To facilitate knowledge transfer between research and practice in education, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research in Germany (BMBF) funds “Meta-Projects” to support, connect and bundle the work and results of research projects working on common topics. Further, Meta-Projects act as intermediaries between the projects and research funders. Regarding the urgent need for changes in education in Germany, transfer is a key issue of Meta-Projects. The presentation gives insights in transfer activities, explores contributions and limitations for transfer on “middle tier” and relates them to structural conditions for transfer.

Since 2021, the BMBF funds 12 research projects and a Meta-Projekt on “Overcoming Educational Barriers: Learning Environments, Educational Success and Social Participation”, which consist of three subprojects, focusing on (1) coordination within the Meta-Project and between the research projects, (2) a synthesis of pre-existing research in empirical educational research and (3) on transfer including cooperation between research and practice.

The activities of the subproject for transfer can broadly be divided broadly into two phases: While the research projects were running, it provided opportunities for exchange and expertise on cooperations with practice in workshops on transfer or participative research and through common lectures of articles from transfer research. The subproject’s expertise focusses the relation between knowledge on and conditions for transfer, which is conveyed to the projects (as possible explanation for gaps between expectations and actual experiences) and contributed to discussions organized by research funders. The second phase started after the research projects generated results. Based on overaching findings, the subproject on transfer identified partners from practice which (1) are particularly affected by research findings and can (possibly) contribute to overcoming educational barriers, which (2) work as multiplicators within their fields and (3) have capacities for cooperation with other fields. The idea is to make the results on educational barriers accessible for their infrastructures but also to initiate discussions on their practical implications within the fields in order transform the knowledge according to their distinct logics so that it can become adopted and make a difference. At the same time, research-practice-dialogue is crucial for considerations on developing innovative approaches on meta-level, like a workshop for students and researchers to foster skills for cooperation with practice to fill the lack of qualification in academia (Gonser/Zimmer 2024).

The transfer activities to support the research projects and the transfer of overall findings are based on findings stressing the need for mutual knowledge transformation and co-construction (Schuster et al. 2024; Blatter/Schelle 2022; Contandriopoulos, Lemire, Denis & Tremblay, 2010). The approach to disseminate of the project’s results in cooperation with multiplicators refers to findings on the role of “middle tiers” (Tournier et al. 2023) for innovations in education and aims at balancing the tension between the need for extensive impact of transfer-products on the one hand and knowledge on limited impact of dissemination without cooperation on the other (Holtappels 2019). Analysis on tensions between knowledge on and conditions for transfer refer to the lack of appreciation on cooperation or intermediaries in general and in German academia in particular (Blatter/Schelle 2022; Duveneck 2024).

The presentation revolves around following questions:

-  What can Meta-Projects contribute to knowledge transfer within education? What can they contribute to conditions enabling or hindering transfer? And to what extent is it a matter of the German educational system or comparable to other European countries?

- To what extent do cooperation between intermediaries such as Meta-Projects and Multiplicators in Education provide infrastructures for dissemination and change? To what extent do they contribute to successful knowledge transfer and transformation?

- Which role does transfer as part of Meta-Projects play? Which conditions frame transfer within Meta-Projects?

To explore contributions of transfer projects cooperating with multiplicators from practice on a “middle tier”, the project is conceptualized as an empirical case study. It follows a transformative understanding of impact (Kny et al. 2023: 178) beyond empirical evidence of (particular forms of) research data (Farley-Ripple et al. 2018: 236), taking capacity building based on mutual learning processes into account. Empirical insights are generated based on practical cooperation. As in most fields, exchange with research is an optional add-on to regular work, its development is the most crucial indicator: Regarding high workload on other, more obligatory topics, it comes easily to an end if partners from practice do not expect to benefit. When cooperation proceed, it indicates mutual advantages worth investing time resources and efforts, which is a crucial precondition for successful transfer. Further, the reciprocity of interest marks successful cooperation, expressed by proactive requests on findings, invitations to contribute to discussions within the fields or for common organization of events. The use of practical partner’s infrastructures for transfer requires a match between the project’s results, current debates within the fields and the distinct formats by understanding and following their logics. Therefore, it is an indicator for successful transformations of knowledge according to the field. The final outcome in practice is evaluated by dialogical communicative validation with partners from practice, taking the high interdependency of actors from different fields and levels with impact on educational barriers and the limited scope of the project into account. Finally, the relation between (identified) needs and conditions for successful knowledge exchange is analyzed based on observations and responses of partners from practice and transformative processes with partners from research, but also on own experiences regarding the role of transfer as part of a Meta-Project, which are reflected against the backdrop of literature on conditions for transfer.

Transfer as a part of Meta-Projects is expected to contribute to professionalization in several ways: Most important are capacities to elaborate knowledge on transfer and knowledge-mobilization relevant field within academia, and for cooperations with partners from practice in order to generate this knowledge. Expertise can be provided to research projects and funding. Tracing back gaps between expectations and experiences in projects aiming at successful transfer back to structural conditions support projects and can bring forward more adequate conditions. Collaboration with multiplicators from practice on the level of intermediaries is expected to improve conditions for dissemination and accessing those practitioners which possibly can make a difference based on results. Though, regarding conditions or limited capacities for cooperation with research or other educational domains as add-on to regular work, the actual implementation of research-based approaches or consideration of empirical findings tends to remain fragile. Even if research findings are taken more into consideration in practice, empirical data shows the need for spaces and occasions which enables practitioners "to challenge taken-for-granted ways and to bring about transformation in educational practice" (Prenger et al. 2022: 9). Therefore, intentions for effective dissemination which brings forward quick changes in practice still are expected to fail. Finally, doing transfer as part of a meta project in Germany reflects the challenges within the field, as on the one hand, capacities are still limited compared to research while collaboration on various levels (with practice, research projects, research funders and within the Meta-Project) is time-consuming, comprises a high amount of invisible labor and highly dependent on various actors. It is hard to communicate and contradicts to the need for high effectiveness. Still, the opportunity to explore cooperation, dissemination and professionalization is an important contribution to facilitate knowledge transfer between research and practice in and thereby foster urgent changes in education.

•Blatter, K. & Schelle, R. (2022): Wissenstransfer in der frühen Bildung. Modelle, Erkenntnisse und Bedingungen. Online available at https://www.dji.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bibs2022/DJI_Wissenstransfer_in_der_fruehen_Bildung_2022.pdf. •Contandriopoulos, D., Lemire, M., Denis, J. L., & Tremblay, É. (2010). Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: a narrative systematic review of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 88(4), p. 444-483. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21166865/ •Duveneck, A. (2024): Wissenschaftliche Begleitung als Transferarbeit. Große Bedarfe, geringe Anerkennung. In: Schuster, J., Hugo, J., Bremm, N., Kolleck, N., & Zala-Mezö, E. (2024). Wissensproduktion, Wissensmobilisierung und Wissenstransfer. Chancen und Grenzen der Entwicklung von Wissenschaft und Praxis. P. 109 – 126. •Dewe, B. (2005): Von der Wissenstransfer Forschung zur Wissenstransformation: Vermittlungsprozesse - Bedeutungsveränderungen. In: Antos, Gerd/Wichter, Sigurd (ed.): Wissenstransfer durch Sprache als gesellschaftliches Problem. Frankfurt am Main, p. 365–379 •Farley-Ripple, E., May, H., Karpyn, A., Tilley, K., & McDonough, K: Rethinking connections between research and practice in education: A conceptual framework. In: Educational Researcher (47), p. 235–245. •Gonser, M. & Zimmer, K. (2024): Kompetenzen für den Transfer zwischen Wissenschaft und Praxis – Vorschlag einer Systematisierung. In: Schuster, J., Hugo, J., Bremm, N., Kolleck, N., & Zala-Mezö, E. (2024). Wissensproduktion, Wissensmobilisierung und Wissenstransfer. Chancen und Grenzen der Entwicklung von Wissenschaft und Praxis. p. 13 – 26. •Holtappels, H.G. (2019): Transfer in der Schulentwicklung. Ansätze und Gelingensbedingungen aus der Perspektive von Schulentwicklungstheorie und -forschung. In: DDS (3), p. 274–293. DOI: 10.25656/01:20597. •Kny, J; Claus, R.; Harris, J. & Schäfer, M. (2023). Assessing societal effects: Lessons from evaluation approaches in transdisciplinary research fields GAIA 32 (1), p. 178 – 185 •Prenger, R.; Tappel, A. P. M.; Poortman, C. L.; Schildkamp, K. (2022): How can educational innovations become sustainable? A review of the empirical literature. In: Front. Educ. 7, Artikel 970715. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2022.970715. •Schuster, J., Hugo, J., Bremm, N., Kolleck, N., & Zala-Mezö, E. (2024). Einleitung. In: Schuster, J., Hugo, J., Bremm, N., Kolleck, N., & Zala-Mezö, E. (2024). Wissensproduktion, Wissensmobilisierung und Wissenstransfer. Chancen und Grenzen der Entwicklung von Wissenschaft und Praxis. P. 7 – 12. •Tournier, B., Chimier, C., Childress, D., & Jones, C. (2023). Leading Teaching and Learning Together: The Role of the Middle Tier. What Do Effective Instructional Leaders at the Middle Tier Do? Research Brief. Instructional Leaders at the Middle Tier. No. 2. UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning. https://www.edt.org/research-and-insights/leading-teaching-and-learning-together-the-role-of-the-middle-tier/#:~:text=Within%20this%20middle%20tier%20is,to%20develop%20and%20implement%20practical