Curated collection of cutting-edge AI learning materials
Highlights • Attitude and trust towards AI directly influencing user knowledge and engagement. • Knowledge and engagement with AI can influence critical thinking abilities. • Responsibly using ChatGPT in education can promote critical thinking.
The increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in student assessment has led to institutional reliance on detection tools. Unlike plagiarism detection, AI detection relies on unverifiable probabilistic estimates. In this paper, we argue that generative AI detection should not be used in education
Textbooks are a cornerstone of education, but they have a fundamental limitation: they are a one-sizef its-all medium.
As researchers rush to investigate the potential of AI tools like ChatGPT to enhance learning, well-documented pitfalls threaten the validity of this emerging research.
Inspired by Arendt’s preoccupation with society’s state of ‘thoughtlessness’ and Freire’s critical pedagogy, this article explores how the role of thinking is impacted by the introduction of Gen-AI in education.
A Stanford study captures the gap between worker desires and AI’s abilities, and highlights areas ripe for research and development.
Generative AI is revolutionizing content creation and has the potential to enable real-time, personalized educational experiences. We investigated the effectiveness of converting textbook chapters into AI-generated podcasts and explored the impact of personalizing these podcasts for individual learner profiles.
Insights and Recommendations
This study focuses on finding out the cognitive cost of using an LLM in the educational context of writing an essay.
Since the release of ChatGPT, the role of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in education has sparked both excitement and concern.
In an era of generative AI and ubiquitous digital tools, human memory faces a paradox: the more we offload knowledge to external aids, the less we exercise and
We evaluated four systems (ELIZA, GPT-4o, LLaMa-3.1-405B, and GPT-4.5) in two randomised, controlled, and pre-registered Turing tests on independent populations. Participants had 5-minute conversations simultaneously with another human participant and one of these systems before judging which conversational partner they thought was human.
