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 301–400 of 1,448
Teacher training in the age of AI: impact on AI literacy and teachers’ attitudes
Lademann, J., Henze, J., Honke, N., Wollny, C., & Becker, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1671306 · Cited by 52
Bakare-Fatungase, O. D., Oladokun, T. A., Quadri, G. O., & Idowu-Davies, T. O. (2023) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0205-7.ch009 · Cited by 16
Singh, G., & Thakur, A. (2024) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-2964-1.ch002 · Cited by 15
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Creation of Future Education: Possibilities and Challenges
Zadorina, O., Hurskaya, V., Соболєва, С. М., Грекова, Л. Ю., & Vasylyuk-Zaitseva, S. (2024) · Futurity Education · doi:10.57125/fed.2024.06.25.09 · Cited by 29
Artificial intelligence and learning environment: Human considerations
Jafari, E. (2024) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.13011 · Cited by 26
An Inquiry Into the Use of Generative AI and Its Implications in Education
Baek, E.-O., & Wilson, R. (2024) · International Journal of Adult Education and Technology · doi:10.4018/ijaet.349233 · Cited by 12
Ethical Dimensions of AI Development
Chakraborty, P. P. (2024) · Advances in human and social aspects of technology book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-4147-6.ch003 · Cited by 16
Ayanwale, M. A., Ntshangase, S. D., Adelana, O. P., Afolabi, O. W., Adam, U. A., & Olatunbosun, S. O. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100330 · Cited by 30
“The ethical challenges of AI in education must be identified and introduced to in-service teachers in preparation for teaching AI (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
Rajan, S., & Niranjan, L. R. (2025) · International Journal of Educational Management · doi:10.1108/ijem-03-2024-0181 · Cited by 18
Shannaq, B. (2024) · doi:10.1109/iccda64887.2024.10867316 · Cited by 14
“The review finishes with suggestions for how to include AI knowledge and ethical issues into K-12 curriculum [16].”
Can ChatGPT outperform a neurosurgical trainee? a prospective comparative study.
Williams, S. C., Starup-Hansen, J., Funnell, J. P., Hanrahan, J. G., Valetopoulou, A., Singh, N., Sinha, S., Muirhead, W. R., & Marcus, H. J. (2025) · British Journal of Neurosurgery · doi:10.1080/02688697.2024.2308222 · Cited by 13
“30 Evidently, prior to wider uptake in healthcare, LLMs such as ChatGPT have a range of issues to overcome, including moderating risk of bias and transparency issues, and answering key questions regarding ethical and equitable use.”
MERZİFONLUOĞLU, A., & Güneş, H. (2025) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.70053 · Cited by 23
Reyes, R. L., & Regala, J. D. (2025) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-025-00667-8 · Cited by 16
“As AI increasingly plays a crucial role in the design, execution, and analysis of experiments, it is imperative to carefully scrutinize its impact on the ethical aspects of experimentation (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021).”
Engineering Students' Perceptions and Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
Jooste, J. L., Wolff, K. E., & Joubert, J. G. (2025) · Computer Applications in Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/cae.70064 · Cited by 16
From intuition to action: Exploring teachers’ ethical awareness in the use of AI tools in education
Ho, C. S. M., & Lee, J. C. (2025) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100502 · Cited by 24
Feng, S., & Carolus, A. (2026) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100551 · Cited by 27
AI Adoption for Teaching and Learning of Physics
Ukoh, E. E., & Nicholas, J. (2022) · International Journal for Infonomics · doi:10.20533/iji.1742.4712.2022.0222 · Cited by 15
Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A Case Study of Cambodian Universities
Heak, H., Phorn, P., Kheav, S., & Sam, R. (2024) · European Journal of Theoretical and Applied Sciences · doi:10.59324/ejtas.2024.2(5).47 · Cited by 15
Bower, M., Henderson, M., Slade, C., Southgate, E., Gulson, K. Ν., & Lodge, J. M. (2025) · The Australian Educational Researcher · doi:10.1007/s13384-025-00801-z · Cited by 23
“Yet the implicit biases, inaccuracies, lack of transparency, and potential disruption to traditional learning and teaching posed by AI in general means that understanding how to set responsible and ethical policy is not necessarily obvious (Akgun and Greenhow, 2021).”
InfluentialThe 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. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4666103 · Cited by 14
Self-citationTanksley, T., Smith, A. D. R., Sharma, S., & Huff, E. W. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713510 · Cited by 19
“Our analysis reveals student concerns align with general concerns revolving around personal data, transparency, and bias [3, 81, 103, 157].”
Hmoud, M., Daher, W. M., & Ayyoub, A. A. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1617132 · Cited by 32
Multidimensional Student Agency in Learning with AI: A Conceptual Framework and Design Implications
Vincoli, M., Scholz, N., & Nagashima, T. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-98459-4_16 · Cited by 16
Reihanian, I., Hou, Y., Chen, Y., & Zheng, Y. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-94943-2_11 · Cited by 22
AI in Education: A Systematic Literature Review of Emerging Trends, Benefits, and Challenges
Adil, J. J. G. (2025) · Seminars in Medical Writing and Education · doi:10.56294/mw2025795 · Cited by 26
Intelligent‑TPACK in practice: design and evidence from a three‑week teacher preparation module
Aldemir, T., Kılınç, S., Biçer, A., Grant, P., Davis, T. J., & Sweany, N. W. (2025) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100306 · Cited by 19
“…to an ethical decision-making checkpoint in every activity; by the final micro-teaching, the majority spontaneously referenced privacy or bias mitigations without a rubric prompt, a behavior rarely reported in earlier i-TPACK interventions, where ethics was siloed in a single session [69,6].”
Educational Collaboration : Teachers and Artificial Intelligence
Mujiono, M. (2023) · Jurnal Kependidikan: Jurnal Hasil Penelitian dan Kajian Kepustakaan di Bidang Pendidikan, Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran · doi:10.33394/jk.v9i2.7801 · Cited by 12
“Teachers are responsible for creating an inclusive learning environment, providing motivation, and facilitating social interactions in the classroom (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
BackgroundAI-Driven Decision-Making Applications in Higher Education
Lestari, R., Windarwati, H. D., & Hidayah, R. (2024) · Advances in media, entertainment and the arts (AMEA) book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0639-0.ch011 · Cited by 12
Voices of the Future: Generation Z’s Views on AI’s Ethical and Social Impact
Gupta, A., Pranathy, R. S., Binny, M., Chellasamy, A., Nagarathinam, A., Pachiyappan, S., & Bhagat, S. (2024) · Studies in systems, decision and control · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-51997-0_31 · Cited by 12
Children’s sensemaking of algorithms and data flows across YouTube and social media
Starks, A., & Reich, S. M. (2024) · Information and Learning Sciences · doi:10.1108/ils-12-2023-0201 · Cited by 13
Identifying Student Behavior in Smart Classrooms: A Systematic Literature Mapping and Taxonomies
Eich, L. G., Francisco, R., & Barbosa, J. L. V. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2383812 · Cited by 13
AI in Adaptive Learning: Challenges and Opportunities
Er-Rafyg, A., Zankadi, H., & Idrissi, A. (2024) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-65038-3_26 · Cited by 17
A Review of AI Tools: Definitions, Functions, and Applications for K-12 Education
Kwid, G., Sarty, N., & Yang, D. (2024) · AI Computer Science and Robotics Technology · doi:10.5772/acrt.20240048 · Cited by 29
The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Schools: A Case of Policy Formation
Roberts, A., & Richardson, J. W. (2024) · Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership · doi:10.1177/15554589241299320 · Cited by 14
Fostering Pre-Service Teachers’ AI Literacy through School Implications
Nuangchalerm, P., Prachagool, V., Saregar, A., & Yunus, Y. M. (2024) · Journal of Philology and Educational Sciences · doi:10.53898/jpes2024327 · Cited by 17
Yapay Zekânın Din Eğitimindeki Rolü: Fırsatlar, Zorluklar ve Geleceğe Yönelik Çıkarımlar
Gül, A., & Si̇pahi̇oğlu, M. (2024) · Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi · doi:10.33415/daad.1592841 · Cited by 11
Artificial intelligence in education: A text mining-based review of the past 56 years
Ekin, C. Ç., Cantekin, Ö. F., Polat, E., & Hopcan, S. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13225-6 · Cited by 20
“Despite the benefits of AIED, there are ethical and social handicaps, such as “data theft, privacy issues, digital divide, over control, and false outcomes” as well as “making learners less social” (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022, p.5).”
Lin, X., Shen, W., Huang, S., Wang, Y., Zhou, W. L., Ling, X., & Li, W. (2025) · Asia Pacific Education Review · doi:10.1007/s12564-024-10034-x · Cited by 15
“From a practical perspective, to address the competency requirements and ethical challenges teachers encounter in the new AI educational reform (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022), educators must provide support to training first-line teachers and consider their concerns (Jiang, 2022).”
AI-Driven Health and Safety Management in School Facilities
Ismail, G. A., & Aldous, S. M. (2025) · Practice, progress, and proficiency in sustainability · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-1917-9.ch002 · Cited by 12
Ethics and Equity in AI-Driven Education
Wang, V. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-0502-8.ch010 · Cited by 14
AI-Assisted Formative Assessment and Feedback
Trajkovski, G., & Hayes, H. (2025) · Digital education and learning · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-88252-4_7 · Cited by 19
Zhang, C., Hu, M., Wu, W., Chen, Y., Kamran, F., & Wang, X. (2025) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2025.105086 · Cited by 17
Artificial intelligence (AI) as a new trajectory in education
Döğer, M. F., & Göçen, A. (2025) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2025.2510391 · Cited by 12
“Recent studies have probed its ethical dimensions (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Evmenova et al., 2024; Huang, 2023; Kasneci et al., 2023; Krutka et al., 2021; Piano, 2020; Remian, 2019; Trust et al., 2023; Wood et al., 2021; Yang, 2023), its effects on school-level decision making (Cukurova et al.,…”
InfluentialChang, M. A., Tissenbaum, M., Philip, T. M., & D’Mello, S. K. (2025) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100364 · Cited by 12
Ravi, M., Kaur, K., Wright, C., Bawn, M., & Cutillo, L. (2025) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-025-00557-7 · Cited by 12
“…for education, these translate into, bias and discrimination associated with automated scoring systems, surveillance or tracking systems that monitor students and/or staff, predictive systems adversely impacting student autonomy and privacy violations (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Kooli, 2023).”
Wieczorek, M. (2025) · Learning Media and Technology · doi:10.1080/17439884.2025.2517335 · Cited by 11
“Some point to statistics demonstrating that Irish schools are now much safer than they were in the 2020s and that attendance and graduation rates have increased significantly (Akgun and Greenhow 2022; Corbeil and Corbeil 2021; Gillani et al. 2023).”
InfluentialKılıçkaya, F., & Kic-Drgas, J. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05715-w · Cited by 11
Samawi, F. S. (2023) · International Journal of Educational Sciences · doi:10.31901/24566322.2023/42.1-3.1299 · Cited by 11
“However, with all these advancements, primary studies by Akgun and Greenhow (2021) and Garibay et al. (2023) have highlighted pressing concerns, especially the ethical implications of AI tools in kindergartens.”
BackgroundPande, S., Moon, J. S., & Haque, M. F. (2024) · Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research · doi:10.46281/bjmsr.v9i1.2186 · Cited by 19
Huang, T., Geng, J., Chen, Y., Wang, H., Yang, H., & Hu, S. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12470-z · Cited by 15
“Consequently, the digital literacy and skills of their populations are progressively emerging as pivotal metrics for assessing international competitiveness and soft power (Akgun & Greenhow, 2021; Borenstein & Howard, 2021).”
AI in Teaching and Learning and Intelligent Tutoring Systems
Khine, M. S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-9350-1_4 · Cited by 20
Erol, M., & Erol, A. (2024) · Sakarya University Journal of Education · doi:10.19126/suje.1446227 · Cited by 28
“First, privacy and security concerns examine AI's effects on children's privacy and safety (White, 2018; Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
Pitychoutis, K. M., & Rawahi, A. A. (2024) · Forum for Linguistic Studies · doi:10.30564/fls.v6i6.7297 · Cited by 12
TEACHERS’ AND STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: ALL-UKRAINIAN RESEARCH
Dovgyi, S. O., Бабійчук, С. М., Давибіда, Л. І., & Biletska, M. (2024) · Information Technologies and Learning Tools · doi:10.33407/itlt.v104i6.5890 · Cited by 25
“Additional research highlights potential problems [7], [8], [9], [10] and perspectives [11], [12] related to the use of AI in education, particularly its role in mitigating the adverse effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, such as a decline in student performance, an increase in educator workload, and…”
Wu, Q., & Xu, A. (2025) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.4119 · Cited by 19
RetractedIntegrating Artificial Intelligence for Science Teaching in High School
Kotsis, K. Τ. (2025) · LatIA · doi:10.62486/latia202589 · Cited by 11
Hariharasitaraman, S., Amudhavel, J., Sambasivam, G., Sohail, S. S., & Madsen, D. Ø. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2485508 · Cited by 13
“Educational institutions must implement robust security measures to protect sensitive data from breaches and misuse, while also being transparent about data usage practices (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
Application Status, Problems and Future Prospects of Generative AI in Education
Yu, H., Liu, Z., & Guo, Y. (2023) · International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE) · doi:10.1109/cste59648.2023.00065 · Cited by 15
Cooperative Education for Sustainability
Em, S., & Khampirat, B. (2025) · Practice, progress, and proficiency in sustainability · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-1917-9.ch004 · Cited by 10
The Impact and Future of Artificial Intelligence in Learning
Achar, H. V. B., & Raghu, N. (2025) · International Conference on Integrated Circuits and Communication Systems (ICICACS) · doi:10.1109/icicacs65178.2025.10967881 · Cited by 10
“The AIK12 report (2019) focuses on five important ideas: perception, expression and reasoning, education, ecological interaction, and the influence of artificial intelligence on society [8].”
Campo, L., Delgado, N., Urbieta, J. M. E., Kanso, H., & Gueye, M. L. (2025) · Innovative Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10755-025-09830-z · Cited by 16
Enhancing graduate AI education through practical and values-driven curriculum integration
Zhong, M., Wei, L., & Mo, H. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1630073 · Cited by 22
AI and higher education: Understanding faculty roles in teaching, research, and administration
Spathopoulou, F., Pitychoutis, K. M., & Papakonstantinidis, S. (2025) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/17406 · Cited by 29
Anwendung von Künstlicher Intelligenz im Religionsunterricht: Möglichkeiten, Grenzen und Brennpunkte
Chrostowski, M. (2023) · Religionspädagogische Beiträge · doi:10.20377/rpb-267 · Cited by 11
“– entscheidend für die Erkenntnis der Gott-ebenbildlichkeit der menschlichen Person und ihre Subjektwerdung (Schlag & Nord, 2021 (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
BackgroundFeedback, Control, or Explanations? Supporting Teachers With Steerable Distractor-Generating AI
Szymanski, M., Ooge, J., Croon, R. D., Abeele, V. V., & Verbert, K. (2024) · International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK) · doi:10.1145/3636555.3636933 · Cited by 10
“AI in education is increasingly being used to automate various teacher tasks, providing benefits such as personalised learning, automated assessments, and freeing up teachers’ time for more interactive and supportive roles [1].”
A review of the application of artificial intelligence in South African Higher Education
Funda, V., & Piderit, R. (2024) · Conference on Information Communications Technology and Society (ICTAS) · doi:10.1109/ictas59620.2024.10507113 · Cited by 23
“For technology to circumvent cultural barriers, its creators must understand and respect consumers' cultural norms and values [39].”
BackgroundIdentifying learning styles in MOOCs environment through machine learning predictive modeling
Jebbari, M., Cherradi, B., Hamida, S., & Raihani, A. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-12637-8 · Cited by 11
Hu, N. (2024) · Wireless Networks · doi:10.1007/s11276-024-03812-3 · Cited by 16
Artificial Intelligence in Education
Kujundziski, A. P., & Bojadjiev, J. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-4310-4.ch001 · Cited by 16
Uddın, M. M. (2024) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-024-00349-7 · Cited by 10
“…is also the risk of propagating biases, as generative AI models can inadvertently mirror and amplify existing biases present in their training data, resulting in the dissemination of biased or inaccurate information, perpetuating stereotypes, and reinforcing inequality in educational contexts [1].”
Infrastructure and Investment Needs for AI Implementation in Education
Sayari, K. T. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-1017-6.ch005 · Cited by 12
Micro-Credentials and AI in Higher Education
Charles, T., & Hill, C. (2025) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-7332-3.ch001 · Cited by 10
The EU AI Act: Implications for Ethical AI in Education
Saarela, M., Gunasekara, S., & Karimov, A. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-93979-2_3 · Cited by 15
Research on Ethical Issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Chu, J., Xi, L., Zhang, Q., & Lin, R. (2022) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-5967-7_12 · Cited by 9
Artificial Intelligence, Augmented Reality and Education
Rusillo-Magdaleno, A., Ruiz‐Ariza, A., Suárez-Manzano, S., & Redecillas, T. M. (2023) · Springer series on cultural computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-27166-3_6 · Cited by 10
Global Trends in Scientific Debates on Trustworthy and Ethical Artificial Intelligence and Education
Stracke, C. M., Chounta, I., & Holmes, W. (2024) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64315-6_21 · Cited by 12
“The identification of the necessity of ethical AI&ED and the development of community-driven proposals and frameworks for ethical AI&ED took twenty years [1, 2, 6, 11, 12].”
Kasun, G. S., Liao, Y.-C., Margulieux, L. E., & Woodall, M. (2024) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2024.1368604 · Cited by 10
Sadaf, A., Maxwell, D., Küplüce, C., & Holz, H. (2025) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100305 · Cited by 12
A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Systematic Reviews of Artificial Intelligence in Education
Nguyen, V. T., Phung, T.-N., & Cuong, D.-D. (2024) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-50818-9_37 · Cited by 15
Generative Artificial Intelligence Impact on Education and Industry: An Ethical Dimension
Montezuma, J. R. M., & Chong, M. (2024) · IEEE World Engineering Education Conference (EDUNINE) · doi:10.1109/edunine60625.2024.10500608 · Cited by 9
“These activities include teaching technical skills and encouraging ethical reflection and critical thinking in students [16] to enable them to make informed and ethical decisions when using GAI.”
BackgroundRubric Development and Validation for Assessing Tasks' Solving via AI Chatbots
Hmoud, M., Swaity, H., Anjass, E., & Ramírez, E. M. A. (2024) · The Electronic Journal of e-Learning · doi:10.34190/ejel.22.6.3292 · Cited by 18
Adoui, A. (2024) · Simulacra · doi:10.21107/sml.v7i1.21911 · Cited by 9
“The teaching of AI presents challenges related to ethics, interdisciplinary approaches, and the development of relevant skills for students, there is a need for stronger accountability and responsibility in adopting AI (Nguyen et al., 2023; Akgun & Greenhow, 2022).”
BackgroundMohamed, A. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3433531 · Cited by 16
“…to fill this gap, presenting a nuanced examination of AI’s capabilities and challenges, with a focus on optimizing learning experiences through AR and VR for students with special needs, reflecting on both the historical context and the current technological advancements in AI [13], [14], [15].”
BackgroundFairness, Bias, and Ethics in AI: Exploring the Factors Affecting Student Performance
Gordon, N. A., Aljaber, T., & Omughelli, D. (2024) · Journal of Intelligent Communication · doi:10.54963/jic.v4i1.306 · Cited by 9
“Such systems could be susceptible to bias and unfairness, for instance, an AI system that tracks student activity and uses facial recognition could be biased against students from certain racial [11].”
BackgroundApplication of transformer architectures in generative video modeling for neurosurgical education
McLean, A. L., & Gutierrez-Pineda, F. (2024) · International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11548-024-03266-0 · Cited by 11
Integrating Youth Perspectives into the Design of AI-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments
Humburg, M., Dragnić-Cindrić, D., Hmelo‐Silver, C. E., Glazewski, K. D., Lester, J. C., & Danish, J. A. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14111197 · Cited by 9
Han, S., & Zhang, Y. (2025) · Journal of Research on Technology in Education · doi:10.1080/15391523.2025.2456051 · Cited by 11
“AI ethics is the ability to recognize ethical responsibilities and avoid risks and moral issues (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022; Celik, 2023; Jang et al., 2022), and should be considered an important dimension of university students’ values regarding technology usage.”
Akbar, M., N.A., J. P. S., Ramayah, T., & Alkashami, M. (2025) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2025.2479401 · Cited by 11
Investigating the use of AI tools in English language learning: A phenomenological approach
Wu, X., & Annamalai, N. (2025) · Contemporary Educational Technology · doi:10.30935/cedtech/16188 · Cited by 25
Doktora Öğrencilerinin Yapay Zeka Kullanımı Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma
Aruğaslan, E. (2025) · Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi · doi:10.32329/uad.1557111 · Cited by 12
Elizondo-García, M. E., la Cerda, H. H. D., Benavides-García, I. G., Caratozzolo, P., & Membrillo‐Hernández, J. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1417642 · Cited by 11
Teaching high school students about generative AI: Cases of teacher lesson design
Delaney, V., Adisa, I. O., Mah, C., & Lee, V. R. (2025) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2025.2510415 · Cited by 15
“Others have ethical concerns (Akgun & Greenhow, 2022), questions about the relationship between students’ AI use and academic integrity (Lee et al., 2024) or negative dispositions toward GenAI as tools that may potentially displace aspects of student thinking and reasoning (Abbas et al., 2024).”
Gunasekara, S., & Saarela, M. (2025) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2025.107933 · Cited by 13
Automated Evaluation Techniques and AI-Enhanced Methods
Ahmed, S., Zaki, A., & Bentley, Y. N. (2024) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-2145-4.ch001 · Cited by 12
Stracke, C. M. (2024) · Lecture notes in educational technology · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-8638-1_7 · Cited by 18
Navigating Ethical Frameworks to Mitigate Academic Misconduct While Leveraging Generative AIPreprint
Uddın, M. M., & Abu, S. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4607113/v1 · Cited by 12
Tripathi, A., Yadav, V., & Kumar, S. (2025) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202504.0598.v1 · Cited by 9
Artificial Intelligence in Computer Science
Sihare, S. R. (2023) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-1301-5.ch001 · Cited by 9
Artificial Intelligence and Literacy Development in K–12 Schools
Maher, D., & Young, K. (2023) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-0205-7.ch004 · Cited by 8
Du, K., Geiger, J., Killen, T., Porta, A. E., & O’Brien, T. V. (2024) · Journal of Education and Training Studies · doi:10.11114/jets.v12i2.6582 · Cited by 13
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
