A cross-country study on integration of artificial intelligence in education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63734/JNFDE.01.01.001Keywords:
digital education, artificial intelligence, ATLAS.ti, professional developmentAbstract
The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in non-formal, informal and formal education is an emerging area with great potential to transform the world. However, the capacity of educators, youth workers and teachers to capitalise on this potential remains limited due to a lack of well-defined frameworks for AI integration in practices. The scope of this study is to explore the needs, challenges, and perspectives of youth work professionals regarding AI integration.
The research methodology employed mixt research methods. The literature review was followed by four semi-structured focus groups involving 72 youth workers and professionals with diverse backgrounds, nationalities and experience levels. A common guideline was used to ensure consistency, including facilitator instructions, discussion prompts, and reporting templates. The data collected during the focus groups were analysed using a Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS), ATLAS.ti software dedicated to qualitative research. The authors conducted qualitative analysis, through coding, identification of main categories, thematic map for visualization of results, and interpretation of findings to uncover patterns and deeper insights.
The results revealed a generally positive attitude toward AI tools and an awareness of their potential benefits in youth work, particularly in content creation. However, participants reported significant challenges regarding the use of AI for administrative tasks efficiency, for personalised learning, ethical concerns, and difficulty in interpretation of data. Cross-country similarities emerged, suggesting a shared need for capacity building and continuous training, while differences highlighted the influence of national contexts and digital infrastructure.
This study provides a foundational understanding of the competence needs of youth workers in relation to AI adoption. The findings are relevant for course designers wishing to offer targeted training for youth workers. Future research is also needed into policy-level support mechanisms that can enhance AI literacy and ethical integration across the sector.
References
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Retrieved from http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/11735
Cachia, R., Ferrari, A., Ala-mutka, K., & Punie, Y. (2010). Creative Learning and Innovative Teaching: final report on the Study on Creativity and Innovation in Education in EU Member States. Luxemburg/Seville.
COE. (2020). Youth work essentials. Retrieved from Council of Europe Portal: https://www.coe.int/en/web/youth-portfolio/youth-work-essentials
Fontana, S., Bisogni, F., & Tedesco, S. (2024). Implementing the European youth work agenda and the Bonn Process at the local and regional level in the EU. Commission for Social Policy, Education, Employment, Research and Culture. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/363276c6-1bd7-11ef-a251-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
Friese, S. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis with ATLAS.ti. SAGE Publications. doi:doi:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529799590.n1
Hofmann-van de Poll, F. (2023). The state of play of national processes within the Bonn processs. Bonn, Germany: JUGEND für Europa. Retrieved from https://www.bonn-process.net/downloads/publications/52/Bonn_Process_2023_State_of_Play_Survey_Report.pdf
Holmes, W., Persson, J., Chounta, I., Wassonand, B., & Dimitrova, V. (2022). AI and Education. A critical view through the lens of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/prems-092922-gbr-2517-ai-and-education-txt-16x24-web/1680a956e3
Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5 ed.). SAGE Publications.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). A. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (Second ed.). Sage Publications. Retrieved from https://vivauniversity.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/milesandhuberman1994.pdf
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. SAGE Publications, Inc. Retrieved from https://vivauniversity.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/milesandhuberman1994.pdf
NYCY. (2020). What is youth work? Retrieved from National Youth Council of Ireland: https://www.youth.ie/articles/what-is-youth-work/
Page, M., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., Mulrow, C., & al., e. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. doi:10.1136/bmj.n160
Pawluczuk, A. (2024). Automating Youth Work: youth workers views on AI. Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/42128013/116591216/AI_views+of+youth+workers.pdf/93ac326a-cf80-3fa4-c4e5-56ee4038a766?t=1682336763487
Saldana, J. (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Stefan, V. (2024). Insights into artificial intelligence and its impact on the youth sector. Council of Europe. Retrieved from https://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/42128013/105305579/051024_Insights%20into%20AI%20and%20the%20youth%20sector.pdf/2a717a7f-8e51-6fad-c129-5a4521d6c8b6?t=1720513638458
Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Non-Formal and Digital Education

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Funding data
-
European Commission
Grant numbers 2023-2-IT03-KA220-YOU-000170929