The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 7 of the 69 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings
Open accessAbstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is a field of study that combines the applications of machine learning, algorithm productions, and natural language processing. Applications of AI transform the tools of education. AI has a variety of educational applications, such as personalized learning platforms to promote students' learning, automated assessment systems to aid teachers, and facial recognition systems to generate insights about learners' behaviors. Despite the potential benefits of AI to support students' learning experiences and teachers' practices, the ethical and societal drawbacks of these systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts. The ethical challenges of AI in education must be identified and introduced to teachers and students. To address these issues, this paper (1) briefly defines AI through the concepts of machine learning and algorithms; (2) introduces applications of AI in educational settings and benefits of AI systems to support students' learning processes; (3) describes ethical challenges and dilemmas of using AI in education; and (4) addresses the teaching and understanding of AI by providing recommended instructional resources from two providers-i.e., the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) Media Lab and Code.org. The article aims to help practitioners reap the benefits and navigate ethical challenges of integrating AI in K-12 classrooms, while also introducing instructional resources that teachers can use to advance K-12 students' understanding of AI and ethics.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
28 Sources not found · 19 No full text of the sources · 12 Own interpretation · 5 Partly supported · 3 Not checked yet · 3 No basis given · 2 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In essence, algorithms reflect the values of their builders who hold positions of power [26].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [26] Hrastinski, S., Olofsson, A.D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., Jaldemark, J., Ryberg, T., Öberg, L., Fuentes, A., Gustafsson, U., Humble, N., Mozelius, P., Sundgren, M., Utterberg, M.: Critical imaginaries and reflections on artificial intelligence and robots in postdigital K-12 education. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 1, 427–445 (2019) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says business interests might shape the agenda for AI in education, and the Artificial Intelligence in Education section discusses economic interests and demand-driven design. Neither passage says that algorithms reflect their builders’ values or that those builders hold positions of power; searches for those ideas and for “algorithms” found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These systems generate models of learners using their knowledge and cognition; however, the existing platforms do not yet provide models for learners’ social, emotional, and motivational states [28].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [28] Herder, E., Sosnovsky, S., Dimitrova, V.: Adaptive intelligent learning environments. In: Duval, Erik, Sharples, Mike, Sutherland, Rosamund (eds.) Technology enhanced learning, pp. 109–114. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper says cognitive state is a main factor in adaptation (Modeling Knowledge, Cognition and Metacognition, p. 4) and that emotion and affect are not yet part of a typical AILE learner model (Beyond Cognition, p. 5). It does not make the same claim about social or motivational states, and its qualifier is “a typical AILE,” not all existing platforms. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Existing research on AI in education provides insight on supporting students’ understanding and use of AI [2, 13]”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Future directions for research and teaching on AI and ethics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites [13] Borenstein, J., Howard, A.: Emerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education. AI Ethics 1, 61–65 (2020) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 5 (page unavailable) offers guidance for teaching students the ethical design of AI and helping them understand its ethical challenges. The paper focuses on AI ethics education for future developers, rather than students’ understanding and use of AI more generally. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Predictive systems which are powered by algorithms jeopardize students and teachers’ autonomy and their ability to govern their own life [46, 47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [46] Piano, S.L.: Ethical principles in machine learning and artificial intelligence: cases from the field and possible ways forward. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 7(9), 1–7 (2020) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that ceding functions to algorithms can diminish human control, and “Points of friction between ethical dimensions” discusses retaining human decision-making autonomy. The paper lists education as an application, but these passages do not establish that predictive systems threaten students’ and teachers’ autonomy or their ability to govern their lives. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
In the paper
“Comparing students’ scores on researcher-developed or standardized tests, research shows that the instruction based on personalized learning systems resulted in higher test scores than traditional teacher-led instruction [36].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [36] Ladson-Billings, G.: Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. Am. Educ. Res. J. 32(3), 465–491 (1995) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“On the other hand, AI cannot be a substitute for human interaction [22, 47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [22] Dishon, G.: New data, old tensions: big data, personalized learning, and the challenges of progressive education. Theory Res. Educ. 15(3), 272–289 (2017) source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ethical challenges and risks posed by AI systems seemingly run counter to marketing efforts that present algorithms to the public as if they are objective and value-neutral tools.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Even though the bias is embedded into the algorithmic model with no explicit intention, we can see various gender and racial biases in different AI-based platforms [54].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [54] Stahl, B.C., Wright, D.: Ethics and privacy in ai and big data: implementing responsible research and innovation. IEEE Secur. Priv. 16(3), 26–33 (2018) source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whenever people create algorithms, they also create a set of data that represent society’s historical and systemic biases, which ultimately transform into algorithmic bias.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Automated assessment systems are becoming one of the most prominent and promising applications of machine learning in K-12 education [42].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 28
- Probably not a substantial claim. 22
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“These algorithms do not occur in a vacuum; rather, they shape and are shaped by ever-evolving cultural, social, institutional and political forces and structures [33, 34].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [33] Johnson, M.: A scalable approach to reducing gender bias in Google translate. https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/04/a-scalable-approach-to-reducing-gender.html Accessed 26 March 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites [34] Ko, A.J., Oleson, A., Ryan, N., Register, Y., Xie, B., Tari, M., Davidson, M., Druga, S., Loksa, D.: It is time for more critical CS education. Commun. ACM 63(11), 31–33 (2020) source
The Abstract says that computing does not occur in a vacuum and both shapes and is shaped by social, cultural, institutional, and political forces. In the same passage, it identifies data and algorithms as part of the systems under discussion, supporting the citing sentence’s paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“More specifically, applications of AI can support instruction in mixed-ability classrooms; while personalized learning systems provide students with detailed and timely feedback about their writing products, automated assessment systems support teachers by freeing them from excessive workloads [26, 42].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [26] Hrastinski, S., Olofsson, A.D., Arkenback, C., Ekström, S., Ericsson, E., Fransson, G., Jaldemark, J., Ryberg, T., Öberg, L., Fuentes, A., Gustafsson, U., Humble, N., Mozelius, P., Sundgren, M., Utterberg, M.: Critical imaginaries and reflections on artificial intelligence and robots in postdigital K-12 education. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 1, 427–445 (2019) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Individualization section reports expectations that AI could help teachers individualize classroom teaching, and the Role of the Teacher section describes possible assistance with assessment and less work. These are prospective views, not demonstrated effects. Neither section supports the specific claim that personalized systems give detailed, timely feedback on students’ writing. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“These AI systems can increase the capacity of K-12 educational systems and support the social and cognitive development of students and teachers [55, 8].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Could not verifycites [8] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Staudt Willet, K.B.: Inquiring tweets want to know: #Edchat supports for #remoteteaching during COVID-19. British Journal of Educational Technology. 1–21, (2021) sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses teachers’ professional learning through social media, and the Discussion describes #Edchat as a source of just-in-time support for remote teaching (page numbers unavailable). Searches for AI systems, artificial intelligence, K–12 educational capacity, and social and cognitive development found no passage addressing the claimed effects of AI systems. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The biggest risks of integrating these algorithms in K-12 contexts are: (a) perpetuating existing systemic bias and discrimination, (b) perpetuating unfairness for students from mostly disadvantaged and marginalized groups, and (c) amplifying racism, sexism, xenophobia, and other forms of injustice and inequity [40].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [40] Miller, F.A., Katz, J.H., Gans, R.: The OD imperative to add inclusion to the algorithms of artificial intelligence. OD Practitioner. 5(1), 6–12 (2018)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For instance, a text-based chatbot system called “Pounce” was used at Georgia State University to help students through the registration and admission process, as well as financial aid and other administrative tasks [7].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [7] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Brandon, D., Askari, E.: A decade of research on K-12 teaching and teacher learning with social media: insights on the state-of-the-field. Teachers College Record 122(6), 1–7 (2020) source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Considering the shift to remote K-12 education during the COVID-19 pandemic, personalized learning systems offer a promising form of distance learning that could reshape K-12 instruction for the future [35].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Personalized learning systems
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [35] Krueger, N.: Artificial intelligence has infiltrated our lives. Can it improve learning? International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2017).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, applications of AI can positively impact students’ and teachers’ educational experiences and help them address instructional challenges and concerns.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These systems provide insights about students’ behaviors during learning processes and allow teachers to take action or intervene, which, in turn, helps teachers develop learner-centered practices and increase student’s engagement [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Facial recognition systems and predictive analytics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, these scoring systems have the potential to deal with the complexities of the teaching context and support students’ learning process by providing them with feedback and guidance to improve and revise their writing.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“On the other hand, a tool called “Gradescope” has been used by over 500 universities to develop and streamline scoring and assessment [12].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Automated assessment systems
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [12] Blumenstyk, G.: Can artificial intelligence make teaching more personal? The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Can-Artificial-Intelligence/243023 (2018)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Researchers have emphasized the importance of using SNSs (such as Facebook) to expand learning opportunities beyond the classroom, monitor students’ well-being, and deepen student–teacher relations [5].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Asterhan, C.S.C., Rosenberg, H.: The promise, reality and dilemmas of secondary school teacher–student interactions in Facebook: the teacher perspective. Comput. Educ. 85, 134–148 (2015) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They point out that the integration of social media can foster students’ active learning, collaboration skills, and connections with communities beyond the classroom [6].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Krutka, D., Manca, S., Galvin, S., Greenhow, C., Koehler, M., Askari, E.: Teaching “against” social media: confronting problems of profit in the curriculum. Teachers College Record 121(14), 1–42 (2019) source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Social media are increasingly integrated into K-12 education [7] and subordinate learners’ activities to intelligent algorithm systems [17].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [7] Greenhow, C., Galvin, S., Brandon, D., Askari, E.: A decade of research on K-12 teaching and teacher learning with social media: insights on the state-of-the-field. Teachers College Record 122(6), 1–7 (2020) source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] Cheney-Lippold, J.: We are data: algorithms and the making of our digital selves. New York University Press, New York (2017) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although AI can be a time-saving and cognitive aide for teachers, it is but one tool in the teachers’ toolkit.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.
In the paper
“For instance, AI has a variety of algorithmic applications in education, such as personalized learning systems to promote students’ learning, automated assessment systems to support teachers in evaluating what students know, and facial recognition systems to provide insights about learners’ behaviors [49].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [49] Remian, D.: Augmenting education: ethical considerations for incorporating artificial intelligence in education (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Massachusetts, Boston (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To create a future generation where an inclusive and diverse citizenry can participate in the development of the future of AI, we need to develop opportunities for K-12 students and teachers to learn about AI via AI- and ethics-based curricula and professional development [2, 58]”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [58] Zimmerman, M.: Teaching AI: exploring new frontiers for learning. International Society for Technology in Education, Portland (2018)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The ethical and societal drawbacks of AI systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Most studies reflect university students’ engagement with ethical ideas about algorithmic bias, but few addresses how to promote students’ understanding of AI and ethics in K-12 settings.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Toward this end, the existing literature provides little guidance and contains a limited number of studies that focus on supporting K-12 students and teachers’ understanding of social, cultural, and ethical implications of AI [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“For example, these analytics can be used to detect university students who are at risk of failing or not completing a course. Through these identifications, instructors can intervene and get students the help they need [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Facial recognition systems and predictive analytics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“AI dominates the fields of science, engineering, and technology, but also is present in education through machine-learning systems and algorithm productions [43].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] Naqvi, A.: Artificial intelligence for audit, forensic accounting, and valuation: a strategic perspective. Wiley (2020) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Students train a cat–dog classifier using two different datasets. While the first dataset reflects the cats as the over-represented group, the second dataset indicates the equal and diverse representation between dogs and cats [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“while Google Translate translated the Turkish equivalent of “She/he is a nurse” into the feminine form, it also translated the Turkish equivalent of “She/he is a doctor” into the masculine form [33].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [33] Johnson, M.: A scalable approach to reducing gender bias in Google translate. https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/04/a-scalable-approach-to-reducing-gender.html Accessed 26 March 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The second workshop in the series is “Designing ads with transparency: A creative workshop”. Through this workshop, students are able to think further about the meaning, aim, and impact of advertising and the role of advertisements in our lives [44].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“England’s A-level and GCSE secondary level examinations were cancelled due to the pandemic in the summer of 2020 [1, 57].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1] Adams, R., McIntyre, N.: England A-level downgrades hit pupils from disadvantaged areas hardest.https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/aug/13/england-a-level-downgrades-hit-pupils-from-disadvantaged-areas-hardest (2020). Accessed 10 September 2020
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [57] Weale, S., Stewart, H.: A-level and GCSE results in England to be based on teacher assessments in U-turn. The Guardian, (2020).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Through a series of lesson plans and hand-on activities, teachers are guided to support students’ learning of the technical terminology of AI systems as well as the ethical and societal implications of AI [2].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [2] Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it revealed how the score distribution favored students who attended private or independent schools, while students from underrepresented groups were hit hardest.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“people’s agency diminishes as AI systems reduce introspective and independent thought [55].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [55] The Institute for Ethical AI in Education. Interim report: towards a shared vision of ethical AI in education. https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Institute-for-Ethical-AI-in-Educations-Interim-Report-Towards-a-Shared-Vision-of-Ethical-AI-in-Education.pdf. (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“One of the main learning goals is to introduce students to basic components of AI through algorithms, datasets, and supervised machine-learning systems all while underlining the problem of algorithmic bias [45].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this way, students are able to figure out that algorithms can have various motives and goals.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“students identify different stakeholders (such as their parents, teacher, or doctor) who care about their peanut butter and jelly sandwich algorithm. In this way, the values and opinions of those stakeholders also are embedded in the algorithm.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Monitoring and tracking students’ online conversations and actions also may limit their participation in the learning event and make them feel unsafe to take ownership for their ideas.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Through algorithms and machine-learning models, AI tracking systems not only necessitate monitoring of activities but also determine the future preferences and actions of their users [47].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [47] Regan, P.M., Jesse, J.: Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics Inf. Technol. 21, 167–179 (2019) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Although existing legislation and standards exist to protect sensitive personal data, AI-based tech companies’ violations with respect to data access and security increase people’s privacy concerns [42, 54].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Ethical concerns and potential risks of AI applications in education
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Murphy, R. F.: Artificial intelligence applications to support k–12 teachers and teaching: a review of promising applications, challenges, and risks. Perspective. 1–20 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7249/PE315 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [54] Stahl, B.C., Wright, D.: Ethics and privacy in ai and big data: implementing responsible research and innovation. IEEE Secur. Priv. 16(3), 26–33 (2018) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Code.org, a nonprofit organization focused on expanding students’ participation in computer science. Sponsored by Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Google, and other tech companies, Code.org aims to provide opportunities for K-12 students to learn about AI and machine-learning systems [20].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] Code.org.: AI for Oceans. https://code.org/oceans (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In their AI Bingo chart, students try to identify what prediction the selected AI system makes and what dataset it uses.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > "AI and Ethics Curriulum" for middle school students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [45] Payne, B. H.: An ethics of artificial intelligence curriculum for middle school students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/ai-ethics-for-middle-school/overview/ (2019)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The final workshop in MIT’s AI and data privacy series is “Designing Privacy in Social Media Platforms”. This workshop is designed to teach students about YouTube, design, civics, and data privacy [44].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The first workshop in the series is “Mystery YouTube Viewer: A lesson on Data Privacy”. During the workshop, students engage with the question of what privacy and data mean [44]. They observe YouTube’s home page from the perspective of a mystery user.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Different scholars have examined the role of social media in education, describing its impact on student and teacher learning and scholarly communication [6].”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Benefits of AI applications in education > Social networking sites and chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [6] Krutka, D., Manca, S., Galvin, S., Greenhow, C., Koehler, M., Askari, E.: Teaching “against” social media: confronting problems of profit in the curriculum. Teachers College Record 121(14), 1–42 (2019) source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The activity is provided as an open-access tutorial for teachers to help their students explore how to train, model and classify data, as well as to understand how human bias plays a role in machine-learning systems. During the activity, students first classify the objects as either “fish” or “not fish” in an attempt to remove trash from the ocean.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] Code.org.: AI for Oceans. https://code.org/oceans (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Another quality resource from the MIT Media Lab’s Personal Robots Group is a workshop series designed to teach students (between the ages 7 and 14) about data privacy and introduce them to designing and prototyping data privacy features.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > “AI and Data Privacy” workshop series for K-9 students by MIT Media Lab
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [44] Nguyen, S., DiPaola, D.: AI & data privacy activities for k-9 students. MIT Media Lab. https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/data-privacy-design-for-youth/overview/ (2020)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
The ethical and societal drawbacks of AI systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.
“Despite the potential benefits of AI to support students’ learning experiences and teachers’ practices, the ethical and societal drawbacks of these systems are rarely fully considered in K-12 educational contexts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.
“Students have a wide range of learning styles and needs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Educators will have different ethical concerns and challenges depending on their students' grade and age of development.
“However, it is important to acknowledge that educators will have different ethical concerns and challenges depending on their students’ grade and age of development.”
The paper relies on this without support.
AI monitoring tools collect extensive information about what students and teachers do and prefer.
“Another ethical concern surrounding the use of AI in K-12 education is surveillance or tracking systems which gather detailed information about the actions and preferences of students and teachers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When public schools mandate AI systems, students and parents effectively cannot opt out, even if they consent to losing privacy.
“They really have no choice if these systems are required by public schools.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Platforms like YouTube serve commonly as instructional tools in K-12 classes and in students' lives outside school.
“social media such as YouTube are widely used as a teaching and learning tool within K-12 classrooms and beyond them, in students’ everyday lives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Scholarship on preparing K-12 teachers to teach AI and ethics remains at an early stage.
“research on how to develop K-12 teachers’ instructional practices regarding AI and ethics is still in its infancy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most privacy breaches happen when individuals reveal too much personal data on online platforms.
“Privacy violations mainly occur as people expose an excessive amount of personal information in online platforms.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“AI systems often require access to vast amounts of student data, including academic performance, behavioral patterns, and even personal information (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Kamalov et al., 2023).”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Educational accessibility refers to GenAI's ability to provide learning opportunities to students with limited resources, allowing equitable access to personalized content (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022).”
From Ethical and regulatory challenges of Generative AI in education: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The personalization of learning is manifested through GenAI's ability to adapt educational content and methods to the specific needs of each student (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Alali and Wardat, 2024).”
From Ethical and regulatory challenges of Generative AI in education: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, the growing use of AI in higher education raises concerns about data privacy and security.”
From Exploring the effects of artificial intelligence on student and academic well-being in higher education: a mini-review (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun and Greenhow, 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These concerns are also central to current discussions on trustworthy artificial intelligence in education, which highlight the importance of ethical awareness, responsible data use, and critical engagement with AI-driven systems in educational contexts (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Luckin et al., 2022).”
From Integrating artificial intelligence into preservice teacher education: enhancing AI literacy and digital material design competency (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“AI-related technologies are frequently associated in the literature with personalization, formative assessment, learning analytics, and instructional support (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Hrastinski et al., 2019;Murphy, 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These reflections echo international discussions on responsible and humancentered AI in education, particularly in contexts involving children and vulnerable learners (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Jobin et al., 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Participants raised concerns regarding data privacy, algorithmic bias, fairness, and inequality, situating AI within broader debates on responsible and human-centered technology use (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022;Jobin et al., 2019;Remian, 2019).”
From Teachers' Experiences with AI in K–12 Education: Opportunities and Challenges (2026) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
In the citing paper
“Challenges such as AI-based misunderstanding, misleadingness, limitations, and hidden ethical issues behind different platforms have been identified (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021;Sijing & Lan, 2018).”
From Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first century skills in the post-pandemic world (2023) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2021
In the citing paper
“The design of AIED applications could face challenges such as AI-based misunderstanding, misleadingness, limitations, the weak connection to theoretical pedagogical perspectives, and the need for deep exploration of ethical and educational approaches in the application of AIED in education (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021;Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019).”
From A systematic review of literature reviews on artificial intelligence in education (AIED): a roadmap to a future research agenda (2024) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2021
In the citing paper
“GAI systems typically require access to large volumes of student data, including academic records and even personal information (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
From Exploring How AI Literacy and Self-Regulated Learning Relate to Student Writing Performance and Well-Being in Generative AI-Supported Higher Education (2025) · cites this paper as Akgun & Greenhow, 2022
In the citing paper
“Educational uses of generative AI pose several other challenges. One is the perpetuation of biases and discrimination, potentially reinforcing racial or gender-based stereotypes during personalized learning, automated scoring, and admission processes (88, 90).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“A review of AI applications in education identified several use cases that produced higher test scores when students used personalized learning systems (88).”
From The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“In addition, AI products for teaching, often sourced from third parties and guided by cost considerations, may pose unique challenges such as the risk of bias or rapid obsolescence [66,67].”
From Proposing a Principle-Based Approach for Teaching AI Ethics in Medical Education (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings
“Code.org’s “AI and Oceans” activity.”
§ Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings > Teaching and understanding AI and ethics in educational settings > Investigation of “AI for Oceans” by Code.org
“the organization offers an activity called “AI for Oceans””
Citations
Cites
Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312032003465 · Cited by 8,057
Culturally responsive teaching: theory, research, and practice
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-2812 · Cited by 3,113
The Handbook of Artificial Intelligence
Salveter, S. C. (1982) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2013-0-07691-8 · Cited by 1,703
Evolution and Revolution in Artificial Intelligence in Education
Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3 · Cited by 1,229
Foundations of Machine Learning
(2012) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/8291.003.0006 · Cited by 1,151
Foundations of Machine Learning
Mohri, M., Rostamizadeh, A., & Talwalkar, A. (2018) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/10290.001.0001 · Cited by 1,122
(2019) · Open Research Online (The Open University) · Cited by 1,004
Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the Facebook Messenger
Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103862 · Cited by 770
Artificial Intelligence and the ‘Good Society’: the US, EU, and UK approach
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2017) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9901-7 · Cited by 733 · cited 1×
“For example, the European Union (EU) has highlighted ethical concerns and implications of AI, emphasized privacy protection, surveillance, and nondiscrimination as primary areas of interest, and provided guidelines on how trustworthy AI should be [3, 15, 23].”
BackgroundEmerging challenges in AI and the need for AI ethics education
Borenstein, J., & Howard, A. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-020-00002-7 · Cited by 626
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Ali, S. A., Payne, B. H., Williams, R., Park, H. W., Breazeal, C.: Constructionism, ethics, and creativity: developing primary and middle school artificial intelligence education. Paper presented at International Workshop on Education in Artificial Intelligence (EDUAI). Palo Alto, CA, USA. (2019)
- Citron, D.K., Pasquale, F.A.: The scored society: due process for automated predictions. Wash. Law Rev. 89, 1–33 (2014)
- IEEE Corporate Advisory Group (CAG): IEEE guide for terms and concepts in intelligent process automation. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association. 1–16 (2017). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel7/8070669/8070670/08070671.pdf
- Miller, F.A., Katz, J.H., Gans, R.: The OD imperative to add inclusion to the algorithms of artificial intelligence. OD Practitioner. 5(1), 6–12 (2018)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–300 of 1,448
K-12 teachers’ ethical competencies for AI literacy: Insights from a systematic literature review
Tagare, D., Karki, T., & Yu, W. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105435 · Cited by 57
KARAKUŞ, N., Gedik, K., & Kazazoğlu, S. (2025) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs15040469 · Cited by 28
“AI is increasingly seen as a tool for addressing complex ethical dilemmas (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022), particularly in fields where ethical sensitivity is critical, such as education (Al-kfairy et al., 2024).”
Students Experience on Self-Study through AI
Namjoo, F., Liaghat, E., Shabaziasl, S., Modabernejad, Z., & Morshedi, H. (2023) · AI and Tech in Behavioral and Social Sciences · doi:10.61838/kman.aitech.1.3.6 · Cited by 31
Drivers of Digital Realities for Ongoing Teacher Professional Learning
Trevisan, O., Christensen, R. W., Drossel, K., Friesen, S., Forkosh‐Baruch, A., & Phillips, M. (2024) · Technology Knowledge and Learning · doi:10.1007/s10758-024-09771-0 · Cited by 45
“Ethical considerations surrounding informed consent and the creation of user profiles become crucial (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Cardona et al., 2023).”
Zhang, L., Carter, R. A., Liu, Y., & Peng, P. (2024) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543241293424 · Cited by 52
Zhai, S., Zhang, S., Rong, Y., & Rong, G. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13352-8 · Cited by 32
A Comprehensive Review on Automated Grading Systems in STEM Using AI Techniques
Tan, L. Y., Hu, S., Yeo, D. J. S., & Cheong, K. H. (2025) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math13172828 · Cited by 34
Exploring emergent AI-TPACK competencies in a two-week AI literacy module for preservice teachers
Aldemir, T., Bicer, A., Kilinc, S., Moon, J., & Kwok, M. (2025) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2025.105231 · Cited by 27
“Such designs align with human-centred integration models that leverage AI strengths while preserving relational teaching (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021; Holmes, 2020).”
The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy makingPreprint
Capraro, V., Lentsch, A., Acemoğlu, D., Akgün, S., Akhmedova, A., Bilancini, E., Bonnefon, J., Brañas‐Garza, P., Butera, L., Douglas, K. M., et al. (2023) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/6fd2y · Cited by 47
Self-citationBehind the Scenes: A Critical Perspective on GenAI and Open Educational Practices
Aksoy, D. A., & Kurşun, E. (2024) · Open Praxis · doi:10.55982/openpraxis.16.3.674 · Cited by 30
Students’ Attitudes on The Role of Artificial Intelligence (Ai) In Personalized Learning
Baltezarević, R., & Baltezarević, I. (2024) · International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science Engineering and Education · doi:10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-2-387-397 · Cited by 24
On Cyber-Social Learning: A Critique of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2024) · Postdigital science and education · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64487-0_1 · Cited by 31
Jie, A. L. X., & Kamrozzaman, N. A. (2024) · Open Journal of Social Sciences · doi:10.4236/jss.2024.1210025 · Cited by 44
Yang, H. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-92327-8 · Cited by 32
A global perspective on artificial intelligence in educational leadership
Göçen, A., & Döğer, M. F. (2025) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2025.2510397 · Cited by 40
“Numerous studies have affirmed the effectiveness and significance of AI in educational contexts (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Cassidy, 2023; Chiu et al., 2023; Cukurova et al., 2019; Evmenova et al., 2024; Holmes et al., 2018, 2019; Kasneci et al., 2023; Trust et al., 2023; Wood et al., 2021).”
InfluentialHo, C. S. M. (2025) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105517 · Cited by 43
Ethical use of artificial intelligence and new technologies in Education 5.0
Smyrnaiou, Z., Liapakis, A., & Bougia, A. (2023) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Data Science · doi:10.51219/jaimld/anastasios-liapakis/15 · Cited by 22
On the relation of causality- versus correlation-based feature selection on model fairness
Saarela, M. (2024) · ACM Symposium on Applied Computing · doi:10.1145/3605098.3636018 · Cited by 22
“As in other domains, educational applications and tools driven by machine learning algorithms carry the potential for ethical challenges [1].”
BackgroundNathaniel, J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J. T., & Tedre, M. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100460 · Cited by 42
“This aligns with broader ethical debates regarding the promotion of clear policies on GenAI usage to maintain academic integrity and skill authenticity (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Holmes et al., 2022).”
Yang, J., Xie, W., & Ni, J. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-21977-5 · Cited by 23
“The finding aligns with established educational theories suggesting that knowledge acquisition forms the cognitive foundation upon which attitudinal frameworks are constructed 66 .”
What’s the Chatter About AI and School Leaders?
Richardson, J. W., Vedder, B. C., Roberts, A. B., & McLeod, S. (2025) · Leadership and Policy in Schools · doi:10.1080/15700763.2024.2409307 · Cited by 24
“Akgun and Greenhow (2022) outlined how AI has already strongly impacted educational settings and student learning.”
The potential scope of a humanoid robot in anatomy education: a review of a unique proposal
Asghar, A., Patra, A., & Ravi, K. S. (2022) · Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy · doi:10.1007/s00276-022-03020-8 · Cited by 23
“Problems may also arise when surveillance systems trigger issues related to autonomy, more specifically the person’s ability to act on her or his own interest and values [1].”
BackgroundEnhancing Language Teaching Materials Through Artificial Intelligence
Singha, S., Singha, R., & Jasmine, E. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0872-1.ch002 · Cited by 24
Lee, J., Hong, M., & Cho, J. (2024) · International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering and Information Technology · doi:10.18517/ijaseit.14.1.19558 · Cited by 23
WHAT SHOULD BE THE DIGITAL COMPETENCE OF TEACHERS IN THE FIELD OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?
Морзе, Н., Бойко, М., Strutynska, O., & Smyrnova‐Trybulska, E. (2024) · OPEN EDUCATIONAL E-ENVIRONMENT OF MODERN UNIVERSITY · doi:10.28925/2414-0325.2024.166 · Cited by 21
Gregorio, T. A. D., Alieto, E. O., Natividad, E.-R. R., & Tanpoco, M. R. (2024) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-68660-3_5 · Cited by 21
Karamuk, E. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0122-8.ch007 · Cited by 26
Pragmatic AI in education and its role in mathematics learning and teaching
Gabriel, F. C., Kennedy, J., Marrone, R. L., & Leonard, S. N. (2025) · npj Science of Learning · doi:10.1038/s41539-025-00315-4 · Cited by 21
PERSONALISED LEARNING WITH AI: IMPLICATIONS FOR IGNATIAN PEDAGOGY
Baskara, R. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Best Practices · doi:10.31258/ijebp.v7n1.p1-16 · Cited by 33
“One of the main benefits of AI in education is its ability to provide personalized learning experiences (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
BackgroundGenerative artificial intelligence in education: analysis of trends and prospects
Андреевна, П. Е., Леонидович, О. П., Gorlacheva, E. N., & Faizullin, R. V. (2024) · Vocational education and labour market · doi:10.52944/port.2024.58.3.001 · Cited by 37
Okul Öncesi Eğitimi Öğretmenlerinin Yapay Zekâya İlişkin Görüşleri
Küçükkara, M. F., Ünal, M., & Sezer, T. (2024) · Temel Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.55008/te-ad.1431142 · Cited by 23
Wang, S. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13359-1 · Cited by 22
“These problems contribute to social stereotypes, unequal opportuni - ties, and obstacles to the individual development of students (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
AI Shaming Among Teacher Education Students
Acut, D. P., Gamusa, E. V., Pernaa, J., Yuenyong, C., Pantaleon, A. T., Espina, R. C., Sim, M. J. C., & Garcia, M. B. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0122-8.ch005 · Cited by 21
Unpacking the ethics of using AI in primary and secondary education: a systematic literature review
Wieczorek, M., Hosseini, M., & Gordijn, B. (2025) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00770-0 · Cited by 40
“It can also guide students and parents through administrative processes, such as registration or applying for financial aid [14, 20].”
InfluentialTo adopt or to ban? Student perceptions and use of generative AI in higher education
Farinosi, M., & Melchior, C. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05982-7 · Cited by 26
“The literature suggests that AI enhances students ’ critical thinking skills, while improving their ability to assess information and formulate inquiries (Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Muscanell and Robert, 2023).”
AI, Behavioural Science, and Consumer Welfare
Mills, S., Costa, S., & Sunstein, C. R. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Policy · doi:10.1007/s10603-023-09547-6 · Cited by 35
“The latter risk is particularly important when considering vulnerable individuals, such as children and teenagers (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Smith & de Villiers-Botha, 2021).”
BackgroundTHE ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Чайка, О. (2023) · Молодь і ринок · doi:10.24919/2308-4634.2023.287898 · Cited by 30
Estrada-Araoz, E. G., Manrique-Jaramillo, Y. V., Díaz-Pereira, V. H., Rucoba-Frisancho, J. M., Valverde, Y. P., Quispe-Herrera, R., & Quispe-Paredes, D. R. (2024) · Data & Metadata · doi:10.56294/dm2024285 · Cited by 37
Kumar, P. C., Cotter, K., & Cabrera, L. Y. (2024) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/rrq.570 · Cited by 22
Ray, S., & Ray, D. P. (2024) · International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH · doi:10.29121/granthaalayah.v11.i12.2023.5464 · Cited by 35
Almubarak, A., Alhalabi, W., Albidewi, I., & Alharbi, E. (2024) · Discover Applied Sciences · doi:10.1007/s42452-024-06117-4 · Cited by 24
“This feature enables teachers to focus on providing additional support to students during their observation, discussion, gathering of information during collaborative knowledge-building processes, etc. [7, 12, 14–16].”
The acceptance of artificial intelligence in education among postgraduate students in Malaysia
Razak, F. Z. A., Abdullah, M. A., Ahmad, B. E., Bakar, W. H. R. B. W. A., & Misaridin, N. A. F. B. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12916-4 · Cited by 27
“Overall, the use of AI in the education industry has the potential to revolutionize teaching and learning, improve educational outcomes, and create more personalized and engaging learning experiences for students (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021; Bozkurt et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021).”
The More Anxious, the More Dependent? The Impact of Math Anxiety on AI‐Assisted Problem‐Solving
Chen, F., Chen, J., & Xu, Y. (2025) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.23500 · Cited by 35
Lin, Z., Dai, Y., & Ng, O. (2025) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331251360442 · Cited by 35
“Integrating ethical reasoning earlier could promote a more holistic understanding of AI (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
Data Ethics Framework for Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED)
Hong, Y., Nguyen, A., Dang, B., & Nguyen, B. T. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) · doi:10.1109/icalt55010.2022.00095 · Cited by 29
Metaphorical Perceptions of Middle School Students Regarding the Concept of Artificial Intelligence
Tartuk, M. (2023) · International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies · doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.11n.2p.108 · Cited by 27
“A significant portion of the studies on artificial intelligence are on the use of artificial intelligence in education (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021; Arslan, 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Coşkun & Gülleroğlu, 2021; Çam et al., 2021; Fahimirad & Kotamjani, 2018; İşler & Kılıç, 2021; Lameras & Arnab, 2021;…”
BackgroundAhmed, H. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Reform · doi:10.1177/10567879241247551 · Cited by 19
“By addressing these ethical considerations, institutional authorities can deploy AI in education responsibly, fostering trust, inclusivity, and positive outcomes for all learners (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021).”
InfluentialDolgopolovas, V., & Dagienė, V. (2024) · Computer Applications in Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/cae.22788 · Cited by 29
“Research should investigate the ethical implications, accessibility, and practical applications of these technologies in educational settings [1].”
Ahmad, W., Shokeen, R., & Raj, R. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-5538-1.ch017 · Cited by 22
Erhardt, C., Kullenberg, H., Grigoriadis, A., Kumar, A., Christidis, N., & Christidis, M. (2025) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-025-00195-6 · Cited by 19
“A previous study indicates that maintaining up-to-date policies amidst continuous advancements is a significant hurdle (Akgun and Greenhow 2022).”
Yapay Zekânın Eğitim Sistemine Entegrasyonunun Potansiyel Faydaları
Temur, S. (2024) · Batı anadolu eğitim bilimleri dergisi · doi:10.51460/baebd.1541524 · Cited by 24
Nguyen, H., Nguyen, V., Ludovise, S., & Santagata, R. (2024) · Learning Media and Technology · doi:10.1080/17439884.2024.2435834 · Cited by 26
Okamoto, S., Kataoka, M., Itano, M., & Sawai, T. (2025) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-025-06801-y · Cited by 18
Akinsemolu, A. A., & Onyeaka, H. N. (2025) · Journal of language and Education · doi:10.17323/jle.2025.22118 · Cited by 36
“A review of the available literature on the topic identifies three main ethical considerations namely data privacy, bias, and the implications of most AI innova - tions on teacher-learner interactions (Gligorea et al., 2023; Kaur, Kumar and Kaushar, 2023; Akgun and Greenhow, 2022; Idowu, 2024).”
Marengo, A., Pagano, A., Lund, B. D., & Santamato, V. (2025) · Frontiers in Computer Science · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2025.1587040 · Cited by 32
Kunjumuhammed, S. K. (2024) · Advances in finance, accounting, and economics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-2185-0.ch007 · Cited by 18
Bohara, D. K., & Rana, K. (2024) · SN Social Sciences · doi:10.1007/s43545-024-01003-7 · Cited by 26
“This creates doubt about whether or not teachers can apply this advanced technology in their real-life situations (Akgun and Greenhow 2022).”
Navigating anxiety in academia: the role of generative artificial intelligence
Jabali, O. M., Saeedi, M., & Alawneh, Y. J. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13433-8 · Cited by 20
“Algorithmic systems have been widely implemented across educational platforms, such as social media and mobile applications, to enhance social and cognitive development, particularly in mixed-ability classrooms (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Green-how et al., 2021 ).”
Generative AI and the social functions of educational assessment
Broadfoot, P., & Rockey, J. C. (2025) · Oxford Review of Education · doi:10.1080/03054985.2025.2455549 · Cited by 22
Kosmas, P., Nisiforou, E. A., Kounnapi, E., Sofocleous, S., & Theofanous, G. (2025) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-025-10492-z · Cited by 47
“They emphasised the potential of AI in personalising learning experiences, student motivation and engagement, and teacher support (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Chiu, 2021).”
Integrating Artificial Intelligence Into English Language Teaching: A Systematic Review
Daud, A., Aulia, A. F., Muryanti, M., Harfal, Z., Nabilla, O., & Ali, H. S. (2025) · European Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.12973/eu-jer.14.2.677 · Cited by 44
Integrating AI tools for enhanced autism education: a comprehensive review
Adako, O. P., Adeusi, O. C., & Alaba, P. A. (2024) · International Journal of Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1080/20473869.2024.2392983 · Cited by 23
Algorethics in Healthcare: Balancing Innovation and Integrity in AI Development
Lastrucci, A., Pirrera, A., Lepri, G., & Giansanti, D. (2024) · Algorithms · doi:10.3390/a17100432 · Cited by 19
“ChatGPT Seems Too Good to be True”: College Students’ Use and Perceptions of Generative AIPreprint
Baek, C., Tate, T. P., & Warschauer, M. (2023) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/6tjpk · Cited by 17
Baldrich, K., Pérez-García, C., & Santamarina-Sancho, M. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1701238 · Cited by 17
Slavych, B. K., Atcherson, S. R., & Zraick, R. (2024) · Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups · doi:10.1044/2024_persp-23-00167 · Cited by 16
Smit, M., Wagner, R. F., & Bond-Barnard, T. J. (2025) · Project Leadership and Society · doi:10.1016/j.plas.2025.100187 · Cited by 19
Cappelli, M. A., & Serugendo, G. D. M. (2024) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-024-00480-z · Cited by 25
“Some of the challenges have been identified by Akgun et al. [1] highlighting the various forms of prejudice and the ethical challenges of applying AI in educational settings in relation to students from kindergarten to 12th grade in the United States, covering an approximate age range of 5–18.”
Kayaalp, F., Durnalı, M., & GÖKBULUT, B. (2024) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12865 · Cited by 30
Caner, S. (2025) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440251343340 · Cited by 26
Abulibdeh, A. O. (2025) · Sustainable Futures · doi:10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101033 · Cited by 39
Sok, S., Heng, K., & Pum, M. (2025) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/21582440251353575 · Cited by 25
“…adoption of AI-enabled tools in education, there have been notable risks and challenges surrounding irresponsible and unethical uses, privacy and security, and ethical issues, as indicated by a growing body of research (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Holmes, 2023; Tlili et al., 2023; Zhai et al., 2021).”
InfluentialGenerative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education: from organizing visions to official guidelines
Nguyen, A., Kishore, S., Hong, Y., Qutab, S., & Dang, B. (2025) · Information Technology and People · doi:10.1108/itp-08-2024-1026 · Cited by 27
Improving pre-service teachers’ AI competencies: a quasi experimental study
Han, X. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1642465 · Cited by 34
Generative AI for Inclusive Special Education
Prabagar, S., Mothkur, R., Swetha, C. B., Kurian, A., Pavithra, K., & Aarthi, S. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-3745-6.ch008 · Cited by 16
Kashif, M., Ammar, M., Sellami, A., Chiu, T. K. F., Abbasi, S. A., & Ahmad, Z. (2025) · Computers in the Schools · doi:10.1080/07380569.2025.2602507 · Cited by 38
Merine, R., & Purkayastha, S. (2022) · 2022 IEEE 10th International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI) · doi:10.1109/ichi54592.2022.00113 · Cited by 16
“For example, instead of relying on a single textbook, students can use interactive multimedia versions of course content [3].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMaphosa, V., & Maphosa, M. (2023) · IntechOpen eBooks · doi:10.5772/intechopen.1001612 · Cited by 20
Mitra, S., Lakshmi, D., & Govindaraj, V. (2023) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0378-8.ch004 · Cited by 16
Challenges and Limitations of Generative AI in Education
Gökoğlu, S. (2024) · Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1351-0.ch008 · Cited by 15
Ismaili, Y. (2024) · Research on Education and Media · doi:10.2478/rem-2024-0017 · Cited by 21
Post-teaching and professional learning: an investigation on teachers attitudes towards AI
Perla, L., Agrati, L. S., & Beri, A. (2025) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2025.2465970 · Cited by 15
“It stimulates the broadening of teachers’ perspective on students, the choice in the variety of digital resources and educational technologies, to assume the classroom as a real learning environment, the conscious participation of teachers (Akgun and Greenhow 2022).”
Artificial Intelligence in Russian Higher Education: Current State and Development Prospects
Давыдов, С. Г., Matveeva, N., Владимировна, А. Н., & Vechkanova, A. A. (2024) · University Management Practice and Analysis · doi:10.15826/umpa.2024.03.023 · Cited by 17
Setiyawan, A., Soeharto, S., Wijaya, T. T., Koreňová, L., & Lavicza, Z. (2025) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100319 · Cited by 46
Hua, J. H. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies · doi:10.53378/353030 · Cited by 30
The Influence of Generative AI on Interpersonal Communication Dynamics
Akdilek, S., Akdilek, I., & Punyanunt-Carter, N. M. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0831-8.ch009 · Cited by 16
A Review of Ethical Considerations in Using Artificial Intelligence in E-Learning
Homayouni, L., Hejazi, Y., & Zarifsanaiey, N. (2024) · International and National Conference on E-Learning and E-Teaching (ICeLeT) · doi:10.1109/icelet62507.2024.10493100 · Cited by 19
“Instructors worry that relying too much on AI systems might compromise the student's ability to learn independently and solve problems creatively [13],[41].”
BackgroundInfluentialKaran, B. (2024) · Technology Pedagogy and Education · doi:10.1080/1475939x.2024.2337924 · Cited by 18
“…teaching (Ahmad et al., 2021), autonomy issues (Seo et al., 2021), fairness, accountability, transparency and ethical risks (Bhimdiwala et al., 2021), AI biases and discrimination issues (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021), deepfakes (Cao et al., 2019) and loss of social skills (Gocen & Aydemir, 2020).”
Wongvorachan, T., Bulut, O., Liu, J. X., & Mazzullo, E. (2024) · Information · doi:10.3390/info15060326 · Cited by 19
Building Trust in AI Education: Addressing Transparency and Ensuring Trustworthiness
Kastania, N. P. (2024) · Postdigital science and education · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64487-0_4 · Cited by 16
Cultural integration in AI-enhanced mathematics education: insights from Southeast Asian educators
Payadnya, I. P. A. A., Putri, G. A. M. A., Suwija, I. K., Saelee, S., & Jayantika, I. G. A. N. T. (2024) · Journal for Multicultural Education · doi:10.1108/jme-09-2024-0119 · Cited by 38
Campbell, M., Barthwal, A., Joshi, S., Shouli, A., & Shrestha, A. K. (2025) · IEEE Annual Computing and Communication Workshop and Conference (CCWC) · doi:10.1109/ccwc62904.2025.10903925 · Cited by 17
“Educators also play a critical role, as they may introduce new technologies in the classroom and influence student’s views by providing guidelines, perspective and context around these technological innovations [4].”
Amini, M., Lee, K.-F., Yi-qiu, W., & Ravindran, L. (2025) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2025.2523382 · Cited by 41
“Ethical AI use has garnered substantial attention from scholars (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Borenstein & Howard, 2021; Sam & Olbrich, 2023; Schiff, 2022).”
Sol, K., Heng, K., & Sok, S. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4687461 · Cited by 16
Guest editorial: AI in education: transforming teaching and learning
Bilal, D., He, J., & Liu, J. (2025) · Information and Learning Sciences · doi:10.1108/ils-01-2025-268 · Cited by 15
Lane, R. (2025) · International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education · doi:10.1080/10382046.2025.2458561 · Cited by 26
Pu, I., Ravi, P., Dinh, L. D., Joe, C., Ogoe, C., Li, Z., Breazeal, C., & Ostrowski, A. K. (2025) · ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC) · doi:10.1145/3713043.3727057 · Cited by 22
“Won’t somebody please (actually) think of the children?” AI Ethics for Children: A Scoping Review
Collyer-Hoar, G., & Rubegni, E. (2025) · ACM Journal on Responsible Computing · doi:10.1145/3745031 · Cited by 16
“Otherwise, sources constituted recommendations and frameworks into the ethical implementation of AI into learning environments [5, 27, 32, 36, 131, 147, 169, 182], with some focusing on the benefits of ethical AIED tools [153], including for vulnerable populations, such as especially young children…”
Fütterer, T., Goldberg, P., Bühler, B., Sikimić, V., Trautwein, U., Gerjets, P. H., Stürmer, K., & Kasneci, E. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100483 · Cited by 38
ChatGPT and intrinsic motivation in higher education: a TAM-based study
Afzaal, M., Brashi, A., Younas, M. S., & El‐Dakhs, D. A. S. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1674141 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Akgun, S., & Greenhow, C.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Venue
- AI and Ethics
- Published
- 2021-09-22
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 431-440
- ISSN
- 2730-5953 (ISSN-L)
- 2730-5961
- PMC
- PMC8455229
- OpenAlex
- W3199189488
- Cited by
- 1,473
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 433 · 2025: 517 · 2024: 393 · 2023: 109 · 2022: 21
- FWCI
- 19.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- AI and Ethics (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- michigan state university, college of education (Summer Research Fellowship)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence in education, AI ethics, K-12 education, personalized learning, automated assessment, AI literacy, Code.org, MIT Media Lab, ethical dilemmas of AI
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
