Search

Deconstructing and Overcoming the Dilemma of “Universal Access to Education” in Basic Education During the Digital Intelligence Era from a Humanistic Perspective

Author(s)

Yunuo Song

Affiliation(s)

School of Education, Xizang Minzu University, Xianyang, Shaanxi, China

Abstract

“Education for All” represents an advanced form of educational equity in the digital age, centered on addressing individual student differences through precise, personalized educational services. This approach ensures every student receives high-quality education tailored to their developmental needs, embodying the deepening practice of humanistic educational theory within a digital context. However, the realization of “education for all” currently faces multiple practical obstacles: the alienation of technology application, misaligned institutional safeguards, lagging teacher roles, and the absence of ethical constraints. Its core contradiction lies in the tension between the humanistic essence of education and the rationality of technology coupled with utilitarian orientation. Therefore, grounded in humanistic educational theory, this study deconstructs these obstacles at their core. It constructs a four-dimensional practical pathway: aligning technology with educational needs, institutionally safeguarding individual development, restoring teachers to their educational essence, and ethically protecting student rights. This aims to provide theoretical support and practical guidance for breaking the “homogeneous supply” dilemma in basic education during the digital-intelligent era and ensuring “every student can enjoy suitable education.”

Keywords

Digital Intelligence Era; Basic Education; Educational Equity; Artificial Intelligence

References

[1] Khine M S. Artificial Intelligence in Education. Singapore: Springer, 2024. [2] Oliver M. Education and the Decadence of Technology. IIS University Journal of Arts, 2024, 13(2): 1-27. [3] Loh R S M, Kraaykamp G, van Hek M. Student ICT resources and intergenerational transmission of educational inequality: testing implications of a reproduction and mobility perspective. European Sociological Review, 2023, 39(5): 804-819. [4] Berson I R, Berson M J, Luo W. Innovating responsibly: ethical considerations for AI in early childhood education. AI, Brain and Child, 2025, 1(1): 2. [5] Paran L, De Leon J L, Pade E Q. Challenges in technology integration for elementary teachers. Cognizance J Multidiscip Stud, 2024, 4(12): 90-99. [6] Ferrante P, Williams F, Büchner F, et al. In/equalities in digital education policy–sociotechnical imaginaries from three world regions. Learning, Media and Technology, 2024, 49(1): 122-132. [7] Boeskens L, Meyer K. Policies for the digital transformation of school education: Evidence from the Policy Survey on School Education in the Digital Age. OECD Education Working Papers, 2025 (328): 0_1-98. [8] Baker R S, Hawn A, Lee S. Algorithmic bias: The state of the situation and policy recommendations. 2023. [9] Lu, S., Nuryana, Z., Ni, X. et al. A decade of educational robotics: trends and SDG contributions. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 1356 (2025). [10] Kumari S. Humanism in education: Fostering student-centered learning through maslow's and rogers' theories. Journal homepage: www. ijrpr. com ISSN, 2024, 2582: 7421. [11] Feigenbaum K D. A critique of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers as educators. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 2024, 64(1): 44-63. [12] Zeng D Q. Rogers’ Humanistic Educational Though and Its Significance. Journal of Sichuan Normal University (Social Science Edition), 2003, 30: 43-48. [13] Puchkors R, Saunders J, Sharp D. Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing. 2024.