Many educational questions arise with the explosive development of systems using generative artificial intelligence. The question of who will take responsibility for implementing and managing AI in schools is pressing. But do we need to act? Should we wait and see? And last but not least, who will take responsibility?
Implementing artificial intelligence (AI) in the education system raises questions about the distribution of responsibilities and requires a strategy at many different levels of decision-making. With AI's potential to transform learning and teaching, we must carefully consider how to integrate these tools responsibly and effectively.
Many already come up with good suggestions for principles and practices about how we can use artificial intelligence. For example, the World Economic Forum highlights seven principles for the responsible use of AI in education that can guide all actors. These include purpose, compliance, knowledge, balance, integrity, decision-making, and evaluation. This set of principles forms the basis for a holistic approach to AI in education, where you both recognize the potential and address the challenges that come with it.
And in practice, there are now many good examples of approaching it. One of these is Vallensbæk Municipality. They have introduced an elective course in artificial intelligence, where students work with theoretical and practical aspects of AI, including ethical application and critical thinking.
Recently, you could also read an article in Ledelse i morgen where Arnov and Frandsen give examples of how AI can be used in teaching. They suggest using chatbots as a supplement to the learning process and emphasize the importance of teaching students both the benefits and limitations of the technology.
What these practice examples have in common is that they are very much about the concrete teaching and use of artificial intelligence. But there is a need to go a little higher in the helicopter and look at the extent to which there is a need to take a position on the use of artificial intelligence and the derived consequences at different levels.
Distribution of roles in the education sector
Mikkel Aslak recently wrote a presentation on this very issue on LinkedIn. Here he wrote, among other things:
"My concern is that we are waiting for each other for too long. Because the fact is that the students are sitting in classes and using AI right now. We have to take that seriously so that we don't have a situation where teachers and students don't talk openly to each other, but instead are in a learning environment with suspicion and students who more or less uncritically try their hand at a new technology."
Here he comes up with a proposal for a division of roles between the ministry, the municipal level and the school. Inspired by this thinking, here comes a proposal for distributing roles in the discussion.
Ministry of Children and Education
There is a need for clear policies and strategies for what role AI must and must play in education. It is very positive that an expert group has been set up and includes practitioners. There is a need for the Ministry of Children and Education to set the direction and help the municipalities with recommendations. Still, at the same time, it should also ensure that there is leeway locally to carry out experiments and gain experience flexibly.
The municipalities
The municipal administrations and school departments should focus on implementing national guidelines locally, preferably with help from and in collaboration with KL. This may include creating training programs for teachers and providing necessary technological resources to schools. As school owners, the municipalities must prepare concrete recommendations for the schools, including guidelines for GDPR-compatible AI tools. In addition to coordinating and supporting projects such as the one described by Vallensbæk Municipality, it can offer specific application areas and ethical guidelines for the municipality's schools. However, securing the schools' knowledge of legislation and regulations will be the most crucial.
The schools
The schools must ensure that the staff know about and discuss the possibilities and risks of using artificial intelligence. It is also about making local guidelines and recommendations to find the right balance between using artificial intelligence as an active player in the classroom and setting limits on where it can and cannot be utilized. The schools should not wait for the test forms to be changed but work with different frameworks for the teachers' experiments with tasks and activities.
It is also essential that the school ensures good and safe communication about the field among parents and students.
The teachers
As always, the teacher's role is crucial, as they are the ones who, together with the students, will use AI in daily teaching and set limits on when it can be utilized. This means that the teachers must have technical competence to understand artificial intelligence and use it sensibly. At the same time, they must also be able to integrate AI meaningfully into their teaching. It also implies that they must be able to guide students in the responsible use of AI, including source criticism, discussion, and critical thinking, which Arnov and Frandsen also mention in their article in Ledelse i morgen.
Hurry slowly
The practical and responsible implementation of AI in the education system requires a concerted effort from all actors - from the ministry to the individual teacher. An interdisciplinary approach, where the ministry, municipalities, schools, and teachers contribute, is necessary to ensure a responsible and well-thought-out integration of AI in the school.
There is a need for continuous evaluation and adaptation of AI in education. All parties involved must contribute to an ongoing assessment of both effectiveness, consequences, and ethics to using AI.
It is vital to have a nuanced dialogue about AI in education, and we must have the debate be close to the concrete reality of the education rather than getting lost in more considerable societal speculations, which Thomas Ryberg also writes about in Version2 on 6 February 2024. We need to better distinguish between AI's different uses and implications, from how it can transform professional disciplines to its role in predicting dropouts. This requires us to focus sharply on the values we want to form the foundation for education in a time characterized by technological change and how these values are challenged or expanded by new technologies such as artificial intelligence.
To be able to do this, we need to be clear about the distribution of tasks and responsibilities throughout the actor chain. It should not happen in a series of echo chambers. Experiences from teaching must also go the other way through the system so that there is an exchange and development of the field. Hopefully, this area will also be something that the Expert Group on ChatGPT and other digital aids will touch upon when they come up with their final recommendations this spring.
Sources
World Economic Forum: Principper for ansvarlig brug af AI i uddannelsen (https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/01/ai-guidance-school-responsible-use-in-education/)
Vallensbæk Kommune: Erfaringer med AI i skolen (https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7152950530472919040/)
Folkeskolen: Debat om AI i skolen (https://www.folkeskolen.dk/it-nb/chatgpt-i-skolen-ma-vi-overhovedet-det/4720307)
Folkeskolen: 6 råd til arbejde med AI (https://www.folkeskolen.dk/it-kunsting-intelligens-nb/debat-her-er-6-rad-til-at-arbejde-med-ai/4730066)
Mikkel Aslak's model for implementering af AI i uddannelsen (https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mikkelaslak_nu-g%C3%A5r-jeg-lige-lidt-ud-over-min-komfortzone-activity-7154047086240378880-AUB_/)
Arnov, L. D., & Frandsen, C. A. (2024). AI-chatbots - nu eller aldrig? Ledelses i morgen nummer 4, januar 2024, side 6-10. (https://issuu.com/dafoloforlag/docs/ledelse_i_morgen_januar_2024)
https://www.version2.dk/artikel/forsker-ai-tempoet-i-skolen-skal-saettes-ned-undgaa-tekno-panik
