Conference Program

In times characterized by professional dynamism and daily “platformization”, European higher education is undergoing a profound transformation through cooperative programmes such as the European University Alliances, promoted within the “European Education Area”. Given that these programmes have been planned to foster inclusion, digitalization and transnational collaboration, this intertwined vision appears to be inspired by a more complex convergence of cooperation and control, creativity and standardization, that reshapes the very idea of the university as a democratic environment.

In this view, this paper explores the rhetorical and metaphorical solutions inspiring the discourse on collaboration, creativity, and control within the official factsheets of the European University Alliances involving Italian public universities. The paper analyzes these declarations with the aim to probe the most frequent programmatic patterns inspiring such academic alliances. As a result, the shared systemic challenges emphasize the joint relationship between institutional discourse and digital transformation, in a time universities are expected to lean on interculturality, cooperation, and social impact.

More specifically, the paper will focus on the role played by some Italian Universities within the international Alliances in which they are involved: University of Cagliari (EDUC Alliance), University of Naples Parthenope (SEA-EU Alliance), Sapienza University of Rome (CIVIS Alliance), University of Catania (EUNICE Alliance), University of Macerata (ERUA Alliance), University of Bergamo (BAUHAUS4EU). The qualitative analysis of the official declarations will help investigate the keywords of such cooperative strategies highlighted through shared rhetorical solutions and theoretical sociological patterns.

Through the theoretical analysis provided by Nicolas Dirks, Frank Furedi, Paul Virilio, Paul Bourdieu, and Jurgen Habermas, these alliances will be framed within the broader debate on the neo-liberal academia, the deification of safety, and the “weaponization” of emotions that Furedi interprets as a real academic drawback. These rhetorical patterns often reproduce the ambivalences of contemporary higher education: while promising open collaboration and creative exchange, they also embed mechanisms of bureaucratic control and normative convergence. In particular, the use of performative keywords (excellence, innovation, impact, quality) reveals the effort to pursue the goals of efficiency and accountability.

Given the theoretical lenses of the “social university” (Ferrarotti) and “civic university” (Dobson and Ferrari), the paper discusses how these alliances perform a communicative redefinition of the academic space, transforming universities into systems capable of developing a digital and intercultural ecosystem.

This transformation entails a potential loss of autonomy and local distinctiveness to achieve harmonization and shared governance, just to foster a reticular model of university.

In the context of digital transformation, universities are increasingly seen as strategic players in promoting digital democracy and intercultural connectivity in the Mediterranean region. Educational innovation plays a strategic role in promoting inclusion, active participation and the co-construction of knowledge within university digital environments. Digital platforms represent potential “bridges” capable of connecting academic communities in different geopolitical and cultural contexts. However, the presence of digital infrastructure cannot automatically translate into participatory and democratic educational environments.

This contribution presents the results of an online survey conducted among students enrolled in Moodle-based courses across partner universities in Italy, Greece, France, Germany, Turkey, Croatia, and Lithuania, within the framework of the Virtual Auditorium project, funded by the ERASMUS+ programme under the Partnerships for Innovation – Forward-Looking Projects action. The study adopts a critical, non-deterministic perspective on digital transformation in higher education, considering platforms not as neutral tools but as environments whose effectiveness depends on how they are integrated into teaching practices. From this perspective, digital democracy is not an automatic effect of technological access, but rather the result of pedagogical choices able to activate collaborative, dialogical and reflective practices.

Preliminary findings indicate a significant process of digital normalisation within participating universities: the 624 respondents report almost universal access to digital devices and extensive use of online communication tools, while Moodle is widely integrated into teaching practices, mainly within blended learning models. At the infrastructural level, the platform contributes to the continuity of access and systematic availability of teaching materials, becoming a stable and routinised component of course delivery. At the organisational level, its use is associated with advantages in sharing materials and managing study activities and is linked to a perception of improved learning and academic performance. These benefits are mainly related to efficiency, structuring and individual study management, rather than collaborative or dialogic practices.

No similar strengthening has been observed in terms of relationships and participation. This is reflected in the reduced use of collaborative activities (co-creation, forums, simulations), limited peer-to-peer interaction and student-teacher engagement through the platform.

This ambivalence suggests a gap between digital transformation and pedagogical innovation. Although universities have extensively implemented technological infrastructures, the intentional redesign of teaching practices towards active, participatory and co-creative models still appears to be incomplete. A predominantly individual and efficiency-oriented use can contribute to dynamics of isolation and digital fatigue, highlighted in the literature on online learning, rather than encouraging participation. In the intercultural Mediterranean context, characterised by heterogeneous institutional traditions and geopolitical asymmetries, the digital transformation into relational “bridges” requires deliberate teaching strategies oriented towards the collective production of knowledge.

From a preliminary and exploratory perspective, the study also opens up a reflection on the post-human dimension of the academic experience. As human-machine interaction becomes commonplace, the question is how pedagogical choices mediate this transformation. Digital innovation is significant for democratic participation when infrastructural integration is accompanied by a pedagogical reconfiguration oriented towards collaborative action and intercultural dialogue.

Civic engagement and civic participation are closely linked to deliberation, empowerment, and democratic learning and are increasingly becoming key responsibilities of local authorities within contemporary decision-making processes. Ehrlich (2022) defines civic engagement as “working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make a difference.” Similarly, Weisseno (2023, p. 317) argues that “Society and educational policymakers expect political education to contribute to the development of democratic attitudes and the associated willingness to participate in order to prevent illiberal, autocratic and authoritarian behaviour.”

Building on the model of political competence (Detjen et al. 2012), there is a demonstrated connection between political knowledge, prior participation experiences, and the willingness to participate politically (Weisseno, 2023, p. 216). Participation experiences—whether positive or negative—significantly influence future civic engagement. This relationship applies not only to children, adolescents, and adults within political education contexts but also to municipalities that design and implement participatory processes. Civic participation must therefore be understood not only as a societal practice but also as an educational task embedded within institutional structures.

In this theoretical background, the paper presents findings from two empirical contexts: civic participation practices in German municipalities (Herzer, G.) and civic education within teacher training at the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (Kofler, D.). The study examines civic engagement and participation in both formal and non-formal settings. On the one hand, it analyses institutional approaches to participation within municipalities, schools, and social institutions. On the other hand, it investigates civic education in teacher training as a foundational space for developing democratic competencies and professional responsibility.

The German data were collected through a online survey of a municipalities (N = 468), representing independent cities, municipalities, and districts. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistical methods and inductive procedures, including factor analysis, to identify structural dimensions of institutional participation practices.

In Italy, data were collected from Master’s students in Primary Education. The sample included first-year students (academic year 2024/25; N = 75) attending a laboratory course in Intercultural Education and two cohorts of fifth-year students enrolled in Civic Education (N = 36; N = 43). Participants completed a questionnaire assessing their knowledge of the European Union and its values, as well as their reflections following a board game activity designed to promote civic learning.

The overall aim is to contribute to the further development of civic education and citizen participation practices by linking municipal participation structures with teacher professionalization. Particular attention is given to schools as democratic spaces shaping new forms of civic and social learning. Innovative approaches such as game-based learning are examined as didactic tools to foster democratic competencies, intrinsic motivation, critical thinking, and reflective engagement.

The findings highlight the crucial role of universities in embedding civic participation as a core educational task. By integrating theoretical knowledge, reflective practice, and experiential learning into curricula, teacher education can function as a central site of professional empowerment, enabling educators to translate democratic principles into sustainable pedagogical practice and to foster inclusive and participatory school cultures.

Challenge-Based Learning (CBL) is increasingly adopted in universities as an innovative pedagogy for cultivating civic competence and collective agency in digitally mediated societies. In the context of socio-ecological crises such as climate change, CBL is often presented as a way to connect higher education with democratic participation and societal problem-solving. In many cases these initiatives intersect with traditions of citizen science and community-engaged learning, where students collaborate with societal partners to generate socially relevant knowledge. Yet the democratic promise of CBL — classroom-laboratories that foster critical thinking, collaboration and responsible citizenship — is frequently constrained by institutional bottlenecks: partner coordination, mentor capacity, assessment practices, and invisible educator labour. These constraints are especially salient when CBL addresses crisis-scale, cross-disciplinary challenges that require sustained institutional support and transparent, participatory monitoring.

This paper reports a systematic review and proposes a design-oriented research agenda that foregrounds institutional orchestration as core infrastructure for resilient, democratic CBL. The review reveals a recurrent pattern: studies on CBL emphasise student outcomes and pedagogical designs for civic engagement, while studies on AI in education focus primarily on learner-facing tools rather than the institutional infrastructures required for digitally supported collaborative learning. The intermediate layer — workflows, role coordination, partner onboarding, governance mechanisms, and assessment modalities reconceived as instruments of empowerment rather than control — remains under-theorised and under-validated in real university settings. From a democratic perspective, this omission risks making crisis CBL episodic, inequitable, and overly dependent on a few motivated staff, thereby undermining sustained public engagement and equitable student voice.

Responding to this gap, the paper outlines a practicable research and design agenda using Action Design Research principles. The agenda treats AI as a coordination support (mentor onboarding aids, progress summarisation, artefact outcome mapping) that preserves human decision authority and enhances transparency — principles increasingly discussed in debates on digital democracy and algorithmic governance. Crucially, it reconceptualises monitoring and assessment: rubrics, participation metrics and reporting flows are reframed as tools to amplify student agency and partner accountability rather than as top-down inspection mechanisms. The agenda also foregrounds teacher competencies (facilitation, boundary-spanning with partners, assessment-as-empowerment) and institutional change mechanisms (role definitions, workload modelling, IT governance) necessary to scale crisis CBL ethically and sustainably.

By linking orchestration design to democratic aims, the paper contributes a bridge between pedagogical innovation and systemic infrastructure: resilient crisis CBL requires not only classroom practices but institutional orchestration within university systems that support equitable participation, transparent reporting, and sustainable staff workloads. The presentation will invite discussion on governance models, the ethics of AI-enabled coordination, competency frameworks for educators, and practical pathways universities can adopt to embed democratic, crisis-responsive CBL at scale.

Italian and international universities are attended by students with special training needs, which do not always fall within the category of Special Educational Needs (SEN) (Savarese, D’Elia, 2018). The latest figures on this subject, dating from the 2019–2020 academic year, show that only 2.13% of students enrolled at Italian universities have a disability or a specific learning difficulty (ANVUR, 2022), but there are no figures available for other needs. The focus on special training needs as opposed to SEN stems from conceptual and regulatory reasons: first and foremost, the definition of educational need refers, in both the Italian and international contexts (OECD, 2022), to developmental difficulties (Ianes, 2006) that tend to emerge by the age of eighteen, which relate to the developmental stage but fall within a clearly defined framework (UNESCO, 1994; MIUR, 2012); as the adjective itself implies, these are needs that arise within the educational context. It is a different matter to consider the heterogeneity of needs, of varying scope, which manifest themselves not during school age but during the transition to adulthood or in adulthood. Despite this, in common international language, training needs and educational needs are often translated in the same way, under the umbrella term SEN, overlooking the important nuance of meaning that distinguishes them.

Three significant studies from different universities, selected for their relevance to the topic, the University of Salerno (Savarese, D'Elia, 2018), the University of Parma (Antonietti, Luciano, Pintus, 2024), and the University of Salento (Pinnelli et al., 2024) report that universities have training needs that are not only related to certifiable conditions that arise during the academic career. This finding is also reflected in the guidelines of the CNUDD (CNUDD, 2024), which guide universities in managing different situations that do not fall within the current regulations on university inclusion (i.e., Law 104/92, Law 118/1971 and Law 170/2010 and subsequent regulatory updates), according to the principle of reasonable accommodation.

The primary objective of this study is to review the national and international scientific literature on the subject and then analyse some case studies from national university teaching practice.

In this regard, the aim is to examine the various approaches to managing training needs within Italian universities, the schemes designed, and the measures put in place to support students who, during their studies, face different needs – namely, non-traditional students (Pinnelli et al., 2024); that is to say, a group of students with varied needs and requirements, including, for example, temporary vulnerabilities, disabilities, and linguistic, cultural and social disadvantages. In this sense, this study also includes those who lack ‘social capital’, that is, a network of personal relationships that an individual can directly draw upon to pursue their goals and improve their social position (Bourdieu, 1980). Social capital thus identifies a particular set of resources – those present in the relationships an individual maintains with the surrounding community – without which they could not have the same opportunities for social stratification (Bourdieu, Passeron 1977).