NFDIxCS is a consortium within the family of NFDI, which defines and establishes a research data management (RDM) infrastructure for Computer Science (CS). Based on a broad community process, the various types of research data, their metadata and quality criteria are agreed upon in the community. The resulting research data, along with all associated supplementary information and context such as software, metadata, and the corresponding execution environment are provided as an integral part of the overall infrastructure to meet the FAIR principles. This extended abstract addresses the interaction of the presented task area Architectures & Interfaces within the NFDIxCS consortium and the planned activities, challenges, and objectives of the recently launched project.

The highly structured nature of the educational sector demands effective policy mechanisms close to the needs of the field. That is why evidence-based policy making, endorsed by the European Commission under Erasmus+ Key Action 3, aims to make an alignment between the domains of policy and practice. Against this background, this article addresses two issues: First, that there is a vertical gap in the translation of higher-level policies to local strategies and regulations. Second, that there is a horizontal gap between educational domains regarding the policy awareness of individual players. This was analyzed in quantitative and qualitative studies with domain experts from the fields of virtual mobility and teacher training. From our findings, we argue that the combination of both gaps puts the academic bridge from secondary to tertiary education at risk, including the associated knowledge proficiency levels. We discuss the role of digitalization in the academic bridge by asking the question: which value does the involved stakeholders expect from educational policies? As a theoretical basis, we rely on the model of value co-creation for and by stakeholders. We describe the used instruments along with the obtained results and proposed benefits. Moreover, we reflect on the methodology applied, and we finally derive recommendations for future academic bridge policies.