The University Campus as a Learning Environment: the role of a Campus-based Living Lab in a Blended Teaching and Learning Environment

“Living Labs” provide stakeholders with an authentic and spontaneous environment in which innovations and technologies can be developed. This paper highlights the use of Living Labs as an educational teaching and learning 10 environment. We give examples of practice currently used and present a conceptual framework for pedagogic design of activities and assessment in a Living Lab environment. The examples provided are based around current HE un der/postgraduate taught assessment and activities. We suggest that Living Labs, particularly campus based Living Labs, are an excellent opportunity for education providers to provide experiences for students that are realistic, promote empowerment of students, and are spontaneous, promoting student inclusivity and sustainability. Living Labs can introduce opportunities for 15 interand transdisciplinarity and cross-cultural working and can provide an excellent base for education for sustainability.


Introduction
Livin g Labs are a reasonably recent concept arguably first co ined in the 2000s (Markopoulos and Rauterberg, 2000)  Some examples of the educational value of Living Labs have been explored (Callaghan and Marlien, 2015;Mazutti et al., 2020). 25 This paper aims to init ially outline a number of teaching and learning activities that take place at Keele University outside of the traditional classroom, lecture theatre or laboratory and explain the educational framework around such activities. The activities have been used to provide authentic learning experiences to HE students, within the setting of a campus -based Livin g Lab. We then highlight how running such authentic assignments and assessments on campus can provide an important element of a hybrid/blended learning environment and provide teachers and learners with an array of experiences and opportunities. These experiences can form important opportunities for students to widen their knowledge, experience and improve on skills wh ich may have been covered digitally or in the classroom. We finally also introduce the concept of the Campus as a Classroom, making use of a campus-based Living Lab as a space for active learning in a curriculum delivered via a range of modalities. Sustainable reflections on our field course travel (and associated CO2 emissions) have 35 factored into the justification using campus-based activities more, as aligned with the University's sustainability ethos.
As practitioners, the authors and colleagues have been making use of Keele campus-based activities for some years, however the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the development and design of these activities and placed a renewed emphasis on the use and benefits of campus as a Living Lab, and of the organisation of such activities. During the COVID-19 pandemic 40 education providers globally have had to redesign and redevelop teaching provision. Wh ilst some changes have been suboptimal alternatives to previous delivery, many innovations have provided platforms for efficient and effec tive learning environments. Another effect of the pandemic was educators having to reflect on what is/was availableone resource wh ich was potentially underused and/or undervalued in many cases was the University campusthe reasons for this are not exa ctly clear, but anecdotally can be linked to the effort needed to organise activities, the perceptions of using campus rather than 45 travelling bein g seen an inferior choice, and/or educators being unaware of the possibilities of using campus space as an educational environment.
We hope the case studies presented here may provide inspiration for others interested in providing authentic, realistic, spontaneous, immersive and empowering learning environments for their students. We also provide some thoughts on 50 framing campus-based activities within a blended teaching environment, supporting and scaffolding authentic teaching and learning activities with asynchronous digital materials. The campus Living Lab can provide an accessible location for experiential lea rning and its use is potentially a much more sustainable alternative to many other field -based teaching. It is hoped that the reporting of the activities outlined here, and their framing within pedagogic theory might encourage others to experiment further with their closer surroundings and use Living Labs as an educational asset. The environmental and 55 economic (potential lower CO2 footprint, and monetary cost, than other fieldwo rk activities) benefits of using campus-based Livin g Labs for educational activities may also be attractive for some and could play an important role in rationalising some programmes in terms of their economic efficiency and minimalising environmental footprint s.
The case study presented here is from Keele University, a campus-based institution situated within the Midlands of the UK. 60 We outline several HE teaching, learning and assessment activities from a range of disciplines, which use the Universit ies' 2.5 square kilometre rural campus as a multifaceted Living Laboratory (Fig. 1). Many of the activities students currently undertake are part of research and/or industry projects or are natural parts of the campus deliberately utilised as a learnin g tool. Keele University campus is host to academic, residential and commercial holdings; it has forests, fields, lakes, roads https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License. and sports facilit ies. In short, it is a perfect analog for a small town. The nature of the campus therefore provides 65 opportunities for a wide variety of educational experiences. Wider research activities are also inc luded here in our description of Livin g Labs for education, and indeed, they are one of the most accessible learning environments on campus.
These educational-based activities rely upon elements from the campus Livin g Lab which would often be in existence if they were part of a learning environment or not; this includes subject -specific research, industrial partnerships and research, plus parts of the campus estate or buildings with particular purposes. 70

Living Labs Background
The Liv ing Lab is a research area and phenomenon which has developed over the last few decades, first appearing in the early 2000s (Markopoulos and Rauterberg, 2000). It is a concept that has introduced new ways of managing and approaching innovations. A Living Lab allows innovations to be experienced and studied in an environment where people, the environment, services, ideas and actions are manifesting in a natural and organic manner. Activities occur in real time, with 75 experiments and studies exposed to a multitude of variables that would be impossible to simulate in a traditional laboratory setting. Multip le stakeholders are involved, and the dynamics of the research environment allows for research to be influenced by users in order to create new ways of work ing and/or deploying t he technologies, concepts or ideas they are testing.  summarise the Livin g Lab as "...an environment in which people and technology are gathered and in which the everyday context and user needs stimulate and challenge both re search and development, since 80 authorities and citizens take active part in the innovation process." A Livin g Lab is essentially a partnership built between stakeholders, often public -private relationships , where companies, organisations, authorities, public-groups and the general public can work together to create an environment in which new concepts, services, technologies or policy can be tested and developed. A precondition of a 85 Livin g Lab is that it is situated in a real-world context . From this shared real-world, details of the innovation under scrutiny can be assessed, but, unlike a "sterile" or controlled lab environment, the results often transcend "discipline" boundaries and can be spontaneous and unexpected. Innovations can be tested for business case validity at the same time as function efficiency (of a technology for example) or social impact that the innovation may have.
This system means that the general public, and real-word infrastructure, play an active role in developing the innovative 90 process. Livin g Labs have been viewed as different things by different authors; this is unsurprising when each Living Lab is likely to be constructed from different perspectives with differen t stakeholders, innovations and intentions. This makes a Livin g Lab a hard to define concept, although there is an emergin g consensus as discussed by Hossain et al. (2019 ). Living Labs have been categorised or used as a type of environment (Ballon el al., 2005;Schaffers et al., 2007), a type of methodology (Eriksson et al., 2006) and as a system for enabling research ). Liedtke 95 et al., (2012) propose several research areas for the development of sustainable technology innovations within a Livin g Lab. Several studies have looked at harmonising and collecting the various methods and approaches (Mulder et al., 2007) or at producing concept designs for Living Lab implementation . CoreLab (2007)  Because of the holistic nature of Living Labs, sustainability issues and "Grand Challenges" have increasingly become the focus of University based Living Labs (König and Evans, 2013;Robinson et al., 2013;Trencher et al., 2013 andEvans et al., 2015). These sustainability approaches are designed to make use of the cross-disciplinary nature of institutes and often work with university estates, procurement or external consultants to provide projects within the Livin g Lab setting (Evans et 110 al., 2015). The focus of this paper is more on the specific design of assessments and activities with in the Liv ing Lab learning environment as part of student modules from a variety of subject areas. Whilst not an explicit requirement, many of the issues tackled will fit within a broad sustainability umbrella as manifest through the United Nations' Agenda 2030 (United Nations, 2015) and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) covering the social, economic and environmental pillars of society. 115

Living Labs as a Learning Environment
The Liv ing Lab environment has a proven track record of producing valuable user-centric and technological/product information (see the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL, 2020) for some examples) and this research approach continues to attract large amounts of funding and interest from well known companies (e.g. Siemens Ltd. at Keele, the Smart Energy Network Demonstrator (SEND), the ground-breaking HyDepoly Project (the first ever demonstration of hydrogen as 120 a fuel source in homes), and the Engie renewables development (Isaac, 2019 andFogwill et al., 2020). The user-centric, collaborative, authentic aspects of Living Labs share many similarit ies with the pedagogic concepts of active learning (Prince, 2004;Settles, 2011;Freeman et al., 2014) and authentic assessment (Wiggins, 1990;Hart, 1994;Darlin g-Hammond and Snyder, 2000;Guliker et al., 2014). Authentic assessment is a widely contested term, first coined in the 1980s (Wiggins, 1990). It can encompass a wide range of different activities that require students to demonstrate higher-order thinkin g and 125 complex problem-solving sk ills through context-specific tasks (Koh, 2017). It encompasses a range of applied and vocational activities and aims to engage learners in different ways. Althou gh authentic assessment is not a new term, it has received renewed attention in recent years because of the increasingly d iverse nature of our student body (OfS, 2020). Our students now transition to Un iversity with very different prior learning experience s, and different learning styles and https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License.
preferences. However, the ways in wh ich we assess students has not kept pace with the increasing d iversity of our student 130 body (Darling-Hammond and Snyder, 2000).
The benefits of students undertaking authentic assessment, such as that provided by an extensive campus environment, and interacting with real world examples and data, is well documented and closely linked to enhanced student engagement and employability (Bosco andFerns, 2014 andSenior et al., 2014). Cumming and Maxwell (1999) suggest four key elements to 135 authentic assessment: • performance and performance assessment; • situated learning and situated assessment; • complexity of expertise and problem -based assessment and; 140 • competence and competence-based assessments.
The Living Lab provides an environment where these elements can all be met whilst the social-, economic-, product-or concept-based focus of the experiment/test isn't compromised by the participation or actions of the students. Indeed, the students can provide an additional stakeholder group or co-operate with a present stakeholder group (by collecting data for 145 example). An additional benefit which can be part of Living Lab based education is how activities can expose students to thinking, p rocesses and skills that they may not 'normally' be exposed to within a discipline 'traditional' curricu lum. The Livin g Lab not only allows interdisciplinary work ing (such as geoscience, ecology and social science tangibly integrated) but lends itself moreover to effectively transdisciplinary work ing, in that knowledge and understanding are produced in contexts of application (for a discussion of the various understandings of disciplinary prefixes such as multi-, inter-and 150 trans-see Osborne, 2015). The five p rinciples relating to the Living Lab methodologies (as highlighted above) and how they relate and contribute to the student experience and the learning environment are summarised in Table 1.

Living Lab Principle
Contribution to the student experience and the learning environment

Continuity
This princip le means that Living Labs are an ongoing process, a feedback loop, where innovations are experimented and evaluated in an often cyclical system superimposed on a linear time frame. The HE system of intended learning outcomes for students over subsequent years, with assessments and content which, whilst flexible, allows for assignment and assessment in a Livin g Lab to be planed over long periods of time. These assignments and assessments can be built into studies of long-term change. For students the ability to work on similar topics and problems across the levels of their learning nurtures deeper

Realism
This p rinciple makes being situated in a Livin g Lab an authentic experience, assessments and projects can reflect real-life tasks. Data gathered can inform research projects, including, but not limited to, the Liv ing Labs "original" experimental aims. Assessment can be co-designed with stakeholders and presented to external audiences. This allows learning and assessment to be competence based and authentic.

Empowerment of users
By undertaking authentic experiences, learners are empowered knowing that they have a realistic experience of an environment. Once they have undertaken the task or assignment, they will have tangible knowledge to apply to their subject of study. This may manifest itself through the use of equipment, software, techniques or data types which the student has experience with, rather than simply learning about a topic. It may also manifest itself through the 'products' of assessment which are celebrated, showcased and have a legacy.

Spontaneity
Things change, they go wrong, resu lts end up completely different to how we envisaged them to, it rains, equipment breaks, such is life. Spontaneous factors add to the complexity of tasks that students may be asked to u ndertake. They add elements of realism and situational and experiential learning. The spontaneity of a Living Lab can result in activities, data, skills, ideas and theories, and applications which transcend traditional discipline boundaries. Tackling complex authentic problems requires a specific approach to teaching, learning and assessment. Practical problemsolving skills, which include collaboration, team -based, active and experiential learning, are key to encouraging the deeper learning required in order to develop the skills and competencies necessary to solve the problem (Espey, 2018;Kek and Huijser, 2011). A deep learning approach fosters the ability for students to build on previous knowledge, to draw on 160 experience, to bring together disparate information and organise it into a coherent whole, to identify relationships, to form hypothesis and ultimately enhance conceptual understanding (Biggs, 1987;Ramsden, 1992). Align ing the assessment and teaching method through the construction of related learning objectives (Biggs, 1996) allo ws for the critical th inking skills to be embedded throughout the teaching. Studies by Brodie (2009) and Yuan et. al., (2008) conclude that a higher level of critical thinking skills are found in students who have experienced a problem -based learning environment. 165 Identified as a teaching method which provides a good example of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1999), problem -based learning (PBL) is a socially constructed pedagogy whereby all students are involved in the co-construction of knowledge based around self-directed learning, groupwork and the exploration of problems (Kek and Huijser, 2011). Originating in the 1960's from McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, it was first used to teach students within the medical profession and 170 its many constructs are well described by Barrows, (1986). At Keele University, a hybrid -PBL model was developed to ensure that delivery would be feasible with regard to both time and staff constraints (Bessant et. al., 2013). The hybrid-PBL form follows a blended learning approach containing a mixture of PBL face -to-face groupwork, online screencasts, traditional lectures and visit ing professional case study speakers. This allows critical thinkin g sk ills and discipline -specific knowledge to be developed simultaneously (Espey, 2018;Kek and Huijser, 2011). Within this mode of teaching, the lecturer 175 assumes the role of facilitator, guiding but not prescribing the learning.
Examples of Campus as a Classroom activities conducted at Keele University which are building on existing components or activities are given below; these activities were chosen to highlight the breadth of opportunity for Liv ing Labs for educatio n.
Having students learning, and staff teaching in these environment s adds an additional stakeholder group to the Living Lab.
The benefits of this group include: insightful feedback to processes and products; a level of expectation for procedures and experiences to be authentic; fresh perspectives and outlooks on projects each year; and, the potential for certain stakeholders to influence, educate or expose potential future consumers or employees. The campus also acts as a test bed for new methodologies to be approved or for academic research to be conducted -these activities benefit from having students and staff as a stakeholder group in the same way that any partner company might do. Each of the given case studies outlines the 185 activity undertaken, some of the logistics involved or processes used, and how the activity sit s within a Living Lab e.g., how activities add to user-centric, industrial, research and other activities.

Campus as a Classroom Case Study 1: Environmental Baseline Survey
An Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) Module was created in 2006 and aimed t o increase the employability, field and research skills of FHEQ Level 5 (UK Government, 2020) Physical Geography students at Keele Un iversity. The module was 190 developed in collaboration with MJCA Environmental Consultancy to ensure that students completing the module gained key skills required for graduate jobs in the environmental and geoscience sector (Robinson and Digges la Touche, 2007).
The module uses the Keele University Campus as a Livin g Lab to undertake student -led, experiential, active learning and to provide students with an authentic experience of collect ing, analysing and presenting data. The module also aims to teach students about a range of techniques relevant to research and data collection in their degree pro gramme, to be more critical of 195 authentic research scenarios and build upon existing skills developed during FHEQ Level 4.
Working in groups, the students are set the brief that that they are acting as Environmental Consultants and must undertake an Environmental Baseline Survey on the so ils, habitats and hydrology surrounding the Keele lakes (Figs. 1 and 2) on Keele campus. Every week for 8 weeks the students spend 3 hours collect ing and analysing specific data to write up as an industry 200 standard EBS. Each class begins with a short briefin g session, outlinin g the aims and objectives of the practical and some background information (e.g., risk assessments, maps and methodologies). Following this, students go out into the Living Lab to watch a demonstration of the techniques and equipment to be used by staff. The staff also spend some time asking questions to the students to get them to think critically about how best to sample (limitations and number of samples to be representative). By revisit ing and building on exist ing knowledge in the introductory sessions, promoting discussion and 205 reflection in the field and having the emphasis on active learning, the sessions foster deep, reflect ive learning in an authe ntic environment (Bloom 1956, Russell et al. 1984Ryan and Deci 2000;Light and Cox 2001).
The students gain experience of a range of techniques includin g water chemistry sampling and analysis (major ions, pH, EC, temperature) of the lakes and inflows, groundwater measurements (using a network of piezometers installed around the 210 lakes), discharge readings using dilution gauging, soil sediment analysis (description and logging, loss-on-ign ition and water content, grain size analysis), and surveying techniques to produce geomorphological maps. The students also make use of the Keele Meteorological station (used by the Met Office, UK), wh ich collects data every hour, to make interpretations of the https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License.
water chemistry, discharge, groundwater and soil data. Students can also compare their resu lts to data collated over the last 4 years by past students to analyse whether trends are comparable. Using the extensive woodland and grassland environment, 215 skills in habitat survey methods are also included. This follows the JNCC (2010) Phase 1 Habitat classification system, currently a key component of Environmental Impact Assessments within the planning system in the UK (Joint Nature Conservancy Council, 2010). The Livin g Lab provides an opportunity to collect ecological data within the framework of an environmental baseline assessment, thereby providing an authentic understanding of the role that ecological data can play in protecting biodiverse sites within the planning system. 220 The EBS is assessed through a group-led, industry standard Environmental Baseline Report which must collate, present and analyse all groups' data to produce a professional report, as a graduate would be required if work ing specifically as an environmental consultant or geoscientist but more broadly in any analytical career. The module therefore caters not only to students who wish to go into the environmental/geoscience sector but has many transferable and desirable skills that 225 graduates can take forward into their careers and FHEQ level 6 studies. The module is supported by self-guided, asynchronous online resources (see The role of digital/virtual platforms in Campus as a Classroom/Living Labs below) related to the techniques covered each week. These resources are intended to be completed independently and include short videos, core texts and examples of academic research using the techniques 230 covered in the practical. Additionally, there are self -directed worksheets encouraging students to learn and focus on key definitions and concepts. These resources are designed to promote knowledge but to develop critical and reflective t hinking.

Campus as a Classroom Case Study 2: Simulated Crime Scene Investigations
Created on campus in 2008, as part of a funded Teaching Innovation Project, in collaboration between academics and the Keele Un iversity Estates team, a simulated multiple buried v ictim crime scene was created within a secure area, with ethical 235 approval given by the University and by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK (DEFRA).
For geophysics-based FHEQ Level 5 or Level 6 (UK Government, 2020) u ndergraduate modules, the outdoor practicals involve a student group-led, problem-based scenario, involving them being a ground forensic search team, tasked with nonintrusively investigating a specified search area to locate (and characterise if possib le) buried murder victim(s) (Fig. 3), for 240 then hypothetical intrusive investigation teams to confirm the presence/absence of victims at locations specified by the students. This style of problem -based, active, outdoor practical learning has been proved to rea lly accelerate learning and understanding and greatly enhance students' employability skills (see Murphy and Prin gle, 2007;. The forensic search angle has also proven useful to enthuse and keep students engaged on the task in hand. Students are provided the opportunity to design a robust forensic search strategy by choosing their own search methods/equipment to use what they have learnt theoretically in class. Each group are then collect the multi-d iscip linary site data in a time-limited period on the campus site, before subsequently processing and integrating datasets back in the lab, to produce a technical group report with recommendations on which area(s) to intrusively investigate, as would be the case when doing this for real. Supervisors have direct experience of this and are on hand to discuss and solve any problems as 250 they come up, but it is emphasised that this is a student exercise and so they are free to make (and hopefully correct) their own mistakes. Many of these graduates go on to related commercial careers usin g the sk ills learnt here, especially within the geotechnical site investigation industry.
Module intended learning outcomes include: (1 ) to work effectively as part of a student-led team to solve a geoscientific 255 problem within a limited time frame, use critical thinking, multi-disciplinary data analysis and interpretation and, (2) to use technical writing, numeracy and computing sk ills in the context of forensic geoscience investigations. Student marks for this forma tive assessment usually average above their other module components, with end -module evaluation quotes which are almost universally positive, includin g "Practicals allowed independent thought & organisation " and "Practical session interesting & fun to carry out". 260 The site has also been used for over 10 years as a collaborative research environment between students and staff. This has been both as formative assessment, as part of their under-or post-graduate courses, as research projects, or indeed as non- Finally, it has also been used for ma ny years as part of our school's very successful outreach and engagement strategy, from having local schools v isit to conduct a simulated forensic investigation, to having Nuffield Foundation Placement School and FE college students since 2010 using it as their 4-week summer placement collaborative research project.

275
Durin g the recent COVID lockdown, outdoor laboratory practicals could still be run in certain situations, and thus sociallydistanced students still attended, used gloves on equipment and facemasks when collecting data, with subsequent data processing occurring remotely but collaboratively through Microsoft Teams. When practicals could not be physically run at all for students, a virtual practical of this case study was generated within the Thin glink online p latform, with short, d igitally-https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License. recorded videos illustrating how each dataset was collected by different equipment, before the datasets were provided and 280 again virtually processed remotely.

Campus as a Classroom Case Study 3: Greening Business: Employability and Sustainability
Since 2008, Keele Un iversity has run the 'Greening Business: employability and sustainability' as a flipped -classroom module for Level 4 students from any degree pathway at the University (Robinson, 2009). With a strong emphasis on fostering the skills required to drive forward positive environmental change within their future workplace, the module has a 285 core transformative agenda which allows students to consider their own perspectives, attitudes and values in the context of their relationship with the business world . As the sustainability agenda continues to gather pace internationally, especially with regards to climate change and net zero carbon targets, the role that businesses and large organisations play in helping to achieve the global Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2015) becomes ever more important to address.
Equipping p rofessionals of the future with the skills and understanding to engage successfully with complex, multi-290 discip linary, real-world sustainability problems is a key aim of this module and this provides a genuine and fundamental link to the Living Lab learning environment at Keele University.
All organisations and businesses are required to address their environmental and sustainability impacts, thereby making the learning relevant to all students whether they are environmentally -conscious or not. Behind the scenes of every large 295 business, whether forced by international law or regu lated at a national level, lies a complex web of voluntary and regulatory compliance, monitoring and reporting, all addressing the ways in wh ich their work affects the natural environment (e.g. carbon reporting / waste transfer / ecological impacts of development). The social agenda is equally important, with companies being mindful of ethical issues within their supply chain from slave labour to fair wages or the right of workers t o form a union. All of us act as stakeholders within the business wo rld, whether we are aware of it or not, and this 'sta keholder 300 lens' becomes a powerful tool for encouraging students to explore the barriers and opportunities for improved sustainability performance within this sector.
The hybrid-PBL model used on this module gives students the chance to investigate one of these issues in more detail, whether it be an operational issue, or one focused on behaviour change with businesses, departments and service providers 305 located within the Living Lab environment on campus. Many of these projects are complex and open -ended with no single solution, and the learning is less scaffolded than in traditional PBL models (Barrows, 1986).
Students present their completed project to a panel of relevant stakeholders in v ideo format, followed by a Question -and-Answer session. Past findings have been used to develop projects on site, illustrating that this truly is an authentic form of 310 assessment and that the University is genuinely interested in their findings. The projects are set within a loose structure within wh ich students are responsible for organising group roles and drawing up an action plan; identifying and interviewing https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License. professionals who can assist them with their enquiries (eg. environmental manager, estates or catering staff); gathering baseline data about the issue they are investigating (e.g. how much waste is produced on campus; how many students and staff commute in single-occupancy cars); and linking their issue to existing over-arching corporate strategies, relatable 315 targets or visionary statements. They also need to develop a storyboard, film and edit relevant footage; develop the narrative, and present their findings to the assessment panel.
Durin g the Covid pandemic, in-situ groupwork changed to a blend of synchronous online sessions, supported by live lectures and a synchronous video materials. 320 Their presentation must include links to the SDG's and the inclusion of clear recommendations linked to SMART targets.

Previous projects have included the development of a communications strategy for the Keele Student Union n ew Zero Waste
shop or exploring packaging issues with an on-site book retailer; working with estates to propose land management practices which encourage pollinators or hedgehogs; workin g with the Head Chef to look at students' relationship with food choic es 325 and related waste on site, and developing ideas for plastic take-back schemes. More detail regarding project options is provided in Table 2.

Living Lab Project options as part of the Greening Business Module
Transportation: investigating the most 'sustainable' options for commuting staff and students including bike hire schemes, reduction in single-car use and sustainable travel strategies; Recycling practices: investigating opportunities to enhance use of the different forms of recyclin g on campus including issues with effective messaging to ensure the correct separation of waste, developing plans and activities to reduce single-use plastics; Auditing of practices on site; investigating energy use or waste generation on campus. The purpose of running educational projects within a Living Lab in this way, is to create the atmosphere for collaborative learning whereby learners co-construct their own knowledge, ult imately generating new sustainability knowledge. Other skills are also evident; team-working; crit ical thinking; negotiation; listening; comm unication; presentation skills; awareness of ethical and value-based motives; a wider understanding of global cit izenship and reflection. Being an elective, this module provides the ideal opportunity for students to work with an intercultural team, in an interdisciplinary environment, which 335 encourages discussion from different perspectives and places of understanding, modellin g the real-world environment that they may one day find themselves working in (described as the principle of Empowerment of Users by CoreLab, 2007, see Table 1). Interdisciplinary and intercultural modules and projects such as this example might provide a useful start for discussions to Decolonising the Curriculum for programmes engaging with the initiative. 340

Campus as a Classroom Case Study 4: Drone Technology
The use of drones in Earth Sciences and cognate disciplines has grown exponentially in recent years, both within academia and in industry (Luppicini and So, 2016), so it is an employable new sector that currently has a lack of trained professionals (King, 2014). Therefore, providing graduates with an authentic opportunity to obtain the necessary skills to pursue a career in drone technology is something that can enhance their employment prospects. Thanks to the experience of some of the 345 Keele staff using drones as part of their research activities (Nobajas et al., 2017) and to funding obtained from a variety of sources, a series of new teaching activities were designed in order to allow students to have a realistic, spontaneou s experience using drones. The biggest limitation when introducing drones to undergraduate students is safety, as a lost drone can cause both material 350 and personal damage (Stewart, 2016). On top of that risk, there are a series of legal limitations that need to be taken into account; not complying with these can result in hefty fines and even jail sentences (Stoica, 2019). For example, such regulations mean that drones cannot be flown near houses, roads or groups of people. Therefore, due to safety and le gal concerns, finding an adequate area to carry out the practical sessions is of paramount importance, and Keele's University campus offered the ideal location to take the classroom outside and practice the flying sk ill learnt inside. In this sense, 355 running a similar type of activity in a city-based campus might be difficult, as regulations and health and safety concerns would make finding a location a challenge, although the use of park or recreation ground could be negotiated.
In Keele's case there was a choice of several locations to choose from. Over the years the practical flying sessions have been carried out in a variety of environments, but it has been found that the best location is one of the most remote areas of 360 campus, which is currently not developed and offers easy access, essentially no t raffic of any kind and considerable distance from any buildings, so it complies with drone flying regulations. There is always the risk that the area may be developed as the university grows but, since there are other places within campus such as sports fields or other open areas that are also suitable for the activity, this should not pose an insurmountable problem.

365
As part of an FHEQ Level 6 GIS module, students are init ially introduced to the school's flee t of drones and the different characteristics and elements of each drone are presented to the students. Once they are familiar with all the controls and technical details a programmed flight is carried out. Programmed flights are key to workin g with d rones in a professional way, as they allow performing automated actions that lead to a photogrammetric output, that is to say, an aerial image that is geometrically correct (e.g. Nobajas et al., 2017 andPriddy et al, 2019). In combination with theoretical and computer-based 370 sessions, the gathered data are processed using Structure from Motion (SfM) software and an accurate 3D model is generated (Nobajas et al., 2017). All these steps help the students understand what can be achieved with modern drone technology , a process that is widely used in a variety of industries such as crop production, surveying, minin g or archaeology (Reinecke and Prinsloo, 2017). Fo r example, Keele staff discovered a medieval Templar-built road on the outskirts of campus thanks to the use of drone technology, and this is used as part of the teaching materials (Burnett, 2018). 375 Finally, students are given a small drone each so they can gain hands-on experience on how to fly a drone. In order to minimise financial losses and reduce damage to property or the public, very simple, cheap and light (~ 100 g) drones are provided, as they are so nimble any crash has minimal consequences. Students are encouraged to practice as part of the practical outdoor session until they get comfortable flying their drones. Once the teaching session is over, they are allowed to 380 keep the drone for around a month and they are expected to take an aerial photograph (Fig. 4) with it that complies with all the legal limitations imposed on drones. Although they can tak e the drone wherever they want to, most of the photographs https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License.
submitted are taken on campus, as, apart from being quite picturesque, it has all the necessary characteristics that make flying a drone a safe activity.

385
None of the described activities are directly assessed. The contents taught during the lectures, computed -based practicals and the outdoors sessions are part of the materials assessed as part of a test in the module. The drone photography students are expected to obtain is entered into a photography contest with a prize given to the winner. Students have had a very positive attitude towards these activities, which have won two teaching-led awards.

Campus as a Classroom Case Study 5: COVID19 Fieldwork 390
The emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic during the 2020/2021 academic year forced a rethink concerning the possible locations from which undergraduate fieldtrips could be safely delivered. The campus provided multiple opportunities to investigate geographical and environmental topics right on our doorstep, reducing the need for travel and preventing the need for residential fieldtrips which could not be undertaken at that time. Home to two different lake systems, small rivers, different blocks of woodland and acres of grassland, the campus itself became the fieldtrip host. 395 Climate change is a core teaching and learning theme within the school, and the University campus provided the opportunity to explore past environmental change linked to previous glacial events (Fig. 5 ), as well as contemporary issues such as forms of renewable energy generation. Situated on the geographical edge of the last glacial maximum of the British Irish Ice Sheet (Clark et al. 2017), the campus provided students with the opportunity to explore glacial geomorphology and sedimentology 400 firsthand using a mixture of GIS mapping techniques and inland field sections. Clast shape and roundness counts were used to investigate the transport pathways of the stones found in the field (Evans and Benn, 2021). The presence of a new oncampus renewable energy installation had revealed numerous glacial erratic clasts within the superficial sed iments, and these were used as a known dataset with wh ich to compare those found across the rest of the campu s. Students had visited the renewable energy construction site p reviously when trenches were exposed for archaeological investigations, but this 405 fieldtrip provided an opportunity to revisit the site during the installation of the solar panels themselvesa fitting link to the modern element of the climate change theme. The campus was also used to explore wider implicit and explicit sustainability messaging (Djordjevic and Cotton, 2011), using self -guided materials to identify and classify different messages seen on site, including the role that the 'hidden curriculum' plays on campus (Orr, 1993).

Discussion: Campus as a Classroom Concept Design 410
The concept design for Campus as a Classroom activities ult imately relies on two factors: 1) activities, project s and infrastructure available to the designer, and 2) an intended learning outcome of the proposed task. Other elements to conside r include logistics, costs (if any), ethical implications of usin g the Liv ing Lab as a classroom, and safety issues. The broa d design for a Campus as a Classroom activity needs to cover the following things: https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License.
interactions, experiences, processes and a guiding strategy. These activities can be planned much like other assessments (see 415 Wiggins, 1998), where student well-being, prepa redness and learning outcomes are understood and acted upon. On a broader level, the design and implementation of these activities is informed by the Keele Social Curriculum and Curriculum Design Framework (CDF; Keele University, 2021). Th is framework sets out key principles for innovative programme design, within the broad themes of Digital Education, Sustainability, and Health and Wellbein g. The Campus as a Classroom concept offers some valuable synergies with the themes and subthemes of the framework. Fo r example, the learning activities delivered in 420 case studies 1 and 2 in this paper both adhere to the subthemes of Authentic Assessment and Employability and Civic Engagement, assessing learners (formatively or summative) through the application or real-world, practical skills that are critical to the respective career pathways associated with each. Furthermore, both case studies draw on the subtheme of Technology Enhanced Learning, making use of asynchronous digital resources and media to support learning. Their studentled approach also ties in with the subtheme of Inclusive Learning, allowing more flexib ility for learners to engage with the 425 process in their own way. Case study 2 also offers direct civ ic engagement, with a significant contribution to outreach and local engagement projects. Case study 3 synergises primarily with the subthemes of Employability and Civic Engagement, and Global Perspectives, offering learners not only an opportunity to engage with real-world challenges, as well as the chance to explore diverse backgrounds and experiences within the realms of business and sustainability. Finally case study 4 exemplifies Technology Enhanced Learning and Employability and Civic En gagement, allowing learners to access high -end 430 drone technology (and associated computer modelling pro grams) and develop skills in a sector within which expertise is in high demand.
Using a Living Lab does potentially increase the time and effort required in the planning and set up of HE teaching and learning activities and assessment. New learning environments and their inherent safety issues must be considered and the 435 students participation in the lab must be carefully considered including such questions as; are the students suitable stakeholders? Does their participation as stakeholders change any processes or ethical considerations of the Liv ing Lab experiment? A concept design fra mework -based on four strands -is suggested. This concept design provides a structured foundation which ensures h igh-quality assessment and/or activity planning with in a Liv ing Lab environment. Such frameworks provide useful guides for development whilst highlighting technical, logist ical and practical considerations of 440 what might be achievable and appropriate.
The Campus as a Classroom concept design framework is divided into the following five strands. The first four are provided to ensure activities within a Living Lab environment are fully considered, practical and beneficial to students. The fifth and final strand outlines the importance of embedding Livin g Lab learning activities into the wider curriculum and providing 445 students with proper preparation and support in the learning activities they will be undertaking.

1) Guiding Strategy
What is the purpose of the Living Lab which is to be used as the basis for this activity? Does the activity compromise this?
Most importantly, are the pedagogical benefits of learning in a Liv ing Lab setting being considered? Pedagogical 450 innovations must be included as an educational innovation, and not as an innovative tool for the sake of using that tool.
Assessments in Liv ing Labs should provide authentic experiences which allow for spontaneity and openness in purpose and resultin g information gathered. Before embarking on an assessment/activity with in a Livin g Lab environment consider the synergy of said activity and the purpose of the lab itself; neither should compromise the efficiency and aims of the other.
Institutional educational vision and strategy (e.g. the CDF, Keele Un iversity, in our example) should also be considered at 455 this point.

2) Interactions
What are the teachers and students going to do -who or what will they be interacting with, is this a passive process or an active process? Do you need permission for the work to be undertaken or ethical considerations to be made? Health and 460 safety of the activities must be considered, for the participants but also other stakeholders and the environments they are working in. The type of interaction should also be considered. For example, students may be interacting directly with other stakeholder groups or the labs innovation (i.e. a piece of technology being tested), or students may be acting passively within the Lab. The level of interaction therefore dictates the influence the activity may have within the Liv ing Lab, this has impacts on aspects of the activity such as feasibility, logistics, safety, impact and overheads etc. 465

3) Experiences
What activities will the students undertake, what are the links between the activities and the intended learning outcome? Are there logistical considerations with equipment or with gettin g to the intended area of work? The skills, competence and aptitude of the student cohort need align ing with the activity, prerequisites or prio r learning should be mapped to the 470 proposed activity.

4) Processes
How will students gather data, who owns this data and what will be done with the data once the students have used it? Are the students going to feedback into the Living Lab exercise or passively interact, gaining skills and experiences but not 475 becoming active stakeholders?
Very few educational activities work in isolation. Most are best suited to a blended approach where a mixed modality of teaching delivery is provided. Th is might include asynchronous or synchronous delivery of materials in a variety of 480 environments (both in situ and digitally). Nearly all authentic activities will require some form of preparation, including training with equipment, contextualisation of the activity, introduction of key concepts and theory, and provision of fundamental health and safety information, all of which provides a foundation upon which learners can build. An efficient way of providing some of this is v ia asynchronous digital resources, which allow students to use them before the activity, but also during the activity should they need to. Th is has the potential not only to enhance the efficiency of learning, but also to 485 enhance greatly the accessibility and inclusivity of learning, particularly where learning is dependent upon access to specific facilit ies or resources such as analytical instrumentation. It is therefore a critical part of developing these resources to plan and develop any additional teaching materials required as the Campus a s a Classroom activities are developed. Examples of materials which we have found to work well include: synchronous discussive sessions (recorded for flex ibility), lab based sessions, pre-recorded video material, virtual reality introductions to the work environment (Rogers 2020), and digital/virtual 490 lab equipment.
For example, here at Keele University we have experimented with the supplementation of traditional laboratory -based teaching (microscopy, XR F spectroscopy, and ion chromatography) with virtualised forms of the instrumentation in question. These learning resources together constitute a variety of virtual laboratory (e.g. Mercer et al., 1990;Koretsky et al., 495 2008) which aim to provide background information on specific techniques, and to simulate the running of the instruments themselves (e.g. calibration, data collection). Simulated laboratories have found application not only in the traditional perception of a chemistry lab, but also in physics, chemistry, computer science, biolo gical science, material science, and engineering (see Jeffery, 2021 and references therein). Their application has increased in recent years due to the everincreasing technological developments available to educators. The actual nature of a virtualised laboratory can range 500 considerably in scale and scope, from compact and simple materials designed to meet very specific learning outcomes such as those found in an individual class (e.g. Jeffery et al., 2021) to materials designed in full 3 -D environments and/or covering a considerable range of academic material (e.g. Hernández-de-Menéndez et al., 2019 and references therein). Although there is no real consensus on the validity and value of virtual laboratories, they are regarded to have the potential to enhance or support the followin g key factors: the development of the learner's key skills and academic performance (e.g. inquiry skills, 505 practical skills, perception, communication skills etc., the learner's motivation and mental wellbeing (e.g. provision of virtualised laboratories as a supplement to learning can reduce or mitigate anxiety in distance learners), and the efficient use of education resources, includin g financial implications for the educational institute and the time required for the educator (e.g. face-to-face, hands-on teaching time could be reduced using a virtual lab a s a preparatory learning activity; see Jeffery 2021 for a review). Nevertheless, their application may lead to negative effects, such as the potential discouragement of 510 learning usin g real instrumentation, or reduced interaction between learners and teache rs or other learners, increased risk of https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License. plagiarism, and reduced opportunity for the development of physical skills (Chan and Fok, 2009). The investment of time required to create such learning materials may also impinge on their abundance or quality (e.g. Wästberg et al., 2019).
Education in these areas has previously been subject to a number of potential barriers to learning. For example, the amount 515 of time that an individual learner can spend developing hands-on experience with a given instrument is dependent on the availability of access to the instrument (e.g. instrument to learner ratio), as well as the face -to-face time required with an appropriate teacher. For many higher-end analytical instruments, there may be only a single instrument available and so learner access, and therefore their ability to develop practical experience, may be heavily rest ricted to specific and limite d times. There may also be health and safety considerations which prevent learners from using an instrument, which may be 520 derived from the instrument itself (e.g. X-Ray fluorescence spectroscopy), or may be linked to external factors (e.g. COVID-19 epidemic). Finally, it must be considered that there may also be individual disability -related needs which make it difficult for learners to access instrumentation. Under the Equality Act 2010 (Legislation.gov.uk, 2010), educators are obliged to provide reasonable adjustments and ensure that materials are accessible for learners with additional needs. To this end, we have found that the application of asynchronous virtualised forms of the instruments given above has been viewed as 525 favourable to learning by learner and educator alike, by providin g learners with a means of exploring an instrument or technique at a time and place of their choosing, in an interactive and accessible form (Jeffery et al., 2021). These resources therefore have the potential to provide a powerful complement to Living Labs, adding depth, diversity, and flexibility, particularly when treated in a supplementary fashion (e.g. Sancho et al., 2006;Bean et al., 2011) rather than being mutually exclusive with traditional lab-based teaching. Nevertheless, their creation and implementation should be considered carefully 530 to maximise compatibility with existing learning narratives.
Finally, a Livin g lab on campus may hopefully go some small way to address some of the inclusiv ity and diversity issues within applied environmental, geo graphy and geoscience courses that have been highlighted recently (e.g. Dowey et al., 2021). Offering authentic and meaningful alternatives wh ich can reduce prohibit ive residential course costs (where HE 535 institutions charge) and the requirements for very robust and expensive student field gear and equipment. If students (and/or staff) don't enjoy or are unable to attend long periods away from their university or home base (have family or care obligations, etc.) Campus as a Classroom ensures those students do not get inferior 'paper based' (often literature review or essay style) alternatives and can participate in authentic activities.

Conclusion
Livin g Labs and campus-based activities -Campus as a Classroom -can be used to provide authentic learning and teaching experiences for HE students. The outdoor environment is perfect for getting students to use field equipment and allowing https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-32 Preprint. Discussion started: 5 October 2021 c Author(s) 2021. CC BY 4.0 License. them to work in an environment where spontaneity and the opportunity for things to go wrong, or not as p lanned, as well as then solving these issues is showcased here as bein g a very important learning experience. Campus as a Classroom gives 545 students interdiscip linary experiences and allows the application of information disseminated by other teaching and learning methods within the curriculum. Act ivities within a Living Lab should be framed by: 1) a Guiding Strategy of why a Living Lab is appropriate; 2) clearly outlined interactions (with people or things) includin g health and safety consideration; 3) a clear idea of the Experiences, Intended Learning Outcomes and activities to be undertaken; 4) an idea of Processes such as how student derived data will be collected and if it will be used in the Living Lab; and 5) a clear scaffold of supporting 550 material preparing students for activities within the Livin g Lab. Making use of the Campus can also help ensure course Intended Learning Outcomes are met, whilst potentially reducing carbon footprints (by not travelling to external locations, for example) wh ich is more sustainable and thus to be encouraged. These types of activities may be a more inclusive option for students either not wish ing, or unable, to go on residential field courses. Campus as a Classroom activities can also result in student-led innovations being implemented across the place they study, heightening student empowerment and including 555 students as stakeholders of the environment in which they learn.

Author Contribution
The drawing together of the co-authors experience and teaching activities into a framework and corresponding manuscript 560 was conceived by SLR. All authors have contributed to case studies herewith and have all contributed to the drafting of the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest