Background: To prepare students to become productive 21 st century citizens, universities have to be more engaged with society. Shifting towards community service learning (CSL) enables students to participate in, and reflect on, services that both benefit the public and also contribute to their own learning. There has been considerable research conducted on the improved student competencies, both academic and personal, resulting from CSL. There is, however, no consensus on how to integrate CSL into courses successfully, owing to the diverse contextual factors that influence implementation. Purpose: By means of conducting a review, this study aimed to establish general design principles to help guide course coordinators in implementing CSL in their academic courses. Design and methods: A systematic review was conducted of articles describing the implementation of CSL in academic courses within various disciplines. Implementation elements and principles were extracted from the articles and inductively grouped together, thereby identifying various design principles. Findings: Our analysis of the literature highlighted three steps that, according to the literature, are important in the implementation of CSL: (1) aligning course objectives and format; (2) establishing a relationship with the community partner; and (3) defining a reflection and evaluation strategy. We found that the nature of the design principles and specific approaches underlying these implementation steps should depend on the students' capabilities, which include their pre-CSL experiences. Conclusion:The implementation steps and underlying design principles uncovered by this review may help guide and support course coordinators in their efforts to integrate CSL in their academic courses. The diverse range of design principles makes it possible to acknowledge students' pre-CSL experiences and, thus, construct appropriate scaffolding, which is necessary for students to attain the improved academic and personal competencies envisaged through CSL, and ultimately to become productive 21 st century citizens.

BackgroundThe quality of a care relationship between a client and a care professional is seen as fundamental if high-quality care is to be delivered. This study reviews studies about the determinants of the quality of the client-professional relationship in long-term care.MethodsA systematic review was performed using the electronic databases of Medline, Psycinfo, CINAHL and Embase. The review focused on three client groups receiving long-term care: physically or mentally frail elderly, people with mental health problems and people with physical or intellectual disabilities. Included studies concern clients receiving inpatient or outpatient care and care professionals who provided recurring physical and supporting care for a long period of time. The studies we included contained primary empirical data, were written in English and were published in peer-reviewed journals. Data extraction was carried out by two researchers independently.ResultsThirty-two studies out of 11,339 initial hits met the inclusion criteria. In total, 27 determinants were revealed, six at the client level, twelve at the professional level, six between the client and care professional levels and three at the contextual level. The data analysis showed that most determinants were relevant in more than one client group.ConclusionsThis is the first review that looked at determinants of the quality of the care relationship for three large client groups receiving long-term care. It suggests that the current client group-specific focus in research and quality improvement initiatives for care relationships might not be needed. Care organisations can use the findings of this review as guidance on determinants to look for when mapping the quality of a care relationship in order to get a picture of specific points of attention for quality improvement.

Purpose To prepare students to address complex sustainability issues, they need to be trained in inter- and transdisciplinarity. This paper aims to contribute to better understanding how to do this, by providing insight into design elements and strategies deployed in inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability education. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature search was conducted to select inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability programmes. Through deductive and inductive qualitative analysis, design elements and strategies were identified and defined. Findings Eleven inter- and transdisciplinary programmes were identified. A comprehensive overview of their design elements and strategies is provided. Moreover, three patterns emerged: students were often only involved in the execution, but not in the preparation and evaluation stages of projects, and thus not trained in these; many programmes relied on diverse student representation for interdisciplinary learning and did not explicitly train interdisciplinary integration; and the societal value of transdisciplinary collaboration received little attention in the evaluation of outcomes and impacts. Research limitations/implications Follow-up research into the effectiveness of design elements and strategies for inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability education is needed, because the field seems to be understudied. Practical implications The comprehensive overview of design elements and strategies for inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability education holds the promise to inform design of novel programmes with similar ambitions. Moreover, the findings urge additional attention for explicitly training interdisciplinary integration and safeguarding the societal value of transdisciplinarity. Originality/value This review presents new insights into strategies and design elements for inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability education.

Background Although participatory research is known to have advantages, it is unclear how participatory research can best be performed. This study aims to report on lessons learned in collaboration with service users involved as co-researchers in three participatory teams in long-term care. Methods A multiple case study design was chosen to explore the collaboration in three teams, each covering one specific client group receiving long-term care: physically or mentally frail elderly people, people with mental health problems or people with intellectual disabilities. Results A good working environment and a good collaboration were found to be crucial requirements for participatory research. A good working environment was developed by discussing reasons for engagement and wishes, formulating basic rules, organizing training sessions, offering financial appreciation, and the availability of the researcher to give travel support. The actual collaboration was established by developing a bond and equal positioning, deciding on the role division, holding on to transparency and a clear structure, and have sufficient time for the collaboration. Moreover, the motivations and unique contributions of the co-researchers and differences between the teams were reported. The motivations of co-researchers ranged from individual goals – such as personal development, creating a new social identity and belonging to a social group – to more external goals, such as being valuable for other service users and increasing the quality of care. An inclusive collaboration required valuing the individual contributions of co-researchers and adjustment to team differences. Conclusions The results showed the importance of developing a good working environment and establishing a good collaboration for participatory research. Furthermore, the study shows that individual and team differences should be taken into account. These results can be used by researchers for designing and shaping future research projects in long-term care in collaboration with co-researchers.

Background The quality of the care relationship between a client and a professional is important in long-term care, as most clients depend on support for a lengthy period. The three largest client groups who receive long-term care in the Netherlands are older adults who are physically or mentally frail, people with mental health problems and people with intellectual disabilities. There is little clarity about how generic and variable the determinants of the quality of care relationships are across these client groups. The aim of this study is to explore and compare the determinants of the quality of care relationships in these three client groups in long-term care. Methods This participatory study involving clients as co-researchers was held in three healthcare organizations, each providing long-term care to one client group. The research was conducted by three teams consisting of researchers and co-researchers. We interviewed clients individually and professionals in focus groups. The focus was on care relationships with professionals where there is weekly recurring contact for at least 3 months. Clients and professionals were selected using a convenience sample. The interviews were coded in open, axial and selective coding. The outcomes were compared between the client groups. Results The study sample consisted of 30 clients and 29 professionals. Determinants were categorized into four levels: client, professional, between client and professional, and context. The findings show that the majority of the determinants apply to the care relationships within all three client groups. At the professional level, eleven generic determinants were found. Eight determinants emerged at the client level of which two were found in two client groups only. At the level between a client and a professional, six determinants were found of which one applied to mental healthcare and disability care only. Five determinants were found at the contextual level of which two were specific for two client groups. Conclusions The study yielded a variety of determinants that came to the fore in all three client groups in long-term care. This suggests that including a homogenous client group from a single care setting is not necessary when studying the quality of long-term care relationships. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4195-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.