Qualitative content analysis reveals varied approaches to inclusion and equity in AI policies across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, indicating structural barriers to access.
Abstract This paper examines how inclusion and educational equity are conceptualized and thematized in national AI and education policies in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (the DACH region). Through a qualitative content analysis of 10 policy documents, this study explores how these policies articulate inclusion and equity, and whether they include concrete implementation plans. The analysis was conducted using MAXQDA, combining inductive codes related to inclusion and equity with a deductive framework. The policy analysis reveals a contrast in how the DACH region approaches inclusive and equitable AI education. Germany uses explicit equity metrics and funding, Austria relies on implicit STEM-focused inclusion, and Switzerland’s decentralized model yields fragmented, declarative measures, all three lacking enforceable commitments or measurable targets. This paper presents the first comparative analysis of how inclusion and equity are addressed in AI policy documents in the DACH region. It highlights promising examples of inclusive governance while also pinpointing structural barriers that may impede equitable access to AI-supported learning. Building on these insights, this paper develops targeted recommendations for future policy development, advocating not only for the integration of inclusion and equity as core principles in national AI policies but also for conceiving inclusion as a collaborative, cross-border effort that leverages shared good practices and joint oversight.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bešić et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: