement by the academic and operations sectors at universities to improve
the viability of approaches incorporating real-world learning (Cooper 2017). It has
to be pointed out, however, that deliberate efforts are usually required to embed
sustainability thinking in experiential learning, which is often characterised by a
lack of structure (McPherson et al. 2016) and with the need to consider continuality
between subjects and the need to look into problems holistically not necessarily
that clear (Johan and Turan 2016). Awareness of these limitations needs to translate
into actions to adapt experiential learning practices so as to realize its potential
contribution to education for sustainability (EfS) and to feed into support of the
SDGs, as presented in the milestone document “Transforming our world: The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development” (UN 2015).
2.3 Applications and Examples
Several international charters and declarations concede to the role of higher education institutions in sustainability, including living labs, as a tool for sustainability
leadership. An example is the Sustainable Campus Charter, with Principle 3 requiring
alignment of the core mission of universities with sustainable development, facilities, research and education to create a ‘living laboratory’ for sustainability (Global
University Leaders Forum 2010). Taking this view, living labs seems to enjoy general acceptance as tool to facilitate experiential learning, which contributes to the
relevance of curricula. It is therefore not strange to find that living labs form part of
the strategic planning of many universities (Graczyk 2015) and is regarded as one of
the options how to integrate teaching and learning, research and operations to work
towards increased campus sustainability (Zen 2017).
An example is the University of British Columbia, which managed to introduce
one of the most successful living labs to date—created in 2010 with the campus as
societal test-bed (Robinson et al. 2013). The University of Manchester is another
example, viewing sustainability as part of their broader social responsibility, including cooperation with stakeholders, to develop real-world skills (Evans et al. 2015).
However, reports on these as well as on other examples of living labs (i.e. Graczyk
2015), tend to focus on the role of research activities and how campus facilities are
utilised, while being less specific about experiential learning. This confirms observations about the lack of scholarly work in this regard (Wall et al. 2017) and accentuates
the value added by this chapter to the body of knowledge on WIL and sustainability
learning.
453
(Graczyk 2015). On the contrary, more effort generally seems to be required to
obtain engagement by the academic and operations sectors at universities to improve
the viability of approaches incorporating real-world learning (Cooper 2017). It has
to be pointed out, however, that deliberate efforts are usually required to embed
sustainability thinking in experiential learning, which is often characterised by a
lack of structure (McPherson et al. 2016) and with the need to consider continuality
between subjects and the need to look into problems holistically not necessarily
that clear (Johan and Turan 2016). Awareness of these limitations needs to translate
into actions to adapt experiential learning practices so as to realize its potential
contribution to education for sustainability (EfS) and to feed into support of the
SDGs, as presented in the milestone document “Transforming our world: The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development” (UN 2015).
2.3 Applications and Examples
Several international charters and declarations concede to the role of higher education institutions in sustainability, including living labs, as a tool for sustainability
leadership. An example is the Sustainable Campus Charter, with Principle 3 requiring
alignment of the core mission of universities with sustainable development, facilities, research and education to create a ‘living laboratory’ for sustainability (Global
University Leaders Forum 2010). Taking this view, living labs seems to enjoy general acceptance as tool to facilitate experiential learning, which contributes to the
relevance of curricula. It is therefore not strange to find that living labs form part of
the strategic planning of many universities (Graczyk 2015) and is regarded as one of
the options how to integrate teaching and learning, research and operations to work
towards increased campus sustainability (Zen 2017).
An example is the University of British Columbia, which managed to introduce
one of the most successful living labs to date—created in 2010 with the campus as
societal test-bed (Robinson et al. 2013). The University of Manchester is another
example, viewing sustainability as part of their broader social responsibility, including cooperation with stakeholders, to develop real-world skills (Evans et al. 2015).
However, reports on these as well as on other examples of living labs (i.e. Graczyk
2015), tend to focus on the role of research activities and how campus facilities are
utilised, while being less specific about experiential learning. This confirms observations about the lack of scholarly work in this regard (Wall et al. 2017) and accentuates
the value added by this chapter to the body of knowledge on WIL and sustainability
learning.