Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) – 2024, pp.

4-12

DOSSIER – INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL EN LA EDUCACIÓN

Artículo Original https://doi.org/10.56152/reped2024-dossierIA2-art1

Hyped or Transformational? AI in Higher Education

¿Hipnotizada o transformadora? La IA en la enseñanza superior
Selcan Kilis
Associate Professor, Giresun University, Türkiye
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5751-2363
E-mail: [email protected]

Stephen Murgatroyd
Futures Leadership for Change Inc., Canadá
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2696-8779
E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract
This paper explores the difference between the transformation idea and the reality of how colleges and
universities leverage technologies for teaching, learning and assessment. We seek to understand why a structural
and operational transformation of these institutions rarely happens and offer an understanding of the structural,
operational, financial, and political constraints that prevent transformation but encourage continuous improvement.
More specifically, we suggest that AI will not deliver on its promise to finally “solve” the so-called “two sigma”
problem, which arises from the work of Bloom (1984), who showed that students taught through tutoring
performed better by two standard deviations than those taught in a traditional classroom.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, AI, artificial intelligence in education, AIED, higher education, transformation.

Resumen
Este documento explora la diferencia entre la idea de transformación y la realidad de cómo las facultades
y universidades aprovechan las tecnologías para la enseñanza, el aprendizaje y la evaluación. Tratamos de entender
por qué rara vez se produce una transformación estructural y operativa de estas instituciones y ofrecemos una
comprensión de las limitaciones estructurales, operativas, financieras y políticas que impiden la transformación,
pero fomentan la mejora continua. Más concretamente, sugerimos que la IA no cumplirá su promesa de «resolver»
por fin el llamado problema de las «dos sigmas», que se deriva del trabajo de Bloom (1984), quien demostró que
los estudiantes a los que se enseñaba mediante tutoría obtenían mejores resultados en dos desviaciones estándar
que los que recibían enseñanza en un aula tradicional.

Palabras clave: inteligencia artificial, IA, inteligencia artificial en la educación, AIED, enseñanza superior,
transformación.

Sal Khan, has suggested that artificial intelligence (AI) will have a profound impact on
the future of education. As founder of the Khan Academy and pioneer of video and chatbot-
based learning, Khan has a vested and fiduciary interest in saying so. In his book (Khan, 2024),
he suggests that “we're at the cusp of using AI for probably the biggest positive transformation
that education has ever seen. The way we're going to do that is by giving every student on the
planet an artificially intelligent, but amazing, personal tutor."

Recibido: 31/07/2024 Aceptado: 28/09/2024

Este es un artículo de acceso abierto bajo la licencia CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.es ).

 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

He is not alone. Others have suggested that a major transformation fuelled by AI and
educational technology is now clearly on the horizon. This is even though this narrative began
in the 1920s with early teaching machines and has so far failed to materialize (Watters,
2019,2021) and repeated attempts to revive the idea (Christensen et al., 2008) prove hollow.
This paper explores the difference between the transformation idea and the reality of
how colleges and universities leverage technologies for teaching, learning and assessment. We
seek to understand why a structural and operational transformation of these institutions rarely
happens and offer an understanding of the structural, operational, financial, and political
constraints that prevent transformation but encourage continuous improvement. More
specifically, we suggest that AI will not deliver on its promise to finally “solve” the so-called
“two sigma” problem, which arises from the work of Bloom (1984), who showed that students
taught through tutoring performed better by two standard deviations than those taught in a
traditional classroom.

Opportunities that AI brings into education

Not only in various industries but also within education, AI offers significant
opportunities for performance and productivity improvement (Mollick & Mollick, 2024; Khan,
2024). Along with recent developments and innovations with each new release of a generative
AI model like ChatGPT5 or Claude 3 Sonnet, the promise that AI brings to education expands
and new applications become apparent. Many benefits are already apparent, including serving
as a 24x7 assistant with providing round-the-clock support, answering questions, dialogue-
based tutoring, and gathering, analyzing, and summarizing data from various sources only in
seconds (Miao et al., 2021). AI also enables multi-language learning with instant translation.
Moreover, AI enriches learning environments through multiple types pf learning materials such
as multimedia and simulations (Ghnemat et al., 2022; Holmes & Tuomi, 2022; Murgatroyd,
2024a). AI is seen by some to have the potential to revolutionize higher education (HE) with
personalized learning and feedback (George, & Wooden, 2023). AI functions as a kind of
intelligent tutoring system providing computer-based step-by-step tutorials to learners (Holmes
& Tuomi, 2022; Miao et al., 2021), providing automatic feedback, formative assessment,
alternative approaches, and guidance. It can identify at-risk students and provide early
interventions for them to support their learning journey (George, & Wooden, 2023). For
educators, AI brings an efficient and effective way of in-classroom monitoring and automating
summative evaluation. AI can help educators to easily create various forms of instructional
materials and smart curation. There is a great deal of potential for education in the effective
deployment of AI in colleges and universities (Murgatroyd, 2024b).
For poliEdTech entrepreneurs, they regard higher education as a very large public sector
industry worth around $1.5 trillion worldwide. The sector spends less than 4% of its budget
(app.$75-100 billion) on technology hardware and software. EdTech developers and vendors
want to move this spending to nearer 7 or 8%. Most of them have convinced themselves that
education is ready for an AI transformation, providing individualized learning, adaptive
assessment, and personal support for learners. More online and hybrid learning, more data-
driven instruction, more formative assessment, and less reliance on precarious instructors which
in turn come up with the idea of automating teacher tasks (Selwyn, 2019; Sperling et al., 2022)
is anticipated to ‘transform’ education. Between 2015 and 2023 a total of$75.5 billion in venture
capital has been invested in EdTech, mainly in China, US, India and Europei.

5
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

Challenges that AI posits to education

Within higher education eco-systems, the impact of recent developments in AI is

unquestionably dramatic. As reported in a recent study (Lee et al., 2024), educators are
encountering new challenges, such as the inability to depend on existing assessment strategies
and uncertainty about how to develop new, reliable assessment methods. Students have always
cheated, but AI enables to do so quickly and efficiently. Some institutions and faculty are using
AI developments to engage students in both critical assessment, ethics and appropriate use of
technologies to support learning. Some others insist on banning it (Lee et al., 2024).
What has become apparent as AI emerged following the pandemic is that institutions
are hindered by slow, cumbersome, and overly “political” corporate governance and a lack of
courageous leadership (Murgatroyd, 2024b). Many educators feel an urgent requirement for
training, professional development, and ongoing support, but they are encountering difficulty
securing the needed support level (Lee et al., 2024). Having firsthand experience and
understanding technical challenges, risks, possibilities, and potential use cases can cause
difficulty in terms of policies and accessibility, which in turn leads to tensions and uncertainty
(Holmes & Tuomi, 2022). Faculty and support staff workloads and the pressure to “perform”
are getting in the way of the time needed to play, explore, and experiment as each new iteration
of generative AI brings new possibilities for teaching and learning. AI is moving much faster
than our institutions can adapt.
The lack of connection between AI developers and experts in learning sciences is
another major barrier to change and transformation (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2024). AI
applications are developed largely by computer scientists and data engineers rather than
educators. This is why most AI applications focus predominantly on content presentation and
testing for understanding - a very behaviourist mode of learning (i.e., present-remember-test-
feedback) is at the heart of many AI applications (Bates, et al., 2020). In such a digitized era
where equity, diversity, and inclusion matter, a more engaging constructivist and connectivist
approaches to education is needed if we are to fully leverage AI for teaching and learning
(Noguera, 2022), especially in higher education. Given the complexity of learning higher
intellectual skills, critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity, teamwork and effective
communication are much needed for the acquisition, construction and communication of
knowledge. To enable these forms of learning, it is essential to strengthen the connection
between developers and educators (Lynch, 2017). Otherwise, AI will merely explore new and
more efficient ways of poor teaching while perpetuating erroneous ideas about teaching and
learning (Bates et al., 2020).

Why an AI Transformation Will Not Happen in Higher Education

On the “revolutionary potential” and transformative power of artificial intelligence in

education, many of the developer and venture capital champions of the “big change is
inevitable” claim are largely grounded in conjecture, speculation, misunderstanding of
education, hype and optimism (Nemorin, 2021; cited in Miao et al., 2021). AI transformation
within higher education is unlikely to occur in the next decade, though over time, it will impact
all components of the higher education system. Continuous improvement using AI is more
likely to occur.
The first and most important reason behind the slow pace of change in higher education,
which AI developers and vendors need to understand, is that they misunderstand the purpose
of learning. Learning in higher education refers to exploring, creating, and using knowledge in
a specific situation by engaging socially, emotionally, and cognitively through the demanding
work of critical inquiry in a learning community (Garrison, et al., 2003). It is not an automated,
6
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

“banking activity” (Biesta, 2017; Freire, 1973; Murgatroyd, 2024a); but rather is a collective
engagement guided and influenced by teachers who serve as a catalyst for liberation and
reimagination in that process as being a creative talent. A lack of understanding of what
educators do in society results in an exaggerated expectation of AI as a transformative tool
(Jean-Louis, 2021). There is a distinct gap between the reality and expectations of AI in HE.
A ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach in education is impossible for any learning technology.
Defining educational problems as simpler than in reality and standardizing a technology
deployment strategy as if responding to the needs of all learners and their instructors is clearly
an overhype. It does not fit with the reality and challenges of college and university classrooms.
Underestimating the complexity and nuances of educational problems, outcomes, solutions, and
challenges leads to more harm than good. Education challenges are complex, “wicked
problems,” not as easy and simple to respond to as many AI developers anticipate. Although
reaching a consensus is challenging when the future of a learning community and education
eco-system, rather than just individuals, is at stake, there is a need for genuine, open dialogue
and engagement of students, teachers and policy makers for the next stage of development of
AI for education. AI is not a panacea in education, despite being showing potential and promise.
There is also a need to understand that educational systems are at different stages of
development. Education is culturally located, local and different. Literature or history courses
are different in New York, Lagos, Caracas, and Bangladesh. No one size fits all.
Despite increasing promise and potential shown with each new release of a generative
AI model or application, AI remains overhyped and underused. A platform adopted in January
2024 become outdated in March due to the rapid pace of AI development and refinement. For
example, the power of ChatGPT4o was, within three weeks, surpassed by Claude 3 Sonnet.
Consequently, many institutions avoid the risk of failure by making such a significant
investment in training and deployment, especially since there is limited funding available for
innovation and risk-taking (Bates et al., 2020; Wheeler, 2019; Murgatroyd, 2024b). Colleges,
and universities generally need to be convinced that new technologies can enhance learning
outcomes and learner experience in significant and sustainable ways. Most technologies do not.
This is why the education sector tends to remain highly conservative when new technologies
emerge (Bates et al., 2020; Watters, 2021).
AI also poses ethical concerns. Problems of academic integrity, cheating, faculty
dishonesty in academic writing, and issues about bias, equity, and inclusion have also led to
resistance by faculty and administrators. These issues slow AI-driven change and
transformation in education, leading to a more gradual, considered and measured pace of
change. Higher education institutions have to implement precautionary policies and practices
to respond to these issues since fundamental human rights and data privacy issues are at the
heart of these ethical concerns. This has also slowed and inhibited the deployment and use of
AI (Berendt, Littlejohn & Blakemore, 2020). In addition, nation-level laws, regulation and
policies are being developed that will require certain conditions of transparency and protection
to be implemented, which is also causing caution in the institutional deployment of AI.
Many of the established EdTech companies have been selling the same basic proposition
about what technology can do since the 1920s and have yet to deliver (Cuban, 1986; Watters,
2019; 2021). They are selling the idea that “education is broken” and that they can now fix it
using AI. In this, they are mistaken. The following table compares and contrasts the EdTech
“value proposition” with the reality of the situation in education as we understand it.

7
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

Table1. The EdTech Value Proposition to “Fix” Broken Education versus Reality
Education is Broken – Technology Can Fix It Educational Institutions Are Complex and Their
Challenges Complex: No Quick Fixes

• Define the problem as simple and offer a • Educational outcomes and “performance” are
standardized solution (e.g. No Child Left “wicked problems” not simple ones.
Behind, tutoring beats classroom teaching). • Both the problem and the solution are local,
• The problem is a global one, not just local. A not global, and need to be owned locally.
fix in New York will work in Bangladesh or • So as to make progress, all need to understand
Turkey. the past, present, and future and the way in
• So as to gain control of the situation, we need which outcomes are shaped by factors outside
to make increased use of data and analytics the institution (inequality, poverty, precarity,
and chatbots. food poverty, homelessness).
• By imposing targets and deadlines we can • There needs to be a recognition that no one
push the system to respond – we also need to size fits all and that consensus is difficult
intervene with more technology and new when what is at stake is the future of the
leadership if targets are not met. community, not just individuals.
• Standardize the strategy and responses to all • What is needed is robust, evidence-informed
challenges - one size fits all. decision-making and risk-taking.
• This all requires agile and adaptive
leadership.

Over the long one-hundred-year history of EdTech, the value proposition has remained
largely the same, but the tools used to suggest a “Solution and fix” keep changing (Watters,
2019, 2021). The challenges within higher education have become more complex, volatile,
uncertain, and brittle, made worse by the continued underfunding of higher education around
the world.
Educators need to pay attention to the potential of AI, rather focus on the negatives
(Bates et al., 2020; Murgatroyd, 2024b). Beginning from Vygotsky’s empirical work on the
role of tools in human cognition in which he asserted that technology can augment human
thinking (Tuomi, 2022), there is a need to systematically explore the potential and opportunities
AI affords to shift teaching, learning and assessment to a more twenty-first century approach.
AI can help, but the key is that it supplements and supports the work of compassionate and
effective teachers. As individuals interact with tools, they engage in a process of cognitive
transformation, where these tools become integral to their thinking processes. That means it
expands their capacity for problem-solving and conceptual understanding beyond what is
achievable through unaided cognition. This perspective underscores the profound influence of
technology on human intellectual development, influencing how we perceive, learn, and
innovate in our increasingly complex world. Considering the role of technology in enhancing
our cognition as described by Vygotsky, leaders can leverage technology for robust, evidence-
informed decision-making.
AI can also enhance leaders' capacity in higher education since it can provide calculated
risk assessment tools and evidence-informed strategies for fostering continuous adaptation,

8
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

agility, and improvement in decision-making processes. As colleges and universities seek to

become more agile, these tools will be vital to the work they need to do.
More recent developments of AI-enabled counselling and mental health supports show
that, carefully positioned and deployed, AI can promote well-being of students, teachers, and
other educational stakeholders by leveraging their character strengths and predicting their levels
of happiness (Bittencourt et al., 2023). Educators will drive continuous improvement, not
EdTech vendors. They will do so by deploying AI for use, which will make their lives easier
while producing improved student outcomes.
AI may lower the costs of instructional materials, space, administrative tasks and
assessment. The most significant costs at all levels of education are people costs: teachers,
student support, and management. A part of the “transformation narrative” is that some of these
people can be replaced by artificial intelligence – something already happening in other sectors,
such as technology companies, financial and insurance institutions, engineering, architecture,
law and accounting (Susskind, 2020). The number of management and administrative positions
will be reduced as AI apps gradually replace these functions. The teaching process, however,
is intensely human - intensely based on empathy, compassion, engagement, and involvement
in a way that goes beyond the reductionist notions of teaching and learning (Biesta, 2013,2017).
AI could and is enabling teachers to focus more on students’ engagement and learning at a
higher and deeper level, which in turn leads to increased productivity and, potentially, improved
learning outcomes. The increase in productivity comes from using AI as a co-intelligent partner
with teachers to improve teaching, not from replacing humans with machines (Diamandis &
Kotler, 2020; Mollick, 2024). AI does not threaten teachers but rather supports them as a
teaching assistant or learning agency for students (Bates et al., 2020; Chiu et al., 2023; Chiu,
2024). Developing this form of AI relationship will take time. There are no “quick fixes.”

What is Currently Happening and What Will Happen Next

Numerous creative, imaginative, effective, and successful implementations of AI in HE

are already becoming evident, and new use cases for AI are emerging (Mollick & Mollick,
2024). AI has been embraced as a cross-interdisciplinary idea in the curriculum and has already
emerged in some universities’ programs, including the University of California, San Diego, the
University of Washington, and the University of California, Berkeley (Southworth, 2023). AI
has been incorporated in some university courses, such as Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Wharton and Carnegie Mellon already centering courses around the ethics and
implications of AI (Southworth, 2023). Stanford University launched a new Institute for
Human Centered Artificial Intelligence. Northwestern University has focused on curriculum
availability in specific majors such as computer science, electrical and computer engineering
while the University of Florida started more advanced initiatives infusing AI across the
curriculum regardless of discipline to create an AI-ready workforce. Similar initiatives can be
found in different HE institutions around the world and their activities will gradually inform
the work of all.
Incorporating AI to enhance multidisciplinary programs and courses is also beginning
to happen (Chiu, 2024). More progress has emerged in K12 education than in the skilled trades,
college, or university education. For instance, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong have each aimed
to incorporate AI into school curricula, whereas China is doing the same both in primary and
secondary schools. Another example is from Singapore which developed specific AI education
programs both for teachers and students through testing before system-wide deployment. To
sum up, the initiatives that are occurring in higher education lag K-12 developments.
Higher education institutions need to be prepared to help students be future-ready for
employment in emerging fields of work, almost all of which will require AI use (Chiu, 2024;
9
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

Susskind, 2020). To achieve this, they will need to develop AI literacy and digital fluency as
well as new relevant competencies of evidence assessment and AI ethics into the curriculum.
Every student should leave college or university with a high level of skill and experience in
using AI tools as a co-intelligent partner in their learning (Mollick, 2024). This, in turn, requires
higher education institutions to adopt innovative teaching pedagogies and assessment
techniques and also build interdisciplinary programs very soon. They need to follow the
developments and fulfill the needs and necessities of the fourth industrial revolution to boost
student preparedness for the next-generation workforce.
As is always the case with innovative developments, spectacular failures are likely to
occur. The question is: will schools, colleges, and universities learn from failure and use the
failure as a basis for “leap-frogging to the future”, or will the failure inhibit innovation
(Murgatroyd, 2023)?
To sum up, as we see more effective, innovative, and successful AI-assisted and AI-
enabled implementations in universities and colleges, change will occur gradually. Despite the
venture capital push and the vendor claims about AI having the power to “revolutionize” and
“transform” education, it will not happen - at least not in the next decade. Despite the promises,
increasing demand, and over $150 billion in EdTech investment since 2000, we should not
expect AI to be a magic wand. Instead, AI technologies should be recognized as ‘far from
perfect, but improving’ (Miao et al., 2021, p. 11).

Author Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception, development, and
writing of the article.

REFERENCIAS

Berendt, B., Littlejohn, A., & Blakemore, M. (2020). AI in education: Learner choice and fundamental
rights. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 312-324.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1786399
Biesta, G. (2013). The beautiful risk of education. Routledge.
Biesta, G. (2017). The rediscovery of teaching. Routledge.
Bittencourt, I. I., Chalco, G., Santos, J., Fernandes, S., Silva, J., Batista, N., ... & Isotani, S. (2023).
Positive artificial intelligence in education (P-AIED): A roadmap. International Journal of Artificial
Intelligence in Education, 1-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00357-y
Bloom, B. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction that are as effective
as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13:6(4-16).
http://www.comp.dit.ie/dgordon/Courses/ILT/ILT0004/TheTwoSigmaProblem.pdf
Chiu, T. K. (2024). Future research recommendations for transforming higher education with generative
AI. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100197.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100197
Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X.-Y., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M.-T. (2023). Systematic literature review
on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in
education. Computer & Education: Artificial Intelligence, Article 100118.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
Christensen, C., Johnson, C.W. & Horn, M. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will
change the way the world learns. McGraw Hill.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines – The classroom uses of technology since 1920. Teachers
College Press.

10
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

Diamandis, P. H., & Kotler, S. (2020). The future is faster than you think: How converging technologies
are transforming business, industries, and our lives. Simon & Schuster.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. Seabury Press.
Garrison, D. R. and Anderson, T. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and
practice. Routledge/Falmer.
George, B., & Wooden, O. (2023). Managing the strategic transformation of higher education through
artificial intelligence. Administrative Sciences, 13(9), 196. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13090196
Ghnemat, R., Shaout, A. ., & Al-Sowi, A. M. (2022). Higher education transformation for artificial
intelligence revolution: Transformation framework. International Journal of Emerging Technologies
in Learning (iJET), 17(19), pp. 224–241. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v17i19.33309
Holmes, W., & Tuomi, I. (2022). State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of
Education, 57(4), 542-570. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12533
Jean-Louis, M. (2021). Why Technology is Not Going to Transform Higher Education (blog).
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-technology-going-transform-higher-education-maxim-jean-
louis
Khan, S. (2024). Brave new word – How AI will revolutionize education (and why that is a good thing).
Penguin.
Katsamakas, E., Pavlov, O. V. & and Saklad, R. (2024). Artificial intelligence and the transformation
of higher education institutions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.08143.
Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., ... & Palmer, E. (2024). The
impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’
perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100221.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
Miao, F., Holmes, W., Huang, R., & Zhang, H. (2021). AI and education: A guidance for policymakers.
UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.54675/PCSP7350
Mollick, E. R. (2024). Co-intelligence: Living and working with AI. Penguin Random House.
Mollick, E.R. & Mollick, L. (2024) Using AI to Implement Effective Teaching Strategies in Classrooms:
Five Strategies, Including Prompts. Available at:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4391243
Murgatroyd, S. (2023). Becoming courageous - The skills of courage. New York: Lulu Press.
Murgatroyd, S. (2024a). Artificial Intelligence and future of higher education. Revista Paraguaya De
Educación a Distancia (REPED), 5(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.56152/reped2024-vol5num1-art1
Murgatroyd, S. (2024b). The future of higher education in an age of artificial intelligence. Ethics Press.
Noguera, I. (2022). Moving forward in social constructivist theories through agile learning in the digital
age. Chapter in Kergel, D., Heidekamp-Kergel, B., Nørreklit, H. & Paulsen, M. [editors] Agile
learning and management in the digital age – Dialogic leadership. Routledge.
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers?: AI and the future of education. Polity.
Skinner, B. F. (1958). Teaching machines. Science, 128(3330), 969–977.
Southworth, J., Migliaccio, K., Glover, J., Reed, D., McCarty, C., Brendemuhl, J., & Thomas, A. (2023).
Developing a model for AI Across the curriculum: Transforming the higher education landscape via
innovation in AI literacy. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100127.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100127
Sperling, K., Stenliden, L., Nissen, J., & Heintz, F. (2022). Still w(AI)ting for the automation of
teaching: An exploration of machine learning in Swedish primary education using actor-network-
theory. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 584-600. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12526
11
 Revista Paraguaya de Educación a Distancia, FACEN-UNA, Vol. 5 (4) - 2024

Susskind, D. (2020). A world without work: Technology, automation, and how we should respond.
Metropolitan Books.
Tuomi, I. (2022). Artificial intelligence, 21st century competences, and socio‐emotional learning in
education: More than high‐risk?. European Journal of Education, 57(4), 601-619.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12531
Watters, A. (2019). The 100 Worst EdTech Debacles of the Decade. Hack Education (blog).
https://hackeducation.com/2019/12/31/what-a-shitshow
Watters, A. (2021). Teaching machines: The history of personalized learning. MIT Press.
Zawacki-Richter, O., Bai, J. Y., Lee, K., Slagter van Tryon, P. J., & Prinsloo, P. (2024). New advances
in artificial intelligence applications in higher education?. International Journal of Educational
Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00464-3

End Notes
i
See https://www.holoniq.com/notes/edtech-vc-collapse-at-580m-for-q1-not-even-an-ai-tailwind-could-hold-up-
the-10-year-low for detailed analysis of EdTech investments.

12