Mission Impact v2.0 — The first two weeks
This posts continues a running autoethnographic experiment conducted at The Hague University of Applied Sciences. Here we run a course called Mission Impact v2.0 that runs from September 2021 through February 2022 with a total of ten students. The course aims to bring the concept of the ecological university into practice by connecting with two living labs around The Hague. This iteration of the course is the result of two-years of design-driven inquiry and has been extensively co-created with students as well as other learners involved in the region. Once again, we have the amazing privilige of running this course with an international and diverse community of students that includes backgrounds in industrial design engineering, mechanical engineering, industrial engineering, civil engineering, european studies, and user experience design. As always, this is part of my dedication to open science and may contain graphical, content, or other types of errors. Feel free to reach out for questions or just to have a chat.
Getting Started
New beginnings… I am not going to lie, jumping back onto campus and in person teaching after like two years of pandemic lockdowns has been both super exciting and also kind of weird. Walking through the central entrance of my university (The Hague University of Applied Sciences) and for the first time since March 2020 seeing hundreds if not thousands of people close together was an interesting experience to say the least. Many of my colleagues shared their absolute delight and excitement over being able to teach in person again. One colleague even commented on LinkedIn ‘It’s like riding a bike’ which is about the most Dutch thing you could say I suppose. For me, while I enjoy the opportunity to engage with people in a same place again, and find value in it. Particularly in terms of the additional spontaneity and serendipity that it causes. And the increased ability to invite inclusion and participation from everyone that is a lot harder online. At the same time, as a neurodiverse person with sensory issues, being suddenly dropped in such large crowds is incredibly challenging. Made more so by the lack of dedicated and adequate physical space for researchers at our institution (especially for less-abled people). So for me, this switch is much more a mixture of excitement and anxiety. Of loving it and feeling absolutely knackered by it. To compensate, I make sure I plan a bit more alone time outside of work by for example going to the movies. Luckily, I quite like experiences that tend to both excite and confuse me! I reckon that’s probably why I have been drawn to extreme sports.
Anyways, we kicked off the week in an online information session to guide everyone through the online environment that we will be using (a custom made Microsoft Teams environment) and on Tuesday (31–8–2021) we had our first physical get together. I had decided to host this outside the university as I firmly believe that any class that can start in nature should. Unfortunately, in the week leading up to the start of the semester we lost almost 1/2 of the total registered students who had decided to persue other paths (other minors or internships) and the systems that we use for that registration don’t automatically update the coordinators, kinda weird. I wished them well and we cracked on with the remaining ones. In total, there are now 10 participants in the second version of this course (16 had registered), 5 of whom are from the Industrial Design Engineering programme and the remainder from a variety of programmes. Most of the students are from Europe but quite diverse and international. So while the final number of students may be less than I’d had hoped, it’s definitely less than would be viable from a management perspective, they are all dedicated and passionate about making the world a better place. And with the type of transformative change and learning we aim for in this course, I’d choose quality over quantity anytime. This does not, however, remove a valid question: why does it seem to be quite difficult to recruit a reasonable (from our educational cultural perspective, probably 15–25) number of students for this course?
I also have to say that I feel a lot more relaxed about the course this time around (except the having to navigate the business at campus), not only because we have some experience in running it now, but because the previous time I had to do most of the prep, recruiting, designing, and teaching myself and this time we had a team of dedicated student-researchers and colleagues that has really made a massive difference for my own levels of anxiety about the course. One of the insights generated through The Regenerative Education Podcast has been that a strong ecosystem of support (within and outside the institution) is essential for running a course like this succesfully. I am very honoured to say that the ecosystem of support this time around is amazing. I don’t think the students realize yet how many people are investing their time and effort into this yet. Perhaps that’s a sign of a good course if they do not ever do so.
I have previously mentioned the work of Scott Barry Kaufman (2020) in his updating of Maslow’s relational network of needs. To continue in that discourse having a strong team and supportive ecosystem in the preparation and delivery of the course has allowed me to feel both more secure and more open for experimentation and embracing the more open nomadic nature of this type of education. What I caught in myself in this regard, because my education has always been relatively open and co-created, is that the amount of trust it requires to not overstep (i.e. oversteer) is quite large. And I am a bit surprised myself that I struggle with that as much as I am doing. I think this is a bit marred by my own experience, a bit egotistically so, where I tend to be able to do things faster and better than (most) students and it’s hard to remember they are coming from a different place and need time and space to develop their abilities to engage in this type of change making. I believe this is also a fundamental difference between connecting graduates to a living lab for example where they are guided by professionals and part of a collective change process versus running a course like this where students can learn in a safe environment how to guide others in collective change. This also mimics conversations I have had (and an upcoming podcast episode) with prof. dr. Anja Overdiek, an expert in methodology and living labs. When we chatted, we highlighted the developmental components of this type of ecological engagement with the world. I feel that this is exactly that point of tension. I am curious to see as the course runs on, and they gain in skills, abilities and understanding of guiding collective change, if my role has to shift accordingly towards those more traditionally in living labs.
In general, I am super excited and energetic at this point, we get to put into practice all of the improvements we have co-designed with students, with external partners, and together as coordinators and teacher-researchers for a full semester. I also noticed that the sudden increase in activity-levels that come from working in person, cause my arthritis (ankylosing spondylitis) to be aggravated a bit, and may have to find a better balance with that.
I am, however, particularly looking forward to two things this semester:
- The testing of the Transformative/Transgressive/Transcendent Learning Expedition Guide as applied learning and (autoethnographic) research tool.
- The use of documentary ethnography, which will also be my first foray into documentary filmmaking after having explored podcasting-as-inquiry as part of my PhD previously. I am working closely with Nicolas Landriati for this, former student of Mission Impact v1.0, collaborator on the redesign of the course, friend, and soon-to-start his graduation research. I am particularly interested in this as I am still exploring the forms of scholarship and dissemination that fits closest to me as a researcher.
The Introweek
Previous data has shown that regenerative forms of education for the ecological university ought to start in two manners: (1) with a focus on building community and (2) with a bang. We enjoyed a warm, tiring, and inspiring introweek (if I do say so myself) that included both of those elements. On Monday, a short 1-hour online session was hosted where we navigated through the digital learning environment, the assessment, and schedule and such together. Basically get through all the necessary shit. This was also recorded so that it could be rewatched and because some of the participants were still outside the Netherlands trying to get back in time. On the first physical day (Tuesday), I invited the students to join me in the Belvedere forest in Scheveningen (about 40 minutes from the university) where we did a variety of activities that focus on getting to know the community a bit better and also starting the journey of self-mastery that is quite central in the Mission Impact course (one of the key assumptions of regenerative education for the ecological university is that learning is a dialectic process between inner and outer change, i.e. creating systemic change leads to personal change and vice versa).
On Tuesday we started by making couples who were sent on an extensive walk around the park to share their stories with a central leading question: how did you get here and what do you hope to leave with? After they came back, I asked them to share the story of the partner they were walking with back to the group and to try and do justice to their story. This serves a few purposes: (1) it gets them moving in a natural place (which has a host of psychological and physiological benefits). (2) it teaches them to listen attentively (a valuable skill for anyone, but particularly for those working with regenerative design as intentional action to catalyze systemic change), where we also highlighted that walking conversation could themselves be a research method that they may be unfamilair with. And (3) it is sufficiently different (both in a setting and pedagogy) that it acts as a neutral space for all.
We also asked each student to write five unique things, attributes, values, perspectives, and/or histories that they bring with them to this community of change-makers (not shown on pictures). And asked them to write this on a slice of wood (frankly inspired by the Netflix show ‘Too hot too handle’ which is objectively terrible but COVID-19 life makes one watch bad quality entertainment). What was particularly interesting for me during this excercise, was the difference in time required for each person to decide on five (some never getting to five things at all), which ranged from less than a minute to more than five. On the other side of this little wooden circle I asked them to write a singular intention. One thing. The thing they wanted to develop further within this course, one thing that they believe would help them be a better version of themselves, to be more fully human. Here, one of the students ended with a particularly powerful (albeit said in a playful manner): ‘It would be nice if half the course, like twenty hours a week, was just about deep thinking of things. No exams or tests, just engagement in learning.’ The intentions are shown here below in a little mosaic. We finished this day with a wee axe throwing trip where we played several games of team vs. team fun. Of course, this also included a few drinks and some snacks. Overall, I believe it was a good day that was definitely something else than they’d experienced in their previous studies. I also suspect that it may take a while more before they can also really feel that. A small note, if it was possible (perhaps for future iterations) I’d really like to do a 2 or 3 day camping trip to start the course, to really take people out of their comfort spaces and focus on diving deep into the experience.
Excursion to the Greenport
On Wednesday (01–09–2021) we visited the Broekpolder, a smaller area of the Greenport West-Holland (the agri- and horticultural innovation ecosystem in the Western Netherlands), where one of the big challenges was apparent right away. Even Google maps was unable to find a pathway to the business that was hosting us for this day through public transport (about 50 minutes by biking from the university). Luckily, all the students managed to get there with or without lifts and we were very warmly welcomed by Erik Persoon, who welcomed us into the normally quite secretive world of greenhouses for horticultural production. We walked through seemingly hidden pathways snuck tightly between greenhouses, catching glimpses of tomatoes growing ina base of stone wool, as Dutch tomato farming does not use soil, at some point before entering a large but seemingly empty warehouse (I was wrong, it was definitely not empty). In fact, when we went through a couple of doors and half-constructed pathways. We quite literally walked into a tropical paradise including a swimming pool! How cool is that!
Once the students had arrived Erik was kind enough to tell us a bit about his own company, but also the region and its history. How over the last five decades the area has transitioned from over 400 growers and farmers to just over 100 mega-growers today. Partially through consolidation, partially through retirement, and partially through attrition. He was lucky enough to have a son who had already taken over the day-to-day management of the firm, as well as added a digital-based side business that sells tropical plant customized-to-individuals as a B2C company. He enlightened us about some of the challenges that the area, as well as other greenport areas in the Netherlands are facing. Notably the energy transition, the circular transition, the biodiversity crisis, and climate change.
What was particularly beautiful for me, was the degree of pride he showed in how innovative his own business was but also the community or ecosystem of businesses in that region has historically been and continues to be. A sidenote that he made in a setting with just a few of us later when the students were exploring also piqued my interest. When he shared how in the past, there was a much more symbiosis-based relationalship between the growers as well. Openly sharing new technologies and innovations so that the community as a whole could thrive. With the increased consolidation and competitiveness, as well as through COVID-19, this seemed to have died down considerably in his experience. The whole production environment of Forever Plants was more like a high-tech robot-driven endeavor than many would likely expect. Ironically, this was also highlighted as one of the main drivers of the disconnection between inhabitants and the products of the growers and the way they are perceived. When in fact, their products are a lot less destructive to the environment as they use less space, energy, raw materials, and toxic chemicals than more traditional approaches to farming. Although, I would add an asterisk here that this was still very much based on the assumption that the products they were growing were inherently needed just because there is currently a market for it. In other words, the need is assumed because there is a market but the question is it even really sustainable to grow plants and flowers in general, or in principle, was left unasked (although the students did ask later). It is also interesting to see how this fundamental assumption is translated in the language used, as he referred to the growing of tropical plants akin to growing furniture for your home. Are we ready for the type of societal change that we have to engage in to be able to live within the planetary boundaries of the Earth? This is an existential question of our time that gets translated to daily reality in these types of conceptualisations and difficulties. Or, is the Greenport ready to move beyond eco-efficiency to eco-effectiveness?
A colleague of him Marko, who is one of the project and innovation managers of the Broekpolder, then joined us a bit later and also shared some of the technicalities of the region in terms of efficiency compared to for example the global average (up to 40x more efficient per m2 in terms of yield per input). Which will never not blow my mind. After this, we had a short break where we enjoyed some nice fruits and other snacks before going on a tour through the entire facility. Erik passionately and openly shared many insights about his own business and through that some of the big transitions and challenges that are already underway in the region such as rapid digitalization and a shift towards renewable energy.
After the tour, we had a lunch break and we were also joined by Else Boutkan, who is the manager for the circular metropole challenge of the Greenport West-Holland. In this challenge, she aims to facilitate a transformative innovation ecosystem in the entire Greenport WH area to be a truly regenerative and circular place. She does this with governments, businesses, residents, researchers, and educational institutions which makes the entire place extremely lively, vibrant but also complex. The students already asked challenging questions, such as ‘what will vertical farming mean for the Broekpolder in 2040?’. This is an extremely interesting question, particularly in light of the ongoing housing crisis in the Netherlands, with house prices rising by up-to-10% on a monthly basis in the urbanized West. The implications of transforming the production there to a more locally oriented vertical system would allow for a lot of the space to be repurposed for more living space. Which would undoubtedly raise conflicts, tensions, and uncertainties. Not least of which for (and within!) the entrepreneurs like Erik who are currently doing their business there. The students were asked to explore and observe the area for an hour (outside the business) with a specific focus on finding signs of some of the large transitions that had already been highlighted by our hosts. We also asked them to use their smartphones as an extension of their senses in this process (i.e. take as many pictures, video’s and sound recordings as possible as you may never know what may be useful data later and in this sense it is better to have too much data than not enough). I was also very happily surprised that one of the student-researchers who helped us redesign the Mission Impact course, has actually joined the co-coordinator of the minor Gaby’s research team as a research-assistant focussing on the Greenport West-Holland and its innovation ecosystem for the next ten weeks. So she will be joining our methodology classes and workshops to help her do that, which is one of the strengths of this form of education as it can be easily opened to allow others to join for parts of it. It’s part of my job, outside of Mission Impact, to prepare and connect high potential student-researchers to the Mission Zero centre so I am always extremely happy when that type of thing happens. And I know that this particular person is going to make a super positive impact on my colleague’s research as well, and through that, the Greenport.
After the students came back and relaxed for a bit with another snack we proceeded to explore a simple forces map of the area together, mapping out the observations, questions, and uncertainties of the student-researchers in five dimensions for the area: technological, ecological, social, economical and political. Two brave volunteers guided the entire group through this exercise and many interesting points were raised. It was interesting to see there is still a bit of hesitancy to get cracking but once the ideas started flowing they were hard to hold back. We had to close a bit more abruptly than we normally would when I got a call that my mom needed to be taken to the emergency room (she can’t drive) so we thanked our hosts, I dropped some of the students off at the nearest bus station and rushed back to The Hague. In fact, I wrote this part waiting in the hospital parking space as covid-19 rules still do not allow unnecessary chaperones in the hospital. I am happy to share she was relatively alright. It’s always a bit stressful though when something health-related happens to someone you are close to, and there are few I am closer to than my mom.
I think that after two full physical days the students deserve a nice relaxing digital day. They have to work on their personal expedition guides tomorrow (or on the weekend if they prefer) that includes a small assignment and some preparatory reading for the next week's start of classes. To my happy surprise, we also got a last-minute addition to the course when I checked my e-mail in waiting-induced boredom. judging by the quality of their questions, thinking, and doings in this first week (which was also highlighted by one of the hosts as extremely exciting for January when we finish) I am super pumped to start helping them develop further in their skills. My colleague Gaby and I also sprung a bit of a surprise on them: throughout this action research-driven course interviews and surveys (at least traditional and non-enhanced ones) will not be allowed. The shock on some of their faces was quite amusing. The reason we have made this decision is because we want to focus on more creative approaches to research that can involve more participation in fun ways. And because it forces them to also step out of their comfort zones as action-researchers. So while the day ended with a bit more drama than I may have hoped for or would like, it was a good day all in all and I hope that they learned a bit. After Friday, each student has to let us know their preferred place to work with and we will make the teams for the semester based on that. Hopefully, we can match them 50/50 but we will see. All in all, a very nice day where much was learned, laughs were had, and observation skills have been triggered.
Navigating the Binckhorst
On Friday (3rd of September, 2021) we joined forces with a Wageningen University course on circular planning for an excursion in the Binckhorst, the Hague. An industrial area currently being redeveloped towards a circular co-working and living space. This area is extremely complex because there are many different actors and forces who say they want a similar goal but in reality are quite opposed (e.g. entrepreneurs that cannot stay in the area as more residential spaces are developed pushing up real estate prices). On this day, in which I grossly underestimated the distance from the university to the place and had an unexpected fourty minute walk that was quite lovely but a bit stressful for my arthritic body. Nonetheless, the weather could not have been better as it was lovely and sunny, in contrast to most of the summer really. In total, there were about fifty students from both programmes and we met in the Caballero factory. This space, which used to house a sigar production site, now houses a large number of creative and digital start-ups in a very collaborative mini-ecosystem.
During the morning of the programme, we were joined by a variety of experts working in or on the Binckhorst in transition including representatives of the municipality, the Provincial government, a developer, an entrepreneur and boardmember of a local cooperative I’m Binck and a senior account manager of Impact City a larger innovation ecosystem programme co-funded by municipalities and the province of South Holland. This variety was important to highlight the multi-leveled and temporal nature of the transition challenges that are faced and tackled in this small part of society. After a morning of interesting talks, good dialogue and fascinating questions. The students were sent on a two hour exploration with a series of guiding questions that can be seen below. While the students were doing this exploration, I took this time to take some B-roll footage for the documentary we are making about this iteration of the course and have a really lovely vegan lunch with my colleague Thomas who will tutor and support the Binckhorst team.
After the students came back from their explorations, the teams (4–5) went thorugh several rounds of working on the questions and preparing towards pitches about what they have learned from these sessions so far. To be honest, the quality of these was a little bit lackluster and all over the place. Some were quite good, and one student in particular (Igor) showed a lot of potential to be a very good storyteller (although what he was presenting was utter bullshit). It will be super interesting to see how he develops that and if he can manage to ‘get real’. Especially as we move towards the first planned personal storytelling session in week 5. We had to close quite quickly as we had a centre of expertise social event in Rotterdam in the evening, luckily one of our colleagues was driving from The Hague, and Thomas and myself were able to catch a ride. The food and chat there was lovely and to my happy surprise one of my colleagues was bringing some of the regenerative education design dispositions highlighted in my previous post on Medium into practice in a course she had taken over last-minute due to internal shuffling. Which definitely served as icing on the cake for this day. I am not entirely sure if it was because the setting was larger (together with WUR) or because the place is just so different, or even because the amount of time we had to engage with each external guest. Something felt different, less meaningful or deep, for me at least than the excursion on Wednesday. The students didn’t seem to feel the same way as so far the preferences from them for a place to work with for the remaining 19 weeks of the semester has been relatively balanced. The students have till Saturday (4th of September, 2021) 15:00 to let us know their preferred spaces and on Sunday (5th) we will communicate the teams that will stay the same throughout the course. On monday, one of the teams will already have their first tutoring session and we will finalize arrangements for them to have some office space in both regions available from the start of week 3 as we think its important for them to be able to spent significant amounts of time involved and engaged within the regions to learn and make an impact.
‘How are we [students] supposed to deal (psychologically) with the wicked problems and challenges of our time? — Nicolas Landriati during a Mission Zero event
Looking forward to a relaxing weekend filled with mostly non-work stuff, I will also re-read the materials the students have to go through to prepare for the theory session on Wednesday (this includes three papers and three book chapters on regenerative design and research methodology) and I am particularly stoked to see what my co-coordinator Gaby does with the Wednesday afternoon practice component of the course. During this day I also realized it would be good for the documentary we are making to interview some of the experts who shared their insights today and maybe also some other academics who were part of The Regenerative Education Podcast to share some of their insights (or maybe use some of those episodes as voice-over materials) as it can enrich the experience of the community within the course with larger systemic insights. All in all, I would say we had a pretty fun, engaging, and meaningful introduction week that definitely raises my own expectations to see and experience what this ecology of learners can achieve in the rest of the semester. But first, a well-deserved weekend!
Second week
In the weekend we made the teams for both locations, and to our surprise or maybe through cosmic magic, the teams were evenly matched for both and quite diverse. We have also picked up some stragglers around the way, existing primarily of student assistants of the Mission Zero research center that decided to join the Wednesday workshops. Every Wednesday we run workshops from 09:30–12:00 and 13:00–17:00 that respectively dive into the theory and practice of guiding collective change. Officially, this course is called Creative Action Research through Design (C.A.R.D) and includes topics such as arts-based research, technology-based research, multi-modal research, indigenous research and how those can be woven together in a design-driven form of inquiry. I guide the theoretical part and my colleague Gaby guides the practice-based workshops, each of which strengthens the others. For many, this is also the first time they are asked to read, think, and analyze a methodology book. It is important to note that a regenerative framework guides the entire course, as well as the way we discuss research (as activism, as a relational construct, as embodied, as embedded, as change-oriented). Students are asked to prepare by reading, listening, and watching carefully curated materials (see the previous post on Mission Impact v2.0 for a detailed list).
In the theory class, we start by collectively filling out an intention box, a small part of the whiteboard in which anyone can put anything that was raised or emerged from the preparatory materials as well as working on the project. We then try to go there together as much as we possibly can. In the first class, we start by exploring what the students already know about research, different kinds, the differences between methodology and methods, epistemology, ontology, etc. We also dived deeply into Design-Driven Autoethnography (DDAE) which is the main methodology for this course. DDAE sees design as the co-creating intentional change in systems and uses autoethnography to capture, understand and study the impact of those intentional changes on those systems. The idea is that this combination allows for more systemic engagement with creating alternative, more regenerative futures than could be offered by either approach by itself. Honestly, I am also using this course a bit to further develop this methodology so that I can really understand the intricacies of this proposed combination. I believe that one of the perspectives that are foundational to regenerative design, and thus in this course, that design is intentional action to co-create changes in systems will be particularly challenging for the students with formal design backgrounds.
In the afternoon, the students were guided through a practice-based session about unlocking creativity. My colleague asked each person to bring an artifact that is an expression of creative practice in their life, which was very insightful and changed the dialogue they were engaging with from interviews to conversations as fellow humans. Where they explored what creativity actually is and has been through time. They also created a really cool vision board as a community to explore their creativity as a community. At the same time, this experience could be translated into a research method akin to a graffiti wall in the places they are working with. One of our roles in this course as teachers is to help the learners get up to speed with their research skills but also push them to further develop, play, and test with creative approaches to research to practice. During the course, the discussions that are emerging are energizing. In particular, seeing more people engaging with them as time moves on and comfort is nurtured in a safe learning space, are very interesting. It’s a great privilege to be allowed to do this type of work, especially in the neoliberal times we are living in.
What has been really cool to see is how rapidly the teams are engaging with the discovery of the regions they are working with. Although the bravest among them started with adding stuff to the piece shown above, through some encouragement from my colleague everyone contributed something. What pops out for me, besides the vibrant use of colours that is representative of the diversity of the individuals that are part of this learning community, is the quote ‘beautyinthestruggle’ which I find incredibly apt. As a cornerstone of transition challenges is uncertainty, and uncertainty is an incredible struggle to face. I look forward to seeing how their engagement with this struggle moves on, and in particular if they’ll be able to still see the beauty of it.
Another aspect that I find very intriguing is seeing the Miro boards grow from day to day. I also have to admit that it is very visible that one team is deciding to use the templates we have provided and the other is choosing to work outside them, which is allowed. But also challenges my own ability to trust them to engage with this work in meaningful ways without being able to see it. Especially as I have decided not to be a tutor this semester I occasionally catch myself on the edge of checking on them, while I know that trust is fundamental for regenerative education. Trusting my students and colleagues in this way feels in a way more like a test of my own trust in myself than a test of my trust in them. But I will do my absolute best not to disrupt their processes.
What I quite like to see, is as the session progressed, the questions and interactions amongst the learners increased. I am excited to see where this goes in the next few weeks and look forward to sharing the next update with you after phase 1 is over (three weeks from) and the challenges they’ll face this semester become clearer. At the same time, we are also considering the future of this course, whether to go for another iteration and if we do if we want this to be an available course for all students in universities of applied sciences in The Netherlands or only for our students (there are pros and cons to both). I really believe that the transformative change that has happened between iteration 1 and 2 (see the blogpost on that redesign) is not going to be parralelled is scope or complexity from iteration 2 to 3. Anyways, we will discuss a bit more internally and see how that flows and goes and if we continue how to do so. So buckle up and be ready as we engage is more epic adventures.
As always, feel free to reach out, chat, like, share, comment or anything like that and see you next time!
