Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose This study develops the AI-Experiential Learning Orchestration (AIELO) framework as a systems-level, theory-building model that links Kolb’s four-stage experiential cycle to concrete artificial-intelligence affordances while embedding an ethics-of-care rubric. It addresses the absence of an integrative, ethically grounded, and pedagogically explicit framework for AI-enhanced experiential learning. Methodology An interdisciplinary mixed-methods evidence-synthesis design combined (i) a PRISMA-aligned random-effects meta-analysis of 46 AI-mediated experiential trials (N approx. 4,500), (ii) sequence-clustering of approx. 32,000 learner trajectories from open datasets, and (iii) bibliometric network analysis of 237 Scopus/Web of Science publications (2020-2025). These methods were used to examine the empirical plausibility of specific AIELO components and propositions, not to field-test the framework as a fully integrated intervention model. Findings The meta-analysis revealed a moderate overall effect of AI on learning outcomes (Hedges’ g approx. 0.50), with collaborative and immersive (VR) implementations outperforming AI tutoring. Learner-analytics identified distributed versus massed engagement patterns; consistent, spaced interaction predicted higher achievement. Bibliometric mapping uncovered six thematic clusters - AI literacy, experiential pedagogy, ethics, digital competence, adaptive analytics, and immersive media - signalling a converging multidisciplinary research front. Taken together, these strands provide convergent but indirect support for the framework’s component relationships. Practical Implications The study offers provisional design implications for AI-supported experiential learning, especially for the orchestration of authentic experience, feedback, conceptual guidance, and iterative practice. Originality/Value By unifying theory development with multi-source evidence synthesis, AIELO offers scholars, educators, and policymakers a conceptually explicit and empirically informed framework whose integrated claims now require direct testing in real educational settings.
Sangwa et al. (Tue,) studied this question.