Conference Agenda

The research aims at enhancing pedagogical practices of developing professional development with science teachers through inquiry based laboratory activity approach towards sustainable science education in Malaysia. The research will further explore on possibility of collaboratively develop materials, ways of implement the teaching and learning materials and reveal the impact to participating teachers. Investigations are indeed about empowering children to apply knowledge, but it is essential that the teacher acts as a skilful mediator in the process (Gott et al.,1995). Hence the research centred on the following inquiries: 1) In what ways do participating teachers collaboratively develop, implement and evaluate the science teaching and learning materials that aligned with scientific literacy skills and sustainable issues? 2) To what extend does inquiry based laboratory activity influence science teacher’s to promote scientific literacy and sustainable issues in their classroom? The research is based on the Interconnected Model of Teacher Professional Growth proposed by Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) that encompasses four domains of change in teachers' professional environment include the personal domain (comprising knowledge, beliefs, and attitude), the domain of practice (involving professional experi- mentation), the domain of consequence (related to student learning) and the domain of the culture of the school (related to student learning) (Willems & Bossche, 2019). The model suggests a non-linear and recursive process for teacher professional growth, capturing the dynamics among the different domains.

Topic description. The topic of my presentation is one part of my PhD thesis research on development of educational competence among university teachers in different cultural environment, which contains thematic content analysis of the regulations of Lithuanian universities and semi-structured interview which well be taken in the framework of the research. The primary stage of the research is thematic content analysis of all regulation documents about developing educational competence among universaity teachers in Lithuania.

The main research question of this presentation. HOW THE EDUCATIONAL COMPETENCE DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM IN LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITIES COULD BE UPGRADED?

Additional (secondary) research question: what is the gap between the regulation texts and the real educational competence situation of the Lithuanian universities?

Relevance of the research. In the fast changing environment of the world educational processes the relevant concepts of the competence and educational competence are always changing (Lennon-Harmon, 2022; Enyon, Iuzzini, 2020; Carbone, 2021; Santoso, Lestari, 2019; Cebrian et al., 2020; Mahlanga, Moloto, 2022). So, despite there is a "common" theory backrounf like White (1959) and Chomsky's (1962) concepts of competence, this concept always can be updated to the current situation (Arifin, 2021). The definition of the educational competence is so flexible, that we are able to "compose" and/or interpretate this concept according to current situation: cultural, political environment, certain country, reagion or institution. This give a large potential for this research not only in Lithuanian, but also in very broad international context.

The practical relevance of the topic. Many higher education institutions (universities and colleges) of Lithuania have an absolutely formal syste, of educational competence development of the teachers/professor. Mostly it contains just a number of hours, which should be spent in specialized events. So, the practical significance of this research is to provide new model, how the educational competences system among university teachers couold be upgraded.

The high rates of depression and suicide amongst teenagers highlights the need for more preventative mental health and wellbeing measures to be in place from an earlier age. Government initiatives such as wellbeing programs and practices are being implemented into schools. There has been considerable variance in their effects, however, likely due to factors relating to implementation (Durlak, 2016).

The purpose of the proposed study is to explore how wellbeing programs are being carried out in primary schools. The aim is to highlight the opportunities and challenges that teachers have with school-based wellbeing programs and how their related practices are perceived by students. Therefore, the research questions include:

• What student/teacher/school-level factors are associated with the implementation of well-being programs in primary schools?

The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) (Cane et al., 2012) will be used as the theoretical framework for the study. The framework consists of 14 domains (1) Knowledge; (2) Skills; (3) Social/Professional Role and Identity; (4) Beliefs and Capability; (5) Optimism; (6) Beliefs about Consequences; (7) Reinforcement; (8) Intentions; (9) Goals; (10) Memory, Attention and Decision Processes; (11) Environmental Context and Resources; (12) Social Influences; (13) Emotion; and (14) Behavioural Regulation. These domains will be used alongside implementation fidelity indicators (Dane & Schneider, 1998) to understand barriers and facilitators to wellbeing program implementation.

By utilising the TDF and implementation fidelity indicators to explore teachers' and students' perspectives of wellbeing programs that have been implemented in schools, we can begin to understand what conditions are needed to increase the uptake of effective wellbeing programs and practices and explain why variance in implementation and effectiveness of programs occurs (Durlak & DuPre, 2008). A recent systematic review that was conducted to identify articles that explored teachers’ views and experiences of implementing mental health and wellbeing programs found only seven studies (Goodwin et al., 2023), two of which were conducted in Australia. Evidently, there is a need to explore this area as programs are increasingly implemented into schools. Furthermore, although behavioural interventions are often guided by theory, in practice they are often not or are only minimally (Michie & Prestwich, 2010). Similarly, studies identified in Goodwin and colleagues (2023) review lack a theoretical framework when constructing questions for teachers and analysis is often undertaken through exploration of themes that were discussed (e.g., in interviews), without attributing these themes to any framework. The authors recommend future research to adopt more robust methodological approaches. Providing a theoretical framework such as this will help to develop a better foundation for exploring and analysing teachers’ and students’ perspectives of wellbeing programs/practices.

The starting point of this study is the belief that pupils are valuable resources for research projects on inclusion in elementary schools. Thus, the objective of this research project is to let pupils` voices be heard from the beginning so that their voices will contribute to designing the research project`s focus areas. They are, after all, the experts on their own experiences and views (Alderson, 2008). This research project is about our experiences as researchers with co-creating a research project with pupils about inclusion. We want to find out with the pupils what matters to themselves when it comes to inclusion in their school life. What do they experience as inclusive or exclusive practices? What is it that really matters to them? And how can researchers co-operate with pupils to explore these questions?

A lot of research has been conducted on different aspects of inclusive education in the educational field as reflected in many different literature reviews (Nilholm, 2021). However, the research that has been conducted is mostly theoretical and does not focus on the realization of inclusive education in different settings in practice (Göransson & Nilholm 2014). What is missing is the perception of children on defining inclusion in education (Qvortrup & Qvortrup, 2018), and even more importantly how children experience inclusion in their daily lives (Mittler, 2000). As Mittler (2000) states “it is the day-to-day experiences of children in classrooms that define the quality of their participation” (p. 95). This highlights the need for a new research entry in the field of education on inclusion that is based on practical experiences, from pupil`s voices.

This is one of the reasons why some researchers have taken the step “inside” the school to investigate the concept of inclusion from the perspective of pupils. Adderley et al. (2015) highlight the importance of the pupils' perspective and that they can provide valuable insight into how teachers' practices can promote or hinder their experience of inclusion in the classroom. Messiou (2019) argues that pupils can become resources for change and the development of inclusive practices provided that they are listened to. Kleeberg-Niepage et al. (2022) describe in their study that pupils can provide important insight into success factors for inclusive practices at secondary school. In pupil-based investigations into how pupils themselves experience school, Arnesen (2020) found various examples of processes that pupils experience as including or excluding. Arnesen (2020) gained an insight into pupils' experiences both in terms of pupil-pupil relationships and teacher-pupil relationships, as well as how positive and negative cycles can be created in the social interaction at school (Arnesen, 2020). Tangen (2022) emphasizes that children are important voices in research and argues that listening to pupils' voices promotes inclusion. She suggests that a good school life can only be developed by seeing it from the pupils' own perspective (Tangen 2022). Uthus and Sivertsen (2023) have also found, through their studies in the field of practice, that teachers themselves demand a pupil-oriented perspective on inclusion.

These previously done research projects emphasize the importance of pupils' voices in research on inclusion in their school life. This project is about our experiences as researchers with using co-creating processes in the research field of inclusion and not about the empirical data that we collected. We want to focus on the co-creating process together with the pupils regarding inclusion while focusing on the following research questions:

Research questions:

1. How can researchers let pupils’ voices be heard regarding their experiences with inclusion at school?

1. How can pupils’ voices contribute to the design of a research project about inclusion in primary school?

This presentation shares the findings of a critical constructivist grounded theory study carried out in Higher Education (HE) in Ireland on the assumptions present in the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL). Assumptions are significant because they represent the driving forces or motivations operating in each context. It is argued that understanding what assumptions are present will bring more transparent, equitable procedures and ultimately will support the delivery of RPL provision (Friesen, 2011; Hamer, 2016, Travers, 2017). Assumptions describe what is expected in each situation, and we act accordingly in response to these underlying assumptions. RPL provides for the identification, assessment, and validation of non-formal and informal learning which in turn allows for access to HE and/or for credits within programmes. RPL is a key component of the broader lifelong learning remit of Higher Education Institutions (HEI). RPL provides for the acknowledgement of learning gained through work, volunteering and life and in doing so RPL supports everyone across the lifespan where individuals choose to return to HE to support their career or for reskilling or upskilling.

This research took a grounded theory approach and followed Charmaz (2006), for the data analysis of 82 semi-structured interviews which were carried out between 2014 and 2016, first with RPL Mentors, then Assessors and finally with Candidates for RPL. The theoretical framework employed for this research adapted Van Kleef’s (2007) model of RPL by following Schein’s (2004) organisational culture model which had explicitly positioned assumptions at the deepest level of culture below espoused values. There were three rounds of coding in the data analysis. The second stage of coding foregrounded two major themes, and these were treated as conceptual categories; assumptions about what is possible through RPL and, assumptions about what is required for RPL. Thus, the findings show that two sets of interrelated assumptions exist in RPL.

This presentation will explore these major findings and the differences in expression between the participants will be explicated. Upholding the academic standards was assumed by all the participants although it was really emphasised by the assessors of RPL. Similarly, the assumption that protocols and procedures were in place was important to RPL mentors and assessors, yet it was not mentioned by the candidates for RPL at all. Instead, the candidates assumed that RPL frees up time, and they also assumed that it meant not repeating learning, and that RPL provided for acknowledgement for their prior learning. All three sets of participants assumed that RPL allows access to the HE system, and that it was a rigorous process. Candidates and RPL mentors assumed that evidence is key, while candidates and assessors assumed that RPL facilitates progression.

This research concludes that the interrelated assumptions that were expressed provides empirical evidence of the conditional nature of our expectations about RPL. Assumptions drive our expectations and the distinct roles of each of the participants whether assessor, RPL mentor or candidate for RPL was clearly apparent in the ways that the assumptions were expressed. For the assessors, although it was important to all, the academic standards were sacrosanct and operating safely within the parameters of policy and procedure was essential. Despite these assumptions, the candidates openly expressed their motivations for engaging with RPL and so distinctly different assumptions were named, such as the assumptions that RPL helps to free up time and that RPL means they do not have to repeat what is known already. This research concludes that the participants respect the inter-dependent nature of what is at stake; that RPL only works to provide access and/or credits for prior learning if the standards are upheld.

University development must be based on the exercise of solid planning with a defined direction, with timely monitoring and evaluation of the achievements obtained and challenges to be addressed that allow for continuous improvement. Link to the productive projects of the Innovation Agenda of the South-Southeast Region in Ibero-America to meet the demands of the social context. Through educational research, it will allow us to highlight cultural roots and define non-profit ethical positions related to the development of social innovation to operationalize the promise of leaving no one behind (Cabrera-Hernández, 2021; Natarén and Reyes, 2022; UN Sustainable Development Group, 2023).

Action research in liberating education recognizes that human beings are conditioned, due to lifelong learning, reflected in the coherence between discourse and practice. On the one hand, there is the humanistic vision, supported by philosophers. and intellectuals at UNESCO (2020), that advocates a hermeneutic approach focused on the integral development of people. On the other hand, we find the utilitarian vision, supported by economists from the OECD (2010) and the World Bank (Ferreyra et al., 2021), which leans towards a more instrumental approach based on individual competencies for a world of work. .

Our study identifies the processes of transfer of knowledge and values, located in educational practice, from the problematization of the contents, the analysis of reality, confrontation of the student through critical dialogue, and teaching the student to think critically about the contents, by which are designed two educational programs that address the social utility of knowledge. This dimension allows measuring the capacity to fulfill the function or social role expected of science and the production of knowledge to promote tertiary education in the Ibero-American region. (Cruz, 2020).

Through the social usefulness of knowledge, it is necessary to ask how it should be approached from the didactic situation, so the questions are established: ¿What is the purpose of scientific knowledge and for whom is it beneficial? What relationships are promoted between teachers and students according to the various interpretations of the usefulness of knowledge? Who plays a role in defining the social utility of knowledge for social justice? Allowing us to structure the analysis of our study. It is recognized that scientific knowledge has the “capacity” to become a “resource or asset” for social agents who do not belong to the scientific field but carry out the work of teacher-researchers in emerging, possible, preliminary or transitory educational contexts.

In particular, understanding what this concept implies in our research is related to the dimensions of social appropriation of knowledge, competencies, culture, environmental uncertainty and strategies (ASCCCIE) as a resource for educational management in action research processes: theoretical, methodological and practical (Elliot, 1993; Mertler, 2021). Answer: ¿What are the challenges of action research in sciences and arts in the ASCCIE educational context for the development of higher education in the south-southeast region of Mexico?

Through the Critical Theory of Education, the historical-social character of higher education examines the relationship between the educational system and the structure of society through the intervention of university educational practice, understanding technological aspects, ideologies, educational objectives and responsibility. pedagogical, whose evaluation is in relation to practice (Horkheimer, 2000). The framework allows improving management and educational practice in Latin America through the application of the phenomenological-hermeneutic methodology in the educational experience of the university classroom, appealing to philosophical traditions (Van Mannen, 2003), fostering critical awareness and respect for individuality, and allowing the legitimacy of the teacher in the educational field for scientific research with the use of qualitative methods for educational emancipation (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018; Denzin et al., 2023).

Research Question Outline

In an era marked by complex global challenges, from climate change to health crises, the imperative for innovative and collaborative solutions is paramount. This urgency foregrounds the role of interdisciplinarity within European Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), positing it not merely as an academic ideal but as a crucial framework for addressing the multifaceted problems of our time. However, the gap between the theoretical valorization of interdisciplinarity and its practical application in Higher Education remains a significant barrier.

My doctoral research endeavors to bridge this chasm by exploring the question I would like to raise in Ignite Talk: How can European HEIs effectively actualize interdisciplinarity, transforming it from a conceptual ideal into a sustainable, practice-oriented approach that fosters collaboration across disciplines to address the pressing challenges of our age?

Theoretical Framework

Grounded in the postmodern paradigm, this research underscores the fluid, pluralistic nature of knowledge and reality, challenging the rigid boundaries that have traditionally defined academic disciplines. Central to this inquiry is the theory of social constructivism, which posits that knowledge is co-constructed through social interactions and cultural contexts. This perspective is pivotal for understanding interdisciplinarity, as it highlights the importance of cultural, institutional, and political factors in shaping interdisciplinary practices.

Social constructivism also emphasizes the role of dialogue and collaboration in the construction of knowledge, suggesting that a true interdisciplinary approach requires not just the blending of disciplines but the creation of new, co-constructed understandings that transcend individual disciplinary perspectives.

Inspiration and Implication

My doctoral research is driven by the conviction that interdisciplinarity holds the key to addressing the complex challenges of our time. By redefining interdisciplinarity within a post-disciplinary context, this study aims to propose actionable strategies for its effective implementation in HEIs, thereby enhancing academic collaboration and fostering a more inclusive, innovative educational environment.

The findings of my research will not only shed light on the barriers to effective interdisciplinarity but also provide a roadmap for HEIs to navigate these challenges, fostering a culture of collaboration that transcends disciplinary boundaries. In doing so, this study will inspire a reimagining of higher education, one that embraces the uncertainty of our age as an opportunity for innovation, collaboration, and transformative learning.

Why Ignite Talk?

I believe in vocalizing the ideas. I believe in giving the voice to the unheard or silenced ones. I will share compelling data from focus groups among HE actors in Lithuania, offering a nuanced conceptualization of interdisciplinarity and drawing attention to its post-disciplinary future. Through this exploration, we will ignite a conversation about the power relations,potential of interdisciplinarity to not only advance academic knowledge but also to equip learners and educators with the tools to collaboratively address the pressing global challenges of our time, fostering a sense of hope and resilience for the future of Higher Education.

This study seeks to contribute to the emerging post-positivist discourse in translation studies by challenging currently prevalent approaches towards translator competence development from a post-structuralist complex systems perspective. If translation studies curricula of higher education institutions (HEIs) were focused on a broader development of the mindset necessary for the reality-yet-to-come, instead of the development of predefined sets of translator skills and capabilities, then future translators would be better equipped for contexts characterised as a VUCA world (Bennis and Nanus 2003) – the world of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. However, currently, translator education is based on translator competence models that are linear, structured and mainly focused on know-how rather than on knowledge (Hébrard 2013) due to various factors: they are grounded on constructivist theories, translator education is market-orientated, technologies evolve faster than our theories, and HEIs are slow in change.

Among diverse professional landscapes, translators are an indicative example of competence development as subject to the technological advancement and overall future uncertainty. Firstly, translation, both as a discipline and a profession, has a long history of being subject to the implications of technological developments and this dates back to the Georgetown-IBM experiment in 1954 aimed at machine translation (MT) research. Secondly, handling uncertainty is an inherent part of translators’ work (i.e., navigating the challenges to produce accurate and contextually appropriate translations), thus, competence development for uncertain professional working environments is at the core of translator competence. And yet, due to the prevalence of neural MT and LLM-based technologies, many graduates need to upskill already right after they have completed their studies. Therefore, the underlying research question raised in this study is how future uncertainty could be incorporated into translator education. To address that, this study aims to re-conceptualise the notion of translator competence based on the post-structuralist complex systems approach by defining competence development as a complex system.

What has the theoretical background of complex systems theories to offer to the European educational domain? Competence development in the European Higher Education Area has occupied the focus of many international debates on curricula, assessment and education in general (European Commission 2019, OECD 2017). Throughout Europe, the focus on competence assessment has been shifting from mere measurement of pre-defined sets of skills to the evaluation of much more complex abilities that are ingrained in real-world contexts (Koeppen et al. 2008). As major educational domains keep moving beyond the long-standing linear, hierarchical and top-down attitudes towards learning and teaching, the understanding of the new dynamics of education can benefit from complexity-informed approach (Biesta 2020), which is increasingly more apparent across many disciplines and professions (Byrne and Callaghan 2014).

Concequently, this complexity-informed standpoint also reflects an ontological turn that is underway in the current paradigm of translator education and HE in general. It calls for viewing students “as persons, not merely knowers” (Barnett 2004), or in a post-modern sense, insists upon a shift from what learners develop or acquire to who they become (Dall‘Alba and Barnacle 2007). As the understanding of what kind of knowledge and competencies are necessary for daily life and employment is rapidly changing (The World Economic forum 2020), and the focus is shifted towards the unpredictability of what learners may need to be able to do in the future (Markauskaite et al. 2022), translator education is expected to undertake a transformative role first and foremost by equipping future translators with the disposition to reflect on becoming and being a translator in this era of digital technologies and rapid change rather than focusing on the mere acquisition of translation skills and capabilities.

In the realm of participatory research, the interplay between ethics and ethical procedures often gives rise to intriguing contradictions. This workshop is dedicated to shedding light on these inconsistencies, fostering a heightened awareness of ethical complexities throughout the various stages of research, including research design, data collection, analysis, and the dissemination of findings, with a special focus on inclusive education.

A strong drive towards enhancing integrity of the research is visible in constant development of new institutional rules and procedures that must be adhered to. To this end, participants will familiarise themselves with the ethical guidelines and procedures as delineated by prominent institutional frameworks like the British Educational Research Association, the Academy of Social Sciences, and the Economic and Social Research Council.

However, we argue that in research practices, where the process and relationships take precedence and where micro-ethical dilemmas are frequently encountered, the focus should be on the professional integrity of the researcher. As Guillemin and Gillam pointed out: "There is no direct or necessary relationship between ethics committee approval of a research project and what actually happens when the research is undertaken. The committee does not have direct control over what the researcher actually does. Ultimately, responsibility falls back on the researchers themselves – they are the ones on whom the conduct of ethical research depends." (2004, p.269). Guided by this perspective, the workshop will utilise case study-driven activities to delve into the nuanced dynamics between participation and ethics.

Participants will have the opportunity to share experiences, grapple with intricate micro-ethical dilemmas, and discuss effective strategies for navigating the researcher-participant relationship, the concept of knowledge ownership, and the sensitivity of ethical rules and procedures to different cultural practices.

Emerging Researchers' Group - Network Meeting

With the emergence of a multitude of new educational technology (EdTech) and the simultaneous opacity of the capabilities, limitations, and methods used by a digital tool or platform, it is becoming increasingly challenging for teachers, school administrators, and education policy makers to make sufficiently informed decisions about the use of technology in schooling. As EdTech remains a ‘black box’ (Hartong, 2021) in terms of both its functionality and emergence, sociotechnical imaginaries and algorithmic logics are inadvertently being implemented into the technology´s educational concept (Decuypere, 2019; Macgilchrist, 2019; Troeger et al., 2023).

Due to their methodology, previous studies on the development of educational media technologies have only been able to hypothesize about the discrepancy between the pedagogical conception and the actual implementation of an EdTech product (e.g., Weich et al., 2021). Meanwhile, ethnographies of the EdTech sector have either been rather event-based (Player-Koro et al., 2022) or have not yet focused on the development processes of technology (Ames, 2019; Macgilchrist, 2019; Ramiel, 2021). I would like to close this gap with my thesis by critically observing developers as they work in a relatively young venture, using a media ethnography approach. Over a time span of at least six months, I would like to investigate which, how, and why fundamental design decisions are made when translating pedagogical concepts into algorithmic environments.

The planned project is situated in two contexts. On the one hand, it is characterized by the assumption that educational media technologies emerge in an interplay of socio-technically negotiated ideas and social construction (Bijker et al., 1987), coming into being through “situated action” (Suchman, 2006, p. 70) and practices (Pink et al., 2016). A technology is therefore an expression of a certain image of educational and learning processes, of pedagogical theories and didactic concepts on the part of its developers. How exactly this image is translated into algorithmic or digital environments, how it is programmed and implemented, is the subject of a variety of negotiation processes. These are embedded in a social working context, characterized by translation practices between different internal and external actors and professions that need to be captured.

On the other hand, my dissertation project assumes that the European educational media production is undergoing a decisive digital transformation, with new players entering the market and fundamentally changing it. While established educational media publishers have to reinvent themselves in order to meet the social and political pressure of digitalization, platform-based technologies and products dominate the school EdTech market, especially from supposedly 'disruptive' start-ups (Ramiel, 2021). These new private-sector actors introduce a wide array of new sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff, 2015) of education, not only to the European EdTech market, but also to more general educational discourses (Eynon & Young, 2021; Nivanaho et al., 2023). However, young EdTech organizations are also interesting for my research in that it is precisely the negotiation processes in the early founding and development phase of a venture that shape fundamental socio-technically influenced concept decisions. Therefore, this moment seems suitable for researching the medial construction of educational concepts ‘in the making’, so to speak.

Over the past 20-30 years, international comparative school achievement studies have established themselves as a key influence for designing educational processes in European schools and beyond (Martens et al., 2016). They have led to the immense prominence of educational standards and thus to a paradigm shift at almost all levels of education in schools (Vogt & Neuhaus, 2021). In this sense, the logics of international educational standards have become deeply inscribed in the logic of European educational research and practice. Accordingly, what is considered 'education' today is largely configured by the international circulation of educational standards through international comparative studies. Following the success of the PISA study, it is therefore not surprising that the way students use digital media technologies in schools is also being surveyed according to these logics and recorded with the help of standardisation and international comparison. The international comparative school performance study ICILS (International Computer and Information Literacy Study) plays a central role in this by attempting to assess the so-called computer and information literacy of eighth-graders in 2018, as it did in 2013. As expected, there was a great deal of media attention in Germany when the study was published, as its results seemingly suggested that students "learnt nothing" (Schmoll, 2019; transl.) with regard to their digital skill and a large number of them are "left behind" (Unterberg, 2019; transl.). What didn’t find its way into this reception were the techniques, methods and apparatus with which such comparable standards and forms of knowledge are fabricated and organised in the first place.

This Ignite Talk takes a critical look at the ICILS 2018 study and these standardisation dynamics. A particular focus is put on the categories and items that are included or not included in the fabrication of comparable school performance data. To exemplify, this contribution questions the items 'technology' and 'social background' as well as their relationship. Although both categories are central and controversially discussed in European educational research, their constructions in international comparative studies such as PISA or ICILS are not self-explanatory. What constitutes a 'technology' or a 'social background' must first be operationalised in the study designs – it has to be constructed in a certain way in order to be surveyed. These operationalisations are contingent and depend, among other things, on disciplinary logics, research pragmatics and institutional power dynamics (Eckhard & Mattmüller, 2017). Accordingly, the research questions of this talk are: How are 'technology' and 'social background' fabricated as categories for computer and information literacy in the international comparative study ICILS 2018? And what implications do these fabrications have for the understanding of and the encounter with digital inequality in European classrooms?

In the rapidly evolving landscape of education, the integration of AI, particularly Chatbots, presents a fundamental area of exploration. My research is centered around the critical question: "How does the integration of AI, particularly Chatbots, affect the professional activities of teachers, and how do educators envision their roles with these AI tools?" This inquiry delves into the transformative impact of artificial intelligence on educational practices. The theoretical framework of this research is multi-faceted, intertwining educational philosophy paradigms with contemporary socio-technological theories.

At its core, the research utilizes a constructivist paradigm, inspired by the works of Papert (1971), Kay (2011), Ilic et al. (2021) viewing AI as a dynamic tool enhancing the learning process. It actively transforms education and motivates teachers to prepare students for the future. These tools simplify complex concepts by relating them to familiar ones within the environment and have the potential to create their models of the world. Complementing this, the postmodern perspective, particularly Foucault's and other Foucauldian scholars contributing to this discourse's insights on power dynamics and knowledge creation, offers a lens to examine the interaction between technology and educators. It probes into how these interactions influence societal structures and control within the educational realm.

Furthermore, the application of Actor-Network Theory (ANT), as conceptualized by Latour (2005), provides a nuanced understanding of AI in education. ANT posits that both technology and humans, in this case, educators, are co-actors in the social world, shaping and being shaped by each other. This theory is particularly relevant in exploring how educators interact with AI tools like Chatbots, forming a symbiotic relationship that redefines the educational landscape.

The research also draws attention to the broader European and international dimensions, reflecting on the insights from UNESCO which underscore the importance of technology in future educational models. The response of European countries, as noted by the OECD and the European Parliament, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic, highlights the strength and adaptability of implementing AI in various sectors, including education.

This research aims not only to provide a theoretical understanding of these dynamics but also to offer practical insights for educators and policymakers. The increasing necessity for teacher professional development in line with technological advancements is a crucial aspect of this study. It addresses the potential risks of a future where educators might be unprepared for the integration of modern AI tools in their teaching practices.

In conclusion, this research analyzing the motivations, implications, and future prospects of AI integration in teacher professional activities, it aims to contribute significantly to the discourse on technology and education, ensuring that educators are well-equipped to harness the benefits of AI in their professional lives.

Motivation plays a crucial role in adult learning and education. In view of the rapid development of society and the transformation of the world in which we live, the concept of lifelong learning is becoming increasingly important (Ilie, 2019). Although motivation for adult learning is one of the classic research topics in the field of adult education, it has received relatively little empirical attention in the last decade (Boeren 2012a, 2012b; Kalenda & Kočvarová, 2021).

Considering the importance of lifelong learning, which is central to personal and professional development, it is essential to understand what motivates adults to engage in learning (Sogunro, 2014) and apply this knowledge in practice. Understanding the factors that drive adults to pursue further education is critical for educators, policymakers, and employers (Gardner et al., 2021).

The topic of adult motivation for learning is important for several reasons. First, motivated adults are more likely to actively engage in the learning process and persist through challenges (Sogunro, 2014). This increases the chances that adults will complete their education in both formal and non-formal settings.

Second, adult learners are often driven by practical considerations such as applying newfound knowledge or skills to their work or daily responsibilities. This makes it possible to discern what direction the current revision of the curricula should take to reflect the current needs and demands of adults (Creighton & Hudson, 2002).

Third, adults could improve their chances of success in the labour market through further organised learning (Boeren et al., 2012a).

Finally, successful completion of training programmes can motivate adults to participate in further education even more, increase their self-esteem and self-confidence, improve working conditions and increase belief in their own abilities (Mara, Cascón-Pereira, & Brunet Icart, 2022)

This presentation will bring the systematic review aimed at exploring the motivations of adults for education, considering both the individual and environmental factors that influence their decision to participate in educational programs. The main objective of this review study is to describe the relationship between motivation and adult learning through an analysis of published empirical studies since the 1960s. A secondary aim is to provide an overview of the directions and trends that these two interrelated concepts have taken.

In this presentation, we address the following research questions:

• Which topics within adult motivation and learning were discussed in the studies?
• Which theories were applied in the studies?
• Which methodologies were used in the studies?
• In which geographical/cultural setting research was done?

In this systematic review, we will examine the existing literature on adult education motivation to identify key themes, trends, and gaps in the current understanding of this topic. By synthesizing the findings from a range of studies, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the motivational factors that influence adults' decisions to engage in educational activities. Our review will contribute to a deeper understanding of adult education motivation and provide valuable insights for practitioners and researchers in the field.

Foreign language teachers’ digital competencies have undoubtedly become significant for effective teaching practices not only due to the rapid advancement in technology. Recently, the importance of teachers’ AI competencies has been highlighted as a result of the release of ChatGPT at the end of 2022, which provoked a huge number of discussions over the effects of Generative AI (GAI) on language instruction. There is no doubt that foreign language teacher training programmes should ensure the enhancement of future language teachers’ AI digital competencies in order to avoid old-fashioned teaching and learning practices, promote innovative methodologies, and prepare student teachers for an effective teaching in the future. However, there are certain difficulties and challenges that still hinder the integration of GAI in teacher training programmes. Thus, it is significant to carry out a systematic analysis of international practices of GAI integration in teacher education for enhancing foreign language teachers’ competencies. This paper describes the practical bases of GAI integration in language teacher education around the world from 2022 to 2024. The purpose of this review is to identify research trends and potential directions that would help to establish knowledge about empirical research on GAI integration in foreign language teacher training. It does not only examine the most novel practices of applying its models, but also describes these practices, evaluates challenges, emphasizes the most interesting experiences, and contributes with an overview for researchers, teacher educators, educational authorities on how foreign language teacher education can develop student teachers’ AI digital competencies necessary for the future use in classroom instruction.

There has been an exponential growth in Transnational Education (TNE) by UK universities in the last two decades (Healey, 2017). This has provided UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) with a method to export high quality education and brand to diversify their international activities and income streams, and to enhance their reputation (Hatakenaka, 2004).

TNE, as opposed to international student recruitment, is commonly understood in the UK to mean the delivery of education from a university in the UK, to students in a different country (JISC, 2020). Rather than the students coming to the UK for their education, the university will deliver education via collaboration with another partner, at an international branch campus (IBC), or via some form of online method.

In 2012 the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) reported 70 UK HEIs were involved in TNE activities specifically with China (QAA, 2013). According to the 2022 British Council research piece into TNE, nearly all UK HEIs are engaged in some type of TNE activity, with 133 respondents declaring some form of collaborative arrangement with a Chinese partner, demonstrating a 50% increase in a decade (British Council, 2022). Similarly, during this time China has been looking to improve its tertiary education by importing the best of the West, as can be seen from updates to the Chinese - Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (CFCRS) policies which date from 2003, (State Council, 2003).

As a major contributor to the UK international student market, China has been seen as a key target for the export of UK higher education. Over the last 30 years, China’s tertiary education has been evolving rapidly (QAA, 2013) during which time there has been a growing interest in UK Universities entering partnership agreements in China.

The first TNE partnerships in China involving UK HEIs can be seen in the joint campus arrangements of University of Nottingham Ningbo (UNNC), which opened in 2004, and Xi’An Jiaotong Liverpool University (XJTLU), established in 2006. Creating such campus models is incredibly complex and expensive (Feng, 2013). As a result, most UK HEIs have preferred to look towards the Joint Institute (JI) or Joint Education Programme (JEP). These models require the foreign partner to contribute one third of the staff, hours, modules, and credits of the degree, based on the Chinese award requirements. The main difference between them is that the former contains two or more programmes while the latter is a single programme. The number of students which can be recruited to each is also capped at 300 for a JI or 120 for a JEP. At present there are 44 JI collaborations between UK and Chinese Universities.

In this paper I will explore the literature around the challenges faced in managing staff working within TNE, and will address the following questions:

1. What can we learn from existing pedagogy about the challenges staff may experience working in TNE Joint Institute activity in China?
2. Where are there gaps in the literature which need addressing?

Research conducted in previous studies, limited by a very small sample of participants, has primarily focused on those teaching at International Branch Campuses (Healey, 2017; Richardson & McKenna, 2002; Tran, Le, Phan, & Pham, 2021). This focus means that evidence is limited and somewhat anecdotal in nature and has not taken account of the challenges of working in partnership with another organisation. This research will look to apply prior knowledge and develop the pedagogy around these new types of complex collaborations.

How to convince examiners of the merit of your thesis, by making your thinking visible within the thesis right from the start of your doctoral journey

Quality in research is to be recognized and applauded for its conceptualization and high level thinking. This thinking must be visible in the text of the thesis so that researchers, supervisors and examiners can acknowledge the scholarship of the thesis.

Questions that examiners intend to ask in doctoral defense events (vivas) is determined by what they read in your thesis. These questions display patterns of emphasis as they are then posed in the viva itself. Recognizing and acting on those patterns can provide insights into what examiners consider to be the determinants of doctorateness in a thesis. This will also determine the level of award that they will recommend to your university. So, knowing what the criteria are and what questions will possibly be asked, provides a framework from which to approach and undertake your research. Making the destination explicit should be the starting point and guide the subsequent planning and execution for your doctoral research.

• So, how can candidates be assisted to reach the level of conceptualization which is expected from a doctoral thesis and make it visible in their writing?
• How can candidates influence the outcome of the doctoral studies, by starting at the end of the journey (examiners’ questions) to visualize and plan how to begin and progress through the doctoral journey?

The workshop will introduce inescapable pre-requisites for a thesis to become doctoral- worthy. It will provide insights on what examiners consider to be the determinants of ‘Doctorateness’ in a thesis so that you can incorporate them right from the start of your writing. It will offer strategic practical tools to apply in your thesis and help candidates and readers appreciate:

1. The ‘whole’ and the’ parts’ that form ‘synergy’ between the account of the research that has been undertaken and the written text.

2. The high quality of conceptualisation expected from a doctoral thesis and recognized by presentation of argument and structure, which make the thesis a coherent piece of research.

The workshop will include both theory and practice where participants will be able to interact with each other and discuss issues regarding their own research.

This is a live stream for the keynote "Educating the Developing Mind in Uncertain and Unstable Times: Can Our Schools Cope?"

This is a live stream for the keynote "Education, the “Age of Uncertainty” and the Politics of such Temporal Metaphors".