Conference Agenda
| Session | ||
05 SES 02 B: Interprofessionality
Paper Session | ||
| Presentations | ||
05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Bridging Education and Youth Care: What Makes Collaboration Work in Complex Student Trajectories? Karel de Grote University College, Belgium Presenting Author:Schools increasingly work with pupils whose learning and participation are affected by complex and intertwined needs. In such cases, adequate support often depends on a network of actors spanning education and youth care services. This need is particularly salient for children and young people in vulnerable situations, where challenges are often situated beyond the school context (Bodden & Deković, 2016; De Graaf, 2010). Coordination across education and youth care is therefore crucial (Mertens et al., 2020), yet collaboration across sectors does not happen “by default”: practitioners describe recurrent frictions when multiple organisations, roles, and accountability regimes intersect (Geveke et al., 2023). This study examines which added value, barriers, and needs actors experience when building a support network around a pupil with complex support needs, and what is required to facilitate collaboration in such networks. The project is grounded in a two-step knowledge-building approach. First, we synthesised international research on interprofessional/interdisciplinary collaboration in school(-related) contexts, mapping recurring conditions and factors that shape collaboration. Second, we translated and tested this framework in the Flemish context through qualitative interviews with actors from both education and youth care, focusing on collaboration in concrete complex cases. Conceptually, we draw on Bronstein’s (2003) model of interdisciplinary collaboration, foregrounding interdependence, flexibility, collective ownership, newly created professional activities, and reflection on process. This framing helps to view collaboration knowledge as situated and contingent—produced within specific organisational, legal, and resource conditions—while still aiming to articulate transferable collaboration conditions that can inform preventive action. Across interviews, participants consistently positioned communication as both the most critical success condition and a recurring bottleneck: collaboration requires communication that is timely and purposeful, while also explicitly addressing collaboration as a process (alignment, consultation, reflection), not only case content. Such communication is complicated by the tensions around information-sharing and confidentiality that often accompany cross-sector work (Geveke et al., 2023). In addition, actors stressed the importance of “being on the same wavelength” through a shared goal and clear task division early on, with continued alignment during the trajectory—elements that resonate with the emphasis on collective ownership and process reflection in Bronstein’s model (Bronstein, 2003). Finally, collaboration is shaped by structural conditions such as time scarcity and limited resources, which constrain feasibility and continuity—dynamics also noted in broader accounts of cross-sector collaboration (Anderson-Butcher & Ashton, 2004). For ECER 2026’s theme Knowing and Acting, the paper contributes to understanding how collaboration knowledge is produced “in the field” under changing conditions and how it can be mobilised into preventive initiatives. Building on the project’s mapping of preventive practices from youth care with potential transferability to educational contexts, we propose a dialogue between collaboration conditions (what must be in place) and preventive initiatives (what can be organised upstream). In the paper session, we invite participants to assess preventive initiatives against the identified conditions: which conditions are meaningfully realised, where vulnerabilities remain, and what this implies for expected impact and implementation across contexts. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The study consists of two connected phases. Phase 1: International literature review and framework synthesis. We conducted a focused, in-depth review on interprofessional/interdisciplinary collaboration across education and youth care/social work-related school contexts. Search strings were formulated based on the research questions and entered into the Discovery database, including: Interprofessional collaboration (in schools OR education OR social work) and Interdisciplinary collaboration (in schools OR education OR social work). We combined database searches with backward snowball sampling (reference tracking) and forward snowball sampling via Google Scholar. Relevant sources were read in full and excluded if they did not substantively address the focal cross-sector collaboration. The output of phase 1 is a synthesis of recurring themes, conditions, and factors used in the literature to describe interprofessional collaboration, aligned with established conceptualisations of collaboration in child- and school-serving systems (Anderson-Butcher & Ashton, 2004) and used to inform the empirical phase. Phase 2: Qualitative interviews and thematic analysis in the Flemish context. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews to map collaboration conditions across sectors, exploring perceived added value, barriers, and needs within concrete complex cases. The sample comprised 24 respondents: 10 actors from education and 14 from youth care. Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically in NVivo, using an initial coding structure derived from phase 1 themes. Throughout analysis, Bronstein’s (2003) model served as a sensitising framework to interpret how actors described interdependence, role negotiation, process reflection, and collective ownership across organisational boundaries. In addition, we incorporated practitioner feedback from a cross-sector network meeting that emphasised the importance of proactive (preventive) work, bridge-building between youth care and education, and creating more informal moments of contact and exchange. These insights were used to sharpen the paper’s focus on preventive initiatives and their alignment with collaboration conditions. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This study shows that inter-sector collaboration around pupils with complex support needs is shaped by a tight interplay between relational, procedural, and structural conditions. First, actors describe a clear need for communication that is not only timely and effective but also explicitly addresses collaboration as a process: alignment, consultation moments, and reflection throughout the trajectory. This aligns with the importance of process reflection and newly created collaborative activities in interdisciplinary work (Bronstein, 2003). Communication becomes fragile when feedback loops fail or when confidentiality and information-sharing tensions generate uncertainty about what may be shared—barriers that have also been reported in studies of education–youth care collaboration (Geveke et al., 2023). Second, collaboration is strengthened when actors develop a shared goal and task division early on and keep revisiting that shared direction. Such practices reflect the need for collective ownership and negotiated interdependence in collaborative models (Bronstein, 2003). Lack of role clarity and limited knowledge of each other’s systems and processes generate unrealistic expectations, duplication, and inefficiency—well-known frictions in cross-sector service delivery (Anderson-Butcher & Ashton, 2004). Third, structural constraints—especially time scarcity, overburdening, and limited resources—place a ceiling on what even highly motivated professionals can sustain. These constraints resonate with broader literature on the organisational conditions shaping collaboration across child- and school-serving systems (Anderson-Butcher & Ashton, 2004). References Anderson-Butcher, D., & Ashton, D. (2004). Innovative models of collaboration to serve children, youths, families, and communities. Children & Schools, 26(1), 39–53. Bodden, D. H. M., & Deković, M. (2016). Multiproblem families referred to youth mental health: What’s in a name? Family Process, 55(1), 31–47. Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work, 48(3), 297–306. De Graaf, M. (2010). Effectief werken met multiprobleemgezinnen. In B. P. Uitenbogaard (Ed.), Werken met multiprobleemhuishoudens (pp. 59–66). Thieme Meulenhof. Geveke, C., van Veen-Schleurholts, H., & Steenbeek, H. (2023). Succesfactoren en knelpunten in de samenwerking tussen onderwijs en jeugdhulp in de klas. Orthopedagogiek: Onderzoek en Praktijk, 62(2), 88–100. Mertens, C., Seghers, M., De Maegd, K., & Van Kerckhove, C. (2020). Kan onderwijs zonder welzijn? En vice versa? Mammoet. 05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Well-being at Work in Hospital School Education: Job Demands and Resource Factors in a Significant Interprofessional Support Context University of Eastern Finland, Finland Presenting Author:Topic and Relevance Teachers’ well-being at work has received increasing attention in European educational research due to rising workloads, emotional strain, and changing professional demands (Lerkkanen et al., 2020; Brady et al., 2023). While teacher's well-being has been widely studied in mainstream and special education, hospital school education remains a relatively under-researched context, despite its highly demanding nature. Hospital teachers work with pupils who are patients in specialized medical care and operate at the intersection of education, healthcare, and social services (Ruutu, 2019; Äärelä et al., 2016). Across Europe hospital education aims to ensure pupils’ right to education during illness and support continuity of schooling. However, hospital teachers face specific challenges related to emotional load, fragmented work structures, multidisciplinary collaboration, and ethical responsibility for vulnerable students (Tilus, 2018; Benigno & Fante, 2020). Understanding how these demands and available resources shape teachers’ well-being is essential for promoting sustainable working conditions in inclusive and multidisciplinary educational settings. Research Questions This paper addresses the following research questions:
The focus is on identifying both strain-inducing factors and resources that strengthen coping, motivation, and professional sustainability. Theoretical Framework The study is theoretically grounded in the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model (Demerouti et al., 2001; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007), which conceptualizes well-being at work as a dynamic interaction between job demands and job resources. Job demands include emotional, cognitive, and organizational aspects of work that require sustained effort and may lead to stress and burnout, while job resources are personal, social, or structural factors that support coping, motivation, and work engagement. In addition, the study draws on eudaimonic perspectives on well-being, which emphasize purpose, meaningfulness, and personal growth in work (Ryan & Deci, 2001). A sense of self-efficacy supports professional identity and increases the meaningfulness of work (Rosso, 2010; Steger, 2012). It is also one of the key factors in reducing teachers’ work-related strain and enhancing work engagement (Lerkkanen, 2020). The framework is further informed by research on teacher burnout and work engagement, particularly in special education and emotionally demanding contexts (Maslach et al., 2001; Cancio et al., 2018; Lerkkanen et al., 2020). Concepts such as emotional load, ethical stress, professional self-esteem, and recovery from stress are used to interpret hospital teachers’ experiences. Aim and Contribution The aim of the paper is to examine hospital teachers’ well-being at work by analyzing the job demands and resource factors at work. Based on qualitative interview data and open-ended survey responses, the paper provides an empirically grounded description of the emotional, structural, and personal demands of hospital education, as well as the resource factors that support well-being, such as meaningfulness of work, social and professional support, leadership, and opportunities for recovery. Focusing specifically on hospital teachers, a professional group that has been largely under-researched, this study offers new insights into a unique educational context where teaching intersects with healthcare and social services. The paper contributes to European educational research by shedding light on a demanding but under-researched education context and by applying internationally recognized theoretical frameworks to hospital education. The findings offer insights that are relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers concerned with teacher well-being, inclusive education, and sustainable professional practices in multidisciplinary educational environments across Europe, highlighting strategies to support teacher engagement and resilience in highly specialized and emotionally demanding work contexts. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study adopts a qualitative research design to examine hospital teachers’ well-being at work in a demanding multidisciplinary educational context. The data consists of thematic interview material (N=9) and open-ended responses from a national survey (N=154), enabling an in-depth and comprehensive exploration of hospital teachers’ experiences. The interview data comprise semi-structured thematic interviews conducted with hospital teachers working in hospital education units in different parts of Finland. A discretionary sampling strategy was used to recruit participants with experience of hospital education in diverse institutional and regional contexts (Puusa, 2020). The interviews focused on teachers’ experiences of job demands, resource factors, well-being at work, and coping in everyday work situations. The interviews lasted approximately 45 minutes, were audio-recorded with participants’ consent, transcribed verbatim, and pseudonymized to ensure confidentiality. The second data set consists of open-ended responses from a survey conducted as part of a broader research project on the well-being of hospital education staff. The survey was distributed to hospital education units nationwide and completed voluntarily during staff meetings. Among special education teachers and special class teachers, the survey achieved a response rate of 94% (N = 193), indicating exceptionally strong coverage of the target population. When hourly‑paid teachers were also counted, the overall response rate for all teaching staff was 91% (N = 200). The open-ended questions invited participants to describe factors that burden or support their well-being at work. The survey data complement the interview material by providing broader coverage of shared experiences across hospital education units. The data were analyzed using thematic text analysis following Kuckartz’s (2014) seven-step model. This method is particularly suitable for studies that combine theory-driven and data-driven analysis. The analysis was guided by the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model (Demerouti et al., 2001; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007), which provided the initial analytical framework for identifying main categories of job demands and job resources. Subcategories were developed inductively from the data. The analysis proceeded in stages: first, the interview data were analyzed to form preliminary categories; second, the survey data were used to deepen and validate these categories. This iterative process strengthened the analytical rigor and credibility of the findings. Ethical principles for research involving human participants were followed throughout the study (TENK, 2019), including informed consent, confidentiality, and responsible data handling. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study highlights that hospital teachers’ well-being at work is shaped by a continuous interaction between high job demands and available job resources, in line with the Job Demands–Resources (JD-R) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007). The findings indicate that hospital education is characterized by substantial emotional load, arising from encounters with pupils’ serious illnesses, psychological symptoms, crisis situations, and threatening or challenging behavior. In addition, structural and organizational demands, such as fragmented work routines, unpredictable daily schedules, inadequate facilities, and intensive documentation and cooperation requirements, increase strain and reduce opportunities for recovery. Simultaneously, the study identifies several resource factors that support hospital teachers’ well-being and professional sustainability. Experiences of meaningfulness of work emerged as a central resource, particularly when teachers perceived that their actions contributed to pupils’ well-being, learning, and sense of security during critical life situations (Rosso et al., 2010; Steger et al., 2012). Professional competence and autonomy, along with opportunities to use pedagogical expertise flexibly in multidisciplinary contexts, strengthened teachers’ sense of efficacy and engagement. Social and professional support played a key role in buffering the effects of high demands. Functional work communities, trust-based leadership, and effective multidisciplinary collaboration supported coping and reduced feelings of isolation. Structural resources, such as appropriate facilities, access to work supervision, and opportunities for recovery, were identified as essential for maintaining well-being in emotionally demanding work (Hintsa, 2019). Overall, the findings suggest that supporting hospital teachers’ well-being requires a holistic approach that combines organizational, social, and individual-level measures. Strengthening job resources can mitigate the negative effects of high demands and promote sustainable professional practices. The results contribute to European educational research by providing empirically grounded insights into an under-researched teaching context and by informing the development of policies and practices aimed at enhancing teacher well-being in multidisciplinary and inclusive educational environments. References Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands‐Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 Benigno, V., & Fante, C. (2020). Hospital School Teachers’ Sense of Stress and Gratification: An Investigation of the Italian Context (1). 1(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5334/cie.14 Brady, L. L., McDaniel, S. C., & Choi, Y.-J. (2023). Teacher stress and burnout: The role of psychological work resources and implications for practitioners. Psychology in the Schools, 60(6), 1706–1726. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22805 Cancio, E. J., Larsen, R., Mathur, S. R., Estes, M. B., Mei Chang, & Johns, B. (2018). Special Education Teacher Stress: Coping Strategies. Education & Treatment of Children (West Virginia University Press), 41(4), 457–481. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2018.0025 Demerouti, Evangelia, Arnold B. Bakker, Friedhelm Nachreiner & Wilmar B. Schaufeli. 2001. “The Job Demands–Resources Model of Burnout.” Journal of Applied Psychology 86:3, 499– 512. Hintsa, T., Honkalampi, K., & Flink, N. (2019). Stressi, allostaattinen kuormitus ja terveysriskit. https://erepo.uef.fi/handle/123456789/26878 Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice & Using Software. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446288719 Lerkkanen, M.-K., Pakarinen, E., Messala, M., Penttinen, V., Aulén, A.-M., & Jõgi, A.-L. (2020). OPETTAJIEN TYÖHYVINVOINTI JA SEN YHTEYS PEDAGOGISEN TYÖN LAATUUN. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.39 Puusa, A., & Juuti, P. (2020). Laadullisen tutkimuksen näkökulmat ja menetelmät. Gaudeamus. Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.001 Ruutu, P. (2019). Psykiatrisessa erikoissairaanhoidossa hoidettujen lasten ja nuorten koulunkäynnin tukeminen perusopetuksessa ja sairaalaopetuksen koetut vaikutukset koulunkäyntiin. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2001). On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being. Annual review of psychology, 52, 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141 Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring Meaningful Work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072711436160 Tilus, P. (2018). Askarrutuksesta osaamiskeskukseksi: Sairaalaopetuksen muutoskehityksen tarkastelu kehittävän työntutkimuksen viitekehyksessä. Jyväskylän yliopisto. Tutkimuseettinen neuvottelukunta. (2023). Hyvä tieteellinen käytäntö ja sen loukkausepäilyjen käsittely Suomessa. https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2023-03/HTK-ohje_2023.pdf. Luettu 4.10.2025. Äärelä, T., Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2016). Ten Encounters between Students and a Special Education Teacher at a Finnish Hospital School—Outlining Hospital School Pedagogy. Global Journal of Human-Social Science, 16(G4), 9–20. 05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Conditions and Mechanisms of Intensive Pedagogical Support: A Multi-Level Study of Cooperation and Development in a German School–Welfare Collaboration University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany Presenting Author:Intensive pedagogical programmes for students with significant emotional and social needs address one of the most persistent challenges in contemporary educational systems: the fragmentation of institutional responsibilities and the vulnerability of learners who do not fit existing support arrangements. In North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, intensive pedagogical support provides a legal framework (Hövel & Mehlmann, 2019), targeting children and adolescents whose psychosocial adversities and disrupted educational trajectories exceed the possibilities of regular schooling (Baumann, 2014, 2019, 2024). The proportion of students receiving support for emotional and social development has been rising continuously with almost one third of students at ESD special schools in 2023/24 receiving intensive support (MSW, 2024). The project Drehscheibe, implemented at a special school for emotional and social development in Duisburg, represents an innovative form of such support. Established through a partnership between the school, the regional educational authority, the municipal youth welfare office, it integrates pedagogical and youth welfare expertise to create a coherent, relationally grounded environment for highly vulnerable learners. Emerging analytical patterns suggest that the effectiveness of intensive pedagogical support is shaped by the interaction between cooperation mechanisms at the system level and students’ subjective developmental experiences. Structured coordination routines and clear organisational arrangements provide stability for relationship-building, while students’ narratives emphasise the importance of emotional security, relational continuity, and shared interpretive frameworks for progress (Törmänen & Wicki, 2025). Based on this introduction, the present evaluation deals with Drehscheibe from two complementary perspectives: (1) a system-level analysis of multiprofessional cooperation and institutional interface work, and (2) a developmental-reconstructive analysis of students’ subjective and relational experiences. Drawing on research on intensive pedagogy (Düvelmeyer et al., 2024; Schwabe, 2014) and models of multi-professional cooperation, particularly the four-level framework by Lütje-Klose and Urban (2014), the study conceptualises cooperation as shaped by personal, relational, organisational, and task-related dynamics. The individual perspective is informed by relational educational theory and qualitative case methodology (Baumann, Albers & Bolz, 2021; Wuntke, 2024), emphasising stable relationships, emotional security, and shared understandings in developmental processes. At the system level, the study analyses how formalised routines, communication formats, and shared meaning-making structure cooperation between school and youth welfare professionals and enable joint responses to complex case dynamics. Conceptualising interface work as a central mechanism, it examines which cooperation structures function as stabilising forces settings and how they generate transferable insights for other school–welfare collaborations (Bathke et al., 2019). At the individual level, the study reconstructs students’ developmental processes by analysing how they perceive relationships with special needs teachers and educators, attribute meaning to support, and interpret changes in emotional regulation, behaviour, and engagement with schooling. By foregrounding students’ experiences of relational continuity, emotional security, and belonging, the study captures the subjective dimension of intensive pedagogy in structurally oriented evaluations. By integrating these two perspectives, the study is guided by four central research questions: (1) How are structural, organisational, and relational mechanisms of multiprofessional cooperation configured within a school-based intensive pedagogical programme? (2) How do students experience relationships, support, and belonging within this setting, and how do they interpret their own developmental processes? (3) How do cooperation structures and individual relational experiences interact in shaping students’ well-being, engagement, and educational participation? (4) Which conditions strengthen or hinder the sustainability of intensive pedagogical support in the context of school–welfare collaboration? The study provides a multi-level understanding of how intensive pedagogical programmes can function as stabilising educational environments for high-risk students insufficiently supported by conventional systems. The expected contribution lies in generating empirically grounded recommendations for sustainable cooperation structures, strengthening relational practices, and conceptualising intensive support within broader debates on inclusion, educational equity, and institutional responsibility. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The joint contribution is grounded in two interrelated doctoral projects that accompany the intensive pedagogical programme Drehscheibe with different, but systematically connected, methodological foci. Both projects share a qualitative, reconstructive orientation, yet follow distinct temporal and analytical steps which together enable a multi-level understanding of cooperation structures and individual developmental trajectories. In the first phase, a scoping review conducted by Altendeitering systematically maps the international and national research on cooperation between schools and youth welfare services for children and young people with extensive emotional and social needs. Following Kuckartz’s (2014) mixed-methods logic, the review draws on database searches (e.g., ERIC, FIS Bildung, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts), includes German- and English-language publications since 2000, and categorises findings along the four-level cooperation model by Lütje-Klose and Urban (2014). The narrative synthesis identifies forms of systematic interface work, cooperation formats, and conditions that enable or hinder intensive pedagogical measures. Parallel to this work, Päselt’s project has generated in-depth qualitative data on the experiences of students and professionals within Drehscheibe. Building on a qualitative case-study design, she conducted guideline-based individual and group interviews with students, teachers, and social pedagogical staff, complemented by participant observations in the learning groups and case-related document analyses. The interview data are analysed through focused interview analysis (Kuckartz & Rädiker, 2024), while observations and documents are used to reconstruct interaction patterns, relationship dynamics, and contextual conditions of development (Kuckartz et al., 2007). Questionnaires are not used, as they are not considered appropriate for the specific target group and research questions. A third, joint phase consists of video-based observations within the programme. Drawing on video interaction analysis (Knoblauch, 2004), Altendeitering and Päselt will conduct and analyse recordings of team meetings, case conferences, and classroom interactions. These data serve as a shared interface: (1) to examine cooperation practices, role negotiations, and forms of systematic interface work, (2) to deepen the reconstruction of relationship work and developmental processes in everyday practice. In a subsequent phase, Altendeitering will carry out further guideline-based interviews with teachers, social pedagogues, school leadership, and, where relevant, youth welfare representatives to investigate organisational conditions, cooperation structures, and school development processes surrounding Drehscheibe. These interviews, document analyses and the video data, will be analysed qualitatively to identify structural and organisational conditions of successful interface work. Across both projects, triangulation of interviews, observations, and documents (Flick, 2022) serves to relate institutional cooperation patterns to students’ subjective experiences and developmental trajectories. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Although final empirical results will only be available at the time of the conference, several theoretically grounded conclusions can be anticipated. First, intensive pedagogical programmes such as Drehscheibe seem to derive their effectiveness from the integration of structural, organisational, and relational mechanisms. Stable cooperation routines, clearly defined roles, and shared interpretive frameworks between school and youth welfare create emotionally secure learning environments that enable professionals to respond coherently to complex psychosocial needs. Second, the reconstructed developmental trajectories are expected to show that relational continuity and emotional security play a central role in students’ re-engagement with schooling. For learners at high risk with significant emotional and social needs, intensive pedagogical arrangements can interrupt trajectories of school absenteeism and contribute to more stable educational participation by providing predictable structures and meaningful relationships. Third, the multi-level design highlights that effectiveness does not arise from individual measures alone, but from the interaction between cooperation structures and students’ subjective experiences. Organisational coordination enables relationship work, while students’ relational experiences give meaning and direction to institutional practices. This interplay illustrates how intensive pedagogical settings can function as stabilising environments within fragmented educational systems. By linking professional accounts, student narratives, and observational data, the study identifies concrete mechanisms through which intensive pedagogical support can stabilise educational pathways. On this basis, practice-oriented recommendations will be formulated concerning cooperation formats, group composition, and relationship-focused pedagogical practices. The findings aim to inform schools, welfare agencies, and policy-makers seeking to design coherent, multiprofessional support structures for students with significant emotional and social needs in contexts of increasing educational complexity. References Baumann, M. (2014). Jugendliche Systemsprenger—Zwischen Jugendhilfe und Justiz. Zeitschrift für Jugendkriminalität und Jugendhilfe, 15, 162–267. Baumann, M. (2019). Kinder, die Systeme sprengen. Band 2: Impulse, Zugangswege und hilfreiche Settingbedingungen für Jugendliche und Schule. W. Bertelsmann Verlag. Baumann, M. (2024). Kinder, die Systeme sprengen: Band 1: Wenn Jugendliche und Erziehungshilfe aneinander scheitern (5th ed.). W. Bertelsmann Verlag. Baumann, M., Albers, V., & Bolz, T. (2021). Verstehende Diagnostik in der Pädagogik: Verstörenden Verhaltensweisen begegnen. Beltz. Bathke, S. A., Bücken, M., & Fiegenbaum, D. (2019). Praxisbuch Kinderschutz interdisziplinär: Wie die Kooperation von Schule und Jugendhilfe gelingen kann. Springer VS. Düvelmeyer, M., Bolz, T., Gonzales Ferreira, L., Hennemann, T., & Leidig, T. (2024). Intensivpädagogik im Kontext Schule: Wissenschaftliche Begleitung der Maßnahme U-Turn. Emotionale und soziale Entwicklung, 6, 218–227. Flick, U. (2022). Triangulation in der qualitativen Forschung. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), Qualitative Forschung (14th ed.). Rowohlt. Hövel, D., & Mehlmann, E. (2019). Ausbildungsorganisation der schulischen Förderung im Förderschwerpunkt Emotionale und soziale Entwicklung. Emotionale und soziale Entwicklung, 1, 242–247. Knoblauch, H. (2004). Die Video-Interaktions-Analyse. sozialer sinn, 5(1), 123–138. Koß, P., Wagner, C., & Baumann, M. (2018). Riskant agierende junge Menschen—Über hilflose Systeme und ihre sogenannten „Systemsprenger“. Zeitschrift für Jugendkriminalität und Jugendhilfe, 4, 285–290. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Mixed Methods. Springer VS. Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2024). Fokussierte Interviewanalyse mit MAXQDA (2nd ed.). Springer VS. Lütje-Klose, B., & Urban, M. (2014). Professionelle Kooperation als wesentliche Bedingung inklusiver Schul- und Unterrichtsentwicklung. Vierteljahresschrift für Heilpädagogik, 83(3), 283–295. Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung. (2024). Sonderpädagogische Förderung in Nordrhein Westfalen. Statistische Daten und Kennziffern zur Inklusion—2023/24. Törmänen, M., & Wicki, M. T. (2025). Multiprofessional collaboration in inclusive schools. In Bildung für alle stärken. Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. Wuntke, L. V. (2024). Professionelle Beziehungsarbeit in intensivpädagogischen Settings. Budrich. 05. Children and Youth at Risk and Education
Paper Rehabilitative Education: A Multi-layered Approach to Supporting Young People with Mental Health Difficulties in Vocational Education and Training University of Lapland, Finland Presenting Author:Mental health difficulties among young people have become increasingly prevalent. In Finland, population-level estimates suggest that approximately 20–25 percent of young people experience mental health disorders, making them the most common health problems in this age group. This represents challenges to the Finnish education system. Mental health difficulties are known to impair learning (see e.g. Gustafsson et al., 2010), increase absenteeism (Finning, 2019), and heighten the risk of educational dropout (Askeland et al., 2022; Dupéré et al., 2018). From the perspective of education and social policy, these developments raise concerns about growing inequalities and the risk of social marginalisation among young people. Internationally, a range of school-based interventions have been developed to support students’ mental health (e.g. Cooper & Whitebread, 2007; Das et al., 2016; Feiss et al., 2019). A shared assumption across these approaches is that schools can function not only as sites of instruction, but also as environments that support recovery, wellbeing, and participation. In Finland, the extension of compulsory education in 2021 has further intensified the need to develop adequate support structures in upper secondary education. The reform extended the age of compulsory education to 18, requiring every young person to transition to upper secondary education after completing basic education. While this policy aims to ensure that all students obtain a secondary qualification and to prevent social exclusion, it has significantly increased the diversity of support needs and the pressure on student welfare systems. In this context, the concept of rehabilitative education has recently emerged in Finnish policy discussions as a potential response to the growing support needs of students with mental health difficulties. However, rehabilitative education is not yet an established concept, particularly in upper secondary vocational education and training, where no formal rehabilitative structures comparable to those in basic education exist. The concept therefore remains ambiguous and under-theorised. This makes it timely to examine how rehabilitative education is understood in professional practice and how it could be developed within the existing education system. This study draws on phenomenographic analysis of focus group interviews with professionals working in vocational education, guidance counselling, and student welfare services. The study addresses the following research question: How do professionals in upper secondary vocational education and training understand rehabilitative education as a form of educational support for students experiencing mental health difficulties? The analysis identifies four qualitatively different but interconnected conceptions of rehabilitative education: (1) supporting the student’s individual resources, (2) pedagogical arrangements that enable participation, (3) multiprofessional collaboration, and (4) structural solutions within the education system. Together, these conceptions form a multi-layered understanding of rehabilitative education that extends beyond individual support to include pedagogical practices, organisational coordination, and systemic conditions. Rehabilitative education emerges not as a single intervention, but as a comprehensive approach that requires alignment across multiple levels of the education system. Interpreted through the capability approach and social justice perspectives, this multi-layered understanding highlights the relational and structural conditions necessary for meaningful educational participation. From the perspective of children and youth at risk, the findings show how mental health difficulties may position young people at the margins of vocational education and training, and how rehabilitative education can function as a rights-based and preventive approach that strengthens participation, inclusion, and educational continuity. While grounded in the Finnish education system, the findings speak to broader European concerns regarding how vocational education systems can respond more equitably to the needs of young people experiencing mental health difficulties. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study adopted a qualitative, exploratory research design to examine professionals’ conceptions of rehabilitative education in upper secondary vocational education and training. The data were produced through focus group interviews, which were considered particularly suitable for exploring variations in professional perspectives and encouraging collective reflection. The aim was not to capture individual opinions but to explore the collective variation in ways of understanding rehabilitative education across professional contexts. Participants were recruited through organisations that had granted research permission, including 22 vocational education institutions, eight wellbeing services counties (regional authorities responsible for health and welfare services), and three vocational special education institutions. The permissions covered diverse educational contexts across Finland, with the exception of South Karelia and the Åland Islands. The resulting dataset was heterogeneous, comprising professionals working in education, guidance counselling, and student welfare services, thereby capturing a wide range of institutional viewpoints. In total, 41 professionals participated in eight focus group interviews, each consisting of four to six participants. The focus group interviews were conducted in August–September 2025 via Microsoft Teams and lasted 75 minutes. A semi-structured interview guide was used consistently across all focus groups, steering the discussion towards participants’ views on the need for rehabilitative education, its pedagogical and organisational features, and related opportunities and challenges. The data were analysed using phenomenographic methods, which aim to identify and describe qualitatively different ways in which a phenomenon is understood or experienced, making them suitable for exploring variation in professional conceptions (Marton, 1981; Åkerlind, 2025). The analysis proceeded iteratively and was grounded in the data. Meaningful expressions and units of thought were identified, compared, and grouped, leading to the construction of descriptive categories capturing the qualitative variation in conceptions of rehabilitative education. The categories were further refined, and their structural relationships were examined. Analytical saturation was reached when no new qualitatively different conceptions emerged in the final focus groups (Åkerlind, 2025). The analysis resulted in a condensed set of descriptive categories forming the basis for interpretation. Ethical principles of voluntary participation, informed consent, and confidentiality were adhered to throughout the research process. Participants were informed about the purpose of the study and the use of the data prior to participation. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings This study contributes to current discussions on inclusive education and student wellbeing by conceptualising rehabilitative education as a multi-layered educational approach grounded in professionals’ understandings. Rather than framing rehabilitative education solely as an individual-level intervention targeted at specific students, the findings demonstrate that it encompasses interconnected dimensions. Supporting students with mental health difficulties requires not only attention to individual needs but also pedagogical arrangements that enable participation, multiprofessional collaboration, and structural conditions that make such practices possible. From the perspective of Amartya Sen’s (1993, 2009) capability approach, rehabilitative education can be understood as a means of expanding students’ real opportunities to engage in education in meaningful and sustainable ways. The findings highlight that professionals perceive significant constraints on these opportunities arising from structural features of the education system, such as qualification-oriented funding models, fragmented support services, and limited access to suitable learning environments. These constraints underline that educational participation cannot be reduced to formal enrolment or attendance but must be assessed in terms of the capabilities education enables. Interpreted through Nancy Fraser’s (1998, 2008) theory of social justice, rehabilitative education emerges as a question of redistribution, recognition, and representation, complemented by affective and contributive dimensions of justice (Lynch, 2012; Sayer, 2009). Conceptually, the study frames rehabilitative education as a realistic utopia grounded in existing professional practices (see Rawls, 1999; Fraser, 2008). It represents an ambitious yet feasible vision of an education system capable of responding more equitably to the needs of students whose mental health difficulties challenge conventional educational structures. While grounded in the Finnish context, the findings offer a framework that may inform international efforts to develop more just and enabling forms of educational support. References Askeland, K. G., Bøe, T., Sivertsen, B., Linton, S. J., Heradstveit, O., Nilsen, S. A., & Hysing, M. (2022). Association of depressive symptoms in late adolescence and school dropout. School Mental Health, 14(4), 1044–1056. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09522-5 Cooper, P., & Whitebread, D. (2007). The effectiveness of nurture groups on student progress: evidence from a national research study. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 12(3), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632750701489915 Das, J. K., Salam, R. A., Lassi, Z. S., Khan, M. N., Mahmood, W., Patel, V., & Bhutta, Z. A. (2016). Interventions for adolescent mental health: An overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Adolescent Health, 59(4), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.06.020 Dupéré, V., Dion, E., Nault-Brière, F., Archambault, I., Leventhal, T., & Lesage, A. (2018). Revisiting the link between depression symptoms and high school dropout: Timing of exposure matters. Journal of Adolescent Health, 62(2), 205-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.09.024 Feiss, R., Dolinger, S. B., Merritt, M., Reiche, E., Martin, K., Yanes, J. A., Thomas, C. M., & Pangelinan, M. (2019). Systematic review and meta-analysis of school-based stress, anxiety, and depression prevention programs for adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(9). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01085-0 Finning, K. (2019). The association between emotional disorder and absence from school in children and young people. Doctoral dissertation, University of Exeter. Fraser, N. (1998). Social justice in the age of identity politics: Redistribution, recognition, participation. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. Fraser, N. (2008). Scales of justice. Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. Columbia University Press. Gustafsson, J.-E., Allodi, M. W., Åkerman, B., Eriksson, C., Eriksson, L., Fischbein, S., Granlund, M., Gustafsson, P., Ljungdahl, S., Ogden, T., & Persson, R. S. (2010). School learning and mental health: A systematic review. Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien Lynch, K. (2012). Affective equality as a key issue of justice: A comment on Fraser’s 3-dimensional framework. Social Justice Series, 12(3), 45-64. http://hdl.handle.net/10197/4400 Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132516 Rawls, J. (1999). The law of peoples. Harvard University Press. Sayer, A. (2009). Contributive justice and meaningful work. Res Publica, 15, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-008-9077-8 Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well‐Being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–53). Clarendon Press. Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Harvard University Press. Åkerlind, G. (2025). Phenomenography in the 21st century. A methodology for investigating human experience of the world. Open Book Publishers. | ||