Methodological substantiation of the reflective integration of generative artificial intelligence into vocational education

Abstract

The aim of the research is the methodological substantiation of a didactic system for the reflective integration of neural network technologies into vocational education, in which work with a generative tool becomes the subject of learning activity rather than a way of replacing it. The article differentiates between technocratic and reflective models of artificial intelligence application, considered as poles of a single continuum, characterizes three didactic functions of the tool, and systematizes the risks of its uncritical application along with mechanisms for their prevention. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the fact that the proposed system is derived not from the properties of technology, but from the methodology of didactics, activity theory, and the competency-based approach, by virtue of which the imperfection of a generative tool is interpreted here as a didactic resource rather than a flaw to be eliminated. As a result, it is substantiated that the choice between technocratic and reflective models has a value-pedagogical rather than a technical nature and is determined by the attitude toward the subject position of the learner, whereas reflective integration acts as the condition under which the application of a generative tool in specialist training receives pedagogical justification.

References

1. Андреев А. Л. Компетентностная парадигма в образовании: опыт философско-методологического анализа // Педагогика. 2005. № 4.
2. Бернавская М. В., Клещева Н. А. Модель фасилитированного проектного обучения с применением нейросетевых технологий в техническом вузе // Научно-методический электронный журнал «Концепт». 2026. № 1.
3. Бернавская М. В., Клещева Н. А. Принципы цифровой этики использования генеративных моделей искусственного интеллекта при подготовке специалистов в области биотехнологии // Мир науки. Педагогика и психология. 2025. Т. 13. № 6.
4. Гальперин П. Я. Психология как объективная наука: избранные психологические труды. М. – Воронеж: Институт практической психологии; МОДЭК, 1998.
5. Загвязинский В. И. Теория обучения. Современная интерпретация. М.: Академия, 2001.
6. Зимняя И. А. Ключевые компетенции – новая парадигма результата образования // Высшее образование сегодня. 2003. № 5.
7. Краевский В. В., Хуторской А. В. Основы обучения. Дидактика и методика. М.: Академия, 2007.
8. Леонтьев А. Н. Деятельность. Сознание. Личность. М.: Политиздат, 1975.
9. Лернер И. Я. Дидактические основы методов обучения. М.: Педагогика, 1981.
10. Семёнов И. Н., Степанов С. Ю. Рефлексия в организации творческого мышления и саморазвитии личности // Вопросы психологии. 1983. № 2.
11. Сериков В. В. Личностно ориентированное образование: поиск новой парадигмы: монография. М., 1998.
12. Сластёнин В. А., Исаев И. Ф., Шиянов Е. Н. Педагогика. М.: Академия, 2002.
13. Bahroun Z., Anane C., Ahmed V., Zacca A. Transforming Education: A Comprehensive Review of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Educational Settings through Bibliometric and Content Analysis // Sustainability. 2023. Vol. 15. № 17. Art. 12983. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712983
14. Bearman M., Ryan J., Ajjawi R. Discourses of Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: a Critical Literature Review // Higher Education. 2023. Vol. 86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2
15. Crompton H., Burke D. Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: the State of the Field // International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023. Vol. 20. Art. 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8
16. Dignum V. Responsible Artificial Intelligence: How to Develop and Use AI in a Responsible Way. Cham: Springer, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30371-6
17. Fan Y., Tang L., Le H., Shen K., Tan S., Zhao Y., Shen Y., Li X., Gašević D. Beware of metacognitive laziness: effects of generative artificial intelligence on learning motivation, processes, and performance // British Journal of Educational Technology. 2025. Vol. 56. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13544
18. Flavell J. H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry // American Psychologist. 1979. Vol. 34. No. 10. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
19. Floridi L., Cowls J. A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society // Harvard Data Science Review. 2019. Vol. 1. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1
20. Gerlich M. AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking // Societies. 2025. Vol. 15. No. 1. Art. 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010006
21. Greene J. A. Teacher support for metacognition and self-regulated learning: a compelling story and a prototypical model // Metacognition and Learning. 2021. Vol. 16. No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09283-7
22. Jobin A., Ienca M., Vayena E. The Global Landscape of AI Ethics Guidelines // Nature Machine Intelligence. 2019. Vol. 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
23. Kasneci E., Sessler K., Küchemann S., Bannert M., Dementieva D., Fischer F., Gasser U., Groh G., Günnemann S., Hüllermeier E., Krusche S., Kutyniok G., Michaeli T., Nerdel C., Pfeffer J., Poquet O., Sailer M, Schmidt A., Seidel T., Stadler M., Weller J., Kuhn J., Kasneci G. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education // Learning and Individual Differences. 2023. Vol. 103. Art. 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
24. Lo C. K. What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature // Education Sciences. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 4. Art. 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040410
25. Luckin R., Holmes W., Griffiths M., Forcier L. B.Intelligence Unleashed: an Argument for AI in Education. L.: Pearson, 2016.
26. Popenici S. A. D., Kerr S. Exploring the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education // Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. 2017. Vol. 12. Art. 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
27. Williamson B., Eynon R. Historical Threads, Missing Links, and Future Directions in AI in Education // Learning, Media and Technology. 2020. Vol. 45. No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995
28. Xu X., Qiao L., Cheng N., Liu H., Zhao W. Enhancing self-regulated learning and learning experience in generative AI environments: the critical role of metacognitive support // British Journal of Educational Technology. 2025. Vol. 56. Iss. 5. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13599
29. Yan L., Sha L., Zhao L., Li Y., Martinez-Maldonado R., Chen G., Li X., Jin Y., Gašević D. Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: a systematic scoping review // British Journal of Educational Technology. 2024. Vol. 55. Iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370
30. Zawacki-Richter O., Marín V. I., Bond M., Gouverneur F. Systematic Review of Research on Artificial Intelligence Applications in Higher Education: Where Are the Educators? // International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2019. Vol. 16. Art. 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
31. Zhai C., Wibowo S., Li L. D. The effects of over-reliance on AI dialogue systems on students' cognitive abilities: a systematic review // Smart Learning Environments. 2024. Vol. 11. Art. 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00316-7

Author information

About this article

Publication history

• Received: June 18, 2026.
• Published: July 30, 2026.

Keywords

• рефлексивная интеграция
• генеративный искусственный интеллект
• дидактическая система
• профессиональное образование
• рефлексивная позиция обучающегося
• учебный сценарий
• reflective integration
• generative artificial intelligence
• didactic system
• vocational education
• reflective position of a learner
• learning scenario

Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s)
© 2026 Gramota Publishing, LLC

User license

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)