PRODIGI
Published December 19, 2025 | Version v1
Report Open

Piloting And Validating Tailored Pre- and Post-Intervention Assessments for PRODIGI Target Groups

Authors/Creators

  • 1. ROR icon KU Leuven
  • 2. Universidade Nova de Lisboa Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas
  • 3. ROR icon Universidade Nova de Lisboa
  • 4. Uniwersytet Jagielloński
  • 5. ROR icon University School of Physical Education in Kraków

Contributors

Project leader:

Project manager:

  • 1. ROR icon KU Leuven
  • 2. Uniwersytet Jagielloński
  • 3. ROR icon Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Description

This report explains how the PRODIGI project created and tested new tools for measuring people’s understanding and use of artificial intelligence (AI) before and after taking part in educational programmes. The project focused on groups who may have less access to digital technologies: young refugees in Belgium, students from disadvantaged backgrounds in Portugal, and older adults in Poland. 
Because AI is increasingly present in everyday life, from chatbots to image generators, the project set out to design assessments that are practical, age-appropriate, and relevant to real situations. The research team reviewed existing AI literacy tools, interviewed experts in digital and media education, and worked directly with young people and seniors to understand which questions were clear, which felt confusing, and which connected to their daily experiencesA pilot study involving 1,200 young people in Belgium was used to refine the structure of the tool and understand how AI skills appear in practice. The results showed that instead of treating technical, creative, ethical, and information-checking skills as separate abilities, young people tend to use them together when interacting with AI. 

Files

ZENODO_PRODIGI_D1.2.pdf

Files (1.5 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:785ac908d781aa6f4b3ef3278e3decb9
1.5 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Funding

European Union
Grant Agreement no. 101182849

Dates

Available
2025-12-19

References

  • Ahmed, S. K., Mohammed, R. A., Nashwan, A. J., Ibrahim, R. H., Abdalla, A. Q., Ameen, B. M. M., & Khidhir, R. M. (2025). Using Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 6(6), 100198. ScienceDirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2025.100198
  • American Library Association. (1989). Presidential Committee on Information Literacy: Final report. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/presidential
  • Azadi, T., d'Haenens, L., & Azadi, T. (2025). Navigating fact and fake: How unaccompanied minors and refugee adolescents evaluate credibility of online information. Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap, 53(3), 324–348. https://doi.org/10.5117/TCW2025.3.006.AZAD
  • Azadi, T., d'Haenens, L., Donoso, V., & Waechter, N. (2025). Vulnerable groups: the role of digital media in the life worlds of unaccompanied minors and implications for youth work and youth policies. In L. Van Audenhove, A. Demeulenaere, M. Walrave, L. d'Haenens, E. Lievens, H. Vanwynsberghe, & D. Nijs (Eds.), Empowering the Digital Citizen Digital and Media Literacy Research in Flanders, Belgium. Owl Press.
  • Brashier, N. M., & Schacter, D. L. (2020). Aging in an Era of Fake News. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 316–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420915872
  • Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
  • Carlson, J., Fosmire, M., Miller, C. C., & Nelson, M. S. (2011). Determining data information literacy needs: A study of students and research faculty. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 11(2), 629–657. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2011.0022
  • Collins, D. (2015). Cognitive interviewing practice. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473913611
  • Cotilla, M., & Esther. (2025). The Impact of AI on Inclusivity in Higher Education: A Rapid Review. Education Sciences, 15(9), 1255–1255. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091255
  • Diana, M. G., Mascia, M. L., Tomczyk, Ł., & Penna, M. P. (2025). The Digital Divide and the Elderly: How Urban and Rural Realities Shape Well-Being and Social Inclusion in the Sardinian Context. Sustainability, 17(4), 1718. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17041718 13.
  • Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder & Herder.
  • Gates, J. R., & Wilson-Menzfeld, G. (2022). What Role Does Geragogy Play in the Delivery of Digital Skills Programmes for Middle and Older Age Adults? A Systematic Narrative Review. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 41(8), 1971–1980. https://doi.org/10.1177/07334648221091236
  • Germine, L., Reinecke, K., & Chaytor, N. S. (2019). Digital neuropsychology: Challenges and opportunities at the intersection of science and software. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 33(2), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1535662
  • Grotto, G., & Buja, A. (2025). Association between digital technology use and social capital among older adults: A systematic review. DIGITAL HEALTH, 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076251336973
  • Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4586
  • Ha, S., & Kim, S. (2024). Developing a conceptual framework for digital platform literacy. Telecommunications Policy, 48(3), 102682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102682
  • Haddon, L., & Ponte, C. (2012). A pan-European study on children's online experiences: Contributions from cognitive testing. Observatorio (OBS) Journal, 6*(2), 239–257
  • Helsper, E. J., Schneider, L. S., J.A.M, A., & van Laar, E. (2020). The youth Digital Skills Indicator: Report on the conceptualisation and development of the ySKILLS digital skills measure. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4608010
  • Law, N., Woo, D., de la Torre, J., & Wong, G. (2018). A global framework of reference on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2 (UIS Information Paper No. 51). UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
  • Lee, J., Sung, J., & Choi, M. (2019). The factors associated with subjective cognitive decline and cognitive function among older adults. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 76(2), 555–565. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14261
  • Lee, S. (2023). Internet Use and Well-Being of Older Adults Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings from European Social Survey. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 67(1), 96–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2023.2217682
  • Lintner, T. A systematic review of AI literacy scales. npj Sci. Learn. 9, 50 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00264-4
  • Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020). What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20) (pp. 1–16). Association for Computing Machinery. doi:10.1145/3313831.3376727
  • Moll, S., Wyndham-West, M., Mulvale, G., Park, S., Buettgen, A., Phoenix, M., Fleisig, R., & Bruce, E. (2020). Are you really doing "codesign"? Critical reflections when working with vulnerable populations. BMJ Open, 10(11), e038339. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038339
  • Mulvale, G., Moll, S., Miatello, A., Robert, G., Larkin, M., Palmer, V. J., Powell, A., Gable, C., & Girling, M. (2019). Codesigning health and other public services with vulnerable and disadvantaged populations: Insights from an international collaboration. Health Expectations, 22(3), 284–297. doi:10.1111/hex.12864
  • Nedeljko, Assist. M., Bogataj, Prof. DDr. D., Perović, Assist. Prof. Dr. B. T., & Kaučič, B. M. (2022). Digital literacy during the coronavirus pandemic in older adults: Literature Review and Research Agenda. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 55(39), 153–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.12.027
  • OECD. (2024). Explanatory memorandum on the updated OECD definition of an AI system, OECD Artificial Intelligence
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, & European Commission. (2025, May). Empowering learners for the age of AI: An AI literacy framework for primary and secondary education (Review draft). OECD & European Commission.
  • Papers, No. 8. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/623da898-en.
  • Peters, S., Guccione, L., Francis, J., Best, S., Tavender, E., Curran, J., Davies, K., Rowe, S., Palmer, V. J., & Klaic, M. (2024). Evaluation of research co-design in health: A systematic overview of reviews and development of a framework. Implementation Science, 19, 63. doi:10.1186/s13012-024-01394-4
  • Potter, W. J. (2019). Media literacy (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Roger, A., Aïmeur, E., & Rish, I. (2023). Towards ethical multimodal systems. ArXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2304.13765
  • Shippee, M. (2024). Beyond the 4c'S: Framing Our Understanding of Future Skills in the Era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4692130
  • Spencer, R., McCormack, M. J., Drew, A. L., Gowdy, G., & Keller, T. E. (2021). (Not) minding the gap: A qualitative interview study of how social class bias can influence youth mentoring relationships. Journal of Community Psychology, 50(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22737
  • Spurava, G., & Kotilainen, S. (2022). Young People as Empirical Experts of Participatory Research in the Age of Information Disorders. Seminar.net, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.7577/seminar.4740
  • Tapia-Benavente, L., Vergara-Merino, L., Garegnani, L. I., Ortiz-Muñoz, L., Loézar Hernández, C., & Vargas-Peirano, M. (2021). Rapid reviews: definitions and uses. Medwave, 21(1), e8090. https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2021.01.8090
  • Thaker, V., Rawal, S., Shukla, H., Dave, I., Jani, A., & Thaker, M. (2025). The dual impact of artificial intelligence on human cognition: A comprehensive review. Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, 6(1), 34–45.
  • Tomczyk, Ł., & Edisherashvili, N. (2024). Learning Objectives in Older Adult Digital Education - Redefining Digital Inclusion. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(3), 507–520. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-3-507-52
  • Tomczyk, Ł., & Kielar, I. (2025a). Empowering the elderly in the information society: Redefining digital education for Polish seniors in the age of rapid technological change. Educational Gerontology, 51(10), 1122–1137. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2024.2439908 11.
  • Tomczyk, Ł., & Kielar, I. (2025b). Neutralising External and Internal Barriers in the Digital Inclusion Process for Seniors - Finding Ways to Effectively Shape Digital and Media Competences among Older People. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 30(4), 2231–2248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09813-7 3.
  • UNESCO. (2011). Media and information literacy curriculum for teachers. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000192971
  • UNESCO. (2013). Global media and information literacy assessment framework: Country readiness and competencies. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000224655
  • Walker, K. C., & Larson, R. W. (2012). Youth Worker Reasoning about Dilemmas Encountered in Practice: Expert-Novice Differences. Journal of Youth Development, 7(1), 23-May. https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2012.149
  • Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Yang, W. Artificial intelligence education for young children: why, what, and how in curriculum design and implementation. Comput. Educ. 3, 100061 (2022).
  • Zuber, S., Ihle, A., Loaiza, V. M., Schnitzspahn, K. M., Stahl, C., Phillips, L. H., Kaller, C. P., & Kliegel, M. (2019). Explaining age differences in working memory: The role of updating, inhibition, and shifting. Psychology & Neuroscience, 12(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000151