The need for digital competence development of teachers, which goes hand in hand with digital transformation, among other things, requires the adaptation of existing conceptual approaches and their transfer to all phases of teacher education to foster teachers' digital competences in Europe. This leads to challenges in teacher education, which are also addressed in the "Digital Education Action Plan" (European Commission, 2020). One key goal of this action plan is to develop “digital skills and competences for the digital transformation” (ibid., p. 12).

To achieve this goal, digitisation-related resources such as MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), learning videos or digital training modules that are both theoretically sound and practice-oriented can be used in the context of (prospective) teachers' education and training. This approach has the advantage that digitisation-related competences of (prospective) teachers can be developed quickly and nationwide.

A profitable form of developing such digitisation-related resources can take place in cross-phase Communities of Practice (CoPs; van Ackeren et al., 2020) because the cooperation of representatives from diverse areas and phases of teacher education brings together different expertise. This contributes to the quality of the digitisation-related resources and possibly facilitates the transfer of the resources into the teacher education system by addressing the needs of school practice.

In general, transfer research has identified three main areas that are relevant for successful transfer: the characteristics of the learners, the characteristics of the learning situation, and the characteristics of the scope of application of the acquired knowledge (Baldwin, Ford & Prasad, 2018; Grossman & Salas, 2011). Central characteristics of the learners are their understanding of their role and their motivation to perceive the learning situation.

Among other things, this should be as close to reality as possible (ibid.) and is conditioned by the CoP work in the context examined here. Studies indicate that in general, learning from each other takes place in CoPs when there is a high degree of certain characteristics such as the diversity of the CoP members, the cohesion and group feeling, the quality of interaction and the free structuring of the CoP. Diversity refers to the composition of the CoP. If there is a high degree of diversity, the CoP members benefit from the different expertise. However, the basic prerequisite is a common basis of ideas so that compromises are possible in the CoP. With a high degree of cohesion, the openness in the CoP increases and the feeling of a group can also rise. With a high degree of interaction and the independent structuring of work, knowledge acquisition can also increase due to the possibility of adapting the structures to the needs of the group (Sagmeister, 2019; Henschel, 2001).

In addition, it requires the support of the organisations or institutions in which the new knowledge is to be applied, e.g., by creating situations in which this is made possible (Grossman & Salas, 2011).

These general assumptions that apply to transfer and CoPs have so far been studied mainly in the context of economic organizations. However, the context-specific determinants of teacher educators' transfer in cross-phase CoPs and whether there are different types of transfer in the context of teacher educators' CoP work remain unexplored. Based on the research context and data of the COMeIN project (Communities of Practice for Innovative Teacher Education) with more than 400 participants from all phases of teacher education, this contribution focuses therefore the following research questions:

1. To what extent can types of transfer be identified in the cross-phase CoP work of teacher educators?

2. Which determinants can contribute to the transfer success of digitisation-related resources into the teacher education system?

To answer the research questions, data from a qualitative online survey from the German project COMeIN (Communities of Practice for Innovative Teacher Education) are used, in which work is being done across phases in CoPs on the development of digitisation-related resources. Due to the objective of the project, the data is particularly suitable for answering the research questions. In the COMeIN project, more than 400 representatives from all three phases of teacher education in Germany (first phase: university studies; second phase: preparatory period for school teachers; third phase: in-service teacher training) work together in five subject-based and three interdisciplinary CoPs. The CoPs are staffed according to the subject expertise of the representatives of the different phases. The work of the CoPs is coordinated by so-called innovation position holders (N=16). In the summer of 2022 they were questioned in writing in an online survey on various topics, such as the status of work, conditions for success of the CoP work and cross-phase cooperation, the transfer between the different phases of teacher education in their CoP, conditions for successful transfer to teacher education and conditions for the sustainability of the project. The collected data was evaluated by means of qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz, on the basis of which a type formation was subsequently carried out (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Kuckartz & Rädiker, 2022). First, the material was coded using deductive and inductive categories (Kuckartz, 2014). The deductive categories were developed using a theoretically derived analysis model and the inductive categories were supplemented by the material. Both content structuring and evaluative categories were formed (Kuckartz, 2014). In accordance with the procedure explained by Kuckartz, the type-building was then carried out in five steps. Based on the research question, the attribute space that was used for the type-building was first defined. Then the individual cases were grouped together to form the typology. This was followed by a description of the typology and a subsequent allocation of the cases to the feature-homogeneous types formed. Finally, a relationships’ analysis was carried out with secondary variables to extract the determinants of successful transfer (Kuckartz, 2014).

With the help of the qualitative content analysis, types of cross-phase transfer in CoPs of teacher education as well as determinants for successful transfer could be identified. Two types of transfer emerge: unilateral transfer and cooperative transfer through cross-phase CoP work. Unilateral transfer is characterised by the fact that transfer between the phases of teacher education only takes place in one direction. In this case, the first phase of teacher education develops the digitisation-related resources, while the second and third phases participate only slightly or not at all in the CoP work. Cooperative transfer can be divided into two subtypes. The division of transfer with divided responsibilities and the collaborative transfer. Transfer with devided resposibilities takes place between the phases. Here, the first phase of teacher education mainly develops the digitisation-related resources and the second and third phases participate in the form of advice and support in testing the resources. In the case of collaborative transfer, there is a two-way transfer between all phases of teacher education. In addition to the types, determinants for successful transfer could be identified on three levels: At the institutional level, the establishment of fixed structures such as permanent coordination and sufficient time resources are seen as relevant. In addition, the integration of research projects in the second and third phases and the adaptation of frameworks appear to be a determinant conducive to transfer. At the CoP level, work process structures such as highlighting the added value of cooperation for all phases appear to be particularly important. At the individual level, the motivation of the participants is relevant for the transfer. Overall, the stronger networking of the three teacher training phases appears to be a central overarching transfer determinant. The implications of these results will be discussed in the context of teacher education in Europe.

Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (4. ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. European Commission (2020). Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027. Resetting education and training for the digital age. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/default/files/document-library-docs/deap-communication-sept2020_en.pdf Henschel, A. (2001). Communities of Practice. Plattform für individuelles und kollektives Lernen sowie Wissenstransfer. Universität St. Gallen. Kuckartz, U. & Rädiker, S. (2022). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung: Grundlagentexte Methoden (Grundlagentexte Methoden, 5. Auflage). Weinheim: Beltz Juventa. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Qualitative text analysis. A guide to methods, practice & using software. London, England: SAGE. Sagmeister, M. (2019). Situiertes Lernen: Informelles Lernen am Arbeitsplatz in der Community of Practice. In M. W. Fröse, B. Naake & M. Arnold (Hrsg.), Führung und Organisation (Perspektiven Sozialwirtschaft und Sozialmanagement, S. 417–432). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. van Ackeren, I., Buhl, H. M., Eickelmann, B., Heinrich, M. & Wolfswinkler, G. (2020). Digitalisierung in der Lehrerbildung durch Communities of Practice. Konzeption, Governance & Qualitätsmanagement des ComeIn-Verbundvorhabens in NRW. In K. Kaspar et al. (Hrsg.), Bildung, Schule und Digitalisierung (S. 321–326). Münster: Waxmann. Grossman, R. & Salas, E. (2011). The transfer of training: what really matters. International Journal of Training and Development, 15(2), 103–120. Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T. & Prasad, J. (2018). Transfer of Training: The Known and the Unknown. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 201–225. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104443