In the era of exponential technology growth, one unexpected guest has claimed a seat in classrooms worldwide, Artificial Intelligence. Generative AI, such as ChatGPT, promises a revolution in education, yet it arrives with a double-edged sword. Its potential for personalized learning is offset by issues of cheating, inaccuracies, and educators struggling to incorporate it effectively into their lesson design. We are standing on the brink of this educational frontier, and it is clear that we need to navigate this terrain with a lot of care. This is a major challenge that could undermine the integrity and value of our educational process. So, how can we turn these challenges into opportunities? When used inappropriately, AI tools can become the perfect tool for the cut copy paste mentality, and quickly begin to corrode critical thinking, creativity, and deep understanding, the most important skills in our rapidly changing world. Teachers feel that they are not equipped to leverage this technology, widening the digital divide among educators and institutions. Addressing these concerns calls for an in depth research approach. We will employ empirical research, drawing on the Technology Acceptance Model, to assess the attitudes toward generative AI among educators and students. Understanding their perceptions, usage patterns, and hurdles is the first crucial step in creating an effective solution. The present study will be used as a process manual for future researchers to apply, running their own data, based on the steps explained here
In the book, 40 experts speak, who explain in clear language what AI is, and what questions, challenges and opportunities the technology brings.
Our current smart society, where problems and frictions are smoothed out with smart, often invisible technology like AI and smart sensors, calls for designers who unravel and open the smart fabric. Societies are not malleable, and moreover, a smooth society without rough edges is neither desirable nor livable. In this paper we argue for designing friction to enhance a more nuanced debate of smart cities in which conflicting values are better expressed. Based on our experiences with the Moral Design Game, an adversarial design activity, we came to understand the value of creating tangible vessels to highlight conflict and dipartite feelings surrounding smart cities.
LINK