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, 21:30:10 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
01 SES 05 C
Paper Session
| ||
    | ||
01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper Dialogical Andragogy: A Professional Learning Model for Educational Leaders and Instructional Supervisors 1: MOFET Institute - The National Center for the Professional Development, Israel; 2: Kaye Academic College of Education, Beer-Sheva, Israel Presenting Author:Topic and Background This study examines an innovative professional learning and development model based on "dialogical andragogy" – a theoretical-practical framework tailored to the unique needs of adult learning in professional and organizational contexts. Professional development for educational leaders faces universal challenges across educational systems: maintaining intrinsic motivation, addressing diverse professional needs, and creating meaningful learning that impacts practice (Loeng, 2018; Sousa, 2024). Traditional training models often fail to account for the rich life experience and autonomous learning needs characteristic of adult learners in leadership positions. The dialogical andragogy model proposes a multidimensional approach that simultaneously addresses individual, interpersonal, and organizational dimensions of professional learning for educational supervisors and instructors. Theoretical Framework The study builds upon classical andragogical theory, which distinguishes adult learning from pedagogy through core assumptions: self-concept, prior experience, readiness to learn, intrinsic motivation, need to know, and problem-centered learning (Purwati et al., 2022; Yusuf, 2021). Sousa (2024) presents an integrated approach emphasizing active and meaningful learning that includes context, relevance, and practical application of knowledge. The model extends these principles by incorporating self-determined learning concepts and transformative learning theory, which emphasizes perspective transformation through disorienting dilemmas. Drawing on Malaguzzi's Reggio Emilia approach – a European educational philosophy emphasizing collaborative inquiry – the model proposes that meaningful adult learning occurs through three simultaneous dialogues: internal dialogue (self-reflection), dialogue with peers (collaborative learning), and dialogue with the organization and environment (contextual understanding). This aligns with developmental task theory, recognizing that adult learners in educational leadership roles seek expertise development relevant to their professional responsibilities. The model comprises three essential components: (1) Inspiring motivation – creating transformative dilemmas; (2) Developing expertise – providing practical tools and solutions; (3) Peer learning – leveraging shared experiences through collaborative processes. Korpela (2023) demonstrates that peer teachers provide personalized guidance and foster an environment of equality and mutual learning, while Qi (2023) emphasizes the importance of feedback and reflection processes. Recent research demonstrates that andragogical approaches enhance professional identity development and workplace effectiveness among educational leaders (Oliveira et al., 2024). Research Questions
Methodology The research employs instrumental case study methodology (Yin, 2018) examining a three-year professional development initiative (2019-2022) involving approximately 120 educational leaders—district supervisors and instructional coordinators—characterized by significant cultural and professional diversity: 90% women, 30% Arab-Bedouin educators, spanning early childhood to secondary education oversight. Data collection included semi-structured feedback questionnaires from nine feedback opportunities (958 responses), organizational documents, visual artifacts, and observations. Analysis followed thematic analysis principles (Braun & Clarke, 2006) with reliability ensured through triangulation and reflexive positioning (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). European/International Relevance This research addresses challenges universal to European educational systems: professional development for educational leadership in culturally diverse contexts, implementation of contemporary adult learning theories (Sousa, 2024), and creating sustainable models for continuous growth of supervisory personnel. The dialogical andragogy model demonstrates applicability across diverse educational leadership contexts. Findings on managing heterogeneous groups, fostering peer learning communities among educational leaders (Korpela, 2023), and balancing autonomy with organizational needs are directly relevant to European leaders implementing reforms aligned with EU lifelong learning frameworks for educational leadership development. Expected Contributions This study provides evidence-based insights for European educational policymakers and administrators, demonstrating how integrated andragogical approaches enhance professional identity and leadership practice (Oliveira et al., 2024), contributing to international discourse on effective adult learning for educational leadership in multicultural settings.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Research Design This study employs qualitative instrumental case study methodology as defined by Stake (1995), wherein the case serves as means to understanding dialogical andragogy implementation in professional development for educational leaders. The methodology enables holistic understanding while accounting for contextual factors: organizational structure, multicultural composition, and exceptional circumstances including the COVID-19 pandemic. The methodological flexibility allows integration of diverse information sources (Yin, 2018). Research Population and Context The research population comprises approximately 120 educational leaders, including 100 district supervisors and 20 instructional coordinators. These leaders hold significant responsibility for guiding teaching staff across their jurisdictions. The group demonstrates significant diversity: 90% women and 10% men; 30% Arab-Bedouin and 70% Jewish. Participants bring extensive professional experience across diverse specializations, from early childhood to secondary education. These educational leaders operate across vast geographical areas including urban and rural communities, different socioeconomic sectors, and diverse population centers, with each supervisor responsible for 20-25 school principals, enriching the research with varied educational leadership perspectives. Data Collection Instruments The primary instrument is content analysis of semi-structured feedback questionnaires collected over three years across nine opportunities, with 100-120 anonymous participants responding each time, totaling 958 questionnaires. Questionnaires included open-ended questions such as "What was most significant?" and "What would you suggest to improve?" enabling authentic expression. Additional instruments include organizational documents analysis encompassing work plans, steering committee protocols, and instructional materials; visual artifacts including posters, podcasts, and project proposals; and observations of professional development processes including conferences, learning journeys, and hackathons documenting group dynamics and collaborative learning among educational leaders. Data Analysis and Reliability Analysis followed thematic analysis principles according to Braun and Clarke (2006), including initial coding, grouping into themes, and re-examination against original data. The combination of instruments enables triangulation and comprehensive understanding of the professional development process. Internal reliability was achieved through triangulation following Lincoln and Guba's (1985) principles. To address potential bias from dual researcher-facilitator roles, Creswell and Creswell's (2018) reflexive approach was implemented emphasizing active search for contradictory evidence. Credibility is based on ethical principles: informed consent, anonymity, and data confidentiality. The study was approved by the institutional ethics committee. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study reveals significant findings regarding dialogical andragogy implementation for professional development of educational leaders. Analysis of 958 feedback questionnaires, organizational documents, and observations demonstrates substantial successes and meaningful challenges across the model's three components. Success in Creating Inspiration The first component successfully generated transformative learning experiences. Educational leaders reported perspective transformation through exposure to innovative pedagogical approaches, international experts, and unfamiliar learning environments. As one participant stated: "This created a consciousness change in me." The process effectively created "disorienting dilemmas" essential for transformative learning (Mezirow, 1997), broadening professional horizons and challenging existing assumptions about educational leadership. Developing Expertise and Skills The second component successfully connected learning to immediate professional leadership needs. Educational leaders developed expertise through active inquiry processes, international dialogues with educators, and practical methodologies applicable to their supervisory work with school principals and teaching staff. The learning was highly relevant: "Solutions directly impact my daily work." Participants expressed intentions to implement learned methodologies with their teams, demonstrating alignment between adult developmental tasks and professional expertise development (Havighurst, 1948). Peer Learning and Professional Identity The third component created strong learning communities and strengthened collective professional identity among educational leaders. Participants valued diverse interdisciplinary collaboration: "Working with colleagues from different fields provided new perspectives." The process connected individual learning with organizational implementation, though educational leaders expressed need for greater organizational continuity and senior leadership involvement. Key Challenges Three primary challenges emerged: time management tensions between learning depth and professional commitments; adaptation to heterogeneous audiences with varying knowledge levels; and organizational continuity gaps between learning processes and practical implementation in schools. Implications Findings demonstrate that dialogical andragogy effectively enhances educational leadership identity and practice (Oliveira et al., 2024) when properly implemented, offering transferable insights for European educational systems addressing similar diversity and professional development challenges. References Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. Havighurst, R. J. (1948). Developmental tasks and education. University of Chicago Press. Korpela, V., Pajula, L., & Hänninen, R. (2023). Older adults learning digital skills together: Peer tutors' perspectives on non‐formal digital support. Media and Communication, 11(3), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i3.6742 Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. Loeng, S. (2018). Various ways of understanding the concept of andragogy. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1496643. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1496643 Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.7401 Oliveira, M. A. M., Cordeiro, M. N., & Kulman, C. (2024). The approach of andragogy in a mechanical engineering course. In Themes focused on interdisciplinarity and sustainable development worldwide (Vol. 2). Seven Academic Publications. Purwati, D., Mardhiah, A., Nurhasanah, E., & Ramli, R. (2022). The six characteristics of andragogy and future research directions in EFL: A literature review. Elsya: Journal of English Language Studies, 4(1), 86-95. https://doi.org/10.31849/elsya.v4i1.7473 Sousa, R. R. A. de. (2024). Pedagogy and andragogy: Project-based education to promote active and meaningful learning. Revista Interseção, 6(1), 231-250. https://doi.org/10.48178/intersecao.v6i1.485 Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. Yusuf, M. A. (2021). Adult learning principles a strategy for improving instructional delivery in higher institutions of learning in Nigeria. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 15(1), 38-45. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJESS/2021/v15i130369 Qi, J. (2022). How people learn through peer learning. The International Conference on Interdisciplinary Humanities and Communication Studies. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/6/20220278 Castillo Silva, F. (2018). Andragogía, andragogos y sus aportaciones. Revista de Educación, 42(3), 15-27. 01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper The Impact of Leader Development Intervention on Abilities to Lead Multilocational Work 1: Tampere University, Finland; 2: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Finland Presenting Author:Multilocational has become a widespread practice in knowledge work following COVID-19. As leadership has been identified to be a critical factor in enabling effective multilocational work (Contreras et al., 2020), as well as supporting learning (Wallo et al., 2025) and well-being (Lundqvist & Wallo, 2023) of employees in multilocational work settings, targeted interventions that can enhance leaders’ competencies are in high demand. Although scholarly interest in this topic is growing in HR and leadership research (Mahadevan et al., 2025), to our knowledge, no existing training program has been specifically designed to address leadership in multilocational, nor has the impact of such program been empirically assessed. Our study addresses this gap by examining whether a peer group-based leader training intervention can enhance leaders’ abilities in leading multilocational. The proximal effects of the intervention were studied using pre-post survey design across four waves. Theoretically our study relies on Bandura's (1986) Social Learning Theory and Ajzen's (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior. Both theories emphasize individuals’ perceptions of their specific self-efficacies as key determinants of actual behavior. Besides self-efficacy, we focus on enhancing leaders’ abilities to cope with the possible obstacles and setbacks while leading multilocational work. Leaders’ resilience in overcoming challenges is, in fact, seen as an important personal resource that enables them to cope effectively with complexity and high job demands (Leithwood, 2023). The specific abilities targeted by the training intervention are derived from studies identifying the focal leadership factors for multilocational work (e.g., Hincapie & Costa, 2024, Lacroix et al., 2025, Mühlenbrock et al., 2023, Pianese et al., 2023, Wallo et al., 2025). Accordingly, the training focuses on three core leader abilities relevant in leading multilocational work: supporting employees’ learning and development, strengthening employees’ social capital, and supporting employees’ motivation and commitment. The change in leaders’ abilities is aimed to occur via utilizing peer learning as a primary pedagogical method. Despite its demonstrated potential to support well-being and motivation in challenging contexts (Tenenbaum et al., 2020), peer learning has remained relatively underexplored in leadership development research compared to coaching and mentoring programs (Larsson et al., 2018). In addition to specific abilities, previous intervention studies have introduced the concept of “preparedness,” which integrates individuals’ self-efficacy beliefs related to specific tasks with their readiness to handle potential setbacks (Pankkonen et al., 2025). As applied in leadership research, leaders who demonstrate high levels of preparedness exhibit both confidence in their leadership abilities and emotional resilience when facing challenges. In line with Meichenbaum’s (2007) cognitive stress inoculation framework, the training also emphasised preparation for setbacks by prompting participants to discuss the challenges they had faced in leading multilocational teams and to co-develop practical leadership solutions. We expected that the training intervention would increase leaders’ perceived abilities to H1) support employees’ learning, to H2) strengthen employees’ social capital, to H3) support employees’ motivation and commitment to organization, and H4) increase preparedness to handle leadership challenges in leading multilocational work. Furthermore, we expected that the increase in perceived abilities and preparedness would be maintained during and remain after the training intervention. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study participants were 28 leaders who led multilocational work, and they came from two public organizations (n = 12) and one private company (n = 16). Participants were on average 49.25 (SD = 8.50) years old and predominantly women (n = 18, 62.1%). They had on average 11.95 (SD = 8.19) years of leadership experience. Based on participants’ schedules, five groups, comprising 3–9 participants each, were formed. There were separate training groups for each organization. The training focused on the beforementioned three themes: 1) supporting employee learning and development, 2) strengthening the social capital of employees and teams, and 3) supporting employee motivation and commitment to organization. The training was designed to have an impact by combining individual reflection, social learning, and current research information through facilitation. The same two facilitators conducted all training sessions. The training comprised six sessions (90 min per), each addressing different aspects of multilocational work: 1) introduction and identification of main challenges, 2) ways to support employees’ learning, 3) ways to strengthen social capital of employees, 4) ways to support motivation and commitment of employees, 5) leaders’ own strengths, 6) a focus group interview on the training and its impact. The sessions were held monthly (excluding summer break) from April to October 2024, face-to-face in organizations’ spaces, and in groups of up to nine participants. Additionally, participants reported their implementations of identified solutions between the sessions. Participants completed four repeated surveys assessing their perceived abilities for supporting employee learning (3 items), strengthening social capital (3 items), supporting motivation and commitment to organization (4 items), and preparedness to handle leadership challenges in leading multilocational work (4 items). The internal consistency of the scales was found to be good to excellent (ω between .79–.95). The measurement timeline included a baseline assessment in April 2024 before the training. This was followed by the first post-intervention measurement in August 2024 after the intervention phase (sessions 1.–4.) and the second post-intervention measurement after the end of the training in October 2024. Finally, a follow-up measurement was conducted in December–January, approximately two months after the conclusion of the second intervention phase. The repeated measures design was used to evaluate the changes in the measured outcomes over time. Bayesian multilevel regression models were fitted using the R package brms (Bürkner, 2017). Control variables included organization type (public or private), age, gender, and leadership experience (years). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings According to the post-survey findings, the participants viewed that the training developed their abilities relatively well, provided new ideas and views, and was not overly burdensome. In addition, they perceived that there were active expression of ideas and propositions in the groups, the atmosphere was open and encouraging, and that the facilitators supported the activities well. These were important findings due to the intervention’s focus on group-based peer learning. Finally, participants reported that they would overwhelmingly recommend the training to other colleagues. Overall, the intervention demonstrated a credible positive effect on all four outcome variables, though the trajectory of change differed for each. The effects on the abilities to strengthen social capital and support motivation, as well as on the preparedness were credibly positive and sustained in all measurements during training and in the follow-up measurement. Regarding the ability of supporting learning, a short-term increase was observed after the first intervention phase, but the end measurement was not credibly different from baseline. Nevertheless, this gain reappeared at the two-month follow-up. In addition, the results suggested that the training was particularly beneficial for men in elevating abilities to strengthen social capital. The positive effect on preparedness to lead multilocational work was also influenced by participant characteristics: Women, leaders with less overall work experience, and those with more specific managerial experience reported higher levels of preparedness throughout the study. The findings highlight the importance of addressing preparedness to setbacks in order to support development of leadership skills, still a relatively under researched issue in literature. Furthermore, this study provides valuable practical information for work organizations regarding an effective and feasible method to support leaders’ abilities in navigating the complexities of multilocational work. References Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall. Bürkner, P-C. (2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80(1). Contreras, F., Baykal, E., & Abid, G. (2020). E-leadership and teleworking in times of COVID-19 and beyond: What we know and where do we go. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 590271. Hincapie, M. X., & Costa, P. (2024). Fostering hybrid team performance through inclusive leadership strategies. Organizational Dynamics, 53(3), 101072. Lacroix, A., Verbruggen, M., Baillien, E., De Winne, S., Delfim Andrade, M., & Van den Broeck, A. (2025). Great to speak to you in person: Face-to-face communication during office days relates to employee basic need satisfaction via job resources. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 583–599. Larsson, G., Bencker, A., Hyllengren, P., & Fors Brandebo, M. (2018). Leader development using group dynamic interventions: A systematic literature review. Scandinavian Psychologist, 5, e7. Lundqvist, D., & Wallo, A. (2023). Leadership and employee well-being and work performance when working from home: A systematic literature review. Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 1–9. Leithwood, K. (2023). The personal resources of successful leaders: A narrative review. Education Sciences, 13(9), 932. Mahadevan, J., Mayer, C. H., Bos-Nehles, A., & Syed, J. (2025). The remote work transformation: New actors, new contexts, new implications. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 36(10), 1653–1665. Mühlenbrock, I., Richter, G., Ellerkamp, A., & Wöhrmann, A. M. (2023). How does telework modify informal workplace learning and how can supervisors provide support? Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 54(3), 311–321. Pankkonen, O., Moazami-Goodarzi, A., & Vuori, J. (2025). Effects of a competence development intervention on informal learning and work engagement – A randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Training and Development, 49(10), 67–83. Pianese, T., Errichiello, L., & da Cunha, J. V. (2023). Organizational control in the context of remote working: A synthesis of empirical findings and a research agenda. European Management Review, 20(2), 326–345. Tenenbaum, H. R., Winstone, N. E., Leman, P. J., & Avery, R. E. (2020). How effective is peer interaction in facilitating learning? A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(7), 1303–1319. Wallo, A., Reineholm, C., Öhman, H., & Lundqvist, D. (2025). Learning-oriented leadership in hybrid work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 37(9), 152–168. 01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper Creative Agency: Empowering School Leaders with Imagination and Innovation through An Online Networked Learning Community The Education University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong S.A.R. (China) Presenting Author:Research objectives Digital technologies enable the expansion of learning communities from a single school to multiple schools (Shal et al., 2024). However, empirical understanding of such communities, both in Europe and globally, remains underdeveloped, particularly in the context of leadership development. In the ever-changing and uncertain contexts that school leaders navigate, they require a new mindset, skills, and capacities to enhance their schools and improve student outcomes (Fullan, 2020). This study focuses on the online component of a comprehensive leadership development program in Hong Kong SAR. Similar to the leadership development programmes in European countries, the development of school leaders in China addresses the needs of school leaders by emphasizing networked learning to help them transfer knowledge into their real work contexts (Sahlin, 2025; Shantal, 2014). The structured, online learning component of the program includes readings, video lectures, PowerPoint slides, and connection activities (CAs). CAs are Moodle forum activities that report on and investigate learning and experiences arising from various program components. CAs provide participants with opportunities to interact while reading, posting, and responding to peers, program organizers, and coaches. In this study, we investigated learning and experiences arising from CAs on Moodle. We sought to understand how the networked online learning community emerged and how it shaped school leaders’ engagement in the programme. Accordingly, the specific questions guiding our research were: RQ1. What is the nature of the online learning component of the leadership development programme? RQ2. How do school leaders and experts as coaches engage in the online learning component of the leadership development programme? We hypothesized that an online learning community with online coaching fosters collaborative online learning engagement (Luik & Požogina, 2025). The manner in which the findings can enable practitioners and scholars internationally to learn from the Chinese experience is discussed. Conceptual framework: Knowledge process model Through the intentional formation of ties, school leaders leverage their networks to acquire new knowledge and refine their leadership approaches, potentially fostering leadership learning and growth (Crawford, 2002; Floyd et al., 2025). Although boundary crossing carries learning potential (Engeström et al., 1995), participants often find it challenging to acquire, integrate, and generate new knowledge from diverse sources. Carlile (2004) found that shared knowledge is particularly beneficial for connecting units, enabling knowledge to be managed across boundaries and thereby stimulating innovation. Carlile's (2004) work on managing knowledge across boundaries is valuable here. Carlile (2002, 2004) identifies three models of knowledge processes that occur across boundaries: knowledge transfer, translation, and transformation. Knowledge transfer is the process of sharing knowledge. It lies in the information processing across boundaries and knowledge sources- receiver connections. Knowledge translation refers to the translation of ideas and methods into concepts that individuals can understand and apply in practice. Knowledge transformation is the process of adapting, integrating, and reshaping existing information to create new or altered knowledge. Participants typically integrate knowledge in multiple contexts in providing solutions. This landscape of expertise has been characterized as “polycontexturality” and “boundary-crossing” (Tuomi-Gröhn & Engeström, 2003). Learning across work teams significantly enhances the transfer of knowledge to their specific contexts (Baldwin & Ford, 1988). While knowledge flows across boundaries are possible, they do not occur without support (Hawkins & Rezazade, 2012). To address the challenges posed by knowledge boundaries, boundary brokers- individuals who connect different domains and facilitate the movement of knowledge between them (Carlile, 2004; Hawkins & Rezazade, 2012). The second mechanism involves boundary objects, identifiable, understandable, and sharable artefacts or activities meaningful to diverse groups of participants (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011). This theoretical perspective enables the authors to analyze different knowledge processes and reveal the underlying knowledge management mechanisms. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodology We employed digital ethnography developed from traditional ethnography to conduct online fieldwork as observers (Murthy, 2008), focusing on the online learning environment. Participants are to post/start at least one strand (a comment) on the Moodle Discussion Board representing their school team’ views, and to comment on others as they are posted over time, again based on joint school views rather than individual views. Moodle data were collected and analyzed to capture multilevel interactions and the growth of knowledge among school leaders. Data source In this study, we delved into data collected from the online learning community, comprising 63 school leaders and coaches (i.e., 26 expert principals and two program designers and lecturers). Text-based interactions among participants were captured in Moodle. The data collected through Moodle encompassed not only text-based interactions but also a variety of resources shared by participants, including articles, videos, and case studies. This extensive dataset enabled us to analyze the depth of collaboration and the processes of knowledge construction within the community. By exploring these interactions, we sought to reveal the process that enabled school leaders to lead innovation and change. Data analysis The study used content analysis to explore how the networked online learning community emerged. Content analysis enables systematic examination of learning in online discussions (Bowen, 2009). The analysis took the complete message a participant posts at a particular moment in the discussion as the unit of analysis. The coding of 298 messages captures the features relevant to the research questions, and the themes were constructed from the codes to identify patterns. Specifically, we identified the codes related to tools and learning-oriented achievement. These themes were analyzed in relation to Carlile’s (2002, 2004) model, which identifies three knowledge processes that occur across boundaries: knowledge transfer, translation, and transformation. This initial framework identifies general domains in which one can develop codes inductively to capture cross-system learning practices and their influences. We assigned initial codes under the guidance of the preliminary framework (descriptive codes and a priori codes). We then identified key analytic categories (interpretive codes) guided by the initial codes. We constructed thematic statements based on the earlier codes to demonstrate their meaning (theming the data). Inter-rater reliability is a critical concern in relation to content analysis (Rourke et al., 2001). Three independent coders coded 298 messages to enhance trustworthiness. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings In this study, we sought to understand how the structured, networked online learning community emerged and how it shaped school leaders’ engagement in the programme. Our analysis showed that the school leaders learned through asking and answering questions. The school leaders moved cognitively between schools to identify successful practices (Floyd et al., 2025) and incorporated elements from different contexts into school-improvement strategies, which corresponds to Engeström’s (1995) term “hybridization”. School leaders established knowledge-sharing ties, while experts promoted the diffusion of knowledge across schools by constructing shared meaning and facilitating subsequent implementation. The guiding discussion questions served as boundary objects, encouraging leaders to critically assess their current practices and strategies through a goal-oriented lens. School leaders appeared motivated to pinpoint specific, impactful initiatives that could drive tangible improvements in their educational settings. Our analysis suggested that the involvement of expert coaches and facilitators, combined with the provision of guiding questions, maximised learning opportunities in the program’s online learning components (Luik & Požogina, 2025). The structured discussion questions both spurred and focused interactions throughout the learning community and shaped a task-driven learning environment (Akkerman & Bakker, 2011; Hutchison & Colwell, 2012). This study identified the significant role of multilevel coaching as a knowledge broker to foster knowledge flow across schools (Hawkins & Rezazade, 2012). Within this environment, the coaches and facilitators could provide the support and encouragement necessary for school leaders to process new knowledge and to explore new areas (Goodyear et al., 2019). As new knowledge emerged from discussions and fed into the learning network, new opportunities to reflect on innovation and change within participants’ schools appeared. This dynamic interaction seemed to form a worthwhile model that incorporated the conditions under which school leaders could develop mindsets and capabilities for continuous personal and organizational improvement. References Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132-169. Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 41, 63–105. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal, 9(2), 27-40. Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455. Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555–568. Crawford, M. (2002). Enhancing school leadership: Evaluating the use of virtual learning communities. Educational Management & Administration, 30(4), 431-445. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5(4), 319–336. Floyd, A., Baxter, J., Morales, A., & Bari, R. (2025). Leading online learning during a pandemic and beyond: Challenges and opportunities for school leaders in England. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 53(4), 829-849. Fullan, M. (2020). The nature of leadership is changing. European Journal of Education, 55(2), 139-142. Hawkins, M. A., & Rezazade M, M. H. (2012). Knowledge boundary spanning process: Synthesizing four spanning mechanisms. Management Decision, 50(10), 1800-1815. Hutchison, A., & Colwell, J. (2012). Using a wiki to facilitate an online professional learning community for induction and mentoring teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 17(3), 273-289. Luik, P., & Požogina, K. (2025). Unleashing digital transformation: How a professional development programme can lead to change. European Journal of Education, 60(3), e70191. Murthy, D. (2008). Digital ethnography: An examination of the use of new technologies for social research. Sociology, 42(5), 837-855. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International journal of artificial intelligence in education, 12, 8-22. Sahlin, S. (2025). Professional development of school principals–how do experienced school leaders make sense of their professional learning?. Educational management administration & leadership, 53(2), 380-397. Shantal, K. M. A., Halttunen, L., & Pekka, K. (2014). Sources of principals’ leadership practices and areas training should emphasize: Case Finland. Journal of leadership Education, 13(2), 29-51. Tuomi-Gröhn, T., & Engeström, Y. (Eds.). (2003). Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing (pp. 123-135). Amsterdam: Pergamon. 01. Professional Learning and Development
Paper Student Assistants’ Support for Teachers in Secondary Education Improves Pupils’ Learning Outcomes: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial 1: KBA Nijmegen, Netherlands, The; 2: Utrecht University; 3: Leiden University; 4: Radboud University Presenting Author:Across Europe, secondary education systems face persistent challenges related to learning loss among pupils (i.e., students in secondary education) and increasing workload among teachers (OECD, 2021). These challenges have intensified in recent years, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, and have renewed attention to interventions that provide additional support within classrooms (Carlana, 2021; European Commission, 2022; OECD, 2022). While many European education systems have invested in such measures to address learning gaps and alleviate pressure on teachers, robust empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these interventions remains limited (Carlana, 2021; European Commission, 2022; OECD, 2022). This has increased interest in interventions that improve pupil learning under conditions of teacher shortages, high workload, and limited differentiation. The proposed presentation focuses on StudentinzetopSchool, an intervention in the Netherlands in which student assistants—higher education students not enrolled in teacher education programmes—support secondary school teachers after completing a compulsory three-hour training provided by academic teacher training programmes. These student assistants work within classrooms and provide support for the teacher, for example by working with individual pupils or small groups, or by other supporting classroom-related tasks. Importantly, these student assistants do not replace teachers, but function as supplementary support aimed at increasing instructional capacity within existing school structures. The intervention has a dual objective: its primary aim is to improve pupils’ learning outcomes, while a secondary objective is to reduce teachers’ perceived workload by redistributing tasks. The primary research question guiding the study is: What is the effect of student assistants’ support for teachers on pupils’ learning outcomes in secondary schools? In addition, the study includes exploratory analyses examining (a) whether teachers’ perceived workload changes during the intervention period, and (b) how variation in implementation-related conditions—such as task agreements, and the preparation of student assistants—may help explain differences in observed outcomes. By combining a focus on pupil outcomes with attention to teachers’ professional experiences and implementation processes, the study contributes to European discussions on evidence-informed educational interventions and professional support structures in schools. The theoretical framework draws on two complementary theoretical perspectives. First, research on tutoring and small-group instruction demonstrates that targeted instructional support can substantially improve pupil achievement, particularly when instruction is responsive to learners’ needs (Begeny et al., 2018; Nickow et al., 2020). This body of research highlights the potential of additional instructional capacity to facilitate differentiation and provide more individualised support, which is often difficult to achieve in traditional whole-class settings. It has been shown in different contexts that small-group tutoring can be as effective as one-on-one tutoring. Also, satisfactory results have been reported with small-group tutoring by student assistants . (Elbaum et al., 2000; Invernizzi et al., 1996; Wyatt & Chapman-DeSousa, 2017). Second, studies on the deployment of additional personnel in classrooms suggest that such support may influence teachers’ workload and professional experience, while emphasising the importance of clear task allocation and role differentiation (Blatchford et al., 2008). Prior research indicates that when roles and responsibilities are insufficiently defined, the deployment of additional personnel does not automatically lead to reduced workload or improved instructional quality, and may place additional demands on teachers’ coordination and supervision (Blatchford et al., 2008). Together, these perspectives highlight that both pupil outcomes and teachers’ workload are shaped not only by the presence of additional support, but also by how this support is organised in school practice. Accordingly, the theoretical framework focuses on implementation-related conditions—such as clear task agreements, the preparation of student assistants, and alignment between student assistants’ expertise and classroom needs—as key factors for understanding variation in outcomes (Devecchi & Rouse, 2010; Jackson et al., 2021). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study employed a mixed-methods design, combining a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with qualitative process data. This design enabled a rigorous assessment of the intervention’s effects on pupils’ learning outcomes, while also providing exploratory insights into implementation processes and perceived mechanisms underlying these effects (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; Schweizer et al, 2016). QUANTITATIVE DESIGN. The study is centred on a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in 18 secondary schools in the Netherlands. The design made use of parallel classes (two classes taught by the same teacher at the same grade level), which were randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition: one class formed the experimental group and received support from student assistants, while a comparable class served as the control group. For ethical reasons, the control group also received support from a student assistant after the intervention period. The intervention involved student assistants (higher education students not enrolled in teacher education programmes) who supported teachers for approximately four hours per week over a ten-week period. Student assistants provided instructional and organisational support, such as small-group tutoring, individual pupil support, and assistance with classroom-related tasks. They did not replace teachers but functioned as additional support. The primary outcome measure was pupils’ learning outcomes, operationalised as grades in the subject in which the intervention took place (e.g., mathematics, languages, history, or natural science subjects such as physics, chemistry, and biology). Grades from the school year prior to the intervention served as a baseline measure. Post-intervention grades were collected during and shortly after the intervention period. The analytic sample consisted of 1,777 pupils from intervention and control classes. Teachers’ perceived workload was measured using self-report questionnaires administered before and after the intervention period. In the absence of a control group, analyses of workload were treated as exploratory. QUALITATIVE METHODS. In addition to the quantitative data, qualitative focus groups were conducted with teachers, pupils, and student assistants. These focus groups explored participants’ experiences with the intervention, perceived effects, and conditions influencing successful implementation. Particular attention was paid to task division, collaboration between teachers and student assistants, and the subjective experiences of participants. ANALYTICAL APPROACH. Quantitative analyses focused primarily on estimating the intervention’s effect on pupils’ learning outcomes using pre–post comparisons between intervention and control classes, within a multilevel framework. Exploratory analyses examined associations between implementation characteristics and perceived outcomes. Qualitative data were analysed thematically to contextualise and interpret the quantitative findings. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This study provides robust evidence on the effects of deploying higher education students as student assistants to support teachers in secondary schools. Using a randomized controlled trial, the findings demonstrate a statistically significant positive effect of the intervention on pupils’ learning outcomes, with a small-to-moderate effect size. Importantly, these effects were achieved within the relatively short intervention period (10 weeks, 4 hours per week), indicating that student assistants can effectively contribute to pupils’ academic progress. In addition to these confirmatory findings, exploratory analyses suggest a reduction in teachers’ perceived workload during the intervention period. Exploratory findings indicate that the extent to which workload is reduced depends on contextual and implementation-related conditions. In particular, clear task agreements between teachers and student assistants, adequate guidance of student assistants, and alignment between student assistants’ subject expertise and classroom needs appear to be critical for successful implementation. Beyond immediate effects on pupils and teachers, the findings also point to potential longer-term implications related to professional orientation. Participation in the intervention appears to shape student assistants’ perceptions of the teaching profession, providing them with a more informed and realistic view of working as a teacher in secondary education. This suggests that such interventions may not only address short-term capacity challenges, but also contribute to future teacher recruitment. By combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the study enables a clear interpretation of intervention effects while providing context-sensitive insights into how and under which conditions these effects occur, contributing to European discussions on evidence-informed educational policy and practice. It highlights the potential of student support interventions as a feasible, low-cost strategy to enhance learning outcomes while supporting teachers facing increasing workload. At the same time, it underscores the importance of careful implementation to ensure that additional support translates into improvements in pupils’ learning outcomes and teachers’ professional practice. References Begeny, J. C., Levy, R. A., & Field, S. A. (2018). Using small-group instruction to improve students' reading fluency: An evaluation of the existing research. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 34(1), 36-64. Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., Brown, P., Martin, C., Russell, A., Webster, R., Babayiçit, S., & Haywood N. (2008). Deployment and impact of support staff in schools and the impact of the national agreement: results from strand 2 wave 1 - 2005/06. Institute of Education, University of London. Carlana, M., & La Ferrara, E. (2021). Apart but Connected: Online Tutoring and Student Outcomes during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Devecchi, C., & Rouse, M. (2010). An exploration of the features of effective collaboration between Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Tejero Hughes, M., & Watson Moody, S. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605. European Commission: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, Education and training monitor 2022 – Comparative report, Publications Office of the European Union, 2022. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. lnvernizzi, M., Juel, C., & Rosemary, C. A. (1996). A community volunteer tutorial that works. The Reading Teacher, 50(4), 304-311. Jackson, C., Sharma, U., Odier-Guedj, D., & Deppeler, J. (2021). Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Work with Teacher Assistants: A Systematic Literature Review. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(11). Nickow, A., Oreopoupos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). The impressive effects of tutoring in PreK-12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. NBER Working Series, 27476. OECD. (2021). Teachers getting the best out of their student: From primary to upper secondary education. Paris: TALIS, OECD Publishing. OECD et al. (2022). From Learning Recovery to Education Transformation: Insights and Reflections from the 4th Survey of National Education Responses to COVID-19 School Closures, UNICEF, New York Schweizer, M. L., Braun, B. I., & Milstone, A. M. (2016). Research methods in healthcare epidemiology and antimicrobial stewardship—quasi-experimental designs. Infection control & hospital epidemiology, 37(10), 1135-1140. Wyatt, T., & Chapman-DeSousa, B. (2017). Teaching as interaction: Challenges in transitioning teachers' instruction to small groups. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(1), 61-70. | ||