Delta Program: Towards Supporting the Personal & Proffesional Development of Students in Extra Curricular Student Teams

Practice Paper Recommended citation: Valencia Cardona, A. M., Bravo, E., Brans, C., Koppelmans, B., Talmar, M., & Reymen, I. (2025). Delta Program: Towards Supporting the Personal & Proffesional Development of Students in Extra Curricular Student Teams. In Kangaslampi, R., Langie, G., Järvinen, H.-M., & Nagy, B. (Eds.), SEFI 53rd Annual Conference. European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), Tampere, Finland. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17631401. This Conference Paper is brought to you for open access by the 53rd Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) at Tampere University in Tampere, Finland. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. DELTA PROGRAM: TOWARDS SUPPORTING THE PERSONAL & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF STUDENTS IN EXTRA CURRICULAR STUDENT TEAMS A.M. Valencia Cardona a,1, E. Bravo b, C. Brans c, B. Koppelmans d, M. Talmar e, I. Reymenf a TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0000-0003-3479-1659 b TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0000-0002-8654-0950 c TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0009-0002-8988-6110 d TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0009-0003-9249-7287 e TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0009-0008-5040-3744 f TU/e innovation Space, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 0000-0002-8654-0950 Conference Key Areas: Engineering skills, professional skills, and transversal skills; Dialogue between engineering and societyeffects on education. Keywords: Extracurricular learning, self-directed learning, flexible learning, personal development, education innovation. ABSTRACT This paper reports on Delta; an educational innovation aiming at supporting the personal and professional development of students in extracurricular, engineeringoriented student teams, helping them make their learning more explicit. Students in these teams already learn in a self-directed, flexible, and contextualized way, deciding what, how, and when to learn through their day-to-day tasks in their teams. However, individual learning is generally tacit and unsupported, resulting in a disconnect between the experience of students in the teams and their intentional development. Delta focuses on the integration of informal learning with structured development, linking team experiences to personal growth through reflection, peer learning, trainings, and workshops. Delta fosters self-awareness, autonomy, and the identity as engineers by aligning competencies with student’s goals and interests. Delta has been running at Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e) since September 2024 as a first exploratory iteration in the educational design-based 1 Corresponding Author A.M. Valencia Cardona [email protected] project initiated in 2022, with satisfactory results. This paper reports the educational design process, key considerations, and preliminary findings from evaluations with students, educators, and the design team. Additionally, we discuss the challenges for wider implementation. 1 INTRODUCTION Higher engineering education institutions around the world are creating visions of future learning (e.g., Graham, 2018). Universities are exploring how to adapt to the evolving needs of the world with the aim of developing professionals who are attuned to the needs of society, active and purposeful in helping to address socio-technical challenges, and capable of transcending their disciplinary boundaries (Habbal et al, 2024; Richet & Kjellgren, 2023; Sale, 2013). At Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), the University of the Future project (UotF; initiated in 2022; link to project's page) is exploring how (elements of) future visions on learning can be implemented now. An important element in these explorations is the personal development of students in environments where self-directed learning (i.e., student in the lead), flexible learning, and contextualized learning are central (Koppelmans, 2024). Self-directed learning (SDL) can be defined as students’ ability to self-manage, monitor, and motivate learnings (and the achievement of learning outcomes) that are meaningful (Garrison, 1997). Students that are self-directed guide their learning autonomously, taking ownership and responsibility for the process of planning, initiating and evaluating their own learning (Wilcox, 1996 p. 165), engaging in a continuous process of “acquiring, applying and creating knowledge and skills in the context of an individual learner's unique problems” Steward (2007, p.454). As a competence, SDL has been linked to individuals’ ability to become life-long learners (Boyer et al., 2013) capable of adapting to the needs of a changing world (Steward, 2007; Morris, 2019). While the ability to adapt and learning to learn (for life) has been pointed as a key skill for future engineers (SEFI, 2025), reports from practice indicate that universities struggle to support the development of SDL as a competence (Valencia et al., 2024), with current educational structures providing inadequate support for its development (Steward, 2007; Jiusto & Di Biasio, 2007). Flexible learning (FL) is a concept generally framed as student-centric (Li & Wong, 2018), which involves providing students with options that suit their personal needs and preferences (Demetriadis & Pombortsis, 2007). Options can refer to a wide variety of components, such as time, content, delivery (i.e., place, channel), assessment and instructional approach (Li & Wong, 2018). In this regard, FL can be seen as means to support the SDL of students, helping them develop competencies through educational components they have intentionally chosen, because they match their preferences and interests. Contextualized learning (CL) refers to approaches to learning, where the learning is close to real-world context. Context can refer to a physical setting (e.g., engineering school, workplace), subject-matter and discipline (e.g., culture and conversations around sustainability), and social interactions (e.g., the interaction between a learner and mentor/role model) (Nugent et. al., 2019). Contextualized, learning supports the personal and professional development of students, as it offers the opportunity to connect to learner’s interests and passions, making the learning more relevant and meaningful (Ritz & Moye, 2011). CL is engineering education is important as it not only stimulates students to integrate the knowledge, skills and attitudes learned through their curriculum; it can help students understand the engineering profession at a higher level, for example, by encouraging them to think critically about what engineering entails and its relation to society (Kleine et al., 2024). Overall, these concepts support each other and serve as key principles for studentcentric learning. While some initiatives have incorporated elements of these principles within co-curricular and extracurricular contexts (Lee et al., 2016; Murzi et al., 2023), there remains limited understanding of how to systematically design and implement curricula that fully integrate these key concepts, namely SDL, FL, and CL (Doulougeri et al., 2024). At TU/e, extracurricular, engineering-oriented student teams already embody these principles, however not within the formal learning environment of the university. The UotF project pilots a support system in the context of these extra-curricular projects to find ingredients for implementation within the curriculum. More specifically, the project aims to support the personal and professional development of students in extracurricular student teams, helping them make their learning more explicit, without compromising the SDL, FL and CL that is naturally present in the team. This paper reports on the journey towards the Delta Program and the preliminary results of the first pilot evaluation cycle in 2024-2025. 2 CONTEXT AND PRACTICAL WORK 2.1 Extracurricular engineering-oriented student teams at TU/e The extracurricular student team program at TU/e includes around 26 teams (variable number per year) and 500 students across different departments. These interdisciplinary teams tackle socio-technical challenges, such as clean energy and transportation, engaging in engineering innovation cycles that facilitate contextualized learning. Teams vary in longevity; some are well-established with clear processes, while others are in the early development stages. Teams work selfdirected, setting up challenges based on personal interests, previous work of the honours program, or as a follow-up of curricular projects. Teams are self-organized, recruiting members that fit their vision, seeking funding, developing partnerships with external stakeholders, and utilizing resources as necessary. Most teams have a board with roles such as technical manager, team management, communication, and finances. Teams operate on a yearly cycle, recruiting new members and setting project goals annually. Students join flexibly, choosing roles that match their personal and professional interests and determining their time commitment, ranging from 4 hrs to full-time. Members typically stay for one cycle, though some stay longer in board positions. The teams are hosted by TU/e innovation Space, which provides resources, like spaces, expert networks, and limited financial support. The program, part of the UotF project, is evolving from the extracurricular space towards an environment where students and teams purposefully engage in learning. 2.2 Educational design process An educational design-research approach (McKenney & Reeves, 2018) led to Delta, a program supporting the personal and professional development of students in extracurricular student teams. The process followed an iterative educational design cycle (Plomp & Nieveen, 2013). First, the problem was explored and analysed in 2022-2023 thorough co-creation sessions with students, support staff, and educational experts. This phase validated the problem statement, defined a rationale, and established preliminary design principles for Delta (Koppelmans, 2024). In addition to SDL, CL, and FL, four key principles were identified as important in supporting students’ personal and personal development: peer-learning, scaffolded learning, clarity of structure and impact on the ecosystem. In 2020-2024, these principles were specified into design guidelines and educational elements (Section 2.3) and developed into an educational design (Section 2.4). Overall, our design is based on an experiential learning setting, which conceptualizes learning as a cyclical and iterative process consisting of four key stages: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). The process involved two educational designers, one PhD researcher, and one support staff. The educational design was refined with input from students and staff. The Delta program was piloted during the 2024/2025 academic year, and its evaluation by students and educators is currently ongoing. This evaluation is central to shaping enhancements for the 2025/2026 academic year. The preliminary findings from the 2024/2025 evaluation cycle form the focus of this paper. 2.3 Delta: Design principles and design guidelines Delta has seven design principles, translated into design guidelines for the definition of educational elements, such as learning aims, learning activities, roles for supporting personal and professional development in extracurricular student team (Table 1). Table 1. Design principles and guidelines for Delta Design principle Design guideline Educational elements (examples, see Section 2.4) Contextuali zed learning Ensure that learning activities are relevant to student’s personal development and role in their student teams. Day-to-day experiences in the team as input for personal reflection. Selfdirected learning Encourage students to set personal development goals in relation to their time in the student team. Empower students to choose what and how to learn. Promote student-initiated feedback collection for reflection and selfevaluation . Facilitate explicit learning through guided reflection and tools. Encourage the definition of ‘next steps’ in terms of development. Continuous individual learning and reflection : • SDL supported by professional coach. • Learning & Development days: Fixed compulsory sessions for personal development. Flexible learning Offer various learning activities that students can select to match their personal interests and professional goals. Majority of learning activities as non -compulsory: • Students choose what content to follow and how. Peer learning Facilitate peer-learning among Delta members and encourage extend ing peer learning beyond Delta by reaching out and exchanging knowledge with other s (non-Delta students). Peer-learning interwoven in the program: • Facilitated sessions for group reflection (i.e., intervisions) throughout the duration of the program. Design principle Design guideline Educational elements (examples, see Section 2.4) • Students in the lead of peerlearning: they define the topics to be discussed. Scaffolded learning Ensure SDL is supported by the program’s activities, people and process, providing guidance during students’ learning journey. One-on-one professional coaching for each student. Clarity of structure Ensure flexibility while maintaining structure, so students know what activities to expect and when they will occur. Regular times for trainings & workshops. Clear and open communication. Impact on the ecosystem Connect students learning in Delta to the development of student teams , enhancing team processes, such as team reflection and communication , to foster a positive learning culture within the teams and the broader ecosystem. Trainings & workshops aligned with the needs of students and their teams in terms of content and time. Some activities open to full population of student teams. 2.4 Delta: Educational design Delta is a year-long program designed to support the learning of students in extracurricular student teams, bridging learning that already takes in their day-to-day activities within the student team, with their personal development. The aim is to make the learning of students more explicit, helping students connect their personal and professional learning goals to their experiences in the team, becoming more self-aware of their development, and intentional on their steps after the team (SDL). Table 2 depicts an overview of the Delta program activities with planning and roles and including the following learning activities: Project and leadership skills training, workshops, peer learning sessions, learning and development (L&D) days, and individual learning and reflection sessions. 2.5 Roll-out Five extracurricular student teams, focused on professionalizing and strengthening their L&D culture, were selected for this exploration of Delta based on maturity and the authors’ insights. Leaders were invited to discuss the program with their boards and nominate members who could benefit from Delta, honouring the selforganization and autonomy of teams and the members. Table 2. Overview of Delta program activities Learning Activity Planning & Roles Objectives & Content Project and leadership skills training Seven sessions were facilitated by a project management expert. The sessions took place in weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13. Build project management proficiency and strengthen leadership skills. Key topics include Agile project management, product breakdown structure, stakeholder and situational leadership, team motivation and building, project execution, applying Agile/Scrum in Learning Activity Planning & Roles Objectives & Content Participation was optional. a mechatronics context, and planning next steps. Workshops Five sessions were facilitated by five subject matter experts. The sessions took place in weeks 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. Participation was optional. Enhance self-awareness, improve communication, and promote organizational learning. Key topics include personal leadership, profiling and motivation insights, mindful communication and conflict resolution, systems thinking, and knowledge transfer and retention. Peerlearning Five sessions facilitated by three members of Delta program staff. The sessions took place in weeks 9, 15, 21, 34, and 36. Participation was optional. Facilitate peer learning, active listening, and community building. L&D Days Three sessions facilitated by three members of Delta program staff. The sessions took place in weeks 4, 22, and 37. Participation was encouraged. L&D 1: Orientation, coach connection, and introduction to Personal Leadership. L&D 2: Reflect on learning using Gibbs’ reflective cycle, identify key experiences, gather peer and stakeholder feedback, and articulate progress. L&D 3: Discuss student experiences facilitated by using Lego blocks and CDIO Syllabus 3.0 learning outcomes, share final impressions, and collect feedback on the program’s overall value. Individual learning and reflection Eight on-demand sessions were facilitated by four professional coaches. Facilitate deep reflection and selfawareness, encourage goal setting, and inspire meaningful action. 2.6 Evaluation The project was evaluated to assess the perceived value of the learning activities, identify areas for improvement, and determine key factors for potential scale-up. A qualitative approach guided the evaluation, drawing on multiple data sources to capture participants’ experiences and insights after obtaining their written consent. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 11 voluntarily participating Delta students, surveys administered during Learning & Development (L&D) Days 1 and 3 to capture initial expectations and final reflections, and field notes from individual intake sessions, L&D Days 1 and 2, and a peer-learning session. The insights presented in this paper are based on data gathered up to February 2025. Final evaluations will be completed in summer 2025 and shared at SEFI 2025. 3 RESULTS AND INSIGHTS 3.1 General demographics Twenty-one students from 5 different teams were nominated for Delta. Students come from nine different engineering programs and have the following roles in the teams: engineering management (9), business management (7), team management (3), technical (2). Nineteen participants remain active in Delta to date with a satisfactory engagement. 3.2 Perceived value Before the program began, Delta participants expressed motivation to develop leadership and project management skills to boost team performance and prepare for future careers. They aimed to improve task delegation, planning, communication, managing uncertainty, and teamwork, while also refining reflective skills, building professional confidence, and expanding their networks with industry experts, professionals, and peers from other teams. Overall, participants value the program and see it as meaningful for their professional growth, as summarized below: Contextualized learning: Students value the link of the program to the timeline of activities and the accompanying needs in the student team. The right tools (i.e., workshops, trainings, coaching) are available at the right moments. “I think the project management training taught a skill we can directly apply, and it's been very useful for us [in the student team]” Continuous individual learning and reflection: Students valued professional coaching for fostering meaningful discussions, deep reflection, and increased selfawareness, while supporting the setting of personal development goals for long-term growth. It inspired actionable change at both the individual and team levels, leading to improved approaches to teamwork and role-related challenges. “There’s a lot of trial and error but coaching helps put it into perspective. It shows that processing all those small failures is actually a key part of the learning.” Peer-learning: Participants valued the peer learning activities for enabling meaningful conversations and feedback that helped address shared challenges. Peer-learning sessions, in particular, were appreciated for linking personal learning with team development and fostering a sense of community, with many students continuing their connections beyond the facilitated sessions. “It makes you see the team from a different perspective. It really helps with reflection, recognizing where issues may lie and how to approach them.” Trainings & workshops: Students appreciated the workshops and trainings for their diverse content and flexible participation options. Sessions on learning organization topics helped them connect individual and team learning, while the variety of trainings broadened their field knowledge and encouraged reflection on career paths. "My perspective as an engineer evolved through the [trainings in] Delta program, realizing that design and building involve many iterative loops” Learning and development days: Students valued the opportunity to connect with potential coaches (Day 1). They found the focus on personal reflection valuable, providing a dedicated time to think about their development and make it explicit, especially for students who do not typically engage in reflection. “Talking about our learning and growth helps others realize that they share similar experiences and progress.” 3.3 Improvements Despite the positive outcomes of the evaluation, there are several opportunities for improvement. In relation to student’s learning, most students have focused on the development of transversal competencies as those fit closely to their role in the student teams. A challenge is how to facilitate deep technical/engineering learning, reaching a broader set of students within the teams. Students demonstrated autonomy in choosing learning activities that matched their personal needs, indicating and understanding their personal goals. However, reflections lack depth, particularly where peer learning is involved. The second half of the evaluations will center on the depth of learning, how learning is made explicit, and its link to future development goals. In relation to organization, facilitating self-directed, flexible learning is difficult due to unpredictable session participation. Moreover, maintaining active communication with students is challenging as some students fail to respond to calendar invitations, requiring one-to-one messaging. We identified two key aspects influencing student’s decision to join Delta activities: (1) Struggles in balancing curricular and extracurricular activities, especially those in teams on a part-time basis; (2) the high load and urgency of team-related activities. Students sometimes prioritize team activities over compulsory Delta sessions, complicating the planning and organization of such program with upscaled numbers. 4 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The preliminary evaluation shows the Delta program effectively meets its goals of supporting the personal and professional development of students in extracurricular student teams. By combining contextualized, flexible support with self-directed, experiential learning, Delta helps students make their learning more explicit and intentional. Students valued the alignment of Delta activities with team needs and timelines. Coaching, reflection, and peer learning fostered self-awareness and meaningful dialogue, turning informal experiences into intentional development. Workshops and training sessions further supported students in linking team-based learning with broader aspirations, reinforcing Delta’s goal of integrating informal learning with structured personal development. However, Delta is in the early stages of development, and further research is needed—especially to better understand learning in open, flexible context, and draw conclusions regarding its impact on learning. Moreover, more research is needed to derive organizational design principles, particularly connected to scaling up and transferring Delta to other contexts. Moving forward, we will focus on facilitating effective learning by helping students clearly define outcomes and engage in deep reflection. Based on future evaluations, we may introduce additional trainings or workshops targeting these areas. We also plan to redesign the program to better foster professional behaviour, enhance student ownership, and address attendance issues in compulsory sessions. Additionally, we aim to attract students with diverse learning interests, including advanced engineering knowledge. To this end, a new pilot launching in September 2025, in collaboration with two engineering programs, will explore awarding ECTS for fully flexible, self-directed learning.