Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:29:22 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
15 SES 07 A
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
15. Research Partnerships in Education
Ignite Talk Examining the Role of School–Family Collaboration in Building Educational Partnerships: The Case of First-Grade Education 1: University of Prishtina, Kosovo; 2: University "Hasan Prishtina", Kosovo Presenting Author:Research Questions To what extent does the school’s welcoming attitude influence the frequency of school–family interactions? How does school communication with families affect the level of school–family contact? How does the sharing of information by the school impact the frequency of contact with families? How does the distribution of responsibilities between the school and families affect the level of engagement? To what extent does parental involvement in school decision-making influence school–family interactions? How does the level of trust that families have in the school influence contact? How do families’ previous experiences with the school affect ongoing communication and collaboration?. Literature Review The purpose and role of schools have evolved alongside the development of human society. Therefore, it is a contemporary requirement for schools to establish quality and comprehensive collaboration with parents, making them an integral part of the school community. “Meta-analytic studies concerning the correlational links between school effectiveness and their collaboration with students’ families indicate the existence of a positive correlational relationship between these pedagogical phenomena” (Hyseni, Mita, Salihaj, & Pupovci, 2003). Numerous studies have confirmed the strong value of school-family-community collaboration. They demonstrate that strong partnerships lead to enhanced student performance, improved student attitudes toward school, and increased parental support for the educational system (Bae, 2001; Smith, 2001; Demikat, 1999). European and global practices, especially in the United States, have shown that parental involvement in schools positively contributes to students’ intellectual achievements as well as their overall development as members of society. Although not as common as before, family involvement in schools is still not a characteristic feature of schools today. Maria Montessori advocated that mothers should visit schools at least once a week to discuss with the principal, providing updates on their children and receiving advice from the principal for their benefit (Montessori, 2009). The literature review revealed that collaboration between schools and families is the primary factor in students’ education and success. The main reason for creating such partnerships is to help all young people succeed both in school and later in life. Parents, teachers, students, and others should see each other as partners (Epstein, 1995). One of the key principles over the past thirty years within educational reform efforts is the idea that parental engagement is a crucial element in children's achievement and the overall social organization (Comer, 2005; Epstein, 2001; Henderson, 2002; Smrekar & Cohen-Vogel, 2001; Sui-Chu & Williams, 1996; Seap, 1993). Today, various strategies are being developed to increase parental involvement in schools. “Scientists have shifted their focus to consider the fact that genetic and environmental influences work together dynamically throughout development” (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Operational Definitions Family: A group of individuals connected through biological ties, legal marriage, or cohabitation; Family involvement: The active engagement and participation of family members in school-related activities and decision-making processes; School: An educational institution where structured teaching and learning activities are organized for students; Optimization: The process of enhancing the school’s effectiveness and impact through structured collaboration with families; School–family collaboration: The coordinated activities, interactions, and agreements established between schools and families aimed at achieving shared educational goals. Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the level of contact between schools and families and the key factors that contribute to effective school–family collaboration. These factors include: the school’s welcoming attitude toward families, clear and effective communication, adequate and accurate information sharing, fair distribution of responsibilities, parental involvement in school decision-making, school support for student academic success, mutual trust between families and schools, and families’ prior experiences with the school. By investigating these dimensions, the study seeks to identify the extent to which each factor influences the quality and frequency of interactions between schools and families In this study, a questionnaire was used to address the research questions related to the key factors influencing the continuous involvement of families in school, general cooperation, as well as the prevention of violence among students. The questionnaire was developed based on the model designed by the PTA (International Organization for Family Engagement in Schools). This questionnaire includes the following standards for family involvement in school: welcoming families to school, supporting student success, collaboration with the community, and empowerment. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Conclusion The analysis shows that welcoming families into schools is the most important factor influencing the level of school-family interactions, significant for both teachers and families in urban and rural settings. Support for student success and trust in the school also strongly affect contact levels, according to teachers in both environments. Communication and information sharing are considered important by schools, but families perceive them as less influential on meeting frequency. Power and task sharing show varied impact: power sharing is significant for teachers, while task sharing is more important for rural teachers than urban teachers. Previous experience has a moderate effect for rural teachers but is not significant for urban teachers. Decision-making matters for urban families but less so for rural families. Overall, collaboration between schools and families depends mainly on welcoming families, student support, and trust, while other factors like communication, task distribution, and previous experience play secondary or context-dependent roles. References Decker, L.E., & Decker, V.A. (2003). Home, school and community partnerships. Oxford, UK: The Scarecroës Press. Epstein, J. L. (1995). School, family community partnerships: Caring for the children ëeshare. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 701-712. Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and accounted for: Improving student attendance through family and community involvement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(5), 308-321. Haynes,N. M., & Ben-Avie, M. (1996).Parents as full partners in education.In A.D. J.Booth (Ed.), Family school links: Hoë do they affect educational outcomes (pp.45- 55). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hyseni.H, Mita.N, Salihaj.J, Pupovci.D. (2003). Qeverisja dhe udhëheqja në arsim, Prishtinë. Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A neë ëave of evidence: The impact of school,family and community connections on student achievement:Southëest Educational Development Laboratory. Montesori, M. ( 2009). Zbulimi i fëmijës. Plejad. Mapp, K. (1997). Making family school connections ëork. Education Digest, 63 (4), 39-40. Full text article retrieved February 7, 2004, from Ebsco Host Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). Neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington D.C.: National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. Smrekar, C., & Cohen-Vogel, L. (2001). The voices of parents: Rethinking the intersection of family and school. Peabody Journal of Education, 76(2), 75-100. Swap, S. M. (1993). Developing home-school partnerships: From concepts practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Paper Examining Erasmus Traineeships Abroad Through The Eyes of The Pre-service Teachers Erciyes University, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:
The importance of overseas fıeld experiences for teacher candidates has already been discussed in the literature, highlighting its role in helping teacher candidates to grow in both personal and professional lives (Cushner, 2007; Stachowski & Mahan, 1995) Having field experience in another country contributes to the development of personal skills such as problem-solving, communication, adaptation, and self-responsibility. Via overseas teaching experiences teacher candidates learn pedagogical approaches including authentic educational practices, various teaching methods and techniques, and different measurement and evaluation processes (Stachowski & Mahan, 1995). At this point ERASMUS Exchange program plays a vital role in providing an opportunity for pre-service teachers to go abroad. Through exchange programs teacher candidates from various countries are able to have field experiences in international contexts. Erasmus international exchange programs improve teacher candidates language skills and enable them to gain a global perspective (Küçükçene & Akbaşlı, 2021). In overseas Erasmus programs, teacher candidates have the opportunity to see and experience different cultures, contributing to the development of their cultural literacy levels (Küçükçene & Akbaşlı, 2021). The aim of this study is to examine the experiences of teacher candidates who are participating in the Erasmus internship program. Research questions are:
(1) Do participants perceive Erasmus internship as an aid to self-development? (2) Do participants believe overseas experiences lead them to gain global perspectives? (3) What kind of learning has occurred within Erasmus internship experiences to support their professional development? In order to answer given questions, a case study was conducted. Theoretical Foundation of Erasmus+ Traineeship Experiences This study is based on the framework developed by Angene H. Wilson (1993) to analyze the effects of Erasmus+ traineeship mobility on participants. Wilson (1993) categorizes the impact of international experiences into two main categories: "Gaining a Global Perspective" and "Developing Self and Relationships". These two main categories form a holistic structure consisting of four sub-dimensions in total. According to this model, an internationally experienced individual can gain a global perspective, including substantive knowledge and perceptual understanding. Also, based upon this model, international experiences often lead to personal growth and new interpersonal relationships. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used In order to get rich information about the beliefs and experiences of teacher candidates towards the Erasmus internship program, the case study approach has been applied (Yin, 2009). In a case study, the focus can be on any social phenomenon, or a single individual, program, or institution. Case studies are carried out to obtain detailed, in-depth information about small selected samples ( Yin, 2009). In this study the internship experiences of each participant are evaluated as a case. In order to reach the target population, the participants were selected employing purposeful and snowball sampling (Patton, 2002). The study was conducted with a study group consisting of 14 participants who completed the Erasmus+ Traineeship Program. The demographic characteristics of the participants are summarized below: ● The majority of the participants are female (n=12), with a smaller number of male participants (n=2). ● The participants' ages range from 22 to 26 years. ● Most participants originated from Türkiye (n=13), while one participant came from Germany. ● Poland was the most frequently chosen destination for the traineeship (n=11). Other host countries included Slovakia (n=1) and Spain (n=2). ● The participants are predominantly from the field of English Language Teaching (ELT) and Education, with roles often involving teaching assistance or general internship duties within educational institutions. The data was collected through a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews (Patton, 2002). Compiled data was analyzed using Maxqda program applying content analysis strategies. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings 1.Gaining a Global Perspectives ● Substantive Knowledge: This dimension increases a person’s international experience, knowledge about other cultures, awareness of global problems, and understanding of global dynamics (Wilson, 1993). One participant states, ‘It helped me to became more global person. I worked with teachers and students from all over the world. I learned so many new cultures, indicating that international experience increased their knowledge and awareness of different cultures. ● Perceptual Understanding: This dimension, adapted from Case (1991), includes open-mindedness, the ability to anticipate complexity, resistance to stereotypes, and a tendency to empathize (Wilson, 1993). One participant said ‘Being positive and open-minded’, while another stated that the program ‘improves personal development and broadens perspectives’. 2. Developing Self and Relationships ● Personal Growth: Experiences like studying or internships abroad provide individuals with a foundation for discovering their own talents and gaining overall maturity (Wilson, 1993). Participants indicate that their self-confidence has increased and that they are ‘self-reliant’ in this dimension. ● Interpersonal Connections: This dimension encompasses the ability to establish relationships with people from different cultures and to act as a "cultural mediator". Wilson (1993) indicates that these connections are not limited to people in the host country, but also make it easier for a person to empathize with foreigners in their own country. Statements such as ‘new friends from all overthe world, ..., fostering social and language skills’ and ‘Working at an international school provides opportunities to meet international colleagues and students’ point out that they formed not only professional but also social and emotional bonds during their internship. References Cushner, K. (2007). The role of experience in the making of internationally-minded teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 34(1), 27-39. Küçükçene, M., & Akbaşlı, S. (2021). The Opinions regarding the Program of the Students Going Abroad in the Scope of the Erasmus+ Exchange Program. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi(26), 155-170. Stachowski, L. L., & Mahan, J. M. (1995). Learning from international field experiences. In G.A Slick (Ed.), Emerging trends in teacher preparation: The future of field experiences (pp. 97-107). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research. New York, NY: John Wiley. Wilson, A. H. (1993). Conversation partners: Helping students gain a global perspective through cross-cultural experiences. Theory into Practice, 32, 21-26. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks. 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Paper Cross-Sector Collaboration Between Schools and Museums in Policy and Practice University of Southeast Norway, Norway Presenting Author:Cross-sector collaboration is emphasized as important for making education relevant and sustainable (WHO, 2023; WHO & UN, 2021), and for improving teaching quality and learning outcomes through partnerships between culture and schools (Kultur- og kirkedepartementet, 2003). In Norway culture in schools is often delivered by The Cultural Schoolbag (TCS), the government initiative that aims to provide all students in primary and secondary schools access to various cultural experiences (Borgen & Hallås, 2023). Museums have traditionally played a central cultural-political role in the dissemination of art and culture to children and young people, both internationally and in Norway. Museums are often seen as suitable alternative learning arenas for schools (Brenna & de Ridder, 2019; Hansen & Særkjær, 2025; Hein, 2002), but studies show that collaboration is often challenged by contextual differences and high demands on time and resources (Marini et al., 2022; Rikstad & Jones, 2024; Raaijmakers et al., 2021). Policy documents emphasize the importance of museums as partners in TCS, and highlight that successful collaboration requires robust dialogue between schools and museums (Kulturdepartementet, 2021). How such dialogues unfold and contribute to value and relevance for both sectors remains poorly understood. Although cross-sector partnerships have been a long-standing political priority, research indicates that they remain in a "formative phase" at the operational level (Aasen et al., 2025, s. 6). This study investigates how cross-sector collaboration between schools and museums is conceptualized and developed in both policy and practice. The study examines the process and didactic outcomes of collaboration on interdisciplinary teaching within the Norwegian LK20s curriculum's topic "Public Health and Life Skills," organized as partnerships inspired by co-creation (Torfing et al., 2020; Aastvedt & Vike, 2025). RQ: "How is collaboration between schools and museums conceptualized and developed in policy and practice? And what are the outcomes of such collaboration?" Objectives are to analyse how the cross-sector collaboration is framed and developed in policy documents, investigate the collaborative process in practice, and examine the didactic outcomes of collaboration in classroom practice, highlighting the challenges and tensions of aligning sectoral logics. The study uses Brinkerhoff’s (Brinkerhoff, 2002) theory of cross-sector partnerships to analyse the collaboration in policy and Skagen’s (Skagen, 2001) Bakhtin influenced concepts of "big conversations" and "small conversations" to examine institutional and relational dynamics both in the collaboration process of developing the didactics and with the didactic outcomes in the classroom. To synthesize the studies, Bakhtin’s dialogism is used as theoretical framework to conceptualize the interconnected contexts of cross-sector collaboration. The project analyses how the great dialogue and outer compositional dialogue (policy frameworks, institutional structures) influence small conversations and micro dialogue (situated collaboration, classroom interactions). And how these contexts shape school-museum partnerships and interact to influence the dynamics and outcomes of collaboration. Central to Bakhtin’s theory is the idea that dialogue emerges from the coexistence of multiple, often conflicting voices (heteroglossia), and that these tensions create opportunities for development and new understanding (Bakhtin, 1986, 2003). Theories of co-creation are used as a complementary perspective to highlight how institutional sectors can engage in collaborative processes that foster the exchange of diverse perspectives and knowledge. Co-creation emphasizes the potential for public value creation through innovative thinking and strengthened partnerships (Torfing et al., 2020; Aastvedt & Vike, 2025). However, there is limited theoretical understanding of how contextual factors influence the potential for co-construction, an area increasingly highlighted as a gap in the literature (Aastvedt & Vike, 2025). By integrating these perspectives, the project situates school-museum partnerships within broader institutional and dialogic contexts, providing insights into the interplay between policy and practice. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study employs a case design (Yin, 2018). The collaboration between a secondary school and a cultural history museum was organized in a mutual partnership influenced by co-creation. Spanning June 2024–March 2025, the project included planning meetings, 5 workshops, and teaching. The subjects involved were History, Norwegian, and Religion and Ethics at the upper secondary level (VG3), with three teachers and three/two museum educators. The project aimed to improve collaboration and enhance teaching quality in public health and life skills. Using a multi-method approach combining document analysis, participatory observation, focus group interviews and student logs, the study explores cross-sector collaboration across policy and practice. Practice-Oriented Document Analysis: By employing a practice-oriented document analysis of four Norwegian policy documents from 2001–2021(Asdal & Reinertsen, 2020), the study analyses how school-museum collaboration has been conceptualized and developed over time, how TCS has engaged in the partnership, and what possibilities and challenges can be caused by the consequential of the culture politics. Documents are active elements that shape the realities they describe, using literary techniques as agents of change. In this way, White Papers actively contribute to the formation and transformation of the issues they address, such as the collaboration between museums and schools (Asdal & Reinertsen, 2020). Participatory Observation Focus Group Interviews and Student Logs: In practice, the study analyses the collaboration process between teachers and museum educators in developing the didactic, inspired by co-creation. In classroom practice, the study examines the didactic outcomes, analysing how students, teachers and museum educators experience and engage with the didactic. Participatory observation captures the negotiation of roles, expectations, and practices (polyphony) during the collaborative process of developing teaching activities. Focus group interviews with teachers and museum educators provide insights into the challenges of aligning sectoral logics and pedagogical goals (outer compositional dialogue). Student logs highlight how students experience the outcomes of the cross-sector collaboration in terms of engagement, relevance, and learning. This can contribute to understand the dialogue between teachers and museum educators in the classroom. Data analysis: The thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022) of practice focuses on collaborative processes and classroom interactions. The analysis was an iterative and flexible process, moving between data, codes, themes, and research questions to deepen understanding. It is grounded in the data but interpreted through a theoretical lens for depth and direction. Bakhtin's dialogism is used to synthesize the studies and analyse the dialogic dynamics between policy and practice. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The policy analysis highlights how TCS has historically functioned as a third-party intermediary, emphasizing a delivery model. However, recent policies signal a shift towards co-creation and equality between schools and museums. The partnership alternates between contracting, where one party sets the terms, and mutuality, where attempts are made to develop shared goals (Brinkerhoff, 2002). Document contexting reveals that cultural policy perspectives dominate, positioning museums as "insiders," while school policy perspectives remain "outsiders" (Hansen & Særkjær, 2025) potentially hindering mutual partnerships (Brinkerhoff, 2002). The collaboration processes reveal tensions stemming from differing professional practices, institutional logics, and unclear expectations. Teachers often prefer ready-made resources they can easily integrate into their teaching, while museums want clearer guidance on what is needed. Structural constraints exacerbate these dynamics, making co-creation resource-intensive and unsustainable. Several teachers withdrew from the project due to these high resource demands, disrupting continuity. However, box didactics—familiar through TCS—became a shared reference point, with TCS continuing to influence the dynamics of the partnership as a third party. The didactic outcomes highlight both potential and challenges. Students appreciated the engaging and varied approaches but struggled to see their relevance to curricula. Teachers found it difficult to adapt the teaching materials to their practice, citing insufficient time and misalignment with curriculum goals. Museums also faced challenges in adapting their pedagogical approaches to the classroom context. This demonstrates that the methods are highly context-dependent, and the classroom fosters different types of dialogue than those typically facilitated within museum spaces. The participants demonstrate a shared preference for a demand-supply model over co-creation. The findings show how the big conversations influence and exert symbolic power over the small ones, and how the context becomes interwoven with the dialogue between schools and museums (Bakhtin, 1986; Skagen, 2001). This offers insights for cross-sector collaboration in European contexts. References Asdal, K., & Reinertsen, H. (2020). Hvordan gjøre dokumentanalyse: En praksisorientert metode. Cappelen Damm akademisk. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. No. 8. University of Texas Press. Bakhtin, M. M. (2003). Latter og dialog: Utvalgte skrifter (Bd. 44). Cappelen akademisk forl. Borgen, J. S., & Hallås, B. O. (2023). Conceptualisations of Extra-Curricular Cross-Sector Partnerships in the Context of The Cultural Schoolbag and Physical Activity Health Initiatives in Norwegian Schools. I T. S. Prøitz, P. Aasen, & W. Wermke (Red.), From Education Policy to Education Practice (Bd. 15, s. 195–225). Springer International Publishing. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE. Brenna, B., & de Ridder, A.-T. (2019, januar 11). Museum og skole. Fra folkeopplysning til kulturell skolesekk [Rapport]. regjeringen.no. Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2002). Government–nonprofit partnership: A defining framework. Public Administration and Development, 22(1), 19–30. Hansen, L. E., & Særkjær, C. (2025). De tre store og børnene. Nordisk kulturpolitisk tidsskrift, 28(1), 3–21. Hein, G. E. (2002). Learning in the Museum. Routledge. Kultur- og kirkedepartementet. (2003, juni 6). St.meld. Nr. 38 (2002-2003) [Stortingsmelding]. regjeringen.no. Kulturdepartementet. (2021, mars 26). Meld. St. 23 (2020–2021) [Stortingsmelding]. regjeringen.no Marini, C., Agostino, D., & Simoni, L. (2022). Co-Creating History: The Case of WORTHY as a Virtual Collaborative Museum. Journal of Museum Education, 47(3), 385–394. Rikstad, G., & Jones, M.-A. (2024). Medvirkning som samskaping i møtepunktet mellom museum og skole. Nordisk Museologi, 36(1)136–151. Raaijmakers, H., Mc Ewen, B., Walan, S., & Christenson, N. (2021). Developing museum-school partnerships: Art-based exploration of science issues in a third space. International Journal of Science Education, 43(17), 2746–2768. Skagen, K. (2001). Veiledningssamtaler i bakhtinsk perspektiv. I Dialog, samspel og læring. Abstrakt forlag. Torfing, J., Cristofoli, D., Gloor, P. A., Meijer, A. J., & Trivellato, B. (2020). Taming the snake in paradise: Combining institutional design and leadership to enhance collaborative innovation. Policy and Society, 39(4), 592–616. WHO. (2023). Achieving well-being: A global framework for integrating well-being into public health utilizing a health promotion approach. World Health Organization. WHO & UN. (2021). Making every school a health-promoting school – Global standards and indicators. Aasen, P., Sørensen, V., Stenersen, C. R., Borgen, J. S., & Prøitz, T. S. (2025). Partnerskap i politikkutforming og utdanningspraksis. I 68 [Report]. Universitetet i Sørøst-Norge. Aastvedt, A., & Vike, H. (2025). Co-creation and the boundaries of democracy: Institutional tensions in the Nordic welfare municipality. Public Management Review, 0(0), 1–32. | ||