Learning transfer (i.e. accelerated learning over a series of structurally related learning tasks) differentiates species and age-groups, but the evolutionary and developmental implications of such differences are unclear. To this end, the relational schema induction paradigm employing tasks that share algebraic (group-like) structures was introduced to contrast stimulus-independent (relational) versus stimulus-dependent (associative) learning processes. However, a theory explaining this kind of relational learning transfer has not been forthcoming beyond a general appeal to some form of structure-mapping, as typically assumed in models of analogy. In this paper, we provide a theory of relational schema induction as a “reconstruction” process: the algebraic structure underlying transfer is reconstructed by comparing stimulus relations, learned within each task, for structural consistency across tasks—formally, the theory derives from a category theory version of Tannakian reconstruction. The theory also applies to non-human studies of relational concepts, thereby placing human and non-human transfer on common ground for sharper comparison and contrast. As the theory and paradigm do not depend on linguistic ability, we also have a way for pinpointing where aspects of human learning diverge from other species without begging the question of language., Author summary Learning transfer—an improvement in the rate of learning over a series of learning tasks—differs between species and age-groups, but the implications of such differences are unclear. Relational schema induction is a form of learning transfer that highlights relational aspects of learning. However, a theory explaining this kind of induction and transfer has not been forthcoming beyond a general appeal to some form of analogical mapping, as typically assumed in models of analogy. I present a theory of relational schema induction as a “reconstruction” process: the common structure affording transfer is reconstructed by comparing stimulus relations learned within each task for structural consistency across tasks. The theory also applies to non-human studies of relational concepts, thereby placing human and non-human studies on common ground for a clearer comparison and contrast.