Collaborative learning is a teaching method that brings together students to discuss a topic important for a given course or curriculum and solve a related problem or create a product. By doing this, learners create knowledge together and gain 21 st -century skills such as communication, critical thinking, decision making, leadership and conflict management. Universities had to close their campuses and turn their education fully online in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which created a forced step in the evolution of the digitalisation of collaborative teaching. How did TU Delft face this challenge? How did the students experience the online version of collaborative learning? How did distant learning affect their motivation? This article presents four student team projects investigating these questions from the collaborative learning perspective. One of the significant findings of these projects is the lack of socio-emotional interactions during online collaborative work. We present a few guidelines on how to enable these interactions when designing online or blended collaborative education.

Citizen science and particularly mobile crowd sourcing (MCS) has large potential in water resources management for data collection and awareness raising. Concerns about data quality, and initiating and sustaining citizen involvement hamper incorporation of citizen science in water monitoring, together with a lack of practical guidance how to set up citizen science monitoring programs. This review presents an overview of key success factors for citizen science including MCS. Specific attention is paid to motivational aspects. Success factors were organized according to project phase and motivations according to selfdetermination theory. The presented overviews provide practical guidelines for setting up citizen science projects. © 2017 The Authors. WIREs Water published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. How to cite this article:WIREs Water 2017, 4:e1218. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1218 INTRODUCTIONC limate change, population growth, and economic development are major challenges for water resources management. For example, for the Netherlands rising of sea level, higher river discharges, more prolonged periods of droughts, and increasing water quality challenges are foreseen. 1 Salinization, acidification, eutrophication, and habitat fragmentation will further increase the pressure on ecosystem and environment. 1 It is expected that innovations in water monitoring are needed to generate knowledge to address the challenges and develop effective water resource management. 2 An additional challenge for water resources management is lack of citizen awareness. Case studies in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom suggest that citizens consider flood protection and water quality management as a task of the authorities and not a community task. 3 In 2014, the OECD 4 warned of 'a striking awareness gap among Dutch citizens related to key water management functions, how they are performed and by whom.' Citizen science can be an attractive instrument to address these challenges, because it offers new monitoring options and can contribute to awareness raising.Citizen science is not a new phenomenon, but revived in the 20th century and gained popularity worldwide over the past two decades. [5][6][7] Many scientific fields adopted citizen science and water resource management is about to join. 2 Involvement of citizens in scientific processes entered a new era in the 20th century with the most well-known citizen science project: the Christmas Bird Count, 6,8 which started in 1900 as a This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.volunteer-based inventory of winter bird populations. Renewed attention for citizen science in the past 20 years has been fuelled by the knowledge-driven society 9 and by changing scientific grant regulations. 6 Easy to use equipment may enhance citizen science in water monitoring, mobile phones increase the se...

Differences in viewpoints between science and society, like in for example the HPV-vaccination debate, should be considered from a socio-technical system perspective, and not solely from a boundary perspective between the lay public, medical doctors and scientists. Recent developments in the HPV-vaccination case show how the debate concerning uncertainty amongst scientists and the lay audience is mostly focussed on the improvement of understanding of lay people about why vaccination is important. This boundary thinking leads to the idea that once the boundary is crossed, the problem is solved. However, such ‘bug-fixing’ and technocentric boundary thinking is not leading to sustainable resolutions. We view science communication as a key aspect of the socio-technical system of scientific, technological and innovation  development, in which the vaccine and its corresponding immunisation program are socially constructed. A process of construction that takes place all the way from the fuzzy front-end of their scientific conception until the marketing back-end. The authority, legitimacy and therefore the license to operate of scientists, engineers and policy makers are discussed, primarily at this boundary, but develops during the whole process of innovation. During upstream processes, professional roles and according behaviour are also defined. In this commentary we state that the development of science communication strategies should also start upstream, and that the ‘bug-fixes’ of improved listening to (and not by) the lay audience, could be become a more sustainable solution to the HPV-debate if this process of listening by experts considers the socio-technical system of vaccination as a whole. One of the outcomes might be that the dialogue between scientists, policy makers and the lay audience is about the various possible scenarios that deal with inherent scientific and societal uncertainty in which the inevitable uncertainty of science becomes more explicit. It is not known according whether this will lead to more profound interactions, however we would like to explore this possibility a bit more from an uncertain innovation process point of view. This could clear the way for a process of co-inquiry into ideas concerning shared responsibility and accountability. The latter means that the focus in the debate is more balanced and concerns the social network, and is not purely focussed on the betterment ofunderstanding by the lay  audience. Moreover, in this way we consider communication and interaction between actors not as a means of crossing any boundaries (since that may be impossible), but as a means to perturb a status quo or equilibrium within a network of actors. This makes apparent boundaries more explicit and discussable. Methods of interaction, e.g. based on concepts like midstream modulation, may lead to another discourse and give way to new dynamics in this social system.

Abstract. In recent years, governmental institutes have started to use citizen science as a form of public participation. The Dutch water authorities are among them. They face pressure on the water governance system and a water awareness gap among the general public, and consider citizen science a possible solution. The reasons for practitioners to engage in citizen science, and in particular those of government practitioners, have seldom been studied. This article aims to pinpoint the various viewpoints of practitioners at Dutch regional water authorities on citizen science. A Qmethodological approach was used because it allows for exploration of viewpoints and statistical analysis using a small sample size. Practitioners (33) at eight different water authorities ranked 46 statements from agree to disagree. Three viewpoints were identified with a total explained variance of 67 %. Viewpoint A considers citizen science a potential solution that can serve several purposes, thereby encouraging citizen participation in data collection and analysis. Viewpoint B considers citizen science a method for additional, illustrative data. Viewpoint C views citizen science primarily as a means of education. These viewpoints show water practitioners in the Netherlands are willing to embrace citizen science at water authorities, although there is no support for higher levels of citizen engagement.

Recent science policy encourages the installation of Responsible Research & Innovation (RRI) practices, which should help solve grand societal challenges and be more readily adopted by society. RRI may be implemented by setting up interdisciplinary innovation development teams, bringing together technical and non-technical experts from various disciplines and backgrounds, enabling engineers to let their work become inspired by – or even partly co-shaped by – societal insights and viewpoints, while societal actors get acquainted with techno-scientific context. We developed a Decision Support Tool to support interdisciplinary innovation teams, that visualizes innovation project performance and success chances. It supports communication and collaboration in interdisciplinary teams by proposing practical improvement areas, based on shared expertise, including socio-ethical, societal, economic and management related aspects. Still, further investigation is needed to learn how such a tool can be used to systematically integrate RRI in practice, to harness its full innovative potential.