Table 1 Building blocks and their... | Emerald Publishing

Table 1

Building blocks and their contribution to guiding principles

Building block	Equity by design	Mutual benefit by design	Resilience by design
Case intake	Schools set the research agenda; university responds to practitioner-identified needs	Cases ensure relevance, making participation worth repeating for all actors	Renewable pipeline: new cases each cycle reduce dependence on prior commitments
Triadic roles	In-service teachers are formal co-inquirers, not passive data sources	Each role receives distinct value (research competence, usable products, boundary-spanning learning)	Distributed responsibility prevents single-broker failure
Collaboration routines	Named contact persons ensure school voices are structurally included	Predictable meeting rhythms lower coordination costs for all partners	Role-based (not person-based) routines survive personnel turnover
Shared artefacts	Differentiated versions for school and university stakeholders	Templates and diaries reduce tacit dependency and onboarding effort	Codified workflows allow new sites to adopt the model without informal knowledge transfer
Capacity scaffolds	Curated method supports democratising access to research skills	Scaffolds protect feasibility for students with uneven readiness	Reduced dependence on “ideal” participants absorbs cohort variation
Outputs and dissemination	Usable products return concrete value to schools	Public return moments create visible, recurring symbols of reciprocity	Dissemination artefacts serve as recruitment assets for future cycles

Building block	Equity by design	Mutual benefit by design	Resilience by design
Case intake	Schools set the research agenda; university responds to practitioner-identified needs	Cases ensure relevance, making participation worth repeating for all actors	Renewable pipeline: new cases each cycle reduce dependence on prior commitments
Triadic roles	In-service teachers are formal co-inquirers, not passive data sources	Each role receives distinct value (research competence, usable products, boundary-spanning learning)	Distributed responsibility prevents single-broker failure
Collaboration routines	Named contact persons ensure school voices are structurally included	Predictable meeting rhythms lower coordination costs for all partners	Role-based (not person-based) routines survive personnel turnover
Shared artefacts	Differentiated versions for school and university stakeholders	Templates and diaries reduce tacit dependency and onboarding effort	Codified workflows allow new sites to adopt the model without informal knowledge transfer
Capacity scaffolds	Curated method supports democratising access to research skills	Scaffolds protect feasibility for students with uneven readiness	Reduced dependence on “ideal” participants absorbs cohort variation
Outputs and dissemination	Usable products return concrete value to schools	Public return moments create visible, recurring symbols of reciprocity	Dissemination artefacts serve as recruitment assets for future cycles