Numerous processes in the social field have focused in recent years the attention at European level on promoting citizenship education. Citizenship education is understood as the subject area that is promoted in schools with the aim of fostering the harmonious co-existence and mutually beneficial development of individuals and of the communities they are part of (Eurydice 2017). That is European countries need citizens to be engaged in social and political life not only to ensure that basic democratic values flourish but also to foster social cohesion at a time of increasing social and cultural diversity (Eurydice, 2012). As well as in 2006 civic and social competences were included among the key competences for citizens living in a knowledge society, nowadays promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship through school education represents one of the main objectives of the current Strategic Framework for European Cooperation in Education and Training which extends to 2020. In order to achieve these objectives, citizenship education needs to help students develop knowledge, skills, attitudes and values in four broad competence area: interacting effectively and constructively with others, thinking critically, acting in a socially responsible manner and acting democratically (Eurydice 2017).

The traditional citizenship, based on the recognition of rights and duties, is overcome by the citizenship of powers and of responsibility and therefore becomes “active” within a school as a “common good”, primary good for the community. Considering the new citizenship training, Sen and Nussbaum's theses deserve to be recalled, among the first to envisage the need, in the field of democratic citizenship education, not to stop at the use of language of rights / duties, recognizing the great importance of what are called “capabilities” (Sen 1993, 2009; Nussbaum, 2011). School’s responsibility has been the subject of increasing attention by international organizations in trying to define which skills can be identified as indispensable and clarify how school can help to build them.

Teachers have a specific role to play in translating the policy aims into effective practice. In order to fulfil this mission, teachers must receive appropriate initial education as well as continuing professional development.In Italy the PNFD – National Plant of Teachers Training (2016-2019) has highlighted integration, citizenship competences and global citizenship among the priorities of teacher training. In a broader sense, the definition of conscious citizenship, both in terms of territory and in its necessary global interpretation, must be increasingly inclusive of all dimensions of citizenship: that means not only cultural integration or education to legality, but also the care of common goods, environmental and food education, etc.

This paper presents the design and the first outcomes of an exploratory survey that the Education Department of the University of Bari has realized within the project 'Citizenship, identity building and culture of respect'. The purpose of the survey is to analyze the processes of constructing the shared meanings of the common good starting from the personal meanings of the individual teachers. The target is made up of 31 expert teachers involved in a network of 5 schools aimed at implementing projects to build active and democratic citizenship. The need for formative intervention has been identified in the construction of a shared meaning of common good starting from representations, from personal meanings and experiences and aimed at designing training interventions aimed at students in coherence with the curricular choices of the schools involved.

Focusing on the didactic model of “transposition” (Chevallard, 1995; Schubauer-Leoni & Leutenegger, 2005) - assumed, in this case, as an explanatory tool for the processes of professional knowledge – training activities have been planned with the aim of co-construction of the meanings of the common good starting from the personal knowledge of the single teacher. Starting from the Design Based Research (Anderson & Shattuck, 2012; Barab & Squire, 2004), training activities have been designed following some methodological frameworks, such as: - reflectivity and analysis of practices (Altet, Vinatier, 2008; Maubant, Martineau 2011), based on reflective thinking and on the figure of a "practical-reflective expert" with specific competences arising both from scientific-rational and experience-based knowledge (Altet, Paquay 2002; Perla 2010, 2011); - narrative framework (Clandinin, Connelly 2000): through narration activities it is possible to analyse the inner emotive and relational processes of a narrator; to analyse meanings of events by triggering reflective and experience-based processes; to explain knowledge deriving from actions; to reconstruct the past and to preserve (individual and common) memories by means of writing practices (Perla, 2012). Various data collection tools have been used: - mind maps as a useful tool to highlight participants' representations concerning the common good: mind maps allow a graphic representation of the implicit features of beliefs dealing with such a complex topic. Mapping activities are one of the most effective and functional representation of knowledge (Novak, Gowin, 1995; Novak, 2001; Buzan, 2006; Buzan, Buzan, 2003). Maps are logical-iconic mediators (Damiano 2013) in a hierarchical structure used to represent concepts and are highly representative tools for the self-reflective analysis of implicit, cultural and experiential dimensions in a profession (Vinci, 2012); - writings on the professional activities (Perla, 2012), that allow to explain the professional knowledge by means of the analysis of working processes (Pastré, Lenoir, 2008). By means of reflective writings, the participants could analyse their experience by reflecting on it and intertwining it with their personal, relational, ethical and ideological beliefs that distinguish their professional actions. Another tool used is the DidaSco Expertise Unit, a format useful to the production of skill units focus on the common good. The textual corpus obtained was subjected to Qualitative Data Analysis procedures (Richards & Morse, 2009) through identification of semantic Nodes.

The early outcomes confirm the polysemous concept of “good” but provide new synthetic meanings of common good. The contribution ends inviting researchers and teachers to operate a deconstruction of the concepts, a shearing of the ‘personal knowledge’ and the co-construction of the core-content of the school curriculum (Agrati, Massaro, Vinci 2017). This goes in the direction of guiding teachers towards the planning of educational-didactic interventions of a systemic type. As a school educational proposal, it remains abstract if it is approached from the purely conceptual or curricular point of view, while it has to be tackled according to a competence project, in systemic contexts, through inter/transdisciplinary interventions and according to active methodologies. During the training-research 'Citizenship, identity building and culture of respect' it was possible to highlight the existence of at least three semantic nuclei ascribable to the concept of the common good and underlined the research-training as an exercise of effective democratic participation by teachers. Since the next step is working with the students, at the end of the realization of those training laboratories, it will be realized the detection of the effects of the training intervention and the consequent reflection by the teachers involved in the survey as a retrospective method of evaluation and comparison of the documents produced. Innovation in training asks the teaching practice the collaborative production of materials to be used on real learning contexts and monitoring their effectiveness. These materials, as well as proving the training experience, represent in fact useful tools in the educational intervention as well as a means of fertilizing the single/group training experience in the school community of origin (by the teacher involved in a process of design, implementation and verification of the realized prototype).

Agrati, L.S., Massaro, S., Vinci, V. (2017). Il bene comune come “sapere da insegnare”. La ricerca-formazione Cittadinanza, costruzione identitaria e cultura del rispetto. MeTis. Mondi educativi. Temi, indagini, suggestioni, 7(2), 600-637. Altet, M., Vinatier I. (2008). Analyser et comprendre la pratique enseignante. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes. Anderson, T., Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research?. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. Barab, S.A., Squire, K.D. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences. Buzan, B., Buzan, T. (2003). Mappe mentali. Milano: NLP Italy. Buzan, T. (2006). Come realizzare le mappe mentali. Milano: Frassinelli. Chevallard, Y. (1995). La transposition didactique. Paris: La Penséè Sauvage. Clandinin D.J., Connelly F.M. (2000). Narrative Inquiry: Experiences and Story. in Qualitative Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Damiano, E. (2013). La mediazione didattica. Per una teoria dell’insegnamento. Milano: FrancoAngeli. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2012). Citizenship Education in Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2017). Citizenship Education at School in Europe – 2017. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Massaro, S. (2013). Metamorfosi della democrazia ed educazione. Principi e metodologie. MILANO: Guerini e Associati. Maubant, P., Martineau, S. (2011). Fondements des pratiques professionnelles des enseignants. Ottawa: Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.
 Novak, J.D. (2001). L’apprendimento significativo. Le mappe concettuali per creare e usare la conoscenza. Trento: Erickson. Novak, J.D., Gowin, B. (1995). Imparando a imparare. Torino: SEI. Nussbaum M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: the human development approach. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Pastré, P., Lenoir Y. (2008). Didactique professionnelle et didactiques disciplinaires en débat. Toulouse: Octarès.
 Perla, L. (2010). Didattica dell'implicito. Ciò che l'insegnante non sa. Brescia: La Scuola. Perla, L. (2011). L’eccellenza in cattedra. Dal saper insegnare alla conoscenza dell'insegnamento. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Perla, L. (Ed.) (2012). Scritture professionali. Metodi per la formazione. Bari: Progedit. Richards, L., Morse, J.M. (2009). Fare ricerca qualitativa. Prima guida (tr. it.). Milano: FrancoAngeli. Schubauer-Leoni, M.L, Leutenegger, F. (2005), Une relecture des phénomènes transpositifs à la lumière de la didactique comparée. Revue suisse des sciences de l’éducation, 27 (3), 407-429. Sen A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Sen A.K. (1993). Capability and Well-Being. In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds), The Quality of life. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Vinci, V. (2012). Scrivere mappe didattiche (120-148). In L. Perla (Ed.). Scritture professionali. Metodi per la formazione. Bari: Progedit.