Conference Agenda

Psychological strain and mental health challenges among higher education students have become a major concern in Nordic countries and globally (Cuppen et al., 2024; Parikka et al., 2024; WHO, 2025). Arts students report higher levels of stress, burnout and mental health problems than students in other fields (Kunttu et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2024; Vaag et al., 2021). Music students particularly display elevated levels of physical and psychological health problems (e.g. Rose et al., 2024; Spahn et al., 2004) and also experience study‑related burnout (e.g. Bernhard, 2007, 2010).

Although music is often associated with positive well‑being, studying to become a music professional can be psychologically and physically demanding. In addition to general higher education demands, music students face discipline-specific stressors such as competition, extensive solitary practice, performance anxiety, and perfectionism (e.g. Araújo et al., 2017; Perkins et al., 2017). While their well-being has been studied through performance anxiety, stress, and overuse injuries, research on academic burnout and engagement remains limited and inconsistent, typically based on single‑institution or single-country samples (see, however, Zabuska et al., 2018).

Understanding factors that influence students’ well-being is essential, as well-being during studies is linked to academic progress and later occupational well-being. In this study, academic well‑being is defined as comprising both negative (study burnout: exhaustion, cynicism, inadequacy) and positive (study engagement: vigor, dedication, absorption) dimensions (Salmela-Aro et al., 2009; Salmela-Aro & Upadaya, 2012; Schaufeli et al., 2002). Study-related burnout is associated with intentions to discontinue studies (e.g. Calcatin et al., 2022) and predicts later work-related burnout (Robins et al., 2018), whereas study engagement is positively associated with academic achievement and subjective well-being (Wong et al., 2024).

Perfectionism is an important factor in students’ well-being (Hill et al., 2025). It has increased among students (Curran & Hill, 2019) and is common among music students (Alpheis & Altenmüller, 2024; Butković et al., 2022). Perfectionism is a multidimensional construct comprising positive and negative dimensions (Hewitt & Flett, 1991; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). While high personal standards and striving for excellence may support engagement, fear of failure and self‑criticism are linked to poorer recovery and a higher risk of burnout (e.g. Flaxman et al., 2017; Tuominen et al., 2021). Perfectionism may also arise from the environment: a perfectionistic climate refers to performance pressures from institutions or teachers, such as expectations of flawlessness or critical responses to mistakes (Grugan et al., 2021).

Perfectionism can lead individuals to work at the expense of their recovery and well-being. It is associated with high workloads (Bellam & Curran, 2025) and stress (Hewitt & Flett, 2002), both of which increase the risk of burnout when sustained over time (Lin et al., 2021; Salmela‑Aro et al., 2009). Adequate recovery can prevent stress from developing into burnout (Gluschkoff et al., 2016). Beyond perfectionism, recovery plays a crucial but understudied role in students’ well-being. Recovery refers to processes that restore psychological and physical resources after a demanding situation (Sonnentag & Fritz, 2007). Sufficient recovery during leisure time is associated with higher work engagement on the following day (Sonnentag, 2003), whereas insufficient recovery is associated with an increased risk of burnout and poorer well-being (Geurts & Sonnentag, 2006; Gluschkoff et al., 2016).

This dissertation examines music students’ academic well‑being and the factors influencing it. The overarching research question is: To what extent do higher education music students in the Nordic countries experience academic burnout and study engagement, and how are perfectionism and recovery associated with these dimensions of well-being at both individual and institutional levels? The study is grounded in the Study Demands–Resources model, which considers both individual- and environment-level demands and resources (Salmela-Aro & Upadyaya, 2014).

This study addresses the global challenges of rapid technological evolution and complex problem-solving by investigating how project-based learning (PBL), through a structured multi-support system, can effectively cultivate self-directed learning (SDL) competencies among engineering students. Focusing on the Chinese higher education context, it seeks to answer the following questions: How do teachers, peers, and AI tools within PBL contribute to the development of multidimensional SDL by providing resource, cognitive, and emotional support? What are the key mechanisms underlying this process? And what design principles can be derived that hold universal relevance for the global engineering education community? The research aims to uncover the interactive relationships between support actors and core functions in PBL, construct an analytical framework for optimizing SDL development, and provide evidence-based insights for institutions worldwide grappling with large-scale education, industry-academia collaboration, and digital transformation. The theoretical framework integrates Activity Theory, which views PBL as a dynamic activity system; Situated Learning Theory, which emphasizes learning through participation in authentic practices; and Self-Determination Theory, which centers on fulfilling learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Together, these perspectives offer a comprehensive, cross-culturally comparable lens for understanding how PBL promotes SDL through systemic, contextual, and motivational dimensions.

Understanding large numbers beyond 1,000 represents a persistent challenge in primary mathematics education. While enactive place-value materials such as base-ten blocks are widely acknowledged as powerful tools for developing early bundling concepts and place-value understanding (Padberg & Benz, 2021; Käpnick, 2014), their pedagogical function becomes increasingly problematic in extended number ranges. Physical representations of ten-thousands, hundred-thousands, or millions are neither proportional nor practically manageable and may even foster misconceptions (Gaidoschik, 2025; Schipper et al., 2018). As a consequence, learners are expected to shift from concrete manipulation to fully mental bundling processes—often without explicit instructional support for this transition.

Although research consistently emphasizes the importance of withdrawing concrete representations and fostering relational and structural interpretations of numbers (Bruner et al., 1988; Schulz & Wartha, 2021), little is known about how teachers design and scaffold this transition in classroom practice. In particular, there is a lack of empirically grounded insights into how instructional materials can support learners’ mental bundling processes without creating new dependencies on visual representations.

Against this background, the present project develops and evaluates an iconically supported instructional format that functions as a deliberately limited bridge between enactive experience and mental place-value reasoning. Rather than representing large quantities themselves, the iconic materials visualize bundling structures and hierarchical relations of the decimal system, thereby supporting learners in mentally simulating bundling and unbundling processes (Ruwisch, 2015; Schulz & Wartha, 2021). From a cognitive perspective, this design builds on evidence that large numbers are primarily processed through relational and structural representations rather than through analog magnitude comparisons (Dehaene, 1992; Schneider et al., 2016).

The study follows a formative evaluation approach (Döring, 2014) and is embedded in a professional development programme for primary school teachers. Its analytical focus lies on the teachers’ perspective, as teachers play a key role in shaping instructional transitions between representation levels and in deciding how learning materials are integrated into classroom practice.

The study addresses the following research questions:

Q1a: Which didactic steps and instructional strategies do teachers describe as particularly supportive for fostering a robust understanding of place value and bundling in the extended number range beyond 1,000?

Q1b: How do teachers integrate the iconically supported place-value material into their existing instructional practices, particularly in relation to textbooks and established routines (e.g., as an addition, substitution, or restructuring of tasks)?

Q1c: Which challenges and difficulties do teachers identify when using the iconic material and when supporting learners’ transition from enactive bundling to fully mental bundling processes?

Q2: How do teachers assess the practicality and instructional usefulness of the iconically supported material across different instructional phases (e.g., introduction, consolidation, practice, and reflection)?

Empirical data are collected across two school years using a qualitative multi-method design combining open questionnaires and short group discussions (Kuckartz & Rädiker, 2024; Vogl, 2014). This design allows for the reconstruction of individual didactic reasoning as well as shared interpretative patterns among teachers.

Preliminary findings from the first evaluation cycle suggest that teachers perceive the iconic material as a meaningful scaffold for structuring instructional transitions between representation levels. At the same time, the data point to differentiated challenges regarding timing, fading strategies, and alignment with heterogeneous student prerequisites.

By systematically linking teachers’ experiential knowledge with theoretically grounded design principles, the project contributes to current debates on how educational research can connect knowing and acting. In line with the ECER 2026 theme, it illustrates how insights from mathematics education and cognitive psychology can be translated into instructional action through iterative design and reflective teacher engagement.

Topic: Internationalisation of Curriculum in Practice: A Critical Discourse Analysis of International Students' Perspectives in Finland

Objectives: In an increasingly globalised and market-oriented higher education landscape, institutions strive to equip students with skills for global citizenship and intercultural competence. This study addresses a gap in programme-specific research by examining international students' lived experiences and discourses regarding the internationalisation of curriculum (IoC) within an international master's programme at a Finnish research university.

Research questions:

• What are the prevailing discourses of international students on the internationalisation of curriculum?

• How do international students construct and negotiate their roles within these processes?

Conceptual and theoretical frameworks: The study adopts a multi-layered theoretical framework to explore the complexities of IoC. Centrally, it draws on Leask’s (2015) Internationalisation of Curriculum (IoC) framework, which emphasises the integration of international and intercultural dimensions into content, pedagogy, and support services. To understand how students navigate institutional structures, the research utilises Archer’s (2003) theory of agency and Fielding’s (2004) typology of student voice. These are complemented by critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970; Giroux, 1988) to analyse how power dynamics and epistemic hierarchies are challenged. Finally, the concept of co-creation is used to examine the potential for students to act as active partners in curriculum design.

European and international dimensions: This research is situated at the intersection of European higher education policy and global market trends. As Finland and the broader European Higher Education Area (EHEA) shift toward "work-based and competence-based immigration," international degree programmes have become central tools for national competitiveness. The study critiques the neoliberal marketisation of Finnish higher education, where students are often positioned as customers rather than active academic participants. Using a case study of a Finnish research university, the study highlights tensions between local academic norms and the global expectations of a diverse student body, particularly regarding the dominance of Western-centric knowledge production. This research contributes to European dialogues on educational equity and the ethical internationalisation of curricula in the Global North.

Proposal Information

The classrooms of tomorrow need biology teachers who can steer debates on gene editing, climate resilience, and biodiversity loss—topics where evidence is contested and the future is unwritten. Standard teacher training, heavy on content delivery, often sidesteps these messy, real-world controversies. Yet, navigating them requires a specific skill set: critical future thinking (CFT). We define CFT as the capacity to dissect complex systems, imagine alternative futures, and weigh decisions against sustainability goals.

Our research starts from a curious gap. While research-based learning (RBL) is a proven engine for inquiry, we know surprisingly little about how to tailor it specifically to grow CFT through the lens of heated socio-scientific issues. This study’s mission is to move past generic endorsements of RBL. Instead, we ask: what does it take, in concrete pedagogical terms, to make an RBL module a powerful incubator for critical future tThinking? We aim to prototype, test, and refine these conditions within a real teacher education program.

This leads us to three focused questions:

1. As student-teachers dive into a controversy-driven RBL project, what shifts can we observe in how they connect scientific facts, societal values, and long-term consequences?
2. Which parts of the research journey—like framing questions that have no textbook answer, or defending a position in a role-played stakeholder negotiation—really push their future-thinking skills?
3. What surprises, hurdles, and breakthroughs do the facilitating instructors report, and what does this reveal about implementing such an approach at the intersection of pedagogy and sustainability?

Our thinking is scaffolded by three interlocking frameworks. From futures and sustainability education, we take the core concept of CFT as a crucial learning outcome. The pedagogy of research-based learning (Healey & Jenkins, 2009) gives us our main method—turning the classroom into a lab for investigating uncertain futures. Finally, the literature on socio-scientific issues (SSI) provides the essential, authentic context: the unresolved, value-laden dilemmas that make future thinking both necessary and difficult.

This work is inherently European and international. Equipping teachers to facilitate debates on sustainable futures is embedded in EU education strategies like the European Sustainability Competence Framework. Our design draws inspiration from leading programs across Europe that treat controversy not as a problem, but as a pedagogical resource. By developing a transferable model and sharing it through European networks, we contribute directly to a collective effort: preparing educators to build resilience and foresight in their students.