Author: Jaroslav Burian

is an Associate Professor and Deputy Head at the Department of Geoinformatics, Faculty of Science, Palacký University Olomouc. His expertise lies in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), spatial analysis, and urban and regional planning. He focuses on applying spatial data, sensor networks, and open data to support evidence-based decision-making in public administration.

Tailored Expert Trainings

Written by Jaroslav Burian on July 15, 2026. Posted in Content. No Comments on Tailored Expert Trainings

Description:

Practical trainings conducted by academic professionals for public administration employees – referred to as Tailored Expert Trainings – represent a dynamic form of cooperation between academia and the applied sector. These trainings facilitate the direct transfer of up-to-date knowledge from research, development, and university education into the day-to-day practice of public administration. They differ from typical commercial courses by their high degree of specialization, narrow thematic focus, and strong customization to the specific needs of participants.

The objective of such trainings is to strengthen the professional competencies of public administration officials through interactive instruction based on scientific know-how. The content is built around real-life problems and data from the public sector. The ability to work with real datasets and tailor the course material to the actual needs of participants is a key added value of this cooperation model.

Objectives

Tailored Expert Trainings aim to achieve the following core objectives:

Transfer of specialized knowledge and skills that are not typically covered in commercially available courses and reflect the latest scientific and technological trends.
Customizing content to specific participant groups and their institutional settings.
Enhancing the practical applicability of expert knowledge through hands-on data work and real-world examples.
Strengthening interdisciplinary and inter-institutional collaboration between university departments and public sector bodies.
Building long-term relationships and partnerships, which may lead to contract research, expert consultations, or joint publicly funded projects.
Providing researchers with valuable insights and inspiration for new research questions and applied studies derived from real-world challenges encountered by public administration professionals.

How does the format work?

Target Group of Participants

Potential training participants may include:

Clerks, analysts, and technical staff in central and local government institutions, public agencies, and related organizations.
Managers and department heads, project or team leaders.
Mayors, deputy mayors, or other public administration representatives involved in adopting or implementing new technologies or procedures.
The selection of training topics should be closely aligned with the profile and needs of the participant group.

Group Size

The recommended group size is 5 to 10 participants. Smaller groups enable higher interactivity, individual consultations, and flexible pacing of the training.

Duration and Timing

The recommended length of training is 1 to 2 working days, depending on topic complexity and the desired level of depth. To accommodate the availability of both public officials and academics, training is best scheduled outside the main teaching semester (e.g., during the summer or examination period).

Training Format

Trainings are highly practice-oriented, emphasizing real-world examples, participant-led tasks, and hands-on engagement.
It is advisable to work with real datasets and case examples that participants bring from their institutions.
Avoid generic or simulated data – instead, aim to incorporate real institutional data under the guidance of the trainer during independent work phases.
A two-trainer setup has proven effective – one leads the main lecture and demonstrations, while the other provides individual support to less advanced participants.

Trainers and Expertise

Trainings should be professionally guaranteed by a senior academic expert with experience in both research and practical application. Active involvement of PhD students and postdoctoral researchers is strongly recommended – they often contribute highly specialized and up-to-date knowledge. Pre-training preparation should include close communication with the participating institution regarding training goals, participant profiles, and expectations.

Example Training Topics

The following is a non-exhaustive list of possible themes. The content should always be customized:

Use of open data, its analysis and application in decision-making.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and cartography – visualization of spatial data.
Fundamentals of process automation using scripting (e.g., Python, R).
Use of graphic software for creating maps, infographics, and reports.
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and its use in public administration.
Data analysis and visualization – building interactive dashboards, maps, and summary charts.

Benefits for Participants

Participants (civil servants, public managers):

Acquisition of advanced skills and tools applicable to their daily work.
Opportunity to work with their own data and discuss real problems.
Enhancement of professional competencies and flexibility.

Academic Staff and Universities:

Opportunities for real-world collaboration and applied research inspiration.
Transfer of academic knowledge into practice.
Establishment of long-term partnerships with the public sector.

Public Administration Institutions:

Upskilling of employees in modern tools and methods.
More effective internal processes.
Enhanced innovation capacity and readiness for data-driven decision-making.

Challenges (and ways to address them)

Another potential challenge relates to the need for formal accreditation of trainings, especially in contexts where public administration institutions require officially recognized certification for their staff’s professional development. In some countries, such as the Czech Republic, accreditation can be granted by government bodies or professional associations (e.g., the Ministry of the Interior). However, the process often involves extensive documentation and compliance with formal standards, which may prolong the preparation timeline. To mitigate this, organizers should initiate accreditation procedures well in advance and maintain clear communication with accrediting institutions to ensure alignment with expected criteria.

A further challenge lies in managing the diversity of participant skill levels, which can significantly affect the group dynamic and the overall effectiveness of the training. Trainers must be flexible and responsive, ready to adjust the scope, depth, and pace of the content delivery in real time. Gathering feedback during the training—preferably through interactive formats—enables facilitators to make immediate modifications, such as skipping redundant sections or elaborating on more advanced topics as needed. Incorporating real-time feedback mechanisms and being prepared to adapt the training structure accordingly are crucial for maintaining participant engagement and ensuring the relevance of the training to all experience levels.

Required Funding for Activities

Trainings are typically funded by the contracting public institutions (municipalities, government bodies, etc.). The cost is calculated individually, based on university regulations and the financial capacity of the contracting institution. It includes trainer preparation, contact hours, and potential use of facilities or equipment. These trainings are considered highly specialized services, and may be funded from institutional training budgets or public grants.

Required resources at a glance

	Hours	Days	Weeks	Months
Researchers` time for trainings preparation		x	X
Policymakers` time		X

Example

The Department of Geoinformatics, Faculty of Science, Palacký University Olomouc has been conducting specialized trainings for public administration professionals for over 15 years. The trainings are held irregularly and adapted to specific requests. They are accredited by the Czech Association for Geoinformation (ČAGI).

The courses focus on cartography, GIS, and remote sensing. The key principle is customization – including the use of participant data and institution-specific tasks. Trainings are held in university computer labs, typically using QGIS and ArcGIS. The format has consistently been evaluated by participants as highly beneficial.

An example of such a course was Unmanned Aerial Systems – Operation, Mapping, Photogrammetry, and Laser Scanning, conducted as part of continuous professional education. The two-day training (20 contact hours) combined lectures on UAV operation principles, relevant Czech and EU legislation, and sensor technologies with practical exercises in flying multirotor and fixed-wing drones, followed by data processing to produce orthophotos, digital terrain models, and 3D point clouds.

How to support citizen science (geoparticipation) by modern digital methods and frameworks

Written by Jaroslav Burian on June 22, 2026. Posted in Content, Cross-Cutting Issues OV. No Comments on How to support citizen science (geoparticipation) by modern digital methods and frameworks

Description

Geoparticipation in the context of citizen science represents a specific group of participatory methods that enable the public to actively contribute to the collection of spatially explicit data through digital map‑based interfaces. In both Czech and international practice, this approach is most commonly implemented through so‑called emotional (participatory) mapping, in which respondents record their experiences, opinions, or subjective perceptions of specific places directly into a map using points, lines, or polygons. These spatial inputs are typically supplemented with textual descriptions, photographs, comments, or predefined thematic categories.

The collected data are subsequently processed using standard Geographic Information Systems (GIS) workflows, including data cleaning, aggregation, spatial analysis, and visualization. A wide range of visualization techniques can be applied to emotional mapping data; however, digital cartographic methods such as heat maps, aggregated visualizations using hexagonal grids of varying resolutions, cartograms, cartodiagrams, or clustering techniques are most commonly used to facilitate interpretation of results by end users.

Unlike conventional questionnaire surveys, geoparticipation captures not only respondents’ opinions but also their precise spatial location associated with each response. This makes the method particularly suitable for topics where spatial context is essential, such as transportation, safety, quality of public spaces, environmental issues, or spatial and urban development. In practice, geoparticipation is often implemented as an extension of a traditional questionnaire enriched with spatial questions.

The method is not intended to produce statistically representative samples but rather to serve as a targeted participatory survey whose main value lies in identifying specific locations and issues that are typically absent from administrative datasets or difficult to detect through conventional means. The collected responses provide valuable supporting evidence for municipal and regional authorities when making strategic decisions informed by public opinion.

The key features in a nutshell

The fundamental characteristic of geoparticipation is the active involvement of citizens in the collection of spatial data through a simple map‑based application. The method supports mapping of points, lines, and polygons, with each spatial entry accompanied by a textual comment and, where applicable, a predefined thematic category specified by the research designer.

Geoparticipation can be used as a standalone research tool or as an extension of a traditional questionnaire by adding a spatial dimension. It is applicable across diverse respondent groups and, due to its intuitive design, is suitable for both technically skilled users and lay participants without advanced IT knowledge. Data collection can take place entirely online via a publicly accessible map application or directly in the field using tablets or mobile phones under the guidance of trained facilitators.

Typical topics include perceived safety and fear, positively and negatively perceived places, proposals for urban development (parks, playgrounds, greenery, benches), problematic traffic situations, noise, pollution, or parking issues. The method enables the collection of data that are otherwise largely unavailable and creates an important bridge between expert planning practices and the everyday experiences of residents.

How does the format work?

Implementing a geoparticipatory mapping project requires careful preparation of the methodology, technical solution, and survey questions. Equally important is the selection of the mapping location and the target group of respondents. A key methodological decision concerns the choice of geometry type—whether respondents will map only points or also lines and polygons. While point mapping is user‑friendly and efficient, lines and polygons allow for more precise representation of phenomena but place higher demands on user orientation and subsequent data processing.

The selection of an appropriate base map is equally critical. In some cases, orthophotos are preferable, while in others topographic maps or detailed urban plans are more suitable. An inadequately chosen base map can significantly reduce the quality of the mapped data. Each mapped feature should include a mandatory description and ideally a thematic category to facilitate later analysis, as spatial clicks without contextual information have limited interpretative value.

It is recommended to use widely familiar map backgrounds to ensure respondents feel comfortable using an interface similar to everyday map applications.

Geoparticipation is best combined with a short non‑spatial questionnaire integrated into the same tool. This usually includes questions on overall satisfaction with the topic and basic sociodemographic information (e.g., age, gender). In some cases, information about the respondent’s place of residence is also collected, typically in a partially anonymized form (such as city district or street), to distinguish between local residents and visitors to the area.

From a technical perspective, only a limited number of tools currently support geoparticipation. Basic scenarios can be implemented using tools such as Survey123; however, more complex logic usually requires the development of a custom solution. While specialized PPGIS platforms are used internationally, none offer a universally applicable solution. In exceptional cases, digital data collection may be supplemented by paper‑based methods (e.g., for seniors or young children), although subsequent data integration is both methodologically and technically demanding.

In the Czech Republic, a specialized company (https://www.pocitovemapy.cz/) develops and implements customized web environments tailored to specific formats, locations, and thematic requirements.

Role of Participants

The academic sector typically ensures methodological design, selection of technical solutions, configuration of the mapping application, and subsequent data processing and evaluation using GIS. Its role also includes interpretation of results and preparation of outputs understandable to both public authorities and the general public.

Municipalities or regions define the thematic focus, specify practical decision‑making questions, and ensure communication with citizens, particularly through promotion of data collection via websites and social media. Citizens contribute local knowledge and experiences that are not available in official datasets. In some cases, targeting specific population groups—such as primary school children when mapping safe routes to school—can be particularly beneficial.

In general, the greater the number and diversity of responses collected within a given area, the more robust and valid the results can be considered.

Benefits for participations

The principal benefit of geoparticipation lies in its ability to generate unique spatial data that are otherwise largely unavailable. The collected data represent respondents’ opinions linked to precise spatial locations. A higher concentration of responses in a given location increases the credibility of the findings.

The method enables precise localization of problems and their qualitative description directly from the perspective of residents. For public authorities, geoparticipation represents a fast and flexible tool for identifying priorities and local issues. For academia, it offers significant opportunities for applied research and collaboration with public administration. Students benefit from working with real‑world data and participating in projects with direct practical impact.

Challenges (and ways to address them)

A fundamental limitation of geoparticipation is the non‑representative nature of the respondent sample and the risk of collecting a low number of responses. Results must therefore be interpreted as exploratory rather than statistically representative. This limitation can be partially mitigated through targeted promotion and involvement of local institutions.

Additional challenges include the technical and methodological complexity of project preparation, particularly when developing custom solutions, as well as issues related to data privacy and anonymization when combining spatial and personal information.

Tasks and Resources

Geoparticipatory projects are both time‑ and expertise‑intensive. Preparation typically takes approximately one month, data collection another month, and evaluation at least one month. The overall project duration therefore usually spans around three months.

In terms of funding, geoparticipation is most commonly implemented through contractual research or close collaboration with municipalities. Universities are generally unable to provide such services free of charge, as they require experienced teams and adequate technical infrastructure.

Example

In recent years, Palacký University Olomouc has implemented a number of geoparticipatory projects, including mapping urban temperature phenomena in the city of Olomouc, monitoring mosquito occurrence in the Litovelské Pomoraví Protected Landscape Area, emotional maps of perceived fear, and the Safe Route to School project focusing on problematic traffic situations from the perspective of primary school children. Additional public outputs are available through specialized web portals dedicated to emotional mapping in the city of Olomouc.

Do you want to know more about the policy engagement toolkit?

Do you want to share your experience in policy engagement? Do you think about contributing to the policy engagement toolkit? Feel free to contact Tome Sandevski via science-policy@pvw.uni-frankfurt.de

A Win-Win Partnership: Collaborative Diploma Theses

Written by Jaroslav Burian on June 12, 2026. Posted in Content, Written Formats OV. No Comments on A Win-Win Partnership: Collaborative Diploma Theses

Description

This text explores the significance of collaborative efforts between academic institutions and state agencies in the context of diploma theses (bachelor, master, and doctoral) solved by students. By fostering partnerships between students, faculty, and policymakers, we can enhance the relevance and impact of academic research, better inform public policy, and cultivate a new generation of scholars equipped to address real-world challenges.

Such collaborations offer a unique opportunity to bridge the gap between theory and practice, ensuring that academic research is directly relevant to the needs of society. By working together, students, faculty, and policymakers can identify pressing issues, gather the necessary data, and develop evidence-based solutions that can be implemented at the local, regional, or national level.

The key features in a nutshell

Objectives-Academic theses solved in cooperation with the public sector seeks:

To bridge the gap between theory and practice: By aligning academic research with the needs of the public sector, we can ensure that research findings are directly applicable to real-world problems.
To enhance the quality and relevance of diploma theses: By providing students with access to real-world data, expertise, and mentorship from policymakers, we can help them produce more impactful and relevant research.
To foster a culture of collaboration and knowledge exchange: By encouraging partnerships between academia and government, we can create a more interconnected and innovative research ecosystem. This can lead to the long-term and fruitful cooperation, beneficial for all partners.
To inform public policy with evidence-based research and analysis: By providing policymakers with access to high-quality research, we can help them make informed decisions that are based on evidence rather than intuition or ideology.

How does the format work?

Diploma theses undertaken within this collaborative framework are jointly supervised by a faculty member and a relevant government official or policymaker. This shared oversight ensures that the research aligns with both academic standards and the practical needs of the public sector. The research topic is collaboratively selected, considering the interests of all parties involved.

For the student, the topic must be clear, attractive, and interesting. For the faculty member, the topic must fall within their expertise and meet academic standards, including a sufficient level of scientific rigor. For the policymaker, the topic must be practical and implementable. A common issue to avoid is mismatched expectations, where the academic supervisor directs the work towards a highly academic direction, while the policymaker’s perspective is often too rigid (adhering strictly to legislation and established practices), thus limiting the space for innovation.

By working closely with policymakers, students gain invaluable insights into the complexities of the policymaking process. They learn how to communicate their research findings effectively to non-academic audiences and understand the challenges and constraints faced by policymakers. This hands-on experience equips students with the skills necessary to become future leaders in both academia and the public sector.

Key phases in addressing the thesis:

A precise discussion of the thesis title and content before commencing work.
An early in-person meeting of all parties involved to establish personal contact.
Presentation of each party’s vision for the thesis content.
Acquisition of necessary data and cooperation with public administration in its correct interpretation prior to thesis completion.
Regular meetings and updates on the progress of the work.
Presentation of the thesis findings to relevant public administration experts (in-depth knowledge of the subject matter often helps students identify inaccurate or incorrect interpretations of the results).
Presentation of the final results of the thesis not only to an academic audience but also to a broader group of public administration experts (mayor, councilors, director, representatives, etc.).
Submission (presentation) of the thesis to other relevant policymakers.

Benefits for Participants

Students:
- Gain practical experience by working on real-world problems.
- Develop transferable skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and communication.
- Contribute to meaningful research that can inform public policy.
- Network with policymakers and other professionals in the field.
- Enhance their career prospects by demonstrating their ability to apply academic knowledge to real-world challenges.
Teachers:
- Expand their research networks and collaborations.
- Stay updated on current policy issues and trends.
- Enhance the relevance of their teaching by incorporating real-world examples and case studies.
- Contribute to the development of the next generation of policy analysts and researchers.
Public Sector (policymakers, officials, agencies):
- Benefit from fresh perspectives and innovative ideas generated by students and faculty.
- Gain access to high-quality research that can inform policy decisions.
- Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government operations.
- Strengthen relationships with academic institutions and foster a culture of collaboration.

Collaboration with Policymakers

Policymakers play a crucial role in the collaborative process, providing guidance, feedback, and access to relevant data. They work closely with students and faculty throughout the research process, ensuring that the research is aligned with their needs and priorities.

By collaborating with policymakers, students and faculty can gain a deeper understanding of the policymaking process and the challenges faced by government agencies. This can help them tailor their research to be more relevant and impactful.

Challenges (and ways to address them)

While the benefits of collaboration are numerous, it is essential to acknowledge the challenges that may arise. For students, balancing coursework with research demands, obtaining necessary data, and effectively communicating complex research findings to policymakers can be daunting. However, these challenges can be mitigated through flexible deadlines, streamlined data sharing protocols, and training in policy communication.

Faculty members involved in collaborative projects may face increased workloads due to the additional responsibilities of supervising students and coordinating with policymakers. To address this, institutions can provide faculty with reduced teaching loads and dedicated research support.

For the public sector, participation in collaborative projects can be challenging due to limited resources and bureaucratic hurdles. However, by prioritizing collaboration and allocating dedicated resources, government agencies can reap the benefits of partnerships with academic institutions.

Additionally, topics with strict deadlines imposed by the public administration should be approached with caution. Students may face unforeseen challenges, such as studying abroad, extending their studies, or needing to take a leave of absence. Such circumstances could lead to substantial delays in completing the thesis, potentially resulting in academic penalties for the student and complications for the collaborating institution. Thus, flexibility in timelines is essential when choosing a thesis topic.

Tasks and Resources

In a typical collaborative project, students are responsible for conducting literature reviews, collecting and analyzing data, writing the text, and presenting their findings to policymakers. Faculty members provide guidance and mentorship, connect students with policymakers, and facilitate knowledge exchange. Policymakers play a crucial role in identifying research priorities, providing data and resources, reviewing research findings, and implementing policy recommendations.

To ensure the success of these collaborations, adequate motivation is essential. All sides (student, faculty member, policymaker) must find acceptable intersection of their requirements, needs and wishes, and must be flexible and able to do some compromises.

Required Funding for Activities

Diploma theses is obligatory part of almost all study programs, so there is no direct need for direct financial resources. Nevertheless, if this option exists it is good to find some supporting resources like student stipends, research assistantships, and administrative support. By investing in collaborative projects, governments can enhance the quality of their decision-making and improve the lives of their citizens.

Example

At the Department of Geoinformatics, Palacky University Olomouc, more than 40 diploma theses have been successfully defended over the past 15 years. These theses were conducted in close cooperation with several state institutions, primarily the Olomouc Region and the Statutory City of Olomouc. The theses covered a wide range of topics focusing on spatial planning, regional planning, transportation, and the environment, with an emphasis on spatial data, spatial analysis, and geovisualization. The results of these theses have been widely utilized by experts from various departments and policymakers at managerial and political levels. Consequently, these findings have directly contributed to more accurate and evidence-based decision-making in public administration.

Many of these diploma theses have also led to the creation of scientific publications, professional articles, and cartographic outputs—both printed and web-based—that are regularly used by municipal staff for spatial and transport planning purposes. In several cases, students complemented their thesis work with professional internships at city or regional offices, gaining hands-on experience in public administration. Specific examples of topics include analyses of transport accessibility to public infrastructure, modern methods for visualizing the spatial plan of Olomouc, and the development of automated tools and ArcGIS extensions for processing large geospatial datasets.

Do you want to know more about the policy engagement toolkit?

On-Site Visits: Students to Public Administration Institutions

Written by Jaroslav Burian on May 18, 2026. Posted in Content, Teaching and Learning Methods OV. No Comments on On-Site Visits: Students to Public Administration Institutions

Description

Organized visits of university students to public administration institutions (so-called on-site visits) represent an effective form of experiential learning, which brings together academic education and practical operation of the public sector. These visits offer students valuable insights into the functioning of state and local institutions, the challenges they face, and the tools and methods used in real-world administrative processes. At the same time, they strengthen mutual understanding between the academic and public sectors and often lay the groundwork for future collaboration in the form of internships, joint research, or employment.

Diverse selection of visited institutions, ranging from large central bodies to smaller local branches and specialized agencies, ensures a broad spectrum of perspectives on how public administration functions in various thematic and territorial contexts.

Objectives

On-site visits of students to public administration institutions aim to:

Provide students with practical insights into the functioning of public institutions and their internal processes.
Encourage critical thinking and active learning through interaction with professionals and real examples from practice.
Create opportunities for future collaboration – student internships, diploma theses, or expert consultation.
Build bridges between academia and practice, enhancing the relevance of university curricula.
Stimulate long-term partnerships based on mutual understanding of the needs and capabilities of both sectors.

How does the format work?

The core of the activity consists of an organized excursion, during which students visit 4–6 institutions per day (depending on location and travel time). Optimally, the program is spread over two days, allowing sufficient space for transfer, breaks, and in-depth discussions.

Visits are designed for smaller groups of students – ideally around 10, maximum 15 participants. Each visit lasts a minimum of 45 minutes, optimally 60–90 minutes. The structure typically includes:

A presentation by a qualified staff member.
If possible, a practical demonstration – software use, workstations, guided office tours, and examples of internal outputs.
A discussion session, which is a key component of the visit. Students are expected to prepare questions in advance.

Key phases in organizing the visit

Early planning – at least three months in advance to ensure institutional availability and logistics.
Careful selection of institutions – balancing thematic diversity and geographical distribution. Suggested examples:
- Municipal and regional offices (transport, education, culture, planning, investments, etc.)
- Cadastral office
- Statistical Offices
- Road and Motorway Directorate
- Environmental and planning agencies
- Financial administration
Preparation of students – prior study of basic facts about each institution. Students prepare independently based on brief guidelines provided by the teacher, which specify key aspects and topics to focus on during their individual pre-visit study.
Coordination with institutions – ensuring the content has added value (e.g., beyond publicly available facts), adapting to students’ level of knowledge, and encouraging informal insights.

Post-visit feedback – students complete a short questionnaire reflecting on what they found most useful or interesting, what could be improved, and any suggestions for future visits. This feedback can help refine the format and maintain quality over time.

Role of Participants

Academic staff:
- Organize the program, coordinate logistics, and communicate with partner institutions.
- Select institutions and plan the thematic focus.
- Supervise the educational outcomes of the activity.
Students:
- Prepare in advance; formulate and ask relevant questions.
- Observe key themes across all institutions (e.g., HR, data usage, IT systems, organizational culture).
- Prepare post-visit outputs – written reports, ideally in pairs, each focused on one transversal topic evaluated across all visits.
Public institutions:
- Provide expert presentations and practical demonstrations.
- Engage professionals capable of discussing technical issues (preferably beyond PR or marketing staff).

Benefits for Participants

Students:

Gain exposure to real working environments in public administration.
Learn to compare practices across institutions and evaluate effectiveness.
Establish personal contacts for future cooperation or employment.

Teachers:

Deepen ties with practice and enhance the relevance of their courses.
Strengthen partnerships with public sector actors.
Gain new ideas for research or thesis topics.

Public administration:

Raise awareness of their work among future professionals.
Identify potential interns, collaborators, or employees.
Receive feedback and fresh perspectives from academia.

Challenges (and ways to address them)

Although on-site visits offer clear educational and collaborative benefits, their implementation presents several practical and organizational challenges that must be anticipated and addressed effectively.

The most significant burden lies in the logistical organization of the entire program. Academic staff must identify suitable institutions, coordinate dates, plan transfers and time schedules, and ensure smooth communication with all involved actors. The complexity increases proportionally with the number of institutions and locations included. Ideally, these activities should be led by an academic with extensive knowledge of the field and strong professional contacts across relevant public sector organizations.

Another challenge is the availability and willingness of institutions to participate. To avoid scheduling conflicts or low engagement, it is essential to begin planning at least three months in advance. Clearly communicating the objectives and mutual benefits of the visit increases the chances of a positive response from institutional partners.

Maintaining active student engagement can also be difficult, particularly if the visits are not formally embedded in the curriculum. This can be addressed by integrating the activity into the course requirements – for example, through a system of credit recognition based on active participation, preparation of questions, and submission of reflective reports.

An often underestimated risk is the variability in the quality of presentations delivered by institutional representatives. If the presenters are not well informed about the background and expectations of the students, the sessions may become either overly basic or too technically advanced. Academic organizers should therefore provide the host institutions with a clear overview of the students’ academic profiles and study focus in advance. Additionally, it is helpful to encourage institutions to involve subject-matter experts rather than PR or administrative staff to ensure relevance and depth.

To further improve the experience and long-term quality of on-site visits, it is beneficial to collect feedback from students through a short evaluation questionnaire after the event. This allows organizers to identify the most valuable aspects of the visits as well as areas for improvement, contributing to the continuous refinement of future excursions.

Tasks and Resources On-site visits are financially undemanding for hosting institutions, requiring only time for preparation and delivery. The main costs fall on students (transport, possibly accommodation) and the organizing academic staff, who must coordinate the entire program.

The most significant burden lies in organizational time and effort, especially when multiple institutions or locations are involved. To support participation, universities may consider offering travel subsidies or integrating visits into funded field trip schemes.

Despite these costs, the educational and networking benefits make the activity highly valuable in the long term.

Example

On-site visits represent a structured form of experiential learning connecting university education with the real operation of public administration. Students visit selected institutions to observe data workflows, decision-making, and everyday administrative processes. The activity is typically integrated into specialized courses or field modules and combines expert presentations, guided tours, and discussions with practitioners. This format effectively bridges theory and practice, strengthens students’ professional orientation, and often initiates further cooperation such as internships or diploma theses.

The Department of Geoinformatics, Palacký University Olomouc, has been organizing student on-site visits for over 20 years as a mandatory part of the Geoinformatics and Cartography study program. During a three-day tour, students visit around 12 public and private institutions across the Czech Republic. The institutions include the Czech Statistical Office, Czech Office for Surveying, Mapping and Cadastre, Institute of Planning and Development Prague, MAPPA Ostrava, Olomouc Regional Authority, City of Olomouc, Directorate of Roads and Motorways, Czech Hydrometeorological Institute, and the Emergency Response Center 112. These visits are highly valued by both students and host institutions and often lead to follow-up collaborations on projects, consultations, or employ006Dent opportunities.