The “Research-Centre-on-Didactics-and-Technology-in-the-Education-of-Trainers” (CIDTFF, from Portuguese) is a research unit associated with the Department of Education and Psychology (DEP) at the University of Aveiro (UA, Portugal). The role of education being pivotal in preparing more qualified and critical citizens in knowledge-based and globalised societies, CIDTFF research/action is focused on educational processes in formal, non-formal and informal contexts, covering their (trans)national regulation conditions and communication spaces where they are developed. By embracing perspectives of lifelong learning, inclusive and integrated education, multidisciplinary and collaborative approaches (Anderson & Shattuck, 2012; Baumfield & Butterworth, 2007; Tress et al., 2005) within (inter)national networks are required, promoting research sustainability and citizen science.
Aligning with the goals of quality education (UNESCO, 2017), CIDTFF researchers seek to work articulately for the development of sustainable communities and societies and of multiliterate and critical citizens, and for a quality and evaluation of education, teacher training and research, the Open Science strategy being a priority. Furthermore, CIDTFF spaces for teaching and learning have been reconceptualised, strengthening collaboration practices and openness to society, through the conception/validation of programmes and educational resources within partnerships and networks, increasingly more sustainable and extended.

Deeper education research and teacher training synergies between university and society as well as higher visibility of research findings have, thus, been crucial CIDTFF goals, as clear in the two 2020-2024 transversal and interrelated projects (supported by National Funds through FCT – UIDB/00194/2020 and UIDP/00194/2020, CIDTFF): “Open-Education-Smart-Campus” (OESC, Laranjeiro, 2022) and “Smart-Knowledge-Garden” (SKG). SKG acts as an open and integrated research framework focused on education, teacher training and education outreach programmes (examples: https://educacaoaescuta.web.ua.pt/; https://www.ua.pt/pt/cidtff/page/24014), grounded in previous CIDTFF research (e.g., Rodrigues, 2016) and aimed at a holistic approach to education, training and research (cf. Pombo, 2008).

The development of such a “conceptual/methodological environment” involves the thematic CIDTFF Labs – which promote articulation between research, training and dissemination with(in) the Centre’s educational partners (https://www.ua.pt/en/cidtff/page/8720) – and the (undergraduate, master’s and PhD) courses offered in DEP-UA. It also includes the reconceptualisation of the Science Garden (Jardim-da-Ciência, JC) – an outdoor environment for non-formal science education activities – to become part of the broader project of a ‘Smart Knowledge Garden’ (Porto et al., 2023).
This reconceptualisation has been taking place through: 1. reconfiguration of existing JC modules with the main objective of lending a holistic character to the module-embedded physical phenomena within an interdisciplinary matrix of knowledge construction, engaging CIDTFF Labs and under/post-graduate students; 2. conceptualisation of new inter/trans-disciplinary modules (here, prefixes are used in relation to curricular subject topics rather than to research paradigms; Tress et al., 2005) with a “space experience design studio” as a partner.

Collaborative partnerships enable “delivering more with less […] by bringing together complementary services” (Baumfield & Butterworth, 2007, p. 414): design-thinking expertise from designers; learning theories and educational issues from education researchers. Moreover, since university-company partnerships involving education research areas seem limited (Nsanzumuhire & Groot, 2020), this partnership model is innovative. In acknowledgement of the complexity of the decision-making process and of the need to involve and benefit from different areas, a sub-team of CIDTFF researchers and educational partners (school teachers, monitors, etc.) has been working on the conceptualisation of new JC modules (SKG-JC team).
The presentation focuses on this partnership-directed process. The (research) question is how to design, through a co-creative and participatory approach, new inter/trans-disciplinary modules while also incorporating the existing JC ones into an aggregated narrative. The design and structure of the modules should be interactive, fostering experiences of knowledge discovery and involving school and university communities, and other (cultural) users/spaces in the city. The process/product can orient participatory approaches within discovery centres elsewhere in Portugal and Europe.

Collaboration with external educational partners, recommended by UNESCO (2017), is at the heart of the JC reconceptualisation, which represents an educational challenge for a non-formal environment in a local context. Module design in the JC space and subsequent implementation of non-formal learning activities is, actually, a “significant intervention […] in a real educational context […] to create an improvement in local practice” (Anderson & Shattuck, 2012, p. 16), which is thus being carried out through design-based research (DBR). “Toyno Studio” was chosen for designing spaces for “knowledge sharing through inclusive experiences of discovery, interaction, and participation” and activities/dynamics for “positive and impactful learning experiences” (https://www.toyno.com/projects), and for having previously worked with CIDTFF. The Toyno and SKG-JC teams have collaborated since July 2022, mainly remotely, through different phases. The “conceive” phase is ongoing, following further iteration of understanding and definition (see Easterday et al., 2014). A kickoff meeting was held to establish a common understanding, between Toyno and SKG-JC, of the purpose/meaning of the modules in JC and for SKG; focus groups were conducted by Toyno with a diversity of CIDTFF researchers to define the themes relevant to module development (water, salt, arts, gastronomy, economics) and target audience (kids aged 4-12, teachers and general public); specific (CIDTFF and non-CIDTFF) researchers/professors were nominated by SKG-JC and interviewed by Toyno to clarify/deepen specific aspects; a first workshop “to test the theme relevance with a pilot audience” was designed by Toyno and (in)validated by SKG-JC. An “online collaborative whiteboard platform” (https://miro.com/) allowed “distributed teams”, both in Toyno internal meetings and those with SKG-JC, “to work effectively together”. In October, Toyno proposed the design of one aggregating module, centring its narrative on the natural/anthropic Ria-de-Aveiro; SKG-JC accepted its form and core theme, but did not agree with topics connected with arts, mathematics or literature being presented as additional activities rather than integrated in the module. A new proposal was presented to the whole CIDTFF community a month later and feedback was categorised and summarised by a SKG-JC sub-team, and shared with Toyno. This participatory process highlighted the need for going beyond topics of compartmentalised subjects and initiating the experience through non-curricular aspects and themes. The two groups, working more and more as one team, in the last 3-4 months have discussed the importance of a macro-to-micro narrative for the module, messages relevant for the audience to achieve through exploring it and related possible learning experiences.

As Barab and Squire (2004) remind, “the design is conceived not just to meet local needs, but to advance a theoretical agenda” (p. 5). SKG-JC has gained significant insights about the process of sense-making within this design partnership (cf. “relational learning process”, Nsanzumuhire & Groot, 2020). For example, the meaning of “content” or “exhibition” needed to be negotiated between SKG-JC and Toyno and “meta-curricular” used by SKG-JC researchers required clarification. Moreover, researchers and designers may have “different understandings of research” (Baumfield & Butterworth, 2007, p. 414). The module development is now being reconceptualised. Co-constructing an inter/trans-disciplinary module based on a holistic approach to knowledge is challenging, as is the complex nature of the project in which the module is integrated. This DBR benefits from culturally diverse professions, being a synergy between an education research unit and a space design company. Toyno, mainly, drives toward a practical outcome – design of a module and narrative for the SKG context – and SKG-JC, mainly, advances integrating the knowledge from this co-construction process within SKG (trainings, dissemination, etc.). Through a participatory approach, this is a “participatory study” with academic and non-academic actors collaborating (Tress et al., 2005), in a problematic situation (Baumfield & Butterworth, 2007), developing useful interventions as well as contributing to the conceptual/methodological intersection envisaged in the education-training-research SKG framework. Further stages will also involve CIDTFF Labs and the local community. This university-company partnership represents a social innovation, which affords possibilities for studies at master’s and doctorate levels – an educational form still neglected (Nsanzumuhire & Groot, 2020) – while also researching educational processes/resources and creating non-formal learning experiences for a diversity of stakeholders. Although CIDTFF belongs to the Portuguese context, this process sustains a global dialogue about how knowledge can be constructed, translated and enjoyed within an education research unit.

- Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813 - Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Introduction: Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1 - Baumfield, V., & Butterworth, M. (2007). Creating and translating knowledge about teaching and learning in collaborative school–university research partnerships: An analysis of what is exchanged across the partnerships, by whom and how. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 13(4), 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600701391960 - Easterday, M. W., Lewis, D. R., & Gerber, E. M. (2014). Design-Based Research process: Problems, phases, and applications. ICLS 2014 Proceedings, 317-324. https://repository.isls.org/bitstream/1/1130/1/317-324.pdf - Laranjeiro, D. (2022, November 17-19). Open Education Smart Campus–technological development of an educational platform [Paper presentation]. 2022 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), Coimbra, Portugal. https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE56031.2022.9982359 - Nsanzumuhire, S. U., & Groot, W. (2020). Context perspective on University-Industry Collaboration processes: A systematic review of literature. Journal of Cleaner Production, 258, 120861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120861 - Pombo, O. (2008). Epistemologia da Interdisciplinaridade. Ideação – Revista do Centro de Educação e Letras. 10(1), 9-40. https://e-revista.unioeste.br/index.php/ideacao/article/view/4141/3187 - Porto, S., Piacentini, V., & Vieira, R. (2023). O “Jardim da Ciência” como contexto de educação e investigação interdisciplinar: Uma trajetória para o Smart Knowledge Garden. Revista Internacional de Pesquisa em Didática das Ciências e Matemática, 4, e023005. https://periodicoscientificos.itp.ifsp.edu.br/index.php/revin/article/view/904 - Rodrigues, A. V. (2016). Perspetiva Integrada de Educação em Ciências: Da teoria à prática. UA Editora. - Tress, B., Tress, G. & Fry, G. (2005). Defining concepts and the process of knowledge production in integrative research. In B. Tress, G. Tress, G. Fry & P. Opdam (Eds.), From landscape research to landscape planning: Aspects of Integration, Education and Application (pp. 13-26). Springer. - UNESCO. (2017). Education for Sustainable Development Goals. Learning objectives. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.