School represents one of the fundamental pillars of the cité éducative. It is not merely the place dedicated to the

transmission of disciplinary knowledge, but also the space where responsible citizens are shaped—capable of

living in pluralistic communities and of facing the challenges of their time (Biesta, 2020).

Today, in a context of transformations accelerated by digitalisation and the emergence of generative artificial

intelligence (GenAI), the role of school appears even more crucial, particularly when considering the widespread

reluctance and unevenness of families in fostering education for the critical use of technology. UNESCO (2023)

Diana Laurillard’s Conversational Framework, which indicate the six-learning method to learning, used for

analyzing how AI tools can support, reshape, and extend meaningful teaching interactions. The methodology

Conversational Framework. After each session, teachers design and test a classroom activity, complete a survey

on emotions, engagement and confidence in conducting this activity in class, and then participate in focus groups.

The cycle is repeated six times, generating both quantitative and qualitative data. At present, only the baseline

survey results are available, which serve as the foundation for the initial discussion presented in this article.

This article explores the role of school as a central node of the digital society and proposes a model of inclusive

educational governance that enhances the specificities of each territory and institution, involves families, and

engages municipalities in building Learning Societies.

This study adopts an action-research methodology (Carr & Kemmis, 1986) engaging nearly 400 Italian teachers

from all school levels. The research design is structured around six iterative teaching cycles, each inspired by

one of the learning activities described in Diana Laurillard’s Conversational Framework (Laurillard, 2012).

Each cycle unfolds in four phases:

1. Lecture introducing a specific didactic activity and its pedagogical rationale.

2. Design and experimentation where teachers plan and implement a classroom activity incorporating AI or

digital tools.

3. Survey where participants report on emotional state, engagement, confidence, and perceived feasibility of

the designed activity.

4. Focus groups, conducted by school level, aimed at capturing qualitative reflections on challenges,

The baseline data reveal that while over 70% of teachers already use digital tools, more than half remain

uncertain about assessing the reliability of online sources. This gap suggests that the main challenge is not

technical proficiency but the cultivation of critical digital literacy. Moreover, although nearly 40% of teachers

have experimented with AI tools, many perceive them as double-edged: while they acknowledge their potential

for pedagogical innovation, almost half express concerns about passivity, diminished critical thinking, and loss

of creativity. Notably, more than 60% of teachers explicitly request structured, continuous, and practical training,

signaling the need for systemic investment in professional development.

The open-ended responses clearly indicate that the main difficulty is not technical but relates to the critical ability

to evaluate sources: a significant proportion of teachers acknowledge not having sufficient tools to guide students

in this field.

The overabundance of online information makes it difficult to discern the reliability of content. Selwyn (2022)

refers to information overload and the risk of cognitive dependence on platforms. Generative AI amplifies this

issue: it can produce texts that are plausible but not always accurate, thus risking the consolidation of false beliefs

(Holmberg & Cukurova, 2022).

The data reveal a multifaceted picture: while most teachers view AI as a teaching opportunity, almost half

nonetheless express concerns about the loss of critical thinking and the passive use of technological tools.

pedagogical support and tools to preserve the critical and creative dimension of students.

The analysis confirms that training is the most pressing and widely shared demand: more than 60% of teachers

highlight the need for structured pathways. Comments further suggest that such training should not be generic

Families are irreplaceable partners. Epstein (2018) demonstrates how school success is closely correlated with

parental involvement. The questionnaires confirm this awareness: «Family support is decisive for ensuring

continuity in the critical use of technologies». Many teachers stress that the lack of digital education within

households makes schoolwork more difficult.

National Strategy for Digital Skills (MIUR, 2022) highlights the importance of the local level in reducing

territorial disparities.

The third sector and associations offer projects and pathways of active citizenship that enrich the school

experience (INDIRE, 2021).

From this perspective, school is a common good: a democratic stronghold where knowledge, cultures, and

generations intersect (UNESCO, 2021b).

The findings point to the necessity of governance frameworks that are multi-level and inclusive. At the national

level, clear policies and funding are required to ensure equitable access. At the local level, municipalities should

provide infrastructures and foster networks of innovation. At the school-community level, families and civil

society must be engaged to co-design educational pathways. In practice, inclusive governance means that AI is

Develop critical digital competences UNESCO (2023) states that “the ability to distinguish what is generated by

the ability to select and interpret information The questionnaires reveal a clear fact: many teachers do not feel

adequately prepared to work with OECD and UNESCO sources together with their students.

1. Train teachers as transformative intellectuals Laurillard (2012) defines teachers as designers of learning

environments. Selwyn (2022) emphasises the political dimension of digital education. More than 60% of

teachers requested structured, continuous, and practical training. Not one-off courses, but integrated and

shared pathways.

2. Promote territorial networks of educational innovation UNESCO (2021b) affirms that learning is “a

4. Foster pluralism, creativity, and ethical responsibility Selwyn (2022) warns that AI may lead to

remains at the centre.”

The Italian case resonates with international experiences, where AI in education is seen as promising but requires

robust governance and teacher empowerment:

transformation. Research shows that Finnish schools prioritise critical literacy and ethics in AI curricula

(Rintala & Nokelainen, 2020).

programmes. Emphasis is placed on teacher readiness and continuous evaluation of impact (Tan & Koh,

2022).

devices, platforms, and training, reducing digital divides and promoting innovation across all school

agency achieve more sustainable results in digital transformation (OECD, 2021).

AI and digital technologies should not be passively endured but governed at the territorial level through an

inclusive, multi-level, and participatory vision that places people, communities, and territories at the centre.

In this way, school can truly become a common good, capable of generating the future and guiding society

towards an ethical and solidarity-based use of innovation.

2023.