Living Labs as Authentic Learning Environments in Vocational Higher Education

The task of the paper and research questions Higher Education (HE) plays a crucial role in equipping students with the skills to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing work life. In many countries, a skills gap can be identified in TVET (Technical and Vocational Education and Training). Living Labs (LLs) have emerged as one solution by offering authentic, practice-oriented learning environments where students collaborate with diverse stakeholders to tackle real-world challenges (Beecroft, 2018). Van der Wee et al. (2024) describe LLs as genuine learning environments where students work alongside stakeholders from business, government, NGOs, and civil society (see Eriksson et al., 2015; Evans et al., 2015). While LLs have been implemented for over a decade in Europe, the USA, Singapore, Japan, and some African countries, existing research has predominantly concentrated on business and project management perspectives, with limited focus on the learning experiences of teachers and students. This study aims to investigate the role of LLs in vocational HE, focusing on Finnish and South African (SA) contexts, and to derive insights for global implementation. Six African exchange researchers collected data from Technological University in SA and the Finnish TVET institutions focusing on research questions: (RQ1) How do teachers perceive LLs in their professional work? and (RQ2) How do students perceive LLs for their learning? The theoretical frame This study examines LLs from teaching and learning perspectives. Teacher work is analyzed through the lens of adaptive expertise. Bransford et al.(2000) see adaptive expertise as the ability to apply knowledge effectively to novel problems or atypical cases. They approach a new situation flexibly, question their current levels of expertise and attempt to move beyond them. Van der Wee et al. (2024) summarise that an adaptive expert’s behaviour is triggered by ‘change; ’ It lies somewhere between that is ‘new for the learner’ and that is ‘new for everyone in the whole world. Cabey et al. (2024) highlight that teachers use in LLs emancipatory pedagogy, which is a learner-centred and transformative approach, promoting collaboration with peers and real-world stakeholders and encouraging self-directed learning, freedom, and choice. From the student learning perspective, the study applies the Situated Learning and 4Es framework (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Shapiro & Stolz, 2019). LLs provide an embedded environment where students integrate theoretical knowledge with practical applications, embodied and enacted learning through hands-on experiences, and extended opportunities via digital and virtual tools. By participating in LLs, students take their first steps toward adaptive expertise, developing the ability to tackle interdisciplinary, real-world challenges. Methodology The study is qualitative and based on interviews (2024) with 8 undergraduate students, 9 teachers or professional staff at Finnish HE, and 9 undergraduate, 22 post-graduate students and 3 teachers in SA. The interviews were analysed using qualitative content analyses. Findings In the SA university, LLs were primarily utilized at the postgraduate level in collaboration with companies to develop research-based solutions. At an undergraduate level, in most cases, authentic learning happened individually by learning skills through digital software labs, e.g. Digital Twins. The existing LLs at BA level evidenced high student engagement and practical skill development. The feedback underscores the importance of accessible and well-resourced labs for experiential learning. All participants emphasized the need for practical, industry-relevant learning experiences and cross-disciplinary collaboration. However, success relies on investment in infrastructure, expertise in content development, and overcoming external logistical challenges. In Finland, LLs are a standard element in undergraduate programs (10–15 ECTS) in Universities of Applied Sciences. With over a decade of experience, these LLs operate in close collaboration with companies and societal partners, addressing real-world problems through multidisciplinary approaches. Teachers demonstrated adaptive expertise, serving as collaborative leaders, and coordinated and managed complex, interdisciplinary projects. They provided support to students through mentoring, guiding, and coaching. When working in diverse circumstances of LLs, certain qualities were essential: collaboration and communication within multi-stakeholder and multidisciplinary communities, flexibility and adaptability, continuous learning, and pedagogical expertise with a student-focused approach. However, they also encountered challenges in navigating multiple roles and responsibilities. Communication and collaboration across disciplines and stakeholders were demanding. They felt uncertainties regarding project goals and outcomes, and teachers' mindset for adaptability was not always easy. Resource constraints and time management caused pressures. In some instances, students should be better prepared for open-ended LL projects. In students’ experience, LLs significantly increased intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and fostered soft skills and technological expertise. They applied theoretical knowledge to real-world contexts. Students gained interdisciplinary problem-solving competencies and improved communication and teamwork abilities. They discovered options for their career plans. However, challenges emerged, including scheduling conflicts, project complexity, and goal uncertainty. Significance The findings offer valuable insights for TVET development with authentic learning in LLs. The study highlights teachers’ and students’ positive experiences working with real-life problems. It also indicates challenges to be overcome in implementation, including infrastructure and resources. References Beecroft, R. (2018), Embedding higher education into a real-world lab: a process-oriented analysis of six transdisciplinary project courses, Sustainability, Vol. 10 No. 10, p. 3798, doi: 10.3390/su10103798. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Mind, Brain, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Eriksson, R., Nenonen, S., Junghans, A., Nielsen, S.B. and Lindahl, G. (2015), Nordic campus retrofitting concepts–scalable practices, Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 21, pp. 329-336, doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00184-7. Evans, J., Jones, R., Karvonen, A., Millard, L. and Wendler, J. (2015), Living labs and co-production: university campuses as platforms for sustainability science, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 16, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.005. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355 Shapiro, L., & Stolz, S. A. (2019). Embodied cognition and its significance for education. Theory and Research in Education, 17(1), 19–39. Van der Wee, D., Wals, A. E. J., & Van Poeck, K. (2024). Characteristics and challenges of teaching and learning in sustainability-oriented Living Labs within higher education: A literature review. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 25(6), 1234–1256. DOI: 10.1108/IJSHE-10-2023-0465