94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
Carmen del Rosario Navas-Bonilla1*
Julio Andrés Guerra-Arango2
Daniel Alejandro Oviedo-Guado1
Daniel Eduardo Murillo-Noriega1- 1Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación, Humanas y Tecnologías, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Riobamba, Ecuador
- 2Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Riobamba, Ecuador
Technologies that contribute to inclusive education are digital tools and specialized devices that facilitate equitable access to learning for students with diverse abilities. Understanding these technologies allows for the personalization of teaching methods, the removal of barriers that limit participation for students with differences, and the promotion of a more accessible and equitable educational environment for all. This study aims to identify and analyze practices and technologies that foster the participation of students with diverse needs. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, gathering responses to the research questions from 159 studies. The Scopus database was utilized, with three blocks of keywords related to technology, inclusion, and education. The findings indicate that educational technologies transform the learning environment into a more inclusive and accessible one by adapting to the diverse needs of students. Tools such as mobile devices, interactive applications, and augmented reality help to remove barriers for students with disabilities or in various contexts, facilitating personalized and equitable learning. Additionally, these technologies promote the development of critical skills and encourage collaboration among students, enriching both their academic training and social integration. Thus, technological inclusion becomes a key factor in maximizing the potential of each student within a diverse educational system.
1 Introduction
For Throughout history, educators have sought to develop inclusive learning societies, reconfiguring both their content approaches and pedagogical methods to improve accessibility. This constant adaptation has become an essential mindset and a fundamental mechanism that impacts not only students but also learning structures and society at large. Adaptive learning practices, designed to address the diverse needs of personal knowledge, play a crucial role in fostering inclusive participation (Mihovska et al., 2021). Given that each person learns differently and that students’ needs evolve in response to technological disruptions, it is imperative to continuously adjust knowledge dissemination practices to effectively respond to these changes.
In recent years, educational reform has highlighted the importance of including all students in regular classrooms and redesigning the educational process to meet their individual needs. Inclusion, understood from the perspective of social justice and equality, involves integrating students with special educational needs into regular schools, ensuring their active participation in all educational aspects and the resulting social interactions (Karagianni and Drigas, 2023a).
Inclusive education aims to ensure that all students have access to education by adapting to their diverse needs, including those of individuals with special requirements (Buenaño-Barreno, 2024). It is based on several fundamental principles, among them that the intrinsic value of each person in modern society does not depend on their abilities or achievements; and that individuals with disabilities or special educational needs should be integrated into the educational environment (Shmeleva and Litovchenko, 2022).
Some research indicates that educational technology (ET) is a valuable tool for differentiating teaching, facilitating learning, and promoting inclusion in educational settings. Merzon et al. (2022) state, the use of digital educational technologies as a means to develop technical skills opens up broad opportunities for teachers and students, especially when it comes to inclusive education. A teacher acquires technological competence when they can understand, manage, and use digital environments to develop and disseminate their knowledge (González and Estrella, 2023).
Inclusive learning environments aim to integrate all students into the educational process, regardless of their individual differences. Their purpose is to ensure that each student has access to equitable educational experiences, respecting diversity and promoting participation without restrictions, while considering their diverse needs and learning preferences (Ghosh et al., 2022).
The use of educational software creates a dynamic learning environment, with diverse content and authentic situations that connect students to the real world, fostering active and independent learning, and allowing personalized adjustments to meet each student’s needs and preferences. Additionally, technology enhances children’s engagement, concentration, and learning curve (Demetriou, 2023).
Creating inclusive spaces in classrooms involves more than administrative adjustments; educators must develop pedagogical approaches that recognize and accept students’ individual differences. This encourages collaboration and learning through “critical creation” in the classroom (Fernandez, 2021). As Marimuthu and Cheong (2015) mention, inclusive education depends on positive beliefs and the commitment of professionals, who must value and respect students, acknowledging that, with adequate support, students with disabilities can exceed expectations. By preparing these students for their integration into society, inclusive education has the power to transform social mindsets and promote a paradigm shift, improving their social adaptation and financial well-being through vocational training and employment.
Technology plays a crucial role in skill development for students, facilitating learning, social interaction, play, and collaboration (Berrones-Yaulema and Buenaño-Barreno, 2023). However, while students enjoy using digital media, they also show interest in real-world activities, highlighting the importance of balancing both environments. Integrating digital technology from an early age is essential for developing digital literacy and fostering inclusion and participation in the digital age. In the context of inclusive education, especially for students with disabilities, technology takes on an even more significant role (Desideri et al., 2023). The use of conventional and assistive technologies has become central in schools, helping to reduce the impact of disabilities and learning difficulties, and promoting the participation of all students in creativity, learning, and play.
“E-inclusion” pedagogy focuses on teachers’ decisions to provide students with innovative learning methods and alternative means for completing their tasks, using technology in educational activities. Students with disabilities may need assistive technology to leverage their strengths and compensate for their weaknesses. Inclusive education must consider these needs for all children with disabilities. An assistive technology device can be any item, equipment, or system used to enhance a child’s functional abilities. Moreover, students need training on how to use their devices (Draper, 2024).
In the context of educational technology for inclusion, the systematic review by Lynch et al. (2024) addresses the use of educational technologies to support children with disabilities in primary schools in low- and middle-income countries. This study highlights a significant disparity in the evidence base among different types of disabilities, with a focus predominantly on sensory disabilities in specialized school environments. It emphasizes the need for more inclusive and participatory research that integrates intersectional factors such as gender and geographical location, to develop technological solutions that meet the needs of all students with disabilities.
On the other hand, Toto et al. (2024) explore, through another systematic review, the impact of emerging technologies on inclusive teaching practices. They focus on the experiences of educators who have implemented innovative teaching methodologies supported by advanced technologies, such as Assistive Technology, Augmented Reality, and Artificial Intelligence. The findings suggest that these technologies can significantly enhance the inclusive educational experience, creating a more effective and engaging learning environment for all students, including those with disabilities. Although the number of publications on these technologies has increased, there is recognized need for further research in certain areas.
Furthermore, Salas-Pilco et al. (2022) reviewed 27 studies on the application of artificial intelligence and new technologies in inclusive education for minority students in regions such as the United States, Colombia, and China. The findings underscore that these technologies enhance accessibility and customization of learning, facilitating the integration of students from diverse sociocultural backgrounds. However, they face challenges such as resource scarcity and the need for adequate teacher training. The study recommends that future research should extend to more minority groups and examine emerging technologies, highlighting the importance of including educators’ perspectives in the design of inclusive practices.
Additionally, Lawan et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review focused on assessing the efficacy of emerging technologies in inclusive education for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Through the analysis of 36 articles, they identified various technological interventions, such as mobile apps, educational robots, and augmented reality, that have proven useful in supporting these students in inclusive environments. The study emphasizes the importance of developing cost-effective and practical solutions for implementing these technologies in educational contexts, especially in resource-limited countries.
As the literature suggests, technology is currently a fundamental part of development and inclusivity for individuals, making it essential to comprehensively understand how technological tools are being implemented to support inclusion in educational settings. This research aims to identify, analyze, and synthesize existing evidence on practices and technologies that have proven effective in promoting the participation of students with diverse needs, as well as to contribute to closing knowledge gaps and identify areas where further research is needed, thereby guiding the development of future educational innovations. To address these objectives, the following research questions are proposed:
RQ1. What are the main types of inclusion presented in the literature?
RQ2. What are the most commonly used technologies in educational settings to promote inclusion?
RQ3. What are the characteristics of the technologies identified in the literature for inclusive learning?
RQ4. How are the diverse inclusion needs of students addressed through the use of technological tools?
2 Materials and methods
The methodology of this systematic review followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to ensure a rigorous and transparent process (Page et al., 2021). First, the inclusion and exclusion criteria for selecting relevant studies were objectively defined. Subsequently, a search was conducted in recognized academic databases using keywords related to technologies for inclusive learning. The identified studies were evaluated in multiple stages, including duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text review. Finally, data from the selected studies were extracted and analyzed to synthesize the available evidence and identify trends, knowledge gaps, and areas for improvement in the use of technologies for educational inclusion.
2.1 Eligibility criteria and information sources
For data collection, the Scopus database was selected as the source of information due to its recognition in collecting high-impact studies across various disciplines worldwide. Scopus is known for its extensive coverage and rigorous selection of scientific publications, ensuring that the included studies are relevant and of high quality (Table 1).
Table 1
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
The inclusion criteria for this search are as follows: documents available in the Scopus database were considered, specifically scientific articles, conference papers, and book chapters. Studies published in the last 5 years (2019–2024) were included to ensure that the information is up-to-date and reflects recent developments in the field. Additionally, studies in any language were accepted to avoid limiting the search to a single language and to gain a broader perspective on the topic.
On the other hand, duplicate studies were excluded to avoid redundancies and ensure the originality of the analyzed data. Studies with conflicts of interest, books (to focus on more specialized publication formats), and those containing retraction letters or errata were also excluded, as these compromise the validity of the results. Moreover, studies that did not address at least one established research question were not included, ensuring that the selected documents are relevant to the research objectives.
2.2 Search strategies
The search process was conducted in the Scopus database, following predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure the relevance of the retrieved documents. The search strategy was organized into three main thematic blocks. The first block addressed the area of technology, the second focused on education, and the third block was oriented toward inclusion. The objective of this search structure was to ensure that the identified studies contained relevant information on the use of technology in the context of inclusive education.
Initially, a preliminary search was conducted in Scopus, setting the parameters so that the article titles included these three essential keywords. From the results obtained, we employed R Studio software to perform a text analysis and generate a keyword cloud. This cloud helped to identify additional terms frequently associated with our key terms, reflecting current trends and approaches in research. Based on this analysis, a second, more refined search string was formed, incorporating these new keywords to broaden and refine the search for relevant studies. The combination of these blocks enabled the creation of a search string that identified a total of 228 pertinent documents up to January 8, 2025. The search string was as follows:
(TITLE (tools OR technologies OR technology OR technological) AND TITLE (learning OR students OR education) AND TITLE (inclusive OR inclusivity OR diversity OR equity)) AND PUBYEAR >2018 AND PUBYEAR <2025 AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ar”) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “cp”) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, “ch”))
2.3 Study selection and data extraction process
The study selection and data extraction process were carried out in several stages. First, the studies retrieved from the Scopus database were individually evaluated through the analysis of their titles, abstracts, and keywords. This initial analysis aimed to identify those studies that primarily focused on the research topic and could provide answers to the research questions posed in the study.
Out of the 197 studies initially selected, 171 were accessible for a full content analysis. During this detailed analysis, 12 studies were excluded as they did not address any of the formulated research questions, resulting in a final sample of 159 studies (see Figure 1). From these studies, the necessary characteristics and data were extracted to adequately answer the research questions.
Figure 1
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process.
2.4 Risk of bias assessment
The risk of bias assessment was conducted using a systematic approach to ensure the validity and reliability of the included studies. In this process, all four authors actively participated in the analysis, arbitration, and selection of each study. Standardized criteria were first applied to identify potential sources of bias, including methodological quality, transparency in reporting results, and the presence of conflicts of interest. Each study was individually evaluated by the authors, who discussed and reached a consensus on the evaluations to minimize the influence of personal or methodological biases.
The arbitration process was essential for conducting an impartial evaluation and selection. Disagreements among the authors were resolved through discussions and complementary reviews, ensuring that each study was evaluated fairly and objectively. The collective participation of all four authors enabled a rigorous assessment, significantly reducing the risk of bias and ensuring the quality and credibility of the studies included in the analysis.
2.5 Synthesis methods
The synthesis methods were carried out using an Excel matrix, which allowed for a systematic and efficient organization of the collected data. Through a detailed analysis of each study, the responses to the research questions were extracted and classified. These included the types of inclusion presented in the literature, the technologies used in educational settings to promote inclusion, and the characteristics and functions of the technologies identified for inclusive learning. Additionally, an evaluation was conducted on how these technological tools address the individual needs of students with various types of disabilities.
It is important to note that many studies did not focus on a single tool, characteristic, or approach to inclusion, but rather addressed multiple aspects. Therefore, the results were categorically presented in the analysis, thus facilitating their understanding. This categorized structure enhances the clarity of the presented information and provides an informative basis for its application in the development of strategies and practices for inclusive education. By presenting the information in this way, it ensures that readers can use it effectively to advance the implementation and improvement of inclusive education.
3 Results
3.1 RQ1. What are the main types of inclusion presented in the literature?
Educational inclusion is a broad and multifaceted concept, with each examined study addressing different forms of inclusion based on its specific context and focus. Some studies concentrate on the inclusion of students with disabilities, while others highlight the importance of including people of different ages, genders, nationalities, customs, or health conditions (see Figure 2). Given that inclusion can manifest in various ways, it is essential to identify the different types of inclusion covered in the literature to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the concept (see Table 2). This will provide insight into the breadth of what educational inclusion entails in its entirety.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Types of inclusion identified in the studies.
Table 2
Table 2. Types of inclusion.
The analysis of inclusion approaches in the literature highlights that sensory disabilities (60%) and gender equality (36%) are the most frequently mentioned topics, followed by racial and ethnic inclusion (35%), physical disabilities (34%), mental or intellectual disabilities (34%), and cultural inclusion (30%). These categories emphasize the need to adapt educational and social environments for individuals with sensory, mobility, or cognitive development limitations, providing equitable opportunities regardless of gender. They also advocate for valuing diversity in classrooms and social settings, actively integrating different races and ethnicities to foster an environment of mutual respect and intercultural understanding.
Additionally, socioeconomic inclusion (28%) aims to remove barriers caused by poverty, ensuring equality of resources. Learning difficulties (27%), linguistic inclusion (8%), age inclusion (4%), and health inclusion (2%) are also highlighted, underscoring the importance of equitably integrating individuals across multiple languages, all ages, and those with chronic health conditions. This comprehensive approach to inclusion reflects the importance of removing barriers to ensure a truly equitable and accessible environment.
3.2 RQ2. What are the technological tools used in educational settings to promote inclusion?
Technology plays a fundamental role in creating more inclusive educational environments, allowing students with diverse needs to access learning equitably. It is crucial to identify both software and hardware tools that have proven effective in this context, as they can facilitate personalized teaching and adaptation to different types of disabilities, learning styles, and access barriers. Understanding the available technologies broadens the possibilities for inclusion and provides educators and educational policymakers with the necessary tools to create truly inclusive and accessible learning environments for all students (Table 3).
Table 3
Table 3. Inclusive technological tools.
The technological tools used in educational settings for inclusion offer multiple benefits by adapting to the diverse abilities of students, significantly enhancing their participation and learning. Physical and sensory accessibility tools, such as electronic Braille displays, adapted keyboards, and alternative mice, facilitate access to educational content for students with visual or physical disabilities, allowing for smoother interaction with the digital environment (see Figure 3). Assistive devices, such as voice output systems or robotic gloves, provide autonomy to those with motor limitations, promoting their integration in the classroom.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Physical and sensory accessibility tools.
Accessibility software, such as screen readers and text-to-speech applications, expands learning opportunities for students with visual, auditory, or cognitive disabilities, improving their ability to process and use educational information. These tools ensure equitable access to content and foster independence in the learning process.
Educational tools, such as mobile devices, tablets, and robotics, promote personalized and adaptive learning by tailoring content to the individual needs of students. This not only enhances their understanding and retention of knowledge but also increases their motivation and active participation in the educational process.
Interaction and collaboration tools, such as digital whiteboards and augmented reality technologies, enrich the educational environment by providing immersive and visual experiences, making learning more dynamic and engaging for all students. Additionally, online collaboration platforms facilitate teamwork and communication, even remotely, which is particularly useful for those with physical or geographical limitations.
Communication technologies like Zoom and augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices enable students with communication challenges to interact and participate actively in the classroom. Educational games, meanwhile, combine entertainment and learning, helping to develop skills in a playful and accessible way.
3.3 RQ3. What are the characteristics of the technologies identified in the literature for inclusive learning?
Understanding the particular features of these technological tools is essential for educators to identify and select those that are most suitable for different types of inclusion. This knowledge allows educators to explore the characteristics that make these technologies effective in supporting students with diverse needs, thus promoting a more accessible and equitable learning environment. Understanding these functionalities can contribute to the adaptation of pedagogical strategies, thereby facilitating the creation of personalized educational experiences that take into account the individual differences of students and foster their full participation in the educational process. Figure 4 presents the most notable characteristics of inclusive technologies.
Figure 4
Figure 4. Main characteristics of technologies in inclusive education.
The results of the analysis show that the most frequently mentioned characteristics in the literature on technologies for inclusive learning are multimedia content, interactive content, and accessibility, highlighting their importance in creating educational environments that promote inclusion. Multimedia content, highlighted in 41 studies, facilitates understanding by integrating various formats, such as images, videos, and audio, adapting to different learning styles. Accessibility, mentioned in 36 studies, emphasizes the importance of designing educational technologies to be usable by students with a wide range of disabilities, including physical, cognitive, or sensory disabilities. Similarly, interactive content, mentioned in 32 studies, supports active student participation, which is essential for promoting better knowledge retention.
Ease of use, mentioned in 9 studies, emphasizes that technologies should be intuitive and accessible for both teachers and students, which is crucial for their adoption in the classroom. Also mentioned in 8 studies, multisensory materials refer to the incorporation of visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli, enriching the learning experience by engaging different senses.
Other relevant characteristics, though mentioned in fewer studies, include adaptability, which appears in 6 studies, referring to the ability of technologies to adjust to the individual needs of students, offering personalized experiences that enhance their learning. Additionally, portability, cited in 6 studies, highlights the importance of using technological tools anywhere, especially through mobile devices, thus expanding access to education.
Other less frequently mentioned, but equally important characteristics, include security and reliability (2 studies), which highlight the need for technologies to be dependable and not disrupt the educational process due to technical failures. Gamification (2 studies) incorporates game elements into learning, contributing to increased student motivation.
Finally, with only one mention in the literature, flexible approaches are highlighted, allowing teaching methods to be adapted to student needs; compatibility, ensuring the smooth integration of technologies with other educational tools; and currency, referring to the ability of technologies to stay up-to-date with advances in the educational field, ensuring the relevance of the resources used. Although mentioned less frequently, these characteristics are key to creating an inclusive and efficient learning environment.
3.4 RQ4. How are the diverse inclusion needs of students addressed through the use of technological tools?
Table 4 presents the technologies mentioned or used in the reviewed studies, classified according to the type of educational inclusion, with a particular focus on disabilities, which is the most widely addressed type of inclusion in the literature. These technological tools allow the adaptation of the educational environment to the specific needs of students with disabilities, facilitating their active and equitable participation in the learning process.
Table 4
Table 4. Technologies used by type of educational inclusion.
Technological tools in inclusive education enable the adaptation of content and teaching methods to the individual needs of students, providing accessibility, autonomy, and a more personalized educational experience. The general use of these technologies includes converting content into accessible formats, such as audiobooks, Braille files, or adapted digital formats, which facilitates universal access to education. Moreover, they allow students to progress at their own pace, promoting a more engaging and motivating learning experience through interaction with dynamic digital environments, such as virtual and augmented reality.
For students with visual impairments, technologies include screen readers, digital magnifiers, and voice synthesizers that convert text into audio, enabling more direct access to information. Tools like touchscreens and Braille displays, as well as the conversion of content into accessible formats (MP3, ePub, tagged PDFs), allow students to interact with educational materials tailored to their needs. Applications with audio-tactile graphics and navigation systems also help improve their independence and understanding of the environment. Additionally, augmented reality offers a new way to explore visual concepts, such as shapes and graphs, in a sensory manner.
In the case of hearing impairments, technologies focus on voice-to-text conversion and sign language translation, facilitating real-time communication through videophones and interpreters, both human and animated. This allows deaf students or those with hearing difficulties to interact more effectively with their peers and teachers. Additionally, there are specific tools for parents and educators to learn sign language, easing communication and support at home and in the classroom.
For students with physical motor disabilities, tools like adapted keyboards, joysticks, and alternative mice enable physical interaction with devices, adapting to their motor abilities. Head or foot control systems, along with digital pens and touchscreens, provide alternative means for writing and completing practical activities. These assistive technologies increase the functionality and autonomy of students, creating interactive environments where they can engage in learning through multiple means of interaction, such as voice, touch, or gestures.
Finally, intellectual and cognitive disabilities are addressed through personalized and adaptive learning systems designed to meet the specific needs of each student. Computer games help improve cognitive skills, while multisensory environments enrich the learning experience. Tools like vibrating alarms or digital pens help improve attention and behavior, and technology is also used to diagnose dyslexia and other learning difficulties. These resources enable the inclusion of students in STEM projects and other educational environments, ensuring that they can fully participate in the learning process.
3.5 Main benefits of technology in inclusive education
As identified in the literature, the use of technology in inclusive education offers multiple benefits that can significantly transform the teaching and learning process. It facilitates student participation by enabling broader interaction and collaboration, which in turn fosters an inclusive and dynamic learning environment. The availability of a variety of digital resources enriches educational content and allows students to access diverse and up-to-date information, thereby stimulating the development of critical and analytical skills.
Furthermore, technology enables educators to reflect on and improve their pedagogical practices through the use of analytical tools that provide real-time feedback on the effectiveness of their teaching methods. Students can explore and debate topics related to social justice and diversity, adapting to various needs and learning styles, which contributes to a more equitable education tailored to individual needs.
The study conducted by Lusigi (2019) highlights how in South Africa, the use of ICT has improved educational quality not only by increasing enrollment and access to distance education but also by enhancing “learning productivity.” This is achieved by optimizing costs and customizing teaching to meet specific labor market and community needs, enabling students to acquire skills that are immediately applicable in professional environments. On the other hand, Kim and Higgs (2023) observe that technology allows future teachers to build more meaningful relationships with their students through digitally mediated interactions. This approach contributes to a deeper and more critical understanding of literacy in the current digital context and underscores the potential of technology to address racial and cultural gaps in education.
Similarly, Coker and Mercieca (2023) emphasize how, by addressing the digital divide, especially in rural areas, technology promotes greater equity in educational participation. Access to digital tools and resources facilitates real-time connections to global resources, enriching learning and fostering international collaboration among students. This enables all students, regardless of their geographical location, to access quality educational opportunities, thus overcoming the traditional limitations imposed by distance and physical resources. Together, these benefits highlight how technology can be a powerful facilitator of more inclusive, equitable, and high-quality education, preparing students to be effective global citizens in an increasingly interconnected society.
3.6 Main challenges of technology in inclusive education
Unequal access to technologies represents one of the major challenges in inclusive education, especially noticeable in rural areas and among students from different socioeconomic levels. Kormos and Julio (2020) highlight how the lack of adequate technological infrastructure, including limitations in hardware and software, amplifies the digital divide and complicates the effective integration of technologies into the educational process. This disparity in access underscores the need not only to provide technological tools but also to ensure that they are adequate and functional for all students.
Another significant challenge is the lack of skills or competencies in teachers related to the use of technology. Insufficient training of teachers in handling new technologies limits their ability to integrate these tools effectively into their teaching methodologies. This is exacerbated by the general lack of teacher training, which prevents educators from adopting pedagogical practices that maximize the benefits of technology in inclusive educational settings.
Furthermore, accessibility issues in applications and virtual platforms, such as difficulties in generating image descriptions, proper semantic structuring, keyboard navigation, and content synchronization, present additional barriers. Acosta-Vargas et al. (2024) emphasize that accessibility evaluation should be thorough and multifaceted, using both automatic and manual assessments to better understand the barriers faced by users with disabilities. It is also crucial to integrate accessibility principles from the early stages of technology development, as well as to consider the ethical implications associated with their use.
Additionally, an excessive dependence on technology, particularly artificial intelligence, can undermine the development of critical thinking and research skills. Lin et al. (2024) point out how technology can demotivate students by reducing their effort in learning, and how web search engines and AI often provide incorrect or irrelevant answers. These authors also highlight the ethical challenges associated with academic integrity and the impact of false accusations of plagiarism on student well-being, underscoring the need for careful and ethical implementation of technology in education.
Wen and Castek (2020) mention that it is fundamental to focus on fostering critical understanding and meaningful use of technology, rather than merely providing access to tools. This involves integrating exploration and fabrication skills, promoting collaboration and knowledge sharing, and maintaining a critical perspective on the impact of technology on communities. Moreover, it is essential to combine technological literacy with content knowledge and pedagogy.
3.7 Successful case examples
In the realm of inclusive education, the integration of technology has proven to be a transformative approach, enabling broader and more effective participation of students from diverse backgrounds and abilities. Among the successful implementations of technology, the study by Kross and Guo (2019) stands out, which presents an innovative approach aimed at adults from historically marginalized and underrepresented communities, proposing an educational program accessible through MOOCs to teach them basic data science skills. This program was specifically designed to equip these adults with the competencies necessary to access entry-level jobs in the technology field, directly addressing the lack of educational and employment opportunities in their communities.
Moreover, Smeins et al. (2022) explored how digital tools can be used to enhance linguistic inclusion in primary education. Through the implementation of digital games that employ augmented reality, such as BabelAR, they sought to inspire future teachers to actively integrate multilingualism into their pedagogical practices. This tool facilitates the teaching of different languages, thus promoting a more inclusive and enriching learning environment for all students, regardless of their mother tongue.
Simultaneously, Singh-Pillay (2023) in South Africa investigated the use of mobile technologies to overcome language barriers and enhance student participation in diverse educational contexts. Using applications like Google Classroom, which incorporates voice dictation functions and dictionaries, teachers were able to adapt their lesson plans and assessments to include the students’ native languages, utilizing these as valuable resources in the learning process. Moreover, virtual platforms have facilitated the conduct of practical work, allowing students to engage in active learning experiences even in resource-limited settings, such as the lack of equipped laboratories in rural environments.
Parallelly, Shmeleva and Litovchenko (2022) propose the use of technical devices such as touch screens for people with visual impairments, modified keyboards for those with musculoskeletal disorders, and special manipulators for students with auditory and speech disabilities. Additionally, programs like “Screen Reader,” which read aloud the content on the screen, and audio materials, such as lectures and audio simulators, enable students with visual impairments to access information effectively. These tools facilitate individualized learning and promote the active participation of students in the educational process, thus enhancing their experience and academic outcomes.
Additionally, Rocha et al. (2023) employed 3D animated avatars as sign language interpreters to teach the alphabet in Portuguese and Brazilian Sign Language (Libras) to children. This approach allows both deaf and hearing children to interact with the content effectively, improving communication and learning in an inclusive environment.
Likewise, Horna-Saldaña and Canaleta (2024) utilized 3D printing technologies to develop a Braille instrument that teaches the chemical elements to students with visual disabilities. This method facilitated playful and accessible learning of chemistry and fostered an inclusive educational environment where students with and without disabilities could share and enjoy learning together.
Equally, Diolaiuti et al. (2021) created immersive learning experiences using 360° video technology, allowing individuals, including those with physical limitations or disabilities, to explore and learn about remote places in an accessible manner. Through devices like smartphones and tablets, users can navigate virtual environments without needing to be physically present in those locations, eliminating physical barriers and facilitating participation for all.
Fang et al. (2024) implemented the Mindomo platform, powered by artificial intelligence, for the creation of collaborative mind maps, improving the inclusion and education of students with intellectual and learning disabilities. This was applied to students with neurodevelopmental disorders, specifically students with Asperger’s Syndrome, ADHD, and dyslexia. The results showed a positive impact on the development of creative thinking, and the use of this tool allowed each student to contribute equitably to the learning process, which improves their engagement and self-esteem. Moreover, by facilitating the organization of ideas and the visualization of concepts, it helps students develop critical and creative thinking skills.
Finally, the study by Materazzini et al. (2024) applied the OLOS® technology, an innovative audio-visual interface, to enhance inclusive education in museums, focusing on individuals with learning disorders (ADHD, dyslexia, among others). This tool allows interaction with life-size holographic figures that converse with visitors, facilitating a more accessible and engaging educational experience. The results of the study, which included responses from over 1,300 individuals certified with learning disorders, suggest that the implementation of visual effects, gamification methods, and user-friendly informational materials can significantly improve accessibility and participation of this population in museum environments.
Each of these studies represents an important step toward achieving truly inclusive education, demonstrating how technology can be effectively used to confront and overcome educational barriers, and how it can be adapted to the specific needs of different groups of students.
3.8 Practical limitations
It is important to note that, in the context of inclusive education, multiple practical challenges are faced when attempting to effectively integrate technologies into learning environments. One of the main obstacles is the digital divide and the lack of adequate infrastructure, especially in remote or low-income regions. It is crucial to focus technological expansion not only on the availability of tools but also on improving the learning environment and digital literacy. An approach that enhances education through the development and implementation of ICT systems that leverage existing infrastructure, supported by both public and private investments, is needed.
Additionally, there is a significant lack of skills and digital literacy among teachers and students, a problem particularly evident in some educational institutions where many teachers lack the access and skills necessary to use ICT effectively. This situation underscores the urgent need for training and continuing education programs that can close this skills gap.
Moreover, the absence of an institutional framework and coherent national policies that foster the use of technology for innovation and ensure quality education represents another considerable obstacle. A holistic and collaborative approach among different sectors and levels of government is required to establish policies that effectively promote the integration of technology in inclusive education.
Despite governmental efforts to promote the use of ICT, many teachers still fail to modify their teaching methods to integrate these technologies. Some educators continue to resort to traditional pedagogical approaches, rather than adopting more student-centered methods that incorporate ICT. This highlights the need to focus attention not only on physical and digital infrastructure but also on the continuous training and updating of educators, enabling them to effectively implement technology in their teaching practices.
This complex landscape of practical limitations for the effective use of technologies in inclusive education illustrates the importance of multidimensional approaches that include improvements in infrastructure, teacher training, coherent policies, and digital literacy programs, framed within a comprehensive strategy that addresses both technological and human and structural needs.
4 Discussion
The analysis of the literature on inclusion reveals a clear trend toward prioritizing sensory and physical disabilities, with less focus on mental or intellectual disabilities and learning difficulties. As Şahin et al. (2023) mention, students with disabilities are a crucial part of the implementation of inclusive education. This distribution suggests that educational and social environments still face the challenge of fully adapting to the needs of all individuals with disabilities. However, inclusive education should not be limited solely to the integration of students with disabilities, as it is often understood. In reality, inclusive education encompasses a wide range of aspects beyond physical or cognitive disabilities. Factors such as age, gender, health status, race, customs, nationality, and other elements that differentiate individuals also play a crucial role in processes of exclusion or unequal treatment within the educational domain. Similarly, Bulathwela et al. (2024) and Uygur et al. (2020) highlight the powerful influence of circumstances such as wealth, gender, ethnicity, and location as important factors in shaping educational and life opportunities.
True inclusive education means ensuring that people of all ages can access opportunities for lifelong learning without restrictions based on their stage of life. It also advocates for students of different nationalities or with diverse customs to enjoy the same rights and benefits as local residents (Rodrigo-Martín et al., 2020). Likewise, those who suffer from conditions that may limit their active participation in education should be treated equally to those who do not face such barriers, such as individuals with HIV, asthma, obesity, or diabetes (Houston-Wilson and Lieberman, 2020). Inclusion, therefore, should be seen as a broad and comprehensive concept that seeks to remove any type of barrier that prevents equitable access to education for all individuals, regardless of their differences. As Uygur et al. (2020) note, factors such as gender, disability, ethnicity, poverty, or migration reflect the versatility that inclusive education must have. Each of these aspects presents specific challenges that require differentiated and adaptive approaches to ensure that all students have equitable access to quality education.
In the context of inclusive education, various technological tools have proven key to promoting the participation and learning of students with diverse needs. Among the most commonly used are mobile devices and tablets, such as PCs, smartphones, and tablets (Chambers, 2020; Sarsenbayeva et al., 2022; Karagianni and Drigas, 2023a). These devices offer flexibility and portability, facilitating their integration into various educational settings and allowing students to access content tailored to their needs at any time and place. Additionally, their intuitive interface makes them easy to use for students with different abilities.
Another highlighted resource is interactive games and applications, which, being dynamic and participatory, provide a stimulating learning environment (Kuvshinova et al., 2019; Collazo, 2022; Rocha et al., 2023). These tools encourage direct interaction between students and content, which not only improves understanding but also fosters motivation and active participation in the educational process, aspects essential for skill development in inclusive environments.
Furthermore, educational platforms and specialized software designed for students to learn in various ways, regardless of their differences, have had a significant impact. These systems allow for personalized learning, offering multiple ways to access content, whether visually, auditorily, or tactilely, facilitating the inclusion of students with different disabilities (Desideri et al., 2023; Karagianni and Drigas, 2023a).
Regarding physical and sensory accessibility tools, such as electronic Braille displays or adapted devices (keyboards, mice), they are essential for removing barriers to accessing information. As Srivastava et al. (2021) mention, these technologies enable students with visual or physical disabilities to interact effectively with devices, ensuring their participation in the educational environment.
Similarly, emerging technologies like augmented and virtual reality, along with educational robotics, are gaining relevance. Augmented and virtual reality devices allow students to interact with simulated environments that can be tailored to their specific needs, providing immersive and personalized learning experiences. Additionally, educational robotics, using tutor robots, offers personalized assistance and guidance, making learning easier for students who struggle with traditional teaching methods (Kuvshinova et al., 2019).
Key features, such as multimedia content, interactivity, accessibility, and adaptability, are essential for inclusive education as they provide diverse ways of presenting information and adjusting to the individual needs of students. As Chambers (2020) mentions, technological devices and programs must be accessible and easy to use for both teachers and students. The portability and ease of use of educational technologies make these tools accessible in any environment (Karagianni and Drigas, 2023b), enhancing participation. Moreover, multisensory material stimulates different senses, which is crucial for students with sensory or cognitive disabilities (Raja and Giannoumis, 2019). The security, reliability, and compatibility of technology ensure that resources are accessible to all students, while gamification and flexible approaches promote a more dynamic and motivating learning (Karagianni and Drigas, 2023b). Finally, the constant updating of these resources ensures that students can benefit from the latest advances in inclusive education.
4.1 Limitations of the study
This study presents some limitations that should be considered. First, the analysis focused on studies available in specific databases, which may have limited access to relevant research published in other sources or in languages other than English and Spanish. This could have influenced the scope of the literature review. Another limitation is that the study mainly focuses on technologies applied to inclusive education, leaving room for deeper exploration of other non-technological factors that also contribute to inclusion, such as traditional pedagogical practices or emotional support in the classroom.
Finally, although various forms of disability are addressed, the review did not delve into each one individually, as the objective was to provide a comprehensive view of inclusion. This may be considered a limitation for those seeking a detailed analysis of a specific type of disability.
4.2 Future work
For future research, it is recommended to expand the focus toward mental and intellectual disabilities, as well as learning difficulties, to obtain a more balanced view of the challenges and opportunities in inclusive education. Additionally, it would be beneficial to conduct studies that explore, in a comparative manner, how different educational institutions address the challenges of inclusion, considering variations in socioeconomic contexts and available resources.
Another area of interest is evaluating the long-term effectiveness of emerging technologies, such as augmented reality and educational robotics, in the development of specific skills in students with different needs. Future research could explore how the integration of these technologies influences students’ motivation and academic performance, and whether these effects vary depending on the type of disability or educational need. Additionally, it would be relevant to consider studies that explore non-technological approaches, such as inclusive pedagogical strategies or adaptive teaching models, which could be applicable in contexts with limited access to advanced technologies.
Finally, it is suggested to investigate the intersection of inclusive education with social factors such as gender, ethnicity, and economic situation, to better understand how these elements influence students’ educational experiences. This approach would allow for the design of more comprehensive and effective interventions that consider the diversity of barriers that can affect equitable access to education.
5 Conclusion
Together, these technologies transform the educational environment into a more inclusive, equitable, and accessible space by adapting to the diverse abilities and needs of students. They provide personalized support that fosters academic development and strengthens critical skills such as autonomy, creativity, and problem-solving. The use of mobile devices, interactive applications, and specialized tools enables students with physical, sensory, or cognitive disabilities to access educational content equitably, removing barriers that have traditionally limited their participation.
Through these technologies, learning environments become more flexible and dynamic, facilitating the personalization of teaching methods. This allows each student to progress at their own pace, with materials tailored to their learning styles and abilities. Additionally, the use of interactive games and applications stimulates participation and engagement, resulting in greater knowledge retention and a more engaging and meaningful learning experience.
Moreover, tools such as Braille devices, adapted keyboards, and inclusive touch screens offer students with sensory disabilities the ability to interact effectively with the digital environment, leveling the playing field compared to their peers. Similarly, augmented and virtual reality, along with educational robotics, open new opportunities for creating immersive learning experiences that can be tailored to the specific needs of each student, promoting a multisensory approach to learning.
These technologies also facilitate the creation of inclusive learning communities, where all students, regardless of their abilities, can collaborate, share ideas, and develop greater empathy and mutual understanding. This not only enriches their academic education but also contributes to their social and emotional development, which are fundamental aspects for their full integration into society.
In conclusion, the integration of these technological tools in the educational field goes beyond simply adapting to individual needs. It represents a decisive step toward building an educational system that recognizes diversity as a central value, offering each student the opportunity to reach their full potential. By promoting equitable and accessible learning, these technologies transform the educational environment and open new possibilities for the future of inclusive education.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
CN-B: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. JG-A: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Validation, Writing – original draft. DO-G: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft. DM-N: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. All content has been generated by the authors without the use of Generative AI; however, ChatGPT was used for correction and translation.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1527851/full#supplementary-material
References
Abiolu, R. T. I., Linganiso, L. Z., and Patrick, H. O. (2022). Nurturing inclusivity among Durban University of Technology students through reflective writing. HTS Teol. Stud. 78. doi: 10.4102/hts.v78i2.7680
Acosta-Vargas, P., Acosta-Vargas, G., Salvador-Acosta, B., and Jadán-Guerrero, J. (2024). Addressing web accessibility challenges with generative artificial intelligence tools for inclusive education. In: 2024 Tenth International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), pp. 1–7.
Ajani, O. A. (2024). Enhancing pre-service teacher education curriculum for English language instruction in South African classrooms: navigating technological advancements and cultural diversity. World J. Engl. Lang. 14:234. doi: 10.5430/wjel.v14n6p234
Al Omoush, M. H., Salih, S. E., and Mehigan, T. (2023). Technology-enhanced inclusive mathematics learning: promoting equity and lifelong learning opportunities for vision-impaired students. In: 2023 IEEE International Humanitarian Technology Conference (IHTC), pp. 1–6.
Albalhareth, A. H., and Saleem, S. S. (2023). Teacher satisfaction with the availability of assistive Technologies for Students with sensory impairments in inclusive schools. Int. J. Educ. Math. Sci. Technol. 11, 1204–1218. doi: 10.46328/ijemst.3541
Alcívar, N. S., Toala, L. P., Ramírez, J. E., and Ponce Villamar, E. (2022). Technologies in Inclusive Education for children with autism Spectrum disorder: experiences of use in developing economies. Rev. Iberica Sist. Tecnol. Inf. 2022, 63–89.
Alhabahbe, F. A., and Alhadidi, M. S. (2022). The degree to which students with visual impairments in Jordanian public schools use their assistive technology to study subjects in inclusive schools from their point of view. Dirasat Hum. Soc. Sci. 49, 451–466. doi: 10.35516/hum.v49i2.1805
Alkeraida, A. (2024). Teachers’ competencies in implementing technologies and artificial intelligence applications to teach students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms in Saudi Arabia. Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 112, 177–195.
Asongu, S. A., Adegboye, A., Ejemeyovwi, J., and Umukoro, O. (2021). The mobile phone technology, gender inclusive education and public accountability in sub-Saharan Africa. Telecommun. Policy 45:102108. doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102108
Asongu, S. A., Orim, S.-M. I., and Nting, R. T. (2019). Inequality, information technology and inclusive education in sub-Saharan Africa. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 146, 380–389. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.06.006
Augusthian, P. D., Lipin, R., Jonathan, D. R., Solomon, R. V., and Wilson, P. (2022). Service learning science camps among Tribals as a tool for capacity building among students - a step toward inclusive chemistry education. J. Chem. Educ. 99, 1700–1707. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01242
Barbetta, P. M. (2023). Remedial and compensatory writing technologies for middle school students with learning disabilities and their classmates in inclusive classrooms. Prev. Sch. Fail. 68, 340–351. doi: 10.1080/1045988X.2023.2259837
Berrones-Yaulema, L. P. B., and Buenaño-Barreno, P. N. B. (2023). ChatGPT en el ámbito educativo. Esprint Investig. 2, 45–54. doi: 10.61347/ei.v2i2.57
Blavt, O., Iedynak, G., Galamanzhuk, L., Helzhynska, T., Nosko, Y., Kachurak, Y., et al. (2024). Determining the reliability of software electronic engineering tools in the control of vestibular disorders in inclusive physical education of students. Phys. Educ. Theory Methodol. 24, 952–960. doi: 10.17309/tmfv.2024.6.13
Blavt, O., Iedynak, G., Pereverzieva, S., Holub, V., and Melnyk, S. (2023). Increasing the reliability of test control using information technologies in inclusive physical education. Phys. Educ. Theory Methodol. 23, 607–613. doi: 10.17309/tmfv.2023.4.16
Boatright, D., Nguyen, M., Hill, K., Berg, D., Castillo-Page, L., Anderson, N., et al. (2024). Development of a tool to measure student perceptions of equity and inclusion in medical schools. JAMA Netw. Open 7:e240001. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.0001
Brown, B., Boda, P., Ribay, K., Wilsey, M., and Perez, G. (2021). A technological bridge to equity: how VR designed through culturally relevant principles impact students appreciation of science. Learn. Media Technol. 46, 564–584. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2021.1948427
Buenaño-Barreno, P. N. B. (2024). Políticas y prácticas de educación inclusiva en Latinoamérica: una revisión sistemática. Rev. Investig. Educ. Niveles 1, 14–30. doi: 10.61347/rien.v1i2.61
Bulathwela, S., Pérez-Ortiz, M., Holloway, C., Cukurova, M., and Shawe-Taylor, J. (2024). Artificial intelligence alone will not democratise education: on educational inequality, techno-solutionism and inclusive tools. Sustainability 16:781. doi: 10.3390/su16020781
Burbage, A. K., Gesing, P., and Ashley, D. (2023). Protocol for applying the learning environment diversity, equity, and inclusion tool to asynchronous health professions courses. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 5:100277. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100277
Castellano-Beltran, A., Moriña, A., and Carballo, R. (2024). Educational technology as an inclusive tool for students with disabilities: experiences of Spanish university professors. Rev. Bras. Educ. Espec. 30:e0180. doi: 10.1590/1980-54702024v30e0180
Chambers, D. (2020). Assistive technology supporting inclusive education: existing and emerging trends. Int. Perspect. Incl. Educ. 14, 1–16. doi: 10.1108/S1479-363620200000014001
Chauhan, E., and Anand, S. (2023). Guided heritage walks as a tool for inclusive heritage education: case study of New Delhi. J. Cult. Herit. Manage. Sustain. Dev. 13, 253–268. doi: 10.1108/JCHMSD-08-2020-0120
Chawla, S., and Sharma, A. (2023). But where will all the women come from? Tackling the supply side of gender diversity in the technology workforce. Why do (female) graduate students avoid or take up ‘technology oriented’ courses? AIP Conference Proceedings 2909, 080001.
Chiu, T. K. (2020). Strategic use of content-specific and content-neutral technologies to cater learning diversity in mathematics. In: Conference: International Conference of Learning Sciences, [International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS)]. Available at: https://repository.isls.org/bitstream/1/6407/1/1717-1718.pdf (Accessed January 13, 2025).
Chiu, T. K. F., and Lim, C. P. (2020). Strategic use of Technology for Inclusive Education in Hong Kong: a content-level perspective. ECNU rev. Educ. 3, 715–734. doi: 10.1177/2096531120930861
Cobian, K. P., Hurtado, S., Romero, A. L., and Gutzwa, J. A. (2024). Enacting inclusive science: culturally responsive higher education practices in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM). PLoS One 19:e0293953. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293953
Coker, H., and Mercieca, D. (2023). “Digital Technology for Inclusive Education: reflecting on the role of teachers” in Inclusion, Equity, Diversity, and Social Justice in Education. eds. S. Weuffen, J. Burke, M. Plunkett, A. Goriss-Hunter, and S. Emmett (Berlin: Springer), 233–243.
Collazo, A. B. (2022). Innovative actions and practices as tools for the promotion of inclusive education. En Claves Pensam. 2022:503. doi: 10.46530/ECDP.V0I31.503
Costa, A. O., Araujo, A. S. F., Castro, T. H. C., Oliveira, E. H. T., Moreira, E. A., Vega, K. C., et al. (2022). “Fun learning in inclusive education: an approach using beauty technology, a tangible artefact, and affective states evaluation” in The 24 th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. eds. M. Chang, N. S. Chen, M. Dascalu, D. G. Sampson, A. Tlili, and S. Trausan-Matu (Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.), 266–268.
Cruz, M. F., Vargas, M. E. R., Cadena, K. A. Á., and Delgado, D. C. O. (2021). Studying health and inclusive education: sentiment analysis using neutrosophy as a research tool. Neutrosophic. Sets Syst. 42, 325–332. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4718180
Daems, J., Delien, T., Bonroy, B., Pitteljon, H., Aristidou, X., Efstathiadou, M., et al. (2023). “The design and implementation of technology-based inclusive classroom activities in inclusive early childhood education and care: a pilot study in four European countries” in Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. eds. D. Archambault and G. Kouroupetroglou (Amsterdam: IOS Press BV), 535–542.
Demetriou, K. (2023). Strengths and weaknesses of using educational technology in inclusive settings with limited available resources: reflections on a classroom-based computer-mediated collaborative learning approach. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 18, 279–303. doi: 10.1504/IJLT.2023.134582
Desideri, L., Mavrou, K., Brunetti, E., Di Fuccio, R., Pagliara, S., Mouka, M., et al. (2023). Touching” stories: towards the development of tangible user interfaces story-building authoring tool for inclusive education. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 306, 551–556. doi: 10.3233/SHTI230676
Dimitrova, M., Krastev, A., Zahariev, R., Vrochidou, E., Bazinas, C., Yaneva, T., et al. (2020). “Robotic Technology for Inclusive Education: a cyber-physical system approach to pedagogical rehabilitation” in ACM International Conference Proceeding Series Technical University of Sofia 8 St Kliment Ohridski blvd, Sofia. eds. T. Vassilev and T. R. Ruse (New York: Association for Computing Machinery), 293–299.
Diolaiuti, G., Maugeri, M., Senese, A., Panizza, M., Ambrosini, R., Ficetola, G. F., et al. (2021). Immersive and virtual tools to see and understand climate CHANGE impacts on glaciers: a new challenge for scientific dissemination and inclusive education. Geogr. Fis. Din. Quat. 44, 67–77. doi: 10.4461/GFDQ.2021.44.6
Draper, E. A. (2024). Using technology to support students with disabilities in inclusive music classrooms. J. Gen. Music. Educ. 37, 39–41. doi: 10.1177/27527646241234886
Drushlyak, M., Semenikhina, O., Kharchenko, I., Mulesa, P., and Shamonia, V. (2023). Effectiveness of digital Technologies in Inclusive Learning for teacher preparation. J. Learn. Dev. 10, 177–195. doi: 10.56059/jl4d.v10i2.777
Du, X., and Meier, E. B. (2020). “Technology and special education: designing effective professional development for equitable and inclusive classrooms” in Learn. Conference, CSCL. eds. M. Gresalfi and I. S. Horn (Buffalo, NY: International Society of the Learning Sciences), 2349–2350.
Ekeng-Itua, R. M., Hanzel-Sello, G., and Gruber, D. (2021). Experiential learning during COVID-19: a systemic approach for increasing diversity in Engineering & Engineering Technology. Available at: https://peer.asee.org/experiential-learning-during-covid-19-a-systemic-approach-for-increasing-diversity-in-engineering-engineering-technology (Accessed January 20, 2025).
Ellis, K. (2020). Technology and inclusive learning: an interview with Dr Kirsten Ellis, senior lecturer at the Department of Human Centred Computing. Biochemist 42, 30–31. doi: 10.1042/BIO20200076
Espinosa-Castaneda, R., and Medellin-Castillo, H. I. (2021). Virtual haptic perception as an educational assistive technology: a case study in inclusive education. IEEE Trans. Haptic 14, 152–160. doi: 10.1109/TOH.2020.3001586
Fälth, L., and Selenius, H. (2024). Primary school teachers’ use and perception of digital technology in early reading and writing education in inclusive settings. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 19, 790–799. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2022.2125089
Fang, M., Abdallah, A. K., and Vorfolomeyeva, O. (2024). Collaborative AI-enhanced digital mind-mapping as a tool for stimulating creative thinking in inclusive education for students with neurodevelopmental disorders. BMC Psychol. 12:488. doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01975-4
Fernandez, S. (2021). Making space in higher education: disability, digital technology, and the inclusive prospect of digital collaborative making. Int. J. Inclusive Educ. 25, 1375–1390. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2019.1610806
Gandolfi, E., Ferdig, R. E., and Kratcoski, A. (2021). A new educational normal an intersectionality-led exploration of education, learning technologies, and diversity during COVID-19. Technol. Soc. 66:101637. doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101637
Garza, T. J. (2023). You’re still muted: technology, access, equity, and world language learning. East European Journal. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/114808058/Youre_Still_Muted_Technology_Access_Equity_and_World_Language_Learning (Accessed January 20, 2025).
Ge, X., Liu, J. C., and Li, Z. (2024). Guest editorial: educational design research for digital learning technologies to promote inclusion, equity, and accessibility. Educ. Technol. Soc. 27, 235–237. doi: 10.30191/ETS.202410_27(4).SP01
Geering, N., and Hayhoe, S. (2023). “The sound pad project: co-creation of Breakin’, dance education, and an inclusive educational technology” in Music for Incl. And healing in schools and beyond: Hip hop, techno, grime, and more. ed. N. Geering (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press), 219–242.
Ghosh, N., Ayer, B., and Sharma, R. (2022). Technology integrated inclusive learning spaces for industry 4.0 adaptive learners- LUR model for sustainable competency development. in ECS Transactions, (Institute of Physics), pp. 13823–13832.
González, J. L., and Estrella, J. (2023). Educación del Siglo XXI, competencias, metodologías y estrategias. Esprint Investig. 2, 5–15. doi: 10.61347/ei.v2i1.50
Gordon, M., and Leutenegger, S. (2022). Piloting a JEDI (justice, ethics, diversity and inclusion) technology ethics living and learning community. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings. Available at: https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10491131-piloting-jedi-justice-ethics-diversity-inclusion-technology-ethics-living-learning-community (Accessed January 13, 2025).
Grindei, L., Blanc, S., and Benlloch-Dualde, J. V. (2019). “ESGarden-implementing a school-university collaboration project for inclusive and equitable education through technology” in Annual Conference of the European Association for Education in Electrical and Information Engineering. ed. P. Z. Zahariev (Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc).
Grindei, L., Blanc, S., Benlloch-Dualde, J. V., Ballester, N. M., and Knez, U. (2024). Development of a repository of technologies and tools to improve digital skills and inclusivity in education, based on school gardens., in S. Vlad and N. M. Roman IFMBE Proceeding. (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), pp. 154–162.
Gupta, S., Das, P., Neogi, B., Roy, A., Sur, M., Maity, M., et al. (2024). Technology enhanced learning driven music inspired LEARN with NOODLE model for inclusive education. J. Eng. Edu. Transform. 37, 156–164. doi: 10.16920/jeet/2024/v37is2/24036
Gweshe, G. T., and Chiware, M. (2023). “Gender-inclusive education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in Postindependence Zimbabwe” in Advances in African Economic, Social and Political Development. ed. G. T. Gweshe (Berlin: Springer Nature), 295–310.
Han, J., and Shim, Y. (2023). “Inclusive Design of a Tool to screen literacy of lower grade elementary school students∗” in 2024 IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering. eds. O. K. Hussain, S. P. Ma, X. Lu, and K. M. Chao (Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.), 178–180.
Higgins, E., Posada, J., Kimble-Brown, Q., Abler, S., Coy, A., and Hamidi, F. (2023). Investigating an equity-based participatory approach to technology-rich learning in community recreation centers., in E. Higgins Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery), 1–18.
Horna-Saldaña, C., and Canaleta, X. (2024). Application of universal Design for Learning and Digital Fabrication in the creation of a tool for inclusive teaching of the ordering of chemical elements. J. Chem. Educ. 101, 5261–5271. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00679
Horna-Saldaña, C., Canaleta, X., Fonseca, D., Amo-Filva, D., and Caro-Via, S. (2024). Development of inclusive tools through digital fabrication for chemistry learning in students with and without visual impairment., in Proceedings of TEEM 2023. J. A. Gonçalves, J. L. S. Lima, J. P. Coelho, F. J. García-Peñalvo, and A. García-Holgado (Singapore: Springer Nature), 604–612.
Houston-Wilson, C., and Lieberman, L. J. (2020). A needs assessment for inclusive physical education: a tool for professional development. J. Health Phys. Recreat. Dance 91, 43–48. doi: 10.1080/07303084.2020.1781718
Huang, Y., and Lan, X. (2024). “The integration path of AI technology and inclusive preschool education quality” in Application of big data, Blockchain, and internet of things for education Informatization. eds. Y. Zhang and N. Shah (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland), 353–363.
Hunt, P. F. (2021). Inclusive education: the case for early identification and early intervention in assistive technology. Assist. Technol. 33, S94–S101. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2021.1974122
Izario, K., Izario, D., Iano, Y., Brancalhone, J., Gomes, G., and Pajuelo, D. (2021). “Technology and inclusive education, hybrid web application - entertainment and learning” in The Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies. eds. Y. Iano, O. Saotome, G. Kemper, A. C. Mendes de Seixas, and G. Gomes de Oliveira (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), 3–9.
Kapieva, K. R., Korolkova, V. A., Lakhmotkina, V. I., and Yastrebova, L. A. (2023). Digital technologies of methodological support for the professional growth of special and inclusive education teachers. Perspekt. Nauki Obraz. 62, 658–676. doi: 10.32744/pse.2023.2.39
Karagianni, E., and Drigas, A. (2023a). New Technologies for Inclusive Learning for students with special educational needs. Int. J. Online. Biomed. Eng. 19, 4–21. doi: 10.3991/ijoe.v19i05.36417
Karagianni, E., and Drigas, A. (2023b). Using new technologies and mobiles for students with disabilities to build a sustainable inclusive learning and development ecosystem. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 17, 57–73. doi: 10.3991/ijim.v17i01.36359
Kim, G. M., and Higgs, J. (2023). Exploring equity issues with technology in secondary literacy education. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 32, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2022.2150288
Kirupainayagam, D. S., and Sutha, J. (2022). Technology facilitation on inclusive learning; higher education institutions in Sri Lanka. Int. J. Educ. Manage. 36, 441–469. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-02-2020-0048
Knestis, K., Cheng, J., Fontaine, C. M., and Feng, R. (2022). Engaging government-industry-university partnerships to further gender equity in STEM workforce education through technology and information system learning tools. J. Inf. Syst. Educ. 33:23.
Kormos, E., and Julio, L. (2020). Contrasting instructional technology adoption in K-12 education to promote digital equity. Int. J. Web Based Learn. Teach. Technol. 15, 19–30. doi: 10.4018/IJWLTT.2020070102
Krasnopevtseva, T. F., Vinokurova, I. V., Filchenkova, I. F., Paputkova, G. A., and Smirnova, Z. V. (2022). “Technologies for assessing the level of socio-psychological well-being of students studying in inclusive groups at the university” in Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. ed. T. F. Krasnopevtseva (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), 495–505.
Kristén, L., Klingvall, B., and Ring, M. (2022). The co-development of inclusive tools in physical education for pupils with and without disabilities. Sport Soc. 25, 1000–1016. doi: 10.1080/17430437.2020.1819243
Kross, S., and Guo, P. J. (2019). End-user programmers repurposing end-user programming tools to Foster diversity in adult end-user programming education. In: 2019 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), pp. 65–74.
Kuvshinova, I. A., Mitsan, E. L., Razumova, E. M., and Shuleva, E. I. (2019). Modern technologies of inclusive higher education. Vysshee Obrazovanie Rossii 28, 138–148. doi: 10.31992/0869-3617-2019-28-6-138-148
Kwawukumey, G., Nath, S., Das, S., and Ojedele-Adejumo, T. (2024). Bridging coalitional divides in the digital age: international student perspectives on diversity and emerging technology. In: Proceedings of the 42nd ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery), pp. 245–247.
Lawan, A. A., Ibrahim Yarima, K., Ibrahim Usman, H., Isah Abba, S., Usman Yakubu, H., and Garba Musa, A. (2023). A systematic literature review on the efficacy of emerging Computer Technologies in Inclusive Education for students with autism Spectrum disorder. OBM Neurobiol. 7, 1–27. doi: 10.21926/obm.neurobiol.2302172
Layachi, A., and Pitchford, N. J. (2024). Formative evaluation of an interactive personalised learning technology to inform equitable access and inclusive education for children with special educational needs and disabilities. Tech. Knowl. Learn 1:739. doi: 10.1007/s10758-024-09739-0
Lee, U. S. A. (2022). “Technology-mediated case-based learning for equity in teacher education: design and implementation from a sociocultural Lens” in Designing technology-mediated case learning in higher education: A global perspective. eds. C. L. G. Quek and Q. Wang (Singapore: Springer Nature), 119–139.
Lim, C. P., Ra, S., Chin, B., and Wang, T. (2020). Leveraging information and communication technologies (ICT) to enhance education equity, quality, and efficiency: case studies of Bangladesh and Nepal. Educ. Media Int. 57, 87–111. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2020.1786774
Lin, M. P.-C., Liu, A. L., Poitras, E., Chang, M., and Chang, D. H. (2024). An exploratory study on the efficacy and inclusivity of AI Technologies in Diverse Learning Environments. Sustain. For. 16:8992. doi: 10.3390/su16208992
Lin, T., and Riccomini, P. (2024). Inclusive education in rural settings: leveraging Technology for Improved Math Learning Outcomes among Students with Disabilities. J. Spec. Educ. Technol. 1:45. doi: 10.1177/01626434241263045
Liping, H. (2021). Research on theoretical model and realization path of 5G technology promoting education equity. In: 2021 2nd international conference on computers, information processing and advanced education. New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery), pp. 1507–1511.
Lusigi, A. (2019). Higher education, technology, and equity in Africa. New Rev. Inf. Netw. 24, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/13614576.2019.1608576
Lynch, P., Singal, N., and Francis, G. A. (2024). Educational technology for learners with disabilities in primary school settings in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic literature review. Educ. Rev. 76, 405–431. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2022.2035685
Maćkowski, M., Kawulok, M., Brzoza, P., and Spinczyk, D. (2023). “Method and tools to supporting math learning in inclusive education of blind students” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. ed. M. Maćkowski (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), 42–53.
Maquera-Maquera, Y. A., Olivera-Condori, E., Bermejo-Gonzáles, L. Y., and Bermejo-Paredes, S. (2024). Tecnologías inmersivas y atención a la diversidad territorial en Educación Física. Retos: nuevas tendencias en educación física, deporte y recreación. pp. 141–150.
Mariappan, P., Khairani, M. Z., Yaakob, M. N., Chanthiran, M., and Cubalit, A. N. (2024). Technology applications through cooperative learning in visual arts education among students in inclusive education programs: a fuzzy Delphi approach. J. Adv. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 33, 407–419. doi: 10.37934/araset.33.3.407419
Marimuthu, S., and Cheong, L. S. (2015). Inclusive education for social transformation. Procedia. Soc. Behav. Sci. 172, 317–322. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.370
Materazzini, M., Melis, A., Zingoni, A., Baldacci, D., Calabrò, G., and Taborri, J. (2024). Which are the needs of people with learning disorders for inclusive museums? Design of OLOS®—an innovative audio-visual technology. Appl. Sci. 14:711. doi: 10.3390/app14093711
Mavangere, N., Edifor, E. E., Adedoyin, F., Apeh, E., and Owusu, A. (2022). Education inequality in underserved regions: exploring the role of technology to promote diversity and inclusivity. In: Proceeding IEEE Interantional Confeference E-bus. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 288–293.
Mawasi, A., Aguilera, E., Wylie, R., and Gee, E. (2020). Neutrality, “new” digital divide, and openness paradox: equity in learning environments mediated by educational technology. Available at: https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/6380 (Accessed January 13, 2025).
Mayfield, E., Madaio, M., Prabhumoye, S., Gerritsen, D., McLaughlin, B., Dixon-Román, E., et al. (2019). Equity beyond Bias in language Technologies for Education., in H. Yannakoudakis, E. Kochmar, C. Leacock, N. Madnani, I. Pilán, and T. Zesch Proceedings of the Fourteenth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications. (Florence, Italy: Association for Computational Linguistics), pp. 444–460.
McDonald, N., Massey, A., and Hamidi, F. (2023). Elicitation and empathy with AI-enhanced adaptive assistive technologies (AATs): towards sustainable inclusive design method education. J. Probl. Based. Learn. High. Educ. 11, 78–99. doi: 10.54337/ojs.jpblhe.v11i2.7667
McMahon, D. D., and Walker, Z. (2019). Leveraging emerging technology to design an inclusive future with universal design for learning. Cent. Educ. Policy Stud. J. 9, 75–93. doi: 10.26529/cepsj.639
Merzon, E., Shterts, O., Sibgatullina-Denis, I., and Sharafullina, Z. (2022). Digital technologies as a means of developing technical abilities in children with writing impairments in an inclusive education. Krasnoyarsk: American Institute of Physics Inc.
Mihovska, A., Prevedourou, D., Tsankova, J., Manolova, A., and Poulkov, V. (2021). Building adaptive and inclusive education readiness through digital technologies. In: 2024 Joint International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 384–388.
Montoya, J. K., Yanza-Chávez, W. G., Molina-Granja, F. T., and Ortega Mosquera, J. M. (2024). Impact of artificial intelligence technologies on inclusive education: a study in students aged 15 to 18. ENCUENTROS. Rev. Cienc. Hum. Teoría Soc. 21, 116–125. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11118100
Mosier, R., Adhikari, S., Langar, S., and Sulbaran, T. (2024). Technological infrastructure equity for minority serving institutions in construction education. Available at: https://peer.asee.org/technological-infrastructure-equity-for-minority-serving-institutions-in-construction-education (Accessed January 15, 2025).
Nasyrova, E. F., and Muller, O. Y. (2023). Use of HUMANITARIAN technologies by future PE teachers in inclusive education. Human Sport. Med. 23, 91–97. doi: 10.14529/hsm23s214
Olivares Granados, S. A., Gonzalez Reyes, J. A., Gomez Campos, S. G., Torres Arias, E. L., and Granados Magaña, J. A. (2019). Functional diversity at Universidad Autonoma de Nayarit. Public policies and Accesible Technologies in Higher Education Institutions., in 2019 international conference on inclusive technologies and education (CONTIE), pp. 141–1413.
Orser, B., Riding, A., and Li, Y. (2019). Technology adoption and gender-inclusive entrepreneurship education and training. Int. J. Gender Entrepreneurship 11, 273–298. doi: 10.1108/IJGE-02-2019-0026
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Rev. Esp. Cardiol. 74, 790–799. doi: 10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
Palla, L., and Vallberg Roth, A.-C. (2022). Inclusive ideals and special educational tools in and out of tact: didactical voices on teaching in language and communication in Swedish early childhood education. Int. J. Early Years Educ. 30, 387–402. doi: 10.1080/09669760.2020.1733939
Peruzzo, F., and Allan, J. (2024). Rethinking inclusive (digital) education: lessons from the pandemic to reconceptualise inclusion through convivial technologies. Learn. Media Technol. 49, 244–258. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2022.2131817
Puentes, G. S. S., Moreno, M. C., Sarmiento, B. D., and Suarez, O. J. (2024). “Robotic arm based on artificial intelligence for learning braille as an inclusive tool in educational environments” in Communications in Computer and Information Science. eds. A. D. Orjuela-Cañón, J. A. Lopez, and J. D. Arias-Londoño (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), 138–153.
Raja, D. S., and Giannoumis, G. A. (2019). “Harnessing technology to realize the right to inclusive education” in International human rights law. ed. D. S. Raja (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 346–372.
Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Álvarez-Icaza, I., Weber, J., and Casillas-Muñoz, F. A. G. (2024). Open and inclusive Technologies in the Complexity of future education: designing a research-based model. Pixel-Bit, 123–139. doi: 10.12795/pixelbit.103582
Rasool, J., and Smith, C. H. (2019). “Improving higher education quality in Jordan using Mobile Technologies for Better Socio-economic Diversity Integration of disadvantaged groups using a Mobile multimedia/augmented reality workflow” in EAI international conference on technology, innovation, entrepreneurship and education. eds. A. Reyes-Munoz, P. Zheng, D. Crawford, and V. Callaghan (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 135–146.
Richter, J., Sharabi, L., Luchmun, R., Geiger, T., Hale, A., and Hall, A. R. (2023). Virtual reality as a tool for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion within the higher education landscape: 15th international conference on computer supported education, CSEDU 2023. Proceedings of the 15th international conference on computer supported education - volume 2, CSEDU 2023, pp. 574–580.
Rizvi, N., Begel, A., and Annabi, H. (2021). Inclusive interpersonal communication education for technology professionals. Association for Information Systems. Available at: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85118606159&partnerID=40&md5=336546bc97769be60791d8545be4846b.
Rocha, D. F. S., Bittencourt, I. I., de Amorim Silva, R., and Ospina, P. L. E. (2023). An assistive technology based on Peirce’s semiotics for the inclusive education of deaf and hearing children. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 22, 1097–1116. doi: 10.1007/s10209-022-00919-2
Rodrigo-Martín, I., Rodrigo-Martín, L., and Mañas-Viniegra, L. (2020). Education, values, technology and music. Aiming for an inclusive model committed to equality and interpersonal relations. Rev. Electron. Complut. Invest. Music. 17, 33–47. doi: 10.5209/RECIEM.64141
Rojas Pernia, S., and Haya Salmón, I. (2021). Inclusive research, learning disabilities, and inquiry and reflection as training tools: a study on experiences from Spain. Disabil. Soc. 36, 978–998. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2020.1779038
Rosado-Castellano, F., Sánchez-Herrera, S., Pérez-Vera, L., and Fernández-Sánchez, M. J. (2022). Inclusive education as a tool of promoting quality in education: teachers’ perception of the educational inclusion of students with disabilities. Educ. Sci. 12:471. doi: 10.3390/educsci12070471
Ruel, S., and Tajmel, T. (2024). At the intersection of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics and business management in Canadian higher education: an intentional equity, diversity, and inclusion framework. Gender Work Organ. 31, 821–850. doi: 10.1111/gwao.13035
Şahin, F., Kızılaslan, A., and Şimşek, Ö. (2023). Factors influencing the acceptance of assistive technology by teacher candidates in the context of inclusive education and special needs students. Educ. Inf. Technol. 29, 12263–12288. doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12383-3
Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Xiao, K., and Oshima, J. (2022). Artificial intelligence and new Technologies in Inclusive Education for minority students: a systematic review. Sustain. For. 14:13572. doi: 10.3390/su142013572
Saltanat, A., Ainagul, R., Raifa, D., Karlygash, T., and Sara, R. (2022). Organisation of volunteer activities of students in the framework of inclusive education through innovative technologies. World J. Edu. Tech. 14, 1246–1258. doi: 10.18844/wjet.v14i5.8054
Sandoval, M., Muñoz, Y., and Márquez, C. (2021). Supporting schools in their journey to inclusive education: review of guides and tools. Support Learn. 36, 20–42. doi: 10.1111/1467-9604.12337
Sarsenbayeva, B., Seksembaevich, M. M., Aitbaevna, A. Z., Alzhanov, G., Zhasulan, K., and Mynzhasarovich, B. D. (2022). Technology of school-family cooperation in promoting inclusive education. World J. Educ. Tech. 14, 825–836. doi: 10.18844/wjet.v14i3.7363
Seale, J. (2023). It’s not all doom and gloom: what the pandemic has taught us about digitally inclusive practices that support people with learning disabilities to access and use technologies. Br. J. Learn. Disabil. 51, 218–228. doi: 10.1111/bld.12497
Shestakevych, T., Pasichnyk, V., and Kunanets, N. (2019). “Information and technology support of inclusive education in Ukraine” in Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. eds. Z. Hu, I. Dychka, M. He, and S. Petoukhov (Berlin: Springer Verlag), 746–758.
Shmeleva, Z. N., and Litovchenko, V. I. (2022). The use of digital Technologies in the Inclusive Education Implementation at the university. College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics Inc.
Shumilova, E. A., Kuzma, L. P., and Makuha, L. S. (2022). Digital tools for assessing educational achievements by students with disabilities in an inclusive educational environment. Perspekt. Nauki Obraz. 60, 337–351. doi: 10.32744/pse.2022.6.19
Singh-Pillay, A. (2023). South African postgraduate STEM students’ use of Mobile digital technologies to facilitate participation and digital equity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustain. For. 15:13418. doi: 10.3390/su151813418
Smeins, E. M., Wildenburg, K., and Duarte, J. (2022). The use of digital tools in pre-service teachers’ professional development towards linguistic diversity in primary education. Sustain. Multiling. 21, 166–196. doi: 10.2478/sm-2022-0017
Srivastava, S., Varshney, A., Katyal, S., Kaur, R., and Gaur, V. (2021). A smart learning assistance tool for inclusive education. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 40, 11981–11994. doi: 10.3233/JIFS-210075
Stepanova, A., Anwar, S., Laya, J. C., Zarikian, C. A. A., Martinez, N. E., and Hammond, T. A. (2024). Board 379: SedimentSketch, teaching tool for undergraduate sedimentology to provide equitable and inclusive learning for Hispanic students. In: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.
Šumak, B., López-De-Ipiña, D., Dziabenko, O., Correia, S. D., De Carvalho, L. M. S., Lopes, S., et al. (2024). AI-based education tools for enabling inclusive education: challenges and benefits. In: ICT Electron. Conv., MIPRO - Proc. Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., pp. 472–477.
Sunny, B., Shukla, N., Mishra, A. K., and Jaheer Mukthar, K. P. (2024). “Addressing the educational technology divide in India: an analysis of access, adoption, and equity in digital learning” in Information and communication Technology in Technical and Vocational Education and training for sustainable and equal opportunity: Business governance and digitalization of business education. eds. R. Khamis Hamdan, A. Hamdan, B. Alareeni, and R. E. Khoury (Singapore: Springer Nature), 103–112.
Suzianti, A., Mubarak, A., Edrisy, F., Sausan, A. R., Lalita, C. N., and Usman, X. (2019). Inclusive design of teaching aids for social science learning process for elementary and middle school students based on creative mini pc raspberry technology. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng 692:2046:012046. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/692/1/012046
Tasker, E. J., Ishimaru, K., Guttenberg, N., and Foriel, J. (2020). Earth-like: an education & outreach tool for exploring the diversity of planets like our own. Int. J. Astrobiol. 19, 264–275. doi: 10.1017/S1473550419000326
Tejera, A., Questa-Torterolo, M., and Cabrera Borges, C. (2023). Development and quality management to achieve equity in higher education: policies and tools. J. Latinos Educ. 22, 2038–2050. doi: 10.1080/15348431.2022.2084097
Tomczyk, Ł., Martins, V. F., de la Higuera Amato, C. A., Eliseo, M. A., and Silveira, I. F. (2021). “The use of technology on inclusive education in Brazil - a discussion on the teacher and student views” in Adv. Intell. Sys. Comput. ed. T. Antipova (Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH), 105–115.
Toto, G. A., Marinelli, C. V., Cavioni, V., Di Furia, M., Traetta, L., Iuso, S., et al. (2024). “What is the role of Technologies for Inclusive Education? A systematic review” in Higher education learning methodologies and technologies online. eds. G. Casalino, R. Di Fuccio, G. Fulantelli, P. Raviolo, P. C. Rivoltella, and D. Taibi (Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland), 533–565.
Tripak, M., Toporivska, Y., Akimjak, A., Nowak, J., Lebid, T., and Vasylkiv, O. (2024). Economic efficiency of the newest Technologies of the Distance Institutionalization of inclusive education in the conditions of a special educational environment. In: 2024 14th International Conference on Advanced Computer Information Technologies (ACIT), pp. 314–317.
Tyutryumova, E., and Pomytkina, T. (2021). The use of information and computer technologies in the conditions of inclusive education. E3S Web Conference. Les Ulis, France: EDP Sciences).
Utami, A., and Palacios Hidalgo, F. J. (2022). “Teachers’ perceptions towards technology integration into inclusive early childhood education: a case study in the Spanish context” in Research Anthology on Early Childhood Development and School Transition in the Digital Era. ed. A. Utami (Pennsylvania, US: IGI Global), 257–276.
Uygur, M., Ayçiçek, B., Doğrul, H., and Yelken, T. Y. (2020). Investigating stakeholders’ views on technology integration: the role of educational leadership for sustainable inclusive education. Sustain. For. 12, 1–24. doi: 10.3390/su122410354
Valdivieso, K. D., and Jadán-Guerrero, J. (2023). “Technological accessibility plan for students with disabilities: An experience in inclusive education” in Perspectives and trends in education and technology. eds. A. Mesquita, A. Abreu, J. V. Carvalho, and C. H. P. de Mello (Singapore: Springer Nature), 577–586.
Vargas Castro, K. V., Bravo Alvarado, R. N., Vargas Castro, M. F., and Ibarra Freire, M. C. (2024). Tecnologías educativas inclusivas en actividades físico-deportivas orientada al alumnado con necesidades educativas especiales. Retos: nuevas tendencias en educación física, deporte y recreación, pp. 18–23.
Vechkanova, I. G., Babkina, N. V., and Yurchenko, T. I. (2022). “Gaming Technologies in Psychological and Pedagogical Habilitation of preschool children with developmental delay in inclusive education” in Education of children with special needs: Theoretical foundations and practical experience in the selected works of Russian, Belarus, and pol. Scholars. ed. I. G. Vechkanova (Berlin: Springer International Publishing), 71–78.
Vishnevsky, V. A., Ukhvatova, I. A., and Malkov, M. N. (2019). Quest technologies for corrective inclusive physical education service. Teor. Prakt. Fiz. Kult. 2019, 91–92.
Vitale, A., and Iacono, U. D. (2024). Using social robots as inclusive educational technology for mathematics learning through storytelling. Eur. Public Soc. Innov. Rev. 9, 1–17. doi: 10.31637/epsir-2024-672
Waizmann, B., Schuhbauer, H., and Brockmann, P. (2020). Smart technology to improve cultural and gender diversity in engineering education. In: 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 61–65.
Weisberg, L., and Dawson, K. (2023). The intersection of equity pedagogy and technology integration in preservice teacher education: a scoping review. J. Teach. Educ. 74, 327–342. doi: 10.1177/00224871231182129
Wen, W., and Castek, J. (2020). “Equity, literacies, and learning in technology-rich makerspaces” in Handbook of research on integrating digital technology with literacy pedagogies. eds. P. M. Sullivan, J. L. Lantz, and B. A. Sullivan (Pennsylvania, US: IGI Global Scientific Publishing), 150–173.
Wood, J. (2021). Promoting inclusive practice: video CVs as a Teaching & Learning Tool in the language classroom. In: International Conference on Higher Education Advances. Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, pp. 753–761.
Wu, I.-C., Lo, C. O., Chrostowski, M., Tsai, K.-F., and Sue, D. (2023). A case study of self-inclusion: self-knowledge as a potential tool for inclusive education. Trends Psychol. 2023:324. doi: 10.1007/s43076-023-00324-5
Yang, L., Pang, F., and Sin, K.-F. (2023). Assessing the psychometric properties of the practice and product inventory of supporting students with ASD (PPI-SSA): a concise assessment tool for teachers in inclusive classrooms. Sustain. For. 15:576. doi: 10.3390/su151914576
Yaskevich, D. (2021). Digital technologies, as a factor in the search for a new quality of inclusive education. In: E3S Web Conference. EDP Sciences.
Ydesen, C., and Elfert, M. (2023). SDG4 as a global governance tool and the quest for recognizing diversity – implications emerging from the intersections between inclusive education and assessment. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 103:102932. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102932
Yenduri, G., Kaluri, R., Rajput, D. S., Lakshmanna, K., Gadekallu, T. R., Mahmud, M., et al. (2023). From assistive technologies to Metaverse - Technologies in Inclusive Higher Education for students with specific learning difficulties: a review. IEEE Access 11, 64907–64927. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3289496
Yusuf, M. (2020). The use of technology and teachers’ competency development in inclusive education learning: a study in Central Java, Indonesia. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Change 13, 141–153.
Zeagler, C., Lish, J., Cheezburger, E., Woo, M., Tynan, K. L., Morton, E., et al. (2021). YOU BETTA WERK: Using wearable technology performance driven inclusive transdisciplinary collaboration to facilitate authentic learning. In: TEI - proc. Int. Conf. Tangible, embed., embodied interact. (Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.)
Zeng, Y., Zhang, H., and Lam, J. F. I. (2022). How cultural diversity influences students’ online learning engagement with online technologies—a narrative analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies, (New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery), pp. 9–15.
Keywords: education, accessibility, inclusion, technological tools, hardware, software
Citation: Navas-Bonilla CdR, Guerra-Arango JA, Oviedo-Guado DA and Murillo-Noriega DE (2025) Inclusive education through technology: a systematic review of types, tools and characteristics. Front. Educ. 10:1527851. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1527851
Edited by:
Alexander Minnaert, University of Groningen, NetherlandsReviewed by:
Ángel Freddy Rodríguez Torres, Central University of Ecuador, EcuadorJose Manuel Salum Tome, Temuco Catholic University, Chile
Copyright © 2025 Navas-Bonilla, Guerra-Arango, Oviedo-Guado and Murillo-Noriega. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Carmen del Rosario Navas-Bonilla, Y25hdmFzQHVuYWNoLmVkdS5lYw==