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).
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
10 SES 07 E: International Perspectives on Teacher Education: From Policy to Classroom Practice
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Bridging Knowing and Acting: The Erasmus+ Teacher Academies as Innovative Policy Action on European Teacher-Education 1: UCD Dublin, Ireland; 2: University College of Teacher Education Vienna, Austria; 3: University of Warsaw Presenting Author:Teacher education in Europe currently operates within a paradoxical landscape: it faces unprecedented political scrutiny while simultaneously being positioned as the primary mechanism for addressing complex societal challenges including digital transformation, sustainability, and educational equity. This tension has generated a critical need for new governance models that can bridge the gap between research, practice, and policy. This paper explores the shifting landscape of European teacher education through the lens of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies (ETAs) within the context of the European Education Area (EEA) and the broader challenges of researching and enhancing teacher education practices and experiences. While European governments all too frequently question the quality of teacher education, there is nonetheless a growing consensus among policy makers that teacher quality is the cornerstone of improved educational outcomes and pupil achievement (OECD 2025; Binder 2024) . This paper proposes to examines how the ETAs represent a novel "knowing and acting" framework – moving policy-work for teacher education beyond traditional research to create innovative policy actions and bespoke communities of learning within a bounded space cultivated by the European Commission. Drawing from research and conceptual analysis that started early in the life of the intervention much of which has been completed by contributors to this paper (see Galvin et al., 2024) and from a significant publication on the implication of academies for teacher education governance (Sorensen & Graf 2024), we examine how these academies foster experimentalist governance (Sabel & Zeitlin, 2010) by including bottom-up, teacher-centred research into EU policy-making. Additionally, we consider the implications of the largely positive and celebratory Assessment of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies Initiative Report (PPMI 2025) which focuses on the first and second cycle Academies. This was recently completed by the European Commission and presented in preliminary form at a Policy event in June 2025. This paper discusses the European Teacher Academies (ETAs) initiative as a potentially transformative policy-led framework that is actively reshaping standards and approaches in teacher education across Europe. As an ongoing initiative with significant implications for future practice, the ETAs represent a timely and important case for understanding how European educational policy is evolving to address the contradictions inherent in contemporary teacher education. Additionally, we discuss the Commission's position that reframing teacher education practices and strengthening national-level policy alignment are essential for the long-term sustainability of research-informed transformation; an often-unspoken but defining aspect of the Academies action. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used We open with a focused analysis examining determining features of the Teacher Academies Initiative – its goals, approaches, and intended outcomes as a Commission policy activity. This analysis presents a clear understanding of the complexities involved in researching the initiative, particularly the challenges of studying key aspects of teacher education and its changing modalities against a background of surprising Commission disinterest. Our analysis draws on considerable insight assembled over three years as both participants in and critical observers of academies and their practices. Nest, we pursue three interconnected lines of inquiry, each offering distinct analytical value: First, we consider the policy influence paradox. When academies emphasize policy advocacy, establishing whether they actually influence educational policy at national and European levels becomes analytically challenging. As Andrews (2022, p1) observes, defining success, and working toward it, remains inherently difficult. Our discussion illuminates the gap between policy production and demonstrable influence in the Academies context. Second, we discuss the multilingualism and cultural diversity challenge. Examining Academy expectations related to multilingualism and cultural diversity exposes a baseline awareness problem. In contemporary Europe, marked by rising populism and cultural tensions, gauging authentic progress becomes especially problematic yet crucial. We identify both opportunities and challenges for Academies in this domain. Third, we address the sustainability question. Our work for this paper has highlighted the importance and urgency of Academy legacy and maintaining accessible educational resources long-term. While projects possess expertise to create pedagogically sound materials, researching their lasting impact presents significant challenges. These three lines of inquiry reveal substantive questions about rigorously researching ambitious educational interventions. In the paper's second part, time permitting, we discuss implications of the Assessment of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies Initiative Report (PPMI 2025). Drawing from publicly available results, we address the problematic now facing European teacher educators as a professional community: research generation is intended as a core function of these networks. Critically, research produced within European Teacher Academies is designed to directly inform policy development at multiple governance levels – local, national, and European – creating feedback loops between practice-based inquiry and policy formation. Our overall assessment is that this unfortunately remains far from the lived reality of the Teacher Academies initiative to date. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The Erasmus+ Teacher Academies (ETAs) initiative represent a pivotal shift in how ‘knowing & acting’ are integrated within EU policy work European teacher education. By positioning teacher quality as the fundamental cornerstone of educational achievement, these academies attempt to move beyond traditional practice and paradigms to foster innovative policy action. As a novel and we suggest significant intervention supporting the EEA objectives they serve as a mechanism for experimentalist governance, aiming to bridge the persistent gap between bottom-up, teacher-educator community practice & values and top-level EU policy-making. While the Assessment of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies Initiative Report (2025) presents a limited but celebratory view of the first two cycles, a more critical examination reveals a complex policy influence paradox. The Commission’s position underscores that the long-term sustainability of these research-informed transformations depends on strengthening national-level policy alignment and reframing professional practices – an often-unspoken yet defining goal of the action. However, findings suggest a significant disconnect remains between the intended function of these networks – where practice-based inquiry is designed to inform multi-level policy development – and the current lived reality of the initiative to date. Furthermore, the potential of education research in this domain is currently hindered by challenges regarding resource sustainability, cultural diversity, and an initial lack of engagement from the wider teacher education community. For the ETAs to successfully navigate the contradictions of contemporary education, they must move beyond the mere production of policy to achieve demonstrable influence at the national level. This paper proposes that while the ETAs provide a unique "bounded space" for innovation, their success as a transformative framework requires a more rigorous integration of "knowing" and "acting" and full policy process participation by the European Teacher Education community to ensure that teacher-educator knowledge & values truly shape the future of European education policy. References Andrews, R. (2022). Defining success in educational advocacy; What is public policy success, Especially in development? HKS Working Paper No. RWP22-015, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4233392 Ball, S. J. (2012). Politics and policy making in education: Explorations in sociology. Routledge. Binder, K. (2024). Teachers: Key to achieving the European education area [Briefing]. European Parliamentary Research Service. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2024)762284. European Commission. (2025). Working groups of the EEA strategic framework. European Education Area. https://education.ec.europa.eu/about-eea/working-groups Galvin, C., Madalińska-Michalak, J., & Revyakina, E. (2024). The European Union Erasmus+ Teacher Academies action: Complementing and supplementing European teacher education and teacher education research? In V. Symeonidis (Ed.), Enhancing the value of teacher education research (pp. 170-197). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004689992_009 Menter, I., & Flores, M. A. (2021). Teacher education, teacher professionalism and research: International trends, future directions. European Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1850550. OECD. (2025). Unlocking high-quality teaching. OECD Publishing PPMI. (2025). Assessment of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies initiative: Executive summary of the draft final report. European Commission Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J. (2008). Learning from difference: The new architecture of experimentalist governance in the EU. European Law Journal, 14(3), 271–327 Sabel, C. F., & Zeitlin, J. (2010). Learning from difference: The new architecture of experimentalist governance in the EU. In C. F. Sabel & J. Zeitlin (Eds.), Experimentalist governance in the European Union: Towards a new architecture (pp. 1-28). Oxford University Press Sorensen, T. B., & Graf, L. (2024). A European experiment in governing teacher education and training: The case of the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies. Education Inquiry, 1-28 Symeonidis, V. (2021). Europeanisation in teacher education: A comparative case study of teacher education policies and practices. Routledge. 10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Optimizing Pedagogical Team Composition: The Impact of Role Distribution and Group Size on Collaborative Efficiency in Kazakhstan Nazarbayev Intellectual schools Presenting Author:Context and European Relevance: Anchored in the global academic discourse on Distributed Leadership and Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), this research investigates the mechanics of teacher collaboration within the context of Kazakhstan’s educational modernization. Specifically, the study responds to the growing emphasis on PLCs as primary drivers of school improvement (Harris, 2014). This topic is particularly relevant for the European context, where despite the policy push for collaboration, schools often struggle with the practical mechanics of teamwork. As noted by Hargreaves and Fullan (2012), simply grouping teachers does not guarantee "Professional Capital"; effective collaboration requires intentional design. This study offers precisely such a design mechanism based on the goal of creating an innovative environment outlined in national strategic documents. Problem Statement and Research Gap: Despite extensive international research on teacher collaboration (Vangrieken et al., 2015), a significant gap remains: existing studies have largely failed to address how specific structural variables (team size) and psychological profiles (role balance) interact to determine team success within the post-Soviet educational context. While Belbin’s Team Role model is proven in the corporate sector, it has not been systematically tested as a mechanism for enhancing teacher engagement and optimizing workforce efficiency in Central Asian schools. Research Question: To what extent do structural interventions (optimizing team size) and psychological profiling (strategic role distribution according to Belbin) improve the efficacy of creative problem-solving and engagement levels among teachers? Original Contribution: This study offers a unique contribution to the field by empirically validating a transferable framework for school management. Unlike prior works that view teambuilding as a social activity, this research redefines it as a measurable managerial strategy. It contributes to the emerging body of literature by demonstrating how adapting corporate role-modeling can enhance the collaborative culture and problem-solving capacity of educational institutions. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodological Alignment: Operationalizing the study’s functionalist framework, the research employed a quasi-experimental design to isolate the specific impact of structural and psychological variables on team performance. The choice of methods was directly dictated by the need to measure constructs defined in Belbin’s theory: functional role distribution and group dynamics. From an educational didactic perspective, this approach shifts the focus from mere administrative grouping to the structural scaffolding required for effective professional learning. Sample and Setting: The research was conducted at the Nazarbayev Intellectual School of Chemical and Biological Sciences (Shymkent), involving 87 educators representing diverse disciplinary backgrounds. Participants were divided into 8 working groups (N=10–20). Instruments and Procedure: The intervention utilized data triangulation across three stages: 1. Diagnostic Phase: Assessment of baseline psychological compatibility and role preferences using Belbin’s Self-Perception Inventory. 2. Intervention Phase: To test the theoretical hypothesis regarding "optimal team size," the Experimental Group was structured with reduced membership to mitigate "social loafing" and received assigned roles (Team Leader, Coordinator, Implementer, Specialist) based on their profiles. The Control Group operated under traditional, unstructured conditions with larger numbers. 3. Evaluation Phase: Both groups performed standardized creative tasks requiring intuitive-logical analysis. Data Analysis: Performance was measured through: • Time-to-solution metrics. • Expert evaluation of solution complexity and creativity (ranked on a 1–15 scale). • Statistical Analysis: Due to the non-normal distribution of data in small samples, the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was applied to identify statistically significant differences in engagement, trust, and conflict levels between the two groups. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The analysis yielded three key findings that empirically corroborate the theoretical model: 1. Validation of Role Theory in Education: The experimental group, structured according to Belbin’s roles, demonstrated a higher coefficient of task complexity compared to the control group. Interpreted through the theoretical lens, this confirms that functional diversity (a balance of roles) is a stronger predictor of problem-solving capacity than mere professional expertise. The absence of assigned roles in the control group led to role ambiguity, inhibiting performance. 2. Psychological Climate and Engagement: Statistical analysis utilizing the Mann-Whitney U test revealed significantly higher levels of engagement ($p=0.032$) and "humor" ($p=0.035$) in the experimental group compared to the control group. Theoretically, this validates the link between psychological safety and role clarity: when members understand their function, interpersonal friction decreases, creating a fertile ground for innovation. 3. Structural Determinants: The findings support the "span of control" theory, showing that smaller, role-optimized teams outperform larger, unstructured groups. The study concludes that distributed leadership—a key educational goal—cannot emerge spontaneously but requires the specific structural scaffolding provided by the Belbin model. Applying these corporate strategies can be instrumental in converting nominal teacher groups into effective Professional Learning Communities. Ultimately, this study contributes to European didactical debates on how structured collaboration mediates the relationship between teaching practices, professional learning, and school improvement. References Barner, R., & Barner, C. P. (2012). Building Better Teams: 70 Tools and Techniques for Strengthening Performance Within and Across Teams. John Wiley & Sons. Belbin, R. M. (2010). Team Roles at Work (2nd ed.). Butterworth-Heinemann. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School. Teachers College Press. Harris, A. (2014). Distributed Leadership Matters: Perspectives, Practicalities, and Potential. Corwin. Krichevsky, R. L., & Dubovskaya, E. M. (2001). Sotsialnaya psikhologiya maloy gruppy [Social psychology of a small group]. Aspekt Press. Leonov, N. O., Sergeev, I. S., & Sudakov, N. S. (2019). Analysis of roles in team interaction. Innovative Economy: Prospects for Development and Improvement, 3(37), 48–53. Lukash, Y. A. (2014). Intra-firm conflicts, or Labor conflictology in business. Yustitsinform. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed Leadership. Jossey-Bass. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17-40. Zinkevich-Evstegineeva, T. D., Frolov, D. F., & Grabenko, T. M. (2014). Theory and practice of teambuilding. Rech. 10. Teacher Education Research
Paper Collaborative Networks in Education: Challenges for Teacher Training. 1: Universidad de Málaga, Spain; 2: Universidad de Cádiz, Spain Presenting Author:This paper is derived from the research project: Collaborative networks in education. Critical teaching for an inclusive society by the Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2022-138882OB-100), whose main purpose is, on the one hand, to analyse, understand and generate collaborative networks in education based on the recognition of educational projects, programmes and experiences; and, on the other hand, from the trajectory of research with and in educational centres where paths, routes, relationships and links are becoming visible for thinking about and developing another type of teacher training (Márquez, et al., 2020; Leite Méndez and Velazco Fano, 2022). The project is based on 15 case studies of various collaborative projects and collaborative research between the University and the community in general, involving social and educational institutions. We understand the formation of networks as a horizontal support and framework for research and accompaniment of educational and social processes (Martagón, et al., 2024; Ceip Gracia, et al., 2025). Networking as a framework, relationship and link allows us to think of a different university that not only transmits or guides processes of knowledge generation, formation and construction, often in a unidirectional way, but also the possibility of co-construction, co-research and co-creation of new spaces for relationship, production and social openness. In this sense, the idea of a third space proposed by authors such as Bhabha (2013) and Zeichner (2010) is relevant. We can also talk about hybrid spaces where encounters take place based on difference, dissent and the recognition of contexts with a critical, intersectional and decolonial perspective (Rivas Flores, et al., 2022). This allows us to move towards other visions of the university as a generator of other movements and practices based on situationality, the horizontality of knowledge (Corona Berkin, 2019), complexity and uncertainty (Morín, 1995). The case studies include educational and social contexts, urban and rural settings, curricular areas, management, artistic movements, music, theatre, and social and psychological unrest. They give shape to different projects, programmes, and experiences with diverse participants: students, social collectives, teachers from different educational levels (early childhood, primary, secondary, university), and other networks (Ocaña, et al., 2025). For the purposes of this communication, we analyse one of the cases developed through collaboration with educational centres based on three experiences of articulation between the university and the school. This collaboration is characterised by the work between university students and teachers, teachers and students from three educational centres in urban and rural areas, where synergies and collaborative experiences have been generated between the students and teachers of the centres themselves. Thus, we experience processes of real participation where teacher training is permeated by these experiences, which lead us to think about processes of identity and belonging that build identity and belonging (of students and teachers) to the educational community as an alternative form of training from the beginning of university life (Leite, et al., 2025). Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The methodological approach is geared towards collaborative and participatory research. From the outset, the research has taken a collaborative approach with and from the participating centres. In this sense, the recognition and evaluation of educational projects has remained at the core of the research. The opportunity to be part of the educational community, sharing ideas and engaging in situated learning, constitutes a form of training and research that breaks with the established norm. This research is far removed from extractivist practices that collect information to exploit the results without transforming the reality in which it is developed. On the contrary, the main objective is a transformation based on the joint analysis of contexts, focusing on listening and assuming dialogue as the main strategy. The entire process is based on free and informed participation, supported by accompanying teachers in their daily routine (beyond specific observations), leisurely conversations (rather than specific interviews) and group meetings. This facilitates the sharing of uncertainties, expectations and desires to make their centres a more humane place for the families and students who pass through them. Participation takes place in classes, staff meetings, gatherings organised by the centre, collaborative production of teaching materials or articles that report on the research, participation with the community, design of activities, seminars and reflection meetings. The centres are part of the process of identity building for education students in a two-way movement: from the participation of students and teachers in the centres and from critical reflection on training by the University, recognising the conditions, limitations and possibilities that arise when experiencing the educational system in the daily life of the institutions. The strategies used to identify and understand the collaboration processes are: Interviews with teaching staff, families and volunteers about the educational project, their own involvement, contributions and possibilities, as well as providing the university teaching staff's point of view on the experience. Meetings with students who collaborate with the centres to reflect on their own learning, feelings and experiences. Analysis of documentation, production by the centres and production by the students. The information generated is analysed jointly by both students and teachers to identify dimensions, elements or aspects that make collaborative work, participation and community involvement possible. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings From the perspective of participation and collaborative work as the focus of the research, some challenges for teacher training are emerging from the prism of coexistence and immersion in educational projects and the educational community. We mention some aspects that can articulate the training processes at the university with the life of educational institutions: -Continuity and discontinuity of teaching teams to sustain projects. This research has demonstrated the importance of management teams in terms of how the educational project is undertaken, sustaining democratic practices and shared leadership, and facilitating the learning process by being open to proposals from teachers, families and students. -Committed collaboration, which means not only being present in the centres but also being an active part of the community that it forms together with other cultural and social agents and families. Participating in activities, learning about the needs and possibilities of each centre, and contributing, both institutionally and personally, as volunteers do. Learning about the project and understanding how it impacts the academic and personal development of students, both schoolchildren and trainee teachers, and the recognition and advancement of the community context. -Need for diverse spaces between the university and the school to share, learn and discuss one's own professional development, training or other issues of concern but which are blocked by the urgencies of everyday life. - The neoliberal context in which public schools operate requires us to keep in mind the conditions, constraints, bureaucratic mechanisms, and different rules of the game that govern them. This is especially true when we consider the advance of privatisation in education, where the basic right to education is being challenged and collaboration compromised. Collaboration between public institutions stands as an act of resistance. References Corona Berkin, S. (2019) Horizontal knowledge production. University of Guadalajara. Cortés González, P., Leite Méndez, A., Mañas Olmo, M. and Calvo León, P. (2025) Secondary education and community engagement. An ethnographic study at the IES Sierra de Yeguas Comprehensive Secondary School, In J.I. Rivas Flores; R. Anguita Martínez; J. Valverde Berrocoso; A. Ocaña Fernández (coords.). Nomads of knowledge: analysis of disruptive practices in secondary education. (pp. 29-55). Octaedro Bhabha, H. (2013) The Place of Culture. Manantial Leite-Méndez, A.E., Rivas-Flores, J.I., Nieto-Martínez, M. and Martagón-Vázquez, V.(2025) New spaces for teacher training: Training reports based on collaboration with educational centres. Revista Cocar. 45, pp. 1 - 22 Leite-Mendez, A. E. and Velazco-Fano, P. (2022) School and University: opening new paths for learning, collaboration, social and political commitment. In D. Madrid Vivar and Mº R. Pascual Lacal (coords.) Good practices in Early Childhood Education. Madrid. Dykinson Ebook. P.811/822. Márquez-García, M.J., Kirsch, W., Leite-Méndez, A.E.(2020) Learning and collaboration in pre-service teacher education: Narrative analysis in a service-learning experience at Andalusian public schools, Teaching and Teacher Education, Volume 96, 2020, 103187, ISSN 0742-051X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103187. Martagón Vázquez, V., González Triviño, B., Mata Padilla, M. T., Ortiz Gálvez, C., Guerrero-Strachan García, P., Leite Méndez, A. E., & Rivas Flores, J. I. (2024). Educational organisation and management from the community. Openness, participation and shared leadership. Journal of the Institute for Educational Research, 15(22). https://doi.org/10.30972/riie.16228045 Morin, E. (1995). Epistemology of complexity. In D. F. Schitman, New paradigms, culture and subjectivity. Paidós. CEIP Gracia; CEIP María de la O; CEIP Prácticas n.º 1; CEPR San José de Calasanz; EI Zapata; PROCIE-UMA Research Group. (2025) Community networks that support public schools: collaboration and openness as tools for change, In M.J. Márquez, P. Calvo, V. Martagón and P. Fernández (coords) Collaboration, learning and educational co-involvement. Pro-community experiences in higher education. Octaedro. Pp.17-32 Ocaña-Fernández, A., Leite-Méndez, A.E, Del Río-Fernández, J.L. and Martagón-Vázquez, V. (2025) Possibilities and challenges of collaborative teaching networks between university and school: a multi-case study. Latin American Journal of Educational Technology 24 (2) pp.69-85. https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288X.24.2.69 Rivas Flores, J. I., Márquez García, M. J., Calvo León, P. and Martagón Vázquez, V. (2022). Community and school relations: a counter-hegemonic proposal from the University. Izquierda Journal, 51, 1-12. Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the Connections Between Campus Courses and Field Experiences in College- and University-Based Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347671 | ||