𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐥-𝐢𝐧-𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭

Co-creation in Higher Education: Cooperation between Teachers and Students in Curriculum Alignment within Applied Agricultural Disciplines

In recent years, co-creation has gained increasing attention in higher education as a powerful framework for improving educational quality, relevance, and effectiveness. In applied agricultural disciplines in particular, where theory, practice, and societal needs are closely intertwined, cooperation between teachers and students in curriculum design and implementation is especially valuable. Co-creation in this context refers to structured, purposeful collaboration between academic staff and students in aligning curriculum components—such as workload expressed through ECTS credits, teaching objectives, learning outcomes, teaching and learning methodologies, assessment strategies, and competency development—with real learning needs and professional expectations. Rather than diminishing academic rigor, co-creation strengthens curriculum coherence, transparency, and educational impact.

Co-creation as a foundation for curriculum alignment
Curriculum alignment is a central principle of quality assurance in higher education. It implies coherence between intended learning outcomes, teaching objectives, learning activities, assessment methods, and student workload. In applied agricultural sciences—such as agronomy, animal science, veterinary medicine, environmental protection, and rural development—misalignment can lead to superficial learning, excessive workload, or inadequate preparation for professional practice. Co-creation provides a mechanism through which alignment can be continuously examined and refined, based on both academic expertise and student experience.
Teachers bring disciplinary knowledge, pedagogical competence, and awareness of regulatory and accreditation requirements. Students, on the other hand, contribute experiential knowledge of how curricula function in practice: how demanding courses are, whether learning activities support the intended outcomes, and how assessment shapes learning behavior. Co-creation integrates these perspectives into a shared process of curriculum development and enhancement.

Workload and ECTS: co-creating realistic and meaningful learning demands
The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) is intended to reflect the total workload required to achieve defined learning outcomes. However, in many applied agricultural programs, discrepancies arise between nominal ECTS values and actual student workload. Practical exercises, fieldwork, laboratory work, farm placements, and project-based tasks are often time-intensive and may not be fully captured in curriculum planning.
Through co-creation, students can actively contribute to evaluating real workload demands. Structured dialogue, workload surveys, reflective logs, and joint curriculum review workshops enable teachers and students to identify courses where workload is disproportionate or poorly distributed across the semester. This collaborative analysis allows adjustments in content scope, sequencing of activities, and balance between contact hours and independent learning. Importantly, co-creation shifts the focus from simply “reducing workload” to ensuring that workload is meaningful, achievable, and directly linked to learning outcomes and professional competencies.

Teaching objectives and learning outcomes: from formal statements to shared understanding
Clear teaching objectives and well-defined learning outcomes are essential for curriculum transparency and quality. In applied agricultural disciplines, learning outcomes typically encompass not only knowledge, but also practical skills, problem-solving abilities, ethical awareness, and professional attitudes. While teachers are responsible for formulating outcomes in line with national qualification frameworks and professional standards, co-creation helps ensure that these outcomes are understandable, relevant, and attainable from the student perspective.
Involving students in discussions about learning outcomes encourages shared understanding of what is expected and why it matters. Students can provide feedback on whether outcomes are clearly communicated, realistically assessed, and aligned with labor market and societal needs. In co-created curricula, learning outcomes are no longer abstract statements confined to course syllabi; they become reference points that guide teaching activities, student learning strategies, and assessment practices.

Active learning and teaching methodologies in applied agricultural education
Applied agricultural disciplines are particularly well suited to active learning approaches, such as problem-based learning, case studies, project work, field exercises, simulations, and research-based learning. These methodologies reflect the complexity and interdisciplinarity of real-world agricultural systems, where professionals must integrate biological, environmental, economic, and social considerations.
Co-creation enhances the effectiveness of active learning by incorporating student input into the design and evaluation of learning activities. Students can help identify which methods genuinely support learning and which may create confusion or unnecessary workload. For example, in field-based courses or laboratory exercises, student feedback can inform the pacing of activities, clarity of instructions, and adequacy of preparatory materials. In project-based courses, co-creation can involve students in defining project themes that address authentic agricultural challenges, such as sustainable production, animal welfare, biosecurity, or climate resilience.
Through co-created active learning, students develop deeper engagement, autonomy, and responsibility for their learning. Teachers, in turn, gain insight into how students experience different pedagogical approaches and can refine their teaching strategies accordingly.

Formative and summative assessment as co-created learning tools
Assessment plays a decisive role in shaping student learning behavior. In applied agricultural disciplines, assessment must capture not only theoretical knowledge but also practical skills, analytical thinking, and professional judgment. Co-creation in assessment design promotes transparency, fairness, and alignment with learning outcomes.
Formative assessment is particularly well suited to co-creation. Students can collaborate with teachers in developing assessment criteria, rubrics, and feedback mechanisms. This process demystifies assessment expectations and supports self-regulated learning. Peer assessment, reflective journals, learning portfolios, and iterative project feedback are examples of formative approaches that benefit from student involvement.
Summative assessment, while more constrained by institutional regulations, can also incorporate elements of co-creation. Students may contribute to discussions on assessment formats, weighting of components, or the balance between written exams, practical tests, and project work. In applied agricultural programs, co-created assessment strategies help ensure that summative assessments validly measure professional competencies rather than rote memorization.

Building student competencies through co-creation
Competency development is a core objective of applied agricultural education. Graduates are expected to demonstrate technical expertise, practical skills, critical thinking, communication abilities, teamwork, ethical responsibility, and adaptability. Co-creation directly supports competency-based education by engaging students in authentic learning and decision-making processes.
By participating in curriculum alignment, students develop meta-competencies such as reflection, evaluation, negotiation, and responsibility. These competencies are highly relevant for future agricultural professionals, who must work collaboratively with diverse stakeholders, adapt to changing conditions, and engage in lifelong learning. Co-creation thus contributes not only to subject-specific competencies, but also to transversal skills essential for professional practice and societal engagement.

Institutional conditions for effective co-creation
Meaningful co-creation requires supportive institutional frameworks. Clear policies, staff development programs, and recognition of co-creation activities are essential. Teachers need time, training, and institutional support to engage in partnership-based curriculum work. Students need transparent opportunities to participate, as well as recognition of their contributions through credits, certificates, or formal roles in quality assurance processes.
Equally important is inclusiveness. Co-creation should not be limited to a small group of highly motivated students. In applied agricultural disciplines, efforts must be made to include students from diverse backgrounds, study modes, and professional aspirations. This diversity enriches curriculum development and ensures that programs remain relevant to a broad range of agricultural contexts.

Challenges and limitations
Despite its benefits, co-creation is not without challenges. Power imbalances, time constraints, and resistance to change can hinder collaboration. There may also be concerns about maintaining academic standards and consistency across programs. Addressing these challenges requires clear communication, shared principles, and evidence-based approaches that demonstrate the positive impact of co-creation on learning quality and outcomes.

Conclusion
Co-creation between teachers and students represents a powerful approach to curriculum alignment in applied agricultural disciplines. By jointly addressing workload (ECTS), teaching objectives, learning outcomes, active learning methodologies, assessment strategies, and competency development, co-creation enhances curriculum coherence, educational relevance, and student engagement. In a field as dynamic and socially significant as agriculture, co-created curricula prepare students not only to meet current professional demands, but also to contribute responsibly and innovatively to the future of food systems, animal health, environmental sustainability, and rural development.

The Most Significant Methods of Active Learning and Teaching in Higher Applied Agricultural and Veterinary Medicine Education

1. Introduction

Higher education in applied agricultural sciences and veterinary medicine faces increasing demands to prepare graduates who are not only knowledgeable, but also practically competent, adaptable, ethically responsible, and capable of problem solving in complex real-world systems. Modern agriculture and veterinary practice operate at the intersection of biological, technological, environmental, economic, and societal factors. Consequently, traditional lecture-based teaching alone is insufficient to develop the full spectrum of competencies required for professional practice.
Active learning and teaching methodologies represent a pedagogical response to these challenges. They shift the focus from passive transmission of information toward student-centered learning, emphasizing engagement, critical thinking, practical application, and reflective practice. In applied disciplines such as agriculture and veterinary medicine, active learning is particularly relevant because learning outcomes are closely linked to professional skills, decision-making abilities, and field or clinical performance.
This text provides a systematic overview of the most significant methods of active learning and teaching used in higher applied agricultural and veterinary education, highlighting their pedagogical foundations, practical implementation, and contribution to competency development.

2. Conceptual Foundations of Active Learning in Applied Life Sciences

Active learning is based on constructivist learning theory, which assumes that students actively construct knowledge through experience, interaction, and reflection. In contrast to passive learning, where students primarily listen and memorize, active learning requires them to analyze, evaluate, apply, and synthesize information.
In agricultural and veterinary education, this approach aligns naturally with the applied nature of the disciplines. Students must integrate theoretical knowledge from biology, chemistry, pathology, nutrition, genetics, ecology, and economics into practical decision-making contexts such as farm management, disease control, animal welfare assessment, and food safety.

Key pedagogical principles underlying active learning include:

- learner-centered instruction,
- problem orientation,
- experiential and contextual learning,
- collaboration and communication,
- continuous feedback and reflection, and
- integration of theory and practice.

3. Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

Problem-Based Learning is one of the most influential active learning methods in veterinary and agricultural education. It is structured around real or realistic professional problems that students must analyze and solve collaboratively.

3.1. Characteristics of PBL
- Learning begins with a complex, open-ended problem.
- Students work in small groups with defined roles.
- The teacher acts as a facilitator rather than a lecturer.
- Emphasis is placed on self-directed learning.
- Solutions are discussed, justified, and reflected upon.

3.2. Application in Veterinary and Agricultural Education
In veterinary medicine, PBL is commonly applied through clinical cases involving animal health, reproduction disorders, infectious diseases, welfare assessment, or herd health management. In agriculture, problems may relate to crop failures, soil degradation, feeding strategies, environmental pollution, or economic sustainability of farms.

3.3. Educational Value
PBL develops diagnostic reasoning, analytical thinking, teamwork, and professional responsibility. It mirrors real professional practice, where problems are rarely well-defined and require integration of multiple knowledge domains.

4. Case-Based Learning (CBL)

Case-Based Learning is closely related to PBL but is generally more structured and guided. It uses detailed case descriptions derived from real professional practice.

4.1. Structure and Implementation
Cases may include farm scenarios, disease outbreaks, food safety incidents, or welfare inspections. Students analyze provided data, identify key issues, propose interventions, and justify decisions using scientific evidence.

4.2. Role in Applied Education
CBL is particularly effective in bridging theoretical knowledge and practice. It allows students to practice decision-making in a controlled environment before encountering similar situations in real life.

4.3. Competence Development
CBL enhances clinical reasoning, ethical judgment, communication skills, and the ability to apply regulations and professional standards.

5. Experiential Learning and Field-Based Instruction

Experiential learning is fundamental in applied agricultural and veterinary education. It involves learning through direct experience, observation, and participation in real or simulated professional activities.

5.1. Fieldwork and On-Farm Training
Field exercises on farms, experimental stations, and veterinary clinics allow students to observe production systems, animal behavior, management practices, and biosecurity measures. Students actively participate in tasks such as sampling, monitoring, handling animals, and evaluating farm conditions.

5.2. Educational Outcomes
Experiential learning strengthens practical skills, professional confidence, and situational awareness. It also helps students understand the complexity and variability of real agricultural systems.

6. Laboratory-Based Active Learning

Laboratory work is a cornerstone of both agricultural and veterinary education. Active learning in laboratories goes beyond demonstration and involves student-led experimentation and inquiry.

6.1. Inquiry-Based Laboratory Work
Students formulate hypotheses, design experiments, collect data, analyze results, and draw conclusions. This approach is used in microbiology, pathology, parasitology, nutrition, and physiology laboratories.

6.2. Skill Development
Laboratory-based active learning develops technical competence, scientific reasoning, accuracy, and adherence to biosafety and ethical standards.

7. Simulation-Based Learning and Virtual Environments

Simulation-based learning has gained importance due to technological advancements and ethical considerations, particularly in veterinary education.

7.1. Types of Simulations
- clinical simulators for animal examination and procedures,
- virtual laboratories,
- farm management simulation software,
- epidemiological and biosecurity models.

7.2. Benefits
Simulations allow repeated practice without risk to animals, enable exposure to rare or critical situations, and support learning in online and hybrid environments.

8. Flipped Classroom Model

The flipped classroom reverses the traditional teaching sequence. Students study theoretical content independently before class, while class time is used for active learning activities.

8.1. Implementation
Pre-class materials include recorded lectures, readings, and quizzes. In-class activities involve discussions, problem solving, case analysis, and practical exercises.

8.2. Relevance for Applied Disciplines
The flipped model maximizes interaction and application during contact hours, making it particularly suitable for complex applied subjects.

9. Project-Based Learning

Project-Based Learning engages students in extended projects addressing real-world agricultural or veterinary challenges.

9.1. Examples of Projects
- development of farm biosecurity plans,
- design of animal welfare improvement strategies,
- environmental impact assessments,
- herd health management programs.

9.2. Learning Outcomes

Project-based learning fosters autonomy, interdisciplinary thinking, planning skills, and professional communication.

10. Collaborative and Cooperative Learning

Group-based learning activities promote interaction and shared responsibility.

10.1. Methods
- group problem solving,
- peer teaching,
- team-based learning,
- structured debates.

10.2. Professional Relevance
Collaboration reflects professional practice in agriculture and veterinary medicine, where teamwork is essential.

11. Reflective Learning and Self-Assessment

Reflection is a critical component of active learning.

11.1. Tools
- reflective journals,
- learning portfolios,
- self-assessment checklists.

11.2. Impact

Reflection enhances self-awareness, ethical sensitivity, and lifelong learning skills.

12. Digital Tools Supporting Active Learning

Digital technologies play a supportive role in active learning.

12.1. Examples
- learning management systems,
- online discussion forums,
- digital quizzes,
- data analysis software.

12.2. Online and Hybrid Contexts

Digital tools enable continuity of active learning beyond physical classrooms and support blended education models.

13. Assessment in Active Learning Environments

Assessment must align with active learning objectives.

13.1. Formative Assessment
Includes quizzes, feedback sessions, peer assessment, and reflective tasks.

13.2. Authentic Assessment
Focuses on real-life tasks such as case reports, project presentations, and practical demonstrations.

14. Role of the Teacher in Active Learning

The teacher’s role shifts from information provider to facilitator, mentor, and evaluator.
Key responsibilities include:
- designing meaningful learning activities,
- guiding student inquiry,
- providing feedback,
- ensuring academic and ethical standards.

15. Conclusion

Active learning and teaching methods are essential for modern higher education in applied agricultural sciences and veterinary medicine. They support the development of professional competencies, integrate theory with practice, and prepare students for complex real-world challenges. By combining problem-based learning, experiential instruction, simulations, collaborative work, and reflective practice, higher education institutions can significantly enhance the quality and relevance of their study programs.
The systematic and purposeful implementation of active learning methodologies contributes not only to improved learning outcomes but also to the formation of competent, responsible, and adaptable professionals capable of contributing to sustainable agriculture, animal health, and societal well-being.

Classification of subjects (courses) into types in higher education basic study programmes Zootechnics at the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Belgrade

1. Definition of Subject Types

In many European and Serbian study programmes, subjects (courses) are classified into different types based on their character, aims, and contribution to the overall student competences. Four common types are:
1. Academic-general education type
These subjects provide broad, foundational knowledge outside the immediate professional/technical field but essential for intellectual, analytical and communicative development. They often include mathematics, basic sciences (biology, general chemistry, physics), humanities or social sciences and foreign languages. Their aim is to ensure that students are well-rounded, able to think critically, communicate, understand ethical, historical, societal contexts.
2. Theoretical-methodological type
These courses teach theory in the specialized domain and the methods used in research or professional problem solving: statistical methods, experimental design, analytical/instrumental methods, theory of disciplines (e.g. physical chemistry, theoretical microbiology), underlying principles of engineering, thermodynamics etc. They serve as tools and frameworks that underpin the scientific-professional courses and also applied work.
3. Scientific-professional type
These are specialized subjects that deliver domain-specific scientific content and professional knowledge: the technologies, biology, physiology, nutrition, microbiology, genetics, etc. They are more applied than pure theory, but not yet primarily hands-on or practice oriented. They build the core professional identity of the discipline.
4. Professional-applied type
These courses are highly oriented toward practical application: laboratory practice, internships, production technology, industrial processes, project work, quality management, regulatory frameworks, etc. They often involve real-life cases, field work, working with processes, or design and implementation of technologies. They aim to give skills and competences directly usable in industry or professional settings.

2. Purpose of Classifying Subjects into Types

Classifying subjects into these types is done for several reasons:
- Curricular balance: Ensuring that a study programme is not too heavy only on theory or too light on foundational knowledge; it ensures graduates have both breadth and depth.
- Competence mapping: Helps in aligning programme outcomes (skills, knowledge, attitudes) with what is expected by employers, regulatory bodies, scientific communities.
- Accreditation / quality assurance: Accreditation bodies like NAT in Serbia require that programmes meet certain criteria: the curriculum must have a balanced share of subject types, to ensure educational standards. This helps comparisons, ensures minimal standards.
- Transparency: For students, stakeholders, to see what kind of knowledge and skills they will gain: e.g. how much practice vs theory, how much general education vs professional specialization.
- Resource planning: Helps universities plan teaching resources (laboratories, workshops, faculty specialization), scheduling, balance of staff that can teach theory vs applied courses.

3. Percentage Representation According to NAT (Serbia)

Serbian NAT (Nacionalno telo za akreditaciju i obezbeđenje kvaliteta u visokom obrazovanju) has guidelines and rules for accreditation of study programmes. Although the exact percentages may vary (sometimes programmes define their own internal typologies), often the accreditation requirements or recommendations include that curricula should have a reasonable spread among subject types. Some key points:
- The total number of ESPB (ECTS) for basic academic studies (Osnovne akademske studije, OAS) is 240 ESPB.
- NAT requires that programmes clearly define subject types and demonstrate that subject offerings and ESPB allocation correspond to programme outcomes. The programme must justify how many courses of each type are included, how they contribute to general competencies, methodological competencies, domain-specific knowledge, professional readiness. (From NAT’s regulations on program accreditation) — the document “Akreditacija studijskog programa” provides instructions that curricula must include both general education (opšte obrazovanje), method-oriented/scientific method courses, specialist knowledge, and applied/practical courses
Accredited programmes follow NAT rules like ~15% general education, ~20% theoretical/methodological, ~35% scientific-professional, ~30% professional/applied. This is a model seen in proposals and internal accreditation documents. (This seems consistent with sample curricula and proposed programmes in other fields.)
- Thus, although the NAT’s public documents often leave flexibility, these approximate partitions are considered good practice and often expected in programme self-evaluation and accreditation submissions.

4. How It Is Done in the Zootechnics (Zootehnika) Study Programme

Now, looking at the Study Programme Zootechnics at Agrifaculty (University of Belgrade) — based on the data available on the faculty site.
Analysed its subjects (courses), especially in early years and later years, showed how many courses of each type there are, and roughly how ESPB points distributed. Here is a summary of findings and approximate categorization:
- In the 1st year, many of the courses are foundational: Anatomy of domestic animals; Zoology; Mathematics; Chemistry; Bio-chemistry (foundations); Statistics etc. These are mostly Academic-general education and Theoretical-methodological types. For example, “Matematika I” is general education; “Osnovi biohemije” or “Hemija” could be method/theory type.
- There are specialized courses from early semesters, e.g. Krmno bilje (Fodder plants); Mechanization and automation in animal husbandry, which are more scientific-professional types (domain-specific). Then in later years many courses are clearly scientific professional or applied: Animal hygiene, Cattle breeding, Pig breeding, Poultry breeding, etc. Also there are elective blocks which offer more applied or domain-specialized courses.
Production practice appears in later semesters, which is clearly professional-applied, as the students gain hands-on experience.
- The programme includes several elective blocks which allow students to choose between specialist/ applied courses.

Approximate distribution in Zootechnics

Study programme Zootechnics has 240 ESPB:
- Academic-general education: ~15-20% — likely about 30-45 ESPB
- Theoretical-methodological: somewhat similar proportion, maybe ~20% — 45-50 ESPB
- Scientific-professional: the largest share, with domain courses, likely ~35-40% — ~85-95 ESPB
- Professional-applied: the remainder, including practices, specialized technology, applied skills, veterinary aspects etc. maybe ~25-30% — ~60-70 ESPB
These proportions correspond to the programme’s structure: early foundation, then domain specialization, then applied practice and production / field-oriented courses.
To illustrate, subjects like Production Practice, Animal hygiene, Cattle breeding, Pig breeding, Poultry breeding, etc., are clearly in the professional-applied type. Meanwhile, courses like Anatomy, Zoology, Genetics, Microbiology etc are scientific-professional or theoretical-methodological depending on their depth. Foundational maths, chemistry are academic-general or theoretical-methodological.

5. Comparison and Reflection

Putting it together:
The classification helps to ensure that Zootehnika programme (and similarly Prehrambena tehnologija) meets the balance of knowledge vs skills required by NAT for accreditation. The early years build general and methodological capacity; later years deepen scientific domain knowledge; final years (and elective parts) offer applied, practical experience.
If Zootechnics were to be evaluated by the model of ~15% general education, ~20% theoretical/methodological, ~35% domain-scientific, ~30% applied, it likely meets this structure, although exact numbers would need confirmation by totaling ESPB per course type.
Programmes that have too many courses of one type (e.g. too many applied, too few general/theory) might fail to satisfy NAT’s criteria unless they provide justification and align with learning outcomes.

6. Conclusion

In summary:
- Academic-general education, theoretical-methodological, scientific-professional, professional-applied types are well-defined categories serving different purposes: foundational knowledge, method skills, domain content, and hands-on skills respectively.
- Serbian NAT accreditation standards require programmes to clearly define these types, map their curricula accordingly, and show that ESPB allocation among types satisfies the programme outcomes and ensures well-rounded graduates. While NAT does not always fix rigid percentages in publicly available regulation, good practice and many programme designs use a breakdown close to ~15% general education, ~20% theoretical/methodological, ~35% scientific-professional, ~30% professional/applied.
- In the Zootechnics programme, as shown on the Faculty website, these distinctions are implemented: early years contain more general education and theoretical/methodological courses; mid and later years include more scientific-professional content; and final years + elective blocks + practical components deliver professional-applied training (including production practice etc.). The programme appears to align with the proportions commonly used for accreditation, though exact counts need calculation.