Holmes, Wayne, Arantes, Janine ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0301-5780, Mouta, Ana, Schiff, Daniel, Laak, Kristjan-Julius, Atenas, Javiera, Bardone, Emanuele, Lochead, Karen, Gonsales, Priscila and Havemann, Leo (2025) Critical Studies of Artificial Intelligence and Education. Putting a Stake in the Ground. Critical Studies of Artificial Intelligence and Education. pp. 1-29.

Abstract

The rapidly developing connections between Artificial Intelligence (AI) and education (AI&ED) have prompted widespread policy and institutional responses. However, critical examinations of AI's implications for education are fragmented, often overshadowed by techno-optimist narratives and mostly ignored by policymakers. This community-authored paper aims to help make AI and education's critical voices more visible, by sharing and building upon the findings of a survey completed by 185 researchers, educators, and policymakers from 56 countries, which followed a Critical Studies of AI and Education (CSAI&ED) online symposium. In the first part of the paper, we present our analysis of the survey responses-what is understood by CSAI&ED, what questions should be asked, and what challenges we face. Key themes that emerge include CSAI&ED's interdisciplinary nature, its interventionist role in challenging power structures and commercial influences in education, and broader ethical imperatives. Respondents emphasised the need for research that interrogates AI's impact on teacher and student agency and democratic participation, while cautioning against techno-solutionism and environmental costs. In the second part of the paper, we build on the respondents' contributions with a three-level interrogation of AI&ED discourse and practice. At the level of educational processes, we explore how AI systems risk reducing education to learning, and learning to a transactional activity, eroding student-teacher relationships and displacing collective agency. At the level of the ecosystem, we examine how AI reinforces market logics and surveillance infrastructures, further entrenching neoliberal policies in schools. Finally, we confront what remains unsaid: the politics of imagination, temporality, and legitimacy that underlie dominant AI narratives and attempt to shape educational futures. In conclusion, we argue that CSAI&ED must move from the margins to the centre of AI discourse in education-to ensure that education is reclaimed as a site of collective meaning-making that prioritises pedagogical integrity, equity, and democratic values.

Search Google Scholar

Repository staff login