Cited by 24Artificial Intelligence in EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEducational Technology and Pedagogy

AI in Education: Shaping the Future of Teaching and Learning

Open access
Takona, James·2024·International Journal of Current Educational Studies

Abstract

This study examines the impactful incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in higher education, emphasizing its ability to improve teaching methods, simplify administration, and facilitate individualized learning. By analyzing literature and assessing case studies, this study demonstrates how AI promotes creativity, enhances critical thinking, and provides personalized learning experiences. Moreover, AI streamlines repetitive tasks like scheduling and communication, allowing educators to concentrate on impactful student interaction and instructional creativity. Nonetheless, the research also highlights significant challenges, including ethical worries regarding data privacy and algorithmic bias, issues of equity such as the digital divide, and the dangers of reduced human interaction. Tackling these challenges necessitates careful design and teamwork to guarantee that the incorporation of AI is in harmony with educational principles. The results indicate that, if applied thoughtfully, AI has the potential to transform higher education into a more adaptive, inclusive, and effective system, aligning technological advancements with the fundamental goal of promoting fair and significant learning opportunities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.46328/ijces.121

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • These syntheses flag data-privacy and algorithmic-bias risks, digital inequities/infrastructure gaps, and the possibility of diminished human interaction, underscoring the need for careful design, educator training, and cross-stakeholder collaboration so that implementations remain aligned with educational values.

    “At the same time, these syntheses flag data-privacy and algorithmic-bias risks, digital inequities/infrastructure gaps, and the possibility of diminished human interaction, underscoring the need for careful design, educator training, and cross-stakeholder collaboration so that implementations remain aligned with educational values [47].”
  • Recent systematic reviews converge on a balanced picture: AI not only augments teaching methods and individualizes learning (adaptive pathways, timely feedback), but also streamlines administrative work and cultivates creativity and critical thinking when embedded in thoughtful pedagogy.

    “Recent systematic reviews converge on a balanced picture: AI not only augments teaching methods and individualizes learning (adaptive pathways, timely feedback), but also streamlines administrative work (e.g., scheduling, communications) and cultivates creativity and critical thinking when embedded in thoughtful pedagogy [47].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Eynon, R., & Malmberg, L. E. (2021). A critical perspective on AI in education: Risks, challenges, and future directions. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(4), 345-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1938901 · DOI
  2. Genin, K., & Grote, T. (2021). Randomized controlled trials in medical AI: A methodological critique. Philosophy of Medicine, 2 (1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.5195/POM.2021. · DOI
  3. Pan, L., Saxon, M., Xu, W., Nathani, D., & Wang, X. (2024). Automatically correcting large language models: Surveying the landscape of diverse automated correction strategies. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00660 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Selwyn, N., & Facer, K. (2021). AI for all? Critical perspectives on artificial intelligence in education. Routledge.
  5. Slimi, Z., & Carballido, B. V. (2023). Navigating the ethical challenges of Artificial Intelligence in higher education. TEM Journal, 12(2), 590-602. https://www.temjournal.com/content/122/TEMJournalMay2023_590_602.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Takona, J.
Affiliations
Coppin State University (US)
Corresponding author
Takona, James
Venue
International Journal of Current Educational Studies
Published
2024-12-26
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
1-25
ISSN
2822-4914 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4412019654
Cited by
24
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 6
FWCI
9.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Current Educational Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
Keywords
artificial intelligence in education, higher education, personalized learning, administrative automation, data privacy, algorithmic bias, digital divide, educational equity, pedagogical interaction, critical thinking, creativity

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.

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