Search

Artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) is a fast-growing field of research. In previous work, we described efforts to explore the possible futures of AIEd by identifying key variables and their future prospects. This paper re-examines our discussions on the governance of data and the role of students and teachers by considering the implications of (1) a recent case related to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and (2) the release of ChatGPT, a generative AI model capable to producing 'human-like' text. These events raise questions for the future of AIEd and the underlying function of assessment, and highlight the importance of active student participation in the integration of AI in education. [This article has been presented in the 5th International Open & Distance Learning Conference-IODL 2022.]

This paper charts a forward-looking roadmap for open universities, drawing upon their historical evolution and current practices. It advocates a shift toward a universally accessible, personalized education system. At the heart of this proposed advancement lies the customization of learning paths and experiences, where individualized advising and mentorship, and a variety of learning content, resources, and environments are essential. The study underscores the importance of integrating advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain into the open and distance education system. Within the discourse, the paper delineates three primary areas for open universities to address: system transformation, expansion of openness, and integration of digital innovation. The concluding part of the paper offers possible strategic recommendations for policymakers and researchers of open universities. The essence of these recommendations is advocating for a universally personalized educational paradigm while making a strong case for addressing the digital divide, fostering strong partnerships at both global and community levels, and supporting the use of the latest technology to its fullest potential. By navigating this transformative journey, open universities are not just participating in the evolution of educational models but also poised to lead a revolution in the broader landscape of higher education.

Background: Driven by the ongoing need to provide high-quality learning and teaching, universities recently have shown an increased interest in using learning analytics (LA) for improving learning design (LD). However, the evidence of such improvements is scarce, and the maturity of such research is unclear. Objectives: This study is aimed to evaluate the maturity of research discussing LA-driven LD improvements in higher education. Methods: The systematic review analyses 49 empirical papers, assesses their quality and suggests further research directions. The review elaborates on methodological (research questions, strategy and methods, LA-LD integration theoretical backgrounds) and substantial (LA-driven LD improvements, types of data used, LA software development) features of the papers. Results and Conclusions: The findings demonstrated the lack of theoretical alignment between LA and LD, with research tending towards user experience studies. The most frequently used research strategy was a case study; experiments were very rare. Researchers predominantly used parsing for collecting data and AI methods for analysing it; mostly used data types related to registering learners' engagement with learning activities as well as resources and tools provided in digital learning environments. Takeaways: The research area discussing LA-driven LD improvements still has a way to go before attaining the level of full maturity. Only a third of the papers reported actual LA-driven LD improvements; moreover, only three papers measured their effectiveness. The presented LA software was mostly at the beta or implementation stages and did not assess the impact of using this software.

Purpose: This paper aims to center the experiences of three cohorts (n = 40) of Black high school students who participated in a critical race technology course that exposed anti-blackness as the organizing logic and default setting of digital and artificially intelligent technology. This paper centers the voices, experiences and technological innovations of the students, and in doing so, introduces a new type of digital literacy: critical race algorithmic literacy. Design/methodology/approach: Data for this study include student interviews (called "talk backs"), journal reflections and final technology presentations. Findings: Broadly, the data suggests that critical race algorithmic literacies prepare Black students to critically read the algorithmic word (e.g. data, code, machine learning models, etc.) so that they can not only resist and survive, but also "rebuild" and "reimagine" the algorithmic world. Originality/value: While critical race media literacy draws upon critical race theory in education - a theorization of race, and a critique of white supremacy and multiculturalism in schools - critical race algorithmic literacy is rooted in critical race technology theory, which is a theorization of blackness as a technology and a critique of algorithmic anti-blackness as the organizing logic of schools and AI systems.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to share findings from empirically driven conceptual research into the implications for English teachers of understanding generative AI as a "tool" for writing. Design/methodology/approach: The paper reports early findings from an Australian National Survey of English teachers and interrogates the notion of the AI writer as "tool" through intersectional feminist discursive-material analysis of the metaphorical entailments of the term. Findings: Through this work, the authors have developed the concept of "coloniser tool-thinking" and juxtaposed it with First Nations and feminist understandings of "tools" and "objects" to demonstrate risks to the pursuit of social and planetary justice through understanding generative AI as a tool for English teachers and students. Originality/value: Bringing together white and First Nations English researchers in dialogue, the paper contributes a unique perspective to challenge widespread and common-sense use of "tool" for generative AI services.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to provide a transcript of a dialogue among literacy educators and researchers on the impact of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in the field. In the spring of 2023, a lively conversation emerged on the National Council of Research on Language and Literacy (NCRLL)'s listserv. Stephanie initiated the conversation by sharing an op-ed she wrote for "Atlanta Journal-Constitution" about the rise of ChatGPT and similar generative AI platforms, moving beyond the general public's concerns about student cheating and robot takeovers. NCRLL then convened a webinar of eight leading scholars in writing and literacies development, inspired by that listserv conversation and an organizational interest in promoting intergenerational collaboration among literacy scholars. Design/methodology/approach: As former doctoral students of two of the panel participants, webinar facilitators Grace and Victoria positioned themselves primarily as learners about this topic and gathered questions from colleagues, P-16 practitioners and those outside the field of education to assess the concerns and wonderings that ChatGPT and generative AI have raised. The following webinar conversation was recorded on two different days due to scheduling conflicts. It has been merged and edited into one dialogue for coherence and convergence. Findings: Panel participants raise a host of questions and issues that go beyond topics of ethics, morality and basic writing instruction. Furthermore, in dialogue with one another, they describe possibilities for meaningful pedagogy and critical literacy to ensure that generative AI is used for a socially just future for students. While the discussion addressed matters of pedagogy, definitions of literacy and the purpose of (literacy) education, other themes included a critique of capitalism; an interrogation of the systems of power and oppression involved in using generative AI; and the philosophical, ontological, ethical and practical life questions about being human. Originality/value: This paper provides a glimpse into one of the first panel conversations about ChatGPT and generative AI in the field of literacy. Not only are the panel members respected scholars in the field, they are also former doctoral students and advisors of one another, thus positioning all involved as both learners and teachers of this new technology.