Keywords
Educational Psychology
Adaptive Learning
Inclusive Pedagogy
Learning Analytics
AI Ethics
Generative AI
How to Cite
Abstract
Background: The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into educational systems worldwide presents significant opportunities for personalised learning, inclusive pedagogy, and data-informed instructional practice, yet AI systems designed without an understanding of how learners acquire knowledge, sustain motivation, regulate emotions, and respond to diverse social and cultural contexts may unintentionally reinforce existing educational inequalities.
Objective: This paper proposes a conceptual framework that positions educational psychology as the primary foundation, rather than a secondary consideration, for the design and evaluation of AI-supported educational systems.
Methods: The framework was developed through a systematic narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed literature, international policy documents, and recent empirical evidence, drawing on searches of PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus, and Web of Science (2011–2025), supplemented by forward and backward citation tracking and review of international policy reports. The search yielded approximately 620 potentially relevant sources, of which approximately 65 were incorporated following title/abstract screening and full-text review against explicit inclusion criteria.
Results: The resulting framework comprises three interconnected components — a psychologically informed understanding of learner diversity, AI-enabled inclusive and innovative pedagogical practices, and reflective teaching within intelligent learning environments — mapped, through a reference table, against specific AI applications, illustrative empirical evidence, and inclusion implications. A comparative analysis across East Asia, Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia further identifies region-specific challenges, policy contexts, and persistent gaps in cross-cultural validation, particularly regarding generative AI and adaptive learning tools.
Conclusion: The framework offers AI designers, teacher educators, and policymakers a psychologically grounded, empirically mapped, and internationally contextualised basis for developing AI-supported educational systems that advance equity, learner engagement, and meaningful educational transformation, provided that access, teacher readiness, cultural validity, and ethical safeguards are adequately addressed.
References
Baker, R. S., & Hawn, A. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 9(2), 134–158. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2022.7798
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 4–16.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
Deng, R., Jiang, M., Yu, X., Lu, Y., & Liu, S. (2024). Does ChatGPT enhance student learning? A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 100214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100214
D'Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145–157.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048.
Ellucian. (2024). Higher education technology trends report: AI adoption, bias, and security. Ellucian. https://www.ellucian.com/insights/higher-education-technology-trends-report
Escalante, J., Pack, A., & Barrett, A. (2023). AI-generated feedback on writing: Insights into efficacy and the importance of student engagement. Educational Technology & Society, 26(2), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202304_26(2).0007
García-Martínez, I., Tadeu, P., Trujillo-Torres, J. M., & Ibáñez-Sánchez, G. (2023). Adaptive learning technologies and their effects on student performance: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 195, 104719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104719
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign. https://curriculumredesign.org/our-work/artificial-intelligence-in-education/
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson. https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/news/news-annoucements/2016/Intelligence-Unleashed-Publication.pdf
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Molenaar, I. (2022). Towards hybrid human-AI learning technologies. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 632–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12527
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. International Universities Press.
Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., & Britten, N. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: A product from the ESRC methods programme (Version 1). Lancaster University. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1018.4643
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Shi, Y., Yu, K., Dong, Y., & Chen, F. (2025). Large language models in education: a systematic review of empirical applications, benefits, and challenges. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 100529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100529
Stadler, M., Bannert, M., & Sailer, M. (2024). Cognitive ease at a cost: LLMs reduce mental effort but compromise depth in student scientific inquiry. Computers in Human Behavior, 160, 108386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108386
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.
Strielkowski, W., Vlasov, A., Selivanov, A., Kalyugina, S., & Shakhnov, V. (2024). AI-driven adaptive learning for sustainable educational transformation. Sustainable Development, 33(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3126
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
UNESCO. (2021). Recommendation on the ethics of artificial intelligence. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381137
VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91.