Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67283
Volume:
10 |
9 |
Sep 2026
Pages:
1-19
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
School of sciences (BCA)
KK Modi University Durg
School of sciences (BCA)
KK Modi University Durg
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping education by shifting digital learning environments from static content delivery toward adaptive, data-informed, and increasingly interactive systems. This paper examines the role of AI in transforming education across teaching, learning, assessment, student support, institutional administration, and educational research. The study follows a structured narrative-synthesis approach grounded in peer-reviewed literature and major policy guidance. A central reference point is a large systematic review that analyzed 2,223 AIED publications and manually examined 125 empirical studies, identifying four major application categories: adaptive learning and personalized tutoring, intelligent assessment and management, profiling and prediction, and emerging AI products [1]. Earlier systematic evidence in higher education similarly identifies profiling and prediction, assessment and evaluation, adaptive systems and personalization, and intelligent tutoring systems as dominant application areas [2]. The paper synthesizes these findings into an education transformation framework linking educational data, AI methods, teacher support, student support, and governance. It argues that AI can improve personalization, feedback timeliness, learning analytics, accessibility, and administrative efficiency, but educational value is not automatic. Risks include algorithmic bias, privacy loss, hallucinated or inaccurate content, over-reliance on automation, unequal access, academic integrity concerns, and weakened human relationships. The paper therefore proposes a human-centered implementation model in which AI augments rather than replaces teachers and learners. The discussion also considers generative AI and large language models, whose rapid adoption has intensified questions about assessment redesign, digital literacy, authorship, and responsible use [8], [9]. The paper concludes with an implementation roadmap and research agenda for institutions seeking measurable, ethical, inclusive, and pedagogically aligned AI adoption.
KEYWORDS
Artificial Intelligence is becoming a major infrastructure layer for education. Its role extends from adaptive learning and intelligent tutoring to assessment, prediction, analytics, accessibility, administration, and generative content creation. The research literature shows strong activity across these areas, with personalization, intelligent tutoring, assessment, and prediction forming recurring application categories [1], [2]. Recent generative AI developments expand the range of interaction and content creation while increasing the importance of academic integrity, privacy, accuracy, and assessment redesign [8], [9]. The central conclusion of this paper is that AI should transform education by increasing the capacity of teachers and learners, not by removing human judgment from the educational process. The highest-value implementations are likely to be those that combine machine speed and scale with human interpretation, empathy, contextual knowledge, and accountability. Institutions should therefore begin with clear educational objectives, pilot measurable use cases, invest in AI literacy, build governance around privacy and fairness, and evaluate outcomes continuously. In this model, AI becomes an enabling layer for more personalized, responsive, accessible, and evidence-informed education while preserving the human purposes of learning.
[1] S. Wang, F. Wang, Z. Zhu, J. Wang, T. Tran, and Z. Du, “Artificial intelligence in education: A systematic literature review,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 252, Art. no. 124167, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124167. [2] O. Zawacki-Richter, V. I. Marín, M. Bond, and F. Gouverneur, “Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—where are the educators?,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 16, Art. no. 39, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0. [3] L. Chen, P. Chen, and Z. Lin, “Artificial intelligence in education: A review,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 75264–75278, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510. [4] F. Ouyang and P. Jiao, “Artificial intelligence in education: The three paradigms,” Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, Art. no. 100020, 2021. [5] J. R. Anderson, C. F. Boyle, and B. J. Reiser, “Intelligent tutoring systems,” Science, vol. 228, no. 4698, pp. 456–462, 1985. [6] B. P. Woolf, Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors: Student-Centered Strategies for Revolutionizing E-Learning. Burlington, MA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 2009. [7] E. Kasneci et al., “ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education,” Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 103, Art. no. 102274, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274. [8] UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research. Paris, France: UNESCO, 2023. [9] J. G. Meyer et al., “ChatGPT and large language models in academia: Opportunities and challenges,” BioData Mining, vol. 16, Art. no. 20, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s13040-023-00339-9. [10] W. Holmes, M. Bialik, and C. Fadel, Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Boston, MA, USA: Center for Curriculum Redesign, 2019.
Publication Date
9/15/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
4
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...