The purpose of this study is to develop a learning model that can provide vocational senior high school students with an authentic industrial working experience in the manufacturing and production sector in the very same school that they are enrolled. An appropriate in-school industrial experience is expected to improve students’ competences and skills. A four stage research and development method was used, involving preliminary study, development, testing and model validation. The study uses both qualitative and quantitative analysis techniques to produce a six steps teaching factory learning model (TF-6M Model). Data was gathered from teachers (n= 8) of a school in Indonesia and students of class XI (n=132) who formed the experimental and the control groups in the model validation stage, and student of class XII for the preliminary study (n=35) and development test (n=98). The focus group discussion (FGD) reveals that the production teacher believes that the TF-6M model can be used to improve students’ competences. Data from students shows that TF-6M Model increases students’ competences, is preferred by students, increases their time spent at work, and improves their soft and hard skills, motivation, sense of responsibility and work ethics.
12 Read more
encounters upon the wider life experience of service users is poorly understood. It is worthy of much more detailed theoretical and empirical exploration. Fifth, the focus of the discussion here has been primarily upon the role of the service user in co- production. However the role of the service professional is equally important – co- production describes the interactions of both service users and service professionals. Insufficient attention has been given to this element of co-production to date. Too often has co-production been confused with user-led or consumerist services. This key interaction, and the role of service professionals within it, requires further exploration. Sixth, insufficient attention has also been paid to the role of learning in co-production – both how service users and professionals learn to co- produce together effectively and how the lessons of co-production are captured at a service level 9 . Finally, mention has already been made of the impact of digital and e- services upon public service delivery and it clearly has significant import for our understanding of co-production. The framework presented here does not address digital public services directly. Nonetheless it does provide a robust analytic structure for exploring and evaluating their impact upon both the experience and performance of public service systems and upon the co-creation of value in public services delivery.
23 Read more
• In situations where there is an immediacy of concern it tends to follow that non- academic partners will want to ensure impact, and in turn that means they will want to facilitate the findings reaching key decision-makers, hence supporting change. Again as a researcher reflects: “We [the researchers] may not have (i) had the knowledge of who was relevant to invite and (ii) had the clout to get them in the room. [A senior policeman’s] influence in these respects thus enabled us to increase the impact of the research – getting the key findings out to a broad and senior level audience of key stakeholders and facilitating this opportunity for them to discuss the findings and implications, next steps and broader regional context.” Furthermore, unlike previous evaluations undertaken by the same team the findings reached different and more significant audiences. As stated in their report: “As we were able to sit down with [clinical] commissioners in the learning event, the final piece of the jigsaw was in place. It is very rare that researchers can present their findings directly to commissioners who have the resources to continue or stop funding a service.” This is reinforced in the case of the Manchester pilot where the co-produced recommendations of the team have helped to shape the emerging policy framework for the devolved responsibilities for adult skills, and also been fed directly into the new House of Lords Committee on Social Mobility.
70 Read more
Each of the cases discussed here work with notions of co-production, and highlight particular ethical, and practical issues associated with this methodological approach to building knowledge. We would argue that teaching is enhanced through including experiential expertise which may highlight hitherto neglected questions, whilst also contributing to building democracy and civil society (Ostrander 2004). Drawing on the Aristotelian concept, Phr—n•sis, which can be understood as the design of problem-solving actions through collaborative knowledge construction with those who have a legitimate stake in the concern, these projects contrast and integrate a number of different knowledge systems (Greenwood 2008). Professional knowledges are combined with ÔlocalÕ knowledges, theoretical knowledges and knowledges that are about acting or practices of the city. This presents opportunities for students to develop other ways of learning, and approaching their subjects.
18 Read more
Development, it is quite likely that co- production is both embedded in their work, perhaps under another name, and linked to other services. In England in particular, where services have become increasingly fragmented and interventionist, with tightly controlled budgets, this is increasingly challenging. The biggest obstacle is the competitive contract – driven nature of services against a financially uncertain backdrop which turns potential partners into competitors, and policy makers into potential commissioners. With a little creativity, however, co– production can be developed as part of a participatory evaluation and reflective learning. The New Economics Foundation
13 Read more
This added benefit chimed well with post graduate thinking skills “It is more about developing originality in thinking.” And directly informed thinking about which model would be relevant to real world practice: ‘‘…with the added value of being able to take this forward to utilise in our current and future areas of practice”. Theoretical learning had more relevance when used in relation to generating a new model: “It gave an appreciation of other existing models lacking evidence that we had previously taken for granted in use in practice”.
10 Read more
SDWs are central to the co-design process, and take place every six months, with eight over the four year project. Discussions and outputs are captured, and cover all facets of the continuing dialogue between stakeholders throughout product development and testing. SDWs vary in their participation but can include a range of stakeholders including academics from social and physical sciences, technicians, educators, politicians, practitioners, community leaders, and household members. The workshops form a learning-by-doing process where participants identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats for the uptake of the solar technologies at household, community and regional level. This format helps clarify attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of individual members of households in the community. SDWs use systematic techniques to engage local populations, to support reflection, attitudes and critique of the technologies and the responses to those of the designers. In doing so they also build the capacity of all to understand the social context of the product’s use, its adaptation or rejection.
From this perspective, knowledge mobilisation is a collaborative process entailing critical reflection on social reality and possibilities for transformation in order to effect change. It underscores the value of ongoing lesson learning, reflexivity and contingency in a way that radically departs from the fixity of gold standard ‘what works’ that preoccupies some social scientists, the fear of failure that haunts police practitioners – aptly conveyed by one police officer in a focus group who described how ‘policing initiatives are doomed to succeed’ – and the quest for ‘golden bullets’ that fixates policy-makers. It stands in stark contrast to the ingrained culture of institutional defensiveness which has marked much British policing; as evidenced all too clearly in the police response to the Hillsborough disaster over nearly three decades (Scraton 2016). Co-production prompts a culture of learning, external engagement and openness. Hence, for our purposes, co-production is a means to realising wider structural, organisational and cultural change both among policing organisations and within universities.
34 Read more
at the end of digestion. The biogas yield from the digestion of the cow dung, poultry dropping and pig manure individually were 185ml, 220ml and 170ml respectively while the co-digestion of the substrates yielded more biogas. The cumulative biogas yield from the digestion was 2780ml. The slurry containing 48g: 144g: 48g of cow dung, poultry dropping and pig manure gave the highest biogas yield. This study showed that though the digestion of a single livestock waste can yield some biogas, co-digestion of such wastes has the potential to generate more biogas.
The main rationale of our approach, therefore, is to pri- oritise officially reported emissions, recognising that these generally make use of data and knowledge unavailable elsewhere. Then we use officially reported clinker produc- tion data and emission factors, IPCC default emission fac- tors, industry-reported clinker production, and finally survey- based clinker ratios. These are applied to cement production data where no better data are available. Full details are pro- vided in Appendix D and in the associated data files. For the 42 Annex I countries that report their greenhouse gas in- ventories annually to the UNFCCC, we extract official esti- mates of cement production emissions from 1990 onwards. Some eastern European countries submit data for years be- fore 1990: Poland and Bulgaria from 1988, Hungary from 1986, and Slovenia from 1987. These are all based on clinker production data and largely use Tier II methods. This dataset covers about 10 % of current global cement production and is available as consistently structured spreadsheet files for each year. In addition, clinker production data were available for the US from 1925 (Hendrik van Oss, USGS, personal com- munication 2015).
23 Read more
We have argued that if ALTs and services are to be ﬁ t for purpose, their design and deployment must be grounded in care recipients ’ lived experience. This is not currently being achieved, as is demonstrated by our ﬁ ndings of how bricolage is a common response for ensuring that ALTs satisfy the needs of their users. Bricolage is important because it ﬁlls the gap between the limitations of a priori design and the lived realities of ageing in place by enabling care recipients and their networks of carers to take the initiative in customising devices to meet their needs. We have examined how new models of technology supply, such as ALT apps, can contribute to making customising and con ﬁ guration more straightfor- ward and effective and discussed some of the challenges of realising customisable and con ﬁ gurable solutions in a safe and dependable way. We have also made a case for how domestic ethnography and co-design workshops can improve understanding of care recipients ’ needs and make design processes more inclusive.
24 Read more
Sci ence a nd Technol ogy Studi es (STS) ha s been concerned to s eek a l terna ti ve ontol ogi es ba s ed on how thi ngs a nd peopl e, na ture a nd cul ture a nd the ma teri a l a nd the s emi oti c a re mutua l l y producti ve, dra wi ng on epi s temol ogi es whi ch recogni s e the knower a s i nti ma tel y bound up i n, a nd a ffecti ng, a ny ‘object’ of s tudy. Or a s Steve Wool ga r a nd Ja vi er Leza un put i t, STS ha s ‘a n a ppreci a ti on of fl ui di ty i n s eemi ngl y s ta bl e enti ti es , a recogni ti on of di fference beyond cl a i ms to s i ngul a ri ty (a nd vi ce vers a ), a rel ucta nce to ta ke the worl d a t fa ce va l ue – to the rea l m of the rea dy-ma de, to the worl d of thos e enti ti es whos e bei ng mi ght s eem mos t unprobl ema ti c a nd ordi na ry’ (2013, p 336 ). A key a s pect of thi s ha s been to ra di ca l l y extend the number of ‘pa rti ci pa nts ’ – i nvol ved to i ncl ude thi ngs , pl a nts a nd a ni ma l s (Sta r a nd Gri es emer, 1989; s ee a l s o Rea s on, 2005) – s ometi me now fra med a s ‘more-tha n-huma n’ pa rti ci pa ti on (Abra m 1996; Ba s ti a n et a l , 2015). Thi s empha s i s on i nterrel a ti ons hi ps a nd co- cons ti tuti on ha s l ed to thes e a pproa ches bei ng na med ‘rel a ti ona l ontol ogy’. Wi thi n the fi el d, the noti on of co-producti on ha s become one wa y of a rti cul a ti ng thi s rel a ti ona l i ty, ‘the conjoi ned producti on of one na ture-cul ture’ (La tour, 1993, p 107). Donna Ha ra wa y, a hi ghl y i nfl uenti a l s ha per of STS thi nki ng, ha s a rgued tha t thi s mea ns refus i ng both the noti on tha t s ci ence produces objecti ve truth (s ci ence-a s -fa cts ) a nd a n ‘a nti -s ci ence meta phys i cs ’ (s ci ence-a s -s oci a l cons tructi on) for a more compl ex a nd i nterdependent a ccount of the worl d:
24 Read more
In this paper, we propose a method to improve Co-training and apply it to word sense disambiguation problems. Co-training is an unsupervised learning method to overcome the problem that labeled training data is fairly expensive to obtain. Co-training is theoretically promising, but it requires two feature sets with the conditional independence assumption. This assumption is too rigid. In fact there is no choice but to use incomplete feature sets, and then the accuracy of learned rules reaches a limit. In this paper, we check co-occurrence between two feature sets to avoid such undesirable situation when we add unlabeled instances to training data. In experiments, we applied our method to word sense disambiguation problems for the three Japanese words ‘koe’, ‘toppu’ and ‘kabe’ and demonstrated that it improved Co-training.
The protein band was stained by using both Commise Brilliant Blue-G as well as silver staining method. The polymorphism using total protein was not conspicuous to provide any confirmed conclusion at this stage of investigation. However, the investigation has helped in standardizing the methodology for protein profiling in sugarcane cultivars for future research. The pattern could shown a tendency of variation in the different varieties including somaclones and its parent (Co- 740) approx 8Kd protein band was missing in the varieties GSBT-7, Co-740 and Co-419 which was quite visible in GSBT-8, 9 and CoC-671.The present investigation assumes importance as it starts from the whole plant level studies of cell and tissue culture through enzyme analysis and molecular level approach of protein profiling. It also assumes important as the investigation look into the biotechnological approach to improve the cane productivity in one of the backward parts of sugarcane growing areas of our state.
Intergenerational co-learning will need to draw on a further diversity of experience – that amongst children themselves. It is clear that understanding childrens’ experience and views of sexting in distinction from that of adults is important in its own right. Even as we assert the importance of children’s perspectives, however, we should not assume that these are consistent across children’s experience related to gender, ethnicity, social class, sexuality, faith and impairment and the intersectionality (Carastathis 2014) of these. There is evidence that social media usage involves a good deal of racist, sexist and other prejudiced content (Hassinoff 2015). The experience of some girls confirms that such tensions are a factor in shaping negative outcomes in childrens’ sexting (Ringrose et al 2012). Despite the significance of the adult/child distinction in forming some responses to childrens’ sexting, then, there is no reason to assume that all children, any more than all adults, have similar experiences, or views, or that they are any more likely as a group to reach a consensual view.
16 Read more
Learning mentors, in particular, have a new role to play as a ‘bridge’ between teachers and non-teaching adults, along with Connexions Personal Advisers and others. Other research undertaken by our research team provides evidence that such ‘friendly adults’ can be invaluable for those young people who are disengaged and excluded from schools (Coldron et al, 2002). It remains to be seen whether these individuals can facilitate access to the vital social capital and networks which can help youngsters gain fulfilling work that others have noted is missing in many work-related schemes (Hall and Raffo, 2001).
21 Read more
Another material suitable for reducing greenhouse gas emission during co-composting is biochar, which has been reported to decrease these emissions after soil amendment (Bass et al., 2016; Ventura et al., 2015). Biochar results from the incomplete combustion or pyrolysis of various feedstock materials. The biochar production process transforms OM into aromatic products, which are resistant against micro- bial decomposition and show increased adsorption properties compared to untransformed OM (Lehmann et al., 2006). As a result, the use of biochar as a co-composting agent leads to a reduction in carbon emissions due to adsorption of organic constituents on the biochar surface (Rogovska et al., 2011; Jindo et al., 2012; Vu et al., 2015).
11 Read more
Finally, we need to mention co-governance and co-management as additional concepts that (could) add to the conceptual ambiguity and confusion around the terms of co-production and co-creation. In the context of creation of innovative, personalised public services, co-governance, and co-management are referred to as the framework that (dis)enables the synergy of different actors’ knowledge and resources (Lindsay et al. 2018). According to Lindsay et al. (2018), co-governance and co-management both serve as important facilitators of co-production. While co-governance features the level of definition of broad programme aims and priorities, co-management refers to the operational level, where materialisation of such broader aims occurs through joint management of resources, design, and delivery of public services. However, if these concepts—co-governance and co-management—refer to the framework and thus to the very process of collaboration, what is left for the definitions of co-production and co-creation? Does this imply that the latter concepts refer specifically to the outcome of the collaborative process—co-creation as the outcome of co-governance and co-production as a result of co-management?
17 Read more
Thinking of who designs, leads and participates reminded me of a much earlier experience facilitating LEGO ® SERIOUS PLAY ® workshops. A senior colleague had asked me to run a series of them for his teams on an issue dear to their hearts. I was thrilled that he was so keen to incorporate this approach into his ways of developing academic practices. The sheen was dulled somewhat when he instructed me that ‘by the end of the sessions I want them all to understand THIS’. He already knew what he wanted them to think and was hoping I would somehow creatively guide them into getting there. This is not how LEGO ® SERIOUS PLAY ® operates, nor does co-design. I explained to him that I could neither dictate nor predict what people might build or say or believe, but that the conversation would be all the more illuminating for it. This was very much on my mind in designing my workshop in Dundee. Leafing through different definitions of co-design was useful in helping me frame my questions and approaches; however, these were just starting points. It was essential that our discussions all for all participants views and voices about co-design to be heard and equally valued. I built my workshop around the LEGO ® SERIOUS PLAY ® principles and techniques but with only two hours, rather than a whole day, at my disposal I had to create a condensed version of it. As a result it felt more accurate to think of it as inspired by LEGO ® SERIOUS PLAY ® , rather than being the method in its pure form.
In building this argument, we will explore a number of issues: Firstly, to illustrate methodologies that are mindful of power issues that promote co-production of knowledge. We will focus here on projects that include service users amongst other stakeholders, with particular reference to the use of design in health projects. We will then explore how making ‘objects’ that are the physical embodiment of co-production, offers opportunities for visible impact within the project and beyond. Finally, we will describe the elements of the CLAHRC architecture that enable the inclusion of these co-production techniques.