Editorial: Enhancing learning through cognitive and social inclusion practices in education

Résumé fourni par la source

Overall, the growing body of research in educational psychology highlights the need to understand learning as a multidimensional process in which cognitive, motivational, emotional, and social factors interact to shape educational outcomes (Immordino-Yang et al., 2019). Rather than being viewed solely as the acquisition of knowledge, learning is increasingly recognised as a socially situated process that depends on meaningful participation, supportive relationships, and equitable learning opportunities (Ainscow & Messiou, 2025;Biesta, 2022). Consequently, promoting cognitive and social inclusion has become a major priority for researchers, educators, and policy makers seeking to improve both educational quality and equity across educational systems (UNESCO, 2024). This evolving perspective has substantially enriched educational research while simultaneously revealing new theoretical and practical challenges.Within this framework, increasing attention has been devoted to active and student-centred pedagogies capable of simultaneously promoting academic achievement, well-being, and inclusion. Educational approaches such as Service-Learning, collaborative learning, peer assessment, mentoring, digital learning environments, and other participatory methodologies have consistently demonstrated their potential for strengthening self-regulated learning, critical thinking, learner engagement, and social participation (Jackson-Summers et al., 2024). Contemporary educational research therefore suggests that cognitive development and social inclusion should not be considered independent educational goals, but rather mutually reinforcing dimensions of meaningful learning (Ainscow & Messiou, 2025). This perspective is consistent with socio-constructivist approaches and with growing evidence demonstrating that inclusive educational practices enhance both learning processes and students' opportunities for participation and success (OECD, 2023).Beyond these pedagogical developments, contemporary education faces significant challenges arising from increasing cultural diversity, widening educational inequalities, and rapid technological transformation (Zhang et al., 2024). These developments require educational research to move beyond examining isolated psychological variables towards more comprehensive approaches capable of explaining how cognitive processes, socio-emotional development, pedagogical innovation, and contextual factors interact across diverse educational settings. Recent international reports similarly emphasise that inclusive education should be understood as a systemic process requiring coordinated action at classroom, institutional, and policy levels (Ainscow & Messiou, 2025;OECD, 2023;UNESCO, 2024).Together, these developments reinforce the need to design learning environments that integrate cognitive engagement, social participation, and inclusive pedagogies as complementary dimensions of educational quality.Against this background, the Research Topic Enhancing Learning through Cognitive and Social Inclusion Practices in Education seeks to advance understanding of how educational psychology can contribute to improving teaching and learning through cognitively and socially inclusive educational practices (Korthals Altes et al., 2024).The contributions included in this Research Topic encompass empirical studies, intervention research, qualitative investigations, reviews, and conceptual contributions that collectively advance current knowledge in this field. Although the articles differ in methodology, educational level, and research context, they share a common focus on understanding how innovative pedagogical approaches can simultaneously foster cognitive development, social inclusion, learner well-being, and equitable educational participation. More specifically, the published studies examine how these educational approaches influence cognitive processes and learning outcomes, explore the psychological mechanisms underlying active learning methodologies-particularly among vulnerable populations-and identify educational practices capable of promoting equitable participation, academic success, and learner well-being across diverse educational contexts. Collectively, the Research Topic provides an interdisciplinary perspective on the dynamic relationships among cognition, inclusion, and educational practice while offering evidence to inform future research, educational innovation, and evidence-based educational policy (Ruiz-Montero et al., 2023).The Research Topic brings together a diverse body of research that reflects the growing international interest in cognitively and socially inclusive educational practices across different educational settings, populations, and methodological traditions. During the call for papers, which remained open between February 2025 and June 2026, a total of 82 manuscripts were submitted (121 authors), with 38 manuscripts successfully completing the review process and being accepted for publication, including one correction article. The resulting collection is predominantly composed of empirical quantitative studies, with cross-sectional designs representing the largest methodological group. The Research Topic also includes a substantial number of intervention studies, mainly based on experimental and quasi-experimental designs, several qualitative and mixed-methods investigations that provide an in-depth understanding of educational processes, one meta-analysis, one narrative review, and one conceptual perspective article. Although a few studies incorporated longitudinal follow-up components, these were relatively limited in number. Geographically, the collection is dominated by research conducted in China (n = 23; 62.2%), reflecting the growing prominence of research on cognitive and social inclusion within Asian educational contexts. Additional contributions were carried out in Spain (n = 3; 8.1%), Turkey (n = 3; 8.1%), Italy (n = 1; 2.7%), Indonesia (n = 1; 2.7%), Ukraine (n = 1; 2.7%), Hungary (n = 1; 2.7%), Libya (n = 1; 2.7%), and the United States (n = 1; 2.7%). Furthermore, two articles (5.4%)-a narrative review and a meta-analysis-synthesised evidence from multiple international contexts rather than focusing on a single country.Regarding the participant profiles represented across the published studies, university populations clearly predominate, particularly students from Chinese higher education institutions. Nevertheless, the Research Topic also encompasses a broad spectrum of educational stakeholders, including children in early childhood, primary, and secondary education, teachers, families, older adults, and groups commonly associated with inclusive education, such as individuals with intellectual disabilities, Roma students, Hispanic children with learning difficulties, and international students. This diversity of participants broadens the scope of the collection and reflects the multidimensional nature of cognitive and social inclusion across the educational lifespan and a wide range of educational contexts.All accepted contributions can be organized into four predominant thematic areas, although some articles address more than one area due to the interdisciplinary nature of their research questions and findings. These areas are: The first thematic area, Cognitive Processes and Learning, examines the psychological and cognitive mechanisms that enable knowledge acquisition, regulation, and application across different educational stages and disciplinary contexts. Representative topics include attention, memory, executive functions, reasoning, critical thinking, reading comprehension, disciplinary competence, self-regulated learning, metacognition, learning strategies, feedback processes, academic selfefficacy, and academic achievement.The second area, Motivation, Well-being, and Socio-emotional Development, brings together research focusing on the emotional, motivational, relational, and identity-rela

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.