The Policy Deficit in AI x Social-Emotional Learning Research

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.29950v1
• Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 18:25:09 GMT
• Title: The Policy Deficit in AI x Social-Emotional Learning Research
• Abstract summary: We systematically reviewed 65 papers that examine the intersection of AI and SEL.<n>Nearly three-quarters of the studies did not mention policy implications at all.<n>We propose a shift from "implication-as-afterthought" to "implication-as-methodology"
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into social-emotional learning (SEL) initiatives, the need for evidence-based policy has become paramount. We systematically reviewed 65 peer-reviewed papers that examine the intersection of AI and SEL to investigate how these studies articulate policy implications. Our analysis revealed a substantial "policy deficit" in the current AI x SEL literature: nearly three-quarters of the studies did not mention policy implications at all. Using the "WH-question" framework (Who, What, Why, When/Where, and How), we map the policy implications narratives present in the literature and show that they often lack the specificity and actor-oriented guidance required for effective evidence-informed policymaking. We find a significant association between publication venue and policy engagement, suggesting that current academic incentive structures may prioritize technical innovation and pedagogical feasibility over explicit engagement with governance and regulation. This study identifies a "techno-solutionist" trap, where technical potential is foregrounded while the institutional conditions for responsible implementation remain under-specified. We conclude by proposing a shift from "implication-as-afterthought" to "implication-as-methodology" and offer a set of actionable guidelines for researchers, editors, reviewers, and policymakers to bridge the gap between AI innovation and educational governance. Rather than presenting policy as a generic ethical horizon, we argue that AI-SEL studies should systematically specify Who should act, What actions are recommended, Why these actions are needed, When and Where they apply, and How strongly they are framed, thereby strengthening the translation of AI x SEL innovation into educational policy and practice.

Related papers

• Economic Competition, EU Regulation, and Executive Orders: A Framework for Discussing AI Policy Implications in CS Courses [5.898240245765167]
  We argue that discussions of the implications of AI policy are not yet present in the computer science curriculum.<n>We propose guiding questions to frame class discussions around AI policy in technical and non-technical (e.g., ethics) CS courses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T21:26:53Z)
• Advancing Science- and Evidence-based AI Policy [163.43609502905707]
  This paper tackles the problem of how to optimize the relationship between evidence and policy to address the opportunities and challenges of AI.<n>An increasing number of efforts address this problem by often either (i) contributing research into the risks of AI and their effective mitigation or (ii) advocating for policy to address these risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-02T23:20:58Z)
• Position: We Need Responsible, Application-Driven (RAD) AI Research [5.472297350890938]
  This position paper argues that achieving meaningful scientific and societal advances with artificial intelligence (AI) requires a responsible, application-driven approach (RAD) to AI research.<n>We present a vision for the future of application-driven AI research to unlock new value through technically feasible methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-07T03:43:52Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [102.19067750759471]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI.<n>This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• From Guidelines to Governance: A Study of AI Policies in Education [1.9659095632676098]
  This study employs a survey methodology to examine the policy landscape concerning emerging technologies. The majority of institutions lack specialized guide-lines for the ethical deployment of AI tools such as ChatGPT. High schools are less inclined to work on policies than higher educational institutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T20:07:58Z)
• Responsible AI Considerations in Text Summarization Research: A Review of Current Practices [89.85174013619883]
  We focus on text summarization, a common NLP task largely overlooked by the responsible AI community. We conduct a multi-round qualitative analysis of 333 summarization papers from the ACL Anthology published between 2020-2022. We focus on how, which, and when responsible AI issues are covered, which relevant stakeholders are considered, and mismatches between stated and realized research goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T15:35:36Z)
• Tackling problems, harvesting benefits -- A systematic review of the regulatory debate around AI [0.0]
  How to integrate an emerging and all-pervasive technology such as AI into the structures and operations of our society is a question of contemporary politics, science and public debate. This article analyzes the academic debate around the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) The analysis concentrates on societal risks and harms, questions of regulatory responsibility, and possible adequate policy frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-07T11:29:30Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.