264
O. Khalaim et al.
on the definition of success and new considerations to frame the expectations of value
creation are involved at the last fifth cycle (Wenger et al. 2011).
Based on the method, we developed a table with estimation of value created by
three change projects (CPA cases) with further comparative analysis of the results
(see Annex).
4 Results and Discussion on CPA Case Study Analysis
At the initial stage, we have formulated a number of starting discussion questions,
serving as key points in the process the results interpretation:
• How did the CPA cases influence teachers on individual level, and the working
environment on departmental/university level?
• Does the CPA induce changes by its own (as an external idea), or it serves primarily
as a catalyst/platform/framework for changes, based on personal intension of a
teacher to change the system? In other words, does it shape the way we are
changing things?
• Do we need “grassroots-induced” changes in university ESD? What are institutional enablers and hindrances for CPA cases realization in universities of Baltic
region?
The value creation stories and comparative analysis of change projects allowed
reflecting on each case following the discussion questions.
The change project from Sumy State University is a good case highlighting the
importance of small bottom-up initiated actions designed according to CPA that
resulted in a significant system change in the quality education on the university
level in a long-time perspective. The starting barriers for the initiative described by
CPA case leader Nadiya Kostyuchenko in a personal interview included primarily
non-willingness of experienced university teachers, professors and senior lecturers,
to explore and practice the methods of active learning. “Why should I play these
games at an obligatory teacher-training?”—that was a typical question during the
first training sessions under a new program [interview with Nadiya Kostyuchenko
2020]. The first resistance was on adopting an interactive learning environment.
Since the very idea of an open space equipped with flexible furniture and necessity
to be part of constantly changing group models (from working in pairs to mini
group discussions etc.) was not regarded as “business as usual” for many teachers, it
provoked some opposition at the first stage. That is why the overall group of teachers
was split in two independently working groups: a smaller one expressed their interest
to be involved in teacher training under the new program, and a bigger one decided
to follow the original program (designed in a format of “passive listening”). The
new program became popular in three years of running through many university
departments. Currently, the active learning techniques promoted by it were approved
by the whole university along with a new design of classrooms that enables using
these methods in teaching.
O. Khalaim et al.
on the definition of success and new considerations to frame the expectations of value
creation are involved at the last fifth cycle (Wenger et al. 2011).
Based on the method, we developed a table with estimation of value created by
three change projects (CPA cases) with further comparative analysis of the results
(see Annex).
4 Results and Discussion on CPA Case Study Analysis
At the initial stage, we have formulated a number of starting discussion questions,
serving as key points in the process the results interpretation:
• How did the CPA cases influence teachers on individual level, and the working
environment on departmental/university level?
• Does the CPA induce changes by its own (as an external idea), or it serves primarily
as a catalyst/platform/framework for changes, based on personal intension of a
teacher to change the system? In other words, does it shape the way we are
changing things?
• Do we need “grassroots-induced” changes in university ESD? What are institutional enablers and hindrances for CPA cases realization in universities of Baltic
region?
The value creation stories and comparative analysis of change projects allowed
reflecting on each case following the discussion questions.
The change project from Sumy State University is a good case highlighting the
importance of small bottom-up initiated actions designed according to CPA that
resulted in a significant system change in the quality education on the university
level in a long-time perspective. The starting barriers for the initiative described by
CPA case leader Nadiya Kostyuchenko in a personal interview included primarily
non-willingness of experienced university teachers, professors and senior lecturers,
to explore and practice the methods of active learning. “Why should I play these
games at an obligatory teacher-training?”—that was a typical question during the
first training sessions under a new program [interview with Nadiya Kostyuchenko
2020]. The first resistance was on adopting an interactive learning environment.
Since the very idea of an open space equipped with flexible furniture and necessity
to be part of constantly changing group models (from working in pairs to mini
group discussions etc.) was not regarded as “business as usual” for many teachers, it
provoked some opposition at the first stage. That is why the overall group of teachers
was split in two independently working groups: a smaller one expressed their interest
to be involved in teacher training under the new program, and a bigger one decided
to follow the original program (designed in a format of “passive listening”). The
new program became popular in three years of running through many university
departments. Currently, the active learning techniques promoted by it were approved
by the whole university along with a new design of classrooms that enables using
these methods in teaching.