"Solutions not Excuses" - Learnings from the BIP: Winter School´25

Practice Paper Recommended citation: Andreasen, M. C. B., Vio, S., Mottl, P., Vaikjärv, T., Kalm, A., & Puente, S. G. (2025). "Solutions not Excuses" - Learnings from the BIP: Winter School´25. In Kangaslampi, R., Langie, G., Järvinen, H.-M., & Nagy, B. (Eds.), SEFI 53rd Annual Conference. European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI), Tampere, Finland. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17631834. This Conference Paper is brought to you for open access by the 53rd Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) at Tampere University in Tampere, Finland. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. "SOLUTIONS NOT EXCUSES” - LEARNINGS FROM THE BIP: WINTER SCHOOL`25 M Boldinga, S Viob, P Mottlc, T Vaikjärvd, A Kalme, S Gomez Puentef a 1 Technical University of Denmark, Kgs.Lyngby, Denmark b Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany c Czech Technical University, Prague, Czech Republic d Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia e Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia f Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands Conference Key Areas: Capacity building Keywords: Engineering education, Learning Communities, University Alliances. ABSTRACT In January 2025 eight educational developers from the EuroTeQ university alliance organized a winter school for thirteen computer science teachers as a Blended Intensive Program (BIP). The intension was to spark collaboration on joint courses and to pilot a program on how to teach in an international and hybrid classroom. In the alliance, we are currently challenged on how to engage teachers in EuroTeQ, encouraging them to open their courses to alliance students, and creating joint courses with partners. The main question we seek to answer in this paper is if the blended intensive format is worth the effort and promotes engagement. Through temporal mapping of empiric data, grounded analysis and team-based interpretation, we found that discussing good teaching and learning, joint courses and intercultural exchange led to a change of perspective from collaboration towards cocreation, focusing on solutions rather than excuses. We also found that teachers and educational developers form distinct learning communities, both of which contribute to the shift from a collaboration mindset toward co-creation. Furthermore, we observed that engaging in co-creation catalysed the transformation of the educational developers´ Professional Learning Community into a Community of Practice. 1 Malene Bolding, [email protected] 1 INTRODUCTION In 2017 the European University Initiative was introduced to improve the international competitiveness of higher education institutions in Europe, whilst promoting European values and identity, to benefit their students, staff and society (European Commission, 2025). In 2020, we launched the EuroTeQ Alliance, a collaboration among leading engineering universities committed to reimagining the future of European engineering education. While EuroTeQ has enabled student mobility, much of this has been supported by administrative staff, there is still room for improvement regarding academic engagement and joint course development. Co-creating educational offerings, though demanding, lies at the heart of the EuroTeQ Alliance’s vision. Research from the Horizon 2020-funded BoostEuroTeQ project highlights the need for teacher training, institutional support, and practical assistance to achieve sustainable cocreation (Voll et al., 2024; EuroTeQ, 2025). Collaboration across national university contexts requires navigating complex national, institutional, and cultural differences. Successful collaboration often hinges on individuals having the opportunity to connect face-to-face, which helps build trust and shared understanding (Bell et al., 2015; Joughin et al., 2022; Messi, 2023). To facilitate this, we created an on-site program called Winter School´25. This Winter School serves as a dedicated space for teachers to meet, allowing them time to build relationships and actively engage in co-creating courses. It encourages participants to move beyond common excuses like mismatched semester structures, lack of a proctoring system, and student dropout rates, and instead focus on finding joint solutions. Since successful co-creation appears closely tied to relationships, the concepts of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and Communities of Practice offer valuable frameworks. These help us understand how learning communities develop and how deeper, sustained collaboration can be fostered (Lennning et al. 2013; Wenger, 1998; DuFour, 2004; Fuchs, 2022). However, it takes more than an interesting program to get busy researchers to join for elective teacher training programs. As educational developers, we seek to explore these dynamics, to design and tailor future Winter School initiatives more effectively. Our goal is to support the development of such communities, and justify the time spend on these programs. 2 CONTEXT AND PRACTICAL WORK 2.1 The Winter School ´25 The Winter School´25 was organized as a Blended Intensive Program (BIP) and brought together teachers and educational developers from EuroTeQ partner universities. We met online in early January to meet, align expectations and define individual learning objectives. Two weeks later we held a five-day on-site program at Tallinn University of Technology (TalTech). Three key elements tied the program together: 1.) Good Teaching – a series of workshops related to teaching international hybrid classroom. 2) Joint courses – a series of roundtable discussions and groupwork, to ideate joint courses. 3) Intercultural exchange – social elements like extended coffee breaks, tours and joint dining. Winter School’25 emerged from a convergence of factors - computer science teachers eager to co-create joint courses and educational developers seizing the chance to pilot elements of a Blended Intensive Program. Figure 1. The onsite TalTech program of the Winter School ´25 The group included both experienced and novice teachers, alongside a mix of established and new educational developers. In total, eight developers and thirteen teachers participated. Given the diversity of participants, their varying goals, and the coincidental nature of the initiative, this evaluation does not assess predefined learning objectives. Instead, it explores what emerged from bringing these people together around good teaching, joint course design, and intercultural exchange. 2.2 The aim of this paper The overarching question is whether bringing teachers and developers together for an entire week in a blended intensive program is worthwhile. We ask if it fosters connections between teachers, supports co-creation of courses, demonstrates the relevance of the Winter School. Research shows that teacher training as well as cocreation is thought to benefit teachers as well as students (Gunersel and Etienne, 2014). Our alliance sees “co-creation as a way to share resources, embrace diverse perspectives and drive innovation”, leading to more inclusive, effective education. (EuroTeQ, 2025). We will show how the dynamics of two separate learning communities: the Educational Faculty Professional Learning Community (Faculty PLC), and the Educational Staff Professional Learning community (Staff PLC) contribute to a transition of collaboration to co-creation. We will also show how this co-creation led the transition of Staff PLC into a Community of Practice. 3 EVALUATION OF THE WINTER SCHOOL`25 3.1 Methodology Bringing together a diverse group from universities across Europe, for a programme with multiple objectives is complex. We chose a grounded theory approach to capture both expected and unforeseen outcomes. This method allows for a comprehensive understanding of the Winter School’s impact beyond predefined goals (Corbin & Strauss, 1990; Corbin & Strauss, 1996). The empirical material encompassed workshop minutes, participants-created products such as drawings, canvases, collaborate power points, evaluation forms, testimonials, and ethnographic notes. The analysis process was structured as follows: • Temporal Mapping: We organized the empirical materials along a timeline. This helped us to track changes over time, and provided insight into evolving collaborative perspectives, joint ideas, and the emergence of overarching values. • Grounded Analysis: We systematically identified dominant stories that emerged from the data. These served as lenses to explore the value of bringing teachers together in the Blended Intensive Program. • Team-Based Interpretation: Findings were addressed collaboratively in team meetings, which involved representatives from the participating universities. This ensured a broader perspective on the learning outcomes from the week. 4 RESULTS AND INSIGHTS 4.1 Temporal mapping Figure 2. Temporal mapping in Miro From the temporal mapping, the grounded theory approach and team-based interpretation, the following understanding of the Learning Community dynamics emerged: Figure 3. Learning communities drive collaboration to cocreation and second to that, cocreation induces the educational staff professional learning community transforming into a Community of Practice. In the following section we discuss how both the Faculty and Staff PLC drove collaboration into co-creation. We also discuss the transformation of the educational staff PLC into a Community of Practice, and the implications of this change. 4.2 Grounded Analysis Collaboration and Co-Creation From the outset, EuroTeQ has aimed not only to open existing courses to students across the alliance but also to co-create new educational offerings. Therefore, when a group of Computer Science teachers proposed a winter school, the idea of jointly developing courses aligned perfectly with the alliance’s core vision. Co-creation is seen as a vital pathway toward socially responsible engineering education. Collaboration involves working together toward shared goals, often with divided responsibilities and hierarchical relationships. In contrast, co-creation is rooted in the joint creation of value, built on egalitarian partnerships where outcomes are shaped collectively. Thus, co-creation requires a set of complex competences, including trust-building, willingness to engage, and intercultural sensitivity. It also demands skilled facilitation, negotiation, conflict resolution, and the ability to shift from an individual perspective to a broader, shared vision (Tharapos & O´Connell, 2022; Plank et al, 2024). The Winter School´25 brought together a diverse group of teachers, some highly experienced, others new to teaching; some familiar with EuroTeQ, others encountering it for the first time. Facilitating this diversity into a shared space of cocreation was both a challenge and an opportunity. On the developers' side, while new members joined the initiative, the team builds on four years of collaboration within EuroTeQ. Some of the signs that we succeeded in moving from collaboration to co-creation were evident in how the discussions evolved throughout the week. At first, when sharing experiences of teaching EuroTeQ courses, reflections centered on barriers - differences in semester structures, the significant workload, the absence of a common proctoring system, and high dropout rates. However, as the week progressed, the focus shifted towards the benefits: the opportunity for universities to showcase their unique strengths within the alliance, the role of teachers in motivating students, and the idea that enrolling in a single EuroTeQ course at a partner university could serve as a low-threshold entry point into international learning, without committing to a full semester or academic year abroad. This shift was perhaps most clearly reflected in the participants’ written reflections on the canvases. Comments such as “Let’s try to build an inter-university course within EuroTeQ,” “What are the main learning objectives of such a EuroTeQ course?” and “I’m an ambassador for EuroTeQ” demonstrated a growing sense of ownership. Others raised critical pedagogical questions like “MOOC vs. in-person vs. travelling, technical vs. Social - how can we get students to truly interact, rather than just consume content?”. In the transition from a collaborative mindset to a co-creative mindset, the conversation about EuroTeQ courses shifted from focusing on excuses, such as semester structures, student dropouts, and the lack of ECTS recognition to exploring solutions, particularly emphasizing the teacher’s role in motivating and engaging students. In the next section we will examine how the Professional Learning Communities supported the transition from collaboration to co-creation. Two Professional Learning Communities Professional Learning Communities are based on the idea that learning is inherently social, as emphasized by social learning theory and situated learning theory (Wenger, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991). This is particularly relevant when bringing together complex organizations like universities to co-create joint educational offerings. In this context, educational developers and teachers often form significant large and separate learning communities, with distinct cultures, roles, and responsibilities. This divide was noted by some participants, who at the final evaluation wrote: “Also, the fact that there were maybe more teacher support staff than actual teachers was somewhat odd to me […]”. We examine the learning community dynamics and what each of these professional learning communities brought to catalyze the transition of collaboration to cocreation. The teachers formed a faculty-PLC and played a key role in the shift from collaboration to co-creation. Their contribution was evident not only in initiating the Winter School´25 seeking to jointly design courses, but also in their active engagement throughout the week. Two teachers presented the very different EuroTeQ courses they had developed: one, a large, asynchronous bachelor-level course; the other, a small, on-site master’s course focused on a specific area of expertise unique to their university. These presentations sparked valuable discussions around key questions: What’s in it for me as a teacher? What’s in it for the students? And what diverse areas of expertise do we, as universities, contribute to the alliance - creating synergy for mutual benefit? The educational developers were rooted in a four-year-old staff-PLC. Their role in catalyzing the shift from collaboration to co-creation was central too. They facilitated the overall structure of the Winter School´25 and provided all teachers regardless of teaching experience or familiarity with EuroTeQ with foundational building blocks. These included a shared vocabulary around teaching and learning, strategies for engaging international classrooms, approaches to hybrid teaching, and practical tips for fostering student motivation. However, halfway through the week, a conflict emerged. Some teachers, eager to move forward with co-creating actual courses grew frustrated with continued discussions about teaching and learning. With 8 developers and 13 teachers, some teachers became frustrated, feeling the balance was skewed, wanting more action. This prompted developers to adjust the program and to internally discuss their role in facilitating. This conflict became a necessary turning point, allowing a path for shared leadership of the Winter School´25 program. From that moment onward, the teachers engaged more actively in the co-creative process. It fostered trust and shared ownership (Tuckman, 1965), not least supported by the onsite program and social activities that encouraged relationship-building and collaboration. Some teachers even continued to seek advice from educational developers after the program ended. The faculty PLC succeeded in establishing a sustained collaboration on co-created courses, engaging three of the participating universities, a process that remains ongoing. Navigating the conflict as collaboration evolved into co-creation also marked a pivotal moment in the transformation of the staff-based PLC into a true Community of Practice. Transforming the Staff PLC into a Community of Practice Practicing together, taking shared responsibility for the program, co-offering workshops, and jointly facilitating sessions became an empirical experience that deepened the staff PLC´s joint understanding of learning, facilitation, group norms, and collaborative problem-solving. The conflict contributed by laying the foundation to negotiate roles, define quality standards, and address ethical dilemmas - challenges deeply embedded in professional practice, yet often difficult to access because of their tacit nature. The Winter School format also offered a role for newcomers in the field of educational development. New members could participate in discussions and group facilitation contributing their professional expertise observing their role in the overall program. In this way, the community of practice was opened to new educational staff. However, their participation was also shaped, and to some extent constrained, by the frameworks and practices established over the past four years. Being together as a large group of educational staff was pivotal in two keyways: it catalysed the maturation of the staff-based PLC into a fully functioning Community of Practice; and it created space for newcomers to engage meaningfully through legitimate peripheral participation. This dual dynamic reinforced learning as a situated, relational, and transformative process, where even those at the margins could gradually assume more central roles. Such participation is essential not only for the professional development of individual staff members, but also for the sustained growth and adaptability of our university alliance. (Tharapos and O´Connell, 2022; Lave, 1991, Wenger, 2000; Fuchs et.al, 2022). 5 CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS In answering the question of whether bringing teachers and developers together for an entire week is worthwhile: we observed the creation of learning communities that continue to co-create courses months after the Winter School. Blended Intensive Programs, such as Winter School'25, can serve as a powerful foundation for engaging both teachers and staff in the EuroTeQ alliance. Teachers and educational developers, as distinct learning communities, each bring valuable perspectives and expertise. This helps drive the transition from collaboration to cocreation, helping move the conversation beyond excuses toward shared solutions. Moreover, we found that practicing together, as enabled by the Blended Intensive Program “Winter School´25”, played a crucial role in this process, and facilitated the transformation of a staff-based Professional Learning Community to a fully developed Community of Practice. The transition from collaboration to co-creation, and the maturation of the staff-PLC into a Community of Practice, was made possible by several key factors: openminded and engaged teachers, teacher-led initiatives, strong collaboration among educational developers, a program designed for a diverse teaching cohort, flexibility in responding to group needs, and a balanced mix of workshops and social activities. 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper was supported by Erasmus+ Project No. 101124320 EuroTeQ Engineering University 2030.