This paper explores how engineering students and Work and Welfare students reflect upon their own engagement in a one-week cross-disciplinary project. To develop a better understanding of what unfolds during these activities we collected data through anonymous surveys two consecutive years. Data from these 141 respondents were analysed using a learning history approach and are presented as narratives. Results show major disruptions and conflicts driving the student projects, exposing inviting confrontations, social identity threats, managing diversity, and friction of ideas. Whereas this in many cases led to new and better project solutions, these real-world experiences raise awareness of the need for tools and methods for training students. The aim of the paper is to learn from students’ experiences through narrative distance, and fill a gap in the literature between problem-based learning (PBL) and the learning history method. Discussing different experiences of cross-disciplinary teamwork through the explanations of these theories, we also lay out potential questions for future research on the topic.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to identify and describe how students experience academic coaching in higher education in Norway.Design/methodology/approachThe study employed a descriptive and exploratory qualitative design where semi-structured interviews formed the basis for data collection. Thematic analysis was used as an analytic strategy to identify, organise and find patterns or themes that emerged from the data.FindingsThe findings showed that academic coaching positively influenced the respondents' ability to identify the necessary and efficient cognitive processes and metacognitive skills needed to cope with everyday scholastic challenges. Academic coaching affected the respondents' metacognitive skills and cognitive processes in terms of evolving their self-efficacy, self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, stress identification, goal identification, goal setting and development of new strategies.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings in this study reflect the respondents' subjective opinions and further research is needed to validate these findings.Originality/valueThis article addresses a gap in the field of research by offering a descriptive pilot study and thematic analysis of students' experiences with academic coaching in Norway.

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeThe aim of this article is to describe work relations between leaders and counsellors in the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV). The study focuses on communication, control, work ethos, worldview and digital production management (DPM).Design/methodology/approachThis article is based on two empirical studies from the same research project at the NAV in the south of Norway called “Leadership and client orientation in NAV”. The research design led to a qualitative interview method being used to collect and analyse the opinions and experiences of the interviewees (Merriam, 2009).FindingsThe study found that (a) leaders use DPM to control employees, (b) communicative and regulative aspects of working in NAV, (c) contradictory simultaneous work demands on leaders and counsellors and (d) the symbolic rationality of work in NAV. The aspects (a) to (d) show a specific worldview in NAV. The study also found aspects of work ethos in NAV, such as a strong will to help and do well for the user and at the same time meet NAV's financial and administrative requirements (Lundquist, 1998; Byrkjeflot, 2008). It is fruitful to describe this situation using the concept of symbolic rationality.Originality/valueThrough symbolic rationality, the study has identified the possibility for further research on the hybrid professionalism of leadership and counsellorship, at three levels in the ambidextrous public sector. The first is the epistemological level, where the concept sets limits on how a social situation such as NAV can be spoken about and understood. A second level is the theoretical level, where categories and logics can be formed and that are seen as being applicable to work in NAV. The third and final level is the practical level, where the concept of symbolic rationality and the meanings connected with it shape leaders' and counsellors' professional practice in the public sector.