Motivated participants and their mainspring for innovation and creation

The opening question to participants and initiators was ‘Why do you want to participate in this initiative’? Some of the motivational drivers mentioned:  

“Research is for knowledge generation and education for knowledge transfer – we need to challenge this. After all, it can also be the other way around. Where is the division?” 

“Education should be given a more important place within the university: teaching is the underdog versus research. This is reflected in the designations: research time and teaching load.” 

“The creativity and innovativeness of researchers evaporate in education, partly due to the massiveness and standardization of teaching. We want to reverse this trend.” 

 “In addition, it is not clear where education is headed. How can education regain creativity and clear direction?” 

More connected and prepared

Looking for an answer, participants indicated that universities should be more connected to society and societal challenges. Another issue that emerged was how to better prepare students for a future we do not know. Education is mostly not for what happens tomorrow. A transition like the rise of AI programs such as ChatGPT was cited as an example. We are more or less caught off guard by such transitions now, but how do we ensure that we are prepared for them, can spot learning opportunities in time and are better able to move with them? 

What if everything was possible? 

The aim of the kick-off was: to collect limitless dreams and wishes for higher education. This was done by defining what if questions: ‘What if everything were possible? What would higher education look like?’  

First, a short attention exercise was done to get into an out-of-the-box mindset. Then people split into small groups to come up with what if questions to further philosophize and build on. The out of the box outcomes were fed back to the group after about 20 minutes. Some what if questions were: 

• ‘What if there were no diplomas/tests/exams?’  
• ‘What if we learned like an ecosystem: adaptive, physical, playful, resourceful?’  
• ‘What if we did the same with seven generations back and forward in mind?’  
• ‘What if there were no more boundaries between learning, play and work?’  
• ‘What if education was a joint expedition of teachers and students with unknown destinations? 

Without diplomas, tests and exams

From the what if question “What if there were no diplomas/tests/exams?” came, for example, the experiment of letting students set learning objectives. And letting them decide for themselves how they show that they have met the learning objectives. What the group wanted to perpetuate through this emphasis on student autonomy and self-direction was continued enjoyment of learning and the phasing out of the performance culture.

Boundaries between learning, playing and working

The team that played with the boundaries between learning, playing and working wanted to step beyond the boundaries of disciplines and work more extracurricularly. The aim here: to let learning become more play and discovery and less interest in institutionalized education. For example, you can also learn outside the university. Students can learn from problems in society and find creative solutions to them. In this way, you gain work experience ‘while playing’. 

Education as a joint expedition

The group that saw education as a joint expedition with unknown destinations emphasized co-creation of learning pathways and making deeper connections. Learning objectives are co-determined by students. No grades are given, but reflection afterwards, for example. Regularly looking back and forward gives quality to the expedition. The desire for a deep democracy-like society and education emerged in several elaborations of what if questions. 

Reflection on the afternoon   

It was a successful afternoon with plenty of room for out-of-the-box ideas. The HOT organizers and participants also noted a huge unanimity towards ‘constructive disruption’ and the importance of organizing counterforce. Many commonalities emerged from the various discussions, seen in the elaboration of the X-Curves on posters. 

Creating ‘HOT spots’

An initial idea that emerged from this meeting was to create several ‘HOT spots’: locations for educational experiments at different institutions. From these, a HOT community of innovators could start. To learn from each other, disseminate ideas, make them concrete, research and realize them. Perhaps HOT could develop a number of courses to experiment with the concept of ‘learning together’ as a starting point. 

Importance of HOT community

All participants expressed a desire to be part of this HOT community. “It is nice to connect with each other, we have different backgrounds but the same struggles and need for radical innovation. It is of added value to think together in terms of possibilities.”