by the Media and Learning Association.
This article on the Media & Learning conference that took place in Leuven 18-19 June 2025 provides an overview of the conference including the themes it addressed as well as the presentations and discussions that were part of the agenda.
Educational media that works
The Media & Learning 2025: Educational media that works conference was organised jointly with KU Leuven’s Learning Lab from 18-19 June 2025 at the Provinciehuis in Leuven, Belgium, and involved more than 260 participants from 26 countries coming from 128 different institutes.
More and more, the question posed to all members of the Media & Learning community is whether the media-supported resources and learning opportunities that they create really make a difference when it comes to learning. What if there were more immersive elements? A stronger focus on storytelling? More involvement of students? More and better production techniques supported by AI? In an environment where dwindling resources are increasingly the norm, knowing how to make the very most of every opportunity to improve learning is, for all of us, a very real priority.
This is why the organisers of the 2025 Media & Learning conference opted for the tagline ‘Educational media that works‘, as we believe it points to the importance of making the best-informed choices when it comes to choosing and using media. This event, organised jointly with KU Leuven’s Learning Lab, was jam-packed with opportunities to share and learn from colleagues. Taking place in the historic city of Leuven in Belgium on 18-19 June 2025, this event brought together a vibrant community of educators, researchers and innovators from different parts of Europe and beyond, all passionate about leveraging media in support of learning in higher education.
This conference was aimed at all staff working in centres for teaching and learning, educational media production centres, learning innovation departments, educational departments, audiovisual services, as well as researchers and policy-makers keen to explore the added value of media in teaching and learning. At its heart was an exploration of the who, how, what, why and where of educational media production in higher education and other associated educational sectors.
Pre-conference workshop
Maximising the impact of Centres for Teaching and Learning in HE Institutions
17 June 2025, 13:30 – 17:00 CEST
This half-day workshop aimed to bring together staff working in Centres for Teaching and Learning (CTLs) across different countries to explore areas of shared interest, exchange successful strategies and build collaborative networks.
The programme included presentations from CTLs operating in diverse contexts, a visit to KU Leuven’s educational media facilities, and discussions on effective mechanisms for training and supporting academic teaching staff.
Kindly hosted by KU Leuven’s Learning Lab, the workshop was organised jointly by KU Leuven Learning Lab (Belgium) and Npuls (The Netherlands).
The workshop consisted of three main components:
- A presentation session entitled ‘How does your CTL work?” with talks given by Armağan Ateşkan, Bilkent University, Turkey, Anneleen Cosemans, KU Leuven, Belgium and Jana Herwig, University of Vienna, Austria.
- A guided tour of KU Leuven’s studios and facilities, accompanied by exchanges on specific CTL challenges.
- A knowledge café with Alexandra Mihai, Maastricht University, The Netherlands.
The conference programme
The 2025 conference programme included presentation sessions where leading experts and practitioners shared their experiences, insights and know-how; screenings of MEDEA Awards finalists and educational media productions; workshops; discussion opportunities; and demonstrations of different tools and services. More than 90 participants from 19 countries contributed to the programme, which featured 36 distinct sessions.
This year’s plenary speakers were:
- Tine Baelmans, KU Leuven, Belgium
- Thomas Espeseth, University of Oslo, Norway
- Maarten Francq, The Royal Institute for Theatre, Cinema and Sound (RITCS) in Brussels, Belgium
- Richard E. Mayer, University of California, USA
- Thierry Koscielniak, France Immersive Learning / Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology, France
- Ivana Juraga, Digital Education Unit, DG EAC, European Commission
- Nynke Kruiderink, Npuls, The Netherlands
The programme included 10 hands-on workshops entitled:
- Hands-on with AI: Transforming Educational Media Production
- Let’s Do Responsible XR through Play and “Polder Perspectives XR”
- AI and the Potential to Transform Personalised Video-Based Learning
- AI-driven Video Production: The Latest Advances and Use Cases in Educational Media Production
- Management and Operation of Centres for Teaching and Learning and Other Support Services
- Developing a Platform and Teacher Training for Ethical Use of Generative AI in Teaching and Learning
- AI in Project Management: A Hands-on Exploration
- Once upon a Time… The Power of Storytelling in Instructional Design
- Exploring XR in Education: A Practical Guide for Educational Institutions
- Should I Really Make That Video? How Format Selection Can Save Time, Effort and Lives
A max of 35 people took part in each workshop and the feedback about the hands-on nature of these workshops was really positive.
The press room was used on 18 June for Pecha Kucha presentations of innovative projects and initiatives, discussions, and screenings showcasing the finalist entries of this year’s MEDEA Awards. The MEDEA Awards were once again organised to coincide with the annual Media & Learning Conference, providing attendees with a unique opportunity to discover outstanding examples of how media are being used to enhance learning across all levels of education.
All 7 finalists for this year’s MEDEA Awards presented their projects during the conference, and many participants joined invited guests for the awards ceremony, which was held in the same venue as the conference.
This year’s awards were proudly sponsored by Jabra, represented at the ceremony by Lars van de Corput. The prizes were officially presented by Lalynn Wadera, Deputy Mayor for Childcare, Education, Economy, Employment, Trade and Hospitality, who warmly welcomed everyone to the city of Leuven and the venue.
A total of 137 entries were submitted this year from 31 countries – spanning Europe, the United States, and even Australia – highlighting the international nature of the competition.
This year’s winners:
- MEDEA Award 2025
Supercampus, submitted by Albert Segura, 3Cat – Catalan Audiovisual Media Corporation (Spain) - Special Jury Prize
Moleculous, submitted by Sven Graindor, KU Leuven (Belgium) - Audience Favourite Award
Supercampus (again!) – following a week of online voting with over 1,240 participants, making it a double winner in 2025, just like in 2023 with a German entry! - Best Use of AI in Education (Thematic Prize)
Beyond Lectures: AI & XR Learning Innovations – Emphasising the Shift from Traditional Teaching Methods, presented by Andrew Parry, Imperial College Business School (United Kingdom)
Alberto Vasciaveo from IIS J.C. Maxwell (Italy) was the lucky winner of the draw for this year’s prize given to a MEDEA judge, in recognition of the continued support and valuable contributions made by the MEDEA judging panel.
Finalists of the MEDEA Awards 2025 (Alphabetical order)
- Beyond Lectures: AI & XR Learning Innovations – Emphasising the Shift from Traditional Teaching Methods, submitted by Imperial College Business School, UK, and represented by Andrew Parry.
- Counselling Skills Resource, submitted by Adtalem Global Education, US, and represented by Renee Beck.
- Knowbody App, submitted by Knowbody, Germany and represented by Vanessa Meyer.
- Moda re-: A Quest to re-Store Sustainability and re-Imagine Fashion, submitted by IE University, Spain, and represented by Elizabeth Valentine.
- Moleculous, submitted by KU Leuven, Belgium and represented by Sven Graindor.
- Phonics Adventures with Zelda, submitted by ClickView Pty Ltd, Australia, and represented by Jane Moore.
- Supercampus, submitted by 3Cat, Spain, and represented by Albert Segura.
Conference highlights
Tine Baelmans (KU Leuven, Belgium) outlined the university’s evolving response to generative AI, emphasising a collaborative approach. The journey began in April 2022, when a student’s tweet about using AI bots for papers prompted the formation of an expert panel, which convened in October 2022. The subsequent launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, reaching one million users within five days, immediately raised concerns about its impact on education and student privacy. By February 2023, a writing group at KU Leuven was developing guidelines, officially released in May 2023 for teachers, students and researchers, and built on principles of transparency, verification, respect for copyright and responsibility. In June 2023, collaboration intensified across various university groups and networks.
By January 2024, the university opened access to AI-based tools, such as Microsoft Copilot and BB Learn’s AI Design Assistant – for staff and students, integrating these tools into the university ecosystem and providing support and training through a university portal and a GenAI Teams channel for faculty. Despite ongoing resistance from some who believe GenAI has no place in academia, its use at the university is permitted for self-generated text, translation, coding, paraphrasing and multimedia generation, with unacknowledged copying strictly forbidden.
Future plans include a vision for master’s theses and an AI literacy curriculum by June 2025, alongside efforts to map the implications of the AI Act. Key challenges include addressing ethical, security and environmental impacts, ensuring top-down to bottom-up alignment, and bridging the mindset gap between penalising and embracing AI’s potential.
The audience questions focused on how to assess whether the steps taken are the right ones, and what we may lose from the widespread adoption of GenAI. Tine indicated that the bachelor’s programmes specifically are already investigating what is being missed. The discussion also focused on the increased responsibility of teachers and educators in refining their learning outcomes and assessment methodologies.
Tine Baelmans, KU Leuven, Belgium
Thomas Espeseth (University of Oslo, Norway) discussed the critical roles of attention, curiosity and memorability in learning. Starting from Dehaene’s (2020) four requirements for effective learning (attention, active engagement, error feedback and consolidation), Espeseth highlighted the inherent challenges and limitations each of them entails. Zooming in on the limits of attention, he demonstrated how phenomena like inattentional blindness and attentional blink can prevent critical information from reaching consciousness or being perceived, even when in plain sight. He stressed that attention alone is insufficient for lasting memory. To address this, Espeseth proposed leveraging AI models to adapt content features to boost memorability, thereby supporting learner needs. He presented evidence showing that images with high-memorability are recalled more effectively, with less effort and increased brain activity. Furthermore, AI models can suggest modifications to text to enhance its memorability. Ultimately, Espeseth advocated for innovative applications of AI-based modelling for improving content quality through AI-driven memorability assessments.
Thomas Espeseth, University of Oslo
Maarten Francq (VUB, Belgium) was set the impossible task of reflecting on what the next six weeks in AI might bring. He took the audience through what a changed learning and working environment could look like, with AI agents embedded in various actions and tasks that impact the real world. Arguing for a move beyond purely screen-based interactions with GenAI, he invited the audience to look at how GenAI outputs could have an effect in the real world, and how interactions with AI models could be diversified.
Maarten Francq, VUB
The highlight of the conference for many was the keynote and panel discussion with eminent researcher Prof. Dr. Richard Mayer (University of California, Santa Barbara, USA).
Richard Mayer presented insights on how we can help people learn so that they can apply their learning in new situations, starting from the sciences of learning, instruction, and assessment. After introducing his cognitive theory of multimedia learning, which stipulates how multimedia material is processed by learners’ sensory memory, working memory and long-term memory, he explained the concepts of different forms of processing happening in a learners’ memory when they engage with material. Based on more than 200 studies conducted in his research group, he outlined his instructional design principles to foster generative processing, reduce extraneous processing, and manage essential processing. He then engaged with an expert panel to discuss his research and its value for practitioners and educators. Elke Van Ael asked about a long-standing point of contention on the benefits of abbreviated subtitles versus verbatim transcripts. Mayer indicated that abbreviated subtitles may be better to avoid redundancy, but exceptions could be necessary in cases where language inhibits (e.g. second-language learners or learner-paced courses). He also expressed scepticism about machine-generated voices lacking emotional tone. They also discussed the need for better rubrics to assess video adherence to instructional principles and questioned if AI could play a role here in checking instructional design. Lana Scott addressed what could be learned from Mayer’s research on adaptations for learners with cognitive differences. He highlighted that the individual differences considered in his research have been primarily focused on differences in prior knowledge. Here the research clearly shows that beginners benefit most from good instructional design, and that learners with less attentional control are disadvantaged in complex, distracting environments. Lana also wondered if the principles are equally applicable to younger learners, as they have been primarily studied in adults. He restated that they could apply to younger learners, indicating that in his opinion, younger brains are not different from previous generations, as all digital developments do not make working memories larger. Zac Woolfitt questioned why these instructional design principles are not more central to teacher training globally, suggesting a disconnect between scientific knowledge and practitioner adoption, particularly in K-12 education. Richard pointed to the need to communicate scientific knowledge to practitioners and indicated that the Learning & Development world seems to have done this more effectively than in formal education. He also pondered whether Generative AI should focus on instructional media design or on creating engaging learning environments. Richard indicated that individualised GenAI-based tutors present an opportunity to be trained on the best teaching methods.
Audience waving at Richard Mayer, presenting from his office, UCSB
Thierry Koscielniak’s (France Immersive Learning, France) speech focused on the potential of immersive learning to enhance educational media, highlighting the work of France Immersive Learning and EUNIS. Koscielniak emphasised the crucial role of accessibility in the widespread adoption of immersive technologies, not just for consumption but also for content creation, citing an example of a digitally agile teacher who developed a chemistry escape game in two weeks. He showcased examples of projects using various immersive technologies such as 360-degree video content, digital twins for educational purposes, collaborative learning in the metaverse, and augmented virtuality.
Thierry Koscielniak, ENSAM
Ivana Juraga (DG EAC, European Commission) gave a presentation about the European Digital Education Policy, highlighting the current state of digital education and skills across the EU. She pointed out issues in schools, including non-functional technology and a concerning statistic that 43% of 8th graders lack basic digital skills, despite girls at this age outperforming boys (although only one-fifth of women enter professional digital fields). The EU’s policy response includes the “Union of Skills” communication, with action plans on basic and STEM skills, and the Digital Education Action Plan, which focuses on improving the digital education ecosystem and enhancing digital skills and competences. While education remains largely a Member State mandate, the EU provides various tools and actions, such as ethical guidelines on AI and data use in teaching and learning, the Digital Education Stakeholder Forum, and guidelines on digital educational content for teachers and educators. A 2030 roadmap for digital education and skills is also envisaged. Persistent challenges include the attainment of digital skills and digital literacy, while emerging challenges encompass AI in education and AI literacy, the development of EU-based EdTech solutions (with concerns for sovereignty, autonomy, data privacy and cybersecurity), and digital well-being.
Ivana Juraga, DG EAC
Nynke Kruiderink (Npuls, The Netherlands) discussed the Growth Innovation Fund from the Ministry of Economic Affairs in the Netherlands, aimed at establishing a national knowledge infrastructure across research universities, universities of applied sciences, and vocational educational and training schools in the country. Nynke emphasised the role of Npuls in facilitating institutional learning, viewing knowledge infrastructures as an “infinity loop” where Centres for Teaching and Learning (CTLs) are ubiquitous. She highlighted the challenge of fostering learning organisations when teachers, despite their passion, often operate within inflexible structures. Within a context of high autonomy of institutions and teachers in Dutch education, Nynke stressed the importance of convincing educators about the necessity of CTLs, with their potential to become a motor for faster learning. Npuls provides funding to educational institutions for creating or developing CTLs, with a key requirement that recipients collaborate with other CTLs. Sharing is a central part of their working method, with monthly knowledge broker activities and grassroots knowledge-sharing initiatives. Nynke identified systemic problems hindering participation in CTLs: teaching innovation is not rewarded for career progression in research universities, there are disparate and sometimes absent certification requirements for teachers across different educational sectors, and the heavy workload of the “renaissance teacher.” The discussion centred around a question on institutional leadership’s slow adoption of change, where Nynke indicated the need for patience and continued support, emphasising that we are in a liminal period transitioning between two systems. Persistent identification of the need for change and barriers to change was needed.
Nynke Kruiderink, Npuls
Several themes came up at multiple points in the conference. Continuous innovation of learning spaces was illustrated through innovation in technology, pedagogy or learning objectives during the Pecha Kucha sessions. For more established technologies such as lecture capture and MOOC production, the discussions centred around the need for the wide-scale adoption of these technologies in higher education, given the often-high costs of production. It was emphasised that it was essential that lecture capture should be embedded into the learning design of courses, to make sure this approach provides continuous value for learners. Moreover, the metacognitive challenge to students in working with lecture capture was also indicated as a point requiring more research. Lecture capture was still seen as an evolving technology where AI is expected to make significant changes in the coming years. Regarding MOOCs, discussion centred around the distributed ownership of MOOC development across institutional departments. Several institutions have services supporting MOOC creation, with a structured approach to content development and quality evaluation. The need for sustained alignment between MOOC teams and professors throughout the project was acknowledged, indicating that professors’ motivation might wane due to the significant time commitment (at least 1 to 1.5 years for MOOC creation). Nevertheless, the MOOC experience is seen as valuable, feeding back into various aspects of campus education and providing meaningful feedback. The underlying rationale for creating MOOCs stems from their potential to extend reach, offer flexible learning opportunities, and disseminate knowledge more broadly.
Ethical use of AI was an equally compelling theme at the conference. Several speakers emphasised the shift among educators from banning AI to embracing experimentation. AI necessitates structural change across teaching, learning, research and administration. For teaching, new pedagogical skills are needed to work with AI. Embedding ethical discussions within the learning design (such as in a master’s thesis process or a collaborative project) was also positioned as a way to develop students’ capabilities to work with this new technology. The value of critical thinking was emphasised continuously, suggesting that educators must rethink their teaching approaches, as students will naturally seek the path of least resistance. The idea of “tech-free spaces” was mentioned as a way to address student behaviour by first focusing on teaching methodologies.
On a macro level, the importance of responsible, institutional leadership was reiterated as those entities that can build and develop a regulated environment, viewing AI as both a structural capability and a cultural shift. Institutions must adopt a holistic approach, focusing on all levels of the organisation, which also requires greater interaction between technology developers and educators.
The uniqueness of audio as a strong pedagogical medium was again a popular theme at the conference. Examples presented in the dedicated sessions on audio showed the strength of audio-based technologies in creating immersive, emotionally gripping experiences that focus the minds of listeners on working with challenging materials. The craftsmanship in the creation of soundscapes was also discussed, likening it to a sculptural process, focused on distilling the essence of sound rather than mere accumulation. This approach encourages the blurring of boundaries between spoken words, ambient sound and musical elements, as well as between spaces of engagement through podcasts and stage shows. Participants discussed how these experiences could be transferred to pedagogical settings where the medium is underused, despite having much potential.
Students as (co-)producers of media was another recurring theme. Examples were brought to the fore where media production could offer learners the space to consider complex issues such as disinformation and misinformation, and how this affects their experience of media. Other examples include creating media as an activity that stimulates observation, inquiry and reflection, to ponder identity and growth in lower-secondary students.
Immersive learning was another theme that stimulated ethical and practical discussions. Thierry Koscielniak showcased the JENII project, which creates and integrates ‘digital twins’ and ‘immersive virtual environments’ to train future engineers. In a digital twin of a steel foundry, learners wear VR glasses and use tools and hand controls to practise from the safety of their own space, in what, in the real world, is a highly dangerous place. Polling the conference audience, Thierry saw that about 20-30% of us had a VR headset at home. He claimed that when this reaches 90%, VR will finally start to connect in education. A group of students from Leiden University, Sofie Delansay, Ula Andrulyte and Zsofia Egri presented a good example of how VR can enhance the learning experience. Their project featured a “1,000 Cuts” VR journey. In this world, you step into the physical body of someone else – you look in the mirror and see you are an African American. Then through various scenes, you experience first-hand what it is to experience racial abuse in different contexts. Eline Wydooghe showed how VR simulations are being used to reduce reliance on live animals and tackle ethical and educational challenges in laboratory skills development. Florence Mei Kuen Tang, presented how the Chinese University of Hong Kong uses VR to help medical students practise various emergency medical treatments on virtual manikins and Emerald Grimshaw from Durham University shared the VR world, with touch and sound elements, developed for younger children to use VR to visit the Silk Roads in an Immersive VR.
The closing session offered reflections on the conference. Andy Thys noted the rapid evolution of AI use within a year, questioning whether our thoughts about AI have also changed. He cautioned against laziness through the use of AI, echoing Thomas Espeseth’s point about creating attention to enable learning. Lucy Kendra reiterated Espeseth’s idea that “it’s easy to miss something you’re not looking for,” advocating for mutual support in identifying blind spots, clarity of purpose, and designing for human imperfections. She called attention to participatory discrepancy – i.e. knowing when to miss the beat because it makes it real. Erik Boon observed that much of the conference was not about AI, highlighting the value of observing others’ practices for benchmarking. Like many at the conference, he expressed his desire for AI to facilitate more time at the beach, while appreciating Richard Mayer’s talk on the multimedia design principles. Elke van Ael brought attention to the power of bottom-up initiatives and the need for Centres for Learning and Teaching (CLTs) to be proactive agents of change, fostering a culture of collaboration and communication. She reflected that CTLs are too modest in their role as essential service providers in educational institutions, and advocated for stepping into that role with more self-confidence. Looking to the future, Andy envisioned more student and pupil involvement at the conference, while Elke hinted at a focus on the societal role of Higher Education Institutions and actionable ethical AI guidelines.
Media & Learning 2025 included an exhibition with sponsor stands from Biamp, Ubicast, X2O Media, Panasonic Connect Europe, Panopto, Catchbox, Epiphan, Kaltura, Audio XL, and Extron.
Many of the presentations given, along with supplementary materials, conference impressions and photos, are available for viewing online.
Participants
The Media & Learning Conference 2025 attracted 266 participants from different backgrounds, with experience across all levels of using media in higher education, ranging from newcomers to highly experienced practitioners. They included educational technologists, heads of university media departments, academics, researchers, service developers and providers, innovation experts and a host of specialists from across the university spectrum.
Participants came from 26 different countries and from 128 different institutions.
When asked about the quality of the programme, 95.4% (98,9% in 2024 and 79,01% in 2023) responded that they were either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied. When asked to rate the extent to which they could gather new information and skills, 88,37% (98,9% in 2024 and 85.19% in 2023) of participants were satisfied or somewhat satisfied.
When invited to assess the opportunities for networking during the conference, 89,66% (95% in 2024 and 87,66% in 2023) of the attendees indicated that they were somewhat satisfied or very satisfied.
The following table presents a comparison of participant satisfaction rates from 2022 to 2025.
When asked which aspects of the conference they appreciated most, participants most frequently mentioned the networking moments (31 mentions), followed closely by the workshops (30 mentions) and presentation sessions (22 mentions). Networking opportunities were highly valued for facilitating informal exchanges, reconnecting with peers, and learning from what other institutions are doing. Workshops were praised for being hands-on, practical and idea-driven, offering space to explore new tools and approaches. Presentation sessions were considered relevant and informative, with several respondents citing specific formats, such as the Pecha Kucha sessions, as especially engaging. In addition, discussion formats were mentioned 13 times, valued for encouraging reflection and peer learning in smaller, more focused groups. A smaller number of participants (7 mentions) appreciated the inclusive atmosphere, the smooth organisation of the event, and the sense of community. A few respondents (6 mentions) highlighted the variety and combination of session formats – presentations, workshops and networking – as a particular strength of the conference experience.
When asked which specific sessions they liked most, Richard Mayer’s presentations stood out with 17 mentions, followed by keynote sessions in general (12 mentions), AI-related content (11 mentions), and the storytelling workshop (8 mentions). The Pecha Kucha sessions and other hands-on workshops were also repeatedly cited. A variety of other individual sessions received one or two mentions each, indicating a wide interest in diverse topics. “University of Leeds – Student Fraud Awareness”, “To Lecture Capture or Not”, “Stuart Dinmore – Learning analytics with real student data”, “The Power of Listening” (field recordings to audio drama), “MEDEA showcases”, “Looking for a media that works?”, “VIBES session”, “Podcasts”.
Participants were also asked which sessions they would recommend for future online events. AI-related content received the most support (7 mentions), followed by Richard Mayer’s sessions (6 mentions), storytelling workshops (5 mentions), and university showcases or institutional presentations (4 mentions). DIY media production training was mentioned 3 times. In addition, six participants expressed a general view that presentations work better online than workshops. At the same time, at least five respondents indicated a clear preference for in-person formats and did not recommend translating sessions to online formats.
When asked how they learned about the event, 44% reported hearing about the conference through colleagues or friends, while 32% had attended previous editions. Other channels included email invitations (11%), the MLA newsletter (6%), the event website (4%), and social media or online advertisements (2%).
When asked if they would register for next year’s conference, 35 out of 82 answered yes and 42 respondents said they would consider to take part, provided they had no scheduling conflicts.
Finally, several participants suggested changes in terms of logistics, particularly relating to both the choice of venue and the catering provided.
Media and Learning Association AGM
The Media and Learning Association, launched in 2012, held its Annual General Meeting during the conference. This AGM was open to all and included a summary of activities carried out by the Media and Learning Association (MLA) in 2024, as well as an overview of the activities that are either underway or planned for 2025. While everyone was welcome, only registered and paid-up members could vote. The Association voted unanimously to accept the annual report and the financial figures for 2024. Furthermore, Eirik Wattengård, NTNU, Norway, and Joasia van Kooten, Leiden University, The Netherlands, were unanimously voted onto the Management Board. Mathy Vanbuel, ATiT, Belgium, was elected as the new President of the Media and Learning Association.
Media & Learning board members
From left to right: Predrag Pale (UNiZG); Mathy Vanbuel(ATiT – President); Sonia Hetzner (FAU); Wim van Petegem (KU Leuven – Treasurer); Lucy Kendra (Heriot-Watt); Marco Toffanin (UNIPD); Eirik Wattengård (NTNU); Andy Demeulenaere (Mediawijs); Bernard Mullarkey (IADT). Not present: Joasia van Kooten (Leiden University); Anke Pesch (KU Leuven); Igor Kanizaj Igor Kanizaj (UNiZG).
The organisers of Media & Learning 2025 would like to thank their sponsors and exhibitors most sincerely for their help and support, without which the conference would simply not be possible.
