Conference Agenda

In 2021, one in every 127 people were estimated to be on the autism spectrum globally (Santomauro et al., 2021). The number of autistic students at university increasing both in the UK and Europe (Gormley et al, 2024, HESA, 2024) though the number is likely to be higher than official figures because not all choose to disclose (Hull et al., 2017) or have been diagnosed (Doherty et al, 2023). Speech and language are central teaching and learning tools, as they are the means through which teachers instruct, support, and assess students. This has implications for autistic students since they are likely to experience challenges with social communication and interaction (APA 2022).

Our actual and perceived ability to communicate ‘effectively’ (including understanding verbal and non-verbal communication) is influenced by our intersectional experiences, cultural differences and other factors including neurotype. Awareness and adaptation of one’s own communication skills is a key part of practice education including speech and language therapy (SaLT) (Dantuma, 2021). For autistic SaLT students, the core interactional differences between autistic and neurotypical people can pose both challenges and opportunities for those practicing in a majority neurotypical society. However, SaLT, whose aim is to maximise an individual’s communication potential, has been traditionally and historically rooted in a conventional medical paradigm (Pellicano and Houting, 2022).

Practice-based learning is central to professional training and placement experiences affect students’ intention to persist with their studies and employment plans after graduation (Pesonen et al, 2021). Autistic students face significant and unique barriers in both academic and practice-based learning. The social model of disability attributes these barriers to environmental and cultural factors (Rieser, 2023). However, although listening to neurodivergent perspectives can progress equity and deconstruct ableism, research that explores the views, priorities and experiences autistic students have of their interactions within these social and physical environments (i.e. education and employment; Gormely, 2024) is still emerging.

Given this context, we were interested to explore the experience and perceptions of practice-based learning from the perspective of students and recently qualified autistic SaLTs, and their placement educators (some of whom will themselves be autistic). We posed the following research questions:

1. What challenges and support do autistic SaLT students experience during practice-based learning?

2. How much do autistic SaLT students perceive that these practice-based learning experiences contribute to their motivation and identity?

3. What suggestions for support and reasonable adjustments do autistic SaLT students identify during practice-based learning?

By posing the above questions, we set out to address the following objectives:

• To identify effective ways to support placement educators in meeting the needs of this group of students;

• To produce recommendations and resources to support the practice-based education of autistic SaLTs;

• To share the information gained to enable the above to be carried forward into/inform Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) and future workplaces.

Taking a neurodiverse affirming approach, the research adopts a critical realist paradigm (Bhaskar, 1975) to examine lived realities and the internal and external factors that contribute to these. Tension between neurotypical standards deemed ‘professional’ and neurodivergent ways of being are likely to impact engagement and identity and are therefore interrogated by applying the social determination theory of motivation (Deci and Ryan, 2000). Examining autistic SaLT students and practitioners and their placement educators’ experiences of competence, relatedness and autonomy - including how they shape their motivation and identity -has relevance across HEI disciplines, particularly practice-based disciplines like SaLT given the fact that communication underpins teaching, learning and assessment in all fields of education.

Higher education institutions face growing pressure to enhance students’ employability and better prepare them for increasingly complex and uncertain labour markets. While policy frameworks emphasise career development learning (CDL), competence development, and work-related skills, these elements often remain weakly integrated into university curricula, particularly in theory-driven programmes (Bridgstock 2009, Bridgstock, et al. 2019, Dean et al. 2022, Tomlinson 2017). Students frequently report difficulties in translating academic knowledge into real-life decision-making related to employment, financial management, and career planning. These challenges are especially visible in Central and Eastern European higher education systems, where student employment during studies is widespread and often driven by financial necessity (Hauschildt et al. 2021, Kocsis & Pusztai 2024).

This paper addresses these issues by examining an innovative, research-based educational board game, Study Hard, Work Hard!, designed to support career development learning through experiential and playful pedagogy in higher education. The game simulates realistic student life situations, including budgeting, student employment, scholarship opportunities, job interviews, and time management dilemmas. It aims to foster employability-related competences such as decision-making, communication, reflection, collaboration, and financial awareness.

The central research question guiding this study is: How do university students perceive the educational value and realism of a board game designed to support career development learning and employability-related skill development?
Sub-questions explore (1) students’ perceived learning outcomes, (2) motivational and affective dimensions of gameplay, and (3) the perceived adaptability of the game across different institutional and disciplinary contexts.

The study is grounded in three complementary theoretical frameworks. First, career development learning theory conceptualises career management as a lifelong process involving self-awareness, opportunity awareness, and informed decision-making. Second, experiential learning theory emphasises learning through concrete experience, reflection, and active engagement, which aligns with the game’s simulation-based design (Bridgstock, et al. 2019, Dean et al. 2022, Tomlinson 2017). Third, game-based learning and playful pedagogy provide the pedagogical foundation for understanding how analogue board games can support motivation, peer interaction, and deep learning in higher education contexts (Karbownik et al., 2016, Manzano-León et al. 2021).

The international relevance of the study lies in its integration of empirical data from large-scale European student surveys (e.g. EUROSTUDENT) into the game mechanics, ensuring realism and cross-national applicability. Although the empirical case is situated in Hungary, the challenges addressed, student employment, employability gaps, and the need for innovative CDL practices, are shared across European higher education systems. The paper therefore contributes a Central and Eastern European perspective to international debates on employability, active learning, and pedagogical innovation.

This poster presents the design and development of a new continuing education program entitled Competence Development in Work with Children and Youth, aimed at professionals working with children and adolescents across Norway. The initiative responds to a national call for more flexible and decentralized education pathways, addressing the need for accessible, practice-oriented professional learning opportunities that can be pursued alongside full-time employment. By offering a fully digital, modular program, the project seeks to broaden participation in continuing education beyond traditional campus-based formats and reach professionals across diverse geographical and institutional contexts.

The central objective of the project is to design and pilot a flexible, research-informed continuing education model that supports professional competence development while allowing participants to remain embedded in their everyday work settings. The program targets a wide range of professionals, including those working in early childhood education, schools, child welfare services, health and social services, and community-based youth work. Rather than emphasizing credential accumulation alone, the program focuses on strengthening reflective practice, professional agency, and collaborative learning across disciplinary boundaries.

The overarching research questions guiding the project are:

1. How can a fully digital, flexible course design support meaningful learning and professional development for practitioners working with children and youth?
2. How are key orientations for creating a positive climate for diversity reflected in the pedagogical design and learning activities of the program?
3. How do participants experience the relationship between theory, reflection, and application in their own professional contexts?

The program is built on three core design principles. First, flexibility is ensured through asynchronous learning activities and modular course structures, allowing participants to organize their learning around their workday and personal responsibilities. Second, fully digital delivery enables genuine location independence, with all teaching, collaboration, and assessment taking place online via the Canvas learning platform. Third, collaborative learning is emphasized through small interdisciplinary learning groups, fostering peer exchange, shared reflection, and mutual professional support across sectors.

Pedagogically, the program adapts the U.S.-based ICMEE model (Viesca & Commins, 2026) to a Norwegian continuing education context. Each course module follows a structured five-step learning cycle: initial reflection, exploration, application (“Make it Work”), sharing, and final reflection. This cycle is designed to support participants in becoming aware of their own perspectives, engaging with research-based knowledge, applying insights in practice, and critically reflecting on changes in understanding over time.

The theoretical framework underpinning the project is the Model for Orientations to Create a Positive Climate for Diversity (Viesca et al., 2024). The model identifies five interrelated orientations—agency, interconnectedness, openness, curiosity, and creativity—which together contribute to inclusive and supportive learning environments. In this project, these orientations inform both the pedagogical design and the intended learning outcomes of the program. The poster will illustrate how the five orientations are embedded within the learning cycle and aligned with module assignments and assessment criteria.

The development of the program is supported by the university’s Learning Hub BLINK, a strategic initiative aimed at strengthening pedagogical innovation and supporting lecturers in the further development of their teaching. In this project, BLINK provides expertise and guidance specifically related to the flexibilization of teaching and learning, with the goal of reaching a broader and more diverse student body. This support has been central in shaping the program’s digital pedagogy, assessment design, and facilitation strategies, ensuring alignment with national priorities for accessible, decentralized, and high-quality continuing education.

As access to tertiary education expands, universities are facing not only a growing number but also a greater diversity of students (Hussey & Smith, 2010). One consequence of the growing demographic diversity is the significant number of first-generation college students (FGCS), whose parents did not attain more than secondary education (Pascarella et al., 2004) and who make up more than 50% of university students in the Czech Republic (Hündlová & Šmídová, 2020). Depending on their social class background, applicants for university studies may differ in financial, social, and cultural resources (Stuber, 2009). Specifically, FGCS come from families with little or no experience of college education, which influences their ability to meet college expectations (Collier & Morgan, 2008). At the same time, FGCS are more at risk of experiencing a cultural mismatch between the values of academic institutions and the values of their family environment, which affects their academic performance (Stephens et al., 2012), and of dropping out of school (Ishitani, 2006). However, the experiences of FGCS in the Czech Republic are largely neglected, despite the Czech tertiary education's high dropout rate, especially in the first year of study (MŠMT, n. d.).

An effective way to reduce the number of students dropping out of higher education is to successfully integrate them academically and socially (Tinto, 1975). However, the integration process tends to be more challenging for FGCS (Soria, Stebleton & Huesman, 2013). A key factor in successful integration is the formation of a new identity as a university student (Whitehead & Wright, 2017). The changes and challenges that students face during the transition from high school to university transform their identities (Hussey & Smith, 2010) and group membership. The process of identification with a new group is influenced by the perceived compatibility of existing and new identities, which tends to be lower for FGCS, making it more difficult for them to identify with their college peers (Iyer et al., 2009). However, the construction of a strong social identity as a university student, in the sense of affiliation with a group of university students and professionals in the field of study, contributes to both psychological well-being and academic success (Mavor et al., 2017).

The presented research project examines how the process of construction of FGCS’ university student identity develops during the transitional first year of their university studies. It maps the challenges influencing this process and potentially threatening students’ academic success, and the protective factors through which they are able to face or avoid these challenges. The aim is to show how aspects of their diversity (e.g., learning and coping strategies) and other developed or developing identities enter into their interactions with the conditions and actors with whom they meet during their studies, and into their emerging university student identity. Identity is perceived from the perspective of social constructionist psychology as multidimensional, relational, contextual, and fluid (Burr, 2015) and through the lens of intersectionality as shaped by interwoven multidimensional power relations determined by class, gender, and other inequalities (Brenner, 2000).

Higher education systems are increasingly positioned as centres of social justice, inclusiveness, and socioeconomic mobility across Europe. In the United Kingdom, including Scotland, legislation that commits to widening access participation acknowledges refugees and people seeking asylum as disadvantaged groups. This recognition is explicit. On the other hand, despite these legislative goals, people who have been forcibly displaced (refugees and asylum seekers) continue to confront enormous structural, institutional, and affective challenges in gaining admission to higher education, advancing through it, and ultimately graduating. This research examines how educational research may both shed light on lived experiences and provide direction for transformational action within higher education systems in Scotland.

The primary objective of this study is to understand the experiences of refugees and people seeking asylum in Scotland as they seek access to, progress within, and complete higher education. The research process is guided by the following questions:

1. What are the experiences of forcibly displaced people when accessing, progressing, and completing higher education in Scotland?

a) To what extent does the status of forcibly displaced people influence and constrain their educational experience in higher education?

(b) What are the implications of these constraints on the higher education trajectories for forcibly displaced people?

2. How (if any) are higher education institutions providing tailored educational support for forcibly displaced people to enhance their access, retention, and completion in Scottish higher education?

The investigation is grounded in a multidisciplinary framework that emphasises human dignity, agency, and the equitable treatment of individuals. A critical lens for perceiving education as both a site of marginalisation and a possible space for liberation, Freire's (1970, 1994) pedagogy of the oppressed focuses on conversation, love, and conscientisation. Education is framed as a relational and ethical practice that requires care, acknowledgement, and mutual humanity, according to bell hooks' love ethic, which extends this concept further.

In addition, the research draws on theories of social justice, specifically Rawls' (1971, 2004) principles of fairness, Sandel's (2011) criticisms of meritocracy, and Sen's (2009) capacity approach. Taking all of these viewpoints into consideration, the study investigates how structural inequalities, institutional arrangements, and governmental decisions shape the actual freedoms forcibly displaced people have to pursue and benefit from higher education. By acknowledging the ways in which legal status, race, gender, language, and trauma intersect to produce distinct experiences of exclusion and opportunity, intersectionality theory provides additional insight into the analysis.

By incorporating these theoretical approaches, the study establishes education research as an ethical and political action. This action not only provides information, but it also challenges inequitable systems and leads to more just practices in higher education.

In interdisciplinary education, students’ group collaboration is often used to simulate real-world collaboration, where individuals from different disciplinary backgrounds work together to solve complex problems (Klein, 1990; Repko & Szostak, 2020). Although this pedagogical strategy is widely adopted, empirical understanding of how interdisciplinary student teams collaborate around classroom-based tasks remains limited. Prior studies have predominantly focused on learning outcomes (e.g., grades, productivity, and knowledge gains), tending to rely on self-report measures, rather than closely examining collaborative processes as they unfold in practice. Some empirical studies have focused on collaborative processes in group work more generally. For example, Van Leeuwen et al. (2014) showed that students’ interaction patterns and role negotiations change dynamically during collaboration, suggesting that collaborative roles and forms of participation are not fixed but continuously renegotiated over time. Similarly, Han and Ellis (2021) found that interdisciplinary teamwork is shaped by uneven role distributions , in which students differed in their levels and forms of participation, as well as by recurring interaction patterns, such as stable participation roles and repeated sequences of engagement, which influenced students’ involvement and engagement. Beyond interactional processes, theoretical work has emphasized the broader context in which collaboration takes place. Jornet and Damşa (2021) argued that collaboration should be understood as a sociomaterial process, in which knowledge emerges through students’ interactions with peers, tools, and learning environments. Markauskaite et al. (2023) further conceptualized interdisciplinary collaboration as part of an “educational ecology,” highlighting the interconnected roles of individual factors (e.g., students’ disciplinary backgrounds and prior experiences), social factors (e.g., interaction patterns, role relations, and norms of collaboration), material factors (e.g., tasks, tools, and digital platforms), and institutional factors (e.g., course structures, assessment requirements, and instructional arrangements).

While these studies have significantly advanced our understanding of interdisciplinary collaboration by focusing on interactional and ecological perspectives, less attention has been paid to how interdisciplinary collaboration is enacted in classroom practice. This study focuses on the question of how students experience, enact, and reflect on collaborative processes within interdisciplinary team-based projects. Adopting a process-oriented focus, the study traces students’ collaborative work over time by following group meetings and discussions and observing how teams jointly conduct system analysis, engage in interdisciplinary investigation, develop and negotiate critical arguments, and integrate knowledge across disciplines as they progress toward completing their projects. It examines multiple cases across different courses and team contexts to enrich and contextualize this understanding, and to explore similarities and variations in how collaboration unfolds.