Beyond AI Teammates: Collective Vicarious Cognition as a Framework for Educational Multi-Agent Systems

Autori

  • Lydia Zampolini
  • Fabrizio Lo Presti
  • Giuseppina Rita Jose Mangione
  • Manuel Gentile

Parole chiave:

Collective Vicarious Cognition; Educational Multi-Agent Systems; Social Learning Theory; Collective Agency; Vicarious Learning; Human–AI Collaboration

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is assuming an increasingly prominent role in educational contexts, yet the notion of the “AI teammate” is often reduced to the generative capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). Such a view preserves a tool-centred logic in which AI supports individual productivity without substantially contributing to collaborative learning processes. This paper argues that meaningful forms of human–AI collaboration in education require socio-technical architectures capable of organizing cognitive plurality and making reasoning processes visible, interpretable and open to evaluation. Drawing on Social Learning Theory, the concept of vicariousness, and perspectives on collective agency, the paper introduces the concept of Collective Vicarious Cognition (CVC) as a pedagogical framework for understanding learning as engagement with multiple, interacting cognitive trajectories. Within this perspective, learning emerges not simply through exposure to information, but through the observation, comparison, interpretation, and regulation of distributed forms of reasoning. Multi-agent systems based on LLMs (LLM-MAS) are examined as a possible educational infrastructure capable of supporting these conditions by distributing cognitive roles across interacting agents and rendering epistemic plurality observable. The paper argues that the educational significance of AI teammates lies less in their capacity to generate responses than in their potential to support organized cognitive diversity, reflective judgment, collective agency, and collaborative knowledge construction within hybrid human–AI learning environments.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Anthropic. (2024). Claude [Large language model]. Anthropic.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

Berthoz, A. (2013). La vicariance: Le cerveau créateur de mondes. Odile Jacob.

Biesta, G. J. J. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315634319

Edelman, G. M., & Gally, J. A. (2001). Degeneracy and complexity in biological systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(24), 13763–13768. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.231499798

Flathmann, C., McNeese, N. J., Schelble, B., Knijnenburg, B., & Freeman, G. (2024). Understanding the impact and design of AI teammate etiquette. Human–Computer Interaction, 39(5–6), 444–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2023.2189595

Gajewska, E., Wawer, M., Budzynska, K., & Chudziak, J. A. (2025). Leveraging a multi-agent LLM-based system to educate teachers in hate incidents management. In A. I. Cristea, E. Walker, Y. Lu, O. C. Santos, & S. Isotani (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence in Education: 26th International Conference, AIED 2025, Palermo, Italy, July 22–26, 2025, Proceedings, Part I (pp. 332–339). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98462-4_42

Greene, J. A., Sandoval, W. A., & Bråten, I. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of epistemic cognition. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315795225

Harbar, Y., & Chudziak, J. A. (2025). Simulating Oxford-style debates with LLM-based multi-agent systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 286–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-6008-7_21

Hou, X., Forsyth, C., Andrews-Todd, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2025). An LLM-enhanced multi-agent architecture for conversation-based assessment. In A. I. Cristea, E. Walker, Y. Lu, O. C. Santos, & S. Isotani (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence in Education: 26th International Conference, AIED 2025, Palermo, Italy, July 22–26, 2025, Proceedings, Part III (pp. 119–134). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-98417-4_9

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MIT Press.

Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.748006

Lo Presti, F., Gentile, M., Mangione, G. R. J., & Zampolini, L. (2025). Reimagining AI agents for education: The evolution towards collaborative large language model multi-agent systems. In ICERI2025 Proceedings (pp. 6936–6944). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2025.1903

Luzolo, P. H., Elrawashdeh, Z., Tchappi, I., Galland, S., & Outay, F. (2024). Combining multi-agent systems and artificial intelligence of things: Technical challenges and gains. Internet of Things, 28, 101364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2024.101364

McNeese, N. J., Schelble, B. G., Canonico, L. B., & Demir, M. (2021). Who/what is my teammate? Team composition considerations in human–AI teaming. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 51(4), 288–299. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2021.3071180

Morin, E. (1999). Les sept savoirs nécessaires à l’éducation du futur. UNESCO.

Muis, K. R., Psaradellis, C., Lajoie, S., Di Leo, I., & Chevrier, M. (2015). The role of epistemic emotions in mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 172–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.003

Mushtaq, A., Naeem, M. R., Ghaznavi, I., Taj, M. I., Hashmi, I., & Qadir, J. (2025). Harnessing multi-agent LLMs for complex engineering problem-solving: A framework for senior design projects. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2501.01205

OpenAI. (2026). ChatGPT (GPT-5) [Large language model]. OpenAI. https://chat.openai.com/

Park, B., & Seo, K. (2025). Assessing critical thinking through a multi-agent LLM-based debate chatbot. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706599.3721207

Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2003). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Prentice Hall.

Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832

Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J. D., & Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 1–51). Information Age Publishing.

Seeber, I., Bittner, E., Briggs, R. O., de Vreede, T., de Vreede, G. J., Elkins, A., Maier, R., Merz, A. B., Oeste-Reiß, S., Randrup, N., Schwabe, G., & Söllner, M. (2020). Machines as team-mates: A research agenda on AI in team collaboration. Information & Management, 57(2), 103174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103174

Stone, P., & Veloso, M. (2000). Multiagent systems: A survey from a machine learning perspective. Autonomous Robots, 8(3), 345–383. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008942012299

Volet, S., Vauras, M., & Salonen, P. (2009). Self- and social regulation in learning contexts: An integrative per-spective. Educational Psychologist, 44(4), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903213584

Zampolini, L., Gentile, M., & Mangione, G. R. J. (2025). Empowering teachers’ creativity: Agentification for design thinking and school innovation. In ICERI2025 Proceedings (pp. 7185–7193). https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2025.1970

Zampolini, L., Mangione, G. R. J., & Gentile, M. (2025). Structured roles in design thinking to foster school innovation: A pilot study in small Italian schools. In EDULEARN25 Proceedings (pp. 6491–6500). https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2025.1597

Zhang, G., Chong, L., Kotovsky, K., & Cagan, J. (2023). Trust in an AI versus a human teammate: The effects of teammate identity and performance on human–AI cooperation. Computers in Human Behavior, 139, 107536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107536

##submission.downloads##

Pubblicato

2026-07-20

Come citare

Zampolini, L. ., Lo Presti, F. ., Mangione, G. R. J., & Gentile, M. . (2026). Beyond AI Teammates: Collective Vicarious Cognition as a Framework for Educational Multi-Agent Systems. Journal of Inclusive Methodology and Technology in Learning and Teaching, 6(1sup). Recuperato da https://www.inclusiveteaching.it/index.php/inclusiveteaching/article/view/745

Puoi leggere altri articoli dello stesso autore/i