This contribution  presents some methodological and operational reflections on a research path started in 2012 at the Free University of Bozen/Bolzano on the relationship between pedagogy and architecture in the design process of school buildings (Weyland, Prey 2020; Weyland, 2022; Weyland & Falanga, 2022), now interpreted by the interdisciplinary laboratory EDEN, Educational Environments with Nature. The laboratory acts along two trajectories: the training of future kindergarten and primary school teachers and the in-service teacher training in a lifelong lifewide learning perspective.
With regard to the first trajectory, a participatory pathway aimed at qualifying the common spaces of the Brixen campus of the Free University of Bolzano-Bozen started in 2017, which led in 2020 to the creation of two Green classrooms, with 100 plants, to carry out teaching activities also in order to comply with the objectives of the 2030 Agenda.
With respect to the second path, between 2016 and 2018 a consultative support activity for schools came into being, combining the need to qualify the school's physical spaces with the need to update teaching practices and develop school organisation. These experiences gave rise to the idea of conveying through the university proposals to support "school development" (Schratz & Steiner-Löffler, 1999) through research-action paths financed by the schools themselves. We work together on the pedagogical-didactical and architectural design process of the environments in which the educational relationship is staged, sharing the perspectives of professionals in education, educational research, architecture and design. Between 2019 and 2022, as many as 24 school communities have entered into research-action agreements with our university. In these processes, school authorities themselves become research commissioners and place teachers in the role of co-researchers in the field, in order to overcome the well-known gap between academic research outcomes and their impact in school-institutional contexts (Zanniello, 2016; Vannini, 2018, Calidoni 2021), With the establishment of the interdisciplinary research laboratory EDENLAB, the intention is to develop this type of research for its methodological flexibility and its ability to affect the motivational (the whys of the research) and relational aspects (the reports, communications, dissemination of results). In addition to sensitising teachers on what Luigina Mortari (2007) defines as the "posture of the researcher" in her daily practice, the effort being developed is in fact to elaborate a research programme that makes the data collected by the different collaborations converge on the three moments that Elisabetta Nigris (2018) describes as central: co-siting the research; identifying the design; discussing and co-constructing the analysis and synthesis of the data, in order to establish the effectiveness of the actions of change undertaken. 
The objectives that the LAB pursues are multiple: the first is to document, accommodate and stimulate teaching activities, research and implementation on the subject of educational environments in which plants are also included as mediators that allow us to question the quality of spaces and at the same time to modify teaching and learning in favour of actions of care, well-being and active exploration. Furthermore, we consider it essential to provide scientific validity and widespread recognition to the virtuous encounter between theory and practice in a process of experimentation in which all parties are involved in the creation of beneficial learning landscapes in which plants are also present.
The question that the EDEN project aims to answer is how to better facilitate the co-participative and interdisciplinary design of formal, non-formal and informal educational environments in a lifelong, lifewide, lifedeep learning perspective in order to promote a paradigm shift: from the concept of the traditional school to the development of educational spaces in which to grow through creativity, cooperation, sensory in connection with plants.

The considerations with which this contribution was initiated are necessary to understand the motivations behind the approach and methodology of action identified by the EDENLAB research team. Our methodology is based on a research-training model founded on the implementation of circular reflexivity by all participants. The focus is on the co-construction of pedagogical knowledge not only from an academic point of view, but in accordance with practical-concrete experience. In other words, the heart of the Research-Training work lies in the desire to lay the foundations for a democratic school through the shared rethinking of learning spaces and educational and training relations (Weyland, Leone, 2020). Specifically, this research takes the socio-cultural constructivist paradigm (Denzin, Lincoln, 2017) and stands at the crossroads between the directions from Educational Action Research (Mertler,2019) and Participatory Action Research (PAR) (Ozer, 2017). The choice of instruments identified for data collection refers to the Participation Choice Point (Vaughn, Jacquez, 2020) and falls into the levels Inform (information is provided to community), consult (input is obtained from community), and involve (researchers work directly with community). More specifically, our EDENLAB laboratory develops ad hoc tools relating to the identification of needs, the mapping of processes and the verification of results in a combination of quantitative (questionnaires) and qualitative (logbook, thematic padlets, interviews) methods. The starting point of the action-research paths is a starter-kit, which uses the padlet platform, to document the different meetings, collect semi-informal information, define tasks and to nimbly get teachers into a field data collection perspective. This tool makes it possible to flexibly adapt inputs, information and requests to different contexts. It is accompanied by a logbook for both personal reflection and documentation of the proposed organisational and teaching activities. Monitoring of the research process and sharing are ensured through rhythmic check/check meetings - in accordance with the schedule (every 4-6 weeks). The technique used to conduct this monitoring is coaching, thanks to which the educating community involved can confront each other and have the support of the research group that offers feedback and stimulates reflection and the co-construction of new practical knowledge. It is precisely this posture of the LAB group that enables the realisation of participatory planning and the understanding of how professional competence has a mobile and open and social or intersubjective nature.

The EDENLAB laboratory aims to offer an operational, customisable model of co-participatory and interdisciplinary design of formal, non-formal and informal educational environments in a lifelong, lifewide, lifedeep learning perspective in which plants become mediating and educating subjects. Through the involvement of the entire community in an exploratory process on the qualities of indoor environments, this is implemented with the aim of achieving greater well-being and appropriation. As indicated by several scholars (Barrett 2015, Huges et al. 2019, Weyland 2022), these are, in fact, the factors that contribute to making schools more effective and capable of affecting the future of new generations. This contribution aims to present the evidence, corresponding to the above-mentioned directions, gathered during a decade of exploratory research. First and foremost, the analysis of the effectiveness of the methodology used which, although referring to specific frameworks, was customised and enriched by the use of techniques and tools co-constructed by the research team and the research community. Secondly, the analysis of the materials produced by the school-academic community ( principals, teachers, parents, student body) in the research-action. Last but not least, it intends to present the data collected during the EDEN GREEN MIND SET event held on 11-12 November 2022 to launch the laboratory. The conference brought together teachers, managers, architects and designers from the international scene who discussed the possibility of thinking about schools capable of accommodating new educational perspectives and sustainability experienced also through the presence of plants in interior spaces. The results of these analyses will form the basis for the promotion of systematic research aimed at identifying methodological guidelines and flexible tools that can be used throughout the national and international context.

Armstrong, F; (2019) Social Constructivism and Action Research: transforming teaching and learning though collaborative practice. In Armstrong, Felicity and Tsokova, Diana, (eds.) Action Research for Inclusive Education: Participation and Democracy in Teaching and Learning. (pp. 17-30). Routledge. Barrett, P. (2015). Clever Classroom. Retrieved October 26, 2021 from https://www.cleverclassroomsdesign.co.uk/results. Calidoni, P., Felini, D., Bobbio, A. (eds.). (2021). Cesare Scurati. Sguardi sull’educazione. FrancoAngeli. Denzin N.K., Lincoln Y.S. (2017). The Sage handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage. Hughes H., Franz J., Willis J. (2019). School spaces for Student Wellbeing and Learning. Singapore: Springer. Mertler, C. A. (Ed.). (2019). The Wiley handbook of action research in education. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. doi: 10.1002/9781119399490 Mortari, L. (2007). Cultura della ricerca e pedagogia. Prospettive epistemologiche. Carocci. Nigris, E. (2018). L'evoluzione della ricerca pedagogico-didattica fra teoria e pratica. Quali i ruoli e quali i compiti di ricercatori e insegnanti nella Ricerca-Formazione? In Asquini, G. (ed.), La Ricerca-Formazione. Temi, esperienze, prospettive. FrancoAngeli: 27 – 40. Ozer, E. J. (2017). Youth-Led Participatory Action Research: Overview and Potential for Enhancing Adolescent Development. Child Development Perspectives, 11(3), 173– 177. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12228 Schratz, M., & Steiner Loffler, U. (2001). La scuola che apprende. Strutture e processi di sviluppo formativo, Brescia: La Scuola. Vannini, I. (2018). Introduzione. Fare ricerca educativa per promuovere la professionalità docente. Il “qui ed ora” del Centro CRESPI. In Asquini, G., (ed.), La Ricerca-Formazione, 13 – 24. Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2020). Participatory Research Methods – Choice Points in the Research Process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1). doi: 10.35844/001c.13244. Weyland B., Prey K. (2020). Ridisegnare la scuola tra didattica archiettura e design. Milano: Guerini. Weyland B., Leone T. (2020). Laboratori attivi di democrazia. Milano: Guerini. Weyland, B., Falanga, M. (2022). Didattica della scuola: spazi e tempi per una comunità in ricerca. Guerini. Weyland B. (2022). Eden. Educare (ne)gli spazi con le piante. Milano: Corraini Zanniello G. (2016). La didattica tra storia e ricercar. Roma:Armando