Labour and skills shortages continue to grow in all EU member states, exemplified by findings from a recent survey (Ipsos, 2023) that 63% of small and medium-sized businesses said they cannot find the talent they need. Although digital skills are becoming an increasingly important component of this landscape, survey data shows that four out of 10 adults, and every third person who works in Europe, lack basic digital skills (European Commission, 2024). This reflects the fact that the increasing datafication of societies and education systems (Erstad et al, 2023) means that the long familiar emphasis on a ‘digital divide’ relating to variations in individuals’ digital access, caused by differences in their motivation, physical access, skills and usage opportunities (van Dijk 2006), has now extended to a ‘data divide’ (Andrejevic 2014; Hayes et al, 2023). This is where data-driven technologies are also not experienced equally. Moreover, individuals belonging to disadvantaged and marginalised groups are more likely to be affected by such inequalities (Kuhn, 2023), which in turn further increases their disadvantage. 

 At the same time, a recent intensification of broader debate concerning the rapid impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) on education and work has given rise to a range of competing political, economic and cultural arguments. These include benefits, threats, questions of equal treatment, access, and the roles of educators, including whether they have sufficient agency to use more critical pedagogies (Sarı, Nayir, & Bozkurt, 2024). Unfortunately, at the level of policy, there is a tendency repeatedly to overlook decades of critical social theory and default to simplified assumptions that new technologies will automatically enhance learning (Hayes, 2019: 89). If technology is referred to as ‘the quiet achiever in the class’ amid ‘a paradigm shift where technology transforms what we learn’ (European Commission, 2009), we omit both the intricacies of how young people learn as well as powerful educational theory. Perhaps, amongst the ‘competing visions of artificial intelligence in education’ (Linderoth, Hulten & Stenliden, 2024: 1662), we might find a way to avoid repeating the cycle of ‘hype, hope, and disappointment’ (Selwyn, 2022). However, important though these debates are, there is a danger that structural inequalities experienced by young people are perpetuated, or even intensified, by such deliberations. 

 This research was therefore designed to listen to the views of young people experiencing three different kinds of marginalisation in relation to education (those with a disability, those living in an area of high deprivation, and Black and minority ethnic young people).We co-created a space where they could voice their hopes for and fears about their future, and the skills they felt they needed to develop to realise their ambitions. It is being conducted in three different areas of England by researchers from two English universities working in collaboration with a colleague from a social enterprise organisation working on community-based inclusion and employability with disadvantaged young people. The theoretical framework for the research drew on co-constructed research approaches (Boyle et al, 2010) and critical examinations of meritocracy (Sandel, 2021) and aspirations (Appadurai, 2004). The  guiding research questions were: 

• Do young people in marginalised or minority groups feel empowered to access the education, skills and employment they seek?
• If not, where are the barriers and what would help them to realise their ambitions?

This paper reports on a small-scale research project undertaken in three geographical areas of England: the South-West, South-East and West Midlands. In each location, a “listening event” was conducted, designed to explore the skills barriers young people face and their hopes for the future. Participating young people were invited to share their opinions about, and experiences of, these issues in an event facilitated by the researchers and involving a small number of “expert” adults from the local community. Our focus was on listening to the young people and helping them to compare and summarise their experiences. “Experts” comprised teachers, support workers and other community stakeholders and their role was to try to answer questions and offer guidance when asked. Each listening event involved participants from a different marginalised, or at-risk group: young people with a disability, those living in an area of high deprivation, and Black and minority ethnic young people. At the time of submission, two of the events have been held, involving 15 participants at each, with the final event scheduled for early February 2025. All events are being audio-recorded and analysis will be undertaken thematically (Braun & Clarke, 2020). Summaries of the events will be shared with participants and the findings will be used both as the basis for applying for further funding to increase the scale of the research, to support participants in realising their hopes and ambitions, and to enable us to evaluate progress.

Conclusions and expected outcomes focus on identifying the hopes and ambitions of participating young people, the barriers and difficulties that they face, and proposals for supporting them to overcome them. For example, in the first listening event with young disabled people in South-West England, we learned about the barriers leading to educational and employment under-attainment that participants had faced. They formed a self-organised peer-support network. the Ambitions Club, and are working with each other and with ‘community connectors’ to try to realise their creative goals. As part of our collaboration with the social enterprise organisation we are seeking funding to expand their creative peer support approach, to help to realise their work or entrepreneurship ambitions, thus addressing their wellbeing and employment goals. This includes developing an existing digital platform to accommodate bias-free reviews of the entrepreneurial ideas that young people submit and to attract investors to help them to realise their goals. In the second event, emerging findings capture their broad feelings of anxiety and the extent to which school is not preparing young people for the future. We have a particular interest in the extent to which (post)digital technologies operate as both a source and potential solution to the difficulties young people face, and attention will also be paid to differentiating between the barriers faced by participants from different groups and in different contexts, avoiding assumptions that one technological solution works for all. We aim instead to encourage a critical movement for change model that can scale to meet different needs. Therefore, although the research is located in England, the presentation of the findings will specify the commonalities, differences and implications for young people and professionals supporting them in wider European contexts

Andrejevic, M. (2014) Big data, big questions| the big data divide, International Journal of Communication, 8(17). Appadurai, A. (2004) The capacity to aspire: Culture and the terms of recognition, in Rao, V. and Walton, M. (eds.) Culture and Public Action. Stamford: Stamford University Press, 59-84. Boyle, D., Slay, J., and Stephens, L. (2010) Public services inside out: Putting co-production into practice. London: NESTA. Braun, V. &Clarke, V. (2020): One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352 Erstad, O. et al (2023) Datafication in and of Education – a literature review. http://agile-edu.eun.org/documents/9709807/9862864/Updated+D2.1+Datafication+in+and+of+Education_090623.pdf European Commission (2009). Educating Europe: Exploiting the benefits of ICT European Commission (2023) Digital Skills and Jobs. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-skills-and-jobs Hayes, S. (2019). The labour of words in higher education: Is it time to reoccupy policy?. Brill. Hayes, S., Jopling, M., Connor, S. & Johnson, M. (eds.) (2023) Human Data Interaction, Disadvantage and Skills in the Community: Enabling Cross-Sector Environments for Postdigital Inclusion. Cham: Springer. Ipsos (2023) European Year of Skills: Skills shortages, recruitment and retention strategies in small and medium-sized enterprises. European Union. Linderoth, C., Hultén, M., & Stenliden, L. (2024). Competing visions of artificial intelligence in education—A heuristic analysis on sociotechnical imaginaries and problematizations in policy guidelines. Policy Futures in Education, 14782103241228900. Sandel, M. (2020) The Tyranny of Merit. London: Allen Lane. Sarı, T., Nayir, F., & Bozkurt, A. (2024). Reimagining education: Bridging artificial intelligence, transhumanism, and critical pedagogy. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 7(1), 102–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1308022 Selwyn N (2022) The future of AI and education: some cautionary notes. European Journal of Education 57: 620–631. DOI: 10.1111/EJED.12532. Van Dijk, J. (2020) The Digital Divide. London: John Wiley & Sons.