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, 20:16:09 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
10 SES 08 D: Digital, STEM, and Subject-Specific Teacher Preparation
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Pre-service Teachers’ Professional Digital Competence - A Scoping Review University of South-Eastern Norway, Norway Presenting Author:Choice of Network: first choice 10, second choice 16 Abstract This study explores what existing research reveals about pre-service teachers’ professional digital competence. As digital technologies increasingly shape everyday life, teaching and learning, it is essential to understand how pre-service teachers perceive and develop this competence. This review synthesises findings from 28 studies to identify current knowledge, trends and gaps related to pre-service teachers’ professional digital competence. Preliminary findings suggest that pre-service teachers rate their technological competence higher than their digital-pedagogical competence. Although many pre-service teachers report a high level of technological competence, many remain uncertain about their readiness to teach in digitally integrated classrooms, highlighting a gap between technical skills and digital pedagogical practice. Proposal: Digital competence has been highlighted both in global and national policy documents in recent decades as a vital competence for everyone in our digitalised society. Across these policy frameworks, PDC is presented as a central requirement for teachers, yet little is known about how pre-service teachers themselves understand and develop this competence. In parallel, professional digital competence (PDC) has emerged as an important topic and as separate research area and is increasingly included in teacher education as mandatory or recommended topics (Janes et al., 2023). Here the term professional implying the digital competence needed to perform within the context of a specific profession, in this case the teaching profession. In Norway, PDC was included in policy documents on teacher education from 2017 and in the Knowledge Promotion reform in 2006 through the introduction of digital skills as one of five basic skills. While we have research on how PDC is facilitated at various teacher education institutions (Hjukse et al., 2020; Nagel, 2024) and hence know something about what the intention with both policy and curriculum has been. We have knowledge of both teacher educators', and teachers' PDC (Lindfors et al., 2021; Löfving, 2025), far less is known about pre-service teachers’ (PSTs’) understanding of PDC. PDC is characterised in research as complex and elusive as different concepts are being used for this specific competence (Skantz-Åberg et al., 2022). Both teacher educators and teachers express that they are unsure of what PDC entails and what their role as professionally digital competent teachers entails (Löfving, 2025; Nagel, 2024). Some research has shown that both teacher educators and in-service teachers have a somewhat technology-based and instrumentalist view of PDC (Hjukse et al., 2020; Nagel, 2024), hence it is relevant to explore whether this is something we also find reflected in PSTs. How PSTs perceive PDC is important for several reasons. One reason is to know whether the PST’s competence and understanding will meet the objectives as addressed in policy documents on education and in the learning outcomes in teacher education. Another reason lies in the fact that it is these PSTs who will soon teach in schools and preferably ensure that students are equipped with an increasingly important competence in navigating a thoroughly digitalised world, where not only instrumental-technical competence is important, but where being both innovative and exploratory, but also critically reflective is important competences. This leads to my research question: What is known about pre-service teachers’ professional digital competence in teacher education? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Method The study is designed as a scoping review drawing on Arksey & O’Malley’s (2005) established methodological framework for mapping and synthesising research literature. The scoping review was guided by the research question, which directed the identification, selection and analysis of relevant literature. The search strategy was developed to capture the breadth of existing research addressing pre-service teachers and their professional digital competence. The inclusion criteria were defined in alignment with the research question and developed using the PCC framework: population, concept and context. The criteria were focused on peer-reviewed studies addressing pre-service teachers aiming at teaching grades 1–13: primary and secondary education, and their professional digital competence within teacher education programmes. The term professional digital competence is central in this review as it refers specifically to digital competence within the teaching profession. The term is widely used in academic and policy discourse, especially in later years, but as discussed, other terms like skills and literacy might be used in the literature and were included in the search, adding to the complexity. A systematic search in key educational research databases was conducted, and studies published between 2004–2025 available in English or a Scandinavian language were included. The included studies were charted and analysed thematically guided by the research question to explore how professional digital competence is conceptualised and discussed in relation to pre-service teachers in teacher education, and finally a total of 28 studies were included in this sample. A scoping review is exploratory by nature and is suitable for capturing the use of concepts and how they are understood by groups, and for exploring and summarising studies in an emerging field (Colquhoun et al., 2014), like what knowledge we have on pre-service teachers’ professional digital competence. A scoping review is well suited for discovering gaps in research literature and provide clarity about a specific topic (Davis et al., 2009). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Findings: The findings show a predominance of European and Asian studies while studies from South America and Oceania are absent in this sample. The studies included were published in 2016 (1), 2018–2021 (5) and 2022–2025 (22). As the study is in progress, findings and preliminary analyses for this paper represent tentative insights rather than definitive conclusions. One of these preliminary results hints that PSTs perceive their technological competence to be higher than their digital pedagogical competence. Several studies indicate that PSTs tend to overestimate their competencies, especially their technological competencies. This phenomenon is addressed in several studies, either by commenting the specific scores, or addressing the possibility of the students overestimating when researchers compare their findings to other studies. Besides the possibility that PSTs overestimate their technological competence, the findings may also indicate that they do not feel prepared for teaching in a digitalised school (Al-Abdullatif, 2019). Several studies illustrate that PSTs self-perception of digital competence is often misaligned with the competencies required for professional teaching. In a study by Davis & Jones (2022) students came to realize that their personal familiarity with technology did not necessarily render them professionally competent with technology. Similarly, Almås et al. (2021) found that PSTs often leaned heavily on the notion of having grown up digital and therefore assumed they were fully capable of teaching in a digitalised school. A third study by Dolezal et al. (2025) showed that PSTs with some teaching experience perceived themselves as less prepared for digital teaching than those without such experience, suggesting that PSTs exposed to real classroom demands may understand the complexity of PDC differently. This preliminary analysis suggests emerging patterns that indicate inconsistencies in how PSTs conceptualise their professional digital readiness and point to specific knowledge gaps the study will further clarify. References Al-Abdullatif, A. M. (2019). Auditing the TPACK confidence of pre-service teachers: The case of Saudi Arabia. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3393–3413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09924-0 Almås, A. G., Bueie, A. A., & Aagaard, T. (2021). From digital competence to Professional Digital Competence: Student teachers’ experiences of and reflections on how teacher education prepares them for working life. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education, 5(4), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.4233 Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 Colquhoun, H. L., Levac, D., O’Brien, K. K., Straus, S., Tricco, A. C., Perrier, L., Kastner, M., & Moher, D. (2014). Scoping reviews: Time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(12), 1291–1294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013 Davis, C., & Jones, P. (2022). Digital Literacy Skills Among Black Pre-Service Florida Teachers. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TEACHER EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJTEPD.295544 Davis, K., Drey, N., & Gould, D. (2009). What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(10), 1386–1400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010 Dolezal, D., Motschnig, R., & Ambros, R. (2025). Pre-Service Teachers’ Digital Competence: A Call for Action. EDUCATION SCIENCES, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020160 Hjukse, H., Aagaard, T., Bueie, A. A., Moser, T., & Vika, K. S. (2020). Digitalisering i grunnskolelærerutdanningen: Om faglige forskjeller i arbeidet med profesjonsfaglig digital kompetanse. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8023 Janes, A., Madsen, S., Saure, H., Lie, M., Gjesdal, B., Thorvaldsen, S., Brito, R., Krasin, S., Jwaifell, M., Konca, A., & Klancar, A. (2023). Preliminary Results from Norway, Slovenia, Portugal, Turkey, Ukraine, and Jordan: Investigating Pre-Service Teachers’ Expected Use of Digital Technology When Becoming Teachers. EDUCATION SCIENCES, 13(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080783 Lindfors, M., Pettersson, F., & Olofsson, A. D. (2021). Conditions for professional digital competence: The teacher educators’ view. Education Inquiry, 12(4), 390–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2021.1890936 Löfving, C. (2025). Catering for Student Digital Competence—Teachers navigating the complexities of digital-infused education [Doctoral thesis, University of Gothenburg]. https://hdl.handle.net/2077/84928 Nagel, I. M. L. (2024). Professional Digital Competence in Norwegian Teacher Education Policy and Practice: Teacher Educators’ Professionalism in the Post-digital Age [Doctoral thesis, University of Oslo]. Universitetet i Oslo. Professional Digital Competence in Norwegian Teacher Education Policy and Practice: Teacher Educators’ Professionalism in the Post-digital Age Skantz-Åberg, E., Lantz-Andersson, A., Lundin, M., & Williams, P. (2022). Teachers’ professional digital competence: An overview of conceptualisations in the literature. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2063224. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2063224 10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Addressing Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Beliefs During SSI-Based Instruction Middle East Technical University, Turkey (Türkiye) Presenting Author:One of the main goals of science education is to promote scientific literacy, by helping students become informed, responsible citizens who can navigate the rapidly growing scientific and technological developments (Sadler, 2004). Currently, SSI-based teaching is considered an effective way to foster scientific literacy (Roberts & Bybee, 2014; Zeidler & Sadler, 2011). SSI are complex, open-ended social issues connected to science, involving ethical, political, and economic dimensions so that students could gain a better understanding of the complex relationship between science and society (Sadler, 2004). Research shows that teaching SSI can help students develop skills such as critical thinking, decision-making, argumentation, reflective judgment, and moral development (e.g., Sadler, 2004; Zeidler et al., 2011). By using these skills students will have ability to make informed judgments about SSI (Zeidler, 2014). In this context, understanding how teachers approach SSI in their science courses sees as important in developing about mentioned skills. According to Luft and Roehrig (2007), teacher beliefs about teaching are context-dependent and dynamic, influenced by reflection and experience. By accepting these belief characteristics in this study changes in science teachers’ beliefs about SSI teaching throughout the SSI-based instructional were addressed. Furthermore, previous studies have found that science teachers' existing beliefs about science teaching may influence how they perceive and implement SSI-based instruction (Lee et al., 2006; Levinson & Turner, 2001). This implies that beliefs regarding SSI teaching may not develop independently, but rather through reinterpretation or restructuring of pre-existing science teaching beliefs. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the dynamic interaction between general science pedagogy and issue-based instructional approaches can be achieved by investigating how PSTs' beliefs regarding SSI change throughout the course of an interdisciplinary science teaching course. In this study, an interdisciplinary science teaching course was examined in addressing shift in PST’ beliefs and practices for science teaching and SSI-based instruction. In fact, "SSI-based instruction has emerged as an effective way for students to contextualize their science learning within a complex social and political context" (Hancock et al., 2019, p. 640). While considering the SSI teaching and learning framework developed by Sadler et. al (2007), the course was addressing focal issues in connection with science and societal aspects, emphasizing multiple perspectives in argumentation to communicate science ideas and scientific practices. The aim of this teaching and learning activities was to enable PSTs to synthesize key ideas and practices and develop teaching beliefs with respect to SSI-based science instruction. PSTs’ beliefs of SSI-based instruction have been the main focus of previous SSI research, which has highlighted how these beliefs influence instructional choices and classroom practices. Nevertheless, little focus has been placed on how these beliefs relate to aims of teaching science. To learn more about how PST negotiate and integrate these beliefs in practice, it is necessary to investigate the relationships between their beliefs and practices about both science teaching and SSI-based instruction. In order to prepare future educators for the combined challenge of teaching disciplinary subjects and engaging students with SSI, science teacher preparation programs have to close this gap. The research question addressed in this study was: How do preservice science teachers’ beliefs and practices about science teaching and SSI-based instruction change through SSI focused interdisciplinary science teaching course? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used A qualitative case study design was used. 38 fourth year pre-service science teachers (PSTs), including 34 females and 4 males, were enrolled in an undergraduate course and 10 of them volunteered for interviews conducted at the beginning and end of the course. The course covers the development of scientific theories, recent scientific and technological advancements, SSI and teaching, as well as issues related to current and future scientific and technological progress. It focuses on four main components: weekly discussion questions, design-based lesson plans, group lesson plans, and SSI-based microteaching. Among these interview participants, one was male and nine were female. Ethical approval was obtained from the university’s Human Subject Ethics Committee before data collection. A semi-structured interview protocol was used to examine changes in PSTs' teaching beliefs regarding SSI teaching. The protocol was originally developed by Luft and Roehrig (2007) to explore teacher beliefs; for this study, this protocol was modified to address PST’ SSI teaching beliefs. Expert opinion was obtained to ensure the validity of the changes applied to the protocol. As a result, two semi-structured interview protocols (pre and post) were developed: pre interview used at the beginning (included 17 questions) and post interview used at the end of the course (included 17 questions and 5 new questions). While the pre-interviews explored PSTs’ initial beliefs and pedagogical intentions, the post-interviews examined how these beliefs changed after engaging in SSI-based instruction. Example questions included: How do your students learn science best? (Science Context), and how do your students learn science best in the context of SSI? (SSI Context). What are some areas of your teaching you would like to improve on SSI teaching? The constant comparative analysis was used to analyze interview data. Open coding was used to separate the interview transcripts into discrete data sections, and codes were created, then compared to look for trends, similarities, and conflicts. The study employed both inductive and deductive coding methods. These initial codes were then organized into conceptually related categories. The categories were then rearranged into four main themes after being examined for broader patterns. This process ensured a hierarchical structure from codes to themes. Some pre-existing codes on teacher beliefs, science teaching, and SSI teaching drawn from relevant literature were also used. To ensure the reliability of the coding process, inter-rater reliability was calculated at 87% with a science education expert. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Analysis of interview data revealed four themes, fourteen categories: Instructional strategy, assessment, teachers’ teaching skills, and challenges for teachers. Instructional Strategies The instructional strategies theme included categories about how PSTs constructed their instructional strategies for science and SSI teaching before and after participating in the SSI-based course. This theme was comprised of four categories: Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK), Teachers’ Content Knowledge (CK), Understanding of Learner, and Use of Resources. Assessment Strategies The theme included diagnostic, formative, summative, and alternative assessments. Diagnostic tools like prerequisite questions and two-tier tests were common in science teaching but rare in SSI context. Formative tools, such as questioning and observing during argumentation, were used more and increased in SSI. Summative assessment noted a significant shift: although homework and exams were widespread in science teaching, they were absent in SSI, replaced by a major emphasis on assessing argumentation quality. Teachers’ Teaching Skills This theme included three categories: SSI skills, SSI learning environment, and inquiry-based science teaching environment. PSTs' awareness of the skills needed to effectively involve students in SSI-based instruction increased after the course. Emphasis on problem-solving skills was highly increased in the SSI-based instruction, but it was limited in science teaching. This finding support better understanding of the significance of negotiating complex real-life issues in SSI-based instruction. Challenges for Teachers Four categories were formed challenges faced by teachers, deficiencies in argumentation, role of the teacher, and suggestions for improvement. At the beginning of the SSI-focused course, PSTs felt they were insufficient in curriculum design and selecting appropriate assessment codes. However, by the end of the course, they perceived themselves as more capable, demonstrating a shift towards an SSI-oriented perspective. Interestingly, the findings indicated that, by the conclusion of the course, no reports were suggesting that the curriculum was inadequate for SSI. References Hancock, T. S., Friedrichsen, P. J., Kinslow, A. T., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). Selecting Socio-scientific Issues for Teaching. Science & Education, 28(6), 639–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00065-x Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Math, Science & Technology Education, 6(2), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150609556691. Levinson, R. & Turner, S. (2001). The teaching of social and ethical issues in the school curriculum, arising from developments in biomedical research: A research study of teachers. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Luft, J., & Roehrig, G. (2007). Capturing science teachers’ epistemological beliefs: The development of the teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 38-63. Roberts, D., & Bybee, R. (2014). Scientific literacy, science literacy and science education. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell, Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 545-558). New York: Routledge. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009 Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 697–726). Routledge. Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). An inclusive view of scientific literacy. In Linder, C., Östman, L., Roberts, D. A., Wickman, P.-O., Ericksen, G., & MacKinnon, A. Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy. (pp. 176-192). Taylor & Francis. Zeidler, D. L., Applebaum, S. M., & Sadler, T. D. (2011). Enacting a socioscientific issues classroom: Transformative transformations. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socioscientific issues in the classroom (pp. 277– 305). Springer. 10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Knowing and Acting Through Metacognitive Scaffolding: A Classroom Action Research Study in English-Medium Instruction 1: NIS-Turkistan, Kazakhstan; 2: No. 32 school in Turkistan, Kazakhstan; 3: No.78 school in Saryagash, Kazakhstan Presenting Author:This paper focuses on a classroom-based action research project that examines the role of planned scaffolding in fostering metacognitive strategies of EMI (English-Medium Instruction) students. EMI has expanded dramatically in Europe and internationally because of globalisation, the internationalisation of education, and increased student mobility (Dearden, 2015; Macaro et al., 2018). While EMI has conventionally been associated with tertiary education, analogous processes are increasingly documented in secondary education, where students are required to access integrated disciplinary knowledge through a foreign language. These circumstances prompt vital questions about justice, epistemic access, and learner empowerment, particularly in multilingual contexts. In modern educational settings characterised by digitalisation, increased external control, and epistemic uncertainty, learners are expected not only to gain subject-specific knowledge but also to monitor, regulate, and evaluate their own learning processes (Zimmerman, 2002). In line with the ECER 2026 conference theme Knowing and Acting, this paper understands metacognition as the bridge between knowing what one knows and knowing what to do with that knowledge. The study thus contributes to European and international discussions on how education research can respond to changing conditions of knowledge production and use, particularly in multilingual and high-stakes educational contexts. The research context is situated in a secondary school EMI classroom that mirrors broader European challenges related to multilingualism, inclusion, and educational quality. Similar contexts can be identified across many European education systems where English functions as a lingua franca of instruction, often intersecting with national language policies, curriculum development, and international benchmarking practices (European Commission, 2020). Although the research is conducted at the classroom level, this micro-level focus enables the generation of transferable insights applicable to a wide range of European and international contexts. The central research question guiding the study is: How does intentional instructional scaffolding impact the development of students’ metacognitive awareness and self-regulatory actions in English-medium instruction classrooms? This overarching research question is underpinned by the following sub-questions:
The theoretical framework of the study draws on metacognition theory as articulated by Flavell (1979), particularly the distinction between metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. In addition, the study is informed by sociocultural perspectives on learning, which conceptualise cognition as socially mediated through language, tools, and interaction (Vygotsky, 1978). From this perspective, instructional scaffolding is understood as a means of externalising cognition, supporting participation, and fostering learner autonomy—key priorities in European policy discussions on inclusive and future-oriented education. The study is further grounded in traditions of action research and practitioner inquiry, which position teachers as reflective professionals and legitimate producers of educational knowledge (Elliott, 1991; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). This orientation resonates with ECER’s emphasis on recognising diverse forms of knowledge production beyond large-scale data and standardised indicators. By foregrounding qualitative, process-oriented forms of evidence—such as students’ annotations, teacher observations, and learning artefacts—the study challenges dominant performative logics that prioritise measurement over meaning (Biesta, 2010). In doing so, it contributes to a more pluralistic understanding of what counts as evidence in education research. Overall, the paper argues that fostering metacognitive awareness through intentional scaffolding enables learners to navigate uncertainty, exercise epistemic responsibility, and move from knowing to acting, while simultaneously supporting teachers’ professional learning and reinforcing the public value of education research in Europe and beyond. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodology / Methods This study employs a qualitative action research methodology, positioning the teacher as a reflective practitioner and knowledge producer within an authentic classroom context (Elliott, 1991). Action research was selected as it enables systematic inquiry into teaching and learning practices while simultaneously supporting professional learning and pedagogical improvement (Burns, 2010). The research followed iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection, allowing for continuous adjustment of instructional strategies in response to students’ learning needs. The study was conducted in a secondary school English-medium instruction (EMI) classroom, where subject content is taught through English as an additional language. Participants included one intact class of students and the classroom teacher-researcher. Ethical considerations were addressed in accordance with institutional guidelines, including informed consent, voluntary participation, anonymity, and the use of data solely for research purposes. The intervention focused on the implementation of intentional instructional scaffolding tools designed to foster metacognitive awareness and self-regulation (Flavell, 1979; Zimmerman, 2002). These tools were embedded within regular classroom practice and included: 1. a brief planning organiser completed before tasks to support goal setting; 2. teacher think-aloud modelling to externalise cognitive and metacognitive processes; 3. a reduced annotation system using agreed symbols to enable students to signal understanding, uncertainty, and the need for clarification during learning; and 4. structured exit tickets to prompt post-task reflection. Data were collected from multiple sources to ensure methodological triangulation (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). Primary data sources included student learning artefacts, teacher observation notes guided by a structured checklist, and the teacher’s reflective journal documenting pedagogical decisions and emerging insights across action research cycles. Data analysis was conducted through thematic analysis, focusing on patterns related to students’ metacognitive monitoring, regulation, and evaluative actions. Rather than aiming for generalisation, the study prioritises contextual validity and transferability, offering practice-based insights relevant to EMI classrooms across diverse European and international settings. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The findings of this study indicate that deliberate instructional scaffolding holds significant potential for supporting students in translating metacognitive awareness into strategic learning actions in English-medium instruction contexts. By making metacognition visible through tools such as planning organisers, annotation symbols, and reflective exit tickets, learners demonstrated increased capacity to recognise understanding, identify uncertainty, and respond to learning difficulties in real time (Flavell, 1979; Zimmerman, 2002). These findings suggest a shift from passive engagement towards greater epistemic agency. In EMI classrooms, where linguistic demands may constrain verbal participation, the use of low-threshold, non-verbal scaffolding tools enabled students to communicate learning needs without stigma. This aligns with sociocultural perspectives that emphasise participation and mediation as central to learning (Vygotsky, 1978; Mercer & Littleton, 2007) and suggests that metacognitive scaffolding can contribute to more inclusive and equitable learning environments. At the professional level, the action research process supported the teacher’s reflective practice and strengthened their role as a producer of situated educational knowledge (Elliott, 1991; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009). Through iterative cycles of inquiry, the teacher developed a more nuanced understanding of how instructional decisions shape students’ ways of knowing and acting. In relation to the ECER 2026 theme Knowing and Acting, the study demonstrates how classroom-based, practitioner-led research can meaningfully address epistemic uncertainty and complexity in contemporary education systems. By prioritising process-oriented evidence and contextual validity, the paper contributes to broader European and international debates on how education research can remain ethically grounded, socially responsive, and publicly valuable in changing conditions of knowledge production and use (Biesta, 2010; Morin & Kern, 1999). References Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2 Hattie, J., & Donoghue, G. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1(1), Article 16013. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13 Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge. Nilsson, P. (2014). When teaching makes a difference: Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through action research. Educational Action Research, 22(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2013.854175 Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press. Dearden, J. (2015). English as a medium of instruction: A growing global phenomenon. British Council. Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444817000350 Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Paradigm Publishers. Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Open University Press. European Commission. (2020). Achieving the European Education Area by 2025. Publications Office of the European Union. https://education.ec.europa.eu Morin, E., & Kern, A. B. (1999). Homeland Earth: A manifesto for the new millennium. Hampton Press. | ||