# data[].attributes.body
AI in education

（ChatGPT）

# data[].attributes.body
1. Academic Integrity

·       It is difficult to track students’ independent thinking.

·       Assessment redesign needed: more authentic and process-based tasks (Defending Assessment Security, 2025).

2. Student Learning ability and Cognition

·       Students may lose independent thinking skills if AI works all the time.

·       Instead of critical thinking, AI can scaffold writing, translation, and examples (SWOT of ChatGPT, 2024).

·       Teachers must design tasks that still require reflection.

3. Professionalism

·       AI can reduce workload. Some teachers can use AI to design curriculums and give feedback drafts.

·       Teachers are no longer only giving knowledge to students. They also need to design learning tasks and guide students in how to use AI in a smart and critical way.

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Sociocultural (Vygotsky)

AI is a tool in the Zone of Proximal Development, but learning still needs peer and teacher scaffolds.

2.  Constructivism

Students must “make meaning,” not just copy answers.

3.  Collaborative Innovation

Wicked problems need networked collaboration, not only top-down bans (Torfing, 2016).

4.  Innovation Discourse Critique

Innovation talk hides power and profit interests; must ask who benefits (Newfield, 2020).

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Students

2.  Teachers

Care about learning quality and integrity.

3.  Schools

Data protection

4.  Parents & Communities

Trying to create a safe, meaningful learning environment for students

5.  Governments

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Teachers require time and training to learn how to use AI effectively.

2.  Students should learn AI literacy so they know when and how to use AI.

3.  Education systems should make sure all students can access AI fairly and avoid bias.

# data[].attributes.body
1.  ‘Ed-tech waves’ always promise revolutions, but real change happens only with pedagogy and assessment redesign (Segercrantz et al., 2016).

2.  Neoliberal discourse translates education goals into economic ones (Newfield, 2020).

3.  Collaboration across boundaries is necessary to address wickedness (Torfing, 2016).

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Pedagogy should use AI as a support tool, not a replacement for thinking.

2.  Teachers and students both need training to build AI literacy.

3.  Collaboration is required between schools, communities, and policymakers.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Teachers spend hours checking if work is AI-written.
2. Some students cannot use AI tools because their devices or language options are limited.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Provide professional development, prompt libraries, and shared resources that reduce workload (Farrokhnia et al., 2024).

2.Involve students in co-creating classroom norms for AI use to build trust and responsibility (Torfing, 2016).

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Defending assessment security in a digital world. (2025). University sector report.

2. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2024). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(3), 460–474.

3. Newfield, C. (2020). “Innovation” discourse and the neoliberal university. In W. Callison & Z. Manfredi (Eds.), Mutant neoliberalism: Market rule and political rupture (pp. 244–262). Fordham University Press.

4. Segercrantz, B., Sveiby, K.-E., & Berglund, K. (2016). The academic discourse of innovation and the self-reinforcing circle. EGOS Conference Paper.

5. Torfing, J. (2016). Collaborative innovation in the public sector: the argument. University Press.