Against Artificial Education: Towards an Ethical Framework for Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use in Education

Andrew Swindell; Luke Greeley; Antony Farag; Bailey Verdone

doi:10.24059/olj.v28i2.4438

Authors

Andrew Swindell Asian University for Women
Luke Greeley Rutgers Business School https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5544-1589
Antony Farag Rutgers Graduate School of Education https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0771-2268
Bailey Verdone Rutgers Graduate School of Education

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i2.4438

Keywords:

generative artificial intelligence (AI), Bloom's Taxonomy, Paolo Friere, philosophy of technology, Gunther Anders

Abstract

The arrival of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) is fundamentally different from prior technologies used in educational settings. Educators and researchers of online, blended, and in-person learning are still coming to grips with possible applications of AI in the learning experience with existing technologies; let alone understanding the potential consequences that future developments in AI will produce. Despite potential risks, AI may revolutionize previous models of teaching and learning and perhaps create opportunities to realize progressive educational goals. Given the longstanding tradition of philosophy to examine questions surrounding ethics, ontology, technology, and education, the purpose of this critical reflection paper is to draw from prominent philosophers across these disciplines to address the question: how can AI be employed in future educational contexts in a humanizing and ethical manner? Drawing from the work of Gunther Anders, Michel Foucault, Paolo Freire, Benjamin Bloom, and Hannah Arendt, we propose a framework for assessing the use and ethics of AI in modern education contexts regarding human versus AI generated textual and multimodal content, and the broader political, social, and cultural implications. We conclude with applied examples of the framework and implications for future research and practice.

References

An, T., & Oliver, M. (2021). What in the world is educational technology? Rethinking the field from the perspective of the philosophy of technology. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(1), 6–19.

Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K–12 settings. AI and Ethics, 2(3), 431–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00096-7

Anders, G. (1956/2002). Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen: Über die Seele im Zeitalter der zweiten industriellen Revolution. C.H. Beck.

Anders, G. (1962). Theses for the Atomic Age. The Massachusetts Review, 3(3), 493–505. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25086864

Anders, G. (2015). The obsolescence of man, volume II: On the destruction of life in the epoch of the third industrial revolution. (Recluse, A., Trans.) Libcom.org. (Original work published 1980). Accessed October 30, 2023, at: https://libcom.org/book/export/html/51647

Anders, G. (2009). The pathology of freedom. (Wolfe, K., Trans). In Bischof, G., Dawsey, J., & Fetz, B. (Eds.) (2014). The life and work of Günther Anders: émigré, iconoclast, philosopher, man of letters. Studien Verlag, Austria. (Original work published in 1936).

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Arendt, H. (1958/2013). The human condition (2nd ed.) University of Chicago Press.

Arendt, H. (1963/2006). Eichmann in Jerusalem. Penguin Publishing Group.

Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

Baidoo-Anu, D., & Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52–62.

Thanh, B. N., Vo, D. T. H., Nhat, M. N., Pham, T. T. T., Trung, H. T., & Xuan, S. H. (2023). Race with the machines: Assessing the capability of generative AI in solving authentic assessments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8902

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans.

Boyd, D. (2016). What would Paulo Freire think of Blackboard. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 7(1), 22.

Bozkurt, A. (2024). GenAI et al.: Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics and integrity in a time of generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.654

Catalani, F. (2020). Anticipation as critique: Objective phantasy from Ernst Bloch to Günther Anders. Praktyka teoretyczna, 35, 149–166.

Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., & Järvelä, S. (2022). The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for teachers: A systematic review of research. TechTrends, 66(4), 616-630.

Crawford, J., Cowling, M., & Allen, K. A. (2023). Leadership is needed for ethical ChatGPT: Character, assessment, and learning using artificial intelligence (AI). Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(3), 02.

Crompton, H., Burke, D., & Lin, Y.-C. (2019). Mobile learning and student cognition: A systematic review of PK-12 research using Bloom’s Taxonomy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 684–701. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12674

Damaševičius, R. (2023). The rise of ChatGPT and the demise of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Learning Stages. In Creative AI Tools and Ethical Implications in Teaching and Learning (pp. 115–134). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0205-7.ch006

Dawsey, J. (2013). The limits of the human in the age of technological revolution: Günther Anders, post-Marxism, and the emergence of technology critique. (Publication No. 3568370) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/openview/97326c30c7b44c5e6e7684e17262cbe2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750

Dobson, J. E. (2023). On reading and interpreting black box deep neural networks. International Journal of Digital Humanities, 5(2), 431–449.

Elsayed, S. (2023). Towards mitigating ChatGPT’s negative impact on education: Optimizing question design through Bloom’s Taxonomy (arXiv:2304.08176). arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.08176

Farag, A., Greeley, L., & Swindell, A. (2021). Freire 2.0: Pedagogy of the digitally oppressed. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2021.2010541

Farrelly, T., & Baker, N. (2023). Generative Artificial Intelligence: Implications and considerations for higher education practice. Education Sciences, 13(11), 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111109

Freire, P. (1965). Education for critical consciousness. Bloomsbury Academic.

Freire, P. (1968). Pedagogy of the Oppressed: 30th Anniversary Edition. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.

Freire, P. (1997). Politics and education. UCLA Latin American Center.

Freire, P. (2005). Education for critical consciousness. Continuum.

Fuchs, C. (2017). Günther Anders’ undiscovered critical theory of technology in the age of big data capitalism. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society, 15(2), 582–611.

Giantini, G. (2023). The sophistry of the neutral tool: Weaponizing artificial intelligence and big data into threats toward social exclusion. AI and Ethics, 3(4), 1049–1061. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00311-7

Jin, S.-H., Im, K., Yoo, M., Roll, I., & Seo, K. (2023). Supporting students’ self-regulated learning in online learning using artificial intelligence applications. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00406-5

Kahn, R., & Kellner, D. (2004). New media and internet activism: From the “Battle of Seattle” to blogging. New Media & Society, 6(1), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804039908

Laricchia, F. (2023) Smartphone penetration worldwide as share of global population 2016–2022. Statista. Retrieved January, 6 2024, from https://www-statista-com.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu/statistics/203734/global-smartphone-penetration-per-capita-since-2005/

Lin, Jingjing, ChatGPT and Moodle Walk into a Bar: A Demonstration of AI’s Mind-blowing

Impact on E-Learning (March 20, 2023). Available at SSRN:

https://ssrn.com/abstract=4393445 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4393445

Loftus, M., & Madden, M. G. (2020). A pedagogy of data and artificial intelligence for student subjectification. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(4), 456–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1748593

Lourenco, A. P., Slanetz, P. J., & Baird, G. L. (2023). Rise of ChatGPT: It may be time to reassess how we teach and test radiology residents. Radiology, 307(5), e231053. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.231053

Lorenzini, D. (2015). What is a “Regime of Truth”? Le foucaldien. 1(1). doi:10.16995/lefou.2

Markauskaite, L., Marrone, R., Poquet, O., Knight, S., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Howard, S., ... & Siemens, G. (2022). Rethinking the entwinement between artificial intelligence and human learning: What capabilities do learners need for a world with AI? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100056.

Marr, B. (2024, February 13). AI Showdown: ChatGPT vs. Google’s Gemini—Which reigns

supreme? Forbes.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2024/02/13/ai-showdown-chatgpt-vs-googles-gemini-which-reigns-supreme/?sh=518ed7746072

Masapanta-Carrión, S., & Velázquez-Iturbide, J. Á. (2018). A systematic review of the use of Bloom’s Taxonomy in computer science education. Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159491

McIntosh, T. R., Liu, T., Susnjak, T., Watters, P., Ng, A., & Halgamuge, M. N. (2023). A culturally sensitive test to evaluate nuanced GPT hallucination. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAI.2023.3332837

Megahed, F. M., Chen, Y.-J., Ferris, J. A., Knoth, S., & Jones-Farmer, L. A. (2023). How

generative AI models such as ChatGPT can be (mis)used in SPC practice, education, and research? An exploratory study. Quality Engineering, 36(2), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08982112.2023.2206479

Müller, C. J. (2016). Prometheanism: Technology, digital culture and human obsolescence. Rowman & Littlefield.

Müller, C. J. (2019). From radioactivity to data mining: Günther Anders in the Anthropocene. Thesis Eleven, 153(1), 9–23.

Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B.-P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4), 4221–4241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w

Ofgang, E. (2023, December 20). Gemini: Teaching with Google’s latest AI. TechLearningMagazine. https://www.techlearning.com/news/gemini-teaching-with-googles-latest-ai

Schraube, E. (2005). “Torturing things until they confess”: Günther Anders' critique of technology. Science as Culture, 14(1), 77–85.

Şenocak, D., Bozkurt, A., & Koçdar, S. (2024). Exploring the ethical principles for the implementation of artificial intelligence in education: Towards a future agenda. In R. Sharma & A. Bozkurt (Eds.), Transforming education with generative AI: Prompt engineering and synthetic content creation (pp. 200–213). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch010

Stapleton, L., Taylor, J., Fox, S., Wu, T., & Zhu, H. (2023). Seeing seeds beyond weeds: Green teaming generative AI for beneficial uses (arXiv:2306.03097). arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.03097

Swartz, M., & McElroy, K. (2023). The “Academicon”: AI and surveillance in higher education. Surveillance & Society, 21(3), 276–281. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v21i3.16105

Rahm, L. (2023). Education, automation and AI: A genealogy of alternative futures. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 6–24.

Rountree, B., & Condee, W. (2021). The nonmaterial mirror: Performing vibrant abstractions in AI networks. Theatre Journal, 73(3), 299–318.

Wong, M. (2023, June 23). The chatbots may poison themselves. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/06/generative-ai-future-training-models/674478/