What’s of interest? The Manifesto for Teaching and Learning in a Time of Generative AI: A Critical Collective Stance to Better Navigate the Future | Open Praxis
Tell me more!
This manifesto critically examines the unfolding integration of Generative AI (GenAI), chatbots, and algorithms into higher education, using a collective and thoughtful approach to navigate the future of teaching and learning. GenAI, while celebrated for its potential to personalize learning, enhance efficiency, and expand educational accessibility, is far from a neutral tool. Algorithms now shape human interaction, communication, and content creation, raising profound questions about human agency and biases and values embedded in their designs. As GenAI continues to evolve, we face critical challenges in maintaining human oversight, safeguarding equity, and facilitating meaningful, authentic learning experiences. This manifesto emphasizes that GenAI is not ideologically and culturally neutral. Instead, it reflects worldviews that can reinforce existing biases and marginalize diverse voices. Furthermore, as the use of GenAI reshapes education, it risks eroding essential human elements—creativity, critical thinking, and empathy—and could displace meaningful human interactions with algorithmic solutions. This manifesto calls for robust, evidence-based research and conscious decision-making to ensure that GenAI enhances, rather than diminishes, human agency and ethical responsibility in education.
This is one among many items I will regularly tag in Pinboard as oegconnect, and automatically post tagged as #OEGConnect to Mastodon. Do you know of something else we should share like this? Just reply below and we will check it out.
Thank you for sharing this manifesto—it raises critical points that resonate deeply with the evolving role of Generative AI in education. I appreciate its balanced perspective on the promises and perils of GenAI integration.
The acknowledgment that GenAI is not ideologically neutral is crucial, especially in education, where inclusivity and equity are non-negotiable. While the technology holds immense potential to personalize learning and expand access, we must be vigilant about the risks of reinforcing biases and marginalizing diverse perspectives.
I strongly agree with the call for maintaining human oversight and fostering creativity, critical thinking, and empathy in learning. Education should remain human-centered, even as we embrace technological advancements. The emphasis on collective, evidence-based decision-making is especially compelling. It’s through such collaborative efforts that we can ensure GenAI becomes a tool for empowerment rather than erosion of essential human elements.
This manifesto serves as an excellent starting point for dialogue and action. I’d love to work on this and hear others’ thoughts on how we can practically implement these principles in real-world educational settings. As for diverse demographics there might be a need to modify and alter this.
Thank you for sharing this manifesto—it raises some crucial and timely issues surrounding the role of GenAI in education. I find the emphasis on its non-neutrality particularly striking. As educators, we cannot afford to ignore the biases and assumptions embedded in such technologies, especially when inclusivity and equity are fundamental to our work.
The manifesto’s focus on preserving human elements—creativity, critical thinking, and empathy—is a reminder that education must remain rooted in these principles, even as we embrace technological advancements. While GenAI holds tremendous potential to personalise learning and widen access, we must proceed with care to ensure it empowers rather than undermines the human experience.
From a practical perspective, I believe there is an opportunity to:
Develop ethical guidelines to govern the use of AI in teaching, with inclusivity and cultural sensitivity at their core.
Equip educators with the skills and tools to integrate AI responsibly, without losing sight of their vital role in shaping students’ minds and values.
Encourage research that explores how AI affects different demographics and contexts, ensuring its benefits reach everyone.
I’m particularly interested in how we can adapt these principles to diverse educational settings and align them with local realities. For instance, in India, where I work, there’s an enormous opportunity to leverage GenAI for expanding access to quality education, but it’s essential we do so without marginalising voices or diminishing the human aspects of learning.
This manifesto is an excellent starting point for deeper dialogue and collaboration. I’d love to hear how others are tackling these challenges and explore how we can collectively create a roadmap for responsible AI use in education.
Thanks for responding and speaking up, Hardik. I’d suggest that almost no technology is neutral.
We too would like to know what we can do collectively as largely we have very litttle say or influence or agency with this opaque systems.
More dialogue is welcome here. It might help to know more about the contexts of facing GenAI in the places we are working/teaching. Where are there policies happening? Professional development? Strategies for educators?
Many thanks for joining OEG Connect, Anish, as a new OEGlobal Individual Member, and demonstrating the community act of participating in discussions.
We would definitely like to understand what is being communicated or felt in India as well as other regions of the world. How might we go about your three points?