Deutsch Intern
Adult Education Academy

Dr. Lisa Breitschwerdt

Dr. Lisa Breitschwerdt is a research associate at the Professorship for Adult and Continuing Education at the University of Würzburg. She works on digitalisation and professionalisation in adult and higher education, didactics and methods of teaching and learning and dialogical perspectives in adult education research.

 

  • Professionalisation in adult education
  • Digitisation in adult education and university teaching
  • Didactics and methodology in adult and contiuning education
  • Participatory and dialogical perspectives in adult education research

CG7: (Generative) Artificial Intelligence in Adult Education and Lifelong Learning

Co-Moderator: Dr. Jan Schiller

Artificial intelligence in education (AIED) is fundamentally changing and transforming educational practices and the delivery and implementation of teaching-learning settings. The development of a wide range of technologies, especially generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) based on large language models (LLMs), is progressing rapidly and there are now numerous AI systems used in education and learning (Holmes & Tuomi, 2022; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). Addressing the social impact of GenAI on our coexistence and our education systems is a central concern of international (education) policy development strategies (e.g. EC, 2024; UNESCO, 2019, 2021). At the same time, (education) policy developments that define the framework for the use of GenAI in (adult) education are only gradually taking place, most recently with the introduction of the AI Act (European Parliament and the Council, 2024), which sets out the framework conditions for the use of GenAI in (educational) organizations and the skills required for this. In the fields of adult education, the use of GenAI is developing in a rhizome-like and needs-oriented manner. To date, there are hardly any studies that examine the use of AI in adult education in a scientifically supported manner. Also, regulations regarding AIED are scarce and offer a fast-evolving field for exploratory comparative work.

Thus, the aim of the Comparative Group is to obtain an initial overview of available usage practices and policy guidelines of GenAI in adult education and lifelong learning through a multi-level approach. To this end, we will determine a common conceptual understanding of GenAI for adult education, and adopt it to the conceptual framework of Lima & Guimaraes (2011, 2016) for policy analysis in adult education. Based on this, we offer to look at the use of AIED from the mega or macro level to the micro level based on the availability of documents and data in the country cases: identify policies and guidelines that regulate the use of GenAI in adult education in the various country contexts; ask about the use of GenAI in organizations and fields of adult education in the different countries; look at concrete practices and approaches of GenAI use in adult education in the different county contexts.

Artificial intelligence in education (AIED) is fundamentally changing and transforming educational practices and the delivery and implementation of teaching-learning settings. The development of a wide range of technologies, especially generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) based on large language models (LLMs), is progressing rapidly and there are now numerous AI systems used in education and learning (Holmes & Tuomi, 2022; Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019). Addressing the social impact of GenAI on our coexistence and our education systems is a central concern of international (education) policy development strategies (e.g. EC, 2024; UNESCO, 2019, 2021). At the same time, (education) policy developments that define the framework for the use of GenAI in (adult) education are only gradually taking place, most recently with the introduction of the AI Act (European Parliament and the Council, 2024), which sets out the framework conditions for the use of GenAI in (educational) organizations and the skills required for this. In the fields of adult education, the use of GenAI is developing in a rhizome-like and needs-oriented manner. To date, there are hardly any studies that examine the use of AI in adult education in a scientifically supported manner. Also, regulations regarding AIED are scarce and offer a fast-evolving field for exploratory comparative work.

Thus, the aim of the Comparative Group is to obtain an initial overview of available usage practices and policy guidelines of GenAI in adult education and lifelong learning through a multi-level approach. To this end, we will determine a common conceptual understanding of GenAI for adult education, and adopt it to the conceptual framework of Lima & Guimaraes (2011, 2016) for policy analysis in adult education. Based on this, we offer to look at the use of AIED from the mega or macro level to the micro level based on the availability of documents and data in the country cases: identify policies and guidelines that regulate the use of GenAI in adult education in the various country contexts; ask about the use of GenAI in organizations and fields of adult education in the different countries; look at concrete practices and approaches of GenAI use in adult education in the different county contexts.

  1. Breitschwerdt, L.; Gojić, A. & Guimarães, P. (2025). Logics of action in the academic professionalisation of adult educators: A comparative analysis of degree programmes in Germany and Serbia.  Andragoška spoznanja/Studies in Adult Education and Learning, 31(1), 105-124. https://doi.org/10.4312/as/19853

  2. Breitschwerdt, L; Rosemann, T. & Schiller, J. (2025). Digitalisation and Higher Education in Germany: Promotion of Transformative Digital Competences. In L. A. Cordie (ed.). Transition from Pedagogy to Andragogy: An International Perspective (103-130). Emerald Publishing Limited.

  3. Breitschwerdt, L. & Schiffner, E. (2025). Digitale Medien in der Freizeit: Perspektiven aus der Erwachsenenbildung. Forum Erwachsenenbildung, 58(2), 40-44.

  4. Breitschwerdt, L.; Hümmer, C. & Egetenmeyer, R. (2024). Gestaltungsanforderungen hybrider Settings in der Hochschullehre aus der Perspektive von Studierenden. Bildungsforschung. 30(1). https://doi.org/10.25539/bildungsforschung.v30i1.1029

  5. Klimkina E.; Rotschnig, S.M.; Yoo, J.; Breitschwerdt, L.; Cordie, L.; Guimarães, P. (2023). Academic professionalisation and hybrid professionalism in adult education: A comparative and explorative analysis. Andragoške Studije.

 

                                                                                                                                                                               

⇒ Back to the Overview week 2
OSZAR »