xFORMAL: Reinventing Lifelong Learning in Cultural Heritage

Lifelong Digital Learning and Education: promoting flexibility, inclusion, critical thinking and international exchange Conference PROCEEDINGS Annamaria DE SANTIS, Elena CALDIROLA e Pietro CARRETTA Italian Symposium on DIGITAL EDUCATION University of Pavia 19 - 21 June 2024 Conference PROCEEDINGS Italian Symposium on DIGITAL EDUCATION University of Pavia 19 - 21 June 2024 Proceedings of the Italian Symposium on Digital Education, ISYDE2024 Pavia (Italy), June 19-21, 2024 Edited by A. De Santis, E. Caldirola, P. Carretta SIe-L, Società Italiana di e-Learning Copyright © 2025 PUBLISHED BY PEARSON WWW.PEARSON.COM ISBN: 9788891938800 Preface ISYDE 2024, the Italian SYmposium on Digital Education, has been jointly organized by the Italian e-Learning Society (SIe-L, https://www.sie-l.it/) and Italian Society for Media Education Research (SIREM, https://sirem.org/). The 2024 edition focused on “Lifelong Digital Learning and Education: promoting ?exibility, inclusion, critical thinking and international exchange” and aimed to promote innovative teaching and learning experiences enabled by technologies in the national and international scenario, able to transform educational paths into ?exible and inclusive ecosystems. Good teaching practices are the starting point for removing barriers and promoting inclusion, intercultural, and international exchange; favoring wellbeing and professional upskilling and reskilling throughout life through education and appropriate communication strategies; critically analyzing digital messages and environments. The conference, which serves as a meeting point for sharing research, experiences, and technological applications, was held at the University of Pavia (Italy) from June 19 to 21, 2024. Nearly 200 participants presented more than 60 contributions merged into eight Sections in the proceedings: •Blended and Distance Learning (8) •Teaching innovations, Communicating Science and emerging technologies in Education (10) •Digital UpSkill and ReSkill for Adult Learners, Career Development and Training (5) •Experiences in Education (11) •Digital Citizenship and Media Literacy (4) •Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (6) •AI in Education (13) •Collaboration Projects and Networks (5). Steering Committee •Tommaso MINERVA President of Italian e-Learning Association University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •Pier Cesare RIVOLTELLA Past President of SIREM University of Bologna •Elena CALDIROLA University of Pavia •Annamaria DE SANTIS University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •Anna DIPACE Pegaso Telematic University •Paolo FERRI University of Milan-Bicocca •Antonio MARZANO University of Salerno •Stefano MORIGGI University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •Chiara PANCIROLI University of Bologna •Maria RANIERI University of Firenze •Paolo RAVIOLO eCampus University •Marina RUI University of Genoa •Susanna SANCASSANI Polytechnic of Milan ScientiJc Advisory Board (1/2) •Giovanni ADORNI University of Genoa •Daniele AGOSTINI University of Trento •Mario ALLEGRA National Research Council, CNR – Palermo •Luisa AMENTA University of Palermo •Daniela ANDREINI University of Bergamo •Michele BALDASSARRE University of Bari •Claudia BELLINI University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •RaLaella BOMBI University of Udine •Bruno BONIOLO Italian e-Learning Society •Fabrizio BRACCO University of Genoa •Filippo BRUNI University of Molise •Alessia CADAMURO University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •Donatella CESARENI Sapienza University of Rome •Paolo CHERUBINI University of Pavia •Letizia CINGANOTTO University for Foreigners of Perugia •Maria CINQUE LUMSA, Rome •Salvatore COLAZZO University of Salento, Lecce •Enricomaria CORBI University Suor Orsona Benincasa, Naples •Pio Alfredo DI TORE University of Cassino - Southern Lazio •Loretta FABBRI University of Siena •Laura FEDELI University of Macerata •Gianni FENU University of Cagliari •Giovanni FERRI LUMSA, Rome •Silvia FIGINI University of Pavia •Giuliana FRANCESCHINIS University of Eastern Piedmont •Giovanni FULANTELLI National Research Council, CNR - Palermo •Giovanni GANINO University of Ferrara •Andrea GARAVAGLIA University of Milan •Lorella GIANNANDREA University of Macerata •Francesco IACOVIELLO University of Cassino - Southern Lazio •Loredana LA VECCHIA University of Ferrara •Giuseppina Rita Jose MANGIONE National Institute for Documentation, Innovation and Educational Research, INDIRE •Marina MARCHISIO University of Turin •Agostino MARENGO University of Foggia •Rebecca MONTANARI University of Bologna •Alberto MONTRESOR University of Trento •Federica PAGANELLI University of Pisa •Andrea PERALI University of Camerino •Donatella PERSICO National Research Council, CNR - Genoa ScientiJc Advisory Board (2/2) •Corrado PETRUCCO University of Padua •Mario PIREDDU University of Tuscia, Viterbo •Antonella POCE University of Rome Tor Vergata •Giorgio POLETTI University of Ferrara •Luigi ROMANO University Parthenope of Naples •Teresa ROSELLI University of Bari •Veronica ROSSANO University of Bari •Sabrina ROSSI Ca’ Foscari University of Venice •Katia SANNICANDRO University of Modena and Reggio Emilia •Valentino SANTUCCI University for Foreigners of Perugia •Adolfo SCOTTO DI LUZIO University of Bergamo •Maurizio SIBILIO University of Salerno •Bruna SINJARI University of Chieti-Pescara •Adriano TOMASSINI University of Parma •Roberto VECCHI University of Bologna •Gianni VERCELLI University of Genoa •Alex WEISSENSTEINER Free University of Bozen Local Organizing Committee •Elena CALDIROLA University of Pavia •Pietro CARRETTA University of Pavia •Paolo CHERUBINI University of Pavia •Gabriella MASSOLINI University of Pavia Table of Contents Section 1 Blended and Distance Learning 1 MICROCREDENTIALS AND LIFELONG LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION: EUROPEAN AND INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES Chiara FINOCCHIETTI 2 APPROPRIATENESS OF THE BLENDED LEARNING INTENSIVE PROGRAMME: ANALYSIS OF A CASE FOR THE DEFINITION OF A MODEL Andrea GARAVAGLIA, Ilaria TERRENGHI, Martina MORREALE, Bianca SoJa Irene FUMAGALLI, Cristina GRECO 10 TEACHING APPROACHES FOR BLENDED LEARNING: RESULTS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL PHASE AT UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE Isabella BRUNI, Maria RANIERI, Francesca PEZZATI, Jonida SHTYLLA, Marius SPINU 19 THE BASIC MATHEMATICS MOODLE COURSE: AN OPEN AND FLEXIBLE TEACHING-LEARNING TOOL FOR THE TRANSITION TO UNIVERSITY Agnese Ilaria TELLONI, Francesca ALESSIO 25 AN INVESTIGATION INTO STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON ACADEMIC INTEGRITY IN UNIVERSITY BLENDED LEARNING COURSES Katia SANNICANDRO, Annamaria DE SANTIS, Claudia BELLINI, Tommaso MINERVA 34 DISTANCE LEARNING IN TIME OF CRISIS: THE UNIVERSITY OF FOGGIA EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE IN RETHINKING DISTANCE EDUCATION IN THE LOCAL AND EUROPEAN DIMENSION Piergiorgio GUARINI, Francesco Pio SAVINO, Domenico LORUSSO, Giusi Antonia TOTO 44 BLENDED LEARNING FOR TEACHER DEVELOPMENT: TRANSFORMING EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES BY HARMONISING TRADITION AND INNOVATION Letizia FERRI, Stefano BONOMETTI, Cristiano TERMINE, Sara BOCCHICCHIO 50 INCLUSIVE MUSEUM AND DIGITAL TEACHING: ENHANCING LEARNING IN STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS Valentina BERARDINETTI, Lucia MELCHIORRE, Giusi Antonia TOTO 59 xFORMAL: Reinventing Lifelong Learning in Cultural Heritage Gianluca OLCESE1,2, Joanna MOLEK1, Anna SIRI3,4 1Società Dante Alighieri Wroclaw (POLAND) 2Università di Wroclaw (POLAND) 3Cattedra UNESCO in Antropologia della salute. Biosfera e sistemi di cura, Università di Genova (ITALY) 4Università Telematica Pegaso, Napoli (ITALY) Abstract The xFORMAL project, focused on Informal and Non-Formal E-Learning for Cultural Heritage, stands as a leading example in cultural heritage education. Its innovative approach combines physical exploration of museums and cultural sites with enriched virtual experiences through a mobile app. Supported by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, this project showcases how digital technology can enhance cultural heritage education, fostering interest and learning among citizens of all ages while inspiring innovation and progress. xFORMAL is built on two fundamental principles: Metadisciplinarity, which encourages collaboration among science, technology, and the humanities through constructive dialogue, and pedagogical innovation, which utilizes interactive games to transform cultural visits into engaging learning experiences. The project places a strong emphasis on valorizing lesserknown cultural heritage that is often overlooked in formal education, using modern and accessible tools to promote its knowledge. To further advance heritage education, xFORMAL has implemented strategies aimed at increasing public interaction and fostering partnerships with cultural organizations and educational institutions. These initiatives have enriched the educational o;erings, catering to diverse interests while enhancing the dissemination of educational content and integrating the project into the formal education system. This collaborative spirit promotes mutual growth and a sense of shared accomplishment. In summary, xFORMAL exempli<es how cultural heritage can be enhanced by merging real and virtual experiences, opening new avenues for the lifelong transmission of cultural heritage. Keywords: Informal Education, Cultural Heritage, European Project, Educational Innovation, Citizen Engagement. 1. Introduction Since the 1960s, learning has generally been divided into three main categories, which are now widely accepted and recognised, even by large institutions. The European Commission describes these types of learning as follows: Formal learning takes place in education and training institutions and leads to recognised diplomas and quali5cations. Non-formal learning takes place alongside mainstream education and training systems and does not usually lead to formalised quali5cations. Non-formal learning can be delivered in the workplace and through the activities of civil society organisations and groups (e.g. youth organisations, trade unions and political parties). It can also be provided by organisations or services set up to complement formal systems (e.g. art, music and sports lessons or tutoring to prepare for exams). Informal learning is a natural part of everyday life. Unlike formal and non-formal learning, informal learning is not necessarily intentional learning and, therefore, may not even be recognised by the individual themselves as contributing to their knowledge and skills. - 287 - Informal learning is a natural part of everyday life Unlike formal and non-formal learning, informal learning is not necessarily intentional learning and, therefore, may not even be recognised by the individual themselves as contributing to their knowledge and skills. Informal education as a response to children's personal curiosity Despite the social and cultural stigma attached to informal and non-formal education, its role has proven to be quite relevant. In fact, school-age children spend a large proportion of their waking hours outside of school (up to 85% according to Medrich et al., 1982) and the school experience, even if it is continuous, represents only part of their personal, intellectual and social development. It is clear that formal education simply cannot ful5l all children's educational needs. Informal education for the education of adults In our society, the concept of education is expanding and is actually seen as a lifelong process: ‘In the education debate of the last 30 years – and especially in the last decade – the concept of lifelong learning has been strategically and functionally sharpened. To a certain extent, it stands for a new way of specifying educational tasks in late modern societies’ (Alheit, 2018). Lifelong learning is no longer just an aspect of education and training but must become the guiding principle for provision and participation across the continuum of learning contexts (European Commission, 2000). Apart from the small percentage of people who participate in university courses, informal education is one of the most important ways of meeting the educational needs of adults. A clear example of the social bene5ts of informal education is the willingness of adults to learn how to use new technological devices and digital applications in their everyday lives. This was already stated by Pasek in 2008, but if you look at the technological innovations of the last 15 years, this statement is even more true. Most of these innovations required a dramatic shift in the mindset of users. If they have successfully become part of our social and personal lives, it is thanks to advances in informal education, which is less content-centred and more people-centred. Informal learning is useful for urgent topics Informal learning also has a crucial impact on citizens' awareness of relevant and current scienti5c topics that are not yet covered in formal education, such as environmental management, global warming or climate change. Traditional science museums have been quite reactive in adapting their educational programmes to social and cultural developments. This has led to the creation of open-air museums and guided tours to provide visitors with an immersive experience. These initiatives have had a positive impact on raising public awareness of environmental issues. Informal and formal learning: comparison of cognitive methods Because of our cultural tradition, we are accustomed to the idea that a large part of education consists of students adapting to the subjects, schemes, timetable and methods of formal education. Relevant experiences we have all had in the 5eld of informal education have broadened this view and opened up aspects that we would never have considered relevant before the technologisation of society. In the ‘80s, computers were professional tools and few had one at home. Today, every family has multiple technological devices, and we all expect them to be accessible, self-learning, intuitive, intelligent and user-friendly. Middle and high school students expect to 5nd some of these aspects in formal education as well, and their expectations are changing the relationship between formal and informal education by linking them more closely in terms of content and methodology. This complementarity is also recognised by important institutions, as the Commission of the European Communities states: ‘Until now, formal learning has dominated policy thinking, shaping the way education and training is delivered and colouring people’s understanding of what counts as learning. The lifelong learning continuum puts non- - 288 - formal and informal learning more centre stage. By de5nition, non-formal learning takes place outside of schools, colleges, training centres and universities. It is not usually considered ‘real’ learning, and its outcomes are not of great value in the labour market. Therefore, non-formal learning is usually undervalued. Informal learning, however, is probably completely overlooked, even though it is the oldest form of learning and remains the mainstay of early childhood education. The fact that microcomputer technology arrived in homes before it arrived in schools emphasises the importance of informal learning. Informal contexts oEer an enormous reservoir of learning opportunities and could be an important source of innovation in teaching and learning methods. Osmosis between formal and informal learning Understanding the diEerences and peculiarities and the gradual osmosis between these diEerent types of learning plays a crucial role in intellectual, cultural and social development. Learners need to be aware of their speci5c aspects and know when it is better to rely on formal and when on informal learning. Formal education is delivered through a range of courses designed by experts in pedagogy and teaching. It is supported by a selection of highly developed materials and texts and is based on a trustworthy scienti5c foundation and proven teaching methods. Formal education also consists of years of intensive and methodical learning activities. It teaches epistemological procedures and cognitive strategies and clari5es how a data set should be processed in order to transform it into an information system, according to the diEerent disciplinary epistemologies. Nevertheless, formal education cannot cover all topics and satisfy all individual curiosities and information needs. Therefore, people rely on non-formal and informal learning to 5ll the gaps in both content acquisition and cognitive methods, generally with a higher level of emotional involvement. For this reason, experiences with informal and non-formal learning can have a deeper impact on cognitive attitudes and practises. Another positive aspect of informal learning environments is that they are (potentially) open to a variety of populations with diEerent levels of interest and knowledge. For this reason, informal learning does not have to conform to predetermined standards and can be easily adapted to personal cognitive potential. Formal and informal education have their advantages and disadvantages. In the places, opportunities and situations where they can co-exist, their positive eEects can be combined and used to maximise the eEectiveness of the learning experience. According to David W. Livingstone, informal learning is the pursuit of knowledge or skills through personal choice, without mandatory requirements or curricula imposed by others. Although informal learning can take place in diEerent situations and under diEerent conditions, e.g. in daily life, it is possible to trigger this process through situations or events that are explicitly designed to provide informal learning experiences. For this purpose, some places are more favourable than others, and in terms of science education, these are zoos, robotics clubs, science competitions and activities such as online games. Above all, however, it is science and nature museums that best represent informal science education. Despite a social and cultural stigma regarding the relevance and eEectiveness of informal and non-formal education, its role has proven to be very important. In fact, school-age children spend a large proportion of their waking hours outside school (up to 85% according to Medrich) and the school experience, albeit a consistent one, represents only part of their personal, intellectual and social development. It is clear that formal education simply cannot ful5l all children's educational needs. So far, formal learning has dominated policy thinking, shaped the way education and training is provided and coloured people's understanding of what counts as learning. The lifelong learning continuum puts non-formal and informal learning more centre stage. By de5nition, non-formal learning takes place outside of schools, colleges, training centres and universities. It is not usually considered 'real' learning, and its outcomes are not of great value on the labour market. Nonformal learning is, therefore, generally undervalued. - 289 - However, informal learning is probably completely ignored, even though it is the oldest form of learning and remains the mainstay of early childhood education. The fact that microcomputer technology arrived in the home before it arrived in schools emphasises the importance of informal learning. Informal contexts oEer an enormous reservoir of learning opportunities and could be an important source of innovation in teaching and learning methods (European Commission, 2000) Understanding the diEerences, characteristics and gradual osmosis between these three diEerent types of learning plays a crucial role in intellectual, cultural and social development. Formal education is delivered through a range of courses designed by education and teaching professionals. It is supported by a selection of highly developed materials and texts and is based on a trustworthy scienti5c foundation and proven teaching methods. Formal education also consists of years of intensive learning activities where learning is the main occupation of the learner. It teaches epistemological and cognitive structures that are of great value, and it teaches how a set of data should be processed to transform it into an information system, according to diEerent disciplinary epistemology. Nevertheless, formal education cannot cover all topics and cannot satisfy all individual curiosity and information needs, so people resort to non-formal and informal learning, generally with a higher level of emotional involvement. For this reason, the experiences of informal and non-formal learning can have a profound impact on cognitive attitudes and practises and eventually even change the learning methods of formal education. As mentioned earlier, Medrich's (1982) research shows that children spend more of their day outside of school, which is only part of their personal, intellectual and social development. This can have a positive eEect as cognitive processes become more Gexible and adaptable. However, it can also lead to problems as the eEectiveness of cognitive schemas is compromised by ineEective procedures. Sometimes osmosis between formal and informal education gets the best of both, relying on the former for cognitive processes and methods and the latter for data collection; other times, mental schemas are negatively aEected by methods acquired through an informal learning experience, resulting in a false epistemic methodology. The integration of formal, informal and non-formal learning is the key to a successful lifelong learning process, as research by Alheit (2018) shows. Lifelong learning is at the centre of European policy and is no longer seen as just an aspect of education and training but must become the guiding principle for provision and participation across the whole continuum of learning contexts (European Commission, 2000). According to Livingstone (1999), informal learning is the pursuit of knowledge or skills through personal choice, without compulsory requirements and without curricula imposed by others. Informal learning can take place in diEerent situations and under diEerent conditions, e.g. in everyday life or in environments and events explicitly designed to provide informal learning experiences (Staus et al., 2023): Zoos, robotics clubs, science competitions and online games are just some of them (Robelen et al., 2011), but what best represents informal science education are museums, whose educational function is widely recognised and whose educational oEerings are mainly referred to as informal learning (Dudzinska-Przesmitzki & Grenier, 2008). The National Science Education Standards published by the US National Research Council state that museums can make an important contribution to the understanding of science and encourage students to explore their interests outside of school (National Research Council, 1996). Howard Gardner (1991) says that museums have the potential to engage students, educate them, promote their understanding and, most importantly, help them take responsibility for their own future learning. A preliminary literature review conducted by Dudzinska-Presmitzki & Grenier in 2008 found that the existing literature on informal learning in museums focuses on two main aspects: how learning is inGuenced by intrapersonal factors such as interests, motivations, prior knowledge, personal agenda, etc. (Falk et al., 1998; Falk & Adelman, 2003) and how it is inGuenced by contextual factors such as the museum environment, the exhibition, initiatives, etc. (Bitgood, 2002). Various aspects of an exhibition's design and environment have been studied in detail to enhance its impact on visitors. These include the isolation of objects, their size, informative labelling, - 290 - diEerent types of technological instruments and multisensory applications, but also the lighting (taking into account natural and arti5cial light), the presence of natural elements such as plants and the noise level (Dudzinska-Przesmitzki & Grenier, 2008). With regard to the latter aspect, the literature makes it clear that the museum environment can be more eEective if it is not focussed on verbal and informative communication (Bradburne, 2001), but instead arouses visitors’ curiosity and appeals to their innate learning processes (Falk, 1997, 2004; Bradburne, 2001; Semper, 1990). For this reason, it is more eEective to rely on aspects that can be learned with less eEort and in a more enjoyable way, using pictures, colours, interactive diagrams or panels, rather than long written texts. This is what Sue Allen calls activating a ‘natural cycle of enquiry’ (Allen, 2004). If the museum consists only of displayed materials and written descriptions, it can easily reduce the visitor to a passive observer. However, if it includes other types of communication that allow for diEerent types of interaction, visitors are more interested, curious and active throughout the visit (Gammon, 1999; Dufresne-Tasse, 1992). In a case study by Shaby and Vedder-Weiss (2021), the behaviour of three children with diEerent attitudes towards science in a science museum is analysed. This study emphasises the importance of physical interaction for a positive attitude towards science and a deeper understanding of it. Depending on the age of the visitors, interaction can be conveyed through short and welldesigned questions, images and infographics rather than objects to touch, turn or manipulate. This can have positive eEects as the cognitive processes become more Gexible and adaptable. However, it can also lead to problems as the eEectiveness of cognitive schemas is compromised by ineEective procedures. Sometimes osmosis between formal and informal education makes the best of both, relying on the former for cognitive processes and methods and the latter for data collection. In other cases, mental schemas are negatively inGuenced by methods acquired through an informal learning experience, leading to a false epistemological methodology and thus con5rming that the integration of formal, informal and non-formal learning is the key to a successful lifelong learning process. Lifelong learning is no longer just an aspect of education and training but must become the guiding principle for provision and participation across the whole continuum of learning contexts (European Commission 2000). Bradburne (2001) summarises this concept as follows: ‘Interactivity takes place in the mind, not just in the hands’. One advantage of informal learning environments is that they are (potentially) open to a variety of population groups with diEerent levels of interest and knowledge (Shaby et al.,2016). They interviewed 17 museum staE from diEerent museums in the USA, Israel and Europe about the goals of science museums. They responded that it is about changing the public perception of science, promoting science education and reducing cultural diEerences between population groups. According to museum staE, science museums play an important role in changing visitors’ attitudes towards science and providing an additional source of science education (Shaby et al., 2016). The concept of ‘science’ can be improved and better shaped thanks to the combination of formal and informal learning, which should go beyond a simple school visit and become a collaborative approach (Monteiro et al., 2016). Several studies emphasise the crucial role of teachers in building positive and collaborative relationships between schools and science museums (McManus, 1992; Chin, 2000; Olson et al., 2001; Jacobucci, 2006). Others focus on the importance of teachers’ personal preparation, pointing out that it is up to teachers to understand the relationship between museum and school as complementary and to emphasise the museum as a response to the school's needs, so that it provides the school with the elements it does not have (Gouvêa et al., 2001). Obstacles to the educational eEectiveness of the museum visit: the diEerent expectations of students, teachers and museum teams in relation to the proposed activities; the passivity of teachers during and after the school visit and the diNculty of dialogue between teachers and museum educators (Almeida, 1997). According to Chagas (1993) and Szpakowski (1973), this co-operation could be improved if museum staE were aware of the topics of the schools' science curriculum, the related disciplines and subjects, and the teaching methods on which teachers rely. Indeed, the integration of informal and formal science learning still seems to be a burden that is mainly borne by teachers. - 291 - As mentioned in the introduction, formal education can provide students with mental structures and schemata, but their curiosity and cognitive needs go far beyond the boundaries of school science curricula and need to be integrated through other types of experiences. It is clear that students learn science by crossing the boundaries between formal and informal learning and moving from one to the other. 2. The case study The European xFORMAL project The project Informal and non-formal e-learning for cultural heritage - xFORMAL was inspired by an innovative form of tourist pilgrimage that allows to (re)discover heritage sites that are usually neglected by tourists and citizens. Pilgrimages have been undertaken by humanity in all historical periods (Reader, 2015). Conceptualised by D. Le Bréton (2012) as a form of communication in space and time, they are de5ned by S. Coleman and J. Eade (2004) as a 'culture on the move'. Most importantly, the place-based approach replaces the person-centred approach typical of private experiences. Not surprisingly, some scholars have identi5ed parallels between pilgrimage and tourism (Graburn, 1977). The project is a compelling case study of how cultural heritage can be eEectively integrated into modern education systems, particularly through the lens of Education 5.0 and Game-Based Learning. These include the University of Genoa, Italy, which is leading the project, as well as Alteritas from Italy, the Museo de Zaragoza in Spain, the Centro Ciençia Viva from Portugal, the FEF in Finland and the Instituto Politecnico de Bragança in Portugal, Museo Nazionale Etrusco di Villa Giulia in Italy, NCLOUD from Italy, the Dante Alighieri Society of Wrocław in Poland, the University of Bordeaux Montaigne in France, the Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznań in Poland and the University of Zaragoza in Spain. This multidisciplinary team brings together expertise in the 5elds of cultural heritage, education and digital innovation to ensure the success of the project. Focused on uncovering and promoting the pre-Roman history of Europe, this project oEers a unique approach that combines informal learning methods with advanced technologies to engage citizens, students and educators in exploring their shared cultural landscape. The populations of Europe in the 5rst millennium BC, often overlooked in contemporary education, shared signi5cant cultural, linguistic and technological commonalities. These characteristics provide an important learning opportunity that reveals Europe’s historical unity in diversity. By focusing on this under-researched period, the xFORMAL project invites participants to rediscover a neglected part of Europe's heritage and thereby develop a deeper sense of collective identity. Zygmunt Bauman (1996) analyses the change in the perception and construction of identity from modernity to postmodernity. In modernity, the challenge was to construct a stable identity, described by the metaphor of the pilgrim, a ‘restless seeker of identity’ travelling along a clear, de5ned path. In contrast, postmodernism rejects the 5xation of identity and favours a Guid and changeable self, similar to a tourist who changes destinations and identities without permanently committing themselves. Identity is seen as a process. The postmodern challenge is thus to keep identity options open and not to commit oneself, reGecting a broader societal shift towards Gexibility and changeability of personal and collective identity. One of the central strategies of the project is to use the landscape as an active educational tool. In contrast to traditional, static approaches to history teaching, here the landscape is a living medium through which participants interact with their cultural heritage. In this environment, learners become active agents, engaging directly with the environment as they explore historical narratives and sites. This reGects Education 5.0’s focus on experiential and humancentred learning, where education goes beyond the mere acquisition of knowledge to include emotional and ethical development. To promote lifelong learning and adaptability, the xFORMAL project utilises heutagogy, a selfdirected learning approach. This methodology encourages individuals to navigate new and unfamiliar environments and helps them to develop critical thinking, problem-solving skills and - 292 - adaptability, which are essential to the Education 5.0 vision of preparing learners for the complexity of the modern world. The innovative use of a smartphone game to cultural education is based on the principles of Game-Based Learning, which utilises the motivational aspects of games to engage learners. Through interactive puzzles, narrative adventures and mini-games, participants are encouraged to think critically about scienti5c methods and historical analyses, bridging the gap between entertainment and education. This playful approach not only makes learning more enjoyable, but also provides an informal learning environment that allows participants to absorb information in a fun, less structured context. Furthermore, the interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral approach of the xFORMAL project is in line with the Education 5.0 ethos of collaborative and inclusive learning. By drawing on diEerent methodologies and 5elds of study, the project enriches the learning experience and encourages participants to approach cultural heritage from diEerent perspectives. This comprehensive framework ensures that participants acquire a wide range of skills and knowledge, from technological knowledge to cultural and ethical awareness. In summary, the xFORMAL project demonstrates how the principles of Education 5.0 can be applied to heritage education by combining advanced technology with human-centred values. By utilising a cross-curricular approach and innovative learning methods such as game-based learning, the project successfully promotes the study of pre-Roman European history by creating a deeper connection to cultural identity while equipping learners with the skills they need for lifelong learning and responsible citizenship. This case study illustrates the potential of combining tradition and modern educational paradigms to create meaningful and impactful learning experiences. The xFORMAL framework The framework of the project is based on several fundamental elements, all aimed at uncovering and promoting the cultural heritage of Europe, particularly from the pre-Roman period. This focus allows for the inclusion of lesser-known minorities and aspects of history that are often overlooked in both public awareness and school curricula. The peoples of Europe in the 5rst millennium BC shared many cultural, technological, religious and linguistic characteristics. Their unity in diversity oEers invaluable lessons for modern society, both today and in the future. By selecting this historical period, the project oEers two clear advantages: It creates opportunities to engage with cultural heritage and invites citizens to explore a lesser known part of their cultural landscape, reinforcing the idea of a shared European history. At the centre of the strategy is the use of the landscape as an educational environment that plays an important role in the development of social and personal identities. The landscape is not simply seen as a static backdrop, but as an interactive medium through which information is conveyed. In this dynamic environment, visitors are not just passive observers, but active participants in the cultural landscape. This is in line with the principles of Education 5.0, which emphasise not only technological progress, but also the ethical, social and emotional aspects of learning. Just as Education 5.0 emphasises a human-centred approach that fosters empathy, creativity and critical thinking, the project’s approach to heritage education encourages individuals to connect with their cultural identity through direct experience. By fostering a sense of belonging and shared history, the project reGects Education 5.0's goal of preparing learners to engage responsibly with the world in both their personal and professional lives. In addition, the project emphasises heutagogy, or self-directed learning, to support lifelong learning. This approach encourages individuals to develop the skills they need to adapt to unfamiliar environments and helps them to develop into open-minded and self-motivated learners. This is in line with the ethos of Education 5.0, which aims to develop well-rounded individuals who are able to navigate and succeed in a complex, rapidly changing world. The use of Game-Based Learning (GBL) to impart informal and non-formal knowledge is also in line with the playful and creative learning methods that Education 5.0 supports. Through a learning game - 293 - that combines narrative adventures with mini-games, participants can engage with scienti5c concepts and develop critical thinking, further bridging the gap between technology and meaningful, contextualised learning. The game-based structure, complemented by mini-games, is only the top layer of a deeper system for fostering informal learning environments. This format not only enriches the learning experience, but also reGects the cross-curricular and cross-sectoral approach of Education 5.0, where diEerent areas and methods are combined to create a more comprehensive and impactful learning experience. This cross-curricular framework ensures that learners bene5t from a broad range of knowledge and skills, in line with the broader vision of Education 5.0, which combines advanced technology with human-centred values and a commitment to social, environmental and ethical responsibility. By encouraging active participation in heritage discovery and fostering a deeper connection with the landscape, the xFORMAL project contributes to a more inclusive, thoughtful and sustainable approach to education. It reGects the core principles of Education 5.0 by balancing technological innovation with a deep commitment to human values, ensuring that both historical knowledge and future learning are pursued in a way that bene5ts individuals, communities and society as a whole. Project Outcomes and Bene<ts It is expected that the activities carried out under the project – including staE exchanges, workshops, seminars, networking events and conferences – will signi5cantly enhance the research and innovation capacities of individuals and institutions in diEerent sectors, with an impact tailored to the focus area of the participants. Museum professionals, science animators and communicators will be exposed to new environments and educational frameworks through the opportunity to work in diEerent countries and sectors. This experience will enrich their understanding of innovative methods that they can bring back to their institutions. In addition, these professionals will hone their skills in scienti5c methods in the areas of observation, reporting and analysis. They will also apply new approaches to social research, particularly in areas such as integration and inclusion. Researchers in the social sciences and humanities will bene5t from the introduction of interdisciplinary methods that combine diEerent approaches and perspectives. While collaboration between academic and nonacademic experts from the 5elds of social research, science, humanities and cultural heritage is not uncommon, this project enables collaboration on two levels. Individual researchers will deepen their expertise through secondments, while collectively they will engage in analysing and consolidating knowledge and shared experiences in diEerent 5elds. For teachers and educators who traditionally focus on formal education, the project oEers a broader perspective by integrating non-formal and informal learning methods into existing curricula. Their participation will signi5cantly contribute to identifying new educational techniques and methods that can be developed in future projects to improve their teaching strategies and enrich their professional development. Researchers in the information, communication and technology sciences will gain a deeper understanding of the needs and priorities of social science and humanities professionals and the driving forces in the various 5elds. This interaction will help them to better develop ICT products – such as game-based learning tools and digital platforms – that are tailored to the speci5c needs of cultural heritage education and dissemination. For policy makers, schools, museums and cultural heritage institutions, the project will provide the opportunity to set clear objectives for the management of their cultural assets and territories. By setting priorities that reGect the collective needs of their communities and by better understanding existing and feasible solutions, they will be able to develop concrete proposals and actionable plans. On an individual level, the knowledge gained through this exchange will provide them with valuable new skills and methods that they can apply in their organisations, ultimately leading to more eEective cultural management and preservation strategies. - 294 - 3. Conclusions The xFORMAL project serves as a bridge between tradition and innovation, demonstrating the potential of informal and non-formal learning to reshape the way we approach education in the 21st century. By utilising digital innovation and immersive learning environments, this project creates a model that goes beyond the classroom and provides dynamic and engaging opportunities for heritage exploration. This holistic approach not only enhances understanding, but also fosters a deeper emotional connection to cultural identity, which will be critical as education continues to evolve. Looking to the future, the xFORMAL framework provides a roadmap for integrating informal learning into more formal educational structures. As we move towards Education 5.0 with its emphasis on human-centred, experiential learning, the 5ndings from this project can inform collaboration between schools, museums and cultural institutions in creating more adaptable, Gexible learning environments. The integration of game-based learning and self-directed approaches such as heutagogy is likely to play a central role in helping students and lifelong learners develop the critical thinking and problem-solving skills necessary to thrive in an increasingly complex world. The project's digital tools, particularly the mobile app and interactive games, oEer scalable solutions for the future of cultural and educational engagement. These tools democratise access to knowledge, make learning opportunities available to a wider audience and ensure that the communication of cultural heritage is both inclusive and relevant. This opens the door to a new kind of learning environment — one that is accessible, interactive and tailored to the needs of a digitally connected generation. In the long term, the partnerships and networks created through xFORMAL have set a precedent for future collaboration between educational and cultural institutions. This cross-sectoral approach will be crucial as we continue to develop new ways of integrating informal learning into formal education systems. The success of this project lays the foundation for future initiatives that can further strengthen the role of cultural heritage in shaping not only educational outcomes, but also personal and collective identities in a rapidly changing world. By promoting a lifelong learning ethos that values both formal education and informal learning experiences, xFORMAL oEers a forward-looking model that is focused on the future of education. In the face of the new challenges facing society, this approach will be instrumental in ensuring that learning remains relevant, accessible and closely linked to both personal development and global citizenship. Acknowledgements This work was supported by the EU-funded project Informal and Non-Formal E-Learning for Cultural Heritage – xFORMAL (Grant Agreement no. 101008184). References Alheit, P. (2018). Biographical learning - within the lifelong learning discourse. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning (2nd ed., pp. 153-165). Routledge. Allen, S. (2004). Designs for learning: Studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education, 88(1), 19-33. Almeida, A. (1997). Desa5os da relação museu-escola. Comunicação & Educação, 3(10), 50-56. Bauman, Z. (1996). From Pilgrim to tourist - or a short history of identity. In: S. Hall, P. du Gay, eds., Questions of Cultural Identity. London. Bitgood, S. (2002). The role of attention in designing eEective interpretative labels. Journal of Interpretation Research, 5(2), 31-45. - 295 - Bradburne, J. (2001). A new strategic approach to the museum and its relationship to society. Museum Management and Curatorship, 19(1), 75-84. Chagas, I. (1993). Aprendizagem—não formal/formal—das ciências: Relações entre museus de ciência e escolas. Revista de Educação, 3(1), 1-17. Chin, C. (2000). Science teachers’ development of museum-based STS modules—what do their perceptions and practices tell us? Proceedings of the National Science Council, 10(3), 115125. Coleman. S., & Eade, J. (Eds.). (2004). Reframing Pilgrimage: Cultures in Motion (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203643693 Commission of the European Communities. 2000. A memorandum on lifelong learning (SEC(2000) 1832). Dufresne-Tasse, C. (1992). Adult epistemic behavior at the museum: Implications for museum education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Dudzinska-Przesmitzki, D., & Grenier, R. S. (2008). Nonformal and informal adult learning in museums: A literature review. The Journal of Museum Education, 33(1), 9–22. Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171-190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1 Falk, J. H. (1997). Testing a museum exhibition design assumption: EEect of explicit labeling of exhibit clusters on visitor concept development. Science Education, 81(6), 679-688. Falk, J. H. (2006). An identity-centered approach to understanding museum learning. Curator, 49(2), 151-166. Falk, J. H., & Adelman, L. (2003). Investigating the impact of prior knowledge and interest on aquarium visitor learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 163-176. Falk, J. H., Missouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1998). The eEect of visitors' agendas on museum learning. Curator: The Museum Journal, 41(2), 107-120. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind. Basic Books. Gammon, B. (1999). Everything we currently know about making visitor-friendly mechanical interactive exhibits. Informal Learning Review, 39, 10-13. Gouvêa, G., et al. (2001). Redes cotidianas de conhecimentos e os museus de ciências. Parcerias Estratégicas, 11, 169-174. Graburn, N. (1977). Tourism: the sacred journey, in V. Smith, ed., Hosts and Guests: the anthropology of Tourism, Philadelphia. Jacobucci, D. F. C. (2006). A formação continuada de professores em centros e museus de ciências no Brasil. In D. F. C. Jacobucci (Ed.), Tese de Doutorado em Educação. Faculdade de Educação da Universidade de Campinas. Le Bréton, D. (2012). Marcher. Paris, Métailié. Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Lifelong learning and underemployment in the knowledge society: A North American perspective. Comparative Education, 35(2), 163-186. McManus, P. (1992). Topics in museums and science education. Studies in Science Education, 20, 157-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269208560007 Medrich, E. A., Roizen, J., Rubin, V., & Buckley, S. (1982). The serious business of growing up. University of California Press. Monteiro, B. A. P., Martins, I., & De Souza Janerine, de Carvalho, F. C. (2016). The issue of the arrangement of new environments for science education through collaborative actions between - 296 -