Month: June 2025

Wrocław provided a fitting setting for this international training on media literacy, fact-checking and cybersecurity. The city is known for its beautiful market square, colourful historic buildings and lively cultural life. With its open and welcoming atmosphere, Wrocław offered an inspiring place for learning, exchange and cooperation.

The event in Wrocław formed part of a multi-day international training programme that brought together learners and trainers from five countries: Austria, Italy, Portugal, Poland and Türkiye. At least two learners from each country took part in the training, which gave the meeting a truly European and intercultural character. This international mix created valuable opportunities for exchange, discussion and mutual learning throughout the programme.

A well-structured training programme

The training programme followed a clear and meaningful structure. One part of the programme introduced participants to the wider project and helped them get to know one another. Another part focused on the question of what media literacy means today and which media competences older people especially need. This created an important foundation for the practical sessions that followed.

The structure of the training worked especially well because it moved step by step from general understanding to practical action. Participants first explored why media literacy matters in everyday life. Then they worked on fact-checking, source analysis and media-related critical thinking. After that, they turned to cybersecurity and learned how to recognise and avoid online threats such as phishing. This sequence gave the programme a strong educational logic and helped participants connect the different topics.

The training also included several feedback moments. These gave participants time to reflect on what they had learned and to share their impressions with the group. This made the programme feel interactive and learner-centred. Participants did not simply listen to presentations. They asked questions, solved tasks together, discussed examples and contributed their own experiences.

The intercultural evening added another important element to the event. Participants from the different countries prepared dishes and cultural contributions and shared them with the group. This part of the programme strengthened the social side of the training and helped build trust and openness among the participants.

More than a meeting: a shared European learning experience

The multi-day training in Wrocław offered much more than a series of lessons. It created a shared European learning experience that combined practical knowledge, social exchange and intercultural understanding. Because learners from different countries took part, the discussions also reflected different perspectives, habits and experiences in dealing with digital media.

This international dimension mattered. Media literacy and cyber security affect people across Europe, but people do not always approach these topics in the same way. By learning together, participants could compare experiences, ask questions freely and discover that many digital challenges are shared across borders. This gave the training additional value and strengthened its European spirit.

Training focus 1: Analyse! Media Literacy and Fact Checking

One important session in the programme was Analyse! Media Literacy and Fact Checking, delivered by MMI, the Portuguese project partner. This session introduced the topic in an interactive and engaging way through a question-and-answer game.

This format worked especially well because it encouraged participants to take an active role from the start. Instead of receiving information only through explanation, they engaged with key ideas through questions, answers and group interaction. The game-based approach likely helped participants reflect on their existing knowledge, test their assumptions and build confidence in discussing media-related issues.

The session also fitted very well into the overall structure of the training. It created a bridge between the broader introduction to media literacy and the more detailed practical activities that followed later in the programme. By using a question-and-answer format, MMI helped make the topic accessible and lively. This was especially important in a mixed international learning group, where interactive methods often support participation more effectively than lecture-style teaching alone.

In the context of the full training, this session played an important role. It helped participants focus on key questions related to media literacy and fact-checking, and it prepared them for deeper work on source credibility, misinformation and critical evaluation. It also supported the learner-centred spirit of the event, since participants learned through participation, discussion and shared reflection.

Training focus 2: Source Detective – Who’s Behind the Article – and is it true?

One of the key practical sessions of the training was Source Detective – Who’s Behind the Article – and is it true? This training focused on a central question of media literacy: how can we decide whether an online article is trustworthy or misleading?

The learner document set out three clear goals for the session. By the end, participants should know how to recognise reliable online sources, use digital tools to check information, and feel more confident when deciding what to trust and share. These goals show that the session aimed not only to provide knowledge, but also to strengthen confidence and independent judgement.

The session used a strongly practical format. Participants worked in small groups of two to four and analysed three online articles. They had to ask key questions such as: Who published the article? Is an author named? What is the purpose of the text? Does the article include facts and sources? Does it appear biased or promotional? This method gave participants a simple but effective structure for analysing digital content.

The training also introduced useful tools that support fact-checking and source verification. Participants could use Google Search, WHOIS Lookup, ICANN Lookup, Snopes and EDMO to investigate authors, websites and claims. This was a very important part of the session because it moved beyond theory. Participants did not only hear that they should verify information. They learned how to do it.

At the end of the session, participants shared their thoughts, joined a Mentimeter poll about their most and least trusted sources, and reflected on what made them trust or distrust an article. They also discussed what they would feel safe sharing on social media. These reflective tasks linked the activity directly to everyday online behaviour and personal decision-making.

The choice of the example articles also strengthened the session. The document included examples from NASA, Reuters and a more questionable health-related website. This contrast likely helped participants see how credibility depends on several factors, such as the reputation of the publisher, the transparency of authorship, the purpose of the text and the quality of the evidence. The activity therefore trained participants not only to consume information, but to examine it critically.

Overall, Source Detective gave participants a practical method for checking online content. It encouraged them to slow down, ask questions and verify before they trust or share.

Training focus 3: Stop and Think! – Cyber Security

Another important training session was Stop and Think! – Cyber Security. This module focused strongly on phishing awareness and practical digital self-protection. It aimed to help participants recognise online threats and respond to them in a calm and informed way.

The module began with an introduction to cyber-attacks and then narrowed its focus to phishing. It defined a cyberattack as an attempt to access a computer network or system in order to alter, steal, destroy or expose information. It also listed common types of cyberattacks, including malware, denial-of-service attacks, phishing, spoofing, insider threats, social engineering, AI-powered attacks, DNS tunnelling and code injection attacks. This overview gave participants a helpful understanding of the wider digital risk landscape before focusing on one particularly relevant threat.

The module then explained phishing as a digital scam that tries to obtain personal information such as usernames, passwords, credit card details and other confidential data. From there, the session introduced several forms of phishing, including bulk phishing, spear phishing, whaling, smishing and vishing. This showed participants that phishing can happen in different formats and can target both large groups and specific individuals.

A particularly strong part of the module was its focus on recognising warning signs. The session taught participants to look for unusual sender email addresses, generic greetings, urgent or threatening language, spelling and grammar mistakes, suspicious links or attachments, requests for personal information, unrealistic offers, inconsistencies in email design and weak signatures. It also mentioned email verification tools as another useful step. These signs gave participants a practical checklist for everyday situations.

The module also included hands-on learning activities. Participants worked with phishing images, identified suspicious elements, compared fake and real emails, and completed a phishing awareness quiz. These activities made the topic concrete and understandable. They translated cyber risks into visible examples and practical decisions.

The lesson on precautions added another important layer. The material stressed that people should avoid clicking on links in unexpected emails or messages, should never share passwords or financial information carelessly, and should use strong passwords, two-factor authentication and updated software. It also asked participants to think about what they should do if they clicked on a phishing link. In this way, the session did not stop at identifying danger. It also equipped participants with practical strategies for prevention and response.

Why the three sessions worked so well together

These three sessions complemented each other very effectively. The session by MMI introduced media literacy and fact-checking through an interactive question-and-answer game and created an accessible entry point into the topic. Source Detective then built on this foundation and gave participants a practical method for checking the credibility of articles, authors and publishers. Finally, Stop and Think! – Cyber Security shifted the focus towards digital safety and helped participants recognise and avoid phishing attempts and other online threats.

Together, the sessions addressed three important dimensions of digital competence. First, participants reflected on key ideas and questions connected to media literacy. Second, they learned how to verify information and judge online content more critically. Third, they developed practical strategies for protecting themselves in digital environments. This combination made the programme coherent, relevant and highly useful for everyday life.

A meaningful multi-day training in Wrocław

The training in Wrocław offered much more than information. It gave participants the chance to learn together, reflect together and build confidence together. Across several days, the programme combined critical thinking, practical skill-building and intercultural exchange in a way that felt both structured and human.

The event helped participants understand today’s digital challenges in a concrete and accessible way. It also strengthened their ability to question online sources, recognise misleading content, identify phishing attempts and make safer choices online. Because the training brought together learners from Austria, Italy, Portugal, Poland and Türkiye, it also showed the value of European cooperation in adult education.

That is what made the training so meaningful. It did not only inform participants. It empowered them.

Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for them.