Active learning

An umbrella term that encompasses many of the teaching approaches below (e.g. problem based / experiential / collaborative) that involve students – often with their peers – actively participating in the learning process beyond simply listening, reading and memorising (as opposed to passively receiving information). 

Baseline

• Interactive polls: using Vevox during in-person sessions to ask short questions (either around student opinion or about key concepts).
• Quick discussion: students briefly debate a topic or question with the person sitting next to them. 

Effective

• Think-pair-share: students first reflect individually, then discuss in pairs, and finally share with the larger group.
• Interactive quizzes: regular short quizzes to provide immediate feedback and reinforce key teaching. 

Excellent

• Flipped classrooms: students access online content before sessions and apply concepts through activities during face-to-face sessions.
• Peer teaching: students prepare and deliver short lessons to their peers, promoting deeper understanding. 

Students work, often collaboratively, to solve complex, open-ended real-world problems, which encouraging them to identify key knowledge gaps, research information independently, and critically analyse solutions in order to construct their own understanding of a subject rather than passively receiving information.

Baseline

• One‑page problem statement – assign a brief prompt for students to write what additional data they’d need to solve it, surfacing knowledge gaps.
• Mini-case studies: integrate short case studies during through sessions, asking students to collaboratively apply concepts covered to solve a practical problem.  

Effective

• In-person discussions: invite students to propose solutions or strategies to a presented problem, facilitating peer-to-peer dialogue guided by colleagues.
• Two‑session PBL cycle – in week 1 groups dissect a multi‑step case, create a concept map of root issues, and set individual research tasks; in week 2 they reconvene to integrate findings and pitch a solution.

Excellent

• Semester‑long consultancy project – teams partner with a local organisation (startup, NGO, Local Authority) to solve a real challenge; they negotiate deliverables, prototype interventions, and present to the client panel.

• Iterative reflection & peer assessment – after each milestone, students complete structured reflections and score team contributions using a rubric aligned to professional project‑management competencies.

Learn more about Problem-based learning.

Hands-on experiences for students to help them connect abstract theory to real-world situations. It is a constructivist learning theory that involves reflection, critical analysis, and synthesis 

Baseline

• Workshops and labs: hands-on sessions providing direct experience with tools, techniques, or materials central to student learning in their disciplines.
• Demonstrations and simulations: conduct short demonstrations or simulations within sessions to allow students direct observation or hands-on interaction with key concepts.
• Real-time data analysis: provide students with authentic data or examples to analyse during lectures, actively engaging them in practical decision-making.   

Effective

• Field trips: visits to relevant industry locations, laboratories, museums, or community sites.
• Simulation and role-play: using realistic scenarios where students enact roles to practice professional skills.
• Guest speakers: invite guest speakers or alumni from relevant professional fields to share real-world experiences directly tied to session content. 

Excellent

• Industrial placements: incorporating structured work experiences into programmes. 
• Interactive 'live' case studies: facilitate interactive discussions around current events or recent developments in the discipline, allowing students to experience immediate connections between theory and practice. 

Students work together in groups over time to create, research and scope projects, in order to solve problems and complete tasks,  fostering a social environment where learners can share ideas and learn from each other. 

Baseline

• Online discussion forums: structured asynchronous online interactions, fostering continued collaboration outside sessions. 
• In-class discussion: structured conversations guided by prompts, with clear expectations and outputs.
• Study groups: formalise study groups within programmes, supported by peer mentors or teaching assistants. 
• Peer feedback sessions: groups critique and provide constructive feedback on each other’s work.   

Effective

• Group projects: structured assignments requiring teamwork, shared responsibilities, and collective problem-solving. 

Excellent

• Assessed group task - structured with careful thought towards group composition, inclusion and assessment of product and /or process. Incorporating a substantive task over multiple weeks.

Students adopt authentic roles (clinician, policymaker, engineer …) inside a scripted scenario or simulated environment. By acting out decisions and consequences they rehearse professional behaviours, test theoretical models and build empathy for multiple perspectives, all within a safe, low-risk setting. 

Baseline

• In‑class scenario – give students a short prompt (“You’re a GP explaining test results”) and 3–4 minutes to improvise in pairs.
• Scripted read‑throughs – distribute a brief dialogue that models a real‑world exchange (e.g., client‑consultant) and have volunteers read it aloud, pausing to annotate key moves.

Effective

• Rotating roles – set up four stations (client, project manager, designer, customer); after each 10‑minute round, students rotate roles and then debrief how their decisions and interactions evolved.
• Branching‑path simulation – present a decision tree on screen; groups choose actions at each branch and immediately see the next scenario unfold, fostering discussion of consequences.

Excellent

• Full press‑conference simulation – a press briefing with trained actors portraying public officials and eyewitnesses, asking real‑time questions, and then receiving structured feedback
• Multi‑stakeholder crisis – over two weeks, teams research positions, then enact a live negotiation (cabinet meeting, media briefing) while an ‘event deck’ introduces surprise constraints.

Learners actively gather primary evidence—measurements, observations and survey responses —to answer a research question. The focus is on designing the method, observing ethical practice and readying the dataset for analysis, so students experience the complete inquiry cycle from raw data to insight. 

Baseline

• Hallway head‑count – in pairs, students spend 10 minutes tallying how many passers‑by carry reusable cups vs. disposables, then pool numbers on a shared sheet.

Effective

• Semi‑structured interview pilot – students draft an interview protocol, secure verbal consent, record two 15‑minute interviews, transcribe key passages and code basic themes.

Excellent

• Community‑partner data drive – in collaboration with a local NGO, teams co‑design and administer a 30‑item survey to residents, manage ethics paperwork, and deliver a cleaned, annotated dataset to the partner for future policy use.
• Longitudinal self‑tracking project – each student logs daily media‑use metrics for a month using a standard template; mid‑course workshops address data cleaning and anonymisation before the cohort combines records into a rich longitudinal dataset.

A simple reorientation of a learning episode where the content (the lecture, the reading etc…) is provided in advance and the classroom time is used for an activity that consolidates that learning.

Baseline

• Pre‑watch & recap quiz – assign a 10‑minute screencast and open class with a short Vevox quiz to surface misconceptions before discussing answers.

• Worked‑example walkthrough – students read a brief worked solution at home; in class they re‑solve a near‑identical problem in pairs while the instructor circulates.

Effective

• Interactive video with checkpoints – upload a 15‑minute Panopto lecture annotated with pause‑and‑answer prompts; class time is spent on small‑group case discussions and decision-making using the pre-recorded material.

Excellent

• Publication‑ready research flip Pre‑class micro‑content covers research design, ethics, and analysis techniques. Live meetings become collaborative writing studios where teams collect data, code findings, and co‑author sections of a paper under rotating faculty mentorship.

1 — Scope & Align

• Identify one of your module's learning outcomes that is pertinent to the workplace / industry / post-graduation setting

2 — Secure the Partner

• Tap existing alumni / employer networks; start with a small, low-risk brief (4–6 weeks, one key deliverable).

• Agree, in writing: purpose, timeline, deliverables, IP/NDAs, feedback touch-points, and a single contact on each side.

3 — Co-Design the Project

• Support students to turn the partner’s need into a clear student brief: background → task → deliverable → success criteria → resources.

4 — Prep Everyone

• Give partners a 1-page “how to work with students” guide and calendar.

• Run a student boot-camp: workplace etiquette, project management, data ethics, risk & safeguarding.

5 — Run & Support

• Schedule weekly stand-ups (15 min, student-led, staff listening).

• Capture mid-point partner feedback; intervene early if scope drifts.

7 — Close & Reflect

• Final client showcase (in-person or video) → immediate partner Q&A.

• Debrief with the partner: what worked, what to tweak, next-year ideas.

1 — Pin down the “problem worth solving”

• Choose one learning outcome that demands diagnosis and solution-finding

• Frame it as a messy, authentic scenario with incomplete data—something professionals actually grapple with.

2 — Set the scope

• Decide the output: client report, prototype, policy brief, or presentation.
• Provide a template for group contracts and meeting minutes.

3 — Craft the PBL package

• Trigger: a 200–300-word case vignette, client video, or data bundle.
• Guiding questions: “What do we know? What do we need to know? Where will we find it?”
• Independent Work (between classes or over 1–2 weeks)
  Teams  investigate, test ideas, build drafts or prototypes.
• Check-ins 
  Ask guiding questions, but don’t give them the answers.
• Share Solutions
  Teams present their best solution. The rest of the class asks questions.

1 — Lock onto the learning outcome
Pick one skill or concept students need to demonstrate in action: negotiating, diagnosing, policy decisions, engineering calculations, etc. e.g. “By the end, students will do X under realistic constraints.”

2 — Choose the right simulation scale

• Micro-role (10–15 min inside a seminar): pairs act as scientist + journalist, or patient + clinician.

• Single-class simulation (50–90 min): crisis-management meeting, courtroom debate, UN climate summit.

• Multi-week immersive: recurring cabinet sessions, business start-up board, mock clinical rounds.
  Start with the smallest version that still proves the outcome—you can always expand later.

3 — Build the scenario pack

• Trigger scenario  – sets stakes, context, challenge.
• Roles – objective, background knowledge, power level, hidden info.
• Task & deliverable – e.g. “Draft a 90-second press statement.”
• Ground rules – clarify timing and etiquette
• Prep resources – key readings or data snippets for each role

6 — Facilitation and Inclusion 

• Nominate a student time-keeper and recorder so you’re free to observe.
• If someone freezes, have a “prompt card” with one question or data point to reboot dialogue.
• Share role cards 24 h early for reading, translation, or screen-reader access.
• Provide an alternative analysis task for anyone who cannot—or prefers not to—act.