The second workshop took place in Berlin on 12th and 13th March 2026, and it was primarily dedicated to clarifying how the development of the joint learning paths for teachers should take place, and choosing four prototypes on which four groups of partners should start to work. The workshop aimed to explore how competencies could be tailored to different teacher profiles, while also consolidating a shared understanding among partners of the priority areas and pedagogical approaches for DECITEL. The methodology was highly interactive, alternating plenary discussions, group work, and practical design sessions. A key discussion point was whether the learning paths should differentiate between pre-service and in-service teachers. This question emerged because the needs, motivations, and prior experiences of these two groups differ significantly. The partners were divided into groups, and they explained their stances in a plenary discussion.

Through these discussions, the plenary reflected on the balance between knowledge acquisition, practical skills, and attitudinal development, recognizing that learning paths must be adaptable to the context of each teacher and school, but not necessarily be substantially different as far as learning outcomes are concerned. After this key step, the group moved towards identifying priority competence areas. The partners then engaged in a collaborative process to identify the priority areas for teacher learning paths. Each area was evaluated along four dimensions: absolute priority, correspondence to expressed local needs, feasibility by the partnership, and originality (not yet largely available for teachers). This structured evaluation allowed partners to identify areas of highest potential impact, while also ensuring that the chosen topics were feasible within the project’s timeframe and resources.

Based on this classification, the partners selected four pathways to develop, each with a corresponding working group:
1. Group COMPART on involving the community in citizenship education, Participation in decision making, and conflict transformation. The focus is on a community participatory approach, motivation of teachers, citizenship concept clarification, development of integrated online/offline materials, practical activities and assessments, reflective journals, and ECTS allocation.
2. Group COMPLEX on Understanding, facilitating complex socio-political topics / Critical thinking. The focus is on understanding and facing complex socio-political challenges, providing teachers with tools to handle complex problems and practical strategies.
3. Group CDC on Critical Digital Citizenship. The focus is on: theoretical knowledge, hands-on application, reflecting on implementation, and moving from students as users to active political agents.
4. Group ICON on Connection / Agency / Layered identity formation / Motivation. The focus is on strengthening teachers’ capacity to navigate diversity, conflict, and identity-related issues in the classroom, while fostering inclusion, dialogue, and critical thinking.

The following day, as a conclusion to the workshop, participants organized into working groups to develop the structure and content of learning paths for the selected priority areas. Each group was tasked with preparing a presentation of the learning path, including objectives, learning outcomes, activities, methodology, assessment approach, online and offline components, and the credit system if relevant.