1. Introduction
This paper describes a pilot project between Ghent University and the University of Antwerp, in which we designed and set up a SkillsLab in an extracurricular setting, where students from different disciplines learn from each other with the lecturers as a coach (Reference MuratovskiMuratovski, 2020). A SkillsLab focuses on the development of supporting skills for design students with the intention to make them grow as a person, and in this case as a co-designer. SkillsLab sessions are organized as short and hands-on sessions. The cross-disciplines interaction stimulates the students to learn from peers, with room for failure and a focus on a trial and learn attitude (Reference Van Dyck, Mestdagh, Vaes and JacobyVan Dyck et al., 2022).
The decision to implement this SkillsLab is grounded in the theory of the Four-Component Instructional Design (4C/ID) model (Reference van Merriënboer, Clark and de Croockvan Merriënboer et al., 2002). This model is particularly effective for educating complex skills and has previously been introduced as a blueprint for teaching and learning activities in design education (Reference van Dooren, Boshuizen, van Merriënboer, Asselbergs and van DorstVan Dooren et al., 2014). By involving students in part-task practice, in this case “How to facilitate awkward moments during co-design”, the 4C/ID supports bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-life applications.
2. Empowering co-design
2.1. The need for inclusive design through co-design
Co-design prioritizes active stakeholder participation, ensuring that the design process is guided by the insights and real-world challenges of people who will ultimately be affected by the product or service. This generative method allows designers to tap into the tacit knowledge these stakeholders hold about their own experiences, knowledge that is often difficult to uncover through conventional methods (Reference Nguyen and MougenotNguyen & Mougenot, 2020). For instance, interviews, surveys and ethnographic studies might not be sufficient to uncover the real needs of people (Reference Sanders and StappersSanders & Stappers, 2014). Incorporating non-professional designers, who possess lived experience, into the design team enables professional designers to gain a deeper understanding of diverse realities. More importantly, it empowers non-designers to become equal partners in the design process, facilitating the transformation of tangible ideas into product development outcomes. Examples include navigating physical environments with disabilities or addressing cultural barriers, which may not be fully captured in standard design research.
Through iterative collaboration, co-design should help creating more personalized, adaptable, and inclusive solutions that directly reflect stakeholders’ lived realities. It shifts the focus from designing ‘for’ users to designing ‘with’ people with lived experiences, fostering empathy, a sense of ownership and empowerment among stakeholders, as they contribute to shaping solutions that are directly relevant to their lives (Reference Benz, Scott-Jeffs, McKercher, Welsh, Norman, Hendrie, Locrantro and RobinsonBenz et al., 2024). This collaborative approach leads to more innovative and tailored outcomes, enhancing the overall usability and satisfaction of the final product and/or service (Reference Naranjo-BockNaranjo-Bock, 2012).
However, a lack of preparation for co-design can significantly hinder successful outcomes. For instance, during last year’s co-design projects in a 3rd-year bachelor course at Ghent University, some students struggled to react adequately to a story shared by a person with lived experience, creating an awkward situation. The challenges of last years’ experience highlighted the need for better preparatory training in the following key collaborative skills:
active listening, empathy, communication skills, cultural competence, and conflict resolution (Reference SchlottSchlott, 2024; Reference Peters, Guccione, Francis, Best, Tavender, Curran, Davies, Rowe, Palmer and KlaicPeters et al., 2024; Reference Slattery, Saeri and BraggeSlattery et al., 2020; Reference UdoewaUdoewa, 2022).
Awareness is foundational in evolving as a more inclusive designer, which is one of the objectives of co-design. Developing awareness requires both self-awareness—recognizing one’s own biases and assumptions—and situational awareness—understanding the diverse needs and contexts of stakeholders. This awareness fosters empathic design, enabling designers to authentically understand and address the challenges stakeholders face (Reference Rossi and BrischettoRossi & Brischetto, 2024). It also promotes reflexivity, where designers continuously reflect on how their decisions impact different stakeholder groups, ensuring the design process remains adaptive and inclusive (Reference Zallio, Chivăran and ClarksonZallio et al., 2024). By cultivating this heightened awareness, designers move beyond generic inclusivity, crafting solutions that truly resonate with and serve a wide range of stakeholders, ultimately contributing to more equitable design outcomes (Reference Peters, Guccione, Francis, Best, Tavender, Curran, Davies, Rowe, Palmer and KlaicPeters et al., 2024).
2.2. Training students in co-design awareness
There is a clear need to prepare students to be more aware before, during, and after co-design sessions. However, the practical implementation of this remains an open question. Recent years have seen a scarcity of publications on learning activities in product design education and industrial design engineering education that focus on teaching and/or learning co-design. Notably, the combined terms of “awareness” AND “co-design” have yielded little relevant research. A recent systematic literature review, which included 17 papers (Reference Örnekoğlu-Selçuk, Emmanouil, Hasirci, Grizioti and Van LangenhoveÖrnekoğlu-Selçuk et al., 2024a), highlighted that co-design education is rarely documented. One of the main findings from this study is the need for more learning activities on co-design and participatory design within these educational fields. Game-based approaches, along with a combination of theory and practice, are proposed as potentially effective methods for creating these learning activities. By confronting students with real-life settings during hands-on co-design projects, they argue that students will develop the skills to manage the uncertainties of co-design. Yet, they still emphasize the need for more unconventional ways for the students to get acquainted with co-design and their role in it.
Other researchers have explored various aspects of co-design and participatory design. Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are suggested as beneficial for teaching these themes in an international or collaborative context (Reference Cavignaux-Bros and CristolCavignaux-Bros & Cristol, 2020; Reference Com, Lai and ChenCom et al., 2021). Collaborative learning design workshops and democratizing design education are also important (Reference FeastFeast, 2020; Reference Perna and NunziantePerna & Nunziante (2021). Game-based learning in heritage museums (Reference LuLu, 2024) and science learning contexts (Reference Durall, Bauters, Hietala, Leinonen and KaprosDurall et al., 2020) have been investigated.
Drawing from these diverse studies, it becomes evident that a two-fold strategy combining theory with practice is essential. These studies collectively advocate for student empowerment through collaboration, highlighting the importance of experiential learning, critical reflection, and transformative pedagogies in design education. By fostering these elements, educators can equip students with the skills and mindset necessary to address contemporary challenges in design (Reference Turhan and DoğanTurhan & Doğan, 2017; Reference Christiansson, Grönvall and YndigegnChristiansson et al., 2018; Reference Lee, Ahn, Kim and KhoLee et al., 2018; Reference Örnekoğlu-Selçuk, Emmanouil, Detand, Bohemia, Nielsen, Pan, Börekçi and ZhangÖrnekoğlu-Selçuk et al., 2021; Reference Örnekoğlu-Selçuk, Brosens, Parmentier, Hasırcı, Emmanouil, Jones, Borekci, Clemente, Corazzo, Lotz, Nielsen and NoelÖrnekoğlu-Selçuk et al., 2023; Reference Örnekoğlu-Selçuk, Emmanouil, Hasirci, Grizioti and Van LangenhoveÖrnekoğlu-Selçuk et al., 2024b).
In conclusion, raising awareness in co-design in design education is essential. Integrating real-life scenarios, theoretical knowledge, and reflective practice, appears to significantly contribute to this goal. However, our review in section 1 reveals a gap in existing educational practices. Therefore, this study focuses on creating a SkillsLab that integrates these elements, allowing students to experience and learn about awareness in co-design within a realistic, yet safe environment.
We hypothesize that SkillsLab participants will be better equipped to manage challenging co-design processes. This research underscores the importance of preparing students for real-world collaborative challenges and demonstrates effective training methods. Our findings offer valuable insights into the benefits of skills-labs in design programs, supporting best practices in design education and promoting global dialogue on collaboration, teamwork, and inclusion.
3. SkillsLab design
The SkillsLab “How to Facilitate Awkward Moments during Co-Design” was designed to equip participants with the skills needed to handle uncomfortable situations that may arise during co-design processes. To set the tone, we started with an icebreaker (figure 1, a) where students voiced assumptions about the new facilitator, who then addressed these. This activity revealed initial biases and prepared the group for deeper discussions. To enhance retention and impact, the relevance of the SkillsLab (figure 1, b) was highlighted through scenarios such as emotional conversations with cancer survivors or patients sharing life stories. Next, participants discussed their own awkward moments (figure 1, c), which helped them relate to the SkillsLab content.
Figure 1. Sequence of the learning activities in the SkillsLab
The SkillsLab continued by exploring awkward moments in co-design (figure 1, d), arising from interpersonal dynamics, communication barriers, and sensitive insights. Common types include cultural misunderstandings, emotional reactions, reluctance to engage, and conflicts. These moments often involve unexpectedness, social discomfort, self-awareness, unclear social cues, and potential for humour. Understanding these types and characteristics helped participants to brainstorm in groups (figure 1, e) on what strategies they could use to manage awkward moments effectively during co-design sessions, followed by a short lecture on general strategies and more specific strategies to manage awkward moments effectively (figure 1, f). Strategies included establishing ground rules, using ice breakers, ensuring clear communication, practicing empathetic listening, pausing for reflection, offering multiple ways to contribute, maintaining contextual sensitivity, and engaging in post-reflection. Specific strategies involved cultural sensitivity training, setting boundaries with support resources, and mediating neutrally to refocus on shared goals.
The most significant part of our SkillsLab was the role-play exercises (figure 1, g). We used “The Co-design Facilitator’s Game” toolkit by Reference Örnekoğlu-Selçuk, Emmanouil, Hasirci, Grizioti and Van LangenhoveÖrnekoğlu-Selçuk et al. (2024b) as inspiration, particularly the ‘Let’s Say’ game, which prepares designers for hypothetical co-design challenges. We adapted two role-play exercises from these challenges and scenarios from the previous academic year. Each group received a scenario with personal instruction cards detailing their roles. One participant acted as the facilitator, while others created awkward moments. After rotating through scenarios, we transitioned to a plenary setup where one group performed a role-play while others observed. Participants rotated roles, resulting in interesting and humorous moments. This was concluded with an extensive debriefing session to generate insights, foster a sense of agency, and ensure retention of these insights. We concluded the SkillsLab with a reflection session (figure 1, h) where participants shared their “aha” moments, consolidating their learning and highlighting key takeaways.
4. Method for data collection and analysis
Participants included first-year Master’s students in Textile Engineering and Design (n = 31), third-year Bachelor’s students in Industrial Design Engineering (n = 26) from Ghent University, and students from Bachelor’s and Master’s programs in Product Design (n = 2) from the University of Antwerp. Written consent was obtained, ensuring non-participation would not affect grades. Data from n = 6 participants were excluded due to incomplete submissions.
To evaluate the impact of the SkillsLab, we employed a pre- and post-test study design, asking students to self-assess their perceived skill levels in managing awkward moments and navigating cultural differences. Recognizing the limitations of self-assessment due to potential biases, we adopted a mixed-methods approach, supplementing quantitative data with qualitative insights. This triangulation not only indicated whether students felt better equipped but also elucidated the underlying reasons for these perceptions, providing deeper insights into their thought processes. To test our hypothesis, we analyzed our data in two steps. First, we conducted paired t-tests on the quantitative data, chosen for their effectiveness in comparing means within the same group over two time points. Second, we examined significant quantitative results and iteratively coded the qualitative data to identify recurring themes (inductive coding), thereby enriching our understanding of the quantitative findings.
5. Results
We analyzed our results using a two-step procedure and will present the findings in the same sequence, specifically general results from the quantitative analysis and more specific insights obtained from the qualitative data.
5.1. General overview of quantitative results
In this section, we highlight some broad trends and regularities in the data. We conducted a paired t-test on students’ self-scored indications of their confidence in managing uncomfortable or awkward moments during co-design, using a scale from 1 to 5 (with 1 being very uncomfortable and 5 being very comfortable). The results yielded a t-statistic of -10.22 and a p-value of 4.84 E-14. This indicates a significant difference between the self-scores before and after the skills lab workshop. The SkillsLab workshop appears to have had a positive impact on students’ confidence in managing uncomfortable or awkward moments during co-design. Additionally, the 95% confidence interval for the mean difference is (1.24, 1.85), meaning we are 95% confident that the true mean difference in self-scores lies between 1.24 and 1.85. An overview of how the data points shifted is presented in Figure 2 (red).
Next, we conducted a second paired t-test on students’ self-scored indications of their confidence in navigating cultural differences or sensitive topics in co-design, again using a scale from 1 to 5. The results yielded a t-statistic of -2.576 and a p-value of 0.0129. This suggests that the workshop positively impacted students’ confidence in navigating cultural differences or sensitive topics. An overview of how the data points shifted is presented in figure 2 (blue). The 95% confidence interval for the mean difference in self-scores before and after the SkillsLab ranges from 0.05 to 0.40.
Overall, the differences in self-scores for managing awkward moments are larger than those for managing cultural differences. This is evident in our data: the mean differences for managing awkward moments indicate that students rated themselves, on average, between 1.24 and 1.85 points higher with 95% confidence. In contrast, for managing cultural differences, students rated themselves between 0.05 and 0.40 points higher with 95% confidence. While this still represents a statistically significant difference, it is relatively smaller. Figures 2 visually illustrate these differences, it is visible that the blue dots are less connected, indicating that both the pre- and post-data points often fall on the same spot.
Figure 2. Differences in self-scores on confidence in managing awkward moments & confidence in navigating cultural differences before and after the SkillsLab
5.2. Specific qualitative results
Regarding their self-scored confidence in managing awkward moments during co-design, we asked students to identify the most challenging moments for them. They could provide open-ended responses, allowing for as much detail as they wished. We categorized their answers based on whether they referred to challenging moments before, during, or after the co-design session. Only one student mentioned a challenging moment before the session: “I’m more of an introverted person, so it can be a little challenging for me to always be social and talk a lot. Knowing that I will have to take a role in a session gives me some stress.” All other statements (n = 52) were about moments during the session, with none mentioning any challenging moment after the session. In total, n = 12 students explicitly mentioned experiencing stress as a challenging moment during the session. This included stress from interacting with new people (n = 8), participants reacting emotionally (n = 2), and the need to document everything during co-design (n = 2). For example, one student stated: “The first time, meeting the person with lived experience can be a bit awkward before the session starts, this gives me some stress.” Additionally, n = 40 students explicitly stated that facilitation was a challenging moment for them. Specifically, they mentioned ensuring everyone participates (n = 10), communication issues (n = 8), authority and influence differences (n = 5), timing during the session (n = 4), silence (n = 4), language barriers (n = 3), conflicts (n = 3), and a lack of understanding (n = 3) as challenges. An example of a quote coded under “ensuring everyone participates” highlights some of the challenges that, despite good intentions to foster a productive co-design environment, reveal underlying prejudgments. One student remarked, “Making lazy people active seems challenging to me.” Another quote, coded under “conflicts”, illustrates the difficulty of making team decisions: “Making a team decision when there are multiple options and the choice we’re taking isn’t good enough creates challenges, especially when I think my ideas are better.”
When asked about if the students had gained new awkward moments from the SkillsLab, n = 26 students responded negatively, and n = 27 students stated that they did gain some awkward moments. The students that stated they did experience awkward moments responded with quotes like the following: “Not personally but maybe someone in my group?” and “Nothing I can think of that was awkward enough that happened during the session that I still remember it.” The others that responded positively articulated their thoughts as: “I have experienced people being deeply uncomfortable to speak in public and that giving me second hand awkwardness” or “Silent moments when brainstorming during the role-play happened, sometimes we sit quiet without talking, which is an awkward moment.”
When asked about their experiences with the SkillsLab, n = 33 students provided feedback. Of these, n = 20 responses were highly reflective, with students explicitly stating what they had learned and providing examples from the lab. For instance, one student noted, “I thought it was a good lesson. I learned a lot about awkward situations, including my own experiences and how others perceive them. By learning this, I discovered new ways to cope with awkward situations and learned strategies from other group members.” Another student mentioned, “At first, role-playing felt strange, but it boosted my confidence once I got into it.” A third student shared, “This lab exposed me to unexpected situations during design sessions, giving me an early opportunity to adapt.” Additionally, a student reflected, “It was helpful to understand common mistakes we make in group work, and it felt like seeing myself from the outside.” N = 13 students provided positive but less detailed feedback, with comments such as “It was fun,” “Nice to participate,” and “It’s educational and interactive.” However, n = 19 students did not specify any general learning outcomes from the SkillsLab. Lastly, one (n = 1) student offered a critical perspective, describing the SkillsLab as “strange, confusing, and moderately funny,” particularly criticizing the role-playing aspect.
6. Discussion
Our results indicate that the SkillsLab significantly boosted students’ self-reported confidence in managing awkward moments during co-design sessions. Although it also improved their confidence in handling cultural differences, this impact was less pronounced, aligning with our initial focus, as cultural differences were not the primary emphasis of the SkillsLab. These findings are supported by both qualitative data from student quotes and quantitative self-assessment scores. Interestingly, students mainly reported challenging awkward moments during the co-design sessions, with only one mentioning a moment before and none after. This suggests that the most intense difficulties are perceived during the sessions. However, students may not fully recognize the impact of awkward moments before and after the sessions, possibly due to the significant time spent on role-playing during the SkillsLab. Many students found the role-playing exercises memorable, both positively and negatively.
Despite these promising initial results, some issues emerged. Notably, 23% of students (n = 12 out of 53) reported experiencing stress during co-design sessions, highlighting the need for better preparation and support. Additionally, the perception of co-design partners as “lazy” indicates a need for further training in interacting with individuals with lived experiences.
We developed the SkillsLab by leveraging our combined expertise and offered it at two locations: the University of Antwerp and Ghent University. At UGhent, the SkillsLab was integrated into a mandatory design sprint week, ensuring full participation. At UAntwerp, the optional SkillsLab attracted only two participants. Feedback suggested that clearer descriptions of “awkward moments” in promotional materials could boost participation. One student remarked, “Describing some awkward moments in the promotional materials could help students relate to those examples, making them more likely to attend the SkillsLab.” Currently, the term ‘awkward moment’ is quite vague, whereas the presentation included many examples that I hadn’t initially thought of but have definitely experienced as a designer.” Linking this feedback to our introduction, which highlighted the scarce documentation and underemphasis of co-design skills in design education literature, we might conclude that researchers and educators in our curricula need to communicate more effectively about the value of these skills as well.
The limited number of participants at UAntwerp restricted our ability to fully explore the potential of implementing a single SkillsLab across various contexts. However, collaboration among researchers from different backgrounds provided valuable new perspectives, enriching the study. Another limitation was the reliance on self-reported data, which lacks the objectivity of measured data. Assessing students’ development in co-design skills is crucial, as emphasized by Biggs’ (1996) constructive alignment framework, which highlights the importance of aligning learning objectives, teaching activities, and assessment methods. While our SkillsLab construction is a valuable step towards enhancing teaching and learning activities, the assessment component remains underdeveloped and requires thorough design.
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, this research contributes to the ongoing dialogue about best practices in design education, emphasizing the importance of inclusive design in creating equitable and effective solutions. Incorporating SkillsLabs into design education curricula offers significant long-term benefits. This approach not only prepares students for real-world collaborative challenges but also serves as a model for other institutions aiming to enhance their inclusive design practices. Future research should focus on further developing the SkillsLab by addressing the three pillars of learning objectives, teaching and learning activities, and assessment methods. This could involve expanding the learning objectives to include appropriate language use (e.g., referring to participants as disengaged rather than lazy), enhancing the teaching and learning activities, and designing robust assessment tools to validate students’ actual skill levels. By refining these components, we can better understand and improve the effectiveness of the SkillsLab in various educational contexts.
Open access
