Integrating AI and EdTech into Inclusive Learning: A Cross-Regional Study of Russia and Kazakhstan

This article evaluates how artificial intelligence (AI) and educational technology (EdTech) support inclusive learning in Russia and Kazakhstan, two Eurasian countries that share post-Soviet educational legacies but differ in their levels of digital infrastructure and teacher preparedness. Using an asymmetric mixed-methods design, the study draws on a primary survey of N = 2570 educators and staff in four Russian cities (Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk; October–December 2024; response rate 59.8%) and secondary policy/indicator analysis for Kazakhstan. Russia exhibits higher broadband access, AI/EdTech platform adoption, and teacher digital skill levels compared with Kazakhstan. Structural equation modeling (SEM; SmartPLS 4.1) tested four latent constructs—learning environment (LE), general digital competencies (HCg), specialized AI skills (HCs), and inclusion (I)—with satisfactory validity (AVE > 0.5; HTMT ≤ 0.85). A three-stage Measurement Invariance of Composite Models (MICOM) procedure confirmed configural, compositional, and full mean/variance invariance across Russian city subgroups, enabling pooled path analysis. Kazakhstan indicators from secondary sources are discussed as a descriptive benchmark. Semi-structured interviews with 24 stakeholders (12 Russia, 12 Kazakhstan; March 2025; analyzed with NVivo 14) revealed four themes: policy coherence, teacher readiness, infrastructure access, and ethical AI governance. Key SEM paths were LE → HCg (β = 0.278), HCg → HCs (β = 0.652), and HCs → I (β = 0.188), all p < 0.001. A formal mediation analysis confirmed a significant indirect effect across the full LE → HCg → HCs → I chain. The findings indicate that infrastructure is necessary but insufficient: the key to inclusion lies in sustained development of both basic and specialized digital skills, supported by coherent policies and continuous professional development. China and India are discussed as secondary international benchmarks drawn from published reports, not as sites of primary data collection.