The REFUGE-ED Dialogic Co-Creation Process: working with and for REFUGE-ED children and minors

The article addresses the need for continuous research and evaluation to implement effective, evidence-based Mental Health and Psychosocial Support (MHPSS), particularly for migrant, asylum-seeking, and refugee (MAR) children who have often been excluded from research and policy. It responds to calls for publicly funded research to tackle societal problems and include end-users’ voices, noting a persistent gap between academic literature and practice. The EU has emphasized co-creation of knowledge and policies, yet practical approaches vary. Within this context, the REFUGE-ED project (coordinated by the Autonomous University of Barcelona with nine partners across Bulgaria, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Italy, and Sweden) seeks to identify, co-create, and evaluate evidence-based practices in education (formal, non-formal, informal) and MHPSS to promote educational success, well-being, and sense of belonging among children (0–18) from recent migrant, refugee, and asylum-seeking cohorts, including unaccompanied minors. This involved two systematic scoping reviews determining effective practices via community-reported benefits, standardized tools, and evidence of social impact. Effective MHPSS approaches identified include creating safe spaces, providing psychoeducation, and facilitating creative expression. Effective educational practices are the Successful Educational Actions (SEAs): literary gatherings; interactive groups; educative participation of the community; family education; dialogic pedagogical education for teachers; and dialogic conflict prevention and resolution model. These practices are being presented to 46 pilot sites across six countries (Spain 13, Italy 14, Greece 10, Bulgaria 5, Sweden 3, Ireland 1) spanning reception/identification centers, inclusive school/social learning environments, and institutional residential care for unaccompanied/separated children. The article introduces and discusses the REFUGE-ED Dialogic Co-Creation Process (RDCP) implemented across these pilots.

The literature emphasizes end-user participation in education and health research, including MHPSS, to increase legitimacy and use of research evidence in practice. Communicative methodology positions end-users as co-creators of knowledge through egalitarian dialogue, integrating scientific evidence with the lifeworld perspectives of those affected, enabling transformative solutions. The Dialogic Inclusion Contract (DIC) operationalizes communicative methodology for dialogic work among families, community members, educators, administrators, politicians, and researchers to agree on actions to counter educational exclusion. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) similarly underscores partnerships with knowledge users to address context-sensitive needs, especially in health systems. In MHPSS, community-based approaches (CB MHPSS) engage emergency-affected populations as active participants in all stages of response, promoting recovery, resilience, and restoring collective structures. Participation can range from informing to empowering. The EU-funded FOCUS project’s dynamic integration approach integrates MHPSS, arriving/receiving communities, participatory/co-creative approaches, and multi-stakeholder partnerships. In education, the EU FP6 INCLUD-ED project identified Successful Educational Actions (SEAs) that overcome inequalities and foster inclusion and cohesion, implemented within Learning Communities guided by Dialogic Learning—egalitarian, consensus-oriented interactions maximizing communicative abilities across contexts. Over 9,000 schools in 14 countries implement SEAs or are Learning Communities, supported by extensive evidence on social impact and transferability. Scalability research (e.g., in Portugal: 139 schools 2017–2020) shows that multidirectional, egalitarian, evidence-based dialogue among stakeholders enhances spread, sustainability, shared ownership, and depth of implementation, through formal and informal networks, ongoing theoretical and practical debate, and reciprocal support. These literatures collectively inform REFUGE-ED’s RDCP, stressing that both the content of interventions and the process of co-creation with end-users are critical to success.

The REFUGE-ED Dialogic Co-Creation Process (RDCP) is a methodological framework for co-creating and implementing evidence-based SEAs and MHPSS approaches with end-users across 46 pilot sites in six European countries. It draws on communicative methodology and the scalability experience of SEAs, guided by seven Dialogic Learning principles serving as quality checkpoints: egalitarian dialogue; cultural intelligence; transformation; instrumental dimension; creation of meaning; solidarity; and equality of differences. These principles shape facilitation (e.g., assemblies, small committees), ensure recognition of all participants’ contributions regardless of background, emphasize transformative interactions, focus on key instrumental learnings (e.g., reading skills), promote meaning-making and identity support, uphold equal opportunities and outcomes, and value diversity while aiming for identical outcomes for all. Implementation steps: - Step 0: Identify and enroll potential pilot sites via introductory meetings outlining co-creation; adapt logistics (online/offline) as needed. - Step 1: Needs analysis with stakeholders/end-users to map socio-economic/cultural context, access constraints, existing initiatives, and specific needs around academic success, well-being, and social belonging; conduct fieldwork and desk research to profile each pilot. - Step 2: Dialogic selection of practices and co-creation. Share needs analysis, gather feedback, and agree on which SEAs and MHPSS approaches to implement via assemblies or small meetings. Facilitation norms include time discipline, respectful turn-taking, prioritizing unheard voices, recognition that all voices count, valuing any participation, aiming for decisions, and inviting additional norms from participants. - Step 3: Create Communities of Practice and Learning (CoP&L) including representatives of all actor types, selected for representativeness, diversity, self-governance, and ownership. CoP&Ls connect stakeholders, identify needs, foster learning, co-create solutions, inform local decision-makers, and guide the future Brokering Knowledge Platform. - Step 4: Training Round 1 on SEAs and MHPSS at three levels: Level 1 train-the-trainers (consortium/pilot representatives; English/online); Level 2 national-level webinars in local languages (online); Level 3 pilot-level training (local language; in-person or online). Training is scheduled collaboratively, focusing on recreating/adapting actions without altering core features. - Step 5: Implementation Round 1 where centers decide operational details (participants, frequency, duration) and receive practical support from partners. - Step 6: Evaluation Round 1 using the Supportive Process for the Inclusion of Children’s Experience (SPICE), aligning with RDCP to involve children and key agents in design, implementation, interpretation, and discussion. Comparative data across pilots capture outcomes (changes in desired indicators) and process (experiences of RDCP engagement), streamlining procedures amid varied contexts, chosen actions, and timelines. - Step 7: Implementation Round 2 to integrate evaluation lessons, provide additional training as needed, and launch a second implementation where appropriate (new or additional SEAs/MHPSS approaches), culminating in final evaluation. Content integrity: Researchers ensure that core features of evidence-based actions are preserved (e.g., Dialogic Literary Gatherings use classic universal literature) while co-creating local enactments with end-users. Scope: 46 pilot sites across Spain (13), Italy (14), Greece (10), Bulgaria (5), Sweden (3), Ireland (1), spanning reception/identification centers, inclusive school/social learning environments, and institutional residential care for unaccompanied or separated children. Effective practices offered: MHPSS—creating safe space, psychoeducation, creative expression; Education—SEAs: literary gatherings, interactive groups, educative community participation, family education, dialogic pedagogical education for teachers, dialogic conflict prevention/resolution.

- The REFUGE-ED Dialogic Co-Creation Process (RDCP) operationalizes co-creation with end-users through a stepwise, principles-based framework applicable across diverse education and MHPSS settings. - Seven Dialogic Learning principles provide actionable quality checkpoints ensuring egalitarian, transformative, inclusive, and outcomes-focused implementation. - Effective practices identified: MHPSS (creating safe space; psychoeducation; creative expression) and SEAs (literary gatherings; interactive groups; educative participation of the community; family education; dialogic pedagogical education for teachers; dialogic conflict prevention/resolution). - Scope and reach: 46 pilot sites in six countries—Spain (13), Italy (14), Greece (10), Bulgaria (5), Sweden (3), Ireland (1)—across reception/identification centers, schools/social learning environments, and institutional residential care. - Training architecture (three levels) and CoP&Ls foster multi-directional dialogue, shared ownership, and capacity-building, supporting scalability and sustainability. - Evaluation approach (SPICE) embeds children’s and stakeholders’ perspectives into outcome and process evaluation, enabling cross-site comparability while respecting contextual diversity. - Practical implementation is feasible but influenced by external factors (e.g., COVID-19, policy and migration shifts); RDCP’s flexibility supports adaptation without compromising core evidence-based features. - The framework shows potential for sustainability and replicability beyond the studied contexts, aligning with EU co-creation priorities and bridging research–practice gaps.

The RDCP demonstrates how co-creation can be enacted on the ground through egalitarian, evidence-based, dialogic processes that integrate scientific knowledge with end-users’ lived experiences. By anchoring implementation in Dialogic Learning principles and leveraging CoP&Ls and multi-level training, the framework strengthens ownership, fidelity to core features, and transferability across varied settings. The approach advances the democratization of science and policy-making in education and MHPSS, particularly for at-risk groups such as refugee and migrant children. While implementation across 46 pilots shows feasibility, timelines and logistics are sensitive to evolving socio-political and public health contexts (e.g., COVID-19, changes in national legislation, the Ukrainian conflict). Nonetheless, RDCP’s design allows iterative adaptation while maintaining fidelity to evidence-based practices, supporting both effective outcomes and sustainable integration into local systems.

The article details the mechanics of the REFUGE-ED Dialogic Co-Creation Process, a flexible, scalable framework for co-creating and implementing evidence-based educational and MHPSS practices with end-users across diverse European contexts. Grounded in the seven principles of Dialogic Learning and informed by the scalability experience of SEAs, the RDCP combines structured steps (needs analysis, dialogic selection, CoP&Ls, multi-level training, iterative implementation, and SPICE-aligned evaluation) with local adaptation, promoting ownership, fidelity, and sustainability. Findings suggest strong potential for replication in additional contexts; future research should examine RDCP’s outcomes and transferability beyond Europe and with diverse populations to further validate and refine the model.

- Generalisability is limited: RDCP has been implemented only across six European countries, necessitating further research in other regions and populations. - Implementation timelines varied due to contextual disruptions such as COVID-19, legislative changes affecting refugee settlement, and geopolitical events (e.g., Ukrainian conflict), which impacted continuity and scheduling. - As a methodological framework article, empirical outcome data are not reported here; broader evaluation results from REFUGE-ED are planned for sharing separately.