The emergence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Virtual Reality (VR) technologies offers transformative potential for the advancement of inclusive education, particularly for students with disabilities. This systematic review critically evaluates the current state of research to assess the impact of AI and VR on enhancing educational accessibility, personalisation and social inclusion in education. AI-driven adaptive systems can dynamically tailor learning experiences to individual needs, while VR offers immersive, multi-sensory environments that promote experiential learning. Despite these advances, the review also identifies significant challenges, including the high cost of implementation, technical barriers and limited teacher readiness, which hinder widespread adoption. Ethical concerns such as privacy and algorithmic bias are cited as key areas that need careful consideration. The findings underscore the urgent need for further empirical research to explore the long-term impact of these technologies and advocate for more equitable access to AI and VR tools in underserved educational settings. Ultimately, the review highlights the importance of integrating AI and VR as part of a broader strategy to foster genuinely inclusive learning environments that align with the goals of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

Purpose: Adaptive educational technologies are increasingly used to support emotional engagement in students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), yet their overall effectiveness remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the impact of adaptive technologies on emotional engagement outcomes and to examine methodological and study-level moderators. Methods: Fourteen independent samples from 14 studies published between 2011 and 2024 were included, comprising 524 participants aged 4–17 years ( M _age = 10.6, SD = 2.9; 21.7% female). Results: Random-effects models with restricted maximum-likelihood (REML) estimation were used to calculate pooled effect sizes. The overall pooled effect size was Hedges’ g = 0.47 (95% CI 0.36–0.58), reflecting a moderate positive effect of adaptive technologies on emotional engagement. Significant heterogeneity was observed (I ² = 69.22%), and moderator analyses indicated that intervention type (e.g., VR/AR vs. gamified or tablet-based platforms) significantly influenced outcomes ( p = .049). Effect sizes were highest for VR/AR-based tools ( g = 0.53). No significant differences emerged by age, geographical region, or study design. Studies with high risk of bias reported larger effect sizes than low-risk studies. Conclusions: Overall, findings support the potential of adaptive technologies to improve emotional engagement in students with ASD. Methodological consistency and the use of validated outcome measures are recommended to enhance future evidence synthesis.