Artificial intelligence and learning analytics are increasingly used in school education. In this case, we consider artificial intelligence to be various subgroups of artificial intelligence, such as machine learning, natural language processing, image recognition, expert systems, classification, etc..  Learning analytics is the measurement, collection, analysis, and reporting of data about learners and their context, for understanding and optimizing learning and environments in which it occurs (Siemens, 2013).
Research is increasingly highlighting the importance of artificial intelligence and learning analytics in improving the quality of student learning and reducing exclusion (Sclater, Mullan, 2017, Kurvinen et al., 2020, Mangaroska ir Giannakos, 2018), strengthening students’ learning motivation (Abo et al., , 2016; Kurvinen et al., 2020), helping teachers to assess students' achievement and personal progress more effectively, to quickly identify learning gaps, to respond to them by providing timely feedback (Williamson, 2016; Guo et al., 2017; Van Leeuwen et al., 2021; Krumm et al., 2021; Cloude et al., 2021), facilitating the differentiation and individualisation of tasks according to students' achievement and thus improving the process of teaching / learning (Admiraal et al., 2017). In addition, research shows that artificial intelligence and learning analytics provide opportunities for smart, adaptive, personalized, predictable learning (Kinshuk et al., 2016; Williamson, 2016; Maseleno ir kt., 2018). Based on the above and other similar studies, it can be concluded that technological progress enables participants in the educational process to achieve teaching / learning goals in more effective ways.

In our paper, we focus on learning experience platforms that are developed and refined using technological solutions of artificial intelligence and learning analytics. Such platforms, as Eduten Playground, Matific, Fast ForWord, EduAi, Stream LXD, Adobe Captivate Prime, LearnLab, etc. provide opportunities of personalises and self-directed learning. With this type of platforms, learners and teachers can identify specific teaching / learning gaps by reviewing performance analysis and suggestions how to improve learners’ achievements (Dalia Baziukė; https://di-ma.lt/produkcija/ataskaita_apzvalga.pdf).  According to the report  “Artificial Intelligence Role in K12 education” by European Schoolnet (2021) Lithuania is one of the countries where the issues of artificial intelligence in the field of education receive minimal attention. This is partly confirmed by the analysis of the database of digital tools compiled by the Lithuanian National Agency of Education: out of the 244 tools provided in the list, only 4 are learning experience platforms and they are used quite rarely (Baziukė, Norvilienė, Girdzijauskienė, 2022).

In 2021, a large-scale action research was conducted to explore the rare use of learning experience platforms, as well as the use of artificial intelligence and possibilities of its development in school education of Lithuania. One aspect of the action research focused on the technological challenges faced by schools using learning experience platforms and we intend to analyse it in this paper.

During the action research 11 schools of Lithuania were offered to pilot two learning experience platforms, such as Eduten Playground (https://www.eduten.com/) and LearnLab (https://learnlab.net/). Several teachers in each school and their leaders, collaborating with researchers “went” all the way from getting to know the platforms, understanding their philosophies and operating principles, learning to use them, solving problems, involving parents and other members of the community until they realize the benefits of artificial intelligence and learning analytics, seeing visions for the future, identifying necessary changes at school, municipal and national levels. The experience of these teachers and school leaders is important that it helps to understand what problems other schools in Lithuania and other countries may face if they start using learning experience platforms more widely. In the final phase of the study, interviews with participating teachers and school leaders and the start of coding led to a better and broader understanding of school issues, so it was decided to take additional interviews with non-participating teachers, school leaders, heads of municipal education and representatives of the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports. In total, about 15 hours of recordings were made, which were transcribed and encoded. From the very first interviews with the participants of the study on the use of learning experience platforms, technological challenges have received the most attention. It should be taken into consideration that teachers and school leaders who actively search for digital innovations were involved in the project, so it is natural that there were no problematic aspects of motivation or their digital competences. During the coding of the data, several topics were identified that reflect the technological use of learning experience platforms: access to computers, the Internet, and the digital platforms themselves. It is the latter topics that the paper focuses on.

It turned out that even with 40 percent availability of computers per student, it is impossible to ensure the smooth operation of teachers and students with learning experience platforms. At present, the provision of computers to schools in the country is diversifying and this depends on the support of municipalities, on the ability of schools themselves to obtain computers from any source. Another area of concern is the access to wireless Internet. In recent years, Lithuania has undergone major changes in the provision of Fiber-optic internet to schools. However, the project has shown that as soon as the project schools began to make intensive use of the learning experience platforms, they all faced problems with online connectivity. Some schools even invested extra urgently in upgrading their internet connection to continue participating in the project. Although the project schools were licensed for two learning experience platforms, teachers and school leaders were very concerned about the future - they would like to continue using them in the future. But what opportunities do schools have to acquire such digital platforms? It turns out that schools receive funding for digital tools, but these are not enough, so they usually buy the cheapest or best-selling platforms rather than the most pedagogically valuable ones. In addition, municipalities sometimes procure the not the most pedagogically valuable platforms centrally for schools. Looking to the future, it should be up to the schools to decide which platforms to buy and to have enough resources for that. However, schools need more expert knowledge on digital tools and competencies to use them. Research suggests that for the wider use of learning experience platforms in schools, it is important to solve at least three technological problems - to provide every student with personal computer, to ensure a high-speed Internet connection, and to enable schools to freely acquire the desired platforms.

1.Abo, R., Koga, T., Horikoshi, I., Yamazki, K., Tamura, Y. (2016). Data visualization framework for learning analytics, The International Workshop on Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining (LAE DM 2016). 2.Admiraal, W., Vermeulen, J., Bulterman-Bos, J. (2017). Learning Analytics in Secondary Education: Assessment for Learning in 7th Grade Language Teaching, ECER 2017, https://eera-ecer.de/ecer-programmes/conference/22/contribution/39935/. 3.Baziukė, D., Norvilienė, A., & Girdzijauskienė, R. (2022). Dirbtinis intelektas ir mokymosi analitika bendrojo ugdymo mokyklose naudojamose skaitmeninėse mokymo(si) priemonėse: Lietuvos atvejis. Computational Science and Techniques. In press. 4.Cloude, E., Carpenter, D., Dever, D. A., Azevedo, R., Lester, J. (2021). Game-based learning analytics for supporting adolescents’ reflection. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(2), 51-72. 5.Guo, J., Huang, X., Wang, B. (2017). MyCOS Intelligent Teaching Assistant, 392-393. 6.Hylen, J. (2015). The State of Art of Learning Analytics in Danish Schools, http://www.laceproject.eu/blog/the-state-of-art-of-learning-analytics-in-danishschools/. Holstein ir kt., 2019. 7.Kinshuk, Chen, NS., Cheng, IL. et al. Evolution Is not enough: Revolutionizing Current Learning Environments to Smart Learning Environments. Int J Artif Intell Educ 26, 561–581 (2016). 8.Krumm, A. E., Boyce, J., Everson, H. T. (2021). A collaborative approach to sharing learner event data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(2), 73-82. 9.Kurvinen, E., Kaila, E., Laakso, M.-J., Salakoski, T. (2020). Long Term Effects on Technology Enhanced Learning: The Use of Weekly Digital Lessons in Mathematics. Informatics in Education. 19. 51-75. 10.Mangaroska, K., Giannakos, M. (2018). Learning analytics for learning design: A systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 12 (4), 516-534. 11.Maseleno, A., Pardimin, Huda, M., Ramlan, Hehsan, A., Yusof, Y.M., Haron, Z., Ripin, M.N., Nor, N.H.M., and Junaidi, J. (2018a). Mathematical Theory of Evidence to Subject Expertise Diagnostic. ICIC Express Letters, 12 (4), 369. 12.OECD (2016). OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2016. OECD Publishing, Paris. Prieiga internetu: https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/sti_in_outlook-2016-en. 13.Sclater, N. and J. Mullan (2017), Learning analytics and student success –assessing the evidence, JISC, Bristol. 14.Siemens, George (2013-08-20). „Learning Analytics: The Emergence of a Discipline“. American Behavioral Scientist. 57 (10): 1380–1400. 15.Van Leeuwen, A., Knoop-van Campen, C. A. N., Molenaar, I., Rummel, N. (2021). How teacher characteristics relate to how teachers use dashboards. Journal of Learning Analytics, 8(2), 6-21. 16.Williamson, B. (2016). Digital education governance: data visualization, predictive analytics, and ‘real-time’ policy instruments. Journal of Education Policy 31(2), 123-141.