SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Muallim Rıfat Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

Proposing a Participatory Action Research Framework for AI in Early Childhood Education

Erken Çocukluk Eğitiminde Yapay Zeka için Katılımcı Eylem Araştırması Çerçevesi Önerisi

Hızır Dinler(KILIS 7 ARALIK UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-3144-6649
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-08-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study concludes with suggestions for policymakers to establish comprehensive ethical principles and for researchers to conduct longitudinal studies on the sustained impacts of co-designed AI tools on children’s development.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence into early childhood education presents substantial ethical risks, including data privacy violations and algorithmic bias.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This situation creates a pressing need for a structured model to guide responsible development.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study concludes with suggestions for policymakers to establish comprehensive ethical principles and for researchers to conduct longitudinal studies on the sustained impacts of co-designed AI tools on children’s development.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:yapay zeka · erken çocukluk eğitimi · katılımcı eylem araştırması

Abstract

The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence into early childhood education presents substantial ethical risks, including data privacy violations and algorithmic bias. This situation creates a pressing need for a structured model to guide responsible development. The purpose of this study is to propose a conceptual framework based on participatory action research, which serves as an ethical compass for the field. This theoretical paper utilizes a conceptual framework development model that synthesizes AI’s educational potential with the collaborative principles of PAR and the philosophy of child-centered design. The proposed model involves diverse participants, specifically children aged three to six, their families, and educators, as active partners in the technology's lifecycle. Data collection tools conceptualized within this framework include focus group discussions, creative play sessions, and storytelling workshops designed to capture stakeholder voices authentically. The analysis process is grounded in an iterative cycle of planning, action, observation, and reflection. The procedure details a three-phase implementation consisting of exploration, co-creation, and evaluation phases. The results of this conceptual synthesis offer a novel theoretical tool that reframes AI development from a top-down imposition to a bottom-up process of co-creation. The study concludes with suggestions for policymakers to establish comprehensive ethical principles and for researchers to conduct longitudinal studies on the sustained impacts of co-designed AI tools on children’s development.

Özet

Yapay zekanın erken çocukluk eğitimine hızla entegre edilmesi, veri gizliliği ihlalleri ve algoritmik önyargı gibi önemli etik riskler ortaya çıkarmakta ve bu durum, yapay zekanın sorumlu bir şekilde geliştirilmesine rehberlik edecek bir modele acil bir ihtiyaç doğurmaktadır. Mevcut yaklaşımlar, etik ilkeleri ve paydaşların sesini yapay zeka tasarımının merkezine yerleştirmek için genellikle yapılandırılmış bir metodolojiden yoksundur. Bu makale, bu boşluğu, alan için bir etik pusula görevi görecek Katılımcı Eylem Araştırmasına dayalı kavramsal bir çerçeve önererek ele almaktadır. Çerçeve, yapay zekanın eğitim potansiyelini Katılımcı Eylem Araştırması işbirliğine dayalı ilkeleri ve çocuk merkezli tasarım felsefesi ile birleştirir. Bu çerçeve, ortak tasarım için yapılandırılmış, döngüsel bir süreci ana hatlarıyla ortaya koyarak, çocukları, aileleri ve eğitimcileri teknolojinin yaşam döngüsünde aktif ortaklar olarak güçlendirmektedir. Bu modeli detaylandırarak, makale araştırmacılar, uygulayıcılar ve politika yapıcılar için yeni bir teorik araç sunmakta ve yapay zekanın geleceğinin sadece yenilikçi değil, aynı zamanda eşitlikçi ve temelde çocuk odaklı olmasını sağlamayı amaçlamaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Dinler, H. (2026). Proposing a Participatory Action Research Framework for AI in Early Childhood Education. Muallim Rıfat Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1530020

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (34)

  1. Alderson, P., & Morrow, V. (2011). The ethics of research with children and young people: A practical handbook. Sage.
  2. Andreadakis, Z. E. (2026). Teaching with AI personas: Designing for Co-CreAItivity in ECEC. In AI Applications in Preschool and Primary Education: Teaching with Artificial Intelligence (pp. 245-260). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-17190-0_14
  3. Anning, A. (2010). ‘Research’in early childhood settings: A pause for thought. Early Years, 30(2), 189-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2010.483895
  4. Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big data's disparate impact. California law review, 104(3), 671-732. http://dx.doi.org/10.15779/Z38BG31
  5. Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2004.028662
  6. Berson, I. R., Berson, M. J., & Luo, W. (2025). Innovating responsibly: Ethical considerations for AI in early childhood education. AI, Brain and Child, 1(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44436-025-00003-5
  7. Cai, Z., Han, A., Zhou, X., Gazulla, E. D., & Peppler, K. (2025). Child-AI Co-Creation: A review of the current research landscape and a proposal for six design considerations. Proceedings of the 24th Interaction Design and Children, 916-922. https://doi.org/10.1145/3713043.3731506
  8. Chen, J. J., & Lin, J. C. (2024). Artificial intelligence as a double-edged sword: Wielding the POWER principles to maximize its positive effects and minimize its negative effects. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 25(1), 146-153. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491231169813
  9. Dangol, A. (2025). Beyond users: Supporting children in interpreting, resisting, and collaborating with AI. In Proceedings of the 24th Interaction Design and Children (pp. 1180-1184). https://doi.org/10.1145/3713043.3731604
  10. Dinler, H. (2025). Development of the artificial intelligence perception and attitude scale (AIPAS). Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 14(4), 1283-1304. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.1602673
  11. Dinler, H., & Cevher-Kalburan, N. (2025). Effects of a teacher professional development program for the transition to school on preschoolers' social-emotional adjustment and school readiness. Early Childhood Education Journal, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-025-01925-8
  12. Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour & Information Technology, 21(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290110108659
  13. Freire, P. (2017). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin Classics.
  14. Fusco, F., Pitt, C., Newman, M., Yip, J., & Soni, N. (2026, April). Towards understanding children’s collaborative interaction patterns in child-ai co-creative interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-20). https://doi.org/10.1145/3772318.3791831
  15. Graham, A., Powell, M. A., & Truscott, J. (2016). Exploring the nexus between participatory methods and ethics in early childhood research. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(1), 82-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/183693911604100111
  16. Holloway, D., Green, L., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Zero to eight: Young children and their internet use. LSE, London: EU Kids Online. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/52630
  17. Holmes, W. (2025, November). AI, education, and children’s rights. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1656736). Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1656736
  18. Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19(1), 173-202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173
  19. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 559–603). Sage Publication.
  20. Kindon, S., Pain, R., & Kesby, M. (2007). Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place. Routledge.
  21. Kölemen, E. B., & Yıldırım, B. (2025). A new era in early childhood education (ECE): Teachers’ opinions on the application of artificial intelligence. Education and Information Technologies, 30(12), 17405-17446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13478-9
  22. Kurian, N. (2025). AI's empathy gap: The risks of conversational Artificial Intelligence for young children's well-being and key ethical considerations for early childhood education and care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 26(1), 132-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/14639491231206004
  23. Lee, J. (2026). Play with AI (PL-AI): A Design-Based, play-centered curriculum for fostering ai literacy in pre-k and kindergarten. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 10, 100569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100569
  24. Nikolopoulou, K. (2025). Child-centered integration of generative AI in early learning: balancing promises and challenges. AI, Brain and Child, 1(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44436-025-00023-1
  25. O'neil, C. (2017). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Penguin.
  26. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (4th ed.). Pearson. Su, J., & Yang, W. (2022). Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100049
  27. Su, J., Ng, D. T. K., & Chu, S. K. W. (2023). Artificial intelligence (AI) literacy in early childhood education: The challenges and opportunities. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100124
  28. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2010). Early childhood matters: Evidence from the effective pre-school and primary education project. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203862063
  29. Tanik Önal, N., Önal, N., & Ilhan, A. G. (2026). Artificial intelligence in early childhood classrooms: insights from in-service and pre-service teachers. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2025.2610619
  30. UNESCO. (2017). Early childhood care and education. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. http://en.unesco.org/themes/early-childhood-care-and-education.
  31. UNICEF. (2021). Policy guidance on AI for children. https://www.unicef.org/innocenti/projects/ai-for-children
  32. Vartiainen, H., Tedre, M., & Valtonen, T. (2020). Learning machine learning with very young children: Who is teaching whom? International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 25, 100182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100182
  33. Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2018). Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3063289
  34. Wong, J. M. S. (2026). Designing trustworthy AI for the youngest learners: an integrated ethical framework and implementation roadmap. Early Childhood Education Journal, 54, 3827–3837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-026-02138-3