The DOI matches its Crossref record; 205 of the 219 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 14 are not checked yet.
Human-centred learning analytics and AI in education: A systematic literature review
Open accessAbstract
The rapid expansion of Learning Analytics (LA) and Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) offers new scalable, data-intensive systems but raises concerns about data privacy and agency. Excluding stakeholders—like students and teachers—from the design process can potentially lead to mistrust and inadequately aligned tools. Despite a shift towards human-centred design in recent LA and AIED research, there remain gaps in our understanding of the importance of human control, safety, reliability, and trustworthiness in the design and implementation of these systems. We conducted a systematic literature review to explore these concerns and gaps. We analysed 108 papers to provide insights about i) the current state of human-centred LA/AIED research; ii) the extent to which educational stakeholders have contributed to the design process of human-centred LA/AIED systems; iii) the current balance between human control and computer automation of such systems; and iv) the extent to which safety, reliability and trustworthiness have been considered in the literature. Results indicate some consideration of human control in LA/AIED system design, but limited end-user involvement in actual design. Based on these findings, we recommend: 1) carefully balancing stakeholders' involvement in designing and deploying LA/AIED systems throughout all design phases 2) actively involving target end-users, especially students, to delineate the balance between human control and automation, and 3) exploring safety, reliability, and trustworthiness as principles in future human-centred LA/AIED systems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“We note that scaffolding students with LLM-generated content that contains hallucination may break the safety, reliability, and trustworthiness requirements of AI-powered learning technologies (Alfredo et al., 2024).”
From Towards reliable generative AI-driven scaffolding: Reducing hallucinations and enhancing quality in self-regulated learning support (2026) · cites this paper as Alfredo et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012) · APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. · doi:10.1037/13620-004 · Cited by 10,299
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., mulrow, C., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J., Akl, E., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2020) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/v7gm2_v1 · Cited by 8,090
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2 · Cited by 6,220
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., mulrow, C., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J., Akl, E., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2020) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/v7gm2 · Cited by 5,177
A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans · doi:10.1109/3468.844354 · Cited by 4,195 · cited 1×
“…computer automation in an HCAI context refers to the characteristics of systems that use computer technology or algorithms to perform tasks automatically, streamlining and expediting operations that were previously completed by human actors (e.g., teachers or students) (Parasuraman et al., 2000).”
BackgroundProceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(2020) · doi:10.1145/3313831 · Cited by 1,951
Ethics of AI in Education: Towards a Community-Wide Framework
Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., Holstein, K., Sutherland, E., Baker, T., Shum, S. B., Santos, O. C., Rodrigo, M. T., Cukurova, M., Bittencourt, I. I., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1 · Cited by 1,437
The role of beliefs in teacher agency
Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015) · Teachers and Teaching · doi:10.1080/13540602.2015.1044325 · Cited by 1,318 · cited 1×
“This notion of human control encompasses key elements of intentional, purposeful, and meaningful learning (Jääskelä et al., 2021) and teaching (Biesta et al., 2015).”
BackgroundMitzias, P., Riga, M., Waddington, S. N., Kontopoulos, E., Μεδίτσκος, Γ., Laurenson, P., & Kompatsiaris, I. Y. (2015) · Cited by 1,240
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Chatti, 2020, How to design effective learning analytics indicators?, vol. 12315
- Moya, 2023, Academic integrity and artificial intelligence in higher education contexts: A rapid scoping review protocol, Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 5, 59
- Ternblad, 2018, Do preschoolers ‘game the system’? A case study of children's intelligent (mis)use of a teachable agent based play-&-learn game in mathematics, vol. 10947, 557
- Wiley, 2023
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding Human-Centred AI: a review of its defining elements and a research agenda
Schmager, S., Pappas, I. O., & Vassilakopoulou, P. (2025) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2024.2448719 · Cited by 215
Artificial intelligence for teaching and learning in schools: The need for pedagogical intelligence
Díaz, B., & Nussbaum, M. (2024) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105071 · Cited by 148
Integrating AI literacy into teacher education: a critical perspective paper
Daher, R. (2025) · Discover Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s44163-025-00475-7 · Cited by 195
Khan, S., Mazhar, T., Shahzad, T., Khan, M. A., Rehman, A. U., Saeed, M. M. A., & Hamam, H. (2025) · Discover Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s43621-025-00809-6 · Cited by 133
Intelligent educational technologies in individual learning: a systematic literature review
Kerimbayev, N., Akramova, А., Shadiev, R., & Altınay, Z. (2025) · Smart Learning Environments · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00360-3 · Cited by 110
Metadata
- Authors
- Alfredo, R., Echeverria, V., Jin, Y., Yan, L., Swiecki, Z., Gašević, D., & Martinez-Maldonado, R.
- Affiliations
- Monash University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Alfredo, Riordan
- Venue
- Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2024-06
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 100215
- ISSN
- 2666-920X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4392769397
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 211
- Citations by year
- 2026: 165 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 22
- FWCI
- 21.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council
- Jacobs Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Keywords
- learning analytics, artificial intelligence in education, human-centered design, stakeholder engagement, human control, automation, data privacy, agency, trustworthiness, safety and reliability, end-user involvement
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
