Adult education in crisis: technology, recognition, dignity

07/10/2025

Adult education in crisis: technology, recognition, dignity

Introduction: It's time to stop talking - let's start taking real action

Adult education today faces a key question: can it keep up with a world that is changing irrevocably? New technologies, changing labor markets, rising expectations of different generations - as well as the costs, barriers and lack of recognition of this education - mean that many declarations about reskilling, upskilling and lifelong learning remain on paper. This article delves into the major challenges - from the lack of flexibility and technology, to the bureaucracy of competency recognition, to the mental and motivational crisis - to ask one tough question: does adult education have a real chance to revolt?

1. Too little technology, too much lecture

Our research shows that only 9% of education companies rate their use of technology in the teaching process as high. Instead of interactive exercises or integrated learning platforms, lecture and presentation methods dominate. This is confirmed by CEDEFOP (2023) data: more than 60% of adult training courses are "front-end" in nature, without engaging participants. Meanwhile, the creation of e-learning or microlearning , which until now has been costly and time-consuming, thanks to the use of AI: ( generative tools like ChatGPT, Synthesia, or Canva AI ) can be agile and calibrated to needs but only if educators start using this technology and institutions break through and create the conditions for using it. Additional challenges are posed to education by Generation Z entering the labor market.

2. Generation Z learns differently - and the system can't keep up

Young adults - representatives of Generation Z (born after 1995) - have grown up in a digital, fast-paced, multi-channel world. For them, education is an ongoing, distributed process, often occurring outside of formal frameworks. As research by LinkedIn Learning, McKinsey and the OECD (2023) shows:

  • as many as 62% of 18-29 year olds consider themselves regular learners, although they do not take any formal courses,
  • the most frequently cited sources of learning are: YouTube, TikTok, online platforms, podcasts, Discord, educational micro-apps,
  • young people want to learn "on demand" - when the need arises, not on the institution's schedule,
  • they prefer microformats: 5-15 minute blocks, assignments, quizzes, educational games,
  • expect immediate feedback, the ability to apply knowledge, the option to earn a digital credential (badge, certificate).

And what do employers want?

In turn, employers - especially in the technology, creative, service industries - are increasingly looking for more than a formal diploma:

  • a specific skill, proven in practice (e.g., campaign development, data analytics, systems operation),
  • proof of commitment to development - e.g., microcredential with AI, no-code, customer experience,
  • next-generation soft skills: adaptability, asynchronous communication, managing oneself in remote work.

The WEF report "Future of Jobs 2023" states that 58% of companies already do not require a master's degree in their hiring processes, and instead look at specific skills and portfolios.A

And what does non-formal education offer?

Unfortunately, non-formal education (especially subsidized) in Poland often fails to meet these expectations - neither of young people nor of employers:

  • Training courses last 1-2 days on average, are formatted with rigid BUR frameworks, often with outdated methodologies and final assessments disconnected from reality,
  • Theydo not offer modularity - they cannot be flexibly combined into logical development paths,
  • Rarely provide recognizable micro-credentials that can be incorporated into a resume or LinkedIn profile (e.g., digital badges, recognizable certifications),
  • Are not linked to the MCC system or validation based on real competencies

3. Microcredentials? Yes - but not in the Polish version...

For several years, the OECD, CEDEFOP and the European Commission have been emphasizing the growing importance of microcredentials - flexible, short forms of education that allow confirmation of the acquisition of specific skills or knowledge, often in a digital and employable way.

In the context of the changing labor market and the expectations of younger generations, this solution seems essential. Eurostat data shows a declining percentage of people taking up master's degrees - in Poland from 27.1% in 2019 to 24.6% in 2023. Young people are increasingly choosing shorter, practical educational paths - and they want them to be officially recognized.

However, in Poland, the system for recognizing such learning is still in its infancy - both formally (there is no widely recognized framework and standards for microcredentials) and financially (there are no real tools to support learners outside the formal system).

What's more - there is a serious risk that microcredentials in Poland will be implemented in the same way as the Integrated Qualification System (IQS) or the so-called BUR validation - that is, with linguistic confusion, blurred goals and no real value for learners.

Validation? No - the symbolic activities of BUR

In the BUR (Development Services Base) system, "validation" is today a term that is overused and disconnected from its original EU meaning. According to the EU Council Recommendation of December 20, 2012, the validation process should include four complete stages:

  1. Identification - recognizing competencies acquired outside the formal system,
  2. Documentation - collecting evidence of these competencies,
  3. Assessment - verification of their compliance with qualification standards,
  4. Certification - formal recognition (e.g., in the form of qualifications in the MCC).

Meanwhile, in practice, BUR limits validation to a simple post-training knowledge check - usually in the form of a test or short assignment, without identifying and documenting prior experience, without reference to qualifications from the ZSK registry, and without the possibility of certification in the formal sense.

This mechanism leads to linguistic and systemic confusion: BUR forces the use of the word "validation" in a sense detached from educational logic and the qualification system. What's more, training institutions are discriminated against - forced to build the illusion of "recognition of competencies" with no real possibility of certification.

The result? Development institutions are obliged to "validate" even one-day training courses, most often developing only fragmentary competencies, and the process itself is artificial, costly and useless from the point of view of participants. In addition, the evaluations are issued not by the trainer who conducted the classes - as in formal education - but by an external "validator," which deepens the nonsense of the procedure.

For comparison:

  • in formal education, validation is the matriculation exam after 4 years of high school,
  • the defense of a thesis after several years of college,
  • semester grades are given by whoever taught.

To make matters worse, these activities are not translated into the Integrated Qualifications Register, and participants are not formally credentialed - even though "validation" sounds official. This creates a false sense of recognition of competence and destabilizes notions built up for years by the education and expert communities. It creates an absurdly incoherent "non-system" that could lead to a situation where thousands of "validated" training courses, not linked to any official qualification or educational pathway, are submitted to the EU.

One may ask: was this really the point?

That's why it's so important that microcredentials don't replicate this mistake. If they too become a "system product" without quality, consistency and purpose - trust in the idea of flexible learning will collapse. And yet microcredentials can be the key to triggering real reskilling and recognition of informally acquired competencies - but only if they are implemented with a head, and not for reports and indicators.

4. HR in crisis - lack of competence, burnout and pauperization

Adult educators - including trainers, counselors, coaches and teachers in the non-formal system - are one of the most overstressed and undervalued professional groups today. They are the ones who would be expected to shoulder the modernization of education, implement AI, support reskilling, respond to the needs of Generation Z and the labor market. But who will take care of them?

Aging workforce and generation gap

In formal education, the average age of a teacher in Poland is about 47. As many as 38% of the cadre are 45-55 years old, and only 5-8% are Generation Z (under 30). In adult education, the age is even higher and many trainers and advisors have not received digital and methodological development support for years.

Digital stress, burnout and professional loneliness

The pandemic was a moment of accelerated transformation, but also a dramatic overload of staff. Many educators had to rush to learn how to work remotely, digital tools, new models for working with clients and participants. As the CEDEFOP and EPALE reports show - the lack of methodological, technical and emotional support exacerbated professional burnout. It manifests itself:

  • decline in motivation,
  • frustration in the face of bureaucracy and regulatory chaos,
  • turnover and leaving the profession.

Economic pressures and pauperization of the profession

In addition to methodological and psychological problems, there are real economic problems. A huge proportion of educators (especially in non-formal education) are self-employed or contract workers, without organizational background, team support or a steady income. Their daily routine is:

  • fighting for every consulting or training hour,
  • dependence on orders from BUR or public projects (with a high risk of not being paid if the Operator fails to pay the training company),
  • increasing uncertainty, seasonality and lack of job guarantees,
  • lack of a professional development system - they teach others, but are left on their own.

As a result, many experienced trainers and consultants have fled to companies - as internal L&D experts, HRBPs or talent development specialists. This is often the only way to be able to continue working in education and at the same time have financial stability, a technological background and a meaningful impact.

Those who have stayed "on the outside" - active professionals, often great in content - are today struggling not only with educational challenges, but also economic survival.

What does the data say?

BKL's research and analysis of the development services market shows that:

  • only about 11% of educators in adult education have access to ongoing methodological or technologicalsupport ,
  • more than 50% of trainers and advisors are self-employed or freelancers, often working alone,
  • turnover and out-migration (to full-time jobs or outside the industry) accelerated between 2020 and 2023, especially among women and people 45+.

What to do

ProblemWhat needs to change
Lack of young staffSupport programs for young trainers and educators, funding for implementation into the profession
Self-employment and instabilityCreation of a support system for the freelancer: mentoring, networks, micro-grants, insurance
Burnout and professional lonelinessWellbeing programs for educators, support groups, recognition of the social importance of their/our work
Lack of professional developmentRealistic training offerings for educators - including technological and methodological, using AI, PBL (Problem/Project-Based Learning) methods and Design Thinking

Without the provision of real support for educational staff - technological, methodological and economic - there will be no systemic change. Educators are the engine of adult education, but today they are left without fuel.

Data from BKL and PIAAC surveys in Poland

This means that most adult education in Poland is compulsory, short training courses funded by the employer - not conscious, long-term learning.

Summary and conclusions

Adult education in Poland today stands at a crossroads - on the one hand, expectations are rising: the dynamic development of technology, the need for reskilling, the need for recognition of competencies acquired outside school, pressure from the labor market and younger generations. On the other hand: we have outdated structures, fragmented systems, burned-out staff and low motivation of participants.

The data collected and observations lead to several key conclusions:

1. We urgently need to modernize non-formal education

If the adult training system is to realistically support competence development, it must be modular, flexible, digital, and adapted to the learning styles of today's participants. It must also abandon archaic, front-end methods in favor of engaging learning experiences.

2. AI is not the future - it's a survival opportunity

Generative AI can realistically support the creation of materials, exercises and personalization of learning. But only if education staff have the space, competence and tools to use it. It's not the technology that will save us - it's how we use it.

3. Microcredentials and validation must make sense - systemically and educationally

Microcredentials can be the answer to market needs - but only if they have real value, are linked to qualifications and the recognition system. They cannot repeat the mistakes of the BUR system - where "validation" means something different from the EU Recommendation.

4. Educators need to be saved

Without a stable, competent, motivated workforce, there will be no reskilling. Educators can no longer be lonely freelancers on the verge of burnout. They need support - methodical, technological and economic.

5. The system must work for people - not indicators

Today, adult education in Poland is too often created "by design," "by requirements" or "by report." It's time to turn this around - and design it anew: around the real needs, capabilities and goals of the people learning.

Data and sources

To make it easier for audiences to inquire further, I've included key sources below:

  1. CEDEFOP: "Measuring participation in adult learning" (2023) - discusses adult participation in learning, indicates that more than 60% of training is lecture-based CEDEFOP+7CEDEFOP+7CEDEFOP+7.
  2. CEDEFOP: "Going digital means skilling for digital" (2023) - highlights the need to strengthen digital competencies in education CEDEFOP+1CEDEFOP+1.
  3. Eurostat - Educational attainment statistics (2024) - shows a decline in the percentage of young people with a master's degree in Poland from 27.1% (2019) to 24.6% (2023) .
  4. Eurostat - Adult participation in education and training (2023) - shows a new EU target: 47% participation of 25-64 year olds in adult education; in Poland it is only 12.7% European Commission+1CEDEFOP+1.
  5. OECD "Education at a Glance 2023" - Report highlighting the skills gap and low participation of adults in OECD training.
  6. CEDEFOP "European inventory on validation of non-formal and informal learning" (2023) - compares validation systems in EU countries CEDEFOP+2CEDEFOP+2refernet.at+2.

Summary of links

PurposeSource
Participation in training - EU vs PLCEDEFOP (2023)
Digital competence and digitalizationCEDEFOP (2023)
Decline in master's degree holders in PolandEurostat 2019-2023
Participation of 25-64 year olds in adult educationEurostat 2023
Validation system in the EUCEDEFOP 2023
General context of adult educationOECD EAG 2023

About the author:

Barbara Matyaszek - Szarek - educator with over 25 years of experience in adult education. Member of the Board of Advisory American Certification Institute (ACI). Pioneer of certification and validation of adult competencies in Poland (2012) and creator of educational tools and e-learning (since 2008). Member of the Presidium of the Sectoral Council for Competencies in the IT sector, former representative of the Lewiatan Confederation in the ZSK Stakeholder Council. Co-creator of the Małopolska MSUES Standards, participant in numerous international projects in the field of adult education. Entrepreneur in the EduTech and HRTech industry. Internationally certified adult trainer (Themes Valley University and American Certification Institute). Passionate about change that starts with education.

This article was written with the support of generative artificial intelligence tools (ChatGPT/OpenAI) - in terms of source data analysis, content organizing and structure editing. All substantive content, interpretations and opinions are by Barbara Matyaszek-Szarek.

{ "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "headline": "Adult Education in Crisis: Technology, Recognition, Dignity", "alternativeHeadline": "Adult education isn't working. What needs to be fixed - now", "description": "Barbara Matyaszek-Szarek's expert article on the state of adult education: technology, competence recognition, staffing crisis and microcredentials.", "author": { "@type": "Person", "name": "Barbara Matyaszek-Szarek", "description": "Adult education expert, trainer, entrepreneur in EduTech and HRTech, member of the Presidium of the AI Competence Council, pioneer of competence validation in Poland.", "sameAs": [ "https://www.linkedin.com/in/barbara-matyaszek-szarek", "https://www.heuresis.pl" ] }, "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "Heuresis", "url": "https://www.heuresis.pl", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://www.heuresis.pl/sites/default/files/logo-heuresis-2022.svg" }, "contactPoint": { "@type": "contactPoint", "telephone": "+48 12 430 42 83", "email": "info@heuresis.pl", "contactType": "customersupport", "areaServed": "EN", "availableLanguage": ["en", "pl" ] } }, "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://www.heuresis.pl/blog/edukacja-doroslych-w-kryzysie" }, "datePublished": "2025-07-10", "dateModified": "2025-07-10", "image": "https://www.heuresis.pl/sites/default/files/images/edukacja-doroslych-w-kryzysie-okladka.png", "keywords": [ "adult education", "reskilling", "upskilling", "AI in education", "microcredentials", "BUR", "MCC", "competencies of the future", "educators," "technology in training," "lifelong learning" ], "inLanguage": "en", "breadcrumb": { "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Homepage", "item": "https://www.heuresis.pl" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Expert Blog", "item": "https://www.heuresis.pl/blog" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Adult Education in Crisis", "item": "https://www.heuresis.pl/blog/edukacja-doroslych-w-kryzysie" } ] }, "potentialAction": { "@type": "searchAction", "target": "https://www.heuresis.pl/search?query={search_term_string}", "query-input": "required-name=search_term_string" } }