PurposeThis study aims to investigate how university students' basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence and relatedness) determine whether coaching or training is more supportive for them.Design/methodology/approachReal-life coaching (N1 = 110) and training (N2 = 176) processes with students as clients were examined, measuring the students' needs before the coaching/training, their need fulfilment after the coaching/training and their satisfaction and goal attainment/intrinsic motivation after the coaching/training.FindingsThe results show that university students with a higher autonomy need had this need fulfilled to a greater extent through coaching, while university students with a higher competence need had this need fulfilled to a greater extent through training.Research limitations/implicationsThe research focused on university students and was conducted at German-speaking universities, so it is unclear to what extent the findings are transferable to other contexts. In addition, future research is needed to further compare other personal development tools, such as mentoring or consulting.Practical implicationsThe results depict the relevance of the most appropriate personal development tool (coaching or training) depending on students' needs. Furthermore, coaches should be autonomy-supportive, while trainers should be competence-supportive.Originality/valueSupporting students with the most appropriate personal development tool is essential for the effectiveness of this tool. Thus, the personal development tool used should reflect students' needs: students with a high autonomy need should receive coaching, while students with a high competence need should receive training.

How can community-engaged scholars best undertake grounded, policy-relevant, food systems research and teaching in ways that support the capacity of-and meaningfully build on-the experiences of civil society organizations working on these issues in Canada? This paper analyzes four case studies in the context of a research project that brings together members of the Canadian Association for Food Studies and Food Secure Canada. One case was led by Region of CFS /RCÉA P. Andrée et al. Vol. 1, No. 1, May 2014 28Waterloo Public Health and faculty from the University of Waterloo; a second by the Food Security Research Network at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay and the North Superior Workforce Planning Board; a third by the national student organization Meal Exchange and Ryerson University in Toronto; and a fourth by the BC Food Systems Network. We argue that the answer to the question above lies in establishing respectful relationships and recognizing the different cultures involved, and we offer five methodological insights for building effective relationships in practice. The first is the need to disaggregate the concept of 'community' in order to acknowledge the distinct needs and assets of the diverse organizations and populations involved. Our second and third insights are linked: Establish the relationship around a shared vision, and then negotiate mutually-beneficial teaching or research projects. Fourth, practitioners should approach community-campus engagement through the framework of contextual fluidity, which includes seeing the relationships and the vision at the heart of the work, while remaining open to shifts and new opportunities. Finally, adopting community capacity building practices helps practitioners realize their shared vision.

Mandatory policies are needed to mitigate environmental problems but often elicit resistance if individuals perceive them as freedom restrictions. Encouraging people to take the perspective of individuals who suffer from environmental problems may help increase support. This should especially be the case with imagine-self as opposed to imagine-other perspective taking, because the former elicits more personal involvement than the latter. To test this hypothesis, we conducted two studies in which we announced the introduction of a voluntary vs. a mandatory proenvironmental initiative and asked people to take an imagine-self vs. imagine-other perspective on an individual, who suffers from human-caused environmental problems. The imagine-self condition increased the support of mandatory compared to voluntary initiatives. In addition, we found an influence of environmental attitude: the mandatory initiatives received higher support than voluntary initiatives by environmentally minded individuals. These findings highlight imagine-self perspective taking as a potentially useful tool for implementing proenvironmental policies.

This thesis explores the use of a multifaceted approach to space to identify the similarities and differences between the rhetoric of engagement within the university and the practices on the ground. This research emerges from tensions between shifts in the structure and purpose of the university as a social institution and a growing commitment to engagement evident in the rhetoric of the university. This thesis analyzes Carleton University's proposed commitment to engagement, as presented in its strategic and academic plans, and the conceptions of engagement that are reflected in and supported by the design, mandate, and administration of the River Building. This thesis concludes that only studying the rhetoric of the university does not present an accurate picture of the university and that space can be used to further identify the similarities and differences between this rhetoric and the practices and policies implemented in a particular space of the university.iii