Peer reviewed
Direct linkERIC Number: EJ1473198
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2025-May
Pages: 16
Abstractor: As Provided
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-8756-3894
EISSN: EISSN-1559-7075
Available Date: 2025-02-19
Venturing into the Unknown: Critical Insights into Grey Areas and Pioneering Future Directions in Educational Generative AI Research
Junhong Xiao1; Aras Bozkurt2; Mark Nichols3; Angelica Pazurek4; Christian M. Stracke5; John Y. H. Bai6; Robert Farrow7; Dónal Mulligan8; Chrissi Nerantzi9; Ramesh Chander Sharma10; Lenandlar Singh11; Isak Frumin12; Andrew Swindell13; Sarah Honeychurch14; Melissa Bond15,16; Jon Dron17; Stephanie Moore18; Jing Leng19; Patricia J. Slagter van Tryon20; Manuel Garcia21; Evgeniy Terentev22; Ahmed Tlili23; Thomas K. F. Chiu24; Charles B. Hodges25; Petar Jandric26; Alexander Sidorkin27; Helen Crompton28; Stefan Hrastinski29; Apostolos Koutropoulos30; Mutlu Cukurova31; Peter Shea32; Steven Watson33; Kai Zhang19; Kyungmee Lee34; Eamon Costello8; Mike Sharples7; Anton Vorochkov35; Bryan Alexander36; Maha Bali37; Robert L. Moore38; Olaf Zawacki-Richter6; Tutaleni Iita Asino39; Henk Huijser40; Chanjin Zheng19; Sunagül Sani-Bozkurt2; Josep M. Duart41; Chryssa Themeli42
TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, v69 n3 p582-597 2025
Advocates of AI in Education (AIEd) assert that the current generation of technologies, collectively dubbed artificial intelligence, including generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), promise results that can transform our conceptions of what education looks like. Therefore, it is imperative to investigate how educators perceive GenAI and its potential use and future impact on education. Adopting the methodology of collective writing as an inquiry, this study reports on the participating educators' perceived grey areas (i.e. issues that are unclear and/or controversial) and recommendations on future research. The grey areas reported cover decision-making on the use of GenAI, AI ethics, appropriate levels of use of GenAI in education, impact on learning and teaching, policy, data, GenAI outputs, humans in the loop and public-private partnerships. Recommended directions for future research include learning and teaching, ethical and legal implications, ownership/authorship, funding, technology, research support, AI metaphor and types of research. Each theme or subtheme is presented in the form of a statement, followed by a justification. These findings serve as a call to action to encourage a continuing debate around GenAI and to engage more educators in research. The paper concludes that unless we can ask the right questions now, we may find that, in the pursuit of greater efficiency, we have lost the very essence of what it means to educate and learn.
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Technology Uses in Education, Educational Trends, Trend Analysis, Educational Benefits, Teacher Attitudes, Ambiguity (Context), Decision Making, Ethics, Input Output Analysis, Computer Peripherals, Man Machine Systems, Partnerships in Education, Legal Problems, Ownership, Financial Support, Figurative Language
Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A
Author Affiliations: 1Open University of Shantou, Shantou, China; 2Anadolu University, Eskisehir, Türkiye; 3Open Polytechnic, Lower Hutt, New Zealand; 4University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA; 5University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; 6Carl Von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany; 7Open University, Milton Keynes, UK; 8Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland; 9University of Leeds, Leeds, UK; 10Dr B R Ambedkar University Delhi, New Delhi, India; 11University of Guyana, Georgetown, Guyana; 12Constructor University, Bremen, Germany; 13Asian University for Women, Cambridge, USA; 14University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK; 15University College London, EPPI Centre, London, UK; 16University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway; 17Athabasca University, Athabasca, Canada; 18University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, USA; 19East China Normal University, Shanghai, China; 20East Carolina University, Greenville, USA; 21FEU Institute of Technology, Manila, Philippines; 22HSE University, Moscow, Russia; 23Smart Learning Institute of Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China; 24Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China; 25Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, USA; 26Zagreb University of Applied Sciences, Zagreb, Croatia; 27California State University, Sacramento, USA; 28Old Dominion University, Norfolk, USA; 29KTH Royal Institution of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; 30University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, USA; 31University College London, London, UK; 32University at Albany, Albany, USA; 33University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; 34Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea; 35Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain; 36Georgetown University, Washington, USA; 37American University in Cairo, Cairo, Egypt; 38University of Florida, Gainesville, USA; 39Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA; 40Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia; 41Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain; 42NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
