Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Social Sciences & Humanities Open

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/social-sciences-and-humanities-open

Regular Article

A comprehensive overview of artificial intelligence and machine learning in

education pedagogy: 21 Years (2000–2021) of research indexed in the
scopus database
Ekene Francis Okagbue a, *, Ujunwa Perpetua Ezeachikulo b, Tosin Yinka Akintunde c,
Mustapha Bala Tsakuwa d, Samuel Nchekwubemchukwu Ilokanulo e,
Kosiso Modest Obiasoanya d, Chidiebere Emeka Ilodibe a, Cheick Amadou Tidiane Ouattara a
a
Faculty of Education, Southwest University, Chongqing, China
b
School of Public Administration, Hohai University, Nanjing, China
c
Department of Social Work, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
d
College of International Studies, Southwest University, Chongqing, China
e
Faculty of Education, Comparative Education, Southwest University, Chongqing, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The utilization of AI (artificial intelligence) and ML (machine learning) in education pedagogy will undoubtedly
Bibliometrics enhance transformative changes in academic pedagogical engagements. Most interestingly, they are perceived to
Education transform traditional instructional activities into digitized and seamless ones for effective and efficient education.
Artificial intelligence
To further explore the discourse, this study tries to elucidate the dramatic rise in trends and the constant evo­
Pedagogy
Machine learning
lution of AI and ML in education pedagogy applying a bibliometrics analysis. Historically, since the emergence of
AI, its influence, functions, and applications have been transcending from one form to another in the sequence of
artificial intelligence (simple level of AI) to applied artificial intelligence, to machine learning, and to deep
learning. From our study outcome, numerous scholars predicted that AI and ML will continue to transform
beyond their current state to more sophisticated tools.
A bibliometric analysis was performed with the extracted articles on artificial intelligence, machine learning,
and education pedagogy from the Scopus database. The downloaded data were analyzed with bibliometrics
research tools such as VOSviewer (Var 1.6.6) and R packages. For this study exploration, a total of one thousand,
one hundred and thirty-eight (1138) documents were authored by two thousand, eight hundred (2800) re­
searchers and published in six-hundred and thirty-five (635) journals from 2000 to 2021, with 5.984 as the
average citations per document from sixty-two (62) countries.
Our study concluded that school administrators should promote the use of AI and ML devices to promote
quality pedagogical services in the academic environment. Most especially, education policymakers are advised
to promulgate policies that will support the acceptability and usability of artificial intelligence and machine
learning in academic environment.

1. Introduction that change the course of education significantly from traditional

In this 21st century, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning
(ML) have become resourceful, magical, and innovative pedagogical
tools in the global academic environment (Poquet et al., 2021). These
two teaching and learning technologies seem to be innovative wonders
learning to a technological learning approach (Ahmad, Rahmat,
Mubarik, Alam, & Hyder, 2021). Hence contribute to the evolution of
one-dimensional learning patterns to multi-learning dimensional con­
cepts (i.e. from physical classroom to digital education) (Hsu, Abelson,
Lao, Tseng, & Lin, 2021). The significance of these smart tools is the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Profkendon001@yahoo.com (E.F. Okagbue), royaluj2015@hotmail.com (U.P. Ezeachikulo), akintunde.ty@link.cuhk.edu.hk (T.Y. Akintunde),
education2214@gmail.com (M.B. Tsakuwa), ilokanulosam@gmail.com (S.N. Ilokanulo), ladymodestk@gmail.com (K.M. Obiasoanya), Ilodibec_ec@yahoo.com
(C.E. Ilodibe), cheick0089@yahoo.fr (C.A.T. Ouattara).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100655
Received 30 May 2023; Received in revised form 2 August 2023; Accepted 21 August 2023
Available online 7 September 2023
2590-2911/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
E.F. Okagbue et al.
salient transformations brought for the elevation of the education
pedagogy by enhancing effective teaching and learning and making it
more seamless (Borko, 1985; Gordon & Debus, 2002).
Nonetheless, the origin of AI started when John McCarthy coined the
term “artificial intelligence” in 1956, and has been a popular nomen­
clature in the field of physics, technology, computer science, engineer­
ing, and mathematics (Zawacki-Richter, Marn, Bond, & Gouverneur,
2019), but less known in the education pedagogy (Kabudi, Pappas, &
Olsen, 2020). However, since then, scientists understand the cutting
edge of AI and constantly adopt its usage in computer modeling, ma­
chine learning, and probability statistics to devise practical applications
of these scientific methods in academic institutions mostly in education
disciplines. The confirmation of the vested interest in awakening the
utilization of artificial intelligence tools in the education pedagogy is
corroborated by the recently launched ‘OpenAI’, a non-profit AI
research company that invested about 1 billion dollars to accelerate the
production of AI and ML learning tools to improve AIED (artificial in­
telligence in education) (https://ourworldindata.org/brief-h
istory-of-ai,2022). More so, the education technology (EDTECH) com­
pany advanced the manufacturing of assistive learning robotic devices
like humanoid robots, AIDAN, etc., which are accentuated to heighten
human-robot interaction (Webb et al., 2020).
For a clearer distinction between AI, and ML, machine learning is
referred to as the subset of artificial intelligence. The elements of ma­
chine learning increase the optimization operations of artificially intel­
ligent devices in providing real-time responses. As an aspect of AI,
machine learning is a subfield of artificial intelligence with the capacity
to command computers to act, think, learn, and operate on their own
(Hamal, Faddouli, Hachem, Harouni, & Lu, 2022). ML instructs com­
puters to modify their actions to improve and elevate the actions for
precision and accuracy (Environment, 2021, pp. 1–12). Aoun, 2017
delineated machine learning as a learning field that potentiates the
capability of smart devices with programming inputs. Its
multi-disciplinary and diverse nature of research range reinforces its
operations. The stimulation tendencies of ML are significantly attached
to computational statistics in making predictions with computers (Chen,
Xie, Zou, & Hwang, 2020). However, the computational possibility of
machine learning and artificial intelligence fosters a smart tutoring
environment in the classroom (Ergen, 2019). The smart machine’s
propensity towards human features, like mimicking human cognitive
ability, and its behavioral tendencies all make it an ideal addition to the
classroom (Musa, 2021). The automated non-human abilities can be
supported with the operations of processing language properties such as
Pascal, C, C++, and JAVA in conjunction with the intelligent internal
components that provide visuals, sound, and speech, aiding seamless
teaching and learning (Tedre et al., 2021). The algorithm optimization
teaching and learning resources in artificial intelligence and machine
learning like web-based chatbots, critical bots, Cobots, and AlphaGo
enhance communication and instructional efficiency (Cavalcanti et al.,
2021; Kose & Arslan, 2017).
AI and ML are interconnected in functions, as they work in nexus
with speech recognition machines, natural language processing, com­
puter vision, and robotics. They are associated with the characteristics of
network devices, cloud computing, digital content production, com­
puter, and robots (Palanivelu & Vasanthi, 2020). Ouyang and Jiao
(2021), indicated that AI adaptive learning tools, tutoring systems, and
learning analytics are helpful for the improvement of seamless learning
activities. The interesting nature of artificial intelligence is in its task
distinction, the task categorization of AI is on its potency of the
following; (i) human tasks intervention (these are tasks performed by
humans), (ii) non-human task intervention. In reference to (Baker & Ga,
2021; Cox, 2021) views on the categorization of AI activities into hu­
manized and non-humanized involvement, further asserted that AI
analytical activities precedence that artificial intelligence portrays
human features such as social intelligence, emotional and cognitive
capacity (Francis et al., 2023).
2
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
According to Srinivasan and Murthy (2021), and Baker and Ga
(2021) state that human tasks intervention in AI operations in relation to
pedagogical programs are used for (i) interactive mechanisms for stu­
dents, (ii) feedback issuance, (iii) development of digital curriculum,
(iv) tracking learners learning progress, (v) smart attendance keeping,
etc.
To understand what education pedagogy is all about. Education
pedagogy is described as the art or science of educating, teaching, and
transmitting knowledge from the teacher to a student (Klitmøller &
Klitmøller, 2017). Lavelle, Lovato, and Stephenson (2020) visualized
education pedagogy as a practice of how teaching impacts learning, in
consideration of what is the right content to teach and methods of
teaching it. The empirical and philosophical concepts of education
pedagogy are centered on (i) academic instructors’ teaching methods,
(ii) students learning behavior and teachers’ teaching impacts, and (iii)
teaching tools in conveying the learning contents (Lavelle et al., 2020).
It is interesting to state that AI and ML play major roles in developing
education pedagogy in this twenty-first century. The essence of AI and
ML-enabled devices in education pedagogy is the ability to give
personalized feedback, constant accessibility, and availability of
learning resources, save cost, improved communication habit, and in­
fluence the learning performance of the students (Lee & Lee, 2021), and
foster inclusive education, especially for disabled learners (Pandey &
Gelin, 2017). In addition, AI has an important part to play in STEM
education pedagogy. The incorporation of AI into STEM education
pedagogy sparks creative thinking among students (Popenici & Kerr,
2017).
This study is highly significant in education development, and the
significance of this current study is to bring to light the essence of
adopting AI and ML educational devices in education pedagogy and to
encourage classroom teachers to accept their usability of them for
effective teaching and learning. In the process of doing so, the study
suggested relevant AI and ML tools, software, and APPS that will guide
their classroom activities, and manage school affairs seamlessly. More
so, this current study tries to dissipate one of the misconceptions in the
education community that artificial intelligence and machine learning
technology are strictly meant for science, medical, and engineering
disciplines only and not for teachers in the education pedagogy domain,
hence believing that they are limited to only use blackboards and chalks.
To change this misconception, this research tries to review the existing
literature on this discourse on education pedagogy aiming to inform
classroom teachers, and education instructors on the long existence of
artificial intelligence and its possible impacts if fully adopted in edu­
cation pedagogy.
One of the problems that contributed to this misconception, is that
there is not enough scholarship on artificial intelligence and machine
learning in the education pedagogy that could provide a simplified un­
derstanding of them and their usages in the classrooms. Without a doubt,
numerous studies have been explored on AI and ML but the majority of
them are in medical sciences, computer science, and engineering. For
example; artificial intelligence and machine learning in cancer studies
(Musa, Afolabi, Musa, & Musa, 2022), artificial neural network (Górriz
et al., 2020), big data, internet of things, machine learning, and artificial
intelligence on virus tracking (Rodr & Shirvanizadeh, 2021), etc. And
this calls for more papers that could serve as guidelines to the
non-engineering, and science teachers that have no knowledge of AI and
ML in their jobs (Hwang & Tu, 2021). Chen et al. (2020) confirm Hwang
and Tu (2021) statement on the lack of interest of professional teachers
in accepting this concept, suggesting the need for them to understand
the interaction needed to exist between the learners and AI devices for
an effective learning activity to occur. In filling this gap, this research
aims to inform the teachers about what has been done so far and high­
light to them the benefits of applying AI and ML smart tools in teaching.
In doing that, the study excavated the existing literature published on
artificial intelligence and machine learning in education, including the
long-existing AI and ML learning teaching software and APPS that might
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

not be known by classroom teachers and students that could be bene­
ficial for teaching and learning.
Due to the nature of the study, the bibliometric strategy remains the
most appropriate approach to serve the purpose of this research. How­
ever, the essence of the bibliometric methodology is to give holistic
dimensions of the top crucial articles published in this area of study. It
brings out the qualitative concepts of the existing research (Song &
Wang, 2020) and in the same vein, identifies the core empirical studies
(Akintunde et al., 2021). The bibliometric analysis also shows the ag­
gregation of the total article citations, the top most active scholars, the
top most journals, institutional affiliations, and countries. This infor­
mation provides significant knowledge on the growth rate of article
publications, and achievements made in this area of discourse to provide
enough information for the teachers, instructors, and school managers.
In addition to the preceding statements, the study highlights the chal­
lenges of AI and ML in education pedagogy, and what future direction of
education pedagogy in accepting AI and ML.
This study is guided by four research questions: (i) What is the
growth rate of research publications on artificial intelligence and ma­
chine learning in education pedagogy from 2000 to 2021? (ii) what are
the achievements of AI and ML in enhancing education pedagogy from
2000 to 2021 (iii) what are the perceived challenges in academic in­
stitutions in adopting AI and ML in the education pedagogy from 2000 to
2021; and (iv) what does the future hold for educational pedagogy in the
use of AI and ML for education development?
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study design
This research employed a bibliometrics strategy to investigate
emerging trends in artificial intelligence and machine learning in the
field of education. And the purpose of this is that the authors discovered
that there is a shortage of literature specifically on artificial intelligence
and machine in education pedagogy. But the application of the biblio­
metric technique makes it easier to identify published articles on this
topic and provides the procedural template for the evaluation of pub­
lished articles bibliometrically (Polito & Temperini, 2021).
2.2. Data source
The Scopus Database was used to obtain information for this inves­
tigation. It is one of the academically approved repositories for quality
scientific publications across all disciplines (www.scopus.com/). As an
open academic database, it does not require ethical approval.
screening and sorting of the selected articles were administered to
examine duplicates, non-English articles, and document types that are
not within the criteria set by the authors. In the screening and sorting
process, the authors reviewed the abstracts, introduction, and method­
ology and together chose the articles that align with the study objectives.
3. Data analysis
3.1. Bibliometric approach
In executing the data analysis, software such as R package (version
4.0.4), Vosviewer (version 1.6.636), and Bibliometrix were used.
However, for co-authorship analysis, Vosviewer helps in finding the
links (L) attributed for calculating the total of published documents and
their citations, including the strength of the links attributed. Also, note
that the Spearman correlation coefficient® was employed in calculating
the total citations (TC) of published articles and the number of article
publications (NP) in this study domain. The characteristics of biblio­
metrics were explored for example; information on the top 10 most cited
articles, top 10 journals, countries, authors, and H-index of the pub­
lished articles (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017).
3.3. Characteristics of the study
Table 1 gives a detailed analysis of the collected published docu­
ments. The documents were downloaded using the “title-abs-key”
command, and only documents published in the English language were
given consideration. From the criteria set by the authors, 1138 papers
satisfied the set requirements. Before the search process, authors
deliberated on the search queries, search terms, publication year, study
title, etc., (Akintunde et al., 2021). Table 1 also provides information on
the material sources, the timespan of the study, average citations, au­
thors’ collaborations, reference frequencies, keywords, etc. In doing this
analysis, bibliometrix and R software packages were adopted for
calculating the mean annual publications, authors’ total articles pub­
lished, and authors’ collaboration index (Musa, 2021). Furthermore,
beyond the information in Table 1, the authors provided results on
journal citations and impact factors which become the core yardstick for
the selection top ten active journals in the field. On that note, Ellegaard
and Wallin (2015) espouse that impact factors and citations are the
determinants for evaluating the productivity index of authors, and ac­
ademic ranking of institutions. For determining the quantity and quality
of articles, the H-index and impact factors of the screened documents
were examined (Musa et al., 2022). Table 3 reveals the top ten most

Table 1
2.2.1. Search strategy
Descriptive results of AI and ML of published documents.
The Scopus Database was searched for articles on artificial intelli­
gence (AI), machine learning (ML), and education pedagogy (EP) pub­ Description Results Description Results

lished from 2000 to 2021. The following terms were used in the query Timespan 2000:2021 Review 38
search to generate and align the topical themes on artificial intelligence, Documents 1138 Note 10
Sources 635 Document Contents
machine learning, and education pedagogy: Title (artificial and intelli­
Average citations per year 1.156 Authors of multi-authored 2522
gence × or convolutional or deep and learning × or neural and network per doc documents
× or machine and learning × or random and forest*) and (autonomous References 29,751 Author Appearances 3223
and robots × or computer and vision × or education × and pedagogy × Average years from 4.04 Authors
or fuzzy and logic × or support and vector and machine × or speech and publication
Average citations per 5.984 Authors 2800
understanding × or automatic and programming × or text and mining × document
or intelligent and agents × or intelligent and tutoring × or voice and Document Types Author’s Keywords (DE) 2399
recognition × and title-abs-key education or teach). Conference paper 533 Authors of single-authored 278
documents
Conference review 27 Keywords Plus (ID) 4691
2.2.2. Data synthesis and criteria
Book chapter 33 Authors Collaboration
The downloaded articles were synthesized using the above- Article 447 Collaboration Index 3.13
enumerated queries and timeline illustrated in section 2.2.1. With a Book 8 Co-authors per document 2.83
focus on the search terms “artificial intelligence”, “machine learning”, Editorial 23 Authors per Document 2.46
and “education pedagogy”. The authors focused on these search terms Erratum 11 Document per author 0.406
Letter 8 Single-authored documents 331
and removed articles that fall out of this research scope. After that,

3
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

3.4. The most cited top 10 articles

Table 2 illustrates the top most cited published research articles on

Fig. 1. Annual Average total citations of AI and ML in Education.
active journals. And journal citation report (JCR) is vital in the evalu­
ation of articles’ total citations and impact factors (Donthu, Kumar,
Mukherjee, Pandey, & Marc, 2021).
3.2. Study outcome
3.2.1. The average total citations and yearly publication growth
Fig. 1 shows annual publication and average citation counts for ar­
ticles in the education field that focus on artificial intelligence and
machine learning. Fig. 1 demonstrates a rise in AI and ML studies from
2000 to 2021. From 2000 to 2011, during the first stage of development,
the number of published papers grew from 6 to 21, with an increase in
annual average citations. In the second phase, between 2002 and 2008,
the number of citations increased to 130, 170, and 245. And the third
stage is considered the phase with an exponential rise in article publi­
cations on AI and ML in education from 2013 to 2021, with a high
number of publications of 135, 247, and 408 articles, respectively. The
peak in publications occurred during these years, while 2013 had a
comparatively low total citation average for articles published that year.
It is worth noting the focus of our research is on articles published be­
tween 2000 and 2021, and articles below the year 2000 and above 2021
were not considered.
artificial intelligence and machine learning in education, with the in­
clusion of authors, publication year, sources, and the aggregations of the
article citations. For this analysis, the authors chose the most-referenced
articles on AI and ML in education. It is important to state that re­
searchers tracked the growing number of citations of the most cited
publications over the targeted years. In that case, our research shows
that the “deep learning and Sustainability of Education” article by
Warburton K (2003) has the most citations (TC = 295), followed by
“artificial intelligence in higher education: where are the educators, a
systematic review” with 160 total citations (TC = 160), and “The impact
exploration of AI on teaching and learning in higher education” by
Popenici and Kerr (2017) with 155 citations (TC = 155) as the third most
cite article, (see Table 2 for more information).
The retrieved articles were from 635 periodicals, such as the Journal
of Intelligent Computing Advances has 15 articles published, the Journal
of Fuzzy Systems published 17 articles, Lecture Notes in Computer Sci­
ence (including the subseries Lecture Notes in AI and Bioinformatics) 24
articles, the Journal of Physics: Conference Series published 15, etc.,
(see Table 3). Our investigation showed that the leading academic
journals have published a total of 118 research articles with 919 cita­
tions and an H-index of 44. The research found that the top 10 journals
have an average number of 7 and 24 articles for every issue. Table 4
illustrates (i) the total amount of citations, (ii) the frequency with which
papers appeared in journals, (iii) the publication year, and (iv) the h-
index.
3.5. Authorship analysis
Table 4 details the top 10 most active authors, their affiliations, the
total number of article citations, the total number of article publications,
and the h-index. These are the essential bibliometric approach in
tracking published articles to reinforce the viability of those studies and
the essence of improving their significance in education enhancement.
To evaluate the authors’ research productivity level, our study discov­
ered that an average of 2.46 of the authors publish one document at a
time out of the 2800 authors identified in the study. In this section, our
study evaluates the following; (i) article sources and with the number of
articles published, (ii) amount of citations with no self-citations, and (iii)
the h-index, and average citations for one article. In addition, we
explored the authorship affiliations and their publication frequencies. In

Table 2
The most Top 10 cited articles on AI and ML application in Education.
S/ Authors, Year Title Title Sources Total
N Citations

1 Roll & Ford, 2016
2 Aoun J.E.2017
3 Warburton K.2003
4 Gordon C., Debus R.2002
5 Timms M.J. (2016)
6 Zawacki-Richter O. et al.,
2019
7 Offir B. et al. (2008)
8 Popenici S.A.D., Kerr
S.2017
9 Zhu, 2015
10 Martí-Parreño J. et al.
(2016)
The Revolution and Evolution of AI in Education International Journal of Artificial Intelligence 131
in Education
Higher education in the era of artificial intelligence: robot-proof Robot-Proof: Higher Education in the Age of 129
Artificial Intelligence
Deep learning and education for sustainability International Journal of Sustainability in 295
Higher Education
The Development of personal teaching effectiveness and Deep learning British Journal of Educational 131
strategies in a preservice Psychology
Using Cobots and smart classrooms to push artificial intelligence in International Journal of Artificial Intelligence 90
education beyond its traditional boundaries in Education
Where are the instructors? A Systematic Review on artificial intelligence International Journal of Educational 160
applications in higher education Technology in Higher Education
The Distance Education and Deep Learning Processes: Synchronous versus Computers and Education 114
asynchronous systems
The Exploration of the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and Research and Practice in Technology-Enhanced 155
learning in higher education Learning
Machine teaching: An inverse problem to machine learning and an approach Proceedings of the National 94
toward optimal education Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Application of gamification in education: A Test Mining and Bibliometric Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning 93
Analysis

4
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

Table 3
Top 10 journals on AI, ML application in Education research
In connection to the first research question on the exploration of the growth rate of publications on AI and ML in education pedagogy from 2000 to 2021, analysis of the
top 10 journals on AI and ML in education in Table 3 shows the top 10 leading journals in artificial intelligence and machine learning also an attempt to answer the first
research question of the study.
Journals TNC H-INDEX PY TNP

Education and Information Technologies 94 5 2020 7

Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems 41 4 2019 17
Communications in Computer and Information Science 22 3 2009 9
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 208 6 2000 24
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 28 2 2008 15
International Journal of Engineering Education 72 5 2001 9
Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 184 5 2020 7
IEEE Access 167 7 2014 8
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 22 3 2019 15
ACM International Conference Proceeding Series 81 4 2018 7

PY: Publication year, TNC: Total number of citations, TNP: Total number of publications.

Table 4
Top 10 active authors on AI and ML in education.
Affiliations Authors PY TNP TNC H-Index

Institute of Automation Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Xiwei Liu 2010 3 17 2
College of Information Science and Engineering, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China Jingyi Li 2020 3 49 3
School of Mathematics and Information Science, Nanjing Normal University, China Juxiao Zhang 2003 6 73 3
Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China Shuai Liu 2020 3 46 3
Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea Junga Lee 2018 3 14 2
Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan Gwo-JenHwang 2020 4 156 4
Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada Qing Li 2018 3 7 2
Usak University, Turkey Utku Kose 2014 3 15 2
LKS Faculty of Medicine, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Yik Sum Li 2019 3 11 2
Yango University, Fuzhou, China Lijia Chen 2010 53 3 2

PY: Active year of the author’s published articles, TNP: Total number of publications, TNC: Total number of citations.

that aspect, Juxiao Zhang with 6 publications becomes the top publisher
on AI and ML in education, the second top publisher is Gwo-JenHwang
with 4 published articles, etc., (See Table 4).
3.6. The top 10 most influential and active countries
Table 5 provides fascinating data on the top ten most influential and
active nations in artificial intelligence and machine learning in educa­
tion. From the 635 retrieved and screened documents, sixty-two coun­
tries were revealed to have contributed to the related topic of the
discourse. The number one country in this area of research is noted to be
China having single-country publications of one hundred and eighty-one
(181), 201 article publications, and 0.32 publication frequency, fol­
lowed by the USA with 80 single-country publications, ninety (90)
article publications, and publication frequency of 0.14, etc. (see
Table 5).
3.8. Keyword analysis on AI and ML in education
Fig. 3 showcases the keyword analyses related to artificial intelli­
gence and machine learning in education. Out of the hundred (100)
analyzed keywords, we selected and reported one of the top occurrences
ones “education computing”, “machine learning”, “artificial intelli­
gence”, “education computing”, “teaching”, “education”, “e-learning”,
“computer-aided instruction”, “learning systems”, “neural networks”.
The remainder of the keywords is elaborated on in Fig. 3.
3.9. Analysis of conceptual structure
The authors carried out conceptual structure analysis with multiple
correspondence analysis (MCA) and factorial analysis from the Scopus
database obtained documents. To analyze the trending keywords in

3.7. Top 10 authors’ affiliations Table 5

The top 10 most active countries on AI and ML in Education (Inter and intra
Fig. 2 shows the top 10 most active author’s affiliations and the countries collaborations).
number of articles published under their affiliations. The top leading Countries SCP TAP FREQ MCP TC MC_RATIO AAC
affiliation is Mcgill University with 14 articles on AI and ML in educa­ Canada 15 19 0.03 4 148 0.210 7.79
tion. Followed by Chang Gung University, the National University of China 181 201 0.32 20 506 0.099 2.52
Singapore, The Education University of Hong Kong, and the University Spain 16 21 0.03 5 236 0.238 11.24
of Toronto with 9 articles respectively. The third-ranked affiliation is India 29 30 0.04 1 211 0.033 7.03
Australia 16 22 0.03 6 760 0.273 34.55
Duke University with 8 published articles on the discourse. While Bei­
USA 80 90 0.14 10 866 0.111 9.62
hang University, Kyoto University, the Hong Kong Polytechnic Univer­ Turkey 14 14 0.02 0 83 0.000 5.93
sity, have 7 respectively, and the least is Harvard Medical School with 6 Korea 14 17 0.03 3 106 0.176 6.24
articles. United Kingdom 23 26 0.04 3 234 0.115 9.00
Japan 21 22 0.03 3 226 0.112 7.56

SCP: Single Country Publication, TAP: Total Articles Published, FREQ: Publi­
cation Frequency: MCP: Multiple Country Publications (intra and inter-country
collaborations), TC: Total Citations: AAC: Average of Article Citations.

5
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

Fig. 2. The Most Top 10 Authors affiliations.

Fig. 3. Top 100 keywords plus analysis.

artificial intelligence and machine learning in education pedagogy,
Figs. 4 and 5 showcase the degree of relationship between keywords and
their related synonyms. While Fig. 6 displays the relationship between
the keywords and their possible synonyms in research topics. Overall,
the multiple correspondence analysis of keywords illustrates the devel­
opment of clusters of keywords from the articles published over the
years.
3.10. Co-authorship analysis between researchers and countries
Furthermore, Figs. 4–6 also demonstrate the total link strength (TLS)
of the network analysis for the visualization of co-authorship and
countries analysis. From the social network analysis as displayed in the
figures above, out of two thousand eight hundred (2800) authors with at
least two publications, have the network map of one hundred and thirty-

6
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

Fig. 4. Analysis of conceptual structure for 50 keywords Plus.

Fig. 5. Authors’ keywords.

one (131) items displayed 4 clusters of different colors with 54 links and
60 total links strength, (L = 54, TLS = 60) between authors. More so, for
the country’s collaborations, our study shows nine (9) different clusters
and colors. In the social analysis process between countries and re­
searchers, only forty-eight (48) countries met the required conditions of
90 links (Links = 90), and 125 total links strength (TLS = 125).
4. Discussion
Given the nature of this current study, the bibliometric approach is
considered the appropriate methodology for analyzing the significant
contributions of the published articles on artificial intelligence and
machine learning in education pedagogy, from the Scopus database. To
address the aims of this study, the established research questions

7
E.F. Okagbue et al.
Fig. 6. The multiple correspondence analysis methods on title keywords.
become the drivers of this discussion. Answering the first research
question on research publications on AI and ML in education pedagogy
from 2000 to 2021 growth rate. This concern brought the type of
research methodology adopted in this study to ascertain the progress
education researchers have made in promoting education with advanced
technology such as AI and ML. In the process, search terms such as
(artificial intelligence*, machine learning*, and education pedagogy*)
were used to formulate related search strings that provided pools of the
related search terms used as mentioned in section 2.2.1. Altogether, the
keywords and search terms produced 1138 published articles on this
topic (see Table 1). In determining the growth rate of publication, Guo,
Bai, Yu, Zhao, and Wan (2021) opine that AI and ML have made a
remarkable transformation in the education sector, thus making teach­
ing and learning more sophisticated, thus providing useful information
in propelling quality education (Guo et al., 2021). More so, the result
shown in Fig. 1 proves that there is a dramatic increase in research
publications growth. A noticeable effort in the publication frequency
from 2010 upward, by calculating the total articles, recorded 1051 (total
articles published from 2010 to 2021). And there is a remarkable
increment in citations of the published articles, with an average of 5.984
citations per document and an average of 1.156 citations per year per
document. These published articles provided the framework for further
studies and research improvement (Mohammadreza & Safabakhsh,
2021). Through the novelty and suggestions of these published schol­
arships, more advanced AI and ML educational devices have been pro­
duced for quality teaching and learning (Ali, 2020). For example; C-PEN,
YouDao reading Pen 3, ByteLearning, Jil Watson, Squirrel AI, Teachable
Machine, Altitude learning, Gradescope, Nuance’s Dragon Speech
Recognition, chatbots, chatgpt, etc., (Taecharungroj, 2023). With these
innovative inventions in education pedagogy, artificial intelligence, and
machine learning have changed how people learn and how schools teach
(Akdeniz & Özdinç, 2021). By and large, since this article also highlights
the projected evolution of AI to 2060, though our study does not extend
its timeline to that extent, beyond the set timeline, miraculous in­
ventions have occurred and new AI learning software has been produced
8
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
for instance advanced humanoid AI robots, ChatGPT (J. Wang & Cheng,
2021).
As technology experts are devising modern AI and ML tools to
improve education pedagogy, researchers kept exploring the meta­
morphosis of AI and ML through paper publications across time. To that
effect, the top 10 journal analysis was done to evaluate the publication
progress, frequency, and NP (number of publications) are part of the
measuring parameters. Journals like Lecture Notes in Computer Science
(Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture
Notes in Bioinformatics) have articles published on AI and ML in edu­
cation pedagogy with 24 TN P (total number of publications), followed
by Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems with TNP = 17 (see Table 3).
In the same vein, the top 10 most cited articles were analyzed to
determine the productivity index of artificial intelligence and machine
learning in education pedagogy, and the study identifies “Deep Learning
and Education for Sustainability” as the most cited article with 295 TC
(total citations), thus emphasized the importance of deep learning AI
and ML the classroom activities, and their stimulating impacts on the
learners to acquire deep learning ability and strategy (Warburton,
2003). The second most cited article with 160 TC (total citations) “A
systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in
higher education – where are the educators?” by Zawacki-Richter,
Marín, Bond, and Gouverneur (2019). This study underscores more
useful usages of AI and ML in higher education beyond classroom ac­
tivities. It further establishes that the utilization of AI and ML in higher
education has multi-dimensional purposes in the areas of institutional
management, and administrative support.
One fact observation made from the reviewed documents is that most
of the artificial intelligence and machine learning inventions are mainly
done by scientists from computer engineering, software engineering,
and medical science disciplines, little is known of researchers from the
education pedagogy to design AI and ML educational technologies
(Webb et al., 2020). And this has generated a huge divide between the
education community of engineering and medical disciplines and edu­
cation pedagogy in understanding the use of artificial intelligence and
E.F. Okagbue et al.
machine learning (Gardner, O’Leary, & Yuan, 2021). The classroom
teachers are skeptical about the possibility of AI and ML educational
technologies displacing them from their jobs such as AI humanoid robots
(Edwards & Cheok, 2018). In the actual sense, these smart teaching
devices are validated to be teaching assistants to the teachers not to
cause teacher attrition (Tuna & Tuna, 2019).
Another interesting part of the study is the highlights of the
achievement of AI and ML in developing education pedagogy from 2000
to 2021. In giving a full explanation of the achievement of AI, it is
imperative to start from the origin of AI. And this is explained in section
4.1.
4.1. The progress and growth of artificial intelligence and machine
learning in education
Fig. 7, illustrates the progress and growth evolution of artificial in­
telligence from its emerging state and transformation across centuries
and decades. Apparently, the concept of AI can be deduced during the
same time the first digital computers were built in the 1940s, and the
initial microprocessor in the computer was developed in the 1970s. It is
perceived that artificial intelligence began to thrive better when internet
connectivity for computer operations was discovered in the 1900s, at the
time, it is stated that less than 0.05% of global users are aware of the
internet (Chauhan, Mittal, Woźniak, Gupta, & de Prado, 2021).
Furthermore, Fig. 7 also shows the peculiarities of AI evolutions from
the 2000s forward. In the 1940s, “Thesus” became the first computer to
have an AI functional robotic mouse that could navigate a maze and still
remember its operations. Between 1958 and 1959, the first artificial
neural network the “Perceptron Mark I” was developed to visually
identify cards marked on the left side from the ones marked on the right
side. Arguably, the immense transformation and popularity of artificial
intelligence and machine learning became more advanced in the 21st
century (Rodr & Shirvanizadeh, 2021). In 2010, an AI computer
“AlexNet” was the first deep learning system to have a neural network
with numerous layers for image and object recognition, for instance,
cars, and dog images that are near human-level (Sandu et al). Notably,
AI with image and language recognition capabilities and human char­
acteristics is predicted to keep transforming to a more sophisticated
version up to 2060 (https://ourworldindata.org/brief-history-of-ai,
2022).
Information in Table 6 tabulated a few of the numerous artificial
Fig. 7. A timeline trend of computer and artificial intelligence in Education.
Source: ourworldindata
9
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
intelligence and machine learning educational technologies before and
within the timeline of the study. The majority of the AI smart teaching
and learning devices were invented in the 2000s, and few of them were
manufactured in the 1990s. Countries known to have contributed
immensely to the innovation of AI and ML smart educational software
and tools are China, India, the USA, Germany, France, Sweden, etc.
Table 6 also highlighted the names of the inventors, software de­
scriptions, functions, and their sources. The reason for highlighting
these AI and ML tools is to educate classroom teachers and school
managers to know that these tools are made for pedagogical activities
and for them to use them (Tedre et al., 2021).
It is also worthwhile to mention the top 10 most active authors on
this topic within the selected study timeline. These authors contributed
through their publications on the importance of salvaging the lapses in
the educational sector across different levels of learning with AI and ML
software, APPS, and devices (Thanh, Duc, Thanh, & Nguyen, 2021). On
that note, it is evidenced that Juxiao Zhang is the leading scholar in this
area of research with 6 article publications and 73 citations, (see
Table 4). We also acknowledged that beyond our selected study time­
line, few articles on this discourse might have been published, and the
most recent one is “CHATGPT” and its inventions to support effective
education (Duha, 2023). This was highlighted in the limitation station
section, and suggestions were given to the interested researchers to
advance this study beyond its current timeline.
4.2. Challenges of AI and ML in the education pedagogy
RQ 3: what are the perceived challenges in academic institutions in
adopting AI and ML in the education pedagogy from 2000 to 2021?
From the analyzed articles, a few of the articles enumerated some
challenges of artificial intelligence and machine learning in education
pedagogy. Before that, authors underscored the relevance of institu­
tionalizing artificial intelligence and machine learning functions in ed­
ucation pedagogy for instance Warburton (2003) stated that the use of
AI enhances mastery of technology by both the teachers and students
and can be used in curriculum development. Cheng, Chae, and Feng
(2021) opine that constant usage of AI and ML smart teaching devices
raises classroom teachers’ efficacy and digital confidence. Ali (2020)
postulates that AI with ML elements helps in human natural speech
training for speech-impaired and autistic learners for better learning
behavior and inclusive education, and Villegas-ch and Palacios-pacheco
E.F. Okagbue et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655

Table 6
AI education software/tools for teaching and learning.
S/ Software Inventor Country of Description Function Year of Source
N Origin Invention

1 C-Pen Christer Fåhraeus Sweden Pen with scanner Transfer text directly into a 1998 https://cpen.com/about-us/#:
computer
2 YouDao YouDao inc. China Dictionary pen Visual interactions through 2022 https://en.prnasia.com/
reading pen 3 point-reading for picture
books & tap and check which
translates in one tap.
3 ByteLearn Aditya Singhal and India Teaching Assistant Help students solve a maths 2021 https://www.bytelearn.com
Nishant Sinha problem.
4 Jil Watson Ashok Goel India AI teaching assistant Teaches and answers 2016 goel@cc.gatech.edu
questions from the students
5 Therapist Bot Joseph Weizenbaum Germany Tutorial Teaches you how to make a 1960 https://appinventor.mit.
tutorial therapist bot app using the edu/explore/resources/ai/th
app inventor erapist-bot#
6 Teachable Google USA Web tool Train a computer to recognize First https://teachablemachine.with
Machine your images, sounds, and version google.com/
poses 2017
7 Squirrel AI Derek Li China Tutorial Tutor students in math 2014 Squirrelai.com
8 Gradescope Pieter Abbeel, Arjun America Learning machine AI-assisted and manual 2014 www.gradescope.com
Singh, Ibrahim questioning group
Awwal Sergey
Karayev
9 Nuance’s Mark Benjamin United States Speech recognition Support verbal command and 1992 www.nuance.com
Dragon Speech and transcription navigate documents
Recognition
10 Altitude Max Ventilla United States Self-learning tool A learner-centered model that 2013 altitudelearning.com
Learning enables self-learning
11 Scikit-learn David Cournapeau Colombia Machine learning in Helps in data mining and data 2007 Scikit-learn.org
Python analysis
12 TensorFlow Google Brain Team Google Java script library Helps in training and building 2015 www.tensorflow.org
models
13 Weka University of New Zealand Data mining software Its algorithm helps in data 1993 www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~ml/w
Waikato in Java mining eka
14 KNIME Michael Berthold Germany Data analytic tool Combines different 2004 www.knime.org
components of machine
learning and data mining
15 Apache Mahout Apache Software USA Machine learning tool Helps mathematicians, 2009 Mahout.apache.org
Foundation statisticians, and data
scientists in executing their
algorithms.
16 Accord.Net CésarRoberto Europe Machine learning It provides an algorithm for 2010 www.accord-framwork.net
deSouza libraries for image and numerical linear algebra,
audio processing. image, audio, signal
processing, etc.
17 Shogun Minamoto Yorimoto Japan Unified large-scale Provides various algorithms 1992 http://shogun-toolbox.org/
learning for a broad and data structures for
range of feature types machine learning
and learning settings.
18 Keras.io François Chollet France API for neural It helps in doing quick 2022 https://keras.io/
networks research and is built into
Python.
19 Rapid Miner rapid miner Germany Machine learning & It can be used for research, 2001 rapidminer.com
deep learning education, and application
development.
20 PyTorch Adam Paszke Sam Meta AI (Astors Torch-based, machine- Can be used on cloud 2016 https://pytorch.org/
Gross Soumith Place, New learning library platforms
Chintala Gregory York City, New
Chanan York, USA

(2020) evince that the fusion of AI and ML helps in making predictions
of academic performance and progress in students enrollment possibil­
ity, monitoring and safeguarding the academic institutions and reducing
corruption in the academic environment, (see Appendix 1). Although
there are numerous benefits of AI and ML in education pedagogy, there
are many challenges that school administrators, educators, and class­
room teachers including students face while using AI and ML devices.
Out of the numerous challenges associated with understanding the
application of artificial intelligence and machine learning by teachers,
the below-enumerated challenges are more peculiar to the academic
institutions, which are;
(i) teachers with no in-depth knowledge of artificial intelligence and
machine learning, (ii) lack of artificial intelligence and machine
learning infrastructure in the school systems, (iii) lack of AI-
driven education curriculum, and (iv) lack of artificial intelli­
gence and machine learning education policy.
For (i) teachers with no in-depth knowledge of artificial intelligence
and machine learning. Up till date, some education instructors still
perceived AI and its elements as potential competitors that will displace
them from their jobs if fully adopted in academic institutions, hence
fighting against the fusion of AI and ML in classroom pedagogy (Thanh
et al., 2021). Due to this stiff-neck behavior, they lack 21st-century skills

10
E.F. Okagbue et al.
in teaching and grooming technocratic learners through education
digitization (Okagbue, Ezeachikulo, & Muhideen, 2022).
(ii) Lack of artificial intelligence and machine learning infrastructure
in the school systems. Some academic institutions have not
evolved into accepting AI and ML teaching devices as viable
mechanisms for achieving quality education due to a lack of
digital competencies and skills in operating them (Francis et al.,
2023). Financial constraints play a major role in the lack of smart
technology infrastructure; such as digital classrooms to facilitate
the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in
school settings (T. Wang & Cheng, 2021). One plausible argu­
ment for some education administrators and school leadership
not investing in establishing AI infrastructure in the school sys­
tem is due to a lack of full understanding of its functions and
operations in fostering seamless education (Luan et al., 2020).
(iii) Lack of AI-driven education curriculum: It is evident that not
having an AI and ML-driven curriculum that cannot foster the
practical teaching of education technology culture in a school,
which in turn hamper the mastery of the concepts, functions, and
general applications of artificial intelligence and machine
learning (Ouyang & Jiao, 2021). By having an AI-driven curric­
ulum, teachers and students can acquire 21st-century skills for
quality education.
(iv) Lack of artificial intelligence and machine learning education
policy: Educational policymakers are yet to develop workable
policies that can support the universal incorporation of artificial
intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) that will align with
education pedagogy (Luckin & Cukurova, 2019). To date, there is
no suitable education policy enacted to strengthen the institu­
tionalization of artificial intelligence and machine learning in
academic institutions. The policy is needed to stimulate the deep
and inventive use of AI and ML by instructors and students. The
intended AI and ML education policy will serve as a template for
effective teaching and learning in schools, and simultaneously
support education digitization to easily permeate in school
membrane for the adequate sustainability and optimization of
knowledge (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019).
4.3. The future of education pedagogy
RQ 4: What does the future hold for education pedagogy in the use of
AI and ML for education development?
Fig. 7 shows that artificial intelligence and its elements will keep
evolving up to or beyond 2060. This implies that more advanced AI and
ML software, tools, and technology will be invented. Interestingly, the
future of education pedagogy is assured as education innovators are
inventing standard education tools, APPS that will elevate teaching and
learning activities. For example; humanoid robots are invented to sup­
port classroom activities and serve as assistive teaching apparatus
(Nossier, Rizk, Moussa, & el Shehaby, 2019). Humanoid robotics seem
to play significant roles in aiding disabled learners with autism, speech
problems, auditory issues, and emotional disorder. This device is said to
potentiate some therapeutic abilities (Tuna & Tuna, 2019). Chatbots and
learning dashboards: these AI smart learning software have contributed
immensely to web-based learning and distance education. They provide
channels where students can communicate in real-time with the teach­
ers, and receive personalized feedback on their academic performance
(Andreoletti et al). Most importantly, the dashboard provides units for
storing class lessons and other learning resources for easy accessibility
and tracking learners’ academic progress (Kabudi, Pappas, & Olsen,
2021). And the current one, CHATGPT, a generative device is said to
possess multi-functional capabilities such that it provides guidelines and
support for (i) article writing, (ii) language assistance, (iii) mapping and
searching of literature, (iv) writing of academic articles, etc. And other
newly invented devices that provide smooth teaching and learning
11
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
activities (Andreoletti et al). With these discoveries, it is safe to say that
education pedagogy will keep on waxing stronger in the line of educa­
tion digitization for standardized learning and raising smart learners
(Nossier et al., 2019).
5. Conclusion
One evidential discovery from this study is that AI and ML are
gradually becoming known phenomena in education pedagogy.
Although, their functions, dynamics, and applications are not fully
comprehended by many classroom teachers, school administrators, and
leaders, due to ambiguities in operating AI and ML educational tech­
nology (Cope et al., 2020). The significance of this research is to inform
classroom teachers on the importance of adopting artificial intelligence
and machine learning tools for quality learning and cognitive stimula­
tion in learners and not to rely on blackboard, chalk, and their limited
textbooks, but use devices like Chatgpt and others for searching quality
learning materials that can impact students with current skills (Kim
et al., 2019). More so, our study uses a bibliometric approach to build a
track of research done on this topic from 2000 to 2021 to establish the
stance of AI and ML including in education pedagogy in this period, and
we discovered that AI, ML, and other assistive teaching and learning
technologies have not been fully integrated due to negative perception
of some classroom teachers, and school leaders (Francis et al., 2023).
Their perceptions corroborated with the challenges found in the aca­
demic institutions in accepting AI and ML educational devices which are
a lack of knowledge and understanding of AI and ML by teachers which
leads to the absence of AI and ML infrastructure in the school, etc. This is
said to be improved through constant teachers’ professional develop­
ment programs (TPD) to train them on how to operate AI and ML
classroom devices and essentially during course delivery (Bates, Cobo,
Mariño, & Wheeler, 2020).
The study was guided by four significant research questions (i) What
is the growth rate of article publications on AI and ML in education
pedagogy, (ii) the achievement of AI and ML in education pedagogy, (iii)
the challenges of AI and ML in education pedagogy, and (iv) what future
holds for the enhancement of education pedagogy. For the first RQ
(research question), the authors analyze the total article published from
2000 to 2021 and their citations as shown in Fig. 1. For further analysis
of that question, analysis of the top ten most cited articles, journals,
authors, and affiliations were explored to show the growth. The second
RQ was explored by highlighting the evolutions of AI including what it
brought as it metamorphose into different items and at the same
bringing new functions. In the process, we excavated AI and ML
educational software, tools, and APPS that were probably not known by
so many educators illustrated in Table 6. This is also part of the study’s
significance to inform teachers to learn and adopt some of them in
pedagogical activities (Kuleto et al., 2021). The third RQ is on the
challenges of AI and ML in education pedagogy, and to ameliorate those
challenges, we suggested that TPD (teachers’ professional development)
program is essential, suitable educational AI policy should be enacted to
institutionalize the proper policy that can drive quality AI education
curriculum for standard education. And the final RQ emphasizes the
future of education pedagogy, and we affirmed from this study outcome
that education pedagogy will continue to progress strongly as education
technology is predicted to keep evolving to a more sophisticated form,
which will digitize in-classroom and out-classroom learning completely.
It is worth noting that school management and administration will be
improved better in the future through the total application of AI and ML
(Rodr & Shirvanizadeh, 2021).
Finally, the overview of this study as indicated in the title is to bring a
holistic view of what has been done on AI and ML in the education
domain to suggest to the teachers, educators, policymakers, researchers,
and school leaders the lapses, gaps, challenges, and failures surrounding
the utilization of AI and ML in improving education pedagogy for
effective teaching and learning in the education institutions.
E.F. Okagbue et al.
6. Limitations, and further directions
Although this current study deeply explored the hidden literature
and stated the probably forgotten or unknown AI and ML educational
technologies that can help teachers to deliver class lessons effectively
and to dissipate the negative perception of teachers that artificial in­
telligence and machine learning tools are invented to displace them
from their jobs, in contrast, from the literature analyzed describe these
two elements as assistive devices that can be of greater help to teachers,
students and school managers to enhance the educational services.
Besides the strong points of the study, the authors agreed this current
research can also be limited on the following grounds; (i) the method­
ology, (ii) the choice of database, (iii) the analyzed literature, and the
selected timeline. First, the authors consider the bibliometric approach
as the suitable methodology for this research, and be used to adequately
answer the research questions and satisfy the aims of the study by
evaluating the publication growth rate, top ten active journals, cited
articles, authors, keywords, etc. However, we are not ignoring the fact
that other methodologies such as quantitative, qualitative, systematic
review, meta-analysis, etc., can equally be used to explore this topic.
And for that, we encourage future studies to consider other methodol­
ogies to explore this topic.
Second, the choice of database, the Scopus database was adopted as a
suitable repository that has a wider coverage of article publications on
AI and ML than other databases. And it is a globally approved academic
resource for scholarly activities, with extensive, comprehensive, and
validated scientific academic resources that are rich in scholarly content
on the discourse, at the same time linked to other global similar aca­
demic databases like WOS (web of Science), PubMed, google scholar,
and Mendeley that can equally provide robust insights to the topic. For
stronger reliability, future researchers are advised to consider incorpo­
rating other databases for data retrieval.
Third, though the authors have a fixed timeline for this study to
avoid complexities, without doubt, we believe that it may have affected
the nature of the downloaded papers, and suggest further studies to
extend their research to cover up to 2023 to get more new literature for
the study.
In screening the documents, our study included research articles,
chapters, and reviews, published in the English language. Future studies
on this topic can explore other types of published articles to bring more
prospects. Regardless of this study’s limitations, this research remains
the very first bibliometric research on AI and machine learning in edu­
cation pedagogy to bring in the existing knowledge to suggest the cur­
rent situation in the education system. Using the bibliometric approach,
the authors sought to provide the education community and researchers
with a 21-year trend of AI and ML, and their impacts in promoting smart
education.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Ekene Francis Okagbue: Project administration, Writing – review &
editing, Visualization, Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal anal­
ysis, Data curation, Writing – original draft. Ujunwa Perpetua
Ezeachikulo: Project administration, Writing – review & editing,
Visualization, Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data
curation, Writing – original draft. Tosin Yinka Akintunde: Project
administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing.
Mustapha Bala Tsakuwa: Visualization, Writing – review & editing.
Samuel Nchekwubemchukwu Ilokanulo: Visualization, Writing –
review & editing. Kosiso Modest Obiasoanya: Visualization, Writing –
review & editing. Chidiebere Emeka Ilodibe: Visualization, Writing –
review & editing. Cheick Amadou Tidiane Ouattara: Visualization,
Writing – review & editing.
12
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
Declaration of competing interest
We the authors of this article hereby state in confidence that there is
no conflict of interest among us.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100655.
References
Ahmad, S. F., Rahmat, M. K., Mubarik, M. S., Alam, M. M., & Hyder, S. I. (2021).
Artificial intelligence and its role in education. Sustainability, 13(22), 1–11. https://
doi.org/10.3390/su132212902
Akdeniz, M., & Özdinç, F. (2021). Maya: An artificial intelligence-based smart toy for
preschool children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 29, Article
100347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100347
Akintunde, T. Y., Musa, T. H., Musa, H. H., Musa, I. H., Shaojun, C., Ibrahim, E., et al.
(2021). Bibliometric analysis of global scientific literature on effects of COVID-19
pandemic on mental health. Asian Journal of Psychiatry. , Article 102753. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.AJP.2021.102753
Ali, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI): A review of its uses in language teaching and
learning. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 769(1). https://doi.
org/10.1088/1757-899X/769/1/012043
Andreoletti, D., & Ayoub, O. (n.d). Decisions of machine learning Model for detecting short
CHAT GPT- generated text. 1–11..
Aoun, J. (2017). Robot-Proof: Higher education in the age of artificial intelligence. https://
doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11456.001.0001
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science
mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Baker, R. S., & Ga, D. (2021). Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence Four
paradigms in learning analytics: Why paradigm convergence matters, 2(April) http
s://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100021.
Bates, T., Cobo, C., Mariño, O., & Wheeler, S. (2020). Can artificial intelligence transform
higher education ?.
Borko, H. (1985). Artificial intelligence and expert systems research and their possible
impact on information science education. Education for Information, 3(2), 103–114.
https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-1985-3203
Cavalcanti, A. P., Barbosa, A., Carvalho, R., Freitas, F., Tsai, Y. S., Gašević, D., et al.
(2021). Automatic feedback in online learning environments: A systematic literature
review. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
caeai.2021.100027
Chauhan, S., Mittal, M., Woźniak, M., Gupta, S., & de Prado, R. P. (2021). A technology
acceptance model-based analytics for online mobile games using machine learning
techniques. Symmetry, 13(8), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13081545
Cheng, J., Chae, M. H. C., & Feng, R. (2021). Stem education-career pathway for
emerging forensic analytics: Innovative professional development in multimodal
environments. J. Higher Educ. Theor. Pract., 21(8), 115–130. https://doi.org/
10.33423/JHETP.V21I8.4509
Chen, X., Xie, H., Zou, D., & Hwang, G. J. (2020). Application and theory gaps during the
rise of artificial intelligence in education. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 1
(July), Article 100002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100002
Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., Searsmith, D., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2020).
Artificial intelligence for education : Knowledge and its assessment in AI-enabled
learning ecologies Artificial intelligence for education : Knowledge and its
assessment in AI-enabled learning ecologies. Educational Philosophy and Theory,
1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1728732, 0(0).
Cox, A. M. (2021). Exploring the impact of Artificial Intelligence and robots on higher
education through literature-based design fiction. Int. J. Educ. Technol. Higher Educ.,
18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00237-8
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Marc, W. (2021). How to conduct a
bibliometric analysis : An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133
(March), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Duha, M. S. U. (2023). ChatGPT in education: An opportunity or a challenge for the
future? TechTrends (0123456789) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00844-y.
Edwards, B. I., & Cheok, A. D. (2018). Why not robot teachers: Artificial intelligence for
addressing teacher shortage. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 32(4), 345–360. https://
doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2018.1464286
Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production:
How great is the impact? Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-
z, 2015, 105-103:1808-1831.
Environment, L. (2021). A framework for using humanoid robots in the school learning
environment.
Ergen, M. (2019). What is artificial intelligence? Technical considerations and future
perception. The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology, 22, 5–7. https://doi.org/10.14744/
AnatolJCardiol.2019.79091
Francis, E., Perpetua, U., Nchekwubemchukwu, S., Emeka, I., Kosiso, O., Tidiane, A.,
et al. (2023). International Journal of Educational Research Open the effects of the
Covid-19 pandemic on the education system in Nigeria : The role of competency-
based education. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open, 4(August 2022), Article 100219. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2022.100219
E.F. Okagbue et al.
Gardner, J., O’Leary, M., & Yuan, L. (2021). Artificial intelligence in educational
assessment: ‘Breakthrough? Or buncombe and ballyhoo?’. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 37(5), 1207–1216. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12577
Gordon, C., & Debus, R. (2002). Developing deep learning approaches and personal
teaching efficacy within a preservice teacher education context. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 72(4), 483–511. https://doi.org/10.1348/
00070990260377488
Górriz, J. M., Ramírez, J., Ortíz, A., Martínez-murcia, F. J., Segovia, F., Suckling, J., et al.
(2020). Artificial intelligence within the interplay between natural and artificial
computation: Advances in data science, trends, and applications. Neurocomputing.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2020.05.078
Guo, J., Bai, L., Yu, Z., Zhao, Z., & Wan, B. (2021). An AI-application-oriented in-class
teaching evaluation.
Hamal, O., Faddouli, N. El, Hachem, M., Harouni, A., & Lu, J. (2022). Sustainability
artificial intelligent in education. (March). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052862.
Hsu, T. C., Abelson, H., Lao, N., Tseng, Y. H., & Lin, Y. T. (2021). Behavioral-pattern
exploration and development of an instructional tool for young children to learn AI.
Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2(January), Article 100012. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100012
Hwang, G. J., & Tu, Y. F. (2021). Roles and research trends of artificial intelligence in
mathematics education: A bibliometric mapping analysis and systematic review.
Mathematics, 9(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060584
Kabudi, T., Pappas, I., & Olsen, D. H. (2020). AI-enabled adaptive learning systems: A
systematic mapping of the literature. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2(March),
Article 100017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100017
Kabudi, T., Pappas, I., & Olsen, D. H. (2021). AI-enabled adaptive learning systems: A
systematic mapping of the literature. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2(March),
Article 100017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100017
Kim, C. M., Yuan, J., Kim, D., Doshi, P., Thai, C. N., Hill, R. B., et al. (2019). Studying the
usability of an intervention to promote teachers’ use of robotics in STEM education.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(8), 1179–1212. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0735633117738537
Klitmøller, J., & Klitmøller, J. (2017). Between ‘ pedagogy ’ and ‘ pädagogik ’: A critique
of lived pedagogy between ‘ pedagogy ’ and ‘ pädagogik ’ : A critique of lived
pedagogy, 4279 https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2017.1373138.
Kose, U., & Arslan, A. (2017). Optimization of self-learning in computer engineering
courses: An intelligent software system supported by artificial neural network and
vortex optimization algorithm. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 25(1),
142–156. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.21787
Kuleto, V., Ilić, M., Dumangiu, M., Ranković, M., Martins, O. M. D., Păun, D., et al.
(2021). Exploring opportunities and challenges of artificial intelligence and machine
learning in higher education institutions. Sustainability, 13(18), 1–16. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su131810424
Lavelle, J. M., Lovato, C., & Stephenson, C. (2020). Evaluation and program planning,
101786 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101786.
Lee, H. S., & Lee, J. (2021). Applying artificial intelligence in physical education and
future perspectives. Sustainability, 13(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su13010351
Luan, H., Geczy, P., Lai, H., Gobert, J., Yang, S. J. H., Ogata, H., et al. (2020). Challenges
and future directions of big data and artificial intelligence in education. Frontiers in
Psychology, 11(October), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.580820
Luckin, R., & Cukurova, M. (2019). sciences-driven approach, 0(0), 1–15 https://doi.org
/10.1111/bjet.12861.
Martí-Parreño, J., Méndez-Ibáñez, E., & Alonso-Arroyo, A. (2016). The use of
gamification in education: A bibliometric and text mining analysis. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12161
Mohammadreza, E., & Safabakhsh, R. (2021). Computers and Education : Artificial
Intelligence Lecture quality assessment based on the audience reactions using
machine learning and neural networks. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article
100022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100022
Musa, Ibrahim Hussein (2021). Artificial intelligence and machine learning in oncology:
Historical overview of documents indexed in the web of science database. Eurasian J.
Med. Oncol., 5(3), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.14744/ejmo.2021.24856
Musa, I. H., Afolabi, L., Musa, T. H., & Musa, H. H. (2022). Artificial intelligence and
machine learning in cancer research : A systematic and thematic analysis of the top
100 cited articles indexed in Scopus database artificial intelligence and machine
learning in cancer research : A systematic and thematic ana. (April). https://doi.
org/10.1177/10732748221095946.
Nossier, S. A., Rizk, M. R. M., Moussa, N. D., & el Shehaby, S. (2019). Enhanced smart
hearing aid using deep neural networks. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 58(2),
539–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2019.05.006
Offir, B., Lev, Y., & Bezalel, R. (2008). Surface and deep learning processes in distance
education: Synchronous versus asynchronous systems. Computers & Education, 51(3),
1172–1183.
Okagbue, E. F., Ezeachikulo, U. P., & Muhideen, S. (2022). The application of tpb
concepts in building innovative african entrepreneurs, and effective
13
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 8 (2023) 100655
entrepreneurship education in africa: A way forward for africa to post-covid-19
economic sustainability. The Future of Entrepreneurship in Afr.: Chall. Opportunities
Post-Pandemic, 162–185. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003216469-9
Ouyang, F., & Jiao, P. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: The three paradigms.
Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2(April). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
caeai.2021.100020
Palanivelu, V. R., & Vasanthi, B. (2020). Role of artificial intelligence in business
transformation. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol., 29(4 Special Issue), 392–400.
Pandey, A. K., & Gelin, R. (2017). Humanoid robots in education: A short review.
Humanoid Robotics: References, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7194-9_
113-1
Polito, G., & Temperini, M. (2021). A gamified web-based system for computer
programming learning. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100029.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100029
Popenici, S. A. D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on
teaching and learning in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology
Enhanced Learning, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8
Poquet, O., Kitto, K., Jovanovic, J., Dawson, S., Siemens, G., & Markauskaite, L. (2021).
Computers and education: Artificial intelligence transitions through lifelong
learning: Implications for learning analytics. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2,
Article 100039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100039
Rodr, I., & Shirvanizadeh, N. (2021). Applications of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
big data and the internet of things to the COVID-19 pandemic : A scientometric review
using text mining.
Roll, I., & Ford, H. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education,
582–599 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3.
Sandu, N., & Gide, E. (n.d.). Analysis of the main factors affecting the adoption of cloud-
based interactive mobile learning in the Australian higher education sector. Vol. 12
(4), 43–58..
Song, P., & Wang, X. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of worldwide educational artificial
intelligence research development in recent twenty years. Asia Pacific Education
Review, 21(3), 473–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-020-09640-2
Srinivasan, V., & Murthy, H. (2021). Computers and education: Artificial intelligence
improving reading and comprehension in K-12: Evidence from a large-scale AI
technology intervention in India. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2(April),
Article 100019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100019
Taecharungroj, V. (2023). “ what can ChatGPT do ?” analyzing early reactions to the
innovative AI chatbot on twitter.
Tedre, M., Toivonen, T., Kahila, J., Vartiainen, H., Valtonen, T., Jormanainen, I., et al.
(2021). Teaching machine learning in K – 12 classroom : Pedagogical and
technological trajectories for artificial intelligence education. IEEE Access, 9(August),
110558–110572. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3097962
Thanh, T., Duc, A., Thanh, H., & Nguyen, T. (2021). Computers and education : Artificial
intelligence NEU-chatbot : Chatbot for admission to national economics university.
Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
caeai.2021.100036
Timms, M. J. (2016). Letting artificial intelligence in education out of the box:
Educational cobots and smart classrooms. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence
in Education, 26(2), 701–712.
Tuna, A., & Tuna, G. (2019). The use of humanoid robots with multilingual interaction
skills in teaching a foreign language: Opportunities, research challenges, and future
research directions. Center for Educ. Pol. Stud. J., 9(3), 95–115. https://doi.org/
10.26529/cepsj.679
Villegas-ch, W., & Palacios-pacheco, X. (2020). Applied sciences improvement of an online
education model with the integration of machine learning and data analysis in an LMS.
Wang, T., & Cheng, E. C. K. (2021). An investigation of barriers to Hong Kong K-12
schools incorporating Artificial Intelligence in education. Comput. Educ.: Artificial
Intelligence, 2(April), Article 100031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100031
Wang, J., Hwang, G., & Chang, C. (2021). Computers and education : Artificial
intelligence directions of the 100 most cited chatbot-related human behavior
research : A review of academic publications. Comput. Educ.: Artificial Intelligence, 2,
Article 100023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100023
Warburton, K. (2003). Deep learning and education for sustainability. International
Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/
14676370310455332
Webb, M. E., Fluck, A., Magenheim, J., Malyn, J., Waters, J., Deschênes, M., et al. (2020).
Machine learning for human learners : Opportunities, issues, tensions, and threats.
Educational Technology Research and Development, Article 0123456789. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09858-2
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). A systematic
review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where
are the educators? Int. J. Educ. Technol. Higher Educ., 16(1). https://doi.org/
10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Zhu, X. (2015). Machine teaching: An inverse problem to machine learning and an approach
toward optimal education (pp. 4083–4087).