Conference Agenda

Schools have always been central to community life, but in an era in an era marked by intersecting and cascading crises, these critical social institutions and infrastructures have become more important than ever. Crises can no longer be treated as exceptional interruptions to be managed, but are instead defining conditions of twenty-first century schooling worldwide. This paper seeks to reframe crisis as both a political condition and an educational challenge. It defines education crisis under two overlapping umbrella terms of material—those that directly affect physical and social infrastructure—and epistemic crises, or those which unsettle shared values and contest the purpose of education itself. Across both, schools emerge not only as sites of vulnerability but as essential social infrastructure for community resilience. In doing so, we contend that crisis can be a productive concept for educational change when it fosters adaptability, relational leadership and practical wisdom among educators and policymakers. Recognising schools as anchors of care, coordination and recovery requires new frameworks for research, policy and practice that positions education in the centre of twenty-first century education and social policymaking. We argue that there needs to be an opening up to a broader international dialogue between educators, young people, families and communities, education leaders, policymakers, and researchers, to develop resilient and sustainable futures for schools and their communities in times of crisis.

In recent years, schools have moved beyond being primarily sites of academic instruction to becoming “multi-functional” ecosystems where the psychosocial needs of students, families, and staff are increasingly visible, and where crises (e.g., disasters, violence, loss/bereavement, social tensions, behavioral health risks) can directly disrupt everyday functioning. The poly-crisis perspective highlights that education is shaped not by a single disruption, but by multiple, intertwined crises operating simultaneously at macro levels (policy, resources, inequality) and micro levels (classroom routines, teacher resilience, student safety). Galvin et al. (2023), examining teacher education responses in Europe, shows that high-level regulatory shifts-such as changes in legislation and funding-often occur only after problems have accumulated and become visible, producing delayed effects that can persist in classrooms. In the context of ecological transformations, Bohn et al. (2025) argue that school policy and knowledge production must be reconnected through approaches that overcome conventional decision-making barriers to address urgent environmental challenges. Similarly, Homer (2024), drawing on post-pandemic Malaysia, illustrates how global shocks reconfigure school regulations and everyday teaching practices, underscoring the complex linkage between macro decisions and micro learning environments.

Within this context, Psychological First Aid (PFA) has gained prominence in schools as an early post-crisis support framework grounded in the principles of “rapid, practical, and do no harm” (Brymer et al., 2006). In school settings, first contact, immediate support, and referral practices during crises are often coordinated by school counselors in interaction with teachers, administrators, and external stakeholders (Kılınç Çelebi, 2025; Şahin Yoluk, 2023; Kılınç Çelebi, 2019; Long et al., 2018). This makes it essential to understand not only whether PFA knowledge is “known,” but under what conditions it becomes actionable in real time. At the same time, knowledge production and circulation in education and mental health is increasingly digital: online platforms, professional networks, document sharing, social media, and generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini) can accelerate access to information while intensifying concerns about credibility, verification practices, ethical responsibility, and “epistemic trust” (whom/what we deem trustworthy). The transformative role of digital platforms in education and mental health in the post–COVID-19 period is particularly evident (Maqsood et al., 2021).

Evidence on new teachers’ preparedness for emergency procedures indicates the need for “pre-crisis readiness” among school staff (Mruk, 2025). Because teachers may function as first responders, crisis intervention/PFA literacy becomes a school-wide competence rather than a counselor-only skill set. The emotional load and sense of “constant high pressure” in trauma-informed practice further indicate the need for both skills training and self-care/peer support for counselors and teachers (Kılınç Çelebi, 2025; Şahin Yoluk, 2023; Kılınç Çelebi, 2019; Long et al., 2018). Reviews of school-based mental health interventions also foreground the tension between evidence-based approaches and local adaptation (Watson, 2023). Additionally, concerns that youth behavioral health crises may be “criminalized” through school policing highlight ethical and systemic barriers and the role of advocacy in school crisis response (Morabito et al., 2025). From an environmental and sustainability perspective, Kagawa (2022) calls for climate-responsive, crisis-sensitive, and “nature-positive” educational frameworks, reinforcing the policy relevance of poly-crisis debates.

Against this backdrop, the present study asks how PFA knowledge in schools is produced/learned and circulated, through what tensions it becomes actionable in practice, and how digital ecosystems facilitate or hinder this transformation. Specifically, from school counselors’ perspectives, it examines the sources and channels of school-based PFA knowledge, the conditions under which it becomes “actionable knowledge” during crises, tensions between standardized indicators/procedures and contextual-professional judgment, and the role of digital tools (professional networks, platforms, generative AI) in these processes.

Navigating Crisis: The Role of School-Based Psychological First Aid in Knowledge Production and Digital Ecosystems for Educational Practice and Policy

Educational inequalities persist as a structural challenge within the German school system, where students' achievement and participation are closely tied to factors such as their socio-economic background, migration history, parental education, and regional context (Maaz & Lörz, 2024). These disparities are particularly evident in disadvantaged urban areas, where cumulative risks, selective transitions, and less stimulating learning environments can restrict educational and life prospects (van Ackeren et al., 2021). Large-scale assessments, including PISA 2022, confirm the enduring influence of social background. The German 2024 Education Report also highlights ongoing participation disparities relating to poverty, parental education, and regional context (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung, 2024).

In this context, school development is increasingly being conceptualised as a strategic response to spatially concentrated inequalities. Research emphasises context-sensitive processes, inclusive and visionary leadership, and integrating schools into their local communities (Arnoldt et al., 2023). The Perspektivschulprogramm in Germany implements this approach by allocating extra resources to schools in disadvantaged areas, supporting multidisciplinary teams, full-day programmes, and local partnerships. Similarly, the concept of schools as community hubs, through 'school–community partnerships' and 'community schools', illustrates a strategy for promoting learning, social support, and equity across Europe and beyond (Becks, 2023; Forell et al., 2023).

As has been pointed out, a key strategy of this framework involves systematically integrating external perspectives and resources into school development. Partnerships with families, social services, and cultural organisations allow schools to address complex learning and life challenges (Valli et al., 2016). Oakes et al. (2017) identified four core pillars of successful community schools in a systematic literature review:

1) Integrated student support to reduce social and health-related barriers to learning;

2) Expanded learning time and opportunities to provide additional free educational offerings;

3) Systematic family and community engagement to actively involve disadvantaged parents;

4) Collaborative leadership practices to foster shared responsibility, participation, and sustainable network structures.

Building on this, our study examines how school leaders (SL) at Perspektivschulen implement community-oriented development in disadvantaged urban neighbourhoods. The following research questions are addressed:

RQ1: How do school leaders shape regional education partnerships as part of community-oriented school development?
RQ2: What strategies do they use to sustain these partnerships over the long term?

Based on semi-structured interviews with 18 school leaders, this study examines the practical implementation of these pillars, the institutional embedding of partnerships and how leadership fosters equity-focused development. The findings contribute to European and international debates on justice-oriented school leadership, demonstrating how schools in disadvantaged contexts can promote learning, participation, and social inclusion. The study also emphasises the pivotal role of educational governance in fostering sustainable, context-sensitive and justice-oriented school development. It emphasises the potential benefits and difficulties of community-oriented strategies when combined with capacity building and systemic support at local and regional levels (Ainscow, 2020; Brücher et al., 2024).

According to the Finnish National Curriculum, schools are obligated to collaborate with parents to support children’s comprehensive well-being and learning (FNBE, 2016). Student welfare intends to promoting student’s learning and comprehensive well-being both in individual and communal levels, and includes interagency collaboration between teaching staff, health and social care professionals, as well as students and parents (Student Welfare Act, 2013). Effective home-school collaboration has been found to support student’s learning and well-being (Smith et al., 2020), as well as parents’ needs (Berg et al., 2021), but parent’s perspectives on functional collaboration between home and student welfare personnel have been studied only little.

Previous studies indicate that interaction between parents and school personnel have a meaningful impact on effective interagency collaboration. Home-school collaboration is needed for parental support, and low threshold for contacting is important for engaging dialogue between home and school (Berg et al., 2021). Most of the contact between home and school takes place via electronic applications, but parental attitudes towards digital communication varies (Kuusimäki et al., 2021), parents may expect availability and quick responses through these channels (Hedlin & Frank, 2022), and one-directional communication through platforms may seem negative or disrespectful for parents (Lutovac et al., 2024). Good home-school relationships can prevent conflicts and support the child’s development (Berg et al., 2021), and building trust between home and school requires mutuality and appreciation (Ovesen et al., 2023).

In this study, we are interested in parental empowerment in interactions with school professionals throughout the Finnish comprehensive school. The research question is: What kind of empowering factors can be recognized in interactions between parents and school professionals? Empowerment is seen as a process in which an individual's beliefs in their own abilities, influence, and agency are strengthened through interaction with their environment (Zimmerman, 2000). Empowering becomes possible when the professional’s role is more like an equal collaborator than a guiding expert. Individual empowerment consists of intrapersonal, interactional, and behavioral components that reflect the individual’s beliefs on their participation, control, and critical awareness over their lives (Zimmerman, 2000).