I would not necessarily change my participation idea as it had a lot of the valid ideas, concepts and skills, like those described in scenario two- and this was done for the right reasons as oppose to many initiatives, such as described in scenario one that is merely a token gesture. 

One aspect that I would have liked to have developed was a continuation of the project to future groups and year groups within the organisation, making it truly sustainable in nature. Unfortunately due to funding and various factors this sadly didn't transpire, but the ideas, concepts and positive impact was there and I think it is evident that if these projects are truly being encouraged for the right participants and for the right motivations, more ringfenced funding needs to be available at both local and national level.

My own participation in an event or sequence offers valuable insights.

If I were to reflect on a recent professional development workshop I attended, I would categorize my initial engagement as Induced. The workshop was organized by my institution, and participation was strongly encouraged, almost mandated, as part of our continuous professional growth. The topics and structure were predetermined by the organizers, and while beneficial, my role was primarily to absorb information and follow the set agenda.

However, as the workshop progressed, particularly during breakout sessions and Q&A, my participation shifted towards Invited. The facilitators actively solicited input, encouraged debate, and allowed for the co-creation of solutions to specific challenges we faced in our roles. This provided an opening to contribute on terms that were, to some extent, set together with my peers and the facilitators.

Looking back, if I were to make changes to this activity, I would advocate for a stronger emphasis on Invited and even Autonomous/Organic participation from the outset. Instead of a fully pre-defined agenda, I would propose an initial phase where participants, especially those with "elite mind titles" and significant experience, could collaboratively shape the workshop's focus areas and desired outcomes. This could involve pre-workshop surveys, small group discussions to identify pressing needs, or even a "hackathon" style approach to problem-solving. This shift would leverage the collective expertise more effectively, fostering greater ownership and potentially leading to more innovative and directly applicable solutions, moving beyond mere knowledge transfer to genuine co-creation and transformative learning.

This approach would align with the principles of sustainable pedagogies, ensuring that participation is not just about compliance but about active, meaningful engagement that empowers individuals to contribute to and shape their learning and professional environment.

I reflected on how participation is incorporated into the current teaching sessions delivered by my unit. Our sessions are interactive and incorporate opportunities for participation with materials, people and issues and concepts. However the participation is currently almost exclusively induced. I think we could improve this by involving our learners more in the content and development of our sessions and by being less scripted and more responsive to their stated needs.

Our outcomes are visible and have the potential to be actionable and transformative in improving the confidence, connection and sense of belonging of our learners. I believe we can do more here - by encouraging more discussion between learners.

To analyze my own approach to participation based on Unit 3 Table 1, I would evaluate the shift from "individual achievement" toward "collaborative deliberation." My event initially relied on fixed learning outcomes, which I now realize limits true participation. Using the descriptors, I recognize that my role must move from a "director" to a facilitator who is willing to "let go" and embrace the "fuzziness" of shared situations. For Activity 3.1, I would change my idea to prioritize problematisation. Instead of providing answers, I will create space for empathetic interactions where learners co-curate the experience through making and exhibiting. This aligns with the "power with" model, ensuring the process is interconnected and interdependent rather than a top-down instruction.