Conference Agenda

Ethics is a historical process by which we reflect upon the impact of new ideas and technologies on our lives. In terms of its practice, ethics is a discipline that has evolved from a classic philosophy, centred on humanistic values, to a post-human approach that goes beyond our individuality, integrating other epistemologies and sources of knowledge.

What has been labelled as undesirable attitudes changes across cultures and throughout time. Even if there is a general consensus that murder and child abuse are nefarious, there are other forms of structural violence which have not yet reached the same degree of broad consensus, as ongoing social struggles and disputes show. Many times these challenges are labelled “controversial” because social movements or individuals challenge the status quo that maintains privileges for certain fringes of society or individuals.

Our aim with this workshop is to build an environmental future scenario where participants can reflect, from an intersectional perspective, on their own subjectivity and “place of speech”, envisioning possible scenarios where privilege is used against structural forms of violence.

Based on a collective journey in the FUTUROSCOPIO, this scenario will be built by integrating the feelings and perceptions of multiple crews across their journey and turned into an on-site installation to invite EERA attendees and passersby to experience a shared future vision.

“Extreme uncertainty – defined in terms of novelty, magnitude, duration, and the rapid pace of change – generates a difficult operating environment for managers and organizations. The radically changed circumstances call for new forms of leadership, new ways of working, and new operating models.” (Finn et al. 2020, 8) This statement taken from a McKinsey publication exemplifies the enormous relevance of uncertainty to todays’ organizations. As the biggest multi-national management consulting company and one of the most prestigious in the industry, McKinsey claims to condense organizations’ needs based on their work experience with numerous clients. At the same time, their publications shape trends in the business world on a discursive level. Therefore, this “call for new forms of leadership” and “new ways of working” (ibid.) can be interpreted as both a discursive trend and an expression of a need examined in organizational practice. However, the two cannot be considered separately.

The discourse of New Work is one of many referring to the challenges organizations are facing in times of uncertainty. As the example above shows, New Work discourse is a popular-scientific one. Rooted in Frithjof Bergmann’s aspiration in the 1980s to transform radically the ways in which we organize work as society, this politico-economic discourse has always been normatively charged. The term has become increasingly prevalent, especially recently, and it has been interpreted in many ways, with no set definition. Its usage shows a wide range from idealistic attempts resembling the original concept to more business-oriented management-strategies (Taimer & Weckmüller 2020). As the McKinsey example points out, the discourse is manifesting, creating, and reproducing notions and normative expectations. From an organizational education perspective, organizations can be seen as spaces, in which institutions, discourses, and norms are enacted (Engel 2020). Simultaneously, organizations as social structures are actors that manifest and perform these institutions, discourses, and norms in specific ways, by translating the existing it into new variations (Engel & Göhlich 2022). Our contribution aims to examine the relation of institutions and organizations by exploring the institutionalization of New Work in organizations. Our research is characterized by tracing documents closely. Based on Smith’s (2002) approach of institutional ethnography, we are investigating how (selected) organizations refer to New Work discourse, how they translate it into organizational programs, and how they perform it. We wish to examine which phenomena manifest when applying each/which theoretical framework. For this purpose, we will introduce three different theoretical perspectives, making use of discourse and document analysis: A historico-philosophical approach (Adorno 1953), an institution theory perspective (Smith 2002), and a genealogical angle (Foucault 2000, 2006). The advantages of this triangulation will be described in the following.

Connected retail refers to organizations that utilize digital technologies and information systems to connect their physical stores, online platforms, stakeholders, and customers into a digital service ecosystem. This ecosystem aims to create value and service in virtual and physical realms (Bowen, 2016). Although the average person may not notice any changes in the technology interfaces used in physical stores, the digital service ecosystems constantly evolve and alter the activities and roles of human employees and customers in the service chain (Larivière et al., 2017). In a connected retail organization, the conditions that shape the service encounter in physical stores constantly change. Employees must keep updating their skills through organizational learning to stay valuable in such an organization. This means that the conditions comprising the organization's sales and service training, including organizational knowledge, routines, methods, norms, values, and roles, must also change along with the workplace.

This working paper aims to understand how the conditions and content forming organizational sales and service training support or constrain salespeople's new roles and skills development as the service encounter in connected stores transforms. To achieve this, the author draws on recent developments in practice theories, particularly the theory of practice architectures (Mahon et al., 2017), which focuses on how practices are prefigured and shaped through arrangements within specific sites. Addressing the research memorandum of organizational education (Göhlich et al., 2018), the theory of practice architectures (TPA) offers a theoretical and analytical framework that provides resources to explore and describe interaction in the semantic, physical, and social dimensions of an organization and social encounters such as the service encounter.

In the 1970s, the retail industry began its digital transformation by introducing computerized cash registers and point-of-sale (POS) systems. These innovations helped automate the transaction process during service encounters. In parallel, service work and the service encounter emerged as research fields, highlighting the social and emotional aspects of work in service organizations )Ikeler, 2016; Payne, 2009). Over the years, scholars from different disciplines and theoretical perspectives have explored service work, service encounters, and workplace learning within the service sector. However, there has been limited knowledge sharing between these research fields despite the extensive literature available. Additionally, there has been a lack of research on the role of frontline employees in service encounters or workplace learning in retail since around 2000.

There are multiple definitions and understandings of the concept of a "service encounter" in service literature. Surprenant and Solomon's seminal work (1987, p. 87) defines a service encounter as "the dyadic interaction between a customer and a service provider." Initially, the service encounter was seen as a game of people driven by learned behaviors relevant to the situation (i.e., roles) formulated in the organization's service script, a detailed guide for frontline employees to follow during a service encounter. However, since marketing shifted its theoretical focus to a customer perspective on customer value creation around 2000, marketing theory and service research have increasingly expanded the definition of service encounters beyond just a dyadic interaction between a firm and a customer to service encounters as ecosystems (Bowen, 2016).

The automation of transactions could be one explanation for why customer service has been a focus in organizational education since the 1990s. However, the soft skills associated with customer service, also known as emotional labor skills, are not easily captured or measured through traditional means of assessing knowledge and skills. This has led to traditional service jobs, such as sales assistant, clerk, cashier and customer service, becoming entry-level positions in retail organizations that do not require any specific skills and are characterized by short-term employment and low salaries.

Schools as socially desired organizations have always been focal points of social, political and economic developments and uncertainties due to the associated mission they have to fulfill. Social change and the omnipresent crises have a direct and indirect impact on organizations, including schools. Crises and uncertainties have the potential to erase or blur existing school structures. In extreme cases, the lack of structures for dealing with these impacts can even threaten the existence of both the organizations and the actors involved, which Weick (1993) illustrated very clearly using the example of a forest fire and the firefighters working there (Weick 1993). In this respect, schools are faced with the question of how they react in moments of crisis and how they manage to handle unexpected situations.

Etymologically, the term crisis can be traced back to the Greek “krisis”, which initially marks a turning point or climax, the end of which is open. The negative connotation that accompanies the use of the term only came into use in today's language (Thießen 2011, p. 63). If one understands a crisis as a turning point or climax, the momentum shifts back to the side of the actively acting actors, who no longer see themselves at the mercy of the situation through passive, reactive behavior, but rather actively shape it, or in the words of Weick and Sutcliffe (2003 ) 'manage' it. A challenge that exists in many European countries - also due to the uncertain times - is the lack of qualified teachers willing to 'manage' the impacts of crisis and therefor the uncertainty in schools. This finding also applies to teachers. Programs for career changers who have previously carried out other professional activities are evidence of this problem. The problem is doubled here: Schools need committed and motivated teachers in order to defy the current uncertainties and are also faced with the situation that there is a shortage of teachers and they have to recruit the most motivated teachers.In this respect, schools as organizations are also required to provide short- and long-term answers to these challenges by asking themselves how they can make themselves attractive as employers for potential teachers. Schools are competing, not only for future students but also for teachers (Altrichter and Feyerer 2017). The perspective of employer branding offers a possible answer to this challange. This term originally comes from strategic corporate management (Sghendo & Said 2022) and is understood as a corporate strategic measure with which companies position themselves as credible and attractive employers (Jepp 2014; Schuhmacher & Gschwill 2014; Biswas 2013). Employer branding can therefore be seen as a concept against the background of which an organization develops as a brand for potential employees and thus stands out from competing organizations. The focus is on so-called attractiveness factors that are relevant when choosing a school as a future employer.

The proposed paper is intended to be a theoretical-conceptual contribution. This article critically discusses the potential of the employer branding approach for the development of an employer brand for schools. The central question here is what contribution schools can make to build an employer brand and what makes an attractive workplace from the perspective of teachers. To this end, the proposed article first outlines the problem. The concept of employer branding is then developed and critically discuesse. The considerations provide an insight into various exemplary attractiveness factors from the perspective of teachers and school management, which we were able to generate as part of an initial exploratory study. The article ends with a summary conclusion.

Across presentations, this symposium explores implications of the onto-epistemological uncertainty paradigm inherent to new materialism, process research, postqualitative research, and activist methodologies. Turning to ontology in qualitative and participatory research emphasizes research as a worlding practice itself (Lather, 2016; Gullian, 2018). Creating knowledge then becomes about respons-able creation of also the practices of knowing (Barad, 2007) in research situations that researchers are part of. Methodology is no longer unquestioned as a pre-legitimized and pre-scriptive fit, procedure or sequencing - in fact, sometimes questioned all entirely (Jackson, 2017; St. Pierre, 2021). Inquiry includes then, instead, a creative and generative assembling of the research situation and its apparatus of observation to the point of emergence where new thinking and new doings become viable.

For many and diverse groups of emergent and senior researchers, process philosophies and their processual ontologies have been inspirational for enacting research differently and in generative ways (Revsbæk & Simpson, 2022). Postqualitative research (St. Pierre, 2023; Jackson & Mazzei, 2018), advanced in educational research and pioneering in organizational studies, as well as new feminist materialism (Barad, 2007; Barad, 2014; Bozalek & Zembylas, 2017), has proliferated multiple innovative, arts-based approaches to research, creating research which move and make in/with the immanence and uncertainty of a world-in-becoming.

Inspired by the processual and ontological turns and experimenting with the onto-epistemological uncertainties embraced in these approaches, the presenters of the symposium illustrate from empirical research situated in Germany, Belgium and Denmark how specific methodological ideas such as diffraction (Barad, 2007) and utopia as method (Levitas, 2013) are put to work in specific organizational education research engagements.

The symposium will discuss the implications of embracing onto-epistemological uncertainties in the practicing of European organizational education research, offering exemplification and illustration of such practices, and discussing their potential and limitations.

“Once you exceed the threshold, something new happens” (Youngblood & Mazzei, 2012, p. 138). In this presentation, I introduce a diffractive methodology to which uncertainty is inherent and discuss how it can contribute to organisational learning in organisational education research. More specifically, I ask how one can use diffraction to explore organisational education. Diffraction signifies waves that overlap to “break apart in different directions” (Barad 2007, p.168 in Foster & Webb, 2023). It helps to ‘spread our thoughts and questions in unpredictable patterns of waves and intensities’ (Jackson & Mazzei, 2012, p. 138) for exploring organisational learning in times of uncertainty. A diffractive methodology then means diffracting data analysis and interpretation in ‘refracting’ different theorists. When putting into conversation Spivak and Foucault, the data analysis becomes more multi-faceted, maybe also more insecure. Lincoln et al. (2011, p. 100) plead for the 'great potential for interweaving of viewpoints, for the incorporation of multiple perspectives, and borrowing, or bricolage' in combining different paradigms to make space for 'multivocality, contested meanings, paradigmatic controversies, and new textual forms’ (Lincoln, Lynham and Guba, 2011, p. 125). As their quote above indicates, Youngblood & Mazzei (2012) understand their engagement with data from various theorists’ perspectives as the ‘threshold’ which lets new things emerge. I will exemplify this ‘new’ in the context of a current research project on gender and sustainability within higher education in which I understand sustainability as a response to uncertainty in relation to climate change for organisational learning (cf. also Webb & Foster, 2023). In these uncertain times, I draw on and contrast with each other Foucault and Spivak to analyse, shed light and diffract data from interviews with higher education professionals and website analysis. In embracing uncertainty through a diffractive methodology, putting into conversation Spivak and Foucault on gender and sustainability within higher education, this presentation contributes to a methodological discussion on how diffraction in organisational education research can be made fruitful for organisational learning as a different form of inquiry, which is continually developing, unpredictable and allows for looking at the phenomena from various angles.

References: Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press. Bozalek, V. and Zembylas, M. (2017) ‘Diffraction or reflection? Sketching the contours of two methodologies in educational research’, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(2), pp. 111–127. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2016.1201166. Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A. and Guba, E. G. (2011) ‘Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences’, in Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. CA: Sage, pp. 97–127. St. Pierre, E. A. (2011) ‘Post Qualitative Research. The critique and the coming after.’, in Lincoln, N. K. and Denzin, Y. S. (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. CA: Sage, pp. 611–626. Webb, R and Foster, K. (2023) Championing a not knowing Transformative Pedagogy and Practice: re-envisioning the role of the ECEC Practitioner, in C. Solvason and R. Webb (Eds)., Exploring and Celebrating the Early Childhood Practitioner: An Interrogation of Pedagogy, Professionalism and Practice. New York, Routledge. Youngblood, J. A. and Mazzei, L. A. (2012) Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge 2012.

Utopia is a concept that fascinates scholars stemming from a variety of research traditions (e.g. literature, philosophy, educational sciences and sociology). From the pun of ‘good’ (εὖ/eu) and ‘no’ (οὐ/ou) ‘place’ (τόπος/topos), it is often described as the never attainable goal of an imaginary good place where humankind could live in harmony. However, utopia could equally be deployed as a method, rather than as a goal: as an approach not just to imagine but also to create another world (see Levitas, 2013). Within an anti-utopian or dystopian thinking, the results are clear, even totalitarian certain. The opposite is at stake when exploring a utopian methodology: a prefiguration of a utopian future is always open, unclear, uncertain. Even as the philosophical positionality is not always made explicit, a utopian methodology nurtures scholars in educational intervention studies (Rajala et al., 2023), in (participatory) action research approaches (Egmose et al., 2020) and in projects that coproduce knowledge in communities (Bell & Pahl, 2017). Despite differences between these studies, they share a commitment to imagining new possibilities, to creating transformations in society and organizations, to critically assessing our current state of play, and to sensitizing for sustainability, equity and democracy. Within my current ethnographical project, I inquire learning materials and strategies developed in a specific educational organization. This organization has a strong commitment to an equitable and democratic education system: within the same organizational structure it combines a school – where Bildung towards a better future is at stake for pupils who are behind, and a SME - a company designing profitable digital tools for the market of pupils with severe learning problems. The project is rooted in the so-called EdTechTestbed-movement, a growing branch in the Belgian field of education that seeks co-creation amongst educational, business and research institutions. Considering learning materials and strategies as utopian prefigurations is one methodological possibility: the everyday activities, the digital tools, the strategies of the teachers and company members could be seen as educational interventions towards a yet uncertain new future. Envisioning this future, grounded in the everyday materials and strategies, is one thing I would like to exemplify. However, also another utopian methodological, merely participatory approach is possible: organizations could participatory seek to develop differently towards a preferred future. By imagining and creating something new together, a utopian future can become viable and achievable, although this utopian envisioning is necessarily provisional, reflexive, dialogical (Levitas, 2013) and thus uncertain.

References: Bell, D. M., & Pahl, K. (2017). Co-production: Towards a utopian approach. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(1), 105-117. Egmose, J., Gleerup, J., & Nielsen, B. S. (2020). Critical Utopian Action Research: Methodological Inspiration for Democratization? International Review of Qualitative Research, 13(2), 233-246. Levitas, R. (2013). Utopia as method. The imaginary reconstitution of society. Palgrave Macmillan. Rajala, A., Cole, M., & Esteban-Guitart, M. (2023). Utopian methodology: Researching educational interventions to promote equity over multiple timescales. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 32(1), 110-136.

From pragmatist Mary Parker Follett, researchers oriented towards community development as part of their participatory research engagements, may draw inspiration regarding community as process (1919), the evolvement of a situation in circular responding of everyone involved, and Follett’s concept of integrative, creative experience (1924[2013]) as a nodal point in community development and the becoming of selves. ‘Togethering’ a situation in whole-a-making (Ibid.) across occasions, actors, fields, and time, have been explored in diffractive inquiry (Revsbæk & Beavan, forthcoming) drawing on Karen Barad’s diffractive methodology of reading insights through one another (Barad, 2007; 2014) in a proliferating process of continued differencing that brings “inventive provocations” which are “good to think with” (Dolphijn & van der Tuin, 2012, p.50). ‘Togethering situation’ as an integrative attitude of inquiry relevant to participatory research is exemplified, drawing on empirics from an action research collaboration between university-based researchers and social care professionals and managers to improve employee onboarding and induction in a Danish care institution for adults with developmental disabilities. Originated as an attitude of inquiry across fields of research and in creative collaborative writing between different researchers (Revsbæk & Beavan, forthcoming), in participatory research a togethering of situation may be conducted across and including different groups of actors in a case study, across case studies, or across case study situations and those in the research literature. As such, the proposed attitude of inquiry from Mary Parker Follett’s concept of ‘Gesammtsituation’ (1924[2013]), responds to the debated concerns of how to combine postqualitative practices of ‘thinking with theory’ with participatory research aimed in part at community development (Mazzei & Jackson, 2023). Responding to the idea of organizational socialization as kin-work (Gilmore & Harding, 2021), the paper explores the idea of togethering situation for community building in participatory research on organizational onboarding.

References: Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. Parallax, 20(3), 168-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2014.927623 Dolphijn, R., & Van der Tuin, I. (2012). “Matter feels, converses, suffers, desires, yearns and remembers”: Interview with Karen Barad. In R. Dolphijn & I. Van der Tuin (Eds.), New Materialism: Interviews & Cartographies. Open Humanities Press, An imprint of Michigan Publishing, University of Michigan Library. https://doi.org/10.3998/ohp.11515701.0001.001 Follett, M. P. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review, 28(6), 576-588. Follett, M. P. (1924[2013]). Creative experience. Longmans, Green and company. Gilmore, S., & Harding, N. (2022). Organizational socialization as kin-work: A psychoanalytic model of settling into a new job. Human Relations, 75(3), 583-605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720964255 Mazzei, L. A. & Jackson, A. Y. (2023). Inquiry as unthought: The emergence of thinking otherwise, Qualitative Inquiry, 29(1), 168-178. Revsbæk, L. & Beavan, K. (accepted for publication/forthcoming). Togethering situation in diffractive inquiry, Qualitative Inquiry.

The release of the language-based AI application ChatGPT in November 2022 attracted international attention and led to a nuanced scientific debate on the opportunities, challenges and implications of generative AI for research, practice and policy (Dwivedi et al. 2023). The 'big language models' were also found to have both benefits and risks for the dimensions of teaching and learning when used in differentiated educational contexts (Kasneci et. al. 2023). In the context of higher education, the changes brought about by technological developments have led to considerable uncertainty from the perspective of both teachers and students (Gimpel et. al. 2023). In addition to (examination) legal issues (Fleck 2023), the objectivity, reliability and validity of the information generated by AI is also viewed critically (Rademacher 2023). Like the general debate on the possible uses of AI technologies, the debate on AI at universities is also largely characterised by weighing up the opportunities and risks of such technologies in areas of application such as governance, administration, research and teaching. These issues relate to the support of decision-making processes as well as the promotion of innovation and the personalisation of learning processes (Wannemacher/Bodmann 2021).

Particularly in social science programmes, the question arises as to what importance will be attached to reflexive, ethical, social and pedagogical dimensions in AI-supported teaching in the future (Zawacki-Rinter et al., 2020, p. 513). Despite all these uncertainties, there is no question that the use of AI-based applications in digitised education at universities will intensify. AI technologies are now reaching a certain level of diffusion in research, study and teaching at universities (Wannemacher/Bodmann 2021). Particularly in the field of higher education, a far-reaching automation of didactic interaction patterns can be expected in the near future, with classic teaching formats being successively expanded or supplemented by the use of chatbots in the context of sophisticated learning scenarios (Schmohl/Löffl/Falkemeier, 2019).

In view of the growing number of students worldwide, concepts are also gaining in importance that use AI applications to provide as many students as possible with fast, individualised advice without having to accept a significant loss in quality compared to advice provided by humans. According to a study by the Georgia Institute of Technology, chatbots can be used successfully to provide such advice. The study showed that learners in selected online courses were unable to distinguish the chatbot from a "real" teacher (Kukulska-Hulme/Bossu/Coughlan et al., 2021, p. 23f).

At the same time, various studies in this field also show that many teachers and students at universities have a certain fundamental scepticism towards highly developed AI technology, which makes it difficult to use (Ferguson/Coughlan/Egelandsdal et al., 2019, p. 12 f.). Only a few studies have been conducted on the pure distance learning sector.

The initial situation for the empirical study in this paper is that "Synthea" has been used at IU International University since December 2023 to answer students' questions in distance learning. These primarily relate to the teaching materials provided so that the AI has a sound basis for answering them. This means that the uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the answers is already reduced. To further increase security, the teachers of the individual modules verify the answers provided by Synthea and can change them if necessary. The system is designed in such a way that the AI understands this as a learning process, further questions on the same subject area are then answered accordingly and no further verification is necessary. This means that students do communicate with an AI, but primarily to generate knowledge rather than for consultation processes.

Organizations can be identified as central actors in transition processes (cf. Truschkat 2013; Truschkat et al. 2019) and therefore play a central role in successfully shaping the passages characterized by uncertainty. On the one hand, transitions are considered to have great potential (cf. Dunlop 2017), as they support individual learning processes and biographically relevant changes (cf. Griebel/Niesel 2017). On the other hand, however, transitions are associated with the fact that they require the individual to make "a variety of adjustments" (cf. Mackowiak 2011, p. 21). Therefore, the individual and temporal uncertainties associated with transitions are often looked at and considerations of how to design transitions in a successful way are developed from this. Organizations play an important role here (cf. Krähnert et al. 2022; Truschkat/Stauber 2011). (cf. Krähnert et.al. 2022). This is because organizations themselves construct, control and accompany these uncertain processes through representatives of organizations (gatekeepers) (Behrens/Rabe-Kleberg 2000) by counselling or evaluation (cf. Truschkat/Stauber 2011).

At the same time the increasing digitalization, not least due to the digitalization of the working world, is also leading to reshaping the organization of transitions (cf. Heisler/Meier 2020). It is not only access to digital technologies and the availability of digital skills that are now a basic requirement for integration into work (cf. D21/Kanter 2023), transitions themselves are also increasingly organized and shaped in digital contexts i.e. by digital job markets, digital career networks or digital application portals. Accordingly, the acquisition and possession of digital skills can be considered central to the safe management of digitalized transitions into work.

By understanding digitalized transitions as a multi-actor and multi-situated process of uncertainty, the focus is on the constitutive conditions and negotiation processes between the individual actors (cf. Wanka et al. 2020). An organizational pedagogical perspective opens up the possibility of looking at organizations as co-actors in negotiation and support, as well as focusing on the organizational nature of digitalized transition processes. In the lecture, this perspective will be presented further on the basis of a future research project.

The digital transformation is not only leading to technological progress in everyday life and society, but is also changing the world of work. Digital technologies are increasingly influencing work processes and organization. This means that (vocational) schools are also confronted with the need to integrate digital technologies into school lessons in order to prepare learners for a digitalized world of work. In this context, schools usually act under uncertainty, as teachers often lack the essential skills, will or tools for pedagogically meaningful and authentic digitally supported teaching (Knezek & Christensen 2016).

The integration of digital technologies into the classroom is associated with changes at the administrative, organizational and cultural level of the school (Blau & Shamir-Inbal 2017; Pettersson 2018). Rather, digitalization in the school context means a fundamental change (Islam & Grönlund 2016). Digital technologies in education can be seen as an innovation, which entails a school innovation process when implemented in the classroom (Rogers 2003). This process takes place in the context of school development, which occurs in various dimensions (Eickelmann & Gerick 2017; Ilomäki & Lakkala 2018), which can be seen as an indication of a successful innovation process. The successful implementation of digital technologies in the classroom therefore requires a holistic innovation process in which, in addition to pedagogical adaptations, extensive changes are required in the school organization, particularly at an organizational and structural level.

The innovation process affects, for example, the design of structural and procedural areas of the school organization. Both hindering and facilitating factors play a decisive role at the school meso level, which can lead to school development succeeding or failing. Barriers to innovation can therefore occur in the change process (Reiß 1997), which can manifest themselves, for example, in a lack of digital skills among teachers or in a lack of IT equipment in schools (Fraillon et al. 2020). Barriers to innovation can change, delay or even prevent the implementation of innovation (Mirow 2010). The promoters in an organization play a decisive role in overcoming innovation barriers (Witte 1973). These are actors in the organization who intensively push the innovation process and want to successfully implement the innovation with personal commitment. The focus is on the promoter's contributions to innovation (e.g. training of colleagues) based on their sources of influence (e.g. expert knowledge). There are four different types of promoter: Expert promoter, power promoter, process promoter and relationship promoter. The success of an innovation process therefore depends on the conditional configuration of hindering innovation barriers and conducive promotional activities. Complex causal structures can be assumed. A successful school development process is influenced by several different conditions, which themselves are interconnected.

The aim of the study is to analyse which constellations of innovation barriers and promotional activities as conditions lead to (un)successful school development when implementing digital technologies in schools. In this way, the causal complexity of the innovation process should be considered. The research question to be addressed is which combinations of conditions in the implementation of digital technologies in schools lead to (not) successful school development?

Uncertainty is a core topic for the conditions of our time and especially in European inter- and transnational research settings, it is a given. With the complexity of Participatory Action Research designs (PAR), uncertainty necessitates a practice of organizing within process-oriented, participatory research. Depending on the rationality put in place, uncertainty may even have the quality of an epistemological position to value and to operate with as a researcher.

Reflecting on these three dimensions and discursive positionings of uncertainty within PAR in transnational complex research settings which encompass conditions, practices, and epistemologies, the symposium discusses uncertainty as a core dimension within collaborative research projects.

The exemplary case of the Horizon EU-funded project “Transforming Education for Democracy through Aesthetic and Embodied Learning, Responsive Pedagogies and Democracy-as-becoming" (AECED) discusses these dimensions of uncertainty to consider. In its overarching Participatory Action Research strategy, the project’s six national partners have designed distinct phases and different levels of participation and opportunities to co-design, co-create, and co-analyse. The research design involves the highly diverse institutional settings of preschool, secondary school, Higher Education, and professional as well as organizational training. For a methodological foundation, a common methodological framework for transformational participatory action research was developed in an iterative process.

The symposium intends to present and discuss the underlying methodological understanding with respect to all six projects involved. Each one works with collaborative and participatory action research methodologies that usually have their grounding in a shared issue with participants. Based on this, the research process is to be understood as an emergent and iterative process of theorizing and verification that includes a series of steps or processes of planning, acting, observing, reflecting, and re-planning. Put into practice, the projects all follow a series of phases, which include designing (planning), trialling (acting and observing), analysing (reflecting) and redesigning (re-planning) in which a pedagogical framework and four practice guides are developed, trialed and re-designed with participants and stakeholders.

All of the projects intend to follow common principles, such as a) flexibility as the project evolves, b) willingness to co-construct and participate in collective problem-solving; c) awareness of how collaboration enables development of critical perspectives and self-directed learning, d) shared curiosity; e) willingness to engage in dialogue and reflection, f) transparency, g) openness to the knowledge and experience of all participants and stakeholders who have their own ideas about the topic of the project and h) collective leadership.

In addition to that, the AECED project encourages the use of arts-based and embodied methods which brings to the fore the embodied dimension of research processes and the entanglement of researchers, participants, and organizational practices.

The complex methodological design will therefore be discussed by the different contributions, firstly, to offer a space of reflection concerning conditions, practices, and epistemologies that engage with uncertainties. Secondly, the symposium will delineate strategies for Participatory Action Research that include uncertainties within processes of democratisation ‘in, of and between organisations’.

In recent years, calls for more participatory, horizontal, and democratic research practices have become widespread because such research can transform how people think, act, and feel. PAR is transformative because it enables participants to think and feel outside the habitual assumptions that inform everyday practice. Participating facilitates questioning and new learning from active engagement with participants and thus meets uncertainty as methodological decicion. PAR is a “research-to-action approach that emphasises direct engagement of local priorities and perspectives” (Vaughn & Jacquez, 2020). As a methodology, it combines social analysis, (self-)reflective collective study of practice, and transformational action to improve practices or conditions (Kemmis et al., 2014; Berg &Lune, 2017; MacDonald, 2012; Fernie & Smith, 2010). This methodology values experiential knowledge and lived experience that can be used to address challenges of our life-worlds and achieve social change. In the presented project "Transforming Education for Democracy through Aesthetic and Embodied Learning, Responsive Pedagogies and Democracy-as-becoming" (AECED), an EU-Horizon funded project with six partner countries, the potential for transformation is reinforced by the nature of the research intervention – namely, aesthetic and embodied learning (AEL) and the use of arts-based and embodied (ABE) pedagogies. Engaging and interacting within an aesthetic learning environment can enable people to surface feelings and thoughts about themselves and how they relate to others. Doing this collaboratively supports people in reflecting on their everyday assumptions and what they can learn from their experience of AELD and ABE pedagogies. In our project, we are aiming for transformational change through the application of the ABE-based Guides regarding the three dimensions of individual and collective transformation, institutional/organisational learning and epistemic reimagination. For this, a methodological framework for all national teams has been co-constructed as orientation and living document to serve the iterative PAR approach in its potential to initiate transformation on the individual, organisational and epistemic level of education for democracy. Connecting to this framing, the project introduces aesthetic and embodied learning, responsive pedagogies and democracy-as-becoming with a threefold notion of democracy: social togetherness, political self-governance (in organizing) and a care-economy based on solidarity.

Berg B. L. & Lune H. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (Ninth). London: Pearson. Fernie, S., & Smith, K. (2010). Action Research. In L. Dahlberg & C. McCaig (Eds.), Practical Research and Evaluation: A Start-to-Finish Guide for Practitioners (pp. 95-110). London: SAGE Publications. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participa-tory action research. Wiesbaden: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2 MacDonald, C. (2012). Understanding Participatory Action Research: A Qualitative Research Methodology Option. Canadian Journal of Action Research, 13(2), pp. 34-50. Seppälä, T., Sarantou, M., & Miettinen, S. (2021). Arts-Based Methods for Decolonising Participatory Research. London: Routledge. von Unger, H., Huber, A., Kühner, A., Odukoya, D., & Reiter, H. (2022). Reflection Labs: A Space for Researcher Reflexivity in Participatory Collaborations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221142460 Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2020). Participatory Research Methods – Choice Points in the Research Process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244

Taking the embodied reciprocity for democratising educational relations seriously, while maintaining our playfulness, we focus on thinking with the concept of the acceptive gaze. The analysis is set in the context of participatory action research in Finnish higher education. We apply the idea of ‘gaze’ from Maurice Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology (1968 [1964]; 2012 [1945]), Jean-Paul Sartre’s (1993 [1956]) existentialism and Jacques Lacan’s (1977[1973]) psychoanalysis, to trial the emerging comforts and controversies We consider the acceptive gaze as a reciprocal, concrete and embodied action. Due to its reciprocal character, acceptive gaze has two cutting edges when it comes to methodology. While it expresses mutual acknowledgement ‘to see and to be seen’ for the equalising classroom teaching methods, it simultaneously plays out as ‘to see oneself seeing oneself’ (see Lacan 1977 [1973], 80) moving towards research methods for unravelling educational settings. This ‘both-educational-and-research-method’ aims to open up the acceptive gaze towards the horizons of democratic becoming, and to see the emerging uncertainties both as troubles to tackle and moments of promise for bettered futures. Despite of its ocularcentric naming of the concept, placing vision over other senses and associating sight with reason (Oxford Reference 2024), we think of the acceptive gaze as a holistic, multisensory experience, not limited to visual sense; instead it covers other sensory signals and the sensuous presences (Ma 2015, 126). Furthermore, the acceptive gaze is a chosen orientation towards the other and the self, striving for a non-judgmental attitude enabling the fundamental differences to coexist and complement one another (Jääskeläinen 2023). We explore the possibilities of the acceptive gaze as an educational participatory practice in co-creating tolerance for the uncertainty which arises from unfamiliar and often uncomfortable feelings when addressing one's body as a reflective medium in different encounters (Payne and Jääskeläinen 2023; Jääskeläinen 2023). We propose that aiming the acceptive gaze not only contributes to creating safe enough learning environments (see Jääskeläinen and Helin 2021; Jääskeläinen 2023) that allow both attachment and difference-making but builds also resilience and capabilities to handle uncomfortable feelings when we engage in holistic learning. Therefore, it also accepts feelings of danger and movement outside the individualistic comfort zones, while keeping the sense of responsiveness and responsibility as educators and co-learners alert. As such, we argue that acceptive gaze strengthens democratic values such as responsiveness, equality and freedom, described in the Prototype Pedagogical Framework developed in the AECED Horizon project.

Jääskeläinen, Pauliina (2023). The Reversibility of Body Movements in Reach-searching Organisational Relations. PhD diss. University of Lapland. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-337-396-9 Jääskeläinen, Pauliina & Helin, Jenny (2021). Writing embodied generosity. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(4), 1398–1412. http://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12650 Lacan, Jacques (1977) [1973]. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis. London: Penguin Books. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1968) [1964]. The Visible and the Invisible. Ed. Claude Lefort, trans. Alphonso Lingis. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.  Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (2012) [1945]. Phenomenology of Perception. Trans. Donald A. Landes. London and New York: Routledge. Ma, Yuanlong (2015). Lacan on Gaze. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 5(10[1]), 125–137. Oxford Reference (2024). ocularcentrism. Retrieved 19 Jan. 2024, from https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100245338. Payne, Helen and Jääskeläinen, Pauliina (2023). Embodied leadership: A Perspective on Reciprocal Body Movement. In Elgar Handbook of Leadership in Education ed. Philip Woods, Amanda Roberts, Meng Tian and Howard Youngs, 60–73. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.  Sartre, Jean-Paul (1993) [1956]. Being and Nothingness: The Principal Text of Modern Existentialism. New York: Simon & Schuster.

this paper focuses on the approach for metadata organisation which is elaborated within the Horizon project AECED and its Participatory Action Research (PAR) to conduct cross-case and cross-country comparative analysis of the effect of using aesthetic and embodied learning (AEL) on experiencing democracy-as-becoming. As cross-case analysis is a method to facilitate the comparison of commonalities and differences in the events, activities, and processes, including the units of analysis in different case studies (Khan & VanWynberghe, 2008), the comparison of contextual and research-related commonalities and differences becomes topical. Six project universities are dealing with differences in educational and cultural backgrounds; experiences in democracy and AEL; arts-based and/or embodied learning methods used; educational phases of research presenting 19 cases; epistemological and terminological challenges caused by national languages and pedagogies, etc. To cope with the challenges caused by research-related differences and prepare a system for comparative analysis, we created a matrix to achieve high transparency of data (Cruzes et al., 2015). The matrix does not contain primary data in national languages but metadata in English which come out of the analysis of each of the 19 cases separately in accordance with the comparison criteria identified as crucial for each PAR phase. Each cell of the Matrix has its hyperlinked code; its name is constructed correspondingly from the country code, case number, letters of the PAR phase and comparison criterion. This guarantees cross-case transparency, easy data input and access, meaningful vertical comparison of metadata related to each criterion and cross-group collaboration. Only one click on a cell with entering the password opens an interactive Word or Excel file for individual and group work for all the research participants. The hyperlinking of each Matrix cell supports access to the most important data from each case at any level of information compression (Khan & VanWynsberghe, 2008), but also provides flexibility to minimize the tension between criteria/variable-oriented and case-oriented approaches (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The matrix serves as a tool to produce a synthesized outcome while remaining adaptive to the uncertainties related to the iterative process of PAR.

1. Cruzes, D. S., Dybå, T., Runeson, P., & Höst, M. (2015). Case Studies Synthesis: A Thematic, Cross-Case, and Narrative Synthesis Worked Example. SpringerLink, 20, 1634-1665. 2. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R. & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner: Doing Critical Participatory Action Research. Springer. 3. Khan, S. & VanWynsberghe, R. (2008). Cultivating the Under-Mined: Cross-Case Analysis as Knowledge Mobilaization. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(1), Art. 34. 4. Miles M. B. and Huberman, A. M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Source Book, Sage, 1994.

Organizational Education is interested in organizational learning in, by, and between organizations (Göhlich et al., 2018). It did not only emerge under conditions of uncertainty (Bennett et al., 2014) but relates in many different ways to this core term. With reference to Dewey's work (1929; 1969), uncertainty becomes a core term for organizational education, as educational organizing does not try to limit and exclude uncertainty but relates to it even in positive ways.

As the special call of organizational Education puts it, uncertainty-affinity may lead to conceptualizing alternative strategies of organizing. Creative approaches to uncertainty involve searching for and posing problems rather than jumping to the comfort of immediate solutions. Looking into historical positions, the special call of organizational Education connects to the works of Mary Parker Follett (1923; 1924). She suggested such an uncertainty-open practice, which in the particular call was discussed as a non-affirmative practice opposing "traditional, transmissive" and "reductive-progressive" (English, 2023) forms of organizational learning. In this approach to uncertainty, listening and relationality might be seen as qualities of a nonaffirmative Organizational Education (Moos, 2023).

Applying such a practice of listening, reflecting, asking, and searching for the 10th anniversary of organizational Education, especially listening into history, relating to the roots, and asking for the relevance of terms, the searching for European connections and methodological implications seems to be the right way to connect past, present and future of an academic association and its research networks, in this case, the research network organizational education.

Honoring the 10th anniversary of organizational Education at the European level, a "Looking Back and Diving Deep" research workshop intends to relate to the historical roots of European organization education research (Göhlich et al., 2018). The Network 32, by this, intends to reflect on its historical roots and the methodological implications of a European and historically grounded organizational education.

As an initializing agent of organizational Education thought, Michael Göhlich was a core academic who established organizational Education in the German educational research setting. In 2014, after a pre-phase of establishing organizational education symposia in ECER, a European research network on organizational Education was accepted within ECER, and Michael Göhlich took the position of convenor at the European level. The 10th anniversary, therefore, is an excellent opportunity for a "look back and dive deep" into the European traditions of organizational education thinking and the emergence and institutionalization of our trans-subdiscipline of organizational Education and ground this collective reflection on the works of Michael Göhlich.

As Michael Göhlich writes in the German Handbook of Organizational Education (Göhlich, 2018, 18), any academic subdiscipline does not emerge overnight but is rooted in history. Any new term, any new academic discourse, and any new academic subdiscipline have early and preliminary phases in the academic history - as a concept, as a discourse, and as an academic subdiscipline. It will always stand "on the shoulders" of concepts, focuses, and arguments, which were already expressed earlier in pedagogy and Education (Göhlich, 2018, 18).

Moreover, Göhlich (2018, 18) continues elaborating in his contribution to the history of organizational Education on the starting point – when to start telling the story of historicization? It even mentions that it would have been possible to begin the search at much earlier starting points, for, in antiquity, the Middle Ages or the Enlightenment. This "prehistory" of organizational Education in the narrower sense is of interest to understand better the emergence of the term' organizational education', which not only develops as in the uniform continuum but (also) can be discussed in phases, stages, steps, and variations (Göhlich, 2018).

Research Context:

Hamas's attack on Israel on the 7th of October started a war with tragic consequences for both sides. One of these consequences was the displacement of 120,000 Israelis who live close to its northern and southern border for their own protection. The displaced have been placed in hotels and other forms of provisional housing for an indefinite period (by the time this proposal was submitted, they have yet to return). To cater to the educational needs of the displaced, provisional schools were opened across the country in the hotels themselves, cultural institutions, and other locations. These schools relied mainly on volunteers, including many former teachers, from the cities to which the displaced had been moved. The schools were designed to provide immediate, short-term educational support for tens of thousands of pupils.

Research focus:

The presented research examines the experiences of the educational staff in the schools for the displaced. We interviewed 16 staff members of these schools (see Method section for more details). The aim of the research was to explore some of the challenges faced by educational staff in temporary educational settings and to inquire into their coping strategies. More specifically, we have asked how teachers and administrators set goals adapted to their needs and the students' capabilities in institutions characterized by a high-degree of uncertainty and disorder. Since most of those interviewed described the situations in these schools as chaotic, we placed an emphasis on questions of educational/organizational adaptations and solutions that the educational staff developed to stabilize the system and achieve its objectives. The following questions formed the basis for empirical examination: (1) How are order, disorder, and autonomy expressed in the way educators and administrators present their challenges, their goals, and their coping strategies within the institutions? (2) How does the educational staff create order? What methods do they use? Is it a 'new order' or an 'old order' (which prevailed before the war)?

Theoretical framework:

The research is grounded in complexity theory, a framework initially devised in the natural sciences for the study of dynamic systems (Mitchel, 2009). This theory played a significant role in shaping the research questions and provided valuable insights for the data analysis process. Complexity theory, which is increasingly used in the social sciences and education, offers powerful models for analyzing change, innovation, and the behavior of systems (Byrne 2022, Radford, Burns & Koster, 2016, Radford 2008). By placing emphasis on concepts such as self-organization, emergence, path dependence, and the influence of external factors, it provides a valuable lens through which to explore the dynamic elements of education in general and in the schools for displaced students in particular (Boulton, Allen and Bowman, 2015). Given that this research took place during a time of crisis marked by ongoing change, uncertainty and instability, complexity theory has proven exceptionally valuable in understanding how teachers and administrators responded to their challenging circumstances.

Objectives: The primary objective of this research is to explore and understand the methods teachers employ to create order in institutions that are characterized by disorder. The unique educational settings of schools for the displaced, often lacking in conventional structure, offer a distinctive opportunity to study how teachers can autonomously operate and establish their own goals and practices in the absence of traditional organizational frameworks. Another important aim of the research is to examine how teachers exhibit their autonomy during times of crisis, highlighting their adaptive strategies and decision-making processes. By addressing these issues, we hope to provide some insights into the overall organization and functioning of schools in emergency situations.

In France, a recurrent and widely publicised managerial discourse points to the allegedly specific relationship to work of the younger generation (Desplats & Pinaud, 2015; Dalmas, 2019; Haegel, 2020). Moreover, recruiters identify negative characteristics in young people simply because of their age (Dagnaud, 2013: Corteso et al. 2018). Less motivated by their work, more interested in other spheres of their lives, no longer respectful of the hierarchical framework, these young people would challenge the traditional organisation of the world of work.

The current economic context of the neoliberal policies of French governments since 2017 and the context of recovery from the crisis have led to a significant fall in unemployment, particularly among young people. This is leading to labour shortages and tensions on the labour market (Niang et al., 2022). In other countries, such as the United States, researchers are even talking about the "great resignation" (Liu Lastres et al., 2022). In such a context, the question of matching the supply of candidates, posed in terms of a failing relationship with work, with employers' demand under pressure, seems less and less relevant.

The idea that the younger generation's relationship with work can take a radical turn is not new, as Inglehart (1977) already suggested. Our paper therefore explores the reality of this 'new' relationship between young people and work. This notion is understood in a broad sense, referring as much to what young people think about the activity of work itself, about their jobs, as about the professional world and the structure of its relationships (Longo, 2019). The first question in our work is therefore to compare the discourse of young people with that of the media. Studies have shown that the younger generations aspire to benefit more from other spheres of life than work. This observation is linked to the general rise in educational attainment and is dependent on national contexts (Méda & Vendramin, 2013; Huang et al., 2003). A higher level of education gives a more distanced view of work, but also more self-confidence in relation to the labour market. In addition, there is a variation in the view of professional integration depending on the course of study followed in higher education. Students on literary and artistic courses, for example, are the ones who "refuse" to enter the labour market (Delès, 2018). Furthermore, job security appears to be more important for graduates of vocational courses, whereas job content is more important for graduates of general courses (Bene, 2021). These observations tie in with others on the influence of social origin on the relationship with the world of work (Altreiter & Flecker, 2020). The level of qualifications and the choice of course of study are correlated with a young person's social background. Students from working-class backgrounds have less knowledge of the labour market (Baker et al, 2018). On the other hand, students from the middle and upper classes are more familiar with the codes of the labour market and use them to secure the best possible job placement (Bathmaker et al., 2013; Burke et al., 2017). These results therefore tend to prove a correlation between level of qualifications, educational pathway, social origin and the critical dimension in the relationship to work. To pursue this line of thought, we wanted to investigate by distinguishing three groups of young people: students in selective courses of study, students in non-selective courses of study, and young people neither in training nor in employment,. So to what extent do young people's attitudes to work and their commitment to the world of work depend on their level of qualification and the training they have received?

This study is a part of the project Life Pathways of Unsuccessful Graduates (CZ.02.3.68/0.0/0.0/19_076/0016377). The project's main objectives were to gain in-depth insights into the (insufficiently researched) phenomenon of failure in the Matura examination and its consequences for the future life pathways of the students concerned and to formulate evidence-based recommendations for education policies.

In the Czech Republic, the format of the Matura examination changed in 2011. Since 2013, it has been roughly stabilised into two essential parts: a common and profile parts. The Centre for the Measurement of Educational Outcomes (CERMAT) is responsible for setting and evaluating the common part of the exam. The profile part consists of 2 to 3 exams based on the field of study, and in the case of secondary vocational schools, it includes a vocational qualification.

The objects of the research were the reasons for failure in the Matura examination itself, i.e. what led to the failure, and the further life pathways of unsuccessful examinees, especially regarding the educational path over two years. In drafting the research intent, the main research question was formulated: How do psychosocial stress and social exclusion in institutional settings affect the subsequent life and educational trajectory of unsuccessful secondary school examinees over the two years following the experience of failure?

Several specific questions arose from qualitative data analysis as a part of the project. One of them forms the axis of this paper: What is the role of workplace training in the course of study which leads to failure in Matura exam? Specific research questions are: What workplace experiences shape a student's path to failure in Matura? Can signals of future failure be identified in informants' retrospective narratives? What inputs improve or decrease the chance for success?

The theoretical framework of the analysis consists of three theoretical concepts. First, failure in the Matura exam is interpreted as one form of school dropout; the reasons for failure are comparable but not identical to reasons for various forms of dropout (conf. Battin-Pearson et al, 2000; Bowers & Sprott, 2012). Second, the interaction of structure and agency is used to interpret the student's school experience (conf. Heinz, 2009). The school, the workplace, and the Matura exam itself form the structure that determines, stimulates, and limits the agency, respectively, the bounded agency (Evans, 2017). Third, the concept of school engagement enlightens the student's participation and identification with the school environment (Rumberger and Rotermund, 2012).

Although promoting gender equality and inclusiveness is a priority of the European Union policies and programs, significant gender inequalities in Research and Innovation (R&I) remain (EC, 2021). In the EU27, women are still under-represented among researchers in the business sector (20.9%), among professors and senior-level staff in academia (26%) and in decision-making positions in higher education (24%). Various global crises, such as global conflicts, pandemics, climate change and anti-feminist movements, have worsened the situation of gender equality for these groups (Bazzul & Siry, 2019; Belser, 2020; Freire & Freire, 2004).

Gender equality is a significant discourse in the European Union and the different national academic systems. However, this concept is highly ambivalent and brings forth both discursive-institutional openings and closures for the identities of female academics (Gill, 2014; Philipps et al., 2022) as agents of change in universities (Wieners & Weber, 2020). Mainly, universities are addressed to implement gender equality measures. These measures are primarily discussed regarding the increase in the number of female academics and lesser in terms of organisational change and learning (cf. also Acker, 1990, 1992).

In this symposium, we address mentoring programmes for female academics and leaders through the overall question of how universities change and learn in and through mentoring programmes. Otherwise asked: How do organisations care for their female researchers and leaders in times of uncertainty marked by multiple crises?

Mentoring can be crucial in addressing the fragile pathways of female students, researchers and leaders within academia (Kaiser-Belz, 2008; Petersen et al., 2017). From an institutional perspective, mentoring programmes are long established in Germany and relatively new in Italy and Spain. At the same time, the mentoring practice in institutionalised mentoring is under-researched regarding the discursive-social mentoring practice and is, therefore, a "black box". Initial empirical findings point to exclusionary practices of 'out-advising' mentoring in relation to gender (Simpson et al., 2023; Wieners, 2022).

We question how organisations change and learn through mentoring programmes in four distinct papers. The first presentation focuses on transformative practices and resistance towards institutional innovation mentoring in Italian universities and research centres. The presentation will analyse mentoring practices in Italy, focusing on innovative approaches and tools as well as resistance to change. The second paper will present findings from an ongoing study on gender and sustainability in Green-Tec study programmes in Germany in light of climate change and how non-traditional students are supported to navigate their studies. In the third presentation, insights from the impact of the Ukrainian war on female leaders are shared, as well as how the HEIs care for their female managers through international cooperation with European partner universities during crisis times. Lastly, the fourth presentation will present a retention study on mentees/ female early career researchers, including deliberations on the pandemic and 'career progress' for mentees from different programs and different types of organisations in Germany.

As such, our panel addresses uncertainty as an external condition and to be situated and positioned in theories of the VUCA world (e.g. Bennett & Lemoine 2014), such as global conflicts, climate change and pandemics, as well as towards rationalities and practices of organising (Weick & Sutcliffe 2001), when addressing the question of how organisations care for uncertainty and change through mentoring practices for female academics and leaders.

The presentation will focus on mentoring experiences in Italian universities and research centres. Notwithstanding, recent studies have confirmed a glass ceiling in Italian academia or segregation processes that negatively affect women’s access to academic and scientific careers; mentoring experiences in Italy are still underdeveloped but present exciting and innovative features. The presentation will analyse mentoring practices in Italy, focusing on innovative approaches and tools as well as resistance to change. In particular, it will focus on mentoring schemes to combat the practices and mechanisms that foster gender inequalities in academia, which adopt the dual approach to mentoring, as Jennifer De Vries (2010) proposed, simultaneously working to support women’s careers and create institutional change. In the last decades, mentoring programs have received criticism as they might not change the masculine model of the ideal academic but rather help women adjust to these norms to be successful (Ely & Meyerson, 2000; Van den Brink & Benschop, 2012). However, transformative mentoring programmes focused on changing the organisation have recently gained more attention. The presentation will, therefore, analyse the impact of the transformative mentoring approach in Italian academia, with particular attention to the gender asymmetries within the framework of the economic crisis and the neoliberal agenda (Archer, 2008; Bagilhole & White, 2013).

Archer, L. (2008). The new neoliberal subjects? Young/er academics’ constructions of professional identity. Journal of Education Policy, 23(3), 265–285. Bagilhole, B. & White, K. (2013). Generation and Gender in Academia. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Ely, R. J. and Meyerson, D. E. (2000). Advancing gender equity in organisations. The challenge and importance of maintaining a gender narrative. Organization, 7(4), 589–608. de Vries, J 2010, A Realistic agenda? Women only programs as strategic interventions for building gender equitable workplaces, University of Western Australia. PhD thesis, University of Western Australia Van den Brink, M. and Benschop, Y. (2012). Slaying the seven-headed dragon. The quest for gender change in academia. Gender, Work & Organization, 19(1), 71–92.

In light of the uncertainty linked to climate change, this presentation provides insights from an ongoing study on gender and sustainability in Green-Tec study programmes in Germany. For this presentation, ‘climate change [is] to be understood as a “thing” that is unbounded, contingent and indeterminate’ (Kirby & Webb 2021, p. 2, original italics). Taking into account space and time, climate change is complex and diffuse, requiring accepting and engaging with uncertainty. In this context, we observe an increased debate on climate change at political and societal levels, for instance, through the Greta Thunberg and Fridays for Future movements. In recent years, Greta Thunberg has become a global media 'role model' for young women and a 'newcomer innovator' (Revsbaek, 2014) in the context of political action. As a socially dynamic movement, Fridays for Future movements have discursivised questions of sustainability and future durability, leading to the institutionalisation of the sustainability discourse (Wahlström et al., 2019). This transformation at political and societal levels also leads to re-imagining and re-conceptualising STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) study programs through integrating issues and subjects related to sustainability. So far, non-traditional students who are female students from non-academic or non-technical backgrounds are strongly underrepresented in the Tec sector (Gilardi & Guglielmetti, 2011). Preliminary studies show, however, that GreenTec can serve as a 'door opener' for attracting and retaining female and other represented student groups for STEM study programs and careers (Spangenberger, 2016). From a discourse-analytical perspective (Weber & Wieners, 2018) and using image-based research methodologies and methods (Wieners & Weber, 2021; Wolffram 2022/i.e.), this presentation focuses on the performative organising (Wieners & Weber, 2020a) in higher education practice (Weber & Wieners 2022/i.e.). In particular, the presentation explores the support mechanisms for non-traditional students through website analysis and image-based interviews. It asks to what extent sustainability in Tec studies attracts more female and other non-traditional students and which support mechanisms help them complete their studies and integrate into the labour market. The study finds that- depending on the institutional context and the individual privileges-although sustainability attracts NTS to study GreenTec, support and advice structures offered by the university, such as mentoring, help students to remain and complete the degree, especially in uncertain times. In this sense, ‘moments of uncertainty offer a rupture of la politique, and the possibility of alternative ways of knowing, doing and being‘ (Kirby & Webb, 2021, p. 16).

Gilardi, S. & Guglielmetti, C. (2011). University Life of Non-Traditional Students: Engagement Styles and Impact on Attrition. In: The Journal of Higher Education, 82 (1). S. 33-53. Kirby, P. & Webb, R. (2021). Conceptualising uncertainty and the role of the teacher for the politics of climate change within and beyond the institution of the school, Educational Review, DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2021.1933392 Spangenberger, P. (2016). Zum Einfluss eines Nachhaltigkeitsbezugs auf die Wahl technischer Berufe durch Frauen. Eine Analyse am Beispiel des Windenergiesektors. Detmold: Eusl. Weber, S. M. & Wieners, S. (2018). Diskurstheoretische Grundlagen der Organisationspädagogik. In: Göhlich, M.; Schröer, A. & Weber, S. M. (Hrsg.): Handbuch Organisationspädagogik. Wiesbaden: Springer. S. 211-223. Weber, S. M. & Wieners, S. (2022/i.E.). Dispositives of Newness and Change. Academic Organisations` Discursive Practice at the Intersection of Excellence and Gender. In: Angermuller, J. (Hrsg.): Power and Knowledge in Research, Science and Higher Education". Social Studies of Academia. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macimilian. Wolffram, Andrea (2022, i. E.): Gendered Representations of Excellence in Science and Technology. In: Jenkins, Fiona; Hoenig, Barbara; Weber, Susanne; Wolffram, Andrea (Hrsg.): Inequalities and the Paradigm of Excellence in Academia. London and New York: Routledge.

War conflicts (colonial, interstate, civil and internationalised civil ones), a total of 54 in 35 countries as of 2021(Palik et al., 2022), produce refugees and other displaced people (Howard, 2018). About 89.3 million forcibly displaced individuals worldwide, of whom women accounted for approximately 49% (UNHCR, 2022). During Europe's 2015‑17 refugee crisis, women lodged only about 30% of all asylum applications and received 35% of all positive first-instance decisions in the EU‑28 (OECD, 2023). That statistic is similar for higher education: in Germany, the ratio was 78 % male refugee students to 22 % female ones, and the same trends were apparent in the proportions in other countries (EU Commission, 2019). The war in Ukraine increased the share of refugees in the EU to more than 20% (EC, 2024). Germany, Italy, and Spain are among the countries with the highest total numbers of Ukrainian refugees (OECD, 2023). The peculiarity of this refugee flow is that the share of women among adult refugees is around 70% in most host countries, creating unique challenges for integration. Refugee women may suffer from a “triple disadvantage” as the challenges related to gender, immigrant status, and forced migration add up and mutually reinforce each other (Liebig & Tronstad, 2018). Being in a more favourable situation as compared with other refugees due to the possibility of employment in the University and continuing their professional career, female refugee scientists face barriers (Crea, 2016) like language and cultural adjustment, recognition of qualification, work-life balance, legal and administrative hurdles, social support, mental health struggle. Considering the number of female refugee researchers from war zones hosted by European universities (i.a., within the Science4Refugees Initiative of the European Research Council (ERA,2022), mentoring might become an effective instrument of their integration into the European academic and scientific community, making all the stakeholders (Brizuela et al. (2023)) benefit from this development tool (Jones, 2017). Therefore, mentoring for female refugee academic staff is in high demand, though more research is needed. The research question of this presentation is: “What are the peculiarities of mentoring female refugee academic staff in European universities compared with other ones (early and mid-career, science2business, etc.)?”. Through this research, we aim to unveil both prosperous and challenging practices of academic mentoring of female researchers hosted by German, Italian and Spanish universities because of global conflicts.

Crea, T. M. (2016). Refugee higher education: Contextual challenges and implications for program design, delivery, and accompaniment. International Journal of Educational Development, 46(), pp. 12–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.11.005 European Commission (2024). Statistics on migration to Europe. [URL.: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/statistics-migration-europe_en]. (accessed on 25 January 2024) European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2019). Integrating Asylum Seekers and Refugees into Higher Education in Europe: National Policies and Measures. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2797/548910 [URL.: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/] (accessed on 25 January 2024) Liebig, T. and K. Tronstad (2018). “Triple Disadvantage?: A first overview of the integration of refugee women”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 216, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f3a9612-en. OECD (2023), “What are the integration challenges of Ukrainian refugee women?”, OECD, Paris, {URL.: https://www.oecd.org/ukraine-hub/policy-responses/what-are-the-integration-challenges-of-ukrainian-refugee-women-bb17dc64/ ] (accessed on 25 January 2024) Palik, Júlia; Anna Marie Obermeier & Siri Aas Rustad (2022) Conflict Trends: A Global Overview, 1946–2021. PRIO Paper. Oslo: PRIO. https://www.prio.org/publications/13178 Howard, R. T. (2018). Migration Wars. The National Interest No. 153, MAKING ASIA GREAT AGAIN?, pp. 53–62 (10 pages) Published By: Center for the National Interest https://www.jstor.org/stable/26557442. UNHCR (2022), Figures at a Glance, [URL: https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html ] (accessed on 25 January 2024).

The German academic system has witnessed and continues to witness the underrepresentation of women in leading positions. Only 27% of professors are women, despite women constituting more than 50% of students in Germany (Destatis, 2023). The reasons for this disparity have been extensively discussed and are attributed to the symbolic order of academia (Jenkins et al., 2022), organisational and institutional challenges in career advancement (Burger et al., 2016; Schwarz et al., 2018), and the absence of career-promoting networks and mentoring relationships (van Helden et al., 2023; Wieners, 2022). To address these issues, German universities have established mentoring programmes for female academics since the 1990s as a measure of gender equality. Mentoring programmes are intended to initiate career-promoting relationships and networks that were long taken for granted by men but were only sometimes visible. However, careers depend not only on relationships but also on social and organisational uncertainties and inequalities. This paper examines the latter aspects and presents results from a retention study of four mentoring programmes within a German collaborative project. The four programmes focus on transitions from university to career, from doctoral studies to industry or academia, and from the late postdoc phase to professorships. The paper presents the first results of a survey of the effectiveness of these long-established mentoring programmes in influencing the career development of women. The focus of this study is (1) retention and job satisfaction and (2) an intersectional perspective on gender (Walgenbach et al., 2012). The study explores the impact of uncertainties, such as those brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, on academic careers and how these uncertainties are structured intersectionally. Initial results from the study on the effectiveness of mentoring relationships will be presented and integrated into research on female academic careers. The article mainly highlights the opportunities for organisational learning and change that mentoring programmes can offer in addressing the broader intersectional challenges faced by women in academia.

Burger, H., Elven, J., Schwarz, J., & Teichmann, F. (2016). Organisierte Karrieren. Zur multiperspektivisch‑multimethodischen Untersuchung akademischer Trajektorien. In M. Göhlich, S. Weber, A. Schröer, & M. Schemmann (Eds.), Organisation und Methode. Beiträge der Kommission Organisationspädagogik (pp. 143–151). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schwarz, J., Weber, S. M., & Wieners, S. (2018). Spacing Career Path: Institutionalised Positioning Practices within the Academic Field. In E. Glaser, H.-C. Koller, W. Thole, & S. Krumme (Eds.), Räume für Bildung - Räume der Bildung. Beiträge zum 25. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenschaft (pp. 88–95). Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich. van Helden, D. L., Dulk, L. den, Steijn, B., & Vernooij, M. W. (2023). Gender, networks and academic leadership: A systematic review. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51, (5, 1049–1066). Walgenbach, K. (2012). Gender is an interdependent Kategorie. In K. Walgenbach, K. Palm, G. Dietze & L Hornscheidt (Eds.). Gender als interdependente Kategorie. Neue Perspektiven auf Intersektionalität, Diversität und Heterogenität (pp. 23-64). Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich. Wieners, S. (2022). Die symbolische Ordnung der Wissenschaft und die Dysfunktionalität universitären Mentorings im MINT-Bereich. In S. M. Weber, & J. Elven (Eds.), Beratung in symbolischer Ordnung (pp. 65–84). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Amidst the challenges of our contemporary crises, there exists a pervasive crisis of trust in collective knowledge, coupled with a seemingly waning faith in democratic principles. This uncertainty has become particularly pronounced as populist solutions no longer remain a peripheral concern in Western industrialized nations; rather, they have become an integral facet of political landscapes (Hiller, 2023, p. 1). The emergence of Post-Truth as the operational modus operandi for far-right political parties (Van Dyk, 2022, p. 30) exacerbates this crisis, casting a shadow over democratic foundations.

Within the context of this pervasive uncertainty, the methodological an empirical focus of our workshop is positioned to delve into the ongoing establishment of this deficit in truth. Our objective is to unravel the intricacies of how this loss of trust perpetuates itself and, more crucially, to discern viable solution strategies through the lens of educational research. In navigating this exploration, questions arise regarding the uncertainties embedded in the research process. These concerns extend beyond the immediate considerations of researchers' personal safety to encompass broader uncertainties related to the epistemological and methodological frameworks that underpin our research endeavors.

Notably, the explicit normative orientation of this workshop is guided by a compelling impetus—to fortify democratic structures and actively counteract the resurgence of anti-emancipatory and anti-democratic impulses. This normative focus positions our collective inquiry as not merely an academic pursuit but a meaningful contribution to the broader societal discourse on safeguarding democratic values. It calls for a critical examination of the forces that challenge democratic principles and seeks to chart a course towards their fortification.

As we grapple with the multifaceted challenges presented by these uncertainties, the workshop aims to cultivate discussions that extend beyond mere acknowledgment. It seeks to illuminate the varied dimensions of this complex landscape—shedding light on the ethical considerations, methodological intricacies, and pragmatic solutions that lie at the heart of our collective pursuit. By actively fostering dialogue around these challenges, we endeavor to pave the way for a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies inherent in organizational education research within uncertain and contested terrains.

Looking ahead, our workshop's concluding call resonates with a forward-looking vision. It advocates for the establishment of a collaborative network, uniting like-minded researchers. This envisioned network, dedicated to addressing challenges, sharing methodological insights, and collectively navigating ethical nuances, aims to be a transformative force in the ongoing exploration of hostile and potentially anti-democratic populations. In embracing these challenges, methodologies, and practices, our collective journey into uncertainty positions us not merely as researchers but as advocates for thoughtful, ethical, and democratic organizational education.

Amid troubled times marked by conflicts, escalating climate changes, and social inequity, it becomes imperative to contemplate how acts of care—to oneself, specific others, strangers, the environment, and the world we share—can serve as valuable tools in navigating the uncertainty that currently envelops us.

The symposium positions care as a crucial theoretical and practical tool within the organizational education perspective. Presentations delve into the transformative power of care in organizational dynamics, especially in the post-pandemic context. The focus is on fostering democratic values and inclusive practices in organizational learning within, by, and between organizations (Göhlich et al., 2018).

The concept of care, once confined to dyadic relationships within the feminine and domestic sphere (Noddings, 1984; Tronto, 1993), has evolved into a multifaceted force extending across education, society (Noddings, 1992), politics (Tronto, 1993), and human-nonhuman interdependency (Puig de la Bellacasa, 2012). This interconnectedness, spanning intimate and planetary scales, necessitates immediate acknowledgment (Hooks, 2001). The symposium explores this expansive understanding of care, offering nuanced perspectives that challenge conventional norms and prompt a reimagining of organizational ways, structures, and practices.

The symposium presents three papers that, collectively, address the transformative potential of care in organizational settings.The first presentation positions care as an organizational principle, examining its transformative potential and democratic possibilities. By exploring care through the lens of feminist methodology and drawing from post-humanist perspectives, this paper invites us to consider how 'caring-with' can catalyze a quiet yet profound reimagining of democracy in practice, fostering an environment where shared resources and relationships are nurtured. The second paper discusses the infusion of care ethics in reshaping organizational structures in disability-led organizations, challenging neoliberal-capitalist narratives and weaves in Puar's (2017) critique of the ability/disability binary, revealing the nuanced interplay of debility, capacity, and care in post-pandemic organizing and advocating for democratic and 'care-full' inclusion. The third paper investigates the influence of care in guiding responses to uncertainty in organizational learning, integrating Dewey's insights on uncertainty and societal democratization (Dewey, 1916; 1949) with feminist care ethics perspectives that highlight its role in fostering inclusive and adaptive environments amid uncertainties. The fourth paper seeks to delve into and scrutinize the conceptual frameworks and underlying theories influencing the assessment of care work quality, with an emphasis on striving for better harmony with ever-evolving sociocultural dynamics inherent in these practices.

These papers collectively advocate for a care ethics framework that goes beyond traditional boundaries, promoting attentiveness, responsiveness, and response-ability. They urge a reconceptualization of care as a catalyst for fostering inclusive organizational learning, decision-making, and a commitment to the well-being of individuals and communities. By integrating care ethics into organizational culture, the papers propose a model encouraging open communication, collaboration, discussions on care management, and a willingness to learn from uncertainties. In doing so, they provide a comprehensive narrative emphasizing the significance of recognizing and integrating acts of care, both ephemeral and sustained, within organizational structures and educational practices.

This symposium encourages thoughtful engagement with its themes, guided by the following questions shaping its structure:

1. In what ways does the organization of care contribute to the emergence and growth of democratic processes during times of uncertainty?
2. How do disability-led and inclusive organizations redefine care ethics and practices in post-pandemic organizational structures, and what are the implications for broader organizational inclusion and equity?
3. How does the integration of John Dewey's philosophy of uncertainty with feminist care ethics enhance our understanding of care's role in organizational learning and decision-making processes?

4. How and to what extent does restructuring care work management theories and methodologies lead to reducing uncertainty in institutional care through an organizational education perspective?

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework Care, essential in our lives, is the focus of this study, embodying efforts to maintain, continue, and enhance our world for improved living, as argued by Fisher and Tronto (1990, p.40). The paper aims to refine the conceptualization of care in organizing, shedding light on its potential for collective transformation in understanding and interactions within the world. With a focus on organizational education, the study investigates the concept of care within the context of organizational learning and democratic transformation, addressing current challenges in times of uncertainty. Examining care's interplay through discussions around the cycle of care formulation (Fisher & Tronto, 1990; Tronto, 2013; 2017), encompassing (a) caring about, (b) taking care of, (c) caregiving, (d) care receiving, and, with a specific contribution from Tronto (2013, 2017), (e) caring with. The primary aim is to explore democratic transformation during uncertainty from an organizational education standpoint, guided by the research question, "To what extent does organizing care foster democracy-as-becoming in times of uncertainty?" Theoretical perspectives include analyses of feminist capitalist systems (Federici, 2019), feminist critiques on social reproduction crises (Winker, 2015; Habermann, 2009; 2016), post-anthropocentric considerations (Barad 2003, p. 810), and new ethical possibilities. Care is presented as a practical philosophy in post-humanist theory (Gravett, Taylor, & Fairchild, 2021), contributing uniquely to understanding care within democratic transformation. Method and Methodology This study employs integrated methodologies and insights from various perspectives, including feminist critiques, post-humanist considerations, and meta-feminist insights, to reevaluate the conventional cycles of care proposed by Tronto (2013; 2017). The method involves critical examination and synthesis of diverse approaches within feminist scholarship. Through a thorough literature review, this research aims to deconstruct prevailing notions of care and reconstruct a broader conceptualization. By doing so, the study provides a nuanced understanding of care in the context of democratic transformation. Conclusions and Expected Outcomes In this paper, the aim is to rethink and explore democratic possibilities for organizing care, with relevance to organizational learning within, by, and between organizations (Göhlich et al., 2018). Toward democracy, the goal is to cultivate contributions from emerging organizing potentials and foster transformations through 'quiet, gentle, slow-cook, everyday' practices in organizing, as well as 'caring for the relationships that exist around the production of shared resources' (Pottinger, 2017; Moore, 2018, p.16). This will open up more discussions and prompt further questions about the conceptualizing and theorizing of care.

Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter. Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28(3) Federici, S. (2019). Re-enchanting the world: feminism and the politics of the commons. PM Press. Fisher, B. & Tronto, J. (1990). Towards a Feminist Theory of Care. E. E. Abel, & M. Nelson (Eds.), Circles of Care. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. Göhlich, M., Novotný, P., Revsbæk, L., Schröer, A., Weber, S. M., & Yi, B. J. (2018). Research Memorandum Organizational Education. Studia Paedagogica, 23(2), 205-215. Gravett, K. Taylor, C. A. & Fairchild, N. (2021) Pedagogies of mattering: reconceptualising relational pedagogies in higher education, Teaching in Higher Education. Habermann, F. (2009): Halbinseln gegen den Strom: Anders Leben und Wirtschaften im Alltag. Ulrike Helmer Verlag. Habermann, F. (2016): Ecommony. UmCARE zum Miteinander, Ulrike Helmer Verlag. Tronto, J. (2017). There is an alternative: homines curans and the limits of neoliberalism. International Journal of care and caring, 1(1), 27-43. Tronto, J. C. (2013). Caring democracy: Markets, equality, and justice. NVU Press. Winker, G. (2015): Care Revolution. Schritte in eine solidarische Gesellschaft.

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework This paper investigates the pivotal role of care-infused ethics and practices in redefining organizational structures in post-pandemic times, focusing on reciprocity and caring-with in disability-led and inclusive organizations. Challenging the reduction of organizational inclusion to governance technologies within neoliberal-capitalist market dynamics (Mitchel & Snyder, 2015; Ahmed, 2012), the paper critiques existing power imbalances and precarious forms of recognition (Dobusch, 2021). Utilizing Jasbir Puar's (2017) framework, it deconstructs the ability/disability binary, examining how intersections of capitalism, racialization, and care create complex assemblages of disability into a triangulation of debility and capacity. Additionally, it incorporates Tronto's (2013) perspective on the democracy and care deficit, arguing for the incompatibility of ideal inclusion with neoliberalism and highlighting the interconnection between democratic organizing and care-full inclusion. The paper underscores the value of disability-led organizations in transforming organizational practices. Methods The methodology involves a diffractive re-reading (Barad, 2014; Bozalek & Zembylas, 2017) of qualitative case-study material from two disability-led organizations, part of the broader care and advocacy sectors. This analysis stems from the 'Cov_Enable: Reimagining Vulnerability in Times of Crisis' project, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (Stand-Alone Project P 34641). The project employs a qualitative, longitudinal, participatory research design to explore evolving vulnerability perceptions during a global crisis, examining the shifts across macro, meso, and micro levels and their implications for inclusive education and supported living. Conclusions, Outcome, Results In re-reading the data and the varying responses to crisis-enactment by two disability-led organizations (Koenig & Barberi, 2023) the findings reveal two intra-related phenomena essential for understanding organizational inclusion. Firstly, it highlights how an ethos of caring practices and reciprocity (Tronto, 2017) not only facilitated a stable and effective organizational navigation through times of uncertainty and turbulence but also reinvigorated the ideological and political motivations of advocacy and service organizations, leading to tangible policy changes. Secondly, it explores a training and counseling organization formed to address structural violence in disability services. The pandemic provided a socio-temporal space free from meritocratic constraints, that facilitated the cultivation of essential skills within the unique temporal rhythms of disabled individuals—often referred to as crip time (Kafer, 2013)—and the fostering of sustained collective care-webs (Piepzna-Samarasinha, 2018) that extended to non-disabled colleagues. In conclusion, the paper calls for recognizing these often overlooked acts of affordance creation (Dokumaci, 2023) and suggests that incorporating care ethics can lead to more resilient, adaptable organizational models in uncertain times.

Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting Diffraction: Cutting Together-Apart. Parallax 20 (3): 168–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2014.927623. Bozalek, V., & Zembylas, M. (2017). Diffraction or Reflection? Sketching the Contours of Two Methodologies in Educational Research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 30(2): 111–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1201166. Dokumaci, A. (2023). Activist Affordances: How Disabled People Improvise More Habitable Worlds. Duke University Press. Dobusch, L. (2021). The inclusivity of inclusion approaches: A relational perspective on inclusion and exclusion in organizations. Gender, Work & Organization, 28(1), 379-396. Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Indiana University Press. Koenig, O., & Barberi, A. (2023). Unterstützungssysteme für Menschen mit Behinderungen »Enacting crisis« zwischen Aktionsspielraum und Hierarchie im Rahmen der COVID-19-Pandemie. SWS-Rundschau 63(4), 329–346. Mitchell, D. T. & Snyder, S. L. (2015). The biopolitics of disability: Neoliberalism, ablenationalism, and peripheral embodiment. University of Michigan Press. Piepzna-Samarasinha, L. L. (2018). Care work: Dreaming disability justice. Arsenal pulp press. Tronto, J. (2017). There is an alternative: homines curans and the limits of neoliberalism. International Journal of care and caring, 1(1), 27-43.

Research objective and theoretical framework This presentation explores how care can guide responses to uncertainties in organizational settings, emphasizing its relevance in organizational learning amid uncertainty. Care is seen as foundational in human and nonhuman relational interdependency, urging a care ethical lens to address organizational learning complexities. The presentation establishes connections between John Dewey's pragmatic philosophy and feminist care ethicists (Nel Noddings, Joan Tronto, Maria Puig de la Bellacasa), enriching the understanding of care in organizational learning. Dewey's insights on doubt, uncertainty, transactional learning, and societal democratization (1916; 1949) align with care ethics principles rooted in relational interdependency; Noddings' moral obligations to the specific other (1984), Tronto's political embeddedness of care (1993), and Puig de la Bellacasa's posthuman perspective on interdependency (2012). Methods The study, rooted in Dewey's philosophy, employs shadowing (McDonald & Simpson, 2014) as an ethnographic method in a participatory doctoral study on elderly care work and education, immersing in the experiences of professionals in nursing homes and a vocational education school in Denmark. Analytic workshops involving stakeholders from diverse roles facilitated collaborative inquiry. Examining shared situations revealed the intricate link between uncertainty, learning, and care principles. The study’s analysis focused on a narrative representing uncertainty, learning, and caring, selected for its aesthetic qualities (Dewey, 1934; Møller, 2022). Integrating Nel Noddings' care ethics enriched the pragmatic framework, offering insights into interdependence, vulnerability, and power dynamics. The paper aims to expand the care ethic analysis by including Tronto and Puig de la Bellacasa's perspectives, constructing a theoretical framework that synthesizes Dewey's philosophy with feminist care ethics, emphasizing their relevance in organizational learning amid uncertainty. Conclusions, outcome, results Exploring the link between care and uncertainty identifies care as a catalyst for inclusive organizational learning, guiding decision-making amid uncertainty, and fostering an environment where diverse perspectives contribute to meaningful outcomes for our shared environments. Care ethics, emphasizing attentiveness, responsiveness, and responsibility, serve as constructs for understanding how organizations navigate uncertainty and foster learning. Reciprocity exists between learning and caring, where learning requires a sense of caring, and caring relies on continuous learning. Cultivation a sense of care requires learning about the diverse perspectives and specific situations of others. Genuine care motivates seeking knowledge, enhancing capabilities, and fostering commitment to well-being of individuals, organizations, and worlds we live in. A caring organizational culture encourages open communication, collaboration, and a willingness to experiment and learn from uncertainties.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The middle works, 1899 - 1924, Volume: 9 (1980th ed.). Southern Illinois University Press. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience (1980th ed.). The Berkeley Publishing Group. Dewey, J. & Bentley, A. F. (1949). Knowing and the known. Beacon Press. McDonald, S., & Simpson, B. (2014). Shadowing research in organizations: The methodological debates. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1108/QROM-02-2014-1204 Møller, B. (2022). Care practice as aesthetic co-creation: A somaesthetic perspective on care work. Journal of Somaesthetics, 8(1), 45–58. https://journals.aau.dk/index.php/JOS/article/view/7380/6274 Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. University of California Press Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2012). ‘Nothing comes without its world’: thinking with care. The sociological review, 60(2), 197-216. Tronto, J. (1993). Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003070672

Research Objective and Theoretical Framework Social work organizations face uncertainties around available resources, intervention effectiveness, and the individual and social value of investing in care resources and work. In Germany, the "New Public Management" reforms over the last two decades aimed to cut welfare state costs by reducing resources for care work with uncertain outcomes. These reforms also forced organizations to reduce outcome uncertainty through quality management. However, expressing the individual and social value of care within a quantitative paradigm remains highly controversial. Method and Methodology As the problem complexity arises mainly from an economic theorization of care value, the objective of this paper is to propose a novel approach to quality logic in care work that is more closely aligned with the actual socio-cultural structure of care. The aim is to increase the justifiability of care investments before decision-makers who primarily focus on economic concerns. To achieve this, the study analyzes the gaps between the management rationality of the German adaptation of New Public Management and the field logic of care work, using literature from the sociology of economics, social management, and social work from the German discourse on social state economization. The study employs discourse analytical tools to demonstrate the dispositif, in which uncertainty poses a particular challenge for care work organization and justification. Conclusions and Expected Outcomes A field- and subject-related quality logic suggests a phenomenologically reflected social management that integrates the addressees' lifeworld (Lebenswelt), the (social) environment, and society at large as essential points of reference. By readjusting the theory and methodology of care work management, the unquantifiable or difficult-to-quantify value of care work can become part of its state organization and open up ways for organizational learning to reduce and appropriately deal with uncertainty in institutionalized care.

Literature Foucault, Michel (1995). Archäologie des Wissens. 7. Aufl. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp. Fricker, Miranda (2023). Epistemische Ungerechtigkeit. Macht und die Ethik des Wissens. München, C.H. Beck. Keller, Reiner (2013). Wissenssoziologische Diskursforschung. Hg. von Ekkehard Felder. Augsburg/Berlin u.a., Universität Augsburg; de Gruyter. Knorr-Cetina, Karin (2009). Wissenskulturen. Ein Vergleich naturwissenschaftlicher Wissensformen. Konstanz, Bibliothek der Universität Konstanz. Laclau, Ernesto/Mouffe, Chantal (2000). Hegemonie und radikale Demokratie. Zur Dekonstruktion des Marxismus. Wien, Passagen Verlag. Merchel, Joachim (2017). Management ist nur dann gut, wenn es mit dem Gegenstand "Soziale Arbeit" verknüpft ist - Das Spezifische an Organisationen der Sozialen Arbeit und seine Bedeutung für das Management. In: Sozialmanagement - eine Zwischenbilanz. Wiesbaden, Springer VS, 2017. Schellberg, K. (2017). Ökonomisierung – was sonst?. In: Wöhrle, A., Fritze, A., Prinz, T., Schwarz, G. (eds) Sozialmanagement – Eine Zwischenbilanz. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. S. 263-277. Winker, G. (2015): Care Revolution. Schritte in eine solidarische Gesellschaft. P.l.: transcript Verlag (X-Texte zu Kultur und Gesellschaft). Winker, G. (2020). Aufbau einer solidarischen und nachhaltigen Care Ökonomie. Ein Plädoyer in Zeiten von Corona. In M. Volkmer & K. Werner (Eds.) Die CoronaGesellschaft, Analysen zur Lage und Perspektiven für die Zukunft. Bielefeld transcript Wöhrle, Armin et al. (Hrsg.) (2017). Sozialmanagement - Eine Zwischenbilanz. Springer.

Our 10th anniversary BarCamp within Network 32: Organizational Education will start looking from the presence and into the future: After reflecting on the roots and sources of organizational education in the first step we reflect on current and future challenges and perspectives for organizational education. The BarCamp explores how research in the field of organizational education can relate to and shape uncertain futures. The BarCamp research workshop introduces core topics through initial short cut impulses that contribute to open up the session for a collective collection of issues and ideas to be discussed in smaller breakout spaces.

What might be topics to address? The so-called VUCA world (Bennett & Lemoine 2014) has been identified as a challenge for organizations – not least for organizations in the education sector. On the other hand, educational organizations, in particular, should help to tackle the challenges and uncertainties of our time – from sustainable development to digitalization and the defence of our democracies. This is why educational science-based organizational research, as it has been conducted in Network 32: Organizational Education for ten years now, is of inestimable importance in the debate about the increasingly uncertain social futures and the educational organizations that deal with and co-produce them. However, this approach places high demands on the reflection of the future readiness of research perspectives, methods, and practices.

We want to address this demand at ECER 2024 in the form of a BarCamp in which we will discuss organizational education research perspectives (1), methodological approaches to organizational education research (2), and concrete research practices in organizational education (3) about the challenges and potentials of uncertain futures:

• Uncertain futures as topics for organizational education research perspectives: Topics to be addressed here may include education for sustainable development, the digitalization of the education system, and the organization of future formats of democracy as central lines of development in society. What challenges do digital forms of organizing pose for organizational educational research perspectives? How can an organizational educational perspective address the potential organizational polarization of contested futures, such as sustainability transformation or the modernization of democratic structures? How can an organizational education research perspective catch up with the conditions of post-truth politics?
• Methodological considerations in dealing with uncertain futures as a subject and condition of research: Not only does research on uncertain future horizons pose specific methodological challenges, digitalization, sustainability transformation, post-truth policies, etc., also directly affect and modify methodologies. What effects does artificial intelligence have on the methodological approach and the analysis of data material in organizational education? How can a critical and reflective approach to temporal analyses, such as time series comparisons or prognostic methods, be guaranteed against the background of uncertain future developments?
• Reflection on the effects of uncertain futures on concrete practices in everyday research: We are experiencing massive transformations in all areas of everyday life, which also have an impact on the everyday techniques embedded in the research process and can, therefore, ultimately have a far-reaching influence on the results of research. Against the backdrop of digitalized media use, how must scientific publication cultures, in particular publication cycles and formats, but also scientific communication, change? How do sustainability strategies in everyday research ultimately affect the forms of data processing (data minimization) or the conference culture (air travel)? In increasingly uncertain times, can medium-term project logics in research and the associated qualification paths of emerging researchers continue to exist?

Networks hold a meeting during ECER. All interested are welcome.

Reducing uncertainty has always been one of the key achievements of organizations: They define goals and the ways to achieve them, they allocate resources and align the practices of their members with these objectives. They achieve this not least through a structure of roles and responsibilities that detaches their functioning from individuals and their peculiarities. In this way, organizations use responsibilities to create stability and predictability into an uncertain future. Of course, these organizational responsibilities are not necessarily congruent with the actual (causal) responsibility (Hart, 1968) of individual actors for certain organizational actions. Against the backdrop of an increasing complexity of social and technical systems in modernity, the very idea of attributing individual responsibility may seem outdated and even pre-modern (Besio, 2014). But nonetheless, for organizations there is unfolding room for practical negotiations on the attribution of effects to individual actors that can be made productive in limiting uncertainty – especially under the concept of “decision” (Brunsson, 1990).

However, uncertainty seems to have grown to a challenging level: in times of multiple, overlapping crises of global proportions, uncertainty is no longer just a theoretical prerequisite of social practice in general, but an actual condition of everyday life that is perceptible to individual as well as organizational actors. Higher Education organizations are particularly affected by this development insofar as they find themselves in an ambivalent situation: On the one hand, orientation towards the future is inherent to them as a task and responsibility; on the other hand, they are particularly dependent on the reliability of future developments in connection with their concrete operations.

As a symposium in network 32 at ECER 2024, we would like to explore the manifold relationships between uncertainty and responsibility in higher education organizations and their effects on organizational education.

Generally, we believe that at least three forms of this relationship between uncertainty and responsibility in higher education organizations can be distinguished, that shall be explored in the symposium:

1. How does increasing societal uncertainty lead to an increased invocation of responsibility within higher education organizations? As uncertainty increases in times of multiple crises, many traditional management strategies that are based on comprehensible cause-and-effect relationships and the ability to plan for the future prove futile. Attributing responsibility, on the other hand, may not ensure more successful management, but it does potentially simplify the handling of uncertainty and the processing of failure. Conversely, the ‘moralization of organization’ that we can witness occasionally could be discussed as a problematic signal: „morality does not solve the complex problems facing organizations; however, moral communication can become a temporarily adequate manner of dealing with uncertainty.“ (Besio, 2014, p. 309)
2. How can responsibility at the same time be maintained in the face of increasing uncertainty within organizations? For organizations, this not only increases uncertainty in their environment, but also within themselves: Particularly with regard to their personnel, changing value patterns lead to a changed meaning of work and changed work structures and forms. At the same time, new technical possibilities (e.g. AI) are changing the content as well as the formal organization of work. This tends to be associated with insecure conditions with changed opportunities for the attribution of responsibility.
3. How comes responsibility into play for breaking up structures and creating uncertainty in order to bring about change in higher education organizations? From an organizational education perspective, however, the question also arises how higher education organizations attribute the responsibility to deliberately create uncertainty - i.e. to question established structures, to consider possible changes, to envision alternative futures. After all, this is an important basis for organizations to maintain an ongoing ability to learn.

The call for a decolonized higher education in 2015 (#RhodesMustFall) flagged that all was not well in higher education in South Africa. Student voices that initially petitioned for the eradication of the Western episteme in the curriculum soon included a call to decolonize university structures, including human resources and institutional processes, and culminated with a call to end university fees (#FeesMustFall). For many South African students, if they are lucky enough to make it to university, the start of a better life is enshrouded in debt, institutional alienation and exclusion, language challenges, and cultural intolerance. In this context, is it the responsibility of higher education to address historical legacies? This paper posits three responses. First, universities ought to be a public good. As such, it needs to be responsive to the needs of society, in terms of skills development, but also the values of citizenship. Second, as extensions of the democratic political economy, universities have the responsibility to mirror the values of this political disposition in their policies and practices, and third, given the political transition, higher education spaces are third spaces/ borderlands and are powerful in their ability to effect change. It is pivotal that universities use this power to demand transformation – for students and for society. The discussion contributes to the expanding discourse of decolonization in the Global South, as well as the debates around the role of higher education in the context of crises and neoliberalism.

Anzaldúa, G. (1987). Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco, CA: Aunt Lute Books. Gutiérrez, K.D. (2008). ‘Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space’. Reading Research Quarterly 43, 148–164, https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3 Jansen, J., & Walters, C. (2018). The Recent Crisis in South African Universities. International Higher Education, (96), 23–24 Jansen, J. & Walters, C. (2022). The Decolonization of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Govender, L., Naidoo, D. (2023). Decolonial insights for transforming the higher education curriculum in South Africa. Curriculum Perspectives 43(Suppl 1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-023-00200-3 Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S.J. (2021). ‘Internationalisation of higher education for pluriversity: a decolonial reflection’. Journal of the British Academy, 9(s1): 77–98. Knowles, C., James, A., Khoza, L., Mtwa, Z., Roboji, M., & Shivambu, M. (2023). Problematising the South African Higher Education inequalities exposed during the Covid-19 pandemic: Students’ perspectives. Critical Studies in Teaching and Learning (CriSTaL), 11(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.14426/cristal.v11i1.668 Sayed, Y., Carrim, N., Badroodien, A., McDonald, Z., Singh, M. (2018) Learning to Teach in Post-Apartheid South Africa – ‘Student Teachers’ Encounters with Initial Teacher Education (Y Sayeded). Stellenbosch: African Sun Media.

In the context of multiple global crises and accelerated changes that we are facing, the relationship between university and society is also shifting. Consensuses that were thought to be secure and responsibilities that have long received little public attention are becoming more and more fragile: The discourse on fake news and post-truth is causing uncertainty among parts of the population about the resilience of knowledge and truth (Elven, 2022), digitalisation / AI is putting research and teaching infrastructure to the test (Pinheiro, Edelhard Tømte, Barman, Degn, & Geschwind, 2023) and the climate crisis is raising questions about the extent to which universities are still able to produce the knowledge they need or whether a fundamental reform of knowledge production is necessary (Schneidewind, Singer-Brodowski, & Augenstein, 2016). There is also a questioning of the self-image, task and role of science within the academic discourse - for example on the part of postcolonial studies (Seth, 2009). On this backdrop, we currently are conducting a research project (funded by the German Research Foundation, project number 457876539), where we raise two core questions: 1. How do higher education institutions (HEI) position themselves in relation to these societal challenges, diverse demands and conflicting expectations? How do universities succeed - on an organizational level - in formulating a consistent concept of the universitys social responsibility? 2. How is this concept of social responsibility negotiated within the HEIs and how does the staff relate to it (e.g. accept, deny, negate constructively critize, …)? Which role does the social background of the staff play for relating and can we find systematic differences betweend different groups within the organization - especially between different generations of researchers? In our contribution, we will present findings from the first step of the research project where we conducted a field-focussed discourse analysis of mission statements from German universities. For this investigation, we gathered mission statements from all universities in Germany (without universities for applied sciences and similar institutions; n=120). We analyzed these documents applying techniques of qualitative text analysis by Kuckartz (2014), suggestions for the methodization of discourse analysis (Diaz-Bone, 2006) and categorizing procedures in discourse analysis (Glasze, Husseini, & Mose, 2021). In our presentation, we focus on uncertainties expressed in mission statements and related concepts of social responsibility. Based on these findings, we can shed light on the relationship between growing uncertainties in Europe and worldwide and the necessity to deal with social responsibility in HEIs.

Diaz-Bone, R. (2006). Zur Methodologisierung der Foucaultschen Diskursanalyse. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 31(2), 243–274. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20762129 Elven, J. (2022). The Negotiation of Social Responsibility in Academia. An Analysis of Ethical Discourses on the March for Science at German Universities. Zeitschrift Für Diskursforschung, 10(1). Glasze, G., Husseini, S., & Mose, J. (2021). Kodierende Verfahren in der Diskursforschung. In Handbuch Diskurs und Raum: Theorien und Methoden für die Humangeographie sowie die sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Raumforschung (pp. 293–314). Bielefeld: transcript. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839432181 Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software. London et al.: SAGE. Retrieved from https://books.google.com?id=9B2VAgAAQBAJ Pinheiro, R., Edelhard Tømte, C., Barman, L., Degn, L., & Geschwind, L. (Eds.). (2023). Digital Transformations in Nordic Higher Education. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27758-0 Schneidewind, U., Singer-Brodowski, M., & Augenstein, K. (2016). Transformative Science for Sustainability Transitions. In H. G. Brauch, Ú. Oswald Spring, J. Grin, & J. Scheffran (Eds.), Handbook on Sustainability Transition and Sustainable Peace (pp. 123–136). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43884-9_5 Seth, S. (2009). Putting knowledge in its place: Science, colonialism, and the postcolonial. Postcolonial Studies, 12(4), 373–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790903350633

Throughout their long history, higher education institutions (HEIs) have regularly been confronted with intensive discussions about their position in society. They have faced a fundamental paradigm shift about what they are expected to accomplish on an economic, social, and environmental level, how they are to be made more accountable to society, and which forms of relationships with partner organizations shape this transformation. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, many endeavours of HEIs have been subject to uncertain conditions due to limited access to partner organizations, reduced operating hours or other issues. These uncertainties have also affected the area of applied teaching, in which educators cooperate with external partners such as non-governmental organizations or schools in the framework of their courses (campus-community partnerships – CCPs). Unfortunately, in the aftermath of the pandemic, many active cooperations were reduced to a minimum. In addition, HEIs have been going through far-reaching processes of transformation in terms of their needed societal impact, which makes CCPs even more important (Fahrenwald et al. 2023). Applied coursework with community partners has multifold benefits for students and fosters civic engagement with mutual, inter-organizational learning. CCPs – defined as the specific cooperation of higher education institutions with community partners pursuing common goals by exploring a relevant societal problem to improve the living conditions in communities, regions, or cities – have proven to be relevant for innovative teaching, applied research and the third mission of universities (Butterfield & Soska 2004). Strategies must be identified, how to revitalize and maintain these cooperations after the pandemic, even if uncertainty remains in, by and between organizations.

Against this background, the following questions arise to which degree these CCPs have been institutionalized and supported so far and which interorganizational learning challenges relate to this form of cooperation. Questions are discussed within the framework of societal transformation and uncertainty addressing the institutionalization of suitable framework conditions for the promotion of social innovation for CCPs.

The first presentation explicates the existing organizational structures for CCPs in Germany on the basis of a nationwide survey with n=101 board members from HEI in 2023. This recent study sheds light on the level of institutionalisation of CCPs. The second presentation focusses on the perspectives of HEIs’ educational leaders on CCPs in Austria. In a nationwide, quantitative, cross-sectoral survey it succeeded in giving voice to a target group, which is hard to reach (top educational leaders). The third presentation shows a specific CCP between HEI and municipalities in Norway who collaborate across public sectors. The study shows how the campus-community partnership is organized and which benefits arise. The fourth presentation also shows a specific CCP between HEI and a region in Germany. Data from this longitudinal study is meaningful because it focuses on the perspectives and experiences of community partners in a yearlong study against the background that studies usually report on HEIs’ perspectives more often than those of community partners. All results from the four presentations are showcased within specific theoretical frameworks, as indicated in the abstracts, in order to highlight relevant organizational aspects.

The symposium will analyse CCPs in the framework of organizational uncertainty and discuss innovative teaching perspectives between higher education institutions and community partners from three national perspectives (Austria – Germany – Norway). First, (1) all presentations explore the state-of-the art of campus-community partnerships in their country from recent, national data, and second, (2) they analyse these partnerships in the light of post-pandemic teaching conditions and as inter-organizational learning challenges. The symposium, thus, contributes to innovative teaching and better coordinated practice, and is at the same time based on empirical findings in all participating countries.

Knowledge transfer is one of the main activities of Higher Education institutions (HEI) (Backhaus-Maul et al. 2024), which, however, does not only comprise cooperating with industry partners, but also with civil society and nonprofit organizations. The umbrella term – campus-community partnerships (CCP) means specific forms of cooperation (e.g. Service Learning, Community Research) between HEI and their communities to solve societal challenges. For the sustainable implementation of CCPs in HEI, change processes like organizational and personal development are needed (Gerholz et al. 2018). In the German speaking countries, we can observe CCPs as being ‘work in progress’ from an institutional point of view. The aim of the current study ‘Strategies and organizational structures for CCP at Higher Education Institutions in Germany’, which is funded by the Transferfonds of the Research Institute Social Cohesion, is to investigate the current status of development regarding knowledge transfer and cooperation with civil society and nonprofit-organizations on the one hand and Science and German HEI on the other hand. A mixed-method design was chosen encompassing a survey deployed among boards of HEI and staff separately as well as content analysis of transfer mission statements and interviews. A total of n=101 board members from HEI nationwide participated in the survey conducted in 2023. 44,3 percent of them agreed or tended to agree, that in HEI’s mission statements CCP was taken into account as a form of knowledge transfer. In contrast, only one fourth (24, 7 percent) of the board members agreed/tended to agree to the statement that the institutionalization of CCP is advanced in Germany. Regarding aspects of institutionalizing CCPs, 10,9 percent of the board members reported the establishment of a position to coordinate CCP activities, whereas approximately one third of the participants (30,6 and 38,6 percent) announced giving incentives to lecturers and students. However, crosstabs revealed relationships between giving incentives to students and the variables of HEI type (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=70, p =.011) and research orientation of the HEI (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=67, p =.028) as well as between incentives for lecturers and registered students (Fisher-Freeman-Halton, n=72, p =.038). Furthermore, correlation analysis showed statistically significant relationships between the importance attached to CCPs as a form of knowledge transfer and the perceived degree of institutionalization (Spearmans ρ = .443, p < .001) as well as between the latter and the use of internal resources (Spearmans ρ = .635, p < .001).

Backhaus-Maul, H., Fücker, S., Grimmig, M., Kamuf, V., Nuske, J. & Quent, M. (Eds.) (2024). Forschungsbasierter Wissenstransfer und gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt. Theorie, Empirie, Konzepte und Instrumente, Frankfurt/New York. Gerholz, K.-H., Backhaus-Maul, H. & Rameder, P. (2018): Editorial: Civic Engagement in Higher Education Institutions in Europe. Journal for Higher Education Development, Vol. 13/ I. 2, 9-19.

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been going through far-reaching processes of transformation in terms of their missions in teaching, research, and societal impact. Contrary to their previous understanding and mission, Austrian universities are now increasingly required to contribute evidence from research and teaching to meet social challenges and to cooperate with community partners (Resch et al. 2020). As a form of research-practice transfer activities, campus-community partnerships (CCPs) contribute to organizational innovative practice by involving civil society partner organizations in higher education (Rameder et al. 2019). This requires educational leadership on multiple levels, but especially within higher education management (Fassi et al., 2020). Against this background, the questions arise to which degree these partnerships have been institutionalized and supported by educational leaders so far and who takes the lead for their initiation and maintenance. These questions are discussed on the basis of a recent empirical study (2024) with educational leaders in Austria, namely higher education management (rectorate, vice-rectorate). The study was performed as a quantitative, cross-sectoral, online survey with a target group, which is hard to reach due to time restraints and other high-profile management responsibilities. The findings with n=30 educational leaders reveal the level of awareness of participants for CCPs and the level of their implementation and support from a management level. The results are analysed in a cross-sectoral manner – throughout the four different types of higher education institutions in Austria. CCPs have, in principle, the potential for broader participation in social transformation processes in times of uncertainty; however, the establishment of CCPs, but also preparation and implementation of partnerships usually require a lot of resources. Cooperation between HEIs and community partners has so far been linked primarily to educators’ interest or commitment. In this respect, support services must be designed in a way that a culture of participation is sustainably promoted and institutionally anchored.

Fassi, D., Landoni, P., Piredda, F. & Salvadeo, P. (Eds.) (2020). Universities as Drivers of Social Innovation. Theoretical Overview and Lessons from the "campUS" Research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31117-9 Rameder, P., Moder, C. M., Meyer, M., & Heinisch, M. (2019). Soziale Innovationen—Herausforderungen und Potenziale im Gesundheitsbereich. In Johannes Eurich, Markus Glatz-Schmallegger (Hrsg.), Soziale Dienste entwickeln. Innovative Ansätze in Diakonie und Caritas Ein Studien- und Arbeitsbuch (S. 129– 152). EVA Verlag. Resch, K., Fellner, M., Fahrenwald, C., Slepcevic-Zach, P., Knapp, M., & Rameder, P. (2020). Embedding Social Innovation and Service Learning in Higher Education's Third Sector Policy Developments in Austria. In Frontiers in Education, 5(112), 1-5.

This paper explores how key actors responsible for education, health, and social welfare in six municipalities in Norway collaborate across public sectors to accommodate the needs of children and youth in their region. The collaboration is organized as an intermunicipal network led by a network coordinator. The network was established due to two major national reforms that involve all three public sectors. These reforms imply changes that aim to improve collaboration across public sectors focusing on identifying and supporting vulnerable children from when they are born until they have finished upper secondary education. In this region, the leaders of municipalities decided to merge these two reforms which would enable identifying problems early and provide a more holistic approach to supporting children and youth in various life phases. To support the multiprofessional collaboration, a partnership with the local university college was established. The partnership includes support in terms of moderating meetings, coaching the network coordinator, providing professional development as well as establishing a joint language, and understanding that facilitate multi-professional collaboration. The following research questions guide our analysis: 1) How is the campus-community partnership organized? 2) What characterizes the emerging professional collaboration across public sectors and institutions? 3) What are mutual benefits from the campus-community partnership? For the analysis, we apply theories on institutional work developed by Lawrence and Suddaby (2006). This concept can help illuminate how actors at different levels translate, share and develop joint knowledge as they put the children at the centre of attention. Translation as a theoretical concept is not only useful for analysing knowledge‐transfer processes, it also has the potential to guide deliberate interventions as part of institutional work in such processes to achieve various outcomes (Røvik, 2016). The analysis draws on data gathered by the means of observation of network meetings and semi-structured interviews with key actors involved in the campus-community partnership. Key findings show that support from the university college is essential to structure, moderate meetings and keep the focus on the children. Moreover, the discussions around interventions reflect appreciation of bringing in multiprofessional perspectives to create support not only for children, but also for their families.

Lawrence, T. B. and Suddaby, R. (2006) Institutions and Institutional work. In Clegg, S.R., et al. (Eds.) Sage Handbook of Organization Studies (p. 215-254). Sage. Røvik, K. A. (2016). Knowledge Transfer as Translation: Review and Elements of an Instrumental Theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(3), 290-310.

Campus-community partnerships (CCPs) aim to establish ‘sustainable, productive and meaningful relationships’ (Kmack et al., 2023, 6), in which knowledge and experience transfer and social engagement can take place in a mutually beneficial way (Slepcevic-Zach et al., 2023). Particularly in sustainable development, partnerships between universities and practitioners are seen as critical to the success of transformation processes (Leal Filho et al., 2023). Research in this context often focuses on the experiences, perspectives and learning processes of the academic staff or students involved. However, for a holistic picture of CCP, more research needs to focus on the community side and the involved practice partners. Therefore, this paper presents empirical findings from a longitudinal study focusing on the perspectives and experiences of practice partners in a yearlong CCP study. The study used three innovation labs and organizational network consulting to support local network-building processes toward sustainable development. Following the idea of Dewey (Dewey, 1980), the programme sees uncertainty as a learning opportunity rather than a challenge. The innovation labs are conceived as a methodical form of exploring ‘the unknown’ (ibid.) together. Within the partnership programme, students from several master programmes played the role of novice-network consultants while stakeholders worked together on solutions for regional sustainable development. In this way, the partnerships between the university and the region aimed at a mutual professionalisation process. Participating stakeholders (n = 32) from different fields (consumers, produces, administration and several others) were asked about their experiences within the innovation labs through image-based interviews before and after each event. The results of the metaphor-oriented (Schmitt, 2017), triangulated (Brake, 2011) analysis of the interview material show that the actors imagine the partnership through path-related and collective metaphors (a train, a joint expedition, a rowing boat), but also through images that refer to risk and uncertainty along the shared path (a white-water rafting trip, climbing a mountain, crossing a river). (Heidelmann & Klös, 2023). The organizational educational consultants are imagined as someone (who sets the pace for rowing, as a hiking guide, as a stable bridge) who 'leads' (Klös & Heidelmann, 2023) the stakeholders on their way through the epistemic terrain of the unknown, rather than someone who merely transfers knowledge (Klös, 2023). Based on the results of a discourse-oriented analysis (Karl, 2007), the paper also discusses how the metaphorical concepts that structure stakeholders' narratives are linked to the discourse about the role of universities within CCPs.

Dewey, J. (1980). The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action. Perigee Books. Heidelmann, M.-A., & Klös, T. (2023). Optimierung des regionalen Wirtschaftskreislaufs: Das Potenzial organisationspädagogischen Wissens im Praxisfeld ländlicher Räume. In S. M. Weber, C. Fahrenwald, & A. Schröer (Eds.), Organisationen optimieren? Springer. Karl, U. (2007). Metaphern als Spuren von Diskursen in biographischen Texten. Klös, T., & Heidelmann, M.-A. (2023). Sustainability Leaders’ Perspectives on the Potential of Innovation Labs: Toward Collective Regional Leadership. In W. Leal Filho, A. Lange Salvia, E. Pallant, B. Choate, & K. Pearce (Eds.), Educating the Sustainability Leaders of the Future (pp. 659–679). Springer Natur. Kmack, H., Pellino, D., & Fricke, I. (2023). Relationship, leadership, action: Evaluating the framework of a sustainable campus-community partnership. Community Development, 54(6), 828–845. Leal Filho, W., Dibbern, T., Viera Trevisan, L., Coggo Cristofoletti, E., Dinis, M. A. P., Matandirotya, N., Sierra, J., Shulla, K., Buttriss, G., L’Espoir Decosta, P., Mbah, M. F., & Sanni, M. (2023). Mapping universities-communities partnerships in the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1246875. Slepcevic-Zach, P., Fahrenwald, C., & Resch, K. (2023). Editorial: Campus-Community-Partnerships: Zukunftspartnerschaften zwischen Hochschule und Gesellschaft. https://doi.org/10.3217/ZFHE-18-02/01

Uncertainty can be understood as an organizational practice of control, dealing with uncertainy in “high reliability organizations”, as Weick & Sutcliffe (2001) put it – and to learn how to manage the unexpected. Moreover, uncertainty can be understood not only as a condition or a mode of organizing, but as an epistemological and ontological foundation of our times. As Dewey’s notion of uncertainty (1929) is explicitly linked to a call for democratizing societies as well as (self-)organizing and democratizing organizations in society (1927/2012), it is a relevant foundation for organizational democratization understood as democracy as becoming.

Starting with experience is core for Dewey – which involves the experience of existential uncertainty (Dewey 1964; 1969) the symposium is interested in the question, how to organize aesthetic experience, embodied transformation and democracy as becoming. Creative democracy in organizing can still be seen as a “task before us”, as Dewey (1991) puts it.

So how does a positive relation to uncertainty contribute to conceptualizing alternative strategies of organizing democracy-as-becoming? How can integrative and democratic creative (Follett 1923; 1924) education support organizational democratization? What is the role of listening, relationality, embodiment and aesthetic transformation?

The European Horizon 2020 project “AECED” – Transforming Education for Democracy through Aesthetic and Embodied Learning, Responsive Pedagogies and Democracy-as-becoming” is exploring the relation between aesthetic and embodied learning, responsive pedagogies and democracy as becoming. It connects to different institutional contexts in educational fields and different European countries.

Based on its Participatory Action Research (PAR) strategy (Bryman 2012), the project with six national partners works with a democracy-as-becoming approach to support individual and collective learning, organizational democratization and epistemic transformation.

Based on an innovative aesthetic and embodied pedagogical framework, project has established associated frameworks and guides to pedagogical practice, that support responsive pedagogies for education for democracy and democracy as becoming. How do the different projects relate to partners in collaboration, how does collaboration happen in the diagnosis of a problem and in the development of a solution?

The case studies operate within complex institutional settings and different stakeholders of different layers of institutionalized power. How does contexts like the municipality in Lisbon, Portugal, the GOOD network of NGOs in Croatia, the ministry of education in Latvia, the Multi-Academy Trust in England, or a commoning social movement relate to the vision of organizational democracy and democracy as becoming? What are the uncertainties in reaching out and relating to them, what are the challenges of democratizing and what are the strategies of uncertainty to be found here? Will partners try to frame democratization as a need of qualification in times of a VUCA world? Will they argue for controlling uncertainty by specific perspectives on mindful education as a functional claim? Will they transform and open up in and “into the open” themselves? And in which way will such institutionalized settings allow for de-institutionalization, for de-hierarchization, for de-alienation – and democratization- as-becoming?

The symposium is interested in the dynamics established (Basit 2010) in this participatory research settings and the (power-)dynamics in cocreating change in practice (Kemmis & McTaggart 2014).

From this exploratory journey, we will relate and reflect the potentials of theorizing organizational, institutional, embodied and discursive dynamics of “democracy-as-(de)-institutionalizing-becoming”, in the sense, that normalized, societally and instititutionally established regimes of power and knowledge become experienced, reflected upon and questioned – and in this sense “enlightened” – maybe into a Foucauldian “not to be governed like this” (Weber & Maurer 2006).

The purpose of this paper is to explore uncertainty as a feature of democracy-as-becoming and the implications for nurturing and researching democracy-as-becoming, based on our work as partners in AECED – a 3-year research project funded by Horizon Europe/UKRI with the purpose of enhancing and transforming aesthetic and embodied learning for democracy, conducted through 19 cases in six countries using participatory action research (PAR). We (the UK partner) are conducting cases in professional learning and secondary education. For the project, the principles of democracy-as-becoming are defined as the dimensions of holistic democracy: power sharing, transforming dialogue, holistic learning and relational well-being (Woods 2021). Democracy-as-becoming is, as Montesquieu described democratic equality, “a possibility in need of nurturing care” (Dallmayr 2017: 6). Such nurturing care can lead to democratic relations that activate discovery and freshness of seeing, possibilities for change and creativity, and an experiencing of the passion of the possible (Docherty 2006; see also Woods et al 2023). Yet democracy can also bring great disappointments and uncertainties that pervade the aesthetic and embodied experience of democratic relations. The paper explores the ways in which democracy-as-becoming is subject to uncertainties. It examines challenges that affect the dimensions of democracy-as-becoming and shape uncertainties – challenges such as the ‘complexity conundrum’ in which volatility and complexity create perpetual uncertainty and ambiguity (Varney 2024: 41); dissonances between, on the one hand, democracy and, on the other hand, conflicting organisational rationalities and endemic power inequalities (Woods 2011, Woods 2019); the need for “unlearning certain mindsets, dispositions and behaviours” that are barriers to democratic relations and discourses (Nanwani 2024: 95); and the limitation of viewing social practices, such as leadership, solely in terms of actions rather than as embodied, relational phenomena (Payne and Jääskeläinen 2024). The purpose is not to discover how to eliminate uncertainties, as this is impossible. Rather, it is to understand better the nature of uncertainties distinctive to democracy-as-becoming, what we can learn about democracy-as-becoming by embracing (being with) uncertainty and how we might explore the ways in which participants and researchers in PAR experience uncertainty. The paper will pay particular attention to the value of arts-based and embodied methods of research and reflection in helping to embrace uncertainty through surfacing complexities and fostering flexibility, shared curiosity, transparency and openness to the knowledge and experience of all (Culshaw 2023). We will draw on our experiences of participatory data generation and reflection in the UK cases.

Culshaw, S. (2023) Using arts-based and embodied methods to research leadership in education, in Woods et al (2023a). Dallmayr, F. (2017) Democracy to Come, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nanwani,S. K. (2024) Teacher Discourses, in O’Hair et al (2024) O’Hair, M. J., Woods, P. A. & O’Hair, D. (Eds.) (2024) Communication and Education: Promoting Peace and Democracy in Times of Crisis and Conflict, Wiley-Blackwell. Payne, H. & Jääskeläinen, P. (2023) Embodied leadership: a perspective on reciprocal body movement, in Woods et al (2023a). Varney, S. (2024) The Dynamic Patterning of Peace and Democracy, in O’Hair et al (2024) Woods, P. A. (2011) Transforming Education Policy, Sage. Woods, P. A. (2019) School organisation: Authority, status and love as an integrative pow¬er. In M. Connolly, et al (Eds.), International Handbook on school organization. Sage. Woods, P. A. (2021) Democratic Leadership, in R. Papa (ed), [Oxford] Encyclopaedia of Educational Administration, Oxford University Press. Woods, P. A., Roberts, A., Tian, M. & Youngs, H. (Eds.) (2023a) Handbook on leadership in education, Elgar. Woods, P. A., Culshaw, S., Smith, K., Jarvis, J., Payne, H. & Roberts, A. (2023b) Nurturing Change, Professional Development in Education, 49:4, 600-619.

This paper analyses some of the findings of the participatory action research (PAR) conducted within the Horizon Europe project AECED “Transforming Education for Democracy through Aesthetic and Embodied Learning, Responsive Pedagogies and Democracy-as-becoming” in three secondary schools of Latvia. The PAR is designed to enable experiencing democracy-as-becoming by embedding the drama sketch learning method into pedagogical practice and to study the individual and collective growth of all its participants. Addressing schools as learning organisations, we initiate multi-level collaboration among the school headmasters, teachers, students, external experts, researchers and schools (OECD, 2016) to achieve sustainable improvements in the democratization of schools. This is a complex task in today’s unstable world including educational systems where uncertainty has become an inescapable feature of it. Hasinoff and Mandzuk suggest that traditional scientific principles can no longer be relied on to manage complex problems. Instead, they offer sensemaking as an approach best to navigate the dilemmas that arise in complex adaptive systems like education institutions in uncertainty (Hasinoff & Mandzuk, 2018). Some scholars consider sensemaking a cognitive process (Starbuck & Milliken, 1988). However, it is also argued that sensemaking is a social process (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014) or a social psychological process (Hasinoff & Mandzuk, 2018) because of individuals’ being embedded in a socio-material context. From the perspective of the Horizon Europe project AECED, we could interpret sensemaking in uncertainty as a more complex process that is based not only on cognitive and affective but also on the embodied side of human living, learning and interaction. Studies on body-mind connection reveal the inevitable role embodiment plays as a source and means for knowing, thinking, understanding, experiencing emotions, feeling, learning, and wellbeing (Payne, 2019). Our previous research showed that arts-based and embodied learning promotes democratic leadership (Woods, 2021) facilitating power sharing, holistic learning, relational wellbeing and transformative dialogue among the participants of the collaborative processes of collage-creation (Woods et al., 2021) and drama (Oganisjana et al., 2021). This phenomenon is explained by the opening of the participants of creative processes to each other, to the situation they find themselves in and to the problems to be solved with enhanced levels of mutual trust, self-confidence and willingness to co-think, co-understand, co-work and co-create. Thus, arts-based and embodied learning not only creates a ground for experiencing democracy as a process of becoming but also assists learners and pedagogues in collective sensemaking and navigating through uncertain and challenging situations.

1. Hasinoff, S. & Mandzuk, D. (2018). Navigating Uncertainty: Sensemaking for Educational Leaders. Boston: Brill. 2. Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organisations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57-125. 3. OECD. (2016). What makes a school a learning organisation? A guide for policy makers, school leaders and teachers. OECD Better Policies for Better Lives. https://www.oecd.org/education/school/school-learning-organisation.pdf 4. Oganisjana, K., Steina, A., & Ozols, R. (2021). Action Research Trials (Arts) – Evaluation Report. Latvia. ENABLES. University of Hertfordshire. https://www.herts.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/340437/4.B.2_Drama-and-improvisation_ARTs-report.pdf 5. Starbuck, W.H., & Milliken, F. J. (1988). Executives; perceptual filters: Whay they notice and how they make sense. In D. C. Hambrick (Ed.), The Executive Effect: Concepts and Methods for Studying Top Managers (pp. 35–65). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 6. Payne, H. (2019). Thought Piece: Embodiment, learning and wellbeing. LINK, 4(1), University of Hertfordshire. https://www.herts.ac.uk/link/volume-4,-issue-1/embodiment,-learning-and-wellbeing 7. Woods, P. A. (2021) Democratic Leadership, in R. Papa (ed), [Oxford] Encyclopaedia of Educational Administration, Oxford University Press. 8. Woods, P. A., Culshaw, S., Smith, K., Jarvis, J., Payne, H. and Roberts, A. (2021) Nurturing Change: Processes and outcomes of workshops using collage and gesture to foster aesthetic qualities and capabilities for distributed leadership, Professional Development in Education.

Organizational democracy in education emphasizes participatory decision-making processes, involving teachers, students, and other stakeholders in shaping educational policies and practices. In teacher education, organizational democracy involves decision-making that empower them to contribute to the design and improvement of educational programs. This concept underscores the importance of co creating with teachers and educators to foster democratic values and equip them with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to promote democratic principles within students and learning community. This approach fits into the ongoing discussion about education and the common good, questioning how education itself can be understood as “common” and as a promoter of common goods (Bollier, 2018; Velicu & Garcia -Lopez, 2020). Analyzing organizational democracy involves examining various dimensions to understand how democratic principles are embedded within the organizational structure and culture. The AECED project aims to develop a prototype of a pedagogical framework and guides to practice that encourages the development of activities based on arts-based embodied methods to provide experiences of democracy-as-becoming. The Portuguese case will carry out 4 of the case studies of the project based on the development of an online training course for teachers and educators who, using a Participatory Action-Research (PAR) methodology (Cornish, et al. 2023), will test the framework and guide in early years, primary and vocational education. In this paper we will present a set of data relating to the initial findings on the perceptions of teachers and educators that participated in the online course about the organizational transformation before the implementation and development of the activities, based on the pedagogical framework and guides of AECED project. Our aim was to identify perceptions about the organizational transformation on the following dimensions: transformative dialogue, power sharing, holistic learning, relational well-being, collaborative decision-making, shared leadership, innovation, and Creativity; Conflict Resolution and Inclusivity and Diversity. By examining these dimensions, researchers and organizations can gain insights into organizational democracy and identify areas for improvement or refinement.

Bollier, D. (2018). The Social Artist - on The commons - Patenting - Enclosure - Power. (J. Clark, Entrevistador) Obtido de https://ccmj.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/The-Commons-David-Bollier-2018.pdf Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. (2023). Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3, 34 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1 Etherington, K. (2004). Becoming a Reflexive Researcher. Cornish, F., Breton, N., Moreno-Tabarez, U. et al. (2023). Participatory action research. Nat Rev Methods Primers 3, 34 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-023-00214-1 Etherington, K. (2004). Becoming a Reflexive Researcher. Fleetwood-Smith, R., Tischler, V. & Robson, D. (2022) Using creative, sensory and embodied research methods when working with people with dementia: a method story, Arts & Health, 14:3, 263-279, DOI: 10.1080/17533015.2021.1974064 Katzman, E. (2015). Embodied Reflexivity: Knowledge and the Body in Professional Practice. 10.1007/978-3-319-00140-1_10. Kelly, M. & de Vries-Erich, J. & Helmich, E. & Dornan, T.& King, N. (2017). Embodied Reflexivity in Qualitative Analysis: A Role for Selfies. 10.17169/fqs-18.2.2701. Velicu, I., & Garcia-Lopez, G. (2018). Thinking the Commons through Ostrom and Butler: Boundness and Vulnerability. Theory, Culture and Society, 35 (6), 55-73. doi:10.1177/0263276418757315

Within a world of multiple crisis and uncertainties, present critiques of modern institutions like the school and the university question inherent epistemes of education, still belonging to an ‘industrial age’. Claiming to move ‘beyond’ such dysfunctional rationalities (Ball & Collet-Sabé 2021), Commoning is regarded as a potential toward organizational democratization (Collet-Sabé & Ball 2022:12). Commoning refers to a threefold notion of (organizational) democracy. Adressing social togetherness, peer governance and care-economy, it refers to an onto-epistemological potential, which may support transforming our given institutions (like schools, universities and others) towards the Common Good. With it´s alternative imaginary of alternative patterns of organizing, Commoning and Commoning Education suspends, neutralizes and inverts the given onto-epistemology. Suggested by the commoning activists Helfrich and Bollier (2020), this potentials of “co-producing and commoning a different episteme” (Collet-Sabé & Ball 2022) for organizational education materializes and methodizes in the Pattern Language of Commoning (PLC), developed by Silke Helfrich. Based on the experiences of more than 400 interviewees from social movement organizations, the PLC card deck condenses into 33 patterns, which each include illustrations, problem questions, short descriptions, examples, and connection patterns. Patterns in general can be understood as a tool that promote life and a free, fair, and sustainable world. Containing proven experiential knowledge, patterns describe the essence of successful solutions to problems that may occur in comparable contexts. The complex interplay between context, problem, and solution is critical; thus, these three elements are never isolated from each other (Helfrich & Bollier 2020). Offering a new frame of reference “among people and between people and the world” (Helfrich & Bollier, 2020, 78), the PLC has been created in order to facilitate patterns of problem solving (cf. Leitner 2015, 33) to promote ethical and process- and relationship-oriented attitudes and stances (cf. Helfrich & Petzold 2021). Suggesting a “best practice” to use, the patterns have a hypothetical character (cf. Alexander & Ishikawa et al 1995). From an organizational education perspective, the PLC may contribute to the learning in, of, and between organizations (cf. Göhlich et al 2018; Weber 2020). In which ways does PLC in the practice of PLC card deck users contribute to ‘re-inventing’ existing organizations (Laloux 2015)? In order to learn more about the empirical use of this new praxis of organizing, the paper will present the empirical findings of an online survey realized with card deck users of the PLC in the german speaking world.

Alexander, C.; Ishikawa, S., Silverstein, M., Jacobson, M., Fiksfahl-King, I.; Angel, S. (1995): Eine Muster-Sprache. A Pattern Language. Städte, Gebäude, Konstruktion. Wien: Löcker Verlag. Ball, S. J. & Collet-Sabé, J. (2021): Against School. an epistemological critique Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 1 July 2021. DOI:10.1080/01596306.2021.1947780 Corpus ID: 237777989 Castoriadis, Cornelius (1975). Gesellschaft als imaginäre Institution. Entwurf einer politischen Philosophie, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Collet-Sabé, J. & Ball, S. J. (2022): Beyond School. The challenge of co-producing and commoning a different episteme for education. In: Journal of Education Policy. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02680939.2022.2157890 Foucault, M. (1981): Archäologie des Wissens. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Göhlich, M.; Novotný, P.: Revsbæk, L.; Schröer, A.; Weber, S. M.; Yi, B. J. (2018): Research Memorandum Organizational Education. In: Studia Paedagogica. 23 (2), pp. 205–215. Helfrich, S. &. Bollier, D. (2020): Frei, Fair & Lebendig. Bielefeld: transcript. Helfrich, S. &. Petzold, J. (2021): Commoning oder wie Transformation gelingt. Auftakt einer Mustersprache. Neudenau/Eberswalde. Leitner, H. (2015): Mit Mustern arbeiten. In: S. Helfrich, D. Bollier & Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (Eds.): Die Welt der Commons. Bielefeld: transcript, 27-35. Laloux, F. (2015): Reinventing Organizations. München: Vahlen Verlag.