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, 21:28:04 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
05 SES 03 A: Autonomy and self-efficacy
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Control vs Autonomy? Adults’ actions supporting students in gaining power within a Change Laboratory 1: Tampere University, Finland; 2: University of Helsinki Presenting Author:The paradox of control and autonomy presents a classic contradiction in education (McNeil, 1988; Rainio & Hilppö, 2017). This paradox manifests in the simultaneous demand for both control and cultivation of students’ participation, aspirations and interests. Such an inherent contradiction is often perceived as insurmountable and has been identified as a significant obstacle to the progressive development of educational practices within the Finnish context (Salminen, 2012). In schools, adults generally hold positions of power (Bertrand et al., 2020), and students usually perceive power as a form of control exercised by adults (Feldman & Marshall, 2020). Students are often seen as mere providers of answers rather than active initiators and decision-makers. They are rarely given opportunities to voice their opinions within the school environment (Bjarnadóttir & Geirsdóttir, 2018; Luoma, 2024). Seldom are they offered the chance to work on issues they deem significant (see Hilppö & Stevens, 2024), and they are frequently marginalised in discussions related to their schoolwork. Moreover, their issues are often examined in isolation, overlooking the wider context and circumstances affecting each student. Power manifests in schools in various forms. However, students are often excluded from having a say on the learning content (Rantavuori & Sannino, 2025), which restricts their capacity to engage meaningfully with the subject matter. As Cothran and Ennis (1997) point out, while students do exercise power during lessons, it generally is not directed towards the learning content and does not enhance their educational experiences. Recognising this power gap is vital for the future development of the education system.
The concept of power is intricately linked to the notion of control. According to cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT), power is closely associated with the object of an activity, which is the fundamental element in CHAT. The CHAT perspective emphasizes the importance of focusing on the object for which power is required rather than just seeking freedom from control. Students’ empowerment cannot simply be achieved through the reduction or elimination of control; rather, it necessitates the identification of a meaningful object that would be motivating for the students to pursue (Rantavuori, 2025). The curriculum and subject matter restrict students’ autonomy, with most topics being determined by adults. Progress in this regard requires the acknowledgement of students as proprietors of their own learning experiences. However, few studies have focused on learning driven by students’ own interests (Hilppö & Stevens, 2024), and research addressing students’ need to influence what they learn is scarce.
This study uses the Change Laboratory (CL) formative intervention to address the contradiction. CL (Virkkunen & Newham, 2013) is a participatory analysis and design approach based on CHAT that fosters expansive learning and transformative agency (Sannino & Engeström, 2017). Since 1995, CL has been applied in over 30 countries across education, workplaces, and communities (Sannino et al., 2016). A key feature of CL is producing outcomes unpredictable at the outset (Sannino & Engeström, 2017). Instead of fixed objectives or content, the intervention's direction is participant-guided (Penuel, 2014). The results often surprise both researchers and participants, highlighting the creative and dynamic nature of genuine collective analysis and design (Engeström & Virkkunen, 2023). CL is a unique, participant-driven approach grounded in strong theoretical foundations that shape its processes and outcomes (Hopwood, 2024).
The study explores the following research question: What actions did adults take during the two student-led projects in Change Laboratory interventions, and how did these actions influence the students’ empowerment? Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used In this study, two CLs with 32 eighth-graders were conducted in schools from two cities in Finland during school years 2020-21 and 2021-22 (Tapola-Haapala et al., 2023). The CL sessions were held during regular school hours in a school space, but the students were given the power to select, design, and implement the contents and means of the projects. Students were supported by researchers, school staff, and external experts as needed. In this study, we focus on two projects. The first project was a documentary film that focused on issues of equality, bullying, and acceptance of others. The group produced a 10-minute documentary film on this topic during CL1. The second project's focus was on developing school recesses from the students' perspective. The group took several initiatives and implemented them during CL2. The data of this study consists of recordings of CL sessions (n=16) and follow-up sessions (n=11). A professional transcriber transcribed the data verbatim (of 193,658 words). The analysis focuses on adults’ actions during the intervention. While previous CL studies show participants gradually assume leadership (Prokopis et al., 2022), this study differs from typical CL interventions usually conducted with adults. Here, CL aimed to support adolescent students’ search for significance, with adults primarily serving as educators and facilitators. A data-driven method was developed to examine adults’ actions, beginning with a review of transcripts to identify six initial types of adult actions. Representative samples were selected, criteria established, and each action type named. An adult action comprises a speaking turn, part of a turn, or a sequence on a specific topic. During this phase, two more types were identified, totaling eight: 1) Asking questions and making suggestions; 2) Respecting students’ ownership; 3) Providing encouragement and positive feedback; 4) Enabling and providing concrete help; 5) Reinforcing students’ ideas; 6) Giving instructions; 7) Co-planning; and 8) Taking restrictive actions. The second phase involved identifying conversational episodes and classifying them into main and sub-themes. Coding proceeded by (a) delineating episodes based on content, (b) analysing turns of talk within each episode in terms of discursive actions, and (c) specifying the function of each action using the eight-category framework. Comparisons of adult actions across two projects were made, and coding was refined through discussions with another researcher to resolve challenges. One CL session was reviewed for validation. The frequency of each adult action was recorded for each session. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The results show that project groups interacted with various adults, observing all eight types of adult actions. The Recess project involved more adult actions (1,188) than the Documentary project (774), with an average of 74 actions per session compared to 65. The most common actions in both projects were asking questions, making suggestions, and respecting students’ ownership. These were followed by encouragement, positive feedback, enabling and providing concrete help, though the order of the last two varied. The rarest actions were co-planning and restrictive actions, with the latter slightly more frequent in the Documentary project, likely because it was the first CL with adolescents during school hours, when adults tended to exercise more control. Despite variations in project topics, final products, group sizes, sessions, and adult collaborators, the percentages and patterns of adult actions remained consistently similar. Significant differences emerged in only three sessions and three action types, highlighting the central role of the object of activity chosen by students. Most adult actions directly supported students’ projects, except for restrictive actions. However, restrictive actions could also indirectly support these processes by offering boundaries against which students could take transgressive actions—an important element of gaining power. Students demonstrated their agency by challenging constraints in order to resolve contradictions in their activity and determine the degree of power needed to achieve their goals. Adult involvement in CLs was substantial but differed from traditional school hierarchies. Instead of controlling content and methods, adults supported students through their actions, challenging established power structures and enabling student-led decision-making Adults facilitated students’ initiatives to address issues meaningful to themselves and the community, rather than exerting control. The results show that CL interventions created a space where the traditional tension between autonomy and control was resolved through the object of activity. References Bertrand, M., Brooks, M. D., & Domínguez, A. D. (2023). Challenging adultism: Centering youth as educational decision makers. Urban Education, 58(10), 2570—2597. Bjarnadóttir, V. S., & Geirsdóttir, G. (2018). ‘You know, nothing changes’. Students’ experiences in influencing pedagogic practices in various upper secondary schools in Iceland. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 26(4), 631—646. Cothran, D. J., & Ennis, C. D. (1997). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of conflict and power. Teaching and teacher education, 13(5), 541—553. Engeström, Y., Rantavuori, P., Ruutu, P., & Tapola-Haapala, M. (2023). From Future Orientation to Future-Making: Towards Adolescents’ Transformative Agency. In Agency and Transformation: Motives, Mediation, and Motion (pp. 107-138). Engeström, Y., & Virkkunen, J. (2023). Kulttuurihistoriallisen toiminnan teorian tarjoamat haasteet ja mahdollisuudet Suomen kasvatustieteellisessä tutkimuksessa. Kasvatus, 54(3), 191—205. Hilppö, J., & Stevens, R. (2024). Learning Inside the School, but Outside the Curriculum: An Extreme Case of Interest-Driven Learning in Alternative STEAM Learning Infrastructure for Schools. Cognition and Instruction, 42(4), 482—504. Hopwood, N. (2024). Twenty-five years of change laboratories in schools: A critical and formative review. Educational Action Research, 1—28. McNeil, L. M. (2013). Contradictions of control: School structure and school knowledge. Routledge. Penuel, W. R. (2014). Emerging Forms of Formative Intervention Research in Education. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(2), 97—117. Prokopis, D., Sannino, A., & Mykkänen, A. (2022). Toward a new beginning: exploring the instructional dynamics of expansive learning with workers in a youth supported housing unit. Journal of Workplace Learning, 34(7), 628-642. Rainio, A. P. (2008). From resistance to involvement: Examining agency and control in a playworld activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(2), 115-140. Rainio, A. P., & Hilppö, J. (2017). The dialectics of agency in educational ethnography. Ethnography and Education, 12(1), 78-94. Rantavuori, P. (2025). Adolescents Gaining Power. [Dissertations]. Tampere University. Salminen, J. (2012). Koulun pirulliset dilemmat. Helsinki: Teos. Rantavuori, P., & Sannino, A. What Adolescents Find Engaging and Why the Content of Instruction Does Not Come Up: A Student-Centered Just Perspective on School Engagement. Teachers College Record. Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2017). Co-generation of societally impactful knowledge in Change Laboratories. Management Learning, 48(1), 80—96. Tapola-Haapala, M., Rantavuori, P., & Ruutu, P. (2023). Ekspansiivinen oppiminen nuorten Muutoslaboratorioissa. Kasvatus, 54(3), 237-252. Virkkunen, J., & Newnham, D. S. (2013). The change laboratory: A tool for collaborative development of work and education. Sense Publishers. 05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Ignite Talk Examining the Differential Effects of Reading Engagement on Reading Achievement Among Migrant and Urban Children in China Beijing Normal University, China, People's Republic of Presenting Author:Reading proficiency is fundamental to children’s academic success and lifelong learning, and its development depends heavily on sustained reading engagement (Guthrie, 2008; OECD, 2010). Reading engagement encompasses behavioural, affective, and cognitive dimensions that collectively foster reading achievement. Globally, promoting reading among disadvantaged populations—such as migrant children—is not only an educational issue but also a social imperative tied to equity and intergenerational mobility. In China, which hosts one of the world’s largest populations of migrant children (NBSPRC, 2023), improving their reading development reflects challenges similar to those faced by migrant or low-SES learners across Europe and other regions. Thus, the findings of this study carry international implications for inclusive education and literacy equity. Migrant children in China relocate with their parents from rural to urban areas but often encounter institutional and social barriers—particularly due to the household registration (hukou) system—that limit their access to quality education (Li & Su, 2025). Despite national policies promoting educational inclusion, gaps persist in reading motivation, strategy use, and achievement compared with urban peers (Ni et al., 2021). While existing studies have examined general reading engagement among Chinese students, few have addressed how engagement–achievement dynamics differ between migrant and urban groups. This study aims to fill that gap by investigating the mechanisms linking reading engagement and reading achievement among migrant children, thereby contributing to international debates on learning equity and the role of engagement in compensating for socioeconomic disadvantage. Grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2013) and the Engagement Model of Reading Development (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000), this research conceptualizes reading engagement as a multidimensional construct comprising behavioural (reading amount, digital reading practices), affective (reading interest), and cognitive (reading strategy use) components. SDT posits that motivation arising from autonomy, competence, and relatedness drives engagement and achievement. Accordingly, intrinsic motivation is hypothesized to foster reading behaviour and strategy use, which in turn enhance achievement. The proposed model assumes that reading interest indirectly influences reading achievement through behavioural and cognitive pathways, aligning with prior findings that emphasize the mediating role of strategy use and digital reading engagement (Miyamoto et al., 2019; Jang et al., 2023). At the same time, two theoretical perspectives guide the investigation of group differences: the Cognitive Limitation Hypothesis, which suggests that limited cognitive skills weaken the engagement–achievement link (Klauda & Guthrie, 2015), and the Compensation Hypothesis, which argues that engagement plays a stronger compensatory role among disadvantaged learners (Logan et al., 2011). Migrant children in China, who typically exhibit lower academic foundations and socioeconomic backgrounds, may simultaneously fit both frameworks. This duality makes them an ideal population to test the boundary conditions of engagement theory and to examine how motivational and behavioural processes operate under structural disadvantage—an issue of relevance for educators globally. The study therefore addresses two central research questions: By situating a Chinese case within global research on literacy engagement, this study contributes to the European and international discourse on educational inclusivity, motivation, and engagement-based pedagogy. It underscores how reading engagement functions as a cross-culturally valid mechanism for reducing learning inequalities, offering theoretical and practical insights for promoting literacy development among marginalized children worldwide. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methodology Participants Data were drawn from the Chinese Regional Assessment of Education Quality (RAEQ), a large-scale monitoring project designed to evaluate regional education quality and support instructional improvement. The survey was approved by local education authorities, and informed consent was obtained from students, parents, and teachers. A total of 18,847 eighth-grade students (mean age ≈ 15) from 72 middle schools across 11 school districts in central China participated, aligning with age benchmarks from international assessments such as TIMSS and PISA. Following national definitions, migrant children were identified as students with rural household registrations who migrated to cities with their parents for work and had been enrolled in urban schools for at least six months. Urban children were those with urban registrations and no migration history. From the RAEQ database, 936 migrant and 2,742 urban students met these criteria and were included in the analysis. Measures Reading Interest was assessed using a three-item scale adapted from PISA (OECD, 2017) on a four-point Likert scale (α = 0.86). Reading Amount was measured by a single multiple-choice item adapted from Schaffner et al. (2013) assessing the number of extracurricular books read in the past semester. Digital Reading Practice was captured using three PISA-derived items measuring online reading frequency (e.g., using online dictionaries, searching information; α = 0.75). Reading Strategy Use was assessed with a nine-item scale based on Mokhtari and Reichard (2002), covering self-regulatory and comprehension strategies (e.g., previewing content, monitoring understanding). Confirmatory factor analysis indicated good model fit (CFI = 0.964, RMSEA = 0.076; α = 0.90). Reading Achievement was measured through a standardized test based on the Chinese Curriculum Standards (MEPRC, 2012), including literary, informational, and classical texts. Ten open-ended items assessed comprehension, inference, and evaluation skills (α = 0.86). Scores were Rasch-scaled (M = 300, SD = 50). Data Analysis Measurement models for the latent constructs (reading interest, digital reading practice, reading strategy use) were validated before analysis. Descriptive statistics addressed RQ1 (group differences). To address RQ2, structural equation modeling (SEM) examined whether reading interest affected achievement indirectly through reading practices and strategy use. Multi-group SEM compared migrant and urban samples to test measurement and structural invariance, assessing whether model parameters and path coefficients differed significantly across groups. Analyses were conducted in R using the lavaan package, employing robust fit indices for model evaluation. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This study examined the mechanisms linking reading engagement and reading achievement among migrant and urban children in China, drawing on self-determination theory and the engagement model of reading development. The findings provide robust empirical support for the hypothesized multidimensional framework of reading engagement, encompassing behavioural, affective, and cognitive components. Overall, the structural model demonstrated good fit, and all constructs showed satisfactory reliability and validity. Migrant children exhibited significantly lower levels of reading interest, digital reading practice, strategy use, and reading achievement compared with their urban peers, though no difference was found in print reading amount. These results indicate that migrant children’s behavioural engagement is comparable to that of urban students, while their affective and cognitive engagement remains weaker. Reading interest emerged as the central driver of reading achievement, directly and indirectly influencing it through reading amount, digital reading practices, and reading strategy use. However, behavioural indicators such as reading amount and digital reading practice showed weak or even negative direct effects on reading achievement, suggesting that quantity of engagement alone does not guarantee improved comprehension. Instead, the positive impact of behavioural engagement depends on students’ strategic and metacognitive reading processes. Multigroup analyses revealed similar engagement–achievement pathways across groups, but two key differences emerged. The effect of reading interest on digital reading practice was stronger among migrant children, reflecting their heightened reliance on digital materials to compensate for limited reading resources. Conversely, digital reading practice negatively predicted reading achievement among urban children, likely due to distraction and noneducational online content. These findings highlight both the compensatory potential and the cognitive constraints within migrant children’s reading pathways. They underscore the importance of enhancing reading interest, digital literacy, and metacognitive strategy instruction to promote equitable literacy development—an issue of international significance for migrant and socioeconomically disadvantaged learners. References Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.42.2.2 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media. Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403-422). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Guthrie, J. T. (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousands Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Jang, E., Seo, Y. S., & Brutt-Griffler, J. (2023). Building academic resilience in literacy: Digital reading practices and motivational and cognitive engagement. Reading Research Quarterly, 58(1), 160-176. https://doi:10.1002/rrq.486 Klauda, S. L., & Guthrie, J. T. (2015). Comparing relations of motivation, engagement, and achievement among struggling and advanced adolescent readers. Reading and Writing, 28(2), 239-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-014-9523-2 Li, Z., & Su, Y. (2025). Identity segregation or educational resources disadvantage? The academic achievement of migrant children in China. Children and Youth Services Review, 170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2025.108134 Logan, S., Medford, E., & Hughes, N. (2011). The importance of intrinsic motivation for high and low ability readers’ reading comprehension performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(1), 124-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.09.011 Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China. (2012). Standard of compulsory education curriculum for Chinese language art (2011th ed.). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press. (in Chinese). Miyamoto, A., Pfost, M., & Artelt, C. (2019). The relationship between intrinsic motivation and reading comprehension: Mediating effects of reading amount and metacognitive knowledge of strategy use. Scientific Studies of Reading, 23(6), 445-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2019.1602836 Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259. https://doi:10.1037//0022-0663.94.2.249 National Bureau of Statistics of the People’s Republic of China. (2023). What the 2020 Census Can Tell Us About Children in China: Facts and Figures. https://www.stats.gov.cn/zs/tjwh/tjkw/tjzl/202304/t20230419_1938814.html (in Chinese). Ni, S. G., Lu, S., Lu, K., & Tan, H. Y. (2021). The effects of parental involvement in parent?child reading for migrant and urban families: A comparative mixed-methods study. Children and Youth Services Review, 123. https://doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.105941 OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Vol. 1). OECD Publishing. OECD. (2017). Student Questionnaire for PISA 2018 Main Survey Version. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/data/datasets/pisa/pisa-2018-datasets/questionnaires/STUDENTS%20questionnaire%20PISA%202018%20main.pdf 05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Profiles of Competence and Autonomy Across Adolescence: Longitudinal Links to Upper Secondary Graduation University of Jyväskylä, Finland Presenting Author:Deci and Ryan’s (Ryan & Deci, 2000, 2017) self-determination theory highlights the fundamental importance of satisfying one’s basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness for psychological well-being and educational outcomes. When these needs are fulfilled, students are more likely to persist in academic tasks and experience more adaptive developmental trajectories. In contrast, unmet needs—particularly lack of autonomy or competence—have been linked to motivational problems, disengagement, and poorer educational outcomes. Previous studies on motivation have typically shown declining trends among lower secondary school students (e.g., Eccles & Roeser, 2009). To date, however, few researchers have explored individual patterns of psychological needs, identified meaningful subgroups, or examined how such profiles are associated with educational outcomes in the long run. Grade 6 and Grade 9 represent two critical educational phases in the Finnish comprehensive school system: the end of primary school and the end of lower secondary school. These years are also key points at which students’ self-beliefs, motivational orientations, and future expectations undergo significant change. Competence beliefs in literacy and mathematics are particularly influential during these stages, as they shape students’ achievement and educational choices. Similarly, students’ sense of autonomy—operationalized in this study as the perceived meaningfulness of schoolwork and its relevance for future goals—tends to fluctuate during adolescence and may influence educational outcomes. This seven-year longitudinal study investigated profiles of primary and lower secondary school students’ sense of competence and autonomy and their predictive value for upper secondary graduation. Sense of competence referred to students’ beliefs about their ability in literacy and mathematics, whereas autonomy reflected the perceived meaningfulness of school and education for future goals. The study addressed the following research questions:
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study draws on a longitudinal dataset comprising 1,900 students from four Finnish municipalities. Data for this study were collected at two time points: Grade 6 (approximately age 12), marking the end of primary school, and Grade 9 (approximately age 15), marking the end of lower secondary education. Students completed self-report questionnaires assessing two core constructs derived from self-determination theory: Sense of competence, operationalized as beliefs about one’s abilities in literacy and mathematics. Sense of autonomy, conceptualized as the perceived meaningfulness and future relevance of school and education. Upper secondary school graduation data were obtained from official school registers approximately 3.5 years after the start of upper secondary education, providing an objective measure of educational attainment. A series of latent profile analyses (LPA) was conducted to identify subgroups of students showing distinct combinations of competence and autonomy across the two measurement points. Model selection was guided by established criteria, including AIC, BIC, entropy, and interpretability of the profiles. To examine differences in graduation outcomes across the identified profiles, we applied the BCH method, which allows for comparisons of distal outcomes while preserving the latent class solution. All analyses were conducted with Mplus 8.10. Missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Although the study is ongoing, preliminary LPA findings revealed four distinct profiles of competence and autonomy across Grades 6 and 9: 1) High competence and autonomy (32.6%) 2) Low competence and autonomy (12.4%) 3) Average competence and autonomy (53.1%) 4) High competence but very low autonomy in Grade 9 (1.9%) Preliminary BCH analyses indicated that students in Profiles 3 and 4 were less likely to graduate from upper secondary education within the expected timeframe. These initial results suggest that satisfying both needs of competence and autonomy throughout basic education is critical for promoting persistence and timely completion of upper secondary education. Students with high competence but low autonomy in Grade 9 showed increased risk for delayed graduation, suggesting that competence alone does not guarantee successful educational outcomes when autonomy is compromised. Final analyses will be completed before the conference. References Eccles, J., & Roeser, R. (2009). Schools, academic motivation, and stage–environment fit. In R.M. Learner, L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp.404–434). Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. The Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28806 | ||