Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED): Towards More Effective Regulation

Abstract This paper critically assesses the effectiveness of the EU AI Act in regulating artificial intelligence in higher education (AIED), with a focus on how it interacts with existing education regulation. It examines the growing use of high-risk AI systems – such as those used in admissions, assessment, academic progression, and exam proctoring – and identifies key regulatory frictions that arise when AI regulation and education regulation pursue overlapping but potentially conflicting aims. Central to this analysis is the concept of human oversight: while the AI Act frames oversight as a safeguard for accountability and fundamental rights, education regulation emphasises the professional autonomy of teachers and their role in maintaining pedagogical integrity. Yet, the regulatory role of teachers in AI-mediated environments remains unclear. Applying Mousmouti’s effectiveness test, the paper evaluates the AI Act along four dimensions – purpose, coherence, results, and structural integration with the broader legal framework – and argues that legal effectiveness in this context requires a more precise alignment between AI and education regulation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Risk Regulation
Published
2025-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.10039
Primary Topic
Legal and Policy Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED): Towards More Effective Regulation

Liane Colonna
European Journal of Risk Regulation
Legal and Policy Issues
article

Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED): Towards More Effective Regulation

Liane Colonna
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper critically assesses the effectiveness of the EU AI Act in regulating artificial intelligence in higher education (AIED), with a focus on how it interacts with existing education regulation. It examines the growing use of high-risk AI systems – such as those used in admissions, assessment, academic progression, and exam proctoring – and identifies key regulatory frictions that arise when AI regulation and education regulation pursue overlapping but potentially conflicting aims. Central to this analysis is the concept of human oversight: while the AI Act frames oversight as a safeguard for accountability and fundamental rights, education regulation emphasises the professional autonomy of teachers and their role in maintaining pedagogical integrity. Yet, the regulatory role of teachers in AI-mediated environments remains unclear. Applying Mousmouti’s effectiveness test, the paper evaluates the AI Act along four dimensions – purpose, coherence, results, and structural integration with the broader legal framework – and argues that legal effectiveness in this context requires a more precise alignment between AI and education regulation.

European Journal of Risk RegulationVol. 17(1)
Stockholm University (SE)
Marcus och Amalia Wallenbergs minnesfond
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Legal and Policy Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.