Envisioning Public Policy and Practices for Experiential Learning in Post-Secondary Education

Carrie Wright and Colleen Loomis
Wilfrid Laurier University

Executive Summary

Experiential learning (EL), as it exists today, combines traditional and emerging approaches.  Synthesized findings from literature reviews on EL show the most widely used theory of EL is the four-stage cycle developed by David Kolb that includes Concrete Experience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization, and Active Experimentation. Some governments have provided policy definitions of EL and released frameworks or guiding principles against which universities and colleges are encouraged to count and report on EL offerings. These definitions are often focused on the development of ‘employability’ skills rather than adhering to EL theory  that puts greater emphasis on developing critical thinking and reflection skills.

Globally, there are calls to transform education to develop thinkers and leaders that can address contemporary “wicked” problems. In a complex and uncertain future, the employable skills of today may not be relevant in the future. Today’s learners need foundational skills such as creativity, critical thinking and adaptability to respond to changing forms of work and the many complex and interconnected global challenges facing the population .

‘Design thinking’ is a human-focused problem-solving approach that can be applied as a pedagogical framework for EL. Case examples of EL that employ design thinking illustrate how these approaches consolidate learning while leveraging student creativity to solve local and global challenges. New frameworks and an ever-growing array of case examples highlight how design thinking can be infused into EL across post-secondary education disciplines.

Post-secondary education is at an inflection point. Technology and societal changes are disrupting pedagogical approaches to learning and generating knowledge, and ‘elite education’ is a growing target for some political groups. In addition to its core missions of generating new knowledge and developing future leaders and thinkers, post-secondary institutions need to contribute to new solutions for a sustainable and peaceful future. We propose that EL from a design thinking approach is not only an effective pedagogical method for developing learners’ skills but also pledges the considerable intellectual and creative energy of students, faculty and staff to solution-building for a better future that marks a renewed relevant and meaningful role for higher education institutions.

We begin with a brief background of EL theory and recent Canadian conceptualizations. Then, we envision a post-secondary future with experiential learning, using case examples from several countries, proposing innovations in education policy and pedagogical methods that will advance human learning to solve ´wicked´ contemporary problems. We close with recommendations for infusing design thinking in EL across disciplines. Previous policy work on EL has been plagued by different definitions and levels of understanding. We suggest that future work is needed to modernize policy definitions of EL that are aligned to research theory, and conduct evaluations of EL experiences with design thinking to inform policy recommendations.

Experiential learning theory

The Kolb model of experiential learning (EL; see Kolb & Kolb, 2009) has its critics, and other models of EL have been proposed, but it remains the most dominant theory. Experiential  Learning Theory describes four stages that form a deepening spiral of learning: Concrete Experience, Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization and Active Experimentation. In this model, a learner engages fully in a new experience, then reflects on their experience from different perspectives. From this reflection, the learner creates new concepts that integrate their observations and experiences into mental models and theories, then they apply these revised theories to inform their decisions in new experiences.

Despite its dominant position in the research literature, critics of the Kolb model have identified the need for more specificity to aid educators. Recent research has explored specific aspects of the Kolb model in greater detail, specifically ‘what is a concrete experience?’ and ‘what makes for good reflection that supports learning?’. Morris (2019) conducted a systematic review of a sample of 60 journal articles drawn from the Journal of Experiential Education and used an inductive process to capture how researchers in the field conceptualized a concrete experience. The findings argue that a concrete experience is when:

• learners, often in collaboration with others, are placed in rich contextualized learning environments that represent, in the moment, uncontrived, ‘hands-on’, real-world experience;
• learners assume full or collaborative responsibility for the learning process;
• learning is situated in a specific time and place (to help learners understand and appreciate that knowledge is contextualized); and
• learning involves risk and learners must accept the challenge and behave with spontaneity to new, novel situations that involves unpredictability and experimentation.

Critical reflection is an important mediator of meaningful learning. Reflection is a deliberate action that is aided by a guided process (e.g., Gibbs (1988) reflective cycle) or a facilitator (faculty member, instructor, coach, etc.). Learners need time to compare and test pre-existing abstractions and theories to present real-world experiences and then to integrate new knowledge into their models. Reflection is less prominent (and sometimes absent) in co-op learning experiences where there may not be a course instructor or preceptor who is guiding reflection towards intended learning outcomes.

Morris (2019) notes that EL activities could meet the classic requirements of EL without providing meaningful learning for students if a) a contextually-poor experience, b) with limited reflective observation, c) results in contextually indifferent conceptualizations, and d) reinforcing or repeating experimentation. This learning represents a circle, where actions are repeated and existing learning is reinforced. EL theories envision a learning spiral where experiences are increasingly complex and learners modify their theories through real-world experiences to develop higher order concepts and appreciate that knowledge is contextualized (Morris, 2019).

Experiential learning in post-secondary education

The traditional rationale for EL in post-secondary education was to complement campus-based classroom instruction. Higher education institutions have been referred to as an ivory tower and were criticized for being too far removed from reality to render knowledge relevant. Moving from the ivory tower to a lab bench and from bench to bedside in medical studies were essential steps in extending post-secondary educational settings beyond institutional walls. The shift from lab bench to patient hospital bedside is a classic example. This student-centered approach focused on how actual situations can enhance student learning. Yet, this connection sometimes overlooked the local area, and universities were criticized for maintaining a town-gown divide because the educational processes and products did not address local social issues or relate to employability. In response, the direction of importing real-world experiences to supplement university knowledge reversed. Workplaces and community organizations became engaged partners that taught educators and students about their needs and provided EL in private sector work or community locations, categorized as work-integrated learning and community-service learning, respectively.

Some governments have stepped forward with policy guidance on EL. In Ontario, Canada, the Ministry of Colleges and Universities (called the Ministry of Applied Education and Skill Development (MAESD) at the time of release) has specified four principles of EL: 1. Post-secondary supported, workplace linked; 2. Meaningful, structured, verified; 3. Compliant with employment laws; and 4. Recognition. The goal of an EL experience from this perspective is to improve students’ employability and interpersonal skills to support their transition to the workforce (MAESD, 2017).

Some colleges and universities define EL with a similar focus on employability skills. For example, the University of Waterloo, Guelph University, Mohawk College, and Mount Royal University specifically draw out work-integrated learning (WIL) as a subset of EL in their definitions. For the University of Waterloo, this distinction references a long history of cooperative learning and highlights partnerships with its employer network. In Canada, post-secondary WIL programs have the benefit of being supported by Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL) which acts as a unifying organization to ensure employers and post-secondary policies and regulations respect fair treatment of students (including financial compensation).

Other post-secondary institutions have focused more on community-service learning (CSL) forms of EL. The CSL movement in Canada picked up momentum around 2003 and, for approximately a decade, was driven by non-government organizations, specifically private foundations, that defined approaches and provided funding. For example, the McConnell Foundation gifted Laurier, and other universities, with a one-million-dollar grant for five years to increase student service and involvement in local community organizations. Implementation at first was in select courses and occasionally infused within an academic program. Meta-analytical studies of community-service learning have found positive outcomes for student understanding of social issues, development of personal insights and cognitive development (Conway et. al., 2009; Yorio & Ye, 2012).

More recently, post-secondary institutions have broadened definitions of EL to envision outcomes for students beyond employability or community service. In closer alignment with EL theory, Simon Fraser University defines EL as “the strategic, active engagement of students with opportunities to learn through doing, and reflection on those activities, which empowers them to apply their theoretical knowledge to practical endeavours in a multitude of settings inside and outside the classroom.” The University of Calgary released a strategic plan for EL for 2020 – 2025 with a definition of EL developed through broad campus consultations (Kaipainen et. al., 2020, p.3):

Experiential learning (EL) is learning-by-doing that bridges knowledge and experience through critical reflection. EL activities are intentionally designed and assessed. As such, they empower learners to enhance individual and collaborative skills such as complex problem solving, professional practice skills, and teamwork. Reflecting critically on these activities helps individuals develop higher order thinking to challenge and advance their perspectives. The EL process prepares students to take on roles as active citizens and thrive in an increasingly complex world.

Regardless of the orientation of their definition, most post-secondary institutions now provide EL experiences for a large portion of their undergraduate student body. As an example, at Wilfrid Laurier University, between May 2022 and April 2023, 74.5% of students (undergraduate and graduate) had EL as part of the curriculum (percentage based on a total student body of 25,483) (WLU, 2023). At Laurier, curricular EL includes 11 types of experiences (e.g., community service-learning, co-op, internships, and field work). Co-curricular EL is defined as “[e]xperiences in a work/simulated-work or community setting not required for academic credit” (such as on-campus employment, on-campus volunteerism, off-campus experiences, and certificates) (WLU, 2024).

There is strong evidence of positive student learning outcomes through EL. In a 43-year systematic review of experiential learning research, Burch et. al., (2019) found students experienced superior learning outcomes, measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, in classes using experiential pedagogies as compared to traditional learning environments. The effect sizes for EL were robust across moderating variables such as the type of learning outcome measured (cognitive, social, personal insight), the type of assessment, the duration of the experience and whether feedback was provided during the experience. Studies across Canada, specifically, have also found favorable findings on the impact of EL on academic achievement, skill development, career readiness, and employability. Process program evaluations have highlighted the need to attend to specific aspects of the off-campus learning environment, such as stakeholder engagement and fair treatment (e.g., student compensation for work, regulation of conditions, etc.) but existing EL programs in Canada have been largely deemed successful. The case for EL methods is strong, but post-secondary education can do more to leverage EL for student success and positive community and global impact if it moves beyond traditional conceptualizations.

Envisioning PSE’s Future with Experiential Learning

In its 2021 report on education, UNESCO referenced the intersecting and cumulative challenges facing the global community, including the recent health pandemic, climate change and increasing political instability and violence. The Reimagining our Futures Together report called for the global education sector to unite in collective endeavours to “provide the knowledge and innovation needed to shape sustainable and peaceful futures for all” (UNESCO, 2021, p.2).

This call-to-action echoes appeals by researchers and global institutions for education that builds 21st century skills – skills and abilities that will allow learners to thrive and lead in the complex and uncertain future. Early conceptualizations of 21st century skills were organized around the four C’s: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity (National Education Association, 2012; Partnership for 21st Century Learning, 2015). More recent research in the area has adopted the concept of ‘global competencies’. The Council of Ministers of Education, Canada defines global competencies as an “overarching sets of attitudes, skills, and knowledge that can be interdependent, interdisciplinary, and leveraged in a variety of situations both locally and globally” (www.cmec.ca). Global competencies is a broad term that includes critical thinking (Seibert, 2021; Wale & Bishaw, 2020), complex problem solving (Shanta & Wells, 2022), creativity and innovation (Hughes et al., 2022; Black et. al., 2021), adaptability (Dishon & Gilead, 2020; Kivunja, 2015), cultural awareness (Akkari & Radhouane, 2022), and futures literacies (Kazemier et. al., 2021; Pouru-Mikkola & Wilenius, 2021; UNESCO, 2021). The future is complex and uncertain and today’s learners will need to be able to adapt and respond to a wide range of ‘wicked’ global challenges for a sustainable and peaceful future.

EL is a core component of an education experience that can develop the skills and abilities that will be demanded in the future of today’s learners. We envision a future for post-secondary education that expands current models of EL by applying design thinking as a pedagogical method for developing global competencies. Design thinking, and its sub-disciplines (e.g., User-Experience Design), are increasingly taught in post-secondary institutions as specific courses and programs, but in its broader form, design thinking in an approach and a mindset that can be applied across sectors and disciplines. With its focus on human-centred problem solving, creativity and optimistic experimentation, design thinking is an interdisciplinary approach to tackling complex ‘wicked’ challenges that will confront today’s students

There are three dominant models of design thinking (Micheli et. al.,2019). The IDEO (www.ideo.com or www.ideo.org) model describes three stages: inspiration, ideation and experimentation. The Stanford D. School (https://dschool.stanford.edu) names five stages of the design thinking process: empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test. IBM describes a four-phase process (https://www.ibm.com/design/thinking/): understand, explore, prototype and evaluate. Though they vary slightly in area of focus and language, all design thinking models share the same set of core concepts: to understand the contextual environment of the problem and explore solutions from the perspective of the end user or beneficiary, to be comfortable with the ambiguity and uncertainty of the creative process while exploring different options, and to use iterative experimentation for problem solving. The design thinking process, with its focus on divergent and convergent thinking, problem-solving, critical thinking, flexibility and adaptability are strongly aligned with the 21st century global competencies needed for the future (Muñoz et. al., 2023; Sheer and Plattner, 2011).

CityStudio is a case example of EL using a design thinking approach. First conceptualized by two faculty members from Simon Fraser University, CityStudio began in 2011 as a partnership between the university and the City of Vancouver, with the goal to leverage the creative energy of students to meet the city’s ambition  of becoming the greenest city in the world by 2020 (https://citystudiovancouver.com/). In a semester-long experience, students, from a wide variety of academic backgrounds, work in teams to tackle challenges identified by municipal partners (www.citystudioglobal.com). Learners are confronted with a real-world, authentic problem that is relevant in their community and must apply design thinking principles effectively, as a team, to explore and test potential solutions. The CityStudio model has been adopted by several other post-secondary institutions (e.g., University of Fraser Valley-City of Abbotsford; Western University-City of London; Wilfrid Laurier University-City of Waterloo) and a global non-profit now provides guidance and support for new partnerships (e.g., Australia).

The design thinking approach can be applied to a range of fields. Integrating the focus on work common among some colleges and universities, educators can draw inspiration from the International Training Centre (ITC); the education and training arm of the International Labor Organization (ILO). In 2019, ITC-ILO hosted an event for collaborative problem-solving. Teams of students focused on designing solutions for the future of work and the future of learning in 2030. Essential elements that emerged from the Hackathon are to “embrace digital ethics and find a technological balance. . . . involve young people. . . . [and know that] empathy and foresight can advance social justice and promote decent work” (ITC, 2019). The ITC offers short courses that use various delivery modes, from the classroom to virtual reality and from an online learning platform to hands-on workshops (ITC, 2022) and use contemporary approaches, including design thinking, systems thinking and futures thinking to develop new solutions for the future of work.

The Government of Australia is a leader in the application of design thinking for public policy and education. In 2014, faculty at the James Cook University in Queensland undertook a study with the support of the Australian government to explore how design thinking pedagogies could be integrated across university disciplines. Through eight initial case studies, they found that design thinking-based EL successfully scaffolded students “ability to solve problems and approach problems from an innovative and creativity mindset” (Anderson et al., 2014). At the conclusion of their study, they determined that design thinking was an applicable and relevant pedagogical strategy across disciplines and there were creative examples of in-class and out-of-class EL activities from which other post-secondary educators could draw inspiration.

Research suggests learning through design thinking occurs in multiple forms. First, students learn about the design process, they become more reflective of the nature of problem solving and the complexity of problems (Carroll et al., 2010), and develop problem solving and creativity skills (Guaman-Quintanilla et. al., 2023). Students also learn at the intersection of design thinking and academic content relevant to the current problem. For example, students exploring how to maximize use of public spaces may investigate theories of urban design or psycho-social theories of social cohesion; or students exploring alternatives to single-use plastic containers may consult research in materials science, behavioural insights or environmental science. Finally, students learn through connection and collaboration with others. The design thinking process is rooted in approaching problems from the user or future beneficiaries’ perspective and almost all human issues require problem solvers to confront issues of equity, diversity, privilege and power. Through design thinking, students gain a greater understanding of social issues, consider and reflect on their place in society and build empathy for others. They also learn to work effectively in interdisciplinary teams through strong communication skills, collaboration and respect for different perspectives. In combination, design thinking-based EL experiences help prepare students for their role as leaders and problem-solvers in a complex and uncertain future.

Recommendations for Experiential Learning through Design Thinking

We recommend three first steps for modernizing EL in post-secondary education.

1. Governments and institutions should update definitions of EL to be more aligned with academic theory.

The theory of EL describes a deepening learning cycle where learners use new experiences to develop, conceptualize and experiment with theories of the world. Through experience, students learn that knowledge is contextualized and develop critical thinking and adaptation skills. Not all current policy definitions of EL adequately describe this form of learning and some are reduced to descriptions of ‘when’ and ‘where’ learned occurs, over ‘how’ or ‘why’. It is possible to offer a EL experience that does not contribute to higher order learning (Morris, 2020). Strengthening definitions would improve the quality of EL for students and inform government policy work in the area.

2. Post-secondary institutions should explore design thinking, not just as subjects in themselves, but as pedagogical approaches across disciplines as part of EL.

There is growing array of case studies and empirical research showing that design thinking as a pedagogical approach to EL is relevant across a wide range of post-secondary disciplines. Centres of teaching and learning can collaborate with design thinking faculty and educators already applying EL approaches to explore options that align with the strengths and needs of each institution. Governments can encourage this work as progress toward developing global competencies in today’s learners to support future social and economic prosperity. Government work to capture and share case studies of design thinking integrated EL would be useful to facilitate the expansion of the practice.

3. Conduct additional research on EL and EL with design thinking across all stakeholders

Additional research is needed to assess the policy context, barriers, facilitators, and implications for promoting and sustaining EL and EL with design thinking at the level of courses, programs and academic institutions, including its impact on funding structures and partners. There is also a need for high-quality systematic research by type of EL and its costs and impacts on all actors. Most research on EL focuses on student outcomes but there are also impacts, costs and benefits to instructors, institutions, partner organizations and the wider community. Broadening the scope of EL outcomes research will advance understanding and policy making in this area.

Summary

In The Avalanche is Coming: Higher Education and the Revolution Ahead, Barber et. al. (2013) argue the concept of the traditional university is under pressure. They note that the economic challenges of education, the accelerating digital disruption and entrance of digital natives to the student ranks are requiring post-secondary institutions to rethink their models of education. In a future when digital content is ubiquitous and digital natives are imaginative, collaborative and confident curators of content, the post-secondary model of transferring knowledge from faculty to students is no longer relevant. Institutions need to educate in a way that integrates theory and practice and where students are able to create value out of these experiences (Barber et. al., 2013; Lor, 2017).

There is a global call for the education sector to unite in collective endeavours to “provide the knowledge and innovation needed to shape sustainable and peaceful futures for all” (UNESCO, 2021, p.2). Developing employability skills focused on today’s needs may not be relevant for future work. Learners need to develop a set of foundational global competencies to prepare for the future. Creativity, innovation, collaboration, complex problem solving, adaptability and cultural awareness are broad skills that transverse across disciplines. EL that applies a design thinking pedagogical approach challenges learners with authentic and relevant challenges that require creative confidence, empathy and iterative problem solving. These are the skills our learners need. The future is complex and uncertain and today’s learners will need to be able to adapt and respond to a wide range of ‘wicked’ global challenges. The peace, sustainability and prosperity of our future depends on it

References

Akkari, A., & Radhouane, M. (2022). Intercultural approaches to education: From theory to practice. Springer Nature.

Anderson, N., Adam, R., Taylor, P., Madden, D., Melles, G., Kuek, C., Wright, N., & Ewens, B. (2014). Design thinking frameworks as transformative cross-disciplinary pedagogy. Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching, Department of Education. https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/37592/1/Anderson%20SD12_2552_Report_2014.pdf

Barber, M., Donnelly, K., Rizvi, S., & Summers, L. (2013). An avalanche is coming. Higher Education and the revolution ahead, 73. https://www.insidehighered.com/sites/default/files/files/FINAL%20Embargoed%20Avalanche%20Paper%20130306%20(1).pdf

Black, G. L., Jarvis, D. H., & Cantalini-Williams, M. T. (2021). Engaging teacher candidates in a curriculum development initiative: Education for innovation (E4I). In J. Nichol & M. Jacobsen (Eds.), Preparing teachers as curriculum designers. Canadian Association of Teacher Educators (CATE) (pp. 154-190). [Online] (ISBN 978-1-990202-00-1) https://cate-acfe.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Preparing-Teachers-as-Curriculum-Designers_ebook_FINAL.pdf

Brennan, J., Deer, F., Desai Trilokekar, R., Findlay, L., Foster, K., Laforest, G., Wheelahan, L., Wright, J. M. (2021). Investing in a Better Future: Higher Education and Post-COVID Canada. Royal Society of Canada. https://rsc-src.ca/sites/default/files/Higher%20Ed%20PB%20ES_EN.pdf

Burch, G. F., Giambatista, R., Batchelor, J. H., Burch, J. J., Hoover, J. D., & Heller, N. A. (2019). A meta‐analysis of the relationship between experiential learning and learning outcomes. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 17(3), 239-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12188

Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom. The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01632.x

Conway, J. M., Amel, E. L., & Gerwien, D. P. (2009). Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning’s effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of psychology, 36(4), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903172969

Dishon, G., & Gilead, T. (2021). Adaptability and its discontents: 21st-century skills and the preparation for an unpredictable future. British Journal of Educational Studies, 69(4), 393-413. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2020.1829545

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Oxford Further Education Unit.

Guaman-Quintanilla, S., Everaert, P., Chiluiza, K., & Valcke, M. (2023). Impact of design thinking in higher education: a multi-actor perspective on problem solving and creativity. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(1), 217–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09724-z

Hughes, J., Robb, J., Hagerman, M., Laffier, J. & Cotnam-Kapell, M. (2022). What makes a maker teacher? Examining key characteristics of two maker educators. International Journal of Educational Research Open, Volume 3, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100118

International Training Centre. (2019, April 11). How do you envision the future of work and the future of learning in 2030? https://www.itcilo.org/news/how-do-you-envision-future-work-and-future-learning-2030

Kaipainen, E., Braun, R., & Arseneault, R. (2020). Experiential learning plan for the University of Calgary (2020-25). Taylor Institute for Learning: University of Calgary. https://www.ucalgary.ca/provost/sites/default/files/teams/2/2020-25-UCalgary-Experiential-Learning-Plan-Digital.pdf

Kazemier, E. M., Damhof, L., Gulmans, J., & Cremers, P. H. M. (2021). Mastering futures literacy in higher education: An evaluation of learning outcomes and instructional design of a faculty development program. Futures, 132, 102814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102814

Kivunja, C. (2015). Teaching students to learn and to work well with 21st century skills: Unpacking the career and life skills domain of the new learning paradigm. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(1), 1-11. https://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.php/ijhe/article/view/5694

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to management learning, education and development. The SAGE handbook of management learning, education and development, 7(2), 42-68. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021038

Lor, R. (2017). Design thinking in education: A critical review of literature. Asian Conference on Education & Psychology. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324684320_Design_Thinking_in_Education_A_Critical_Review_of_Literature

Micheli, P., Wilner, S. J., Bhatti, S. H., Mura, M., & Beverland, M. B. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12466

The Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development. (2017). Guiding Principles for Experiential Learning. University of Toronto. https://hive.utsc.utoronto.ca/public/dean/academic%20administrators/DCD%202017-18/A04%20EL%20-%20Guiding%20Priciples%20FINAL%20EN.pdf

Morris, T. H. (2020). Experiential learning – a systematic review and revision of Kolb’s model. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1064–1077. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570279

Muñoz, C. B., Nanclares, N. H., Zamorano, L. R. M., & Sánchez, J. Á. L. (2023). Gamification and Design Thinking in Higher Education: Case Studies for Instructional Innovation in the Economics Classroom. Taylor & Francis.

National Education Association. (2012). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educator’s guide to” the four Cs.” Washington, DC. https://dl.icdst.org/pdfs/files3/0d3e72e9b873e0ef2ed780bf53a347b4.pdf

Partnership for 21st Century Learning (2015). Framework for 21st Century Learning. The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework

Pouru-Mikkola, L., & Wilenius, M. (2021). Building individual futures capacity through transformative futures learning. Futures, 132, 102804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102804

Seibert, S. A. (2021). Problem-based learning: A strategy to foster generation Z’s critical thinking and perseverance. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 16(1), 85-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2020.09.002

Shanta, S., & Wells, J. G. (2022). T/E design based learning: Assessing student critical thinking and problem solving abilities. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(1), 267-285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09608-8

Scheer, A., & Plattner, H. (2011). Transforming Constructivist Learning into Action: Design Thinking in education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 17(3), 8–19. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ996067.pdf

Unesco, P. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. Paris, France: Educational and Cultural Organization of the United Nations.

Wale, B. D., & Bishaw, K. S. (2020). Effects of using inquiry-based learning on EFL students’ critical thinking skills. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 5, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-020-00090-2

Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU) (2023). Laurier Curricular Experiential Learning (EL) Inventory Report May 2022 to April 2023. Office of Experiential Learning & Career Development. Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

Wilfrid Laurier University. (2024). Experiential Learning Typology. https://lauriercloud.sharepoint.com/sites/teaching-and-learning/experiential-learning-and-career-development/Pages/experiential-learning-typology.aspx

Yorio, P. L., & Ye, F. (2012). A meta-analysis on the effects of service-learning on the social, personal, and cognitive outcomes of learning. Academy of management learning & education, 11(1), 9-27. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0072

About the authors

name: Carrie Wright

Carrie Wright is a Research Fellow at the Balsillie School of International Affairs. She studies strategies and approaches to increase public sector innovation.

name: Colleen Loomis

Colleen Loomis is on Faculty at the Balsillie School of International Affairs and Wilfrid Laurier University. Her research focuses on international and local influences on education.