Effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Scaffolded Planning Tools on Research Question Formulation Among Students with Mild Intellectual Disabilities: A Randomized Controlled Trial Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2292-2598.2025.13.04.6Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, scaffolding, research topic formulation, mild intellectual disabilities, inclusive education, school type, gender equityAbstract
Introduction: Students with mild intellectual disabilities often encounter significant difficulties when faced with complex academic tasks, particularly in developing research topics. These challenges are not only linked to their cognitive limitations but are also compounded by limited instructional support within learning environments. As a result, there is an increasing need for innovative strategies that can simplify learning without diluting academic standards. One promising approach is the use of artificial intelligence–based scaffolding tools, which provide learners with structured guidance to help them navigate demanding academic tasks.
Purpose: This study aimed to explore how AI-supported planning tools influence students' ability to formulate research topics. Beyond this central objective, the study also examined whether differences in school type and gender affected students' performance when supported with AI scaffolding.
Methods: The study adopted a pretest–posttest randomized controlled trial involving 94 students. Participants were randomly assigned to either the experimental group, which received AI-scaffolded support, or the control group, which did not receive any support. The Research Topic Quality Scale, adapted from Creswell and Clark (2018), was employed to evaluate the clarity, feasibility, and alignment of research topics generated by the students. Data analysis was conducted using ANCOVA to examine both main effects and interaction effects of the independent variables.
Results: The findings revealed that students who had access to the AI-scaffolded tool performed significantly better in developing their research topics compared to those in the control group. In addition, results showed that private school students achieved higher scores than their counterparts in public schools, suggesting that resource availability played a role. Gender, however, did not emerge as a significant factor in students’ performance. No significant interaction effects were found between school type, gender, and intervention.
Conclusion: The study demonstrates that AI-based scaffolding has the potential to enhance the ability of students with mild intellectual disabilities to engage with higher-order academic tasks, such as formulating research topics. While the intervention proved effective for both male and female learners, the differences observed between private and public schools highlight persistent inequalities in educational resources that still need to be addressed.
Originality/Value: This research contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the integration of artificial intelligence into inclusive education. By demonstrating that AI-driven scaffolding can enhance complex academic skills, the study underscores its value as a practical and innovative approach for promoting educational success among students with mild intellectual disabilities.
References
Luckasson R, Spreat S. Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports. 10th ed. Washington, DC: AAIDD 2002.
Schalock RL, Luckasson R. Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of supports. 11th ed. Washington, DC: AAIDD 2010.
Holloway J, Mayne P. Research topic formulation and academic self-efficacy among students with mild intellectual disabilities. Int J Incl Educ 2021; 25(3): 245-60.
Gargiulo RM, Bouck EC, editors. Instructional strategies for students with mild, moderate, and severe intellectual disability. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2020.
Brown P, Smith J, Lee A. Cognitive scaffolding and topic clarity among undergraduate students. J High Educ Res 2021; 45(3): 123-38.
Carroll M, O’Connor J, Lee S. Communication supports and research engagement for students with intellectual disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2020; 33(6): 1254-66.
Wilson A, Taylor J. Academic inclusion and research participation of university students with mild intellectual disabilities. Res Dev Disabil 2022; 125: 104230.
Anderson JR, Corbett AT, Koedinger KR, Pelletier R. Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. J Learn Sci. 1995; 4(2): 167-207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_2
Thomas G, Drew H. Personal relevance of research topics and student engagement. J Educ Psychol 2022; 114(2): 234-45.
Chinn C, Gubbins E. Resilience, persistence, and research dispositions. Teach Teach Educ 2021; 100: 103285.
Nguyen T, Tran L, Pham H. Structured peer support and topic refinement. High Educ Stud 2020; 10(4): 112-25.
Scott D, Draper S. AI-based platforms supporting novice researchers. Educ Technol Soc 2023; 26(3): 45-59. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26943245
Jones C, Taylor J. Inclusive pedagogies for supporting students with disabilities in research. Disabil Soc 2024; 39(2): 234-50.
Shah S, Richardson M. Assistive technologies and research planning. Assist Technol 2023; 35(4): 210-23.
Okafor I, Mensah A. Cultural context and topic choice in African higher education. Afr J High Educ 2023; 31(1): 78-92.
Turner M, Davis P. Online collaborative writing tools and research question formulation. Comput Educ 2024; 76: 45-59.
Nguyen T, Adeyemi B, Clark E. Mentorship models scaffolding topic development. J Spec Educ 2020; 54(2): 73-88.
Harper M, Johnson L, Davis R. Literacy interventions in research question development. Int J Educ Dev 2022; 58: 45-59.
Jones M, Taylor R. Closing equity gaps through research engagement. Disabil Soc 2024; 39(2): 210-28.
Thomas K, Drew S. Self-expression and topic selection. Br J Spec Educ 2022; 49(4): 567-80.
Anderson L, Patel R, Hughes D. Employability and transferable competencies. High Educ Res Dev 2021; 40(7): 1421-36.
Heilman M, Zhao L, Pino J, Eskenazi M. Retrieval-based question generation. NAACL HLT Workshop 2010: 1-9. Available from: https://aclanthology.org/W10-1002
Liu Y, Ke F. Personalized scaffolding in AI-supported learning. Educ Res Rev 2023; 38: 100493.
Sun L, Tang Y, Zuo W. Metacognitive prompts in AI-assisted learning. J Educ Comput Res 2022; 60(1): 89-110.
Cheng Y, Xie J. Inclusive learning with AI. Br J Educ Technol 2021; 52(4): 1498-514.
Zawacki-Richter O, Gouverneur F. Systematic review of AI in higher education. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 2020; 17(1): 1-27.
Chen Y, Zhang L, Xu H. Intelligent scaffolding for critical thinking. Educ Technol Res Dev 2023; 71(2): 423-40.
Bai H, Wang J. AI-based scaffolding and learner confidence. Comput Educ 2022; 188: 104571.
Huang Z, Li X, Wu Q. AI-facilitated idea generation. Int J Artif Intell Educ 2022; 32(3): 589-608.
Park S, Kim H. Linking research relevance through AI planning tools. Interact Learn Environ 2023; 31(5): 693-709.
Zhou M, Wang C, Chen D. Synthesizing prior knowledge with AI scaffolds. Educ Technol Soc 2021; 24(3): 75-87. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27032715
Rahimi M, Arnott L. AI and accessible language scaffolding. J Comput Assist Learn 2021; 37(6): 1461-75.
Garcia R, Lee M. Equity in AI-enhanced education. J Learn Anal 2024; 11(1): 56-72.
Holmes W, Porayska-Pomsta K, Woolf B. Personalised adaptive learning. Br J Educ Technol 2021; 52(2): 264-78.
Zhang Y, Wang L. Intelligent tutoring systems. J Comput Assist Learn 2022; 38(3): 571-85.
Al-Azawei A, Badii A. The impact of e-learning systems. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 2021; 18(1): 45.
Gregory T, Parolin Z, Cumming T. Digital inclusion and educational equity. Australas J Spec Incl Educ 2020; 44(1): 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/jsi.2019.16
García-Sánchez JN, Fidalgo-Ruiz M. AI-enhanced instructional scaffolds. Comput Educ 2024; 194: 104839.
Seok S, DaCosta B. Assistive technology for individuals with mild disabilities. Assist Technol 2010; 22(3): 172-8.
Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2018.
Ofem UJ, Idika D, Otu B, Ovat S, Iyam MA, Anakwue AL, Atah CA, Anake PM, Nnyenkpa NA, Edam-Agbor I, Orim F, et al. Academic optimism, capital indicators as predictors of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning outcome among students in secondary school: Hierarchical regression approach (HRA). Heliyon 2024; 10: e30773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30773
Ofem UJ, Iyam MA, Ovat SV, Nworgwugwu EC, Anake PM, Udeh MR, Otu BD. Artificial intelligence (AI) in academic research: A multi-group analysis of students’ awareness and perceptions using gender and programme type. J Appl Learn Teach 2024; 7(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2024.7.1.9
Ofem UJ, Anake PM, Abuo CB, Ukatu JO, Etta EO. Artificial intelligence application in counselling practices: A multigroup analysis of acceptance and awareness using gender and professional rank. Front Digit Health 2025; 6: 1414178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1414178
Ofem UJ, Ene EI, Ajuluchukwu EN, Neji HA, Edam-Agbor IB, Orim FS, Nworgwugwu CE, Ovat SV, Ukatu JO, Ekpang P, Ogochukwu FI, Ntah HE, Ameh ED. Strengthening students’ research efficacy in higher institutions: A joint mediating effect of the impact of artificial intelligence using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Comput Educ Artif Intell 2024; 7: 100337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100337
Alkan A. The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Education of Students with Special Needs. Int J Technol Educ Sci 2024; 8(4): 542-557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.569
Rice MF, Dunn S. The Use of Artificial Intelligence with Students with Identified Disabilities: A Systematic Review with Critique. Comput Sch 2023; 40(4): 370-390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2023.2244935
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
