Convenient or concerning: Navigating the benefits and risks of artificial intelligence in education
Kata Kunci:
artificial intelligence, education technology, human-centred learning, algorithmic bias, ethical concernsAbstrak
The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into educational contexts has sparked both enthusiasm and skepticism. On one hand, AI-driven technologies such as adaptive learning systems, automated grading, and intelligent tutoring promise increased efficiency, personalization, and scalability in instruction. On the other, critical concerns arise regarding data privacy, algorithmic bias, equity, and the depersonalization of pedagogy. This study seeks to explore the dual nature of AI in education—its potential as a transformative tool and its implications for ethical practice. Employing a qualitative document analysis methodology, this paper examines recent peer-reviewed literature, policy briefs, and case studies that highlight both the strengths and shortcomings of AI applications in classrooms and higher education institutions. The findings show that while AI can significantly support differentiated learning and reduce administrative burdens, it also introduces risks such as surveillance, diminished human agency, and the marginalization of non-mainstream learners. The analysis underscores the importance of critical digital literacy among educators and policymakers to ensure that AI tools are implemented thoughtfully and inclusively. It concludes by recommending a framework for ethical AI use in education that centres transparency, equity, and human oversight.
Unduhan
Referensi
AP News. (2025). AI is a game changer for students with disabilities; schools still learning to harness it.
Baker, R. S., & Inventado, P. S. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics. In J. Larusson & B. White (Eds.), Learning analytics: From research to practice (pp. 61–75). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3305-7_4
Bayne, S. (2015). What’s the matter with ‘technology-enhanced learning’? Learning, Media and Technology, 40(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2014.915851
Bayne, S. (2015). Learning, technology and the posthuman: The emergence of the cybernetic subject. International Journal of Educational Research, 70, 19–24.
Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287592
Boncillo, J. (2025). AI in education: A systematic review of its applications, benefits, and ethical challenges. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research and Innovation, 3(2), 436–447.
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1801.00395
Business Insider. (2024). India’s Ferby chatbot transforming rural education. https://www.businessinsider.com/india-ferby-chatbot-education
Business Insider. (2025, July 10). Nonprofits are creating their own AI tools to combat global educational inequities.
Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. MIT Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Dillenbourg, P. (2016). Orchestration graphs: Modeling scalable education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.32.2
Duffy, B. E., & Schwartz, B. (2018). Digital labor and the limits of automation. Communication, Culture & Critique, 11(2), 264–283. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcy002
Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press.
Financial Times. (2024). Youth talks: Students reveal hopes and fears for AI. 1,000+ responses.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Pantheon Books.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2021). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Holmes, W., & Porayska-Pomsta, K. (Eds.). (2022). The ethics of artificial intelligence in education: Practices, challenges, and debates. Routledge.
Holmes, W., Porayska-Pomsta, K., & Holstein, K. (2021). Ethics of AI in education: Toward a community-wide framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 31, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00239-1
Holstein, K., & Doroudi, S. (2021). Towards a critical race theory of learning analytics. In Proceedings of the 11th International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference (pp. 242–252). ACM.
Holstein, K., Wortman Vaughan, J., Daumé III, H., Dudik, M., & Wallach, H. (2019). Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need? Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300830
Knox, J. (2020). Artificial intelligence and education in China. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 298–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1745405
Livingstone, S., & Stoilova, M. (2021). The 4Cs: Classifying online risk to children. Communications and Strategies, 123(1), 127–146. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4043587
Lum, K., & Isaac, W. (2016). To predict and serve? Significance, 13(5), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-9713.2016.00960.x
Manolev, J., Sullivan, A., & Slee, R. (2019). The datafication of discipline: ClassDojo, surveillance and a performative classroom culture. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 36–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1558237
MDPI Editorial Team. (2024). The impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on students’ academic outcomes. Education Sciences, 15(3), 343.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
OECD. (2022). Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Skills. https://www.oecd.org/education/ai-education-future-skills
OECD. (2022). Digital education outlook: Pushing the frontiers with AI, blockchain and robots. https://www.oecd.org
O’Leary, Z. (2017). The essential guide to doing your research project (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., & Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532
Selwyn, N. (2016). Is technology good for education? Polity Press.
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity Press.
The Guardian. (2024, January 23). ChatGPT is coming to Australian schools. Here’s what you need to know.
UNDP. (2023). AI for social good: Brazil’s EdIA open-source learning platform. https://www.undp.org
UNESCO. (2023). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376706
UNESCO. (2023). Guidelines for AI in education: Ensuring inclusion and equity. https://www.unesco.org
Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020). Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 223–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995
Williamson, B., & Piattoeva, N. (2022). Education governance and data infrastructures: AI, algorithms and datafication. European Educational Research Journal, 21(3), 351–369.
Williamson, B., & Piattoeva, N. (2022). Education governance and datafication. In A. Wilkins & A. Olmedo (Eds.), Education governance and social theory (pp. 92–110). Bloomsbury Academic.
Woolf, B. P. (2010). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Morgan Kaufmann.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
