Oltre l'automazione: l'IA come mediatore pedagogico nell'apprendimento collaborativo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60923/issn.2532-8816/24266Parole chiave:
Agenzialità Epistemica , Cognizione Distribuita, Teoria Socio-culturale, Mediazione Pedagogica, Apprendimento Collaborativo, Intelligenza Artificiale nell’Educazione (AIED)Abstract
La ricerca sull’Intelligenza Artificiale nell’Educazione (AIED) ha prevalentemente concettualizzato l’IA come uno strumento di automazione, personalizzazione o efficienza didattica, privilegiando spesso gli esiti individuali di apprendimento rispetto ai processi sociali e relazionali. Questo orientamento strumentale ha generato un disallineamento teorico tra i sistemi di IA contemporanei, in particolare i modelli generativi e interattivi, e le consolidate concezioni pedagogiche dell’apprendimento collaborativo come processo socialmente mediato e co-regolato. Di conseguenza, il ruolo dell’IA nel modellare l’interazione, l’agenzialità epistemica e la regolazione condivisa nell’apprendimento collaborativo rimane ancora insufficientemente teorizzato. Il presente contributo propone un quadro concettuale che riconcettualizza l’IA come mediatore pedagogico negli ambienti di apprendimento collaborativo. Basandosi sulla teoria socio-culturale, sulla cognizione distribuita, sulle prospettive connettiviste e su recenti studi sull’apprendimento collaborativo supportato dall’IA, il framework proposto considera l’IA come partecipante attivo nell’orchestrazione dell’interazione, nella costruzione di senso epistemico e nei processi di regolazione, senza sostituire l’agenzialità di studenti e docenti. Piuttosto che trattare l’IA come tutor, pari o orchestratore automatizzato, il quadro teorico mette in primo piano la mediazione come funzione pedagogica attraverso la quale agenzia, autorità e responsabilità vengono dinamicamente ridistribuite tra attori umani e non umani. Il contributo offre tre apporti principali. In primo luogo, propone una riconcettualizzazione teoricamente fondata del ruolo dell’IA nell’apprendimento collaborativo che supera paradigmi centrati sullo strumento e sull’individualismo. In secondo luogo, articola le principali funzioni mediative dell’IA — interazionale, epistemica e regolativa — esaminandone le implicazioni per la progettazione dell’apprendimento collaborativo. In terzo luogo, affronta criticamente le sfide etiche, professionali e di governance associate alla collaborazione mediata dall’IA, con particolare attenzione all’equità, alla trasparenza e al giudizio professionale docente.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Alfiras, M.I.I., Emran, A.Q. & Mohamed, A.M. (2025). Ethics and governance of generative AI in education: a systematic review on responsible adoption. Discover Education (in press). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-01051-y
Bayne, S. (2018). Posthumanism: A navigation aid for educators. on_education: Journal for Research and Debate, 2(1). 1-7.
Biesta, G. (2015). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge.
Casebourne, I., Shi, S., Hogan, M., Holmes, W., Hoel, T., Wegerif, R., & Yuan, L. (2025). Using AI to support education for collective intelligence. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35, 1597–1629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-024-00437-7
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Cambridge University Press.
Damşa, C., Andriessen, J. (2012). Shared Epistemic Agency For Knowledge Creation. In: Moen, A., Mørch, A.I., Paavola, S. (eds) Collaborative Knowledge Creation. Technology Enhanced Learning, 7. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-004-0_11
Degen, P.-B. & Asanov, I. (2025). Beyond Automation: Socratic AI, Epistemic Agency, and the Implications of the Emergence of Orchestrated Multi-Agent Learning Architectures. arxiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.05116
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Elsevier.
Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 485–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.013
Dillenbourg, P. (2016). The Evolution of Research on Digital Education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 544–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0106-z
Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2010). Technology for classroom orchestration. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning (pp. 525–552). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5716-0_26
European Commission (2022). Ethical guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence and data in teaching and learning for educators. https://education.ec.europa.eu/news/ethical-guidelines-on-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-and-data-in-teaching-and-learning-for-educators
European Commission (2023). EU AI Act: first regulation on artificial intelligence. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence
Fenwick, T. (2014). Sociomateriality in medical practice and learning: Attuning to what matters. Medical Education, 48(1), 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12295
Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging approaches to educational research: Tracing the sociomaterial. Routledge.
Gourlay, L. (2020). Posthumanism and the Digital University: Texts, Bodies and Materialities. Bloomsbury Publishing
Guitert Catasús, M., Romeu Fontanillas, T., Raffaghelli, J. E., & Cerro Martínez, J. P. (2025). Collaborative Learning Analytics: Centring the Ethical Implications Around Teacher and Student Empowerment. A Systematic Review. Journal of Learning Analytics, 12(1), 201-214. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2025.8489
Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2011). Self-regulated, co-regulated, and socially shared regulation of learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 65–84). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. (1st ed.). Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Holstein, K., McLaren, B. M., & Aleven, V. (2019). Designing for Complementarity: Teacher and Student Needs for Orchestration Support in AI-enhanced Classrooms. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education, Chicago, IL, USA. June 25 - 29, 2019.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1881.001.0001
Kim, J., Detrick, R., Yu, S., Song, Y., Bol, L., & Li, N. (2025). Socially shared regulation of learning and artificial intelligence: Opportunities to support socially shared regulation. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 11483–11521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13187-9
Kukulska-Hulme, A., Bossu, C., Charitonos, K., Coughlan, T., Deacon, A., Deane, N., Ferguson, R., Herodotou, C., Huang, C-W., Mayisela, T., Rets, I., Sargent, J., Scanlon, E., Small, J., Walji, S., Weller, M., & Whitelock, D. (2023). Innovating Pedagogy 2023: Open University Innovation Report 11. Milton Keynes: The Open University.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lee, G.-G., Mun, S., Shin, M.-K., & Zhai, X. (2025). Collaborative learning with artificial intelligence speakers: Pre-service elementary science teachers’ responses to the prototype. Science & Education, 34, 847–875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00526-y
Luckin, R. (2018). Enhancing Learning and Teaching with Technology: What the Research Says. Institute of Education Press (IOE Press).
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education. Pearson. https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/edu.google.com/en//pdfs/Intelligence-Unleashed-Publication.pdf
Mustafa, M.Y., Tlili, A., Lampropoulos, G., Huang, R., Jandrić, P., Zhao, J., Salha, S.S., Xu, L., Panda, S., Kinshuk, López‐Pernas, S., & Saqr, M. (2024). A systematic review of literature reviews on artificial intelligence in education (AIED): a roadmap to a future research agenda. Smart Learning Environments, 11(59). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00350-5
Oppenheimer, D. M., Cash, T. N., & Connell Pensky, A. E. (2025). You’ve got AI friend in me: LLMs as collaborative learning partners. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35, 3896–3921. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-025-00521-6
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury.
Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge University Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2, 3-10.
Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576362
Suthers, D.D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. Computer Supported Learning 1, 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9660-y
VanLehn, K. (2011). The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Methods. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369
VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369
Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226852904.001.0001
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195117530.001.0001
Williamson, B. & Piattoeva, N. (2019). Objectivity as Standardization in Data-Scientific Education Policy, Technology and Governance. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 64-76.
Williamson, Β., Macgilchrist, F. & Potter, J. (2023). Re-examining AI, automation and datafication in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2023.2167830
Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 17, 89-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
Woolf, B. P. (2007). Building intelligent interactive tutors. Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-373594-2.X0001-9
Woolf, B. P. (2010). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Elsevier & Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-373594-2.X0001-9
Yan, L. (2025). From tool to collaborator: AI agency in human-AI collaborative learning. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.14825
Yan, Y., Liu, H., & Chau, T. (2025). A Systematic Review of AI Ethics in Education: Challenges, Policy Gaps, and Future Directions. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 33(1), 1-50. https://doi.org/10.4018/JGIM.386381
Downloads
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2026 Maria Niari
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale.
