Conference Agenda

Many university researchers belong to research groups, yet little is known about what makes a research group effective or how they benefit members in terms of developing their capacity to produce high-quality research. This project seeks to examine research groups and their members in order to determine the factors that contribute to an effective research group and to collective as well as individual development within those groups.
For the purposes of this project, we use a broad definition of research groups. Research groups
include any group that engage in research activities as a collective. These activities might include reading groups/circles, peer review, research projects or reflections on research endeavors. These groups may be part of an institution, through internal or external funding, or may exist separately from an institutional structure.
Based on established contacts, this study will be conducted as parallel studies focusing on two regional areas, Australia and the Nordic countries, with similar aims and research questions The Australian study is conducted at Charles Sturt University, Australia. The Swedish one at Karlstad University, Sweden. The fact that these two studies are carried out around the same time and with similar aims, research questions, and methodology and data construction tools creates opportunities for regional in-depth knowledge and understanding as well as international comparisons.
Some argue that research groups (Ion & Del Mar Duran Belloch, 2013) and networks (Heffernan, 2021) are the key to an academic’s career success, with other research suggesting that the support offered in the first five years significantly influences an individual’s career trajectory (Browning et al., 2014).
Previous research has examined the functioning of research groups (Park et al., 2017), the size and composition of research groups (Joshi, 2014) and leadership in research groups (Ion & Del Mar Duran Belloch, 2013; Vebree et al., 2012). Most research focuses on case study groups, how they function and the particular practices that are made possible within them (c.f. Degn, 2018; Mahon et al., 2018). There are also reports of research groups as a method to speak back to, or work within the constraints of, the neoliberal institutions’ metric driven and individualizing nature (Degn, 2018; Mahon et al., 2018).
Research groups have been investigated in many countries including Australia (Mahon et al., 2018), Spain (Ion & Del Mar Duran Belloch, 2013), Denmark (Degn, 2018) and the Netherlands (Degn, 2018). In Australia, there is little research that has explored the functioning of research groups or the factors that make them effective; rather, most studies have focused on the benefits of the group for members (c.f. Larsen et al., 2023; Mahon et al., 2018). Given the Australian research context is slightly different to that of the Nordic countries, with its hyperfocus on productivity and performative metrics, it is important and timely to consider the functioning of research groups in Australia and in the Nordic countries and what role they play for individual researchers.
By examining members’ experiences, research groups can develop targeted strategies to support their members and build research capability. Likewise, institutions will benefit by having qualitative data in relation to the effectiveness of research groups, which may assist with policy and funding decisions.
The research questions are:
1. What factors contribute to effective research groups?
2. Why do researchers belong to research groups?
3. How do researchers define a high-quality research group?

Neoliberal policies of performativity played a crucial role in creating a higher education system where 'publish or perish' and more recently 'publish or no degree' is the norm in many contexts. These neoliberal manifestations have moulded institutional cultures and practices, transforming higher education institutions into commercial enterprises where competitiveness is promoted (Croucher & Lacy 2022) and a new form of governance based on principles of performativity reigns (Mula-Falcón et al., 2022). By putting pressure on scholars to comply with performative values (Aguinis et al., 2020), this transformation has encouraged scholars to prove their worth through publication performance most often measured by research quantity, impact and reach (Sandy & Shen, 2019) to benefit from research funding, promotion and tenure opportunities (Casadevall & Fang, 2012), also accelerating institutionalization of publishing during candidature (Lei 2019).

Influenced by these developments, the task role of doctoral students and early career researchers has undergone a significant transformation in way that require them 'to be, or to quickly become, proficient and prolific writers' (Aitchison et al. 2012, 435) in early or preparatory stages of their faculty careers (Horta and Santos 2016; Xu 2022). This study focuses on the metaphorical images doctoral students and early career researchers use to describe the publishing process and themselves as novice authors in relation to their publishing experiences while also exploring conceptual themes that emerge from these metaphorical images.

The paper is guided by the figured world and socialization theories. We conceptualize socialization as a process bound to influence inexperienced scholars’ publication experiences (Ramirez, 2016) and their conceptualizations of the publishing process and themselves as novice authors. It is a means through which inexperienced scholars (i.e. doctoral students and early career researchers) get to know the figured world of publishing, a socially constructed realm where certain acts, capitals, discourses and outcomes are privileged over others (Holland et al., 1998). A “discursive social practice embedded in a tangle of cultural, historical practices that are both institutional and disciplinary” (Kamler and Thomson, 2008, p. 508), publishing is loaded with many challenges for inexperienced scholars whose attempts at ‘becoming’ are coupled with the threat of ‘unbecoming’ (Archer, 2008). This is a truism particularly in higher education systems characterized by the use of publications as a basis for recruitment, promotion and funding decisions (Lei, 2021).

The romantic image of peregrinate academicus, the privileged scholar who travels in pursuit of knowledge and scholarly exchange (Henderson, 2021), has long been associated with academic life. The wandering intellectual image is built around a particular type of academic, one who can travel freely, without ties like caring responsibilities. In recent years, however, the concept of academic mobility has faced criticism with a growing body of literature exposing how the concept of peregrinate academicus is linked to conditions of inequity (e.g., Henderson, 2021). For many academics in modern, neoliberal universities, the expectation of mobility can be highly problematic – some academics are not afforded opportunities beyond their current institution(s), and many are unable to commit to extended travel for a range of reasons, including finances, care giving responsibilities and safety concerns. Given the increased focus on disparities between academics in insecure work and those in ongoing positions, the issue of mobility warrants further attention.

Binary conceptualisations have previously dominated discussions of academic mobility, with academics perceived as either mobile or immobile (Henderson, 2021). Tzanakou and Henderson’s (2021) concepts of ‘sticky’ and ‘stuck’ were developed to deconstruct this im/mobility binary, with sticky representing remnants of an academic’s past as the “imprint of the previous context in [the academic’s] identity or work practices” (Tzanakou and Henderson, 2021, p. 689). Sticky can also represent mobility that might be restricted through personal circumstances, creating links that ‘stick’ the academic to their family, locality or community. Being ‘stuck’, on the other hand, is conceptualised as being unable to move from a particular location or employment type, which often experienced by those in casual or fixed-term positions.

Changes to the academic workforce, which now see up to 70% of academic staff employed on fixed-term or casual employment contracts, necessitate a reconsideration of the expectation of academic mobility. In this age of uncertainty, academics who are precariously employed often don’t have access to the types of funding, support and international networks required to meet the ideal of the ‘wandering scholar’. Furthermore, privileging the notion of academic mobility creates an inequitable playing field for those who, for myriad reasons, want to maintain specific geographical or institutional ties.

In this paper, we take up the call by Tzanakou and Henderson (2021) to use their conceptualisations and further examine the nuances within discussions of academic mobility, particularly with reference to academics employed in fixed-term or casual positions. We conceptualise ‘stickiness’ as the affective strings which metaphorically connect the mobile scholar to particular localities, including the one from which they originate. In practice, residues across the life course create stretchy strings that bind academics to places, people and institutions, even when they are mobile. These strings can influence a scholar’s short-term mobility (such as conference attendance) or long-term mobility, such as relocating overseas. We also expand on the notion of how academics become ‘stuck’, and identify how staying within one location is viewed as a positive for many academics, while for others it remains a source of frustration.

This paper describes a how using an online or virtual Community of Practice (VCoP) supported the professional development of five Early Career Academics (ECA) in science education in New Zealand. Four of the five ECAs were employed in permanent positions in New Zealand universities and the fifth was an independent researcher. All participants had either received their PhD within the last five years or had not been in full-time employment at a university for more than five years when this CoP was formed. The VCoP was facilitated and mentored by an experienced academic.

Becoming an academic can be a stressful, isolating and challenging (Patton & Parker, 2017). Juggling a high teaching load, and endeavouring to produce quality research to obtain or maintain permanency can impact one’s health and career longevity (Hollywood et al., 2020). For ECAs in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) the transition may be difficult as they seek to balance their teacher identity with their researcher identity (van Lankveld et al., 2017). Professional development and mentoring may support ECA’s successful transition (Rienties & Hosein, 2020). However, as most ITE ECA come to academia with a background as a practicing teacher, there is a need for professional development that recognises their expertise in teaching (MacPhail et al., 2014) but also their need for development as researchers.

This study used Wenger’s (2018) Communities of Practice (CoP) as a conceptual framework to explore the social learning that was undertaken in the online ECA community as well as an analytical lens (see methodology). His theory of learning incorporates four components – the community in which the learning takes place, our identity within that community, how we discuss our practice and make meaning. A CoP has been described as “groups of people who share a concern or passion for something they do and learn how to do it as they interact regularly” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015, p. 2). CoP vary in configuration – ranging from those intentionally devised by management to support learning to those facilitated and others that are self-driven and organic in nature (McDonald et al., 2012). This particular VCoP meets online and uses a virtual space for “socializing, learning, identification and emotional and affective exchange”(Maretti et al., 2022, p. 336).

This study will add to the literature on Communities of Practice exploring Initial Teacher Education (MacPhail et al., 2014; Patton & Parker, 2017) and supporting ECAs (Mulholland et al., 2023; Rienties & Hosein, 2020). It seeks to answer the following research question:

How does this Community of Practice support ECAs in science education to develop their practice and research capabilities?

The challenges of early career academics (ECA) in Higher Education Institutions (HEI) have been extensively described in the literature; the learning processes academics face in their careers are inherently emotional (Bloch, 2016; Walker, 2017), yet that needs some unpacking. ECA in European HEI face precarious working conditions, high competition, etc., to which teaching labour is added. The literature shows that ECA work in Europe can be experienced both positively and negatively (Hollywood et al., 2020; Nästesjö, 2020; 2022; Stupnisky et al., 2016), or succinctly stated: mixed (Bloch, 2016). Additionally, teaching is often identified as one of the major duties of early career academics. Thus, the pressure to perform in all fronts and levels undoubtedly frames the experience of entering this field of work. Still, the literature has been inconsistent when describing their experiences and therefore some have concluded that what predominates here are mixed feelings.

This article works with the idea that teaching is only one aspect of an already emotionally demanding job and yet it is not necessarily intentionally or formally in advance. This would be a contrasting point with what research training in a doctoral programme or industry/practice professional background would offer to a job-seeking novel academic. Thus, this article also draws from the research on doctoral education for teaching and the emotionality that plays out from the experiences of the role, of teaching and of learning, to get a better sense of the phenomenon.

Managing the emotions related to teaching has been considered the emotional labour of teaching in HE (Salisbury, 2014), and some of the ECA struggles arise from managing the demands of the teaching role plus the intrinsically emotional aspects of it. In this sense, how early career academic experience their academic work at the start of their journey in a broad sense would be complemented by how they experience teaching as something still to be learnt and developed.

Within this context, ECA experiences of the role and of teaching may also reflect their experiences of learning. Thus, other concepts like affection and emotions of/in learning become relevant to understand this field. Arguably, mainstream research in Europe on this topic has turned towards analysing if emotions foster or hinder learning (Loon & Bell, 2018; Pekrun, 2011). Diffusive research outcomes on the field have been synthesised in a recent literature review where Mustafina et al. (2020) argue that both positive and negative emotions can affect learning either positively or negatively. This idea, although an accurate representation of the field, is not particularly helpful.

Within these fields of research, the argument stated here is that early career academics experience their role in different ways, just as they experience learning in different ways. This realization paves the way for the main contribution of this paper: a theorical re-work of an already researched area. The aim here is to articulate a body of literature that arguably showcases contradictory experiences of teaching of academics in their early years of entering this field of work, which is also congruent with the contradictory experiences of learning.

This paper contributes to the field by conceptually re-working ECA experiences of work in European HEI in general, and teaching and learning in particular, to argue that experiencing itself might be inscribed within a learning process. To do so, this paper explores the concept of perezhivanie by Vygotski (1994) to provide a theorical framework to examine the phenomenon from another light. Re-working this phenomenon through perezhivanie means that the experience of ECA could be collectively learnt and thus, that it could be intentionally produced and transformed in specific ways in different educational settings.

This is a descriptive case study (Yin,2017) seeking to provide detailed descriptions of the ways two groups of instructors in a University in Cyprus engaged in two faculty Professional Learning Communities (fPLCs) throughout the academic year 2022-2023, specifically focusing on the characteristics of fPLC work. We analyze evidence from these two case studies to comparatively describe how the work in these fPLCs looked, seeking to describe facets of the fPLC work and characteristics that were deemed productive and supportive, as well as aspects that seemed to be related to challenges faced during the work of the fPLCs. Data were collected as part of a funded project that aimed to investigate the characteristics of productive and sustainable faculty PLCs., Our evidence suggests insights for supporting sustainable fPLCs in higher education (e.g., Laws, 1996).

Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are a form of professional development that provides teachers/instructors a framework in which to act as “learners” and schools/institutions as “learning communities” (Clarke & Hollingsworth,2002). PLCs refer to small teams (communities) of teachers/instructors with shared interests and visions that meet regularly, exchange expertise, and work collaboratively with the goal of improving their teaching practice (Brookhart,2009; Margalef & Roblin,2016). In the context of PLCs, professional learning should be an ongoing, sustained, intensive, and collaborative approach to improving teachers’/instructors’ effectiveness in raising student achievement (Slabine,2011) and enhancing student learning experiences. This engagement provides teachers/instructors with opportunities to refine their content knowledge and teaching pedagogies and approaches, understand the need to change, and helps them find ways to implement changes in their teaching that will help their students to learn more effectively (e.g., Fishman et al.,2003; Loucks-Horsley et al.,2003).

Although a recently growing number of studies have investigated the use and function of PLCs at primary and secondary education levels, there is to date relatively little investigation of PLCs in higher education (e.g., Laws,1996). Cox (2004) indicates that faculty PLCs (fPLCs) can play an important role in faculty development with evidence suggesting that both student and faculty learning is improved through this process. In a study exploring the potential introduction of fPLCs as an innovative way to enhance instructors’ teaching competencies, Authors (2023) have described new directions in fPLCs, focusing more on peer interaction and support, and student data focusing on learning outcomes aligned with the increasing research interest in the field (e.g., Terry, et al.,2018). In a sense, engaging faculty in fPLC practices may be a way to further empower faculty in their working environment. Overall, there is to date very little evidence of whether these changes are sustained or can be sustainable beyond participation in fPLCs (Tinnell et al.,2019). The growth of this idea has been slow, and there seem to be many obstacles to implementation (Palmer,2002), with Authors (2023) asking for further, more detailed investigations related to fPLC work and impact.

Echoing the theme of this 30th EERA conference, I propose to share my research work on professional posture which leads me to say that a better knowledge of one's personal and professional posture can be a way to keep one's balance in the world. in the midst of the change in which we live. My 2024 communication proposal is part of the extension of the communication selected for EERA Glasgow 2023 which aimed to shed light on the conditions for the professional development of teacher-researchers. In a phenomeno-praxeological approach the notion of posture is located at the heart of the professional development process at the interface of two axes: one which goes from the subject to the social and another on which the personal and professional dimensions of the process meet. “Posture” is defined as “the manifestation (physical or symbolic) of a mental state, shaped by our beliefs and oriented by our intentions, which exerts a guiding and dynamic influence on our actions, giving them meaning and justification” (Lameul , 2008, 2016). By taking root in this work, my 2024 communication proposal will attempt to provide additional answers to the following questions:

- How to know yourself better so as not to lose your footing in the turmoil of this world?

- How can we become aware of the different dimensions that make up a posture (which make up who we are as humans) ?

Across the OECD countries, the proportion of young people who have attained a tertiary degree has increased by more than 20 percentage points to 47% over the past two decades (OECD, 2023). However, as participation in higher education (HE) continues to increase, concerns have been raised as to whether some groups of young people with certain characteristics may have benefited from HE expansion more than others (Montacute & Cullinane, 2023; Smith, 2018). Fair access to HE matters given that it is well established that graduates tend to earn higher average salaries in the labour market than their non-graduate counterparts (Britton et al., 2020; Eurostat, 2021). Furthermore, HE participation also appears to be positively associated with a number of favourable outcomes in later adulthood, such as longer life expectancy and greater civic engagement (Balaj et al., 2024; Brennan et al., 2013).

Research on patterns of access to HE in England in particular presents the opportunity to understand the impact of high university tuition fees, given that England is reported to have the highest tuition fees of any OECD country (OECD, 2021). Despite this, some international comparisons have suggested that England has performed well in enabling certain groups of disadvantaged students to access HE. For example, the UK as a whole was ranked in fifth place among the OECD countries with respect to access to HE for young people who have parents with lower levels of education (OECD, 2012). Whilst tuition fees in England appear to be exceptionally high, students are supported financially by a system of income-contingent loans. These can be used to finance the cost of HE and are only repaid by graduates who earn above a certain threshold (Murphy et al., 2019), potentially reducing the deterrent effect of high tuition fees.

Existing literature on access to HE in England has suggested that many inequalities in access to HE (such as those by socioeconomic background) can be largely explained by corresponding inequalities in attainment at the secondary education level (Crawford & Greaves, 2015; Croll & Attwood, 2013). This is in line with other international evidence on this issue, with the OECD reporting that 37% of all variance in disparities in access to HE by parental level of education (across the OECD countries) can be explained by inequalities in earlier schooling (OECD, 2012). However, some research suggests that some vulnerable groups (such as poorer students and those from ethnic minority backgrounds) may be disadvantaged in the HE admissions process, perhaps by being disadvantaged in the application process itself (Boliver, 2013; Jones, 2013).

The UK Government routinely collects data concerning the attainment and personal characteristics of all school pupils within state-funded schools in England and makes this data available to researchers via the National Pupil Database, which is believed to be one of the richest education datasets in the world (Department for Education, 2015). This study takes advantage the richness of administrative data available in England to explore the following research question:

• To what extent do the personal characteristics of English school pupils (such as parental income, gender and ethnicity) predict the likelihood of them progressing into higher education?

As well as considering absolute disparities in access to HE by different characteristics, there will also be consideration as to whether or not different inequalities in HE access can be explained by confounding variables such as disparities in attainment in secondary education. This will reveal the extent to which certain background characteristics may present a barrier to HE participation, within the context of one of the most expensive higher education systems in the world.

This paper centres on how first-in-family university graduate Roma (Gitano) and non-Roma Hungarians of working-class origin experience higher education-driven social mobility. We focus on their university years and their transition from education to work, and explore the structural, institutional and socio-cultural conditions that shape Roma and non-Roma young people’s distinctive mobility paths.

Most research projects on racialised ethnic minorities’ successful university attainment (e.g. Flecha et al., 2022; Gallego-Noche & Goenechea-Permisán, 2022; Gamella, 2011; Padilla-Carmona et al., 2020) take for granted the lineal, positive effect of education on social mobility, similar to the quantitative tradition of social mobility studies (Bukodi & Goldthorpe, 2019; Róbert, 2019). In contrast, our project – drawing on a recently developed perspective - goes further to study the link between higher education gains and social mobility chances for the racialised Gitano minority, and their non-racialised co-citizens from similar socio-economic and social contexts, through an intersectional comparison. This paper can be situated in the recent line of social mobility studies (e.g. Friedman, 2016; Mallman, 2018) Haga clic o pulse aquí para escribir texto. that investigate the individual, personal accounts of education-driven upwardly mobile people to understand the diverging outcomes and processes of their different mobility paths. So, we interpret social mobility using Bourdieu’s conceptual tools, particularly his concept of habitus, which connects both the structural and the individual levels. The individual experience of social mobility, and particularly the one driven by higher education, is a complex and often painful process, during which one must cope with misalignment between one’s primary habitus (embodied dispositions and tastes acquired in the family and [ethnic] community of origin) and a subsequent adopted habitus in the fields of education and initial professional career. There is a growing literature on the phenomenon of the dislocated and destabilised habitus – what Bourdieu (2004) called a ‘cleft habitus’ – in the case of the university students of lower-class origin. There has been relatively little exploration of how students reconcile shifts in the habitus they obtain in educational settings with their pre-existing, non-elite habitus (Abrahams & Ingram, 2013; Naudet, 2018; Wang, 2022). This paper contributes to understanding this reconciliation process. We aim to unpack how class-changers, in moving between the social milieu of their origin and their destination, occupy a unique position between two fields, what can be called a ‘third space’. Their social position is described as one of social navigators and ‘outsiders within’ who can play a bridging role between two social groupings or class fractions (Bourdieu, 1984). Contrasting the Higher Education experience of Roma with non-Roma first-generation graduates in Hungary, we draw attention to the different opportunities of reconciling conflicting class-related habitus along ethno-racial lines.

For this purpose, we use the concept of ‘Third Space’ (TS) to understand these young people’s experiences. TSs provide a privileged space for reflection and selfhood elaboration during mobility trajectories (Bhabha, 1994). Empirical research finds that there are salient differences between Roma and non-Roma, that is ethnic/racial minority and majority, in the ways they occupy or create ‘third spaces’ due to the specificities of the Roma community's mobility journey through higher education.

Although research has been burgeoning on the experience of nonelite students in elite settings, most scholars focus on the Ivy League or Oxbridge, neglecting some of the most prestigious universities in Europe. With past research mainly focused on initial entry to HE, little attention has been paid to postgraduate levels, which this study aims to remedy. Using interviews with a cohort of final-year doctoral students at a highly prestigious European graduate school, the paper specifically focuses on the social integration of Eastern European (EE) students who struggle to fit in among the elite-university-educated, mostly Western European student body. By considering "fitting in" as an interactional process, the paper aims to examine the experiences of EE students’ vis-a-vis their peers and faculty, and the ways in which this varies by social class.

Researchers have looked into the ways in which nonelite students felt excluded in elite HE settings, resulting in a growing body of scholarship investigating the experiences of working class, black, and ethnic minority students who successfully penetrated the class ceiling (see e.g. Friedman and Laurison 2019). Yet, scholars often studied race and class independently, with separate streams of scholarship tackling the ‘black student experience’ (e.g. Carter 2005) or the ‘working class experience’ (e.g. Reay et al. 2009). Although American scholarship was keen to place race at the centre stage, British scholars posited that ‘class differences are more apparent and significant than minority ethnic similarities’ (Ball et al., 2002). But with neither of these groups being monolithic, it is often the interaction of race/ethnicity and class that provokes ‘a sense of cultural alienation’ among nonelite students in elite settings (Torres 2009: 888).

Despite the EU enlargement occurring some decades ago, the increasing number of EE students studying at Western European (WE) universities has received limited attention. Overall, there has been negligible research specifically dedicated to EEs as a student group (see, e.g., Chankseliani 2016, Genova 2016, Ginnerskov-Dahlberg 2021, Marcu 2015), and, to my knowledge, none has delved into their social integration within elite settings. This study significantly contributes to the literature through the exploration of the experiences of EE students at an elite WE campus where all students share the same social milieu throughout their studies and all benefit from scholarships that enable them to access high quality education regardless of their social origin.

Our research focuses on Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a comprehensive framework for designing and implementing teaching strategies across diverse educational settings, with a particular emphasis on higher education (CAST, 2018). Recognizing the positive impact of training teachers in UDL guidelines on both student skills and the overall quality of teaching (Rusconi & Squillaci, 2023), our study seeks to contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

While previous synthesis studies have explored UDL at the university level (Cumming & Rose, 2021; Roberts et al., 2011) and its application in teacher education (Rusconi & Squillaci, 2023), there is a notable gap in reviews that concurrently consider these two critical dimensions. To address this void, our proposed mapping review aims to answer the following key questions:

• What types of studies have been conducted at the university level regarding teacher professional development with Universal Design for Learning?

• What benefits emerge from these programs or training initiatives in terms of enhancing teaching skills and practices?

A mapping review is chosen as the research method to systematically identify, evaluate, and synthesize existing literature within this specific niche of interest. By adopting this approach, we aim to provide valuable insights into the predominant trends, methodological approaches, and thematic gaps in the literature related to UDL in higher education teacher professional development (Grant & Booth, 2009).

Higher education as a sector is increasingly required to incorporate accessibility and universal design in its curricula to facilitate the development of ‘proactive approaches to accommodations’ (Nieminen 2022), but there is a long way to go in achieving this. The Erasmus+ ATHENA project consortium, led by the European Disability Forum and comprised of the Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Masarykova Univerzi,ta (Muni Teiresias), European University Cyprus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, and EURASHE, aims to develop a set of recommendations on how to broadly integrate Accessibility and Universal Design into higher education curricula. To do so, the project first sought to examine how and to what extent accessibility and universal design are incorporated into higher education curricula in four European countries: Spain, Austria, Cyprus, and Czechia. The study was conducted by applying two methodological approaches: corpus linguistics and thematic analysis of university curricula and syllabi. The main research questions guiding this were: (a) Is the Accessibility and Universal Design approach included in the sample of HE curricula in the selected domains? (b) How is the Accessibility and Universal Design approach applied in the sample of HE curricula in the selected domains, in terms of construction and conceptualisation and curricula aim? This paper presents the findings of this task for one of the four countries, Cyprus.

In the context of this study, accessibility is defined as a fundamental principle that ensures equal access for all individuals, particularly those with disabilities (UN, 2007). To attain full inclusion, communities need to tackle multiple barriers that prevent individuals with disabilities from accessing facilities, goods, and services. These challenges encompass physical barriers such as stairs, information presented in non-universal formats, and services that aren't easily understandable for those with disabilities. It embraces the core values of human diversity, social inclusion, and equality, fostering an environment where everyone, regardless of age, ability, or background, can engage with and benefit from the designed solutions. Although certain accessibility initiatives might come with high expenses, affordable, immediate remedies exist that can still have a considerable impact. Accessibility is about developing solutions to achieve universal design. Universal Design (UD) is conceptualized as a comprehensive approach to design that seeks to create products, environments, and systems that can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability (Centre for Excellence in Universal Design, 2023). Universal Design for Learning is an inclusive and non-discriminatory approach aimed at introducing curricula, teaching and assessment methods that foster accessible and engaging learning environments to accommodate students’ diverse needs and modalities of learning. ( Dell et al. 2015). Even though this approach provides conceptual and pragmatic tools to implement educational differentiation of curricula and pedagogical interventions, the application of the latter is limited in Higher Education (Turner et al 2017).

Notwithstanding the importance of UD in creating accessible learning environments, a mono-dimensional focuson accessibility silences issues of difference and inequality to empower disenfranchised students. As pointed out by Knoll (2009: 124), ‘To apply only universal design or individual accommodation would either leave gaping holes in access to academia and courses by not seeing and addressing the intersecting dilemmas of privilege and oppression within the disability experience ‘. Hence, the necessity of developing universally designed curricula that problematize and destabilize power asymmetries and discourses of normality, such as eurocentric knowledge to create inclusive spaces in HE (Mole, 2012)

The main findings of this research endeavor revealed that accessibility and universal design do not appear frequently in university programs of study in Cyprus, and neither do they appear consistently in terms of frequency and conceptualization across domains.

The literature on learning practices and strategies is rich with insights about the effectiveness of specific interventions and strategy instructions (e.g., Chamot, 1993; Spencer & Maynard, 2014), student’s perceptions and experiences (e.g., Ginns & Ellis, 2007; Nijhuis, Segers, & Gijselaers, 2007; Virtanen & Tynjälä, 2019), and cognitive and psychometric views on learning strategies and approaches (e.g., Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001; Neroni, Meijs, Gijselaers, Kirschner, & de Groot, 2019; Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & Mckeachie, 1993). Such existing research is often psychologically framed, focusing on highly abstract aspects of learning like rehearsal, summarization, information organizing skills, and time management. However, when it comes to looking at students at universities, little is known about what they actually do in their everyday lives in order to learn. Do they, for example, meet with friends for sharing ideas? Do they converse with ChatGPT? Do they print out learning materials and use text markers? Do they listen to audio recordings of lectures when riding the bus? And so on.

Against this backdrop, we take a more sociological approach looking at what students do in their everyday lives. Adopting a practice-based perspective (Giddens, 1984), we aim at mapping the learning practices of university students, i.e., the micro-practices of their everyday lives enacted to learn. Our first main research question is, hence, the following:

1) How does university students’ learning look like in practice?

Furthermore, recent years have seen substantial changes in the education sector, especially due to the pandemic and the advent of new digital technologies like ChatGPT. Consequentially, there is a myriad of studies focusing on the impact of the pandemic and/or of new digital technologies on learning experiences and effectiveness (Carrillo & Flores, 2020; Orozco, Giraldo-García, & Chang, 2023). One big issue as of now is the opportunities and challenges that artificial intelligence (AI) poses for education in general (Zhu et al., 2023) and for higher education in terms of academic integrity in particular (Perkins, 2023).

However, empirical research on how the impact on the actual learning practices of students looks like, is yet to be conducted. Existing works are more based on assumptions and possibilities. We therefore see a lack of research, which we aim to overcome with our study comparing student’s learning practices before and after the pandemic and the introduction of artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT. Therefore, we have derived a second main question:

2) How have university students’ learning practices changed through the pandemic and the introduction of AI tools like ChatGPT?

In our study, we will answer these questions through a longitudinal interview study at a German university. Using our practice-based approach, we identify university students’ practices of learning and how these have changed through the pandemic and the advent of artificial intelligence technologies like ChatGPT.

The student population in Higher Education (HE) is becoming increasingly diverse, with the Netherlands being no exception (van Middelkoop et al., 2017). This changing student population raises the question of how to provide education for current and future student populations (Noppe et al., 2018). Therefore, it is no surprise that (international) governments and scholars are focusing on increasing inclusion in education (EECEA, 2022; Ainscow, 2020). HE-teachers play an important role in realizing inclusive HE (O’Shea, 2016; van Middelkoop et al., 2017). However, studies on HE-teachers’ views, images, and opinions on inclusion, in short, their understanding, are almost absent in the academic literature (Authors et al., [under review]; Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2021; Shaeffer, 2019). Consequently, the following research question was developed to address this gap in knowledge:

How do teachers understand inclusive higher education in the Netherlands?

The primary objective of this paper is to report on a study that aims to gain more insight into HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusive education, while simultaneously considering their institutional context. By doing so, this research aims to offer valuable insights that can guide HE institutions (HEIs), researchers, and governments in their efforts to promote and support inclusive HE.

Currently, students that differ from the norm associated with HE students, the “traditional student” (white, male, cis-gendered, able-bodied, neurotypical, straight, following education in their home country, and recently out of secondary education), often experience more barriers for student achievement (Meerman et al., 2018). The growing diversity in HE thus does not one-on-one result in inclusive HE programs.

Besides the moral imperative for ensuring student achievement of a diverse population to decrease inequity in HE and society (Shaeffer, 2019; Lister, 2020), there are multiple educational and societal rationales. Including, but not exhaustive: the need for more HE graduates (see Council of Europe’s ‘Lisbon recognition convention’ 1997, 2016), the facilitation of critical thinking by challenging hitherto unchallenged norms in HE (Harless, 2018; Callan, 2016; Moriña, 2016), and it prepares students for the diverse and international society they will work/live in (Palfrey & Ibargüen, 2018), e.g. education adjusted to the changing society in the future.

To realize an environment in which the likelihood of student achievement is equal for everyone in the diverse student population, e.g. inclusive HE, it is essential that HEIs and HE-teachers see diversity as an asset rather than an issue (Moriña, 2016). Fortunately, HE-teachers have a positive attitude toward inclusive HE (Authors et al. under review). Because there is currently a lack of research examining the understanding of inclusive HE among HE-teachers (Authors et al., under review; Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2020; Shaeffer, 2019), it remains unclear what specific aspects of inclusive HE HE-teachers hold positive attitudes toward.

In contrast to HE-teachers’ understanding, research has shown, the influence of the institutional context on the possibilities HE-teachers feel to realize inclusive HE (Authors et al., under review; Authors et al., under review). HEIs increasingly recognize their responsibility for accessibility and equal opportunities for student achievement (Glastra & Van Middelkoop, 2018). However, HE-teachers still experience challenges in their HEI due to a felt lack of support in resources, information, and training (Authors et al. under review).

To support HE-teachers in improving inclusive learning environments, more knowledge is needed on HE-teachers’ understandings of inclusion (Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2020), while paying attention to their institutional context (Authors et al., under review).

In the university context, there has been an increase in the enrollment of a highly diverse student profile, including students with disabilities, educational support needs, or socio-educational disadvantages (Davis et al., 2021; Stanwood & Mittiga, 2022). In this regard, this study defines diversity-support students as those who, during the teaching-learning process, require ordinary or extraordinary actions to optimize their learning experiences (Vázquez Varela et al., 2020). These interventions, conceived from an inclusive perspective, must address the student's needs, whether they are specific or permanent, thus ensuring an equitable and accessible educational environment (Vázquez Varela et al., 2020; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2023).

Considering this student profile, it is necessary for universities to establish action plans aimed at promoting the inclusion of students within the university system (Banerjee, 2018; Ramos Santana et al., 2021). On the one hand, the services offered by universities to address the needs of diversity-support students have increased with the goal of enabling them to play an active role and succeed in their academic trajectory (Banerjee, 2018; Cesarano et al., 2018; European Commission, 2022). Among these services, the provision of psychological counseling stands out in European universities to ensure the holistic development of students, offering both psychological and health-related counseling (European Commission, 2022).

On the other hand, specific actions have been implemented to respond to the needs of diversity-support students. The provision of tutorials is a widespread practice in universities as they positively impact the student's retention in the university (Nardacchione & Peconio, 2021). Tutorials are considered key actions because of the important role of teacher-tutors in addressing the needs of diverse students (European Commission, 2022). Linked to the tutor concept, mentorship programs are being implemented, especially to assist students with disabilities in acquiring skills for academic success, such as learning strategies (Stanwood & Mittiga, 2022). Another noteworthy action is focused on interpersonal counseling with the aim of ensuring that students with specific needs, whether temporary or permanent, succeed within the academic sphere (Cardinot & Flynn, 2022).

In summary, it is essential for universities to have personnel with specialized training to address the needs of both university students and the challenges they may face during their academic journey (Bishop, 2016). This is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 agenda, as it helps reduce inequalities among students by offering quality education (UNESCO, 2016, 2023). Therefore, by implementing actions in the university to address the specific needs of students, it contributes to achieving SDGs 4 and 10 (UNESCO, 2023). Taking into account the SDGs, diversity support is approached from an inclusive perspective, grounded in equity, and enabling students to actively participate in the teaching-learning process (UNESCO, 2016).

In light of all the above, the research question is: What are the profiles of students addressed in diversity support by Spanish public universities? This leads us to define the general objective of this study, which is to understand the profiles of students framed in diversity support attended by Spanish public universities. This objective has been specified in the following specific objective linked to a research question: to develop a classification of the type of diversity addressed in Spanish public universities, what are the predominant categories and dimensions of diversity being addressed by Spanish public universities in their initiatives and diversity support programs?

The COALITION Erasmus Plus Higher Ed project has allowed for the creation of a collaborative environment to map teaching competencies, following needs analysis, towards the implementation of inclusive teaching practices as well as virtually develop participatory inquiry processes for the transformation of teaching practice. Using a comparative dimension among six European universities, we advocate for a transition towards faculty development (FD) processes that prioritize sustainability. This shift is essential to empower academics as self-regulated learners, enabling them to cultivate competencies conducive to the creation of effective Inclusive Student-Centered Pedagogy (I-ScP) lessons within their specific educational contexts. I-ScP as a prevailing approach in higher education (HE) has garnered acclaim from students, educational researchers, and policymakers alike (Council Recommendation, 2017). As a catalyst for fostering self-directed learners, I-ScP positions learners at the core of the learning experience.

FD Programs focusing on I-ScP can serve as an innovative approach to enhance the knowledge and skills of faculty members. According to Doménech et al. (2023), faculty members can play a decisive role and “can provide decisive help to prevent students from dropping out of the university and guarantee their academic success (Lombardi, Murray & Kowitt, 2016)”. Intentional syllabus redesign employed as a self-regulatory FD method (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2022) showed academics feel accountable for their teaching choices. Carballo et al. (2019) confirmed that adopting an inclusive social model helps academics realise that they can be held accountable by how they design courses that are proactively inclusive and appropriately align learning environments, processes, and resources. I-ScP FD programs can also contribute to fostering a robust and enduring collegial work environment, ensuring that faculty members are prepared and consistently advancing in their strategies and competencies (Zahedi & Bazargan, 2023). Perceived as a tool to cultivate effectiveness among early-career faculty members, and enhancing the quality of their teaching, research, and counseling capabilities (Rahman, 2023), peer-coaching and peer-observation are considered as effective development tools that utilise collaborative and reciprocal reflective input between teachers in non-intimidating and non-hierarchical systems (Netolicky, 2016). Moreover, if FD activities contribute to students’ learning outcomes in positive way (Gutierez & Kim, 2018; Yee, 2016), they are likely to be effective.

Despite the pivotal role attributed to I-ScP in HE, there exists a gap in systematic understanding of its practical implementation. A comprehensive systematic review of empirical research unveils the varied applications of I-ScP within classroom settings, beyond-classroom scenarios, and at institutional levels in HE institutions (Grøndahl Glavind, et. al., 2023). Aiming to encourage engagement, self-awareness and self-regulation, and building upon Hockings' (2001) framework, we characterize I-ScP in HE as a deliberate and forward-looking approach to teaching and learning. Seeking to proactively meet the needs of all students and considering the potential requirements of all stakeholders without resorting to labeling (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023), we strategically crafted FD activities promoting equity as learner-centered opportunities.

Recent advancements in FD favor approaches leveraging 1) informal peer discussions, 2) peer coaching sessions before or after peer-observation protocols, 3) self-regulation tasks aligning syllabus components with I-ScP principles following the work of Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts on intentional syllabus re-design as a reflective process (2022) and 4) action research. However, a substantial disparity exists between teaching practices and policies, with limited attention given to the pedagogical acumen of academics’ post target FD modes (Castillo-Montoya, et al., 2023; Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023). In light of this shift, the COALITION partners aim to address this gap by systematically documenting academics' reflections and assessments of various reflective FD modes.

In Central and Eastern Europe, higher education institutions are run, besides public institutions, by non-governmental organizations, such as religious organizations and foundations. International research shows that non-governmental higher education in the 21^st century can exhibit much more distinctive features than in the past (Benne, 2001; James, 2006; Carpenter, 2014; Berger, 2021). This is mostly due to the uniformization of higher education as a result of the monkey policy caused by an international ranking fetishism (Hrubos, 2012). Consequently, it fails to meet the needs of various types of students in a highly pluralized society (Hrubos, 2012; Berger, 2021). As a result of all this, in the competition for students, the expression of institutional identity and culture can become more prominent in order to meet the expectations of specific student groups (Reynolds & Wallace, 2016; Hulme et al., 2016). Forced to respond, the non-governmental sector can either become uniform (Reynolds & Wallace, 2016; Hulme et al., 2016) or assume an individual profile (Sullivan, 2019; Rizzi, 2019; Mishra, 2020). One option is to choose to compete with institutions belonging to the public sector by assimilating into the sphere dominated by state, renouncing the distinctive features of its institutional culture, but, on the other hand, approaching students who are also attracted by public institutions. Another option is to slightly distance itself from the competitive arena of global higher education, and construct a special, for example denominational institutional culture, thereby attracting students who are seeking an environment with a distinctly denominational institutional culture. The need to respond brings about a diversity within the non-governmental sector, and although these institutions are represented globally, it serves fundamentally different functions in various geographical, regional-societal, and cultural segments (James, 2006). The diversity within the non-governmental sector can be grasped at several levels, it is most evident, however, in the institutional culture, as institutions utilize the channels of institutional culture to emphasize diversity and various functions.

The institutional culture characteristic of non-governmental organizations is perceived by some through dimensions such as institutional leadership, education, and academic research (Barton, 2019; Batugal & Tindowen, 2019), while others investigate it within the dimensions of student community and student life (Rizzi, 2019). Building on the results of institutional culture research, the current thesis focuses on the student dimensions of institutional culture. The first dimension of institutional culture perceived at the student level is recruitment as the message the institution conveys to prospective students is a significant manifestation of institutional culture, as well as the assumptions different groups of students have when choosing a specific institution (Bess & Dee, 2012), i.e. the self-selection performed on the basis of the anticipated institutional culture. The second dimension of the institutional culture perceived by students consists of learning characteristics as this reflects how students interpret the institutional goals. It includes the specifics of student performance patterns, student effort and academic progress (Hulme et al., 2016). The third dimension of institutional culture perceived from the student perspective involves relational integration within the institution, as well as trust, and satisfaction. Community life and experiences, along with inter- and intragenerational integration are fundamental aspects of institutional culture.

Analysing the international and national literature, the following question arises: inasmuch as, in response to the challenges, a distinct institutional culture is truly perceptible in denominational institutions, how attractive can the examined institutions be as alternatives to non-governmental sector higher education institutions in the globalized, pluralistic, post-Christian era (Sullivan, 2019). Additionally, considering the continuously narrowing pool of higher education applicants, which institutional culture might different groups of prospective students be most open to.

In recent years, many European countries have been struggling to balance their national language (L1) with English and the increased emphasis on of internationalization in higher education. Particularly the Nordic countries have questioned if the growing use of English in academia will lead to an attrition of Nordic languages, leaving Norwegian ‘undeveloped’ as an academic language (Brock-Utne, 2001). This has contributed to a growth in policy strengthening. Various institutions, such as the Language Council of Norway and an array of universities have recently created language policies that strengthen the Norwegian language.

However, neither the feasibility of these language policies nor their consequences for (international) employees has been investigated. The current study aims to fill this research gap by investigating employee attitudes toward a new language policy that was introduced in January 2023 at Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). It was pitched under the slogan “Norwegian when you can, English when you must”, emphasizing the use and importance of Norwegian at NTNU (see NTNU, 2023).

To contribute knowledge on what stricter national language policies can mean in an international setting, we have conducted an online survey targeted at all employees at NTNU. The aim of this study was to map current attitudes toward the language policies at NTNU among all employees. We distinguish between those who speak Norwegian as, at least, one of their native languages versus those who have one or more other native languages (which we label “international” employees).

Our study was guided by the following research questions:

• What are employees’ perceptions and experiences toward the new language policy at NTNU?
• Do employees' perceptions and experiences differ depending on language background, i.e., Norwegian native speaker versus international background?

The goal of this study is to uncover tensions between policy and practice in multilingual settings. By exploring L1-dominant policies, we wish to lift various voices in this process and critically discuss how language policies can be achieved through ethical internationalization. This is relevant for all countries that struggle to balance L1 and English in international settings.

Policies in several regions of the world have made considerable progress in recent years in the formulation of principles and guidelines for action aimed at institutionalizing diversity and inclusion in higher education. This is the case in Europe (European Commission, 2022; European Higher Education Area [EHEA], 2020). Real progress, however, is slow, and this pace may be due not only to institutional or, more generally, contextual variables, but also to individual characteristics that deserve some attention. Thus, for example, personal variables of teachers have been identified that predict their teaching practices with an inclusive approach. Such is the case with personality, ideological attitudes, and beliefs and attitudes about diversity (Álvarez-Castillo et al., 2023). Particularly, with regard to beliefs about diversity, it has been observed that plural approaches exist in university institutions, both in the analysis of leaders' discourses and policy documents (García-Cano et al., 2021; Hendin, 2023; White-Lewis, 2022) and in the beliefs of teaching and research staff (Márquez & Melero-Aguilar, 2022), but there is no evidence of a deep critical commitment (i.e., an approach that considers diversity in terms of unequal power relations and which directs measures to institutional transformation).

The lack of in-depth commitment to diversity does not mean that certain groups of leaders and teachers do not adopt this type of critical approach that links difference to inequality and involvement with change. This has been manifested, for example, in the heads and members, belonging to ethnic minorities, of the staff of services and diversity committees, both in North America (Griffin et al., 2019) and in the United Kingdom (Ahmet, 2021; Bhopal, 2023), or also in ethnic minority faculty from British (Bhopal, 2020; 2022) and North American universities (Bhopal, 2022). The identification in these qualitative studies of a transformative commitment in minority member groups raises the question of whether beliefs, attitudes and behaviors about diversity are linked to the social identity of professional actors. The present quantitative study was designed to clarify this doubt, with the aim of verifying whether the social identity of teaching staff works as a predictor for inclusion in university teaching.

In the case of having developed a social identity linked to vulnerable or disadvantaged groups, Tajfel's classic Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) would predict that university teachers are characterized by beliefs, attitudes and behaviors aimed at favoring their groups and, thus, increasing their self-esteem. From this approach, it is expected, therefore, that teachers who feel they belong to minority groups are more likely to develop beliefs, attitudes and teaching practices with an inclusive approach than teachers who have not internalized this type of social identity. This prediction is made in a normative context – that of higher education – that favors, at least from its policies, the preservation of diverse identities.

The freedom of learning and the possibility for students to access a much wider educational offer are key elements for reshaping the European higher education landscape. Students are more mobile than ever, and new formats for teaching and learning readdress the need to rethink how academic curriculum is designed and developed. New tendencies and innovative approaches to education, such as micro-credentials, embedded mobility, digital credentialing, and flexible learning pathways open the way for true ‘universities without walls’ (EUA, 2021) across Europe. The global academic community is constantly changing; cooperation among universities grew in the past 20 years, facing a significant increase in student mobility, in Europe mainly due to Erasmus+ funding and mobility schemes and other Bologna Process tools (de Wit & Hunter, 2015, p. 1). Moreover, European universities intensified cooperation not only with partners from other European countries, but at an international level also, with partner from other continents (Claeys-Kulik, 2020, p. 10).

In such a global educational context, universities and policy makers can ask whether the increase in mobility can represent a tool for designing new curricular models, creating new educational programmes in which mobility and cultural exchanges become functional components and in which all graduates become international students. Such an approach could be done through academic degrees and programmes where mobility is embedded in the curriculum, in the shape of small mobility windows (up to one semester), taking advantage of new mobility schemes such as the Blended Intensive Programmes (European Commission, 2022, p. 49) or modular approaches, such as the ones proposed by some European Universities Alliances (Iucu et al., 2022, p. 26), based on a `micro-credentials philosophy`.

While setting up such a process can require significant changes in legislation, funding, pedagogical design, and administrative practices, the real impact of these changes need to be addressed to the potential beneficiaries, the students. In fact, the importance and relevance of physical mobility has been several times mentioned by students, stating the “physical mobility should be accessible to all students, and should not exclude certain groups” (ESU, 2020, p. 2), emphasising that reaching the 50% mobile students need to remain a constant desiderate of higher education policies across Europe.

In this regard, our research aims at understanding what is the students’ perception on embedded mobility in higher education programmes. The research proposes an exploratory analysis on how students view mobility as part of their educational pathway and possible downsides of transforming mobility as an opportunity to mobility as a necessary experience. Motivations for studying abroad by European exchange students have been addressed in a range of studies (Bryntesson et al., 2018; European Commission, 2017; Hovdhaugen & Wiers-Jenssen, 2021; Krzaklewska, 2008; Lesjak et al., 2015; Maiworm & Teichler, 2002; Murphy-Lejeune, 2002), the present research aiming to see, on top of motivational aspects, if differences appear when changing the scope of mobility and its relation with the degree. Different types of students will be included in the research, both junior students prior any mobility experience during their academic studies, as well as students who already participated in different mobility opportunities during their studies. Also, the research will focus on understanding what students value most in a mobility experience, to understand what aspects need to be intensified further in developing new mobility models and opportunities for higher education students.

In the context of globalization, the concept of "internationalization of higher education" is a broad and evolving phenomenon with diverse interpretations (De Wit & Altbach, 2021). At the institutional level, it involves integrating international, cross-cultural, or global dimensions into the purposes, functions, and implementation processes of higher education. This integration aims to enhance the quality of student education and the research output of academic staff, serving as a strategic approach and practice for academic systems, institutions, and individuals in the globalized academic environment worldwide, including in the European educational context (Altbach & Knight, 2007; De Wit, Hunter, Howard, & Egron-Polak, 2015; Knight, 2003; Knight & De Wit, 2018). Moreover, internationalization also helps institutions improve efficiency and aids government, stakeholders, and higher education units in understanding institutional performance (Mandinach & Gummer, 2013). On a personal level, internationalization contributes to cultivating the global competitiveness and employability of local students, providing opportunities for cross-cultural communication and a global perspective.

The International Association of Universities (IAU) (2006) defines the internationalization of higher education as a process that combines transnational and cross-cultural perspectives, atmospheres, and functions within higher education. This involves internal and external changes within universities, encompassing the implementation of policies through bottom-up and top-down approaches and shifts in institutional policy orientations. Over the past 25 years, internationalization is considered a strategic response to the inevitable impact of globalization on higher education, transforming from a marginal micro-level element into a mainstream global factor (Knight & De Wit, 2018). This evolution has shifted the concept from national-level international, cross-cultural, and global dimensions to factors within higher education, such as the diversity of educators and students' nationalities, research quality, and the quality of student education. Internationally renowned university rankings, such as THE (Times Higher Education) and QS (Quacquarelli Symonds), also include "internationalization" as one of the evaluation criteria. This makes internationalization a crucial part of the development of higher education institutions.

Current institutional research in Taiwan covers academic, student, and administrative aspects. In the main educational data bases, “(Higher Education) Course Information website (CIW)”, “Information Platform for College and University Institute Research (IPCUIR)”, “Academic Statistics Database of Ministry of Science and Technology (ASDMST)”, and “Scopus”, the wide-ranging scope of institutional research topics, including student admission, performance during the study period, post-graduation performance, and related administrative or university environmental aspects is evident. However, the previous research has touched upon international exchange aspects, yet there has been a lack of an investigation for the link between domestic education databases and internationalization indicators, and the exploration into the internationalization models of higher education applying existing national-level education database resources. Hence, the present research aims to consolidate diverse dimensions and manifestations of internationalization from existing research, to integrate data from different cross-institutional databases and explore relevant variables in internationalization of higher education institutes, and to establish a broader evaluation model for internationalization.

Based on above, the research questions are:

1. Through the integration of cross-platform database indicators and linking with relevant internationalization indicators from sources like THE and QS, what variables are pertinent to internationalization of higher education institutes?

2. What are including in the evaluation model for internationalization constructed based on the cross-platform database?

This paper maps and questions the discursive limits of current debates about student migration in postcolonial global context and the challenges this poses on the definition and self-fashioning of the university as autonomous, inclusive and open to new kinds of students (Derrida, 2002). The standpoint for the mapping and questioning of discourses and the genealogical critique of the institution of the university is from the positionality of those whose lives have been mostly affected by intersecting axes of migration and race, namely, migrant students’ precarious lives. It is argued that despite their seeming discontinuity, the discourse of unconditional endorsement of global student mobility, on the one hand, and the harsh critique on institutional/educational policies and practices, on the other hand, both participate and interlock in rendering invisible or inconsequential the kinds of racialization and securitization they produce or reproduce (Stein & Andreotti, 2017)

Student mobility across state borders is not a new phenomenon. What transforms, and not just increases, student mobility is large-scale processes that invested in the attractiveness of European higher education and repositioned it within, (a) the global economy of educational and psychic life of power (Butler, 1997) in a precarious world, and (b) the globalization of scapes of (post)modernity (Appadurai, 1990) within and across which student migration takes place.

Attracting the most talented foreign students has been perceived by receiving countries as beneficial for both the governments and educational institutions. However, beneficial aspects have not been accepted without cautioning voices. The scholarly conversation about the risks involved in the growing numbers of migrant students is usually bound by concerns about the commodification of higher education and the decline and compromise of the quality of the education provided. On the one hand, those against the entrepreneurial character of higher education express their concerns about the weakening role of higher education as a public good and the undermining of its democratic character (Brown, 2015; Giroux, 2003). On the other hand, even those who, despite and beyond market rationalities, acknowledge the positive effects of student mobility and higher education internationalization for students, institutions and societies, they stressed from early on that this would backfire and warned of “unintended consequences” and “worrisome trends” (Knight, 2012). Cautionary discourse revolves around “diploma mills” and “sham students”. Diploma mills, as a by-product of the growing demand for university degrees and implicitly associated with less privileged and mostly migrant students, are considered a threat that needs to be combated. What is at risk is not only the quality of education but also the excellence and earned entitlement of those “who have worked hard for years to obtain their degrees” (Odou & Ogar, 2022). This seeming deregulation of quality and equality (among the excellent) is alleviated through new lines and borders, such as the line between highly appreciated ‘genuine’ students, and unwelcomed ‘bogus’ students. The latter are perceived to abuse student visa in order to secure entrance to and residency in the country of studies, sidestepping the reach of immigration policies and compromising the very integrity of the universities (Brooks, 2018).

As argued in the paper, academic discourse on migrant students, despite its discontinuities and even fundamentally opposing views on the marketization of higher education, reenacts the colonial zero-point perspective to the world (Mignolo, 2010) and reproduces an elitist conception of the institution of the university. Failing to consider the racialization and precarization of migrant students through migration control apparatuses, but also the politics and epistemologies of resilience migrant students develop, we fail to grasp the complexities and the im/possibilities embedded in the ways migrant students navigate through and transform the landscapes of European higher education.

Background

The world is grappling with complex and multi-dimensional challenges on an unparalleled scale (Markauskaite et al., 2023). These significant societal issues are characterized by their vague boundaries and their intricate often contradictory and evolving nature, making them difficult to resolve. Rittel and Webber (1973) have described these types of issues as “wicked problems.” There is mounting pressure on higher education institutions to equip students with the skills necessary to navigate and address these problems (Cantor et al., 2015; McCune et al., 2023). Given that wicked problems have no clear-cut solutions and involve multiple stakeholders, interdisciplinary education is increasingly promoted as a generative means of surmounting these problems (McCune et al., 2023).

The last fifty years have therefore seen an increasing number of national and international policy-makers champion interdisciplinarity. However, productive, ongoing interdisciplinary collaboration is easier said than done (Chandramohan & Fallows 2009; Lyall et al. 2015). Yet universities must prepare their graduates well for it (Lindvig et al. 2019), and educational leaders, teachers, students and administrators need to find ways to work interdisciplinarily in education.

Interdisciplinary education involves harnessing and integrating insights from various disciplines to form a more holistic understanding (Newell, 2013). The aim is often to create insights that are integrative or synthetic, rather than merely additive (McCune et al., 2023). This complexity necessitates a need to negotiate and reconcile the often implicit and conflicting epistemological positions, values, and practices inherent to different disciplines (Di Giulio and Defila, 2017; Ripley et al., 2023). There is often a struggle to overcome both structural and cultural obstacles to interdisciplinary collaboration. Even though many academic leaders signal the importance of interdisciplinary education in their university’s strategic plans, they are silent on how to support it (Stensaker et al., 2019; Sutphen et al., 2019). So how then can we do interdisciplinary education that works? Is it even possible?

Three cases

In this panel, researchers from Norway, Sweden and Ireland will present empirical cases that look at collaboration in interdisciplinary education. The cases presented have come out of the international research project Academic Hospitality in Interdisciplinary Education (AHIE), led by Molly Sutphen at the University of Oslo, who is also the proposed chair for this panel. The presentations will also draw on the extensive literature review coming out of the AHIE project.

At each of the three universities, focus-group interviews have been carried out with different stakeholders involved in interdisciplinary education. The presentation of preliminary results will lead into a discussion of challenges to collaboration in interdisciplinary education and how to overcome these. The international perspective will contribute to a fuller contextual understanding of the findings.

Discussion

The concluding discussion will focus on ways of addressing challenges to collaboration in interdisciplinary education. Here, we would like to discuss and receive feedback on some of the central ideas in the AHIE project, not least the potential of what Phipps and Barnett (2007) have termed academic hospitality.

Phipps and Barnett (2007) argue that working within different disciplines requires a hospitable academic practice, adapting to the evolving dynamics and demands of academic life. The concept of academic hospitality involves demonstrating generosity towards peers, students and other university staff in daily academic interactions. Phipps and Barnett delineate four distinct types of academic hospitality – epistemic, linguistic, material and touristic – which we would like to discuss with colleagues attending the panel in relation to their research or experiences and to the cases presented by the panel. We also draw on concepts of affective hospitality (Imperiale et al., 2021; Zembylas, 2019) as a means for understanding hospitality as a relational, embodied and entangled mode of being.

The ECER 2024 Symposium on Academic Development Initiatives Across Europe invites researchers, academic developers, and practitioners to share insights into diverse academic development initiatives and their impact on the academic community. It consolidates contributions from four distinct research studies, providing a comprehensive view of academic development processes, objectives, methodologies, findings, and future trajectories.

The first contribution comes from a six-university partnership within the COALITION Erasmus Plus HighEd project and advocates for sustainable faculty development (FD) processes to enhance Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogy (ISCP), by focusing on one FD process, that is, peer-observation as a self-regulatory development tool (Tenenberg, 2016). The methodological approach includes comparative analysis of reflective reports by 18 academics and follow-up semi-structured interviews, uncovering insights into academics' engagement and expectations. Discussion presents the findings shaped by developmental peer-observation protocols and the crucial role of FD processes focusing on reflective engagement with Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogy (ISCP) to promote inclusivity in teaching practice (Hockings, 2010; Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023).

The second study, is a bottom-up initiative from the University of Crete, exploring the feasibility of Student Engagement Associate Academic Development schemes with Academics and Students as Equal Partners (Cook-Sather et al., 2014; Obadare et al., 2022). Questionnaires and interviews reveal insights into challenges, steps for successful implementation, and the transformative potential of student perspectives. The findings highlight the importance of collaborative engagement and the need for a cultural shift in academia towards inclusive teaching and innovative pedagogies.

The third contribution explores academic development initiatives in Portuguese universities and problematises the mismatch between theory and practice (Almeida, Viana & Alves, 2022). The study maps professional development (PD) initiatives across 14 public universities, using document analysis and exploratory website analysis. The findings reveal a varied landscape of PD visions, emphasizing structured training, induction, continuous training, and recognition initiatives. The study addresses the gap in understanding PD practices in Portuguese universities, contributing valuable insights to the broader conversation on academic development.

Finally, the fourth contribution delves into the exploration of academic identities (Djerasimovic & Villani, 2020) in Portuguese public universities. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study analyzes academics' perceptions across disciplinary areas. Findings highlight self-identification, perceptions of transformations, and reactions to the academic environment. The study underscores the importance of recognizing academics' agency in shaping their identities amidst evolving higher education landscapes.

In summary, this symposium emphases on sustainable FD processes, bottom-up SEA schemes, PD practices in Portuguese universities, and the nuanced exploration of academic identities. By bridging these diverse perspectives, the symposium aims to contribute to a holistic understanding of the evolving landscape of academic development and its impact on higher education.

This paper proposes a shift towards faculty development (FD) processes emphasizing sustainability, specifically targeting Inclusive Student-Centered Pedagogy (I-ScP). The focus narrows to a key FD practice—peer-observations as a self-regulatory tool—and its impact on enhancing the competencies necessary for effective I-ScP implementation within diverse educational contexts. As a transformative methodology in higher education fostering self-directed learners, I-ScP places students at the core of the learning experience (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023). Reflective FD processes like peer-observations as a developmental tool for the observing teachers (Tennenberg, 2016) have been gaining track in academia. Peer-coaching and peer-observation are considered as an effective FD Programs method as it combines collaborative and reciprocal reflective input between teachers (Charteris and Smardon, 2018) in non-intimidating and non-hierarchical systems between peers (Netolicky, 2016). However, there exists a gap in understanding the practical implementation of I-ScP, especially when it comes to reflective FD processes. Building on Hockings' framework (2010), characterising I-ScP as a deliberate and forward-looking approach to teaching and learning, this paper specifically hones in on one aspect of FD—peer-observations—as a self-regulatory tool that fosters teacher reflexivity. The emphasis of peer-observation protocols lies on creating learner-centred opportunities that promote equity, student engagement, self-awareness, self-regulation, and learner autonomy without categorizing specific groups or individuals. In line with Tenneberg’s (2016) model, participants were asked to observe their peers’ teaching once, complete an observation protocol and write a report on the ways and the degree this experience changed their own current practices in terms of I-ScP. COALITION partners, engaged in a European project involving six universities, address the gap in exploring the pedagogical acumen of academics post FD modes. The study systematically documents academics' reflections and assessments focusing on peer-observations as a developmental tool within the broader scope of I-ScP pedagogies. The methodological approach involves a comparative analysis of reflective reports by 18 academics across six countries, followed by 18 semi-structured interviews to delve deeper into their engagement, challenges, key insights and recommendations for optimising peer-observation as an FD practice for teachers observing others (not being observed). Findings highlight the transformative potential of peer-observations, emphasising the nuanced understanding of I-ScP in a culture where faculty members are prepared and consistently advancing in their strategies and competencies (Zahedi & Bazargan, 2023).

Charteris, J., & Smardon, D. (2018). “Professional learning on steroids” : Implications for teacher learning through spatialised practice in new generation learning environments. Australian Journal of Teacher Education; v.43 n.12 p.12-29; December 2018, 43(12), 12–29. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/aeipt.221964 Hockings, C. (2010). Inclusive Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: A Synthesis of Research. York: Higher Education Academy. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023). Coaching Instructors as Learners: Considerations For A Proactively Designed Inclusive Syllabus. Education Centre for Higher Education, Marijampoles Kolegija, Latvia. Netolicky, D.M. (2016), "Coaching for professional growth in one Australian school: “oil in water”", International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 66-86. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-09-2015-0025 Tenenberg, J. (2016). Learning through observing peers in practice, Studies in Higher Education, 41:4, 756-773, DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.950954 Zahedi, S., & Bazargan, A. (2023). Faculty member's opinion regarding faculty development needs and the ways to meet the needs. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-89.

Bottom-up Student Engagement Associate (SEA) schemes allow for the development of both student and staff partners in a unique and collaborative way (Obadare et al., 2022). This academic development (AD) approach is based on the seminal paper by Cook-Sather et al. (2014) on the Scholarship of Students as Equal Partners (SEP) and serves as a viable means of increasing the drive for educational transformation (Dunne & Zandstra, 2011). Unlike UK and USA universities, bottom-up academic development schemes at the University of Crete started in 2019 with the Training of the trainers (TotT) initiative in which teaching staff and senior faculty collaborated as equal partners in AD schemes. Since then, the very notion of “bottom-up” initiatives evolved including students as co-researchers in the design of a MOOC on “Higher Education Pedagogy: Teaching Methodologies in Tertiary Education” tailored to academics needs (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts et al., 2023, Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023a,b). To further increase the drive for transformational teaching and learning, this paper presents a new initiative which aims to explore student and academics’ beliefs regarding the design of SEP schemes and their employability as reliable bottom-up AD Schemes at the University of Crete. Twenty professors and 65 students submitted questionnaires regarding the feasibility, the challenges and the steps to be taken for such a scheme to be successfully employed by university teachers or academics. Following a course whose one of its main priorities was to encourage student engagement in course instructional design and assessment decision making, ten semi-structured student interviews were conducted in order to provide qualitative data towards the aforementioned issues. Ten academics were also interviewed. Data analysis was conducted using grounded theory and thematic analysis of open-ended questions and interview responses (Charmaz, 2008; Tuckett, 2005). Findings highlighted the main reasons why students and teachers may not be willing to engage in such schemes, how to overcome potential challenges and what steps should be taken before implementing SEA as Academic Development Schemes. The overlap between teachers and students’ initial views was expected due to the established cultural realities underpinning university teaching and learning. Yet, after the course completion, students offered key perspectives regarding inclusive teaching and provided realistic ways of engaging students in SEA developmental and pedagogical innovation schemes. Students’ perspectives can transform teacher beliefs about teaching and assessment provided this process is perceived as “doing with rather than doing to” students so as to ensure equity (O’Shea, 2018, pp 18).

Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the grounded theory method. In J. A. Holstein, & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 397 –412). New York: TheGuilfordPress. Cook-Sather, A., Bovill, C., & Felten, P. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching: A guide for faculty. Wiley Dunne, E., & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as Change Agents. New Ways of Engaging with Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Bristol: Escalate. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts K., Katsarou, E., Sipitanos, K. and Vavouraki, G. (2023.) Identifying Faculty competences and needs in a research-intensive university in Europe. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts K. (2023) Critical insights of instructional design of online reflective participatory spaces in an academic development course in Europe. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023b) (Ed.) University Education: Teaching Methodology in Tertiary Education. Disigma Editions: Thessaloniki. In https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-JagQqQXh2ioOlx8Ymg-XsXmSsyX1Sg8/view Obadare, O. et al. (2022). Building equal partnerships: The Student Engagement Associate scheme at the University of Nottingham, International Journal for Students as Partners, 6 (1). O’Shea, S. (2018). Equity and students as partners: The importance of inclusive relationships. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2). Tuckett, A. G. (2005). Applying thematic analysis theory to practice: A researcher’s experience. Contemporary nurse, 19(1-2), 75-87.

Professional development of higher education teachers (PD) has not yet received the desired attention in some countries, particularly in Portugal. Detached from national policies, PD has had little expression in the policies of portuguese higher education institutions (HEI), contrary to what is observed in some countries (Almeida, 2021a). Research has also been addressing this theme (Kuzhabekova, et al, 2015), providing significant contributions to the understanding of PD processes. With Portugal's integration in the ‘Bolonha Process’, learning and teaching in higher education have gained protagonism (Almeida & Costa, 2020). A fresh professionalism of academics is advocated as essential for pedagogical innovation, and the lack of pedagogical preparation among teachers and the mismatch between declared theory and theory in practice are problematized (Almeida, Viana & Alves, 2022; Trigwell et al, 2008). The diversity of initiatives and practices implemented by HEI (Day, 2017) and the impact of PD programmes on teachers and organizations (e.g., Hanbury, et al; Parsons et al, 2012) have been widely demonstrated. In Portugal, recent studies highlight the work of pedagogical advisory services (Xavier & Leite, 2019) and initiatives promoted by Polytechnic HEI (Gomes & Alves, 2023) leaving unexplored what is being done in this domain by portuguese universities. Therefore, this study aims to map the PD initiatives and the associated understanding of PD (Almeida, 2021b) of all portuguese public universities (14), identifying their underlying modalities, and objectives. Using a matrix for document analysis (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2006), a collection containing the Strategic Plans and Activity Plans of all universities was assembled. In a second phase, an exploratory analysis of institutional websites was conducted to i) characterize the measures supporting teacher PD identified in the first phase of the study, and ii) identify other initiatives not found in the previous analysis. The analysis allowed the characterizition of the PD vision of portuguese universities, where the dominant conception of PD is associated with the idea of structured training and the implementation of initiatives more or less scattered, with varying degrees of consolidation and coverage. Initiatives include i) induction and continuous training; ii) structured short and medium/long-term training; iii) scientific meetings, sharing forums and communities of practice; iv) dissemination of best practices; v) social recognition and financial support. These initiatives derive either from separate measures or from measures integrated into organizational policies.

Almeida, M. (2021a). Fatores mediadores no processo de desenvolvimento profissional de docentes do ensino superior. Educação e Pesquisa, 47, 1-20. Almeida, M. (2021b). Desenvolvimento profissional docente: anatomia de um conceito. In M.G. Alves, (coord.) (2021). Pedagogia do Ensino Superior - a (in)visibilidade do trabalho docente (p.49- 68). Ebook IE-Ulisboa. Almeida, M., Viana, J., & Alves, M. (2022). Exploring teaching conceptions and practices: aqualitative research with academics in Portugal. Studia Paedagogica, 27(2):35-53 Almeida, M. & Costa, E. (2020). A arquitetura de uma política transnacional de Ensino Superior para a Europa: o Processo de Bolonha. TMQ – Techniques, Methodologies and Quality, Número Especial, 17-38. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2006). Research methods in education. London: Routledge. Day, C. (2017). Revisiting the purposes of continuing professional development. In Professional development and institutional needs (pp. 51-77). Routledge. Gomes, S., & Alves, M. (2023). Estratégias e apoios institucionais ao desenvolvimento profissional docente: o caso dos institutos politécnicos portugueses, Docência Ens. Sup., 13. Kuzhabekova, A., Hendel, D. D., & Chapman, D. W. (2015). Mapping global research on international higher education. Research in Higher Education, 56(8), 861-882. Trigwell, K., Postareffa, L., Katajavuoria, N., & Lindblom-Ylännea, S. (2008). Consonance and dissonance in descriptions of teaching of university teachers. Studies in Higher Education, 33 (1), 49–61.

The landscape of higher education has been shaped by neoliberal influences such as managerialism and market regulation (Djerasimovic and Villani, 2020; Roberts, 2019). These changes have significant implications for the academic profession, including ways of being and doing in academia, well-being, and academic identities (Skea, 2021; Tülübaş and Göktürk, 2020). On one side, academic identities are constantly shaped by social and institutional contexts and external pressures; on the other, individual agency, personal narratives, experiences and beliefs play an important role in shaping them. These factors influence how academics respond to changes in the academic environment and how they perceive their roles within the profession (Fanghanel, 2011; Ybema et al., 2009). The purpose of this research is to analyse academic identities in Portuguese public universities, based on academics' perceptions of their work dimensions. After conducting a systematic literature review, we designed a mixed-methods study involving academics from different disciplines. Four focus groups were conducted, one for each disciplinary area (soft pure, soft applied, hard pure, hard applied). The data was analysed using a content analysis approach guided by abductive inference (Gondim and Bendassolli, 2014). The analysis was based on three dimensions of categorisation: (1) self-identification of the academics, (2) perceptions of the transformations, and (3) reactions to the scenario. The categories 'focus on professional field', 'focus on diversity of functions' and 'focus on teaching/training' emerged in the first dimension. Additionally, we discuss the different roles within the career and note a tendency to balance them, although some academics clearly see them as opposites. We also observe a recognition that the perceived tensions are not felt equally at all stages of the career. The categories of 'positive trends', 'negative trends', 'ambivalent trends' and 'continuity trends' emerged in the dimension of perceptions of change. Although some positive perspectives are presented, the discussion mainly focuses on the negative or ambivalent aspects of these changes. In the third section, we observe reactions of 'adaptation' and 'resistance', with hybrid identities prevailing. These identities both reinforce and resist discourses of change and management. This overview raises questions about the current state of the academic profession and the risk of distancing from its core values. To (re)consider this topic, it is important to recognise the agency of academics in performing their work, rather than simply analysing structural change and the demands of higher education policies.

Djerasimovic, Sanja, & Villani, Marialuisa (2020). Constructing academic identity in the European higher education space: Experiences of early career educational researchers. European Educational Research Journal, 19(3), 247-268. doi:10.1177/1474904119867186. Fanghanel, Joëlle (2011). Being an Academic. Abingdon: Routledge. Gondim, S. M. G., & Bendassolli, P. F. (2014). The use of the qualitative content analysis in psychology: a critical review. Psicologia em Estudo, 19, 191-199. doi: 10.1590/1413-737220530002 Roberts, Peter (2019). Performativity, big data and higher education: the death of the professor? Beijing International Review of Education, 1, 73-91. doi:10.1163/25902547-00101008. Skea, Claire (2021). Emerging Neoliberal Academic Identities: Looking Beyond Homo economicus. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 40(4), 399-414. doi:/10.1007/s11217-021-09768-7. Tülübaş, Tijen, & Göktürk, Şöheyda (2020). Neoliberal governmentality and performativity culture in higher education: Reflections on academic identity. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, 5(1), 198-232. doi:10.30828/real/2020.1.6 Ybema, Sierk, Keenoy, Tom, Oswick, Cliff, Beverungen, Armin, Ellis, Nick, & Sabelis, Ilda (2009). Articulating identities. Human Relations, 62(3), 299-322. doi:10.1177/0018726708101904.

In recent decades, universities across the globe opened their doors to a much broader group of students, a phenomenon not only driven by increasing demographics but also opportunities for those whose previous generations did not have a university education. These students are referred to in many research studies as first-generation students (FGS). Research has shown that, compared to continuing-generation students (CGS), the proportion of FGS in part-time employment and the number of hours they work are higher. FGS repeatedly consider whether studying at university is the right choice for them (Vengřinová, 2023). Moreover, FGS often stem from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, are more likely to live off-campus rather than in student residences, and continue to help out at home in various ways, or to care for their own children, which is why they have less time to focus on their studies (Archer & Leathwood, 2005; Bowl, 2003; Chowdry et al., 2013; Hurst, 2012; Nuñez & Cuccaro-Alamin, 1998; Reay et al., 2005). In sum, it can be argued that students without academic backgrounds experience more significant uncertainties about the various steps involved in studying than CGS. It is assumed that first-generation students face similar challenges across countries; this symposium, therefore, focuses on the specific situation and support structures for first-generation students in four different higher education landscapes: Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, and the UK, each presenting unique thematic angles: Common characteristics depicting FGS will be presented in the first symposium paper. By putting a specific focus on the German context, it examines the ways in which intersectional disadvantages are taken into account in research and institutional support for FGS. The second paper puts a specific focus on uncertainty during the transition to university from the perspective of emerging adulthood. Qualitative research shows that, in the Czech Republic, FGS have less space to explore and figure out who they are and what they expect from the future. Compared to CGS, the period of emerging adulthood is, therefore, shorter for them. As has been mentioned above, FGS face more severe and diverse problems and challenges during their studies. For example, research shows that FGS may be more vulnerable to mental health problems than their CGS peers (Smith & McLellan, 2023). The third paper presents findings from a mixed methods study comparing mental health problems in FGS and CGS in the UK. Lastly, in the fourth paper, we discuss the intentions of non-traditional students to drop out, with a particular focus on the Austrian situation.

Over the past decades, research on first-generation students (FGS), defined as students who are the first in their families to study at a higher education institution, has steadily increased, resulting in a proliferation of publications (Beattie, 2018). Despite the increasing popularity of this research strand, numerous studies criticize the arbitrary and superfluously use of the term, resulting in an international incommensurability of data, and the lack of differentiation within the group of first-generation students (Ives & Castillo-Montoya, 2020). Not only is there substantial variation among first-generation students, but, compared to continuing-education generations, they are also more likely to be multiply minoritized based upon race, gender, and social class (Chen & Carroll, 2005; Choy, 2001; Toutkoushian, Stollberg & Slaton, 2018). Individuals with multiple marginalized identities are at a heightened risk of facing greater oppression than those with fewer marginalized identities (King & McPherson, 2020; Roscigno et al., 2022). Although it is collectively affirmed that the experiences of students are particularly challenging when the first-generation status intersects with other marginalized identities, such as race, socioeconomic status, gender, and age (Harackiewicz et al., 2016), Ives and Castillo-Montoya (2020) reveal that most scholars frame FGS from a limited number of theories pertinent to dominant “white” identity groups, namely Bourdieu (1986), Tinto (1993), and Bandura (1997). Against this backdrop, employing intersectionality as a theoretical lens is essential to uncover the power structures that shape the experiences of students facing intersecting forms of marginalization (Collins, 2000; Crenshaw, 1989). By aiding in structuring and guiding the data analysis, frameworks play a crucial role in empirical research; yet little is known about the ways in which intersectionality is applied as an analytical framework in research on first-generation students. This contribution attends to this gap by examining over forty empirical studies that analyze first-generation students through an intersectional lens. Through the analysis, key similarities, and differences in their approaches to study FGS as multiple identities are identified.

Beattie, I.(2018). Sociological Perspectives on First-Generation College Students. In Handbook of Sociology of Education in the 21st Century. Cham: Springer, pp. 171–91. Bandura, A.(1997). Self-efficacy:The exercise of control. Freeman. Bourdieu, P.(1986). Forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson(Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258).Greenwood Press. Chen,X., & Carroll,C.D.(2005).First-generation students in postsecondary education:A look at their college transcripts.National Center for Education Statistics. Choy,S.(2001).Students whose parents did not go to college:Postsecondary access, persistence, and attainment: Findings from the condition of education. Collins,P.H.(2000).Black feminist thought:Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Crenshaw,K.(1989).Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex:A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics.University of Chicago Legal Forum,1,139–167. Ives,J.,& Castillo-Montoya,M.(2020).First-Generation College Students as Academic Learners: A Systematic Review. Review of Educational Research, 90(2),139–178. Harackiewicz,J.M. et al.(2016).Closing achievement gaps with a utility-value intervention: Disentangling race and social class.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,111(5),745–765. King, Colby R., & Sean H. McPherson.(2020).Class beyond the Classroom: Supporting Working-Class and First-Generation Students, Faculty, and Staff. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. University of Chicago Press. Toutkoushian,R.,Stollberg,R.,&Slaton,K.(2018).Talking ‘bout my generation: defining ‘first-generation college students’ in higher education research. Teachers College Record,120, 1–38.

The transition from high school to college is often referred to as a life change, where the student moves from a controlled educational environment to one where self-regulation is emphasised, and the student has responsibility for his or her education (Vengřinová, 2023). A continuous educational pathway characterises the Czech environment, and with the opening of higher education to a wider population, more and more FGS are entering Czech universities (Vengřinová, 2021). Approximately 66.1% of Czech students study at the bachelor level (Hündlová & Šmídová, 2020). Thus, they are the first in their family to experience the university environment, and unlike their parents, they should be able to experience the period of emerging adulthood fully. That means they should experience a safe period of self-identity exploration that takes place during, among other things, the transition to college, specifically between the ages of 18-25 of an individual's life (Arnett, 2004). This paper will focus specifically on the transition period of FGS and their perception of their emerging adulthood among a specific group neglected in the Czech research environment. However, it now represents more than half of the undergraduate student population, which will contribute to filling the current research gap. Results will be presented based on qualitative analysis of 70 semi-structured interviews conducted with 35 novice FGS. The students interviewed perceive a shorter period of emerging adulthood as they often start working while studying for their CGD. At the same time, they feel pressure from their family to be clear in their lives and not to experiment in their decisions. They felt support from their parents in choosing higher education over work, but they felt pressure to graduate or drop out and go to work during their studies. Suppose the student is uncertain about his/her choice. In that case, he/she feels similar uncertainty from his/her parents, leading to different coping strategies, e.g., hardening up and graduating, leaving school, and working. In all types of coping strategies, however, this leads to an earlier acceptance of one's role as an adult, thus shortening the period of emerging adulthood.

Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. Oxford University Press. Hündlová, L, Šmídová, M (2020). Netradiční student a studentky vysokých škol: Studie z šetření Eurostudent VII. CSVŠ. Vengřinova, T. (2021). Akademická a sociální integrace do studia na vysoké škole u první generace vysokoškoláků: přehledová studie. Studia paedagogica, 26(1), 167–184. Vengřinová, T. (2023). Akademická integrace do studia: Pohled první generace vysokoškolských studentů na své vyučující. Pedagogická orientace, 32(3), 152–177.

First-generation students (FGS; those whose parents did not achieve a university degree) constitute almost half of the UK university population (Office for Students, 2022). The UK University Mental Health Charter (Hughes & Spanner, 2019) recognises that FGS may face greater challenges to their mental health than continuing generation students (CGS; those with at least one parent who achieved a university degree). However, a scoping review of the international literature (Smith & McLellan, 2023) found no published empirical research on the mental health of FGS at UK universities. An online study was carried out to address this gap in the research. Participants were students aged 18 years or older from any UK university and were recruited to the study via advertisements on social media. A sample of 247 university students, comprising both FGS (n = 115) and CGS (n = 128) completed a survey containing demographic questions (gender identity, age, level of study, parental education) and scales to measure mental health problems (depression, eating concerns, substance use, generalised anxiety, frustration/anger, social anxiety, family distress, academic distress and a total distress index). In addition, participants responded to open-ended questions on mental health. In this presentation I will report the findings of this study and discuss the implications for FGS, widening participation and future research in this field. This study makes a significant contribution to knowledge about mental health problems in UK FGS and adds a UK perspective to existing international research.

Hughes, G., & Spanner, L. (2019). The University Mental Health Charter. Student Minds. https://www.studentminds.org.uk/uploads/3/7/8/4/3784584/191208_umhc_artwork.pdf Office for Students. (2022). Equality, diversity and student characteristics data. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/equality-diversity-and-student-characteristics-data/ Smith, D., & McLellan, R. (2023). Mental health problems in first-generation university students: A scoping review. Review of Education, 11(3), e3418. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3418

This paper examines empirical evidence from higher education research on student dropout intentions. Dropping out from university is associated with high individual and societal costs, a lack of innovation, a shortage of skilled workers, and a loss of competitiveness and diversity (Nairz-Wirth/Feldmann 2018; Thaler/Unger 2014). In addition, one of the European Union's goals is to achieve greater equality of educational opportunity – a goal that depends in part on reducing the number of students who drop out from university (Vossensteyn et al. 2015). With European universities already reporting high dropout rates within their specific systems (Vossensteyn et al. 2015), universities are under increasing pressure to implement measures to prevent student attrition. In this context, dropout intentions can be seen as an early warning indicator and are therefore relevant for empirical research and the design of effective prevention and intervention strategies (Deuer/Wild 2018). The present analysis combines both psychological-individual and sociological-institutional approaches (Heublein/Wolter 2011), exploring the role of institutional social capital (in terms of peers, university staff, and study group), transitional experiences, and individual resilience in relation to dropout intentions. In addition, different characteristics of non-traditional students are considered (Schuetze/Slowey 2002). Therefore, a survey was conducted in 2022 at an Austrian public university among bachelor students in economics and social sciences (n = 1.000). The results of a hierarchical logistic regression model show that high levels of social capital (in relation to other peers), high individual resilience, and positive experiences with the transition to university can have a preventive effect on dropout intentions. No significant effect was found regarding characteristics of non-traditional students, such as first-generation status. However, an extended duration of study may increase the likelihood of having intentions to drop out. Building on previous findings in higher education research during times of uncertainty (e.g. Falk 2022; Álvarez-Pérez et al. 2021; Baalmann et al. 2020; Baalmann/Speck 2020; Bano et al. 2019), the results suggest that early preparation for studying, active management of the transition process by the institution, support for building students' resilience, and promotion of social networks at the institution can prevent dropout intentions and contribute to reducing dropout rates among university students. These findings are relevant - not only during times of crisis - but also for the long term.

Álvarez-Pérez,P.R. et al.(2021).Academic Engagement and Dropout Intention Academic Engagement and Dropout Intention in Undergraduate University Students. In: Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice,0(0),1-18. Baalmann,T. et al.(2020).Multikontextuelle Einflüsse auf den Studienerfolg: Zusammenführung und Ergänzung der bisherigen Ergebnisse.In: M. Feldhaus & K., Speck(Eds.),Herkunftsfamilie,Partnerschaft und Studienerfolg.Baden-Baden, Ergon,281-324. Baalmann,T. & Speck,K.(2020).Der Einfluss der Studieneingangs- und der Lernmotivation auf den Studienerfolg und die Abbruchneigung von Studierenden.In:Feldhaus, Michael/Speck, Karsten (Hrsg.):Herkunftsfamilie, Partnerschaft und Studienerfolg. Ergon, 81-116. Deuer, E.& Wild, S.(2018). Validierung eines Instruments zur Erfassung der Studienabbruchsneigung bei dual Studierenden, 4. Auflage.Duale Hochschule Baden-Württemberg. Falk,S.(2022).Die Auswirkungen der Corona Pandemie auf die geplante Studiendauer internationaler Studierender an deutschen Hochschulen.In:Beiträge zur Hochschulforschung,44(2-3),144-163. Nairz-Wirth,E. & Feldmann,K.(2018).Hochschulen relational betrachtet. In: AQ Austria (Hrsg.): Durchlässigkeit in der Hochschulbildung. Beiträge zur 5. AQ Austria Jahrestagung 2017.Facultas.,79-94. Schubert,N. et al. (2020). Studienverläufe – Der Weg durchs Studium:Zusatzbericht der Studierenden-Sozialerhebung 2019.Institut für Höhere Studien (IHS). Schuetze,H.G. & Slowey,M. (2002).Participation and exclusion: A comparative analysis of non-traditional students and lifelong learners in higher education.In Higher Education,44(3/4),309-327. Thaler,B. & Unger,M. (2014).Dropouts ≠ Dropouts: Wege nach dem Abgang von der Universität.Institut für Höhere Studien.https://irihs.ihs.ac.at/id/eprint/2259/ Vossensteyn,H. et al. (2015).Dropout and Completion in Higher Education in Europe:Main Report.Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.