Extension usage examples:
Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
How can we design for learning in an AI world? | Elsevier Enhanced Reader
Source: reader.elsevier.com
Article summary:
1. AI is challenging assumptions about what capabilities are intrinsically human, such as creativity and complex problem solving.
2. There is a need to support educators and learners to figure out how to create the best possible future in an AI world.
3. UNESCO has made recommendations for a ‘humanistic approach’ as the overarching principle for AI in education, which includes protecting human rights, equipping people with skills needed for sustainable development and for human-machine collaboration.
Article analysis:
The article provides an overview of the current state of learning in an AI world, discussing the implications of AI on society and its impact on formal educational contexts such as schools and universities. The article also outlines UNESCO’s recommendations for a ‘humanistic approach’ as the overarching principle for AI in education.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy, providing evidence from multiple sources to back up its claims. It cites relevant research studies to support its arguments, including Arnts et al., 2016; Manyika et al., 2017; Muro et al., 2019; Dellot et al., 2020; David, 2015; Harari, 2018; Nissim & Simon, 2021; Touretzky et al., 2019; Agus & Samuri, 2018; Arnold & Pistilli, 2012; Fan et al., 2021; Lucas et al., 2021; Martinez-Maldonado et al., 2021; Selwyn & Gasevic, 2020; Selwyn, 2019; Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018; Williansom & Eynon, 2020); Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019); Miaoet al., 2021); Luckin et al., 2016); UNESCO (2019, 2020).
The article does not appear to be biased or one-sided in its reporting of the topic. It acknowledges both potential benefits and risks associated with AI applications in education contexts. It also presents both sides of the argument equally by exploring both positive and negative implications of AI on society and education systems.
The only potential issue with this article is that it does not provide any counterarguments or alternative perspectives on the topic discussed. While it does provide evidence from multiple sources to back up its claims, it would have been beneficial if it had explored other points of view or counterarguments related to learning in an AI world.