Conference Agenda

Education in, through and for democracy is a constant and currently highly relevant topic within the discourse of European Civic Education. From an education policy perspective democracy education is normally considered in conjunction with democratic citizenship education (e.g. Westheimer/Kahne 2004, Georgi 2008, Biesta 2011). The Council of Europe’s Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture was once developed with regard to the challenges of culturally diverse societies and experiences of extremist and terrorist violence as a result of radicalization (Barrett 2020; Council of Europe 2021). Likewise in Germany, social discourses are concerned about the increase of anti-democratic and inhuman attitudes (e.g. Zick et al. 2025, Decker et al. 2024) and a perceived polarization (Mau et al. 2023, Kumkar 2025). Particularly striking are increasing patterns of libertarian authoritarianism (e g. Amlinger/Nachtwey 2025) and a way of thinking in schemes of derservingness (e. g. Mau et al. 2023).

Against this backdrop educational policy documents highlight at intervals the importance of democracy education (KMK 2018, SWK 2024). On the other hand, critical reflections warn against governmental instrumentalization and suppression of or ignorance towards societal conflicts (e.g. Eis/Moulin-Doos 2017). Moreover, many approaches do not take into account that socio-economic disadvantages correlate with educational disadvantages in many cases what forms a barrier to civic education and political participation (e. g. Achour et al. 2025).

With regard to democracy education we can differentiate analytically between various approaches. In the early 2000s, a vehement controversy between advocates of experience-based democracy learning and subject-specific didactics of politics contributed to some conceptual clarifications. Established distinctions include those between democratic experiences and subject-specific learning, between school subject, school and teaching principles, and informal, non-formal and formal educational formats with their own inherent areas of tension (e.g. Achour et al. 2025). Further differentiating categories include distinctions between education about democracy, democracy as a principle and foundation of education, and education as democratization. (e.g.Beutel et al. 2025). Furthermore, dealing with controversial issues in class is considered highly relevant in order to foster the ability to deal with conflicts democratically (Byford et al. 2009; Hess 2009; Cowan/Maitles 2012; Drerup 2021).

Against this backdrop the paper discusses the results of a pre-study with regard to controversial issues in schools and a teaching project addressing democracy education.

For the pre-study we collect different types of data at various types of schools at diverse locations as urban and rural regions. We observe various approaches to address societal controversies in school and conduct interviews with students and teachers. With this approach we aim at a better understanding of which controversies are relevant for the students, how do they think about, how do they talk about in class, what do teachers know about the students’ opinions, how do they work with that information in class?

In the teaching project, students designed workshops on democratic education for classes from various disciplines at the vocational school. In different formats the young people explored group decision-making processes and issues of inequality, justice, and solidarity. The interactions, discussions, and statements were recorded and then analysed to determine which attitudes and developmental processes emerged.

Based on a brief presentation of these insights into school realities we intend a systematizing discussion of various approaches of democracy education, their limitations and their potentials.

Across Europe and globally, education systems face increasing societal uncertainty, including democratic erosion, misinformation, climate crisis, and growing social inequalities. Schools are increasingly expected to prepare students not only with disciplinary knowledge but also with the capacities required for democratic participation (Campbell, 2012). Citizenship Education (CE) has therefore become a central educational mission across curricula. However, research on CE remains largely fragmented across subject-specific didactic traditions.

While substantial research has explored CE within individual subjects such as social studies, science education, mathematics education, language education, and arts education (e.g., Levy et al., 2021; Skovsmose et al., 2023), there is limited systematic knowledge about how these subjects together contribute to students’ democratic formation. Most CE research either adopts a general educational perspective detached from subject teaching or remains confined within single disciplinary traditions. Consequently, little is known about how subject-specific knowledge practices interact, complement one another, or potentially generate tensions in relation to CE.

This fragmentation is particularly problematic in times of societal uncertainty, where students must engage with complex, interdisciplinary and value-laden societal issues. Research has emphasised the importance of deliberative classroom practices for democratic learning (Englund, 2006), yet how such practices are embedded within different subject traditions remains underexplored. Moreover, despite well-developed theoretical models of democratic competence (Detjen et al., 2012), empirical classroom-based research examining how CE is enacted across subjects is limited.

Another significant gap concerns assessment. While large-scale studies provide important insights into students’ civic knowledge and attitudes, they are weakly connected to subject didactics and everyday classroom practices. There is a lack of validated instruments capable of capturing how citizenship-related competencies develop through subject teaching in different disciplinary contexts.

This paper outlines a research project aimed at addressing these challenges through two interconnected approaches. First, it seeks to develop an integrated and interdisciplinary conceptualisation of Citizenship Education (CE) in and across school subjects in secondary education, identifying both subject-specific contributions and shared didactic features. Second, it proposes a practice-based and comparative research design to explore how CE can be enacted, developed, and studied within different subject contexts.

The project is theoretically grounded in Detjen et al.’s (2012) multidimensional model of democratic competencies, encompassing attitudes and motivation, knowledge and skills, action capacity, and judgement (cf. Campbell, 2012). This framework is combined with the concept of powerful knowledge (Young & Müller, 2013), highlighting the role of disciplinary knowledge in enabling students to understand and critically engage with societal issues. Together, these perspectives allow for an exploration of how subject-specific epistemic practices intersect with broader democratic aims.

By bringing together researchers from multiple subject didactics, the project responds to current societal demands for interdisciplinary educational research capable of addressing uncertainty, complexity, and democratic challenges (Ligozat, 2023). It aims to move beyond parallel subject-specific traditions toward a comparative and synthesising didactics of Citizenship Education

This paper explores the transformative potential of teaching global citizenship through Blended Intensive Programs (BIPs) in higher education, with a specific focus on sustainability-oriented, real-world case study work. Global citizenship is defined in concise terms as the capacity to engage responsibly, critically, and ethically with global challenges across cultural, disciplinary, and national boundaries (Bosio et al. 2023; OECD/Asia Society 2018).

The empirical setting comprises three Blended Intensive Programs jointly designed and implemented by LAB University of Applied Sciences (FIN) together with HTW Saar University of Applied Sciences (DE) and Avans University of Applied Sciences (NL) between 2023 and 2026. Each program followed a comparable methodological and didactic structure, combining online preparatory sessions and a research-based pre-assignment with a face-to-face interdisciplinary intensive week in Finland. Approximately 30 students participated in each implementation, representing Engineering, Business, and Tourism and Hospitality Management degree programs. The cohorts were international and culturally diverse, including also international students from European and non-European countries.

A central pedagogical component of all four BIPs was collaborative student work on real-world case studies addressing sustainability challenges. These case studies were derived from actual projects and partner companies and were explicitly linked to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Students worked in interdisciplinary and intercultural teams to analyze complex sustainability problems, develop viable solutions, and reflect on the social, economic, and environmental implications of their proposals. This applied, problem-based approach was intended to situate learning within authentic global contexts and to encourage students to confront ambiguity, competing values, systemic interdependencies and cultural differences in teamwork and communication.

The study is guided by the following research questions:

(1) How do Blended Intensive Programs that integrate real-world sustainability case studies and teaching content about diversity, culture awareness and a global mindset contribute to students’ learning about global citizenship?

(2) To what extent do interdisciplinary, intercultural, and SDG-oriented learning settings foster transformative learning experiences?

(3) Which elements of the BIP design - particularly the use of authentic case studies - are perceived by students as most influential for perspective transformation and the development of global citizenship competences?

The objectives of the research are threefold. First, it aims to examine how students experience global citizenship learning within a blended, intensive, and sustainability-focused educational format. Second, it seeks to identify signs of transformative learning, such as shifts in perspectives, values, and self-perception, as reported by participants. Third, the study aims to contribute to research on innovative internationalization and sustainability education by providing empirical insights into the educational potential of BIPs.

The empirical material consists of feedback questionnaires collected after each BIP implementation as well as from students’ reflective essays written after the face-to-face intensive weeks. This data provides the basis for analyzing perceived learning outcomes and transformative effects and is described more in the methodology section.

The theoretical framework draws on theories of transformative teaching and learning. Mezirow’s theory of transformative learning, which emphasizes critical reflection on frames of reference triggered by disorienting dilemmas, provides the core conceptual lens (Mezirow, 1991; Mezirow & Taylor, 2009). This is complemented by approaches to transformative teaching that stress experiential, dialogical, and affective dimensions of learning as well as on the theory of planetary social pedagogy (Dirkx, 2001; Cranton, 2016; Salonen et al., 2023). Within this framework, real-world, SDG-related case studies in BIPs are understood as powerful catalysts for a transformation on a personal level, as they confront students with complex global sustainability challenges that demand reflexivity, collaboration, and ethical judgment.

Overall, the paper argues that BIPs integrating case studies offer a particularly effective pedagogical format for fostering transformative learning and global citizenship in higher education.