Where?

San Servolo, Venice, Italy. One-day experience on field took place in Ca’ Roman, a wildlife sanctuary in a smaller island in the Southern part of the Venetian Lagoon.

When?

July 18-23, 2021.

Who?

1 Student and 1 Teacher from each of the nine partner institutions in STEAM+. In addition, Lab 1 involved a number of speakers and experts who gave insight talks about the main concepts analyzed during the lab. A facilitator and two organizers lead and coordinated all the activities of the lab.

What was the topic of the Lab and why was it chosen?

The lab was aimed at fostering socio-ecological literacy, contributing to the co-creation of knowledge on marine conservation and nurturing (citizen-scientific) commitment for environmental stewardship. It focused on marine conservation, mainly due to the challenges that Venice, a unique global city, is now facing.

The lab was designed around four main keywords: transdisciplinarity, co-creation, citizen science and marine conservation. Within the perspective of Citizen Science, diversity was a plus! The lab was based on a transdisciplinary and methodologically diverse approach, also enriched by the cultural heterogeneity of the participants.

The pedagogical approach of the lab was based on the Theory-U, a dynamic learning process, where the collaborative endeavour to grasp knowledge gaps evolves into a deeper reflection, bridging the cognitive, the emotional and the institutional/practical spheres. This sustained co-creation of knowledge for sea life conservation, inspired participants’ long-term dedication to the protection of marine environments. The approach was strongly multidisciplinary, also connecting the lab theme to the arts, challenging participants to choose an art form to communicate their view and possible solutions for marine conservation.

Major outcomes of groups’ projects

At the end of the lab, during the co-creation phase, participants were divided into five groups, each working on designing and prototyping a project upon the four keywords mentioned above.

This is one example. The abstracts of the 5 group projects can be found online

Project of group 1: “GiOlivi”

Abstract of the project: Recycling wastes in Venice is an open issue, in particular thinking about the large touristic flows visiting the lagoon for few days. In light of citizen science, the aim of the project is twofold: on the one hand, it will involve all people in Venice (locals and visitors) in recycling plastic bottles and, on the other hand, make them contribute to geolocalised data about pollution in the Venetian lagoon. To pursue these goals, the “GiOlivi” app will be developed. Through the app, people will be incentivized (through either monetary amounts or gadgets) to collect plastic battles in ad-hoc collection machines distributed in the key touristic points in Venice. In addition, a second function will allow people to upload pictures of polluted sites found through their trip around the city. The motivating principles behind the projects are: (i) visitors can be a resource for Venice, (ii) recycling can be promoted by gamification and incentives, (iii) the nudge process can trigger social proof imitation over time. The project will have a finite delivery and implementation period of four years: the nudge factor will elongate the effect of the action. It will be delivered in three phases: local Venetian schools and communities and university, wider city and regional/national area, and international tourists. We expect to work with universities, city, local businesses (supermarkets), creators of recycled products, creative industries, sponsors.

Role and involvement of policy makers

The hosting institution involved a representative (Professor Enrica De Cian) of the main policy partner, CMCC, in the evaluation committee of the students’ projects. This facilitated an exchange of ideas and the interaction between the Collegio Internazionale and CMCC, also in light of the next dissemination activities that were planned to be conducted within the STEAM+ project.

Lessons learned from an organizational perspective

Thanks to the contribution of the administrative staff of the Collegio Internazionale, the overall organization of the lab was extremely successful, and the activities were carried out smoothly and efficiently. The main lessons learnt from the lab can be summarized with three main keywords:

Solidarity: Since many processes were intertwined during the implementation of the lab, it is necessary to coordinate people involved in logistics, service supply, accounting, management/organization. This requires an enthusiastic, effective, and problem-solving staff.

Generosity: The hosting institution is often required to integrate the budget with extra resources (human effort, outsourced competencies, working hours, financial budget) on top of what was initially allocated by the project.

Sensibility: Although the overall satisfaction of participants can be high, the hosting institution should be extremely open to collect observations on critical aspects and to conduct a deep reflection in light of future events.

What do participants say about the experience?

According to the lab evaluation survey, the overall majority appreciated the lab both in terms of contents, methods and organization.

These are some indications collected by participants:

The strongest points were:

• The fieldtrips and hands-on experience
• Interactive and co-creative approach with room for discussion
• The diversity of the group, in age, student/teacher, disciplines, nationalities
• The setup of the lab, variations of different methods/new ways of working, self-reflection, clear assignments
• The nice and welcome organizers, a wonderful organization/timing of the lab all together
• The social aspects/contacts/team building, familiar and open-minded atmosphere
• The focus on sustainability.

The most loved activities were:

• The trip to Ca’ Roman
• The way of working and how this was structured in several activities including the discussion in small groups, the co-creating activities and the corresponding brainstorming, the gamification of some activities, the time invested in self-reflection and meditative swim
• Beach-time and learning about the island itself.

Expectations were totally, or mostly, met for all participants but all loved the fact that they learned new things.

Nevertheless, participants suggested some points that could be improved during the Lab:

• Make more time for the project prototypes' development
• Increase diversity of disciplines as there were only a few learners with a real STEM profile
• participants should be ready to question the STEM approach otherwise the activities' pace could be too fast
• Lab site location on a small island made access to stores, ample food supplies and an efficient way to reduce waste difficult

Some underlined the experience as:

• A change of mindset regarding education and sustainability, offering a big variety of ideas and views on the topic that can affect the future of one’s education
• An occasion in which students and teachers worked together on an equal 'level'
• The discovery of citizen science as a research method with its advantages/disadvantages
• A way of changing the perspective of a hierarchy of learning (like lectures, teachers/bosses who teach and others who have to listen) to a collaborative transdisciplinary learning where each voice is important
• An occasion to build friendship with other participants
• Appreciation of meditation and silent observation that can bring to strong involvement and provide an opportunity to shy participants.