The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Education: Insights From Global Deans

Introduction

On November 1 and 2, 2024, 53 deans, associate deans, and other educational leaders from 40 institutions across 29 countries gathered in Shanghai for the sixth annual Global Education Deans Forum (GEDF). The GEDF was established to afford educational deans at research universities from around the world the opportunity to identify and discuss shared problems and challenges and to forge collaborative partnerships. GEDF co-founding Deans Zhenguo Yuan and Rick Ginsberg seeded the conversations for the coming day and a half in their opening remarks.

Both addressed the future of education in the context of significant technological and societal changes, offering perspectives on how educational research and practices must evolve. Dr. Ginsburg, Dean of the University of Kansas School of Education and Human Science, delivered a keynote address titled, “Carving Out a Sustainable Future for GEDF in an AI World.” At the outset, he reviewed the historical development of GEDF since its inception. He noted that the Forum has grown significantly since its inaugural meeting in Shanghai at East China Normal University (ECNU) in 2018. Over subsequent years, GEDF has expanded its reach, hosting annual meetings in Boston and Dublin as well as online gatherings during the pandemic. From the beginning, the Forum established clear aims: to learn, to lead, and to act, with a commitment to global collaboration and innovative educational research and practices.

From small to big science

In his presentation entitled, “Reconstructing Education Research in the Era of Big Science,” Dean Yuan of the Faculty of Education at East China Normal University described the evolution of educational research methodologies as the landscape of scientific inquiry has changed. He contrasted the traditional model of “small science” with the emerging paradigm of “big science.”

In the small science era, researchers’ personal interests and individual exploration characterized research. In that era, knowledge accumulated gradually and over time. Humans and machines were demarcated, a distinction captured in the phrase “Man is man; machine is machine.”

Conversely, the big science era is characterized by a shift toward goal-oriented and collaborative group efforts. This new approach fosters human-machine symbiosis and co-creation. Technology and human capabilities work in tandem to achieve common goals. Big science is also characterized by breaching disciplinary boundaries and focusing on significant societal challenges.

To effectively reconceive educational research within this context, Dean Yuan advocated research initiatives that promote large-scale collaboration. This requires establishing robust communication mechanisms and easily accessible platforms to facilitate knowledge sharing among researchers. Additionally, innovative organizational structures are needed to expedite the assembling of large teams of researchers capable of addressing complex educational and social issues.

This requires rethinking how education can contribute significantly to big science. The advent of artificial intelligence represents a powerful tool for driving educational innovation and achieving breakthroughs. However, a powerful barrier to rethinking education is the inherent conservatism of educators at all levels.

In sum, Dean Yuan emphasized the need for a transformative approach to educational research in the context of big science. By advocating for large-scale collaborations, innovative communication platforms, and the integration of AI technologies, he outlined a vision for educational research that is more responsive to societal challenges and capable of making actionable contributions to the field. This shift toward greater collective efforts and technological advancement is essential for fostering meaningful improvements in education.

AI and the challenges educators face

Dean Ginsberg highlighted several interconnected challenges facing higher education. Public confidence in higher education in the U.S. has dramatically declined, dropping from 57% in 2015 to just 36% in 2024. Concurrent challenges include geopolitical conflicts, particularly in regions like the Middle East and Eastern Europe, evolving internal political contexts, and significant issues within the teaching profession such as workforce shortages and changing professional expectations.

A central theme of the presentation was the potential of generative AI to fundamentally reshape education. Dean Ginsberg posited that AI might create a crisis that dramatically transforms research, teaching, and literacy. He enumerated potential impacts that included:

Transformation of academic work.

Research methods and practices.

Evolving concepts of literacy.

Personalized education.

Alternatives to traditional degree pathways.

Echoing Dean Yuan's observation, Dean Ginsberg noted the inherent conservatism in academic institutions. He identified several sources of resistance to change including normative professional practices, conventional modes of thinking, legitimate ethical concerns about AI, and uncertainty about its actual benefits. He referenced Lortie's (1975) concept of “conservative proclivities” among educators.

The presentation concluded with a call to action for education leaders. Dean Ginsberg proposed collaborative approaches to productively integrate and capitalize on AI, including:

Creating international AI-user groups.

Developing collaborative work groups.

Establishing multi-country research paradigms.

Promoting crowd-sourcing approaches to technological advances.

Ultimately, Dean Ginsberg challenged the assembled education deans with a fundamental question: If not they, who would lead this emerging paradigm change in an AI-driven world?

Discussions of AI in education

The Forum is designed to maximize discussion and conversation. In addition to plenary sessions, participants met in small groups facilitated by one of their colleagues. Across the day and a half of the formal meetings in Shanghai, participants voiced both what they believe to be the benefits of AI to education as well as their concerns and uncertainties.

Benefits of AI

Participants identified several key current and potential benefits of AI in educational settings:

Access to resources. AI affords access to powerful information and learning tools for educators and students in remote and economically impoverished areas. This capability enables diverse student populations around the world to engage with high-quality learning resources and experiences.

Identification of at-risk students. Educators can utilize AI to predict which students are at risk of underperforming or dropping out. Early identification allows for timely and targeted interventions to support struggling students.

Support for special needs and neurodiverse students. AI has the potential to enhance support for students with diverse learning needs or disabilities through personalized interventions and assistive technologies.

Personalized instruction. AI facilitates personalized instruction, assessment, and individualized tutoring. By adapting learning materials to meet each student's unique needs, AI allows for personalized pacing and difficulty levels. This adaptability helps students identify and strengthen their weaknesses while enhancing their strengths.

Immediate feedback. The ability to provide immediate assessment and feedback enables students to precisely identify their knowledge gaps and misunderstandings, self-assessing their progress. AI can curate learning resources tailored to individual learners.

Administrative assistance. AI assists educators with mundane, non-instructional tasks such as attendance tracking, report writing, student progress management, lesson planning, and grading.

Addressing teacher shortages. In critical areas such as STEM and Special Education, AI can help alleviate persistent teacher shortages by providing instruction and tutoring.

Challenges in introducing AI to educators and schools

Despite its potential benefits, participants also described the challenges of integrating AI into educational settings:

Skepticism among educators. Many educators are skeptical about new technologies due to their experiences with past reforms that have come and gone. Some view AI as merely the latest trend or a distraction from their primary responsibilities of preparing students for high-stakes examinations.

Perception of AI as a “crutch” for students. Several participants expressed their concern that AI may enable students to avoid demanding cognitive work by offloading challenging tasks such as writing essays or solving complex problems. This observation raises questions about academic integrity and the ability to distinguish between AI-generated work and human-produced work.

Risk perception. A significant portion of educators perceive AI as a risky technology. For instance, a dean reported that 80% of Russian educators believe that AI poses a societal threat due to its potential to eliminate jobs and its misuse as a surveillance tool. The comments of other participants echoed a widely held view that AI's dangers outweigh its usefulness.

Need for training. Effective use of AI in classrooms requires extensive training for educators. Without adequate preparation, teachers may struggle to integrate AI into their practice effectively.

Uncertainties and concerns

The discussions among participants also highlighted several uncertainties regarding the impact of AI on education and the future. In fact, uncertainties and concerns dominated the conversations:

Ethical concerns and biases. This concern arose throughout the conversations in both plenary and small groups. Ensuring the ethical use of AI is paramount, as these systems can perpetuate existing societal biases that are inherent in their training data. Moreover, AI enables tracking and analyzing personal data without consent.

Threat to human identity. Several participants voiced their deep unease at the threat AI poses to human identity and value by overshadowing uniquely human contributions such as emotional intelligence, empathy, ethical reasoning, and moral judgment.

Lack of accountability. As several participants noted, AI systems typically operate as “black boxes,” concealing data sources and algorithms from users. This raises questions about accountability among AI creators and purveyors and whether non-tech-savvy individuals can evaluate the trustworthiness of these technologies.

Control over technology. As AI evolves, another concern is: Who controls its development and application—commercial interests or governmental entities? How will this control shape educational policies and practices?

Trustworthiness. The information produced by AI can be convincing yet incorrect. This raises critical questions about whether students possess the skills necessary to evaluate the accuracy of AI-generated information effectively, especially given the lack of transparency about the technology.

Undermining learning processes. Some participants expressed their concern that reliance on AI may lead to a superficial understanding of complex issues, hindering the development of critical problem-solving capabilities.

Equity and access issues. Access to advanced AI tools is not equitable; low-income countries may lack the resources necessary for effective integration into education systems. Additionally, developing digital literacy requires access to technology that some schools do not have.

Environmental costs

• Several participants raised concerns about the environmental impact of implementing AI technologies. As one participant noted, data centers supporting AI applications consume massive amounts of energy and produce significant CO₂ emissions. Additionally, they require millions of gallons of water for cooling purposes.

Changing role of educators

As AI becomes more integrated into education, participants also observed that the role of educators is evolving:

Educators are transitioning from being primarily purveyors of content to facilitators who guide students in navigating complex information landscapes.

Educators will need to enhance their technological literacy to leverage evolving tools effectively to identify learning gaps and provide personalized interventions.

Educators may need to adapt their methods of assessing student learning. As information becomes increasingly accessible, assessments could shift focus toward evaluating students’ skills in applying knowledge rather than reproducing existing knowledge.

Observations

In addition to the summary of the participants’ views of AI in education, we offer a few general observations of the GEDF:

It can be lonely at the top. Several participants described how being an education leader or researcher can be a solitary experience. Several noted that pressures from several sources can be relentless and intense. They face competition for increasingly scarce resources and external scrutiny from the public, policymakers, and regulatory agencies. The rapid evolution of technologies such as AI as well as uncertainty about the future are additional concerns.

In this context, the GEDF 2024 offered a rare opportunity to connect with colleagues from other countries who face similar pressures and uncertainties. The Forum was also a chance to step back from the daily grind to think about and discuss larger issues.

Shared interests and the power of dialogue. One of the key insights from the Forum was the realization that, despite differences, participants have multiple shared interests and concerns. The discussions highlighted the common ground that educational leaders share.

The need for a platform like GEDF. The participants stressed the importance of platforms like GEDF. They noted that opportunities for informal conversations, establishing personal relationships with other leaders, and discovering possible international collaborations are rare. Attesting to the value of a mechanism such as GEDF, several participants suggested extending it by an additional day in the future.

Expanding the discussion to more educational stakeholders. Some participants suggested that more stakeholders—such as teachers, students, and policymakers—be included. In some group sessions, participants invited student volunteers to share their insights on AI and other topics. Students who participated in past 2019 GEDF events have reported that the experience had a lifelong impact. In particular, graduate students from several institutions who participated in past graduate research seminars found the experience invaluable, both because of what they learned and the connections they made with other developing scholars.

What machines cannot replace? Multiple participants observed that some of the most valuable moments of GEDF 2024 were the informal, unplanned interactions with other attendees, the ECNU student volunteers and faculty, Lijiang Normal University (LNU) faculty and students, and the faculty and children at the Baisha Elementary School in Lijiang. Participants who were able to travel to Lijiang in Yunnan Province were greeted by LNU students performing a traditional Lion dance (舞狮) in costumes and a student orchestra playing traditional instruments. Participants tried their hand at local arts and crafts such as tie-dye (扎染) and the Dongba (东巴) script. Later, they were treated to a performance by students playing traditional instruments at the Baisha Elementary School which serves mostly Naxi children, the predominant ethnic group in Lijiang. GEDF participants reported that the visit to Lijiang was an unforgettable experience that awakened them to the ethnic diversity of southwestern China and the pride residents took in their heritage.

Human cognition and social complexity set us apart from other species and machines. The GEDF participants and scholars exemplified this through their multifaceted interactions, cross-cultural understanding, and dedication to education. These individuals, while not inherently extraordinary, are engaged in work that can advance their field. Their drive for continuous learning, effective leadership, and commitment to impactful educational research manifest distinctly human traits. While artificial intelligence excels at data processing, it lacks the nuanced understanding and adaptability these educators bring to their work. Human emotional intelligence, creativity, and ability to form meaningful connections enable innovative approaches in education and research that machines cannot replicate. This combination of cognitive flexibility, social acumen, and professional dedication distinguishes human potential to improve teaching, learning, and disciplined inquiry. Arguably, these qualities are essential for achieving the goals of the GEDF: to learn, to lead, and to act (Figure 1).

A few comments from Deans in a post-Forum survey:

“I was struck by how we are working to address similar problems and challenges from multiple perspectives. Sharing thoughts and ideas as well as cultural experiences built friendships and valuable connections for the future.” (Dean 1)

“I have expanded my understanding of the impact of AI and the need to engage with this directly. I learned a lot more about China and its diversity during the time in Lijiang. I hope to be able to collaborate with colleagues there.” (Dean 2)

“It is always interesting to see how different institutes are addressing and dealing with the various demands and constraints of the sector.” (Dean 3)

Figure 1.

“Love” in Dongba script and on Dongba paper.

To sum up, the GEDF 2024 is a testament to the power of human connection in shaping the future of education. In an era increasingly dominated by AI and technological advancements, the GEDF reminds us that the heart of education lies in the uniquely human qualities of empathy, creativity, collaboration, and cultural understanding. As education leaders from across the globe shared their challenges, concerns, and insights, they both forged valuable connections and highlighted the essential role of human educators in navigating the complex landscape of modern education. The Forum's success, enriched by cultural experiences and candid dialogues, underscores a central truth: Although AI can process data at lightning speed, the collective experience, wisdom, adaptability, and commitment of human educators are necessary to truly transform and advance global education in the years to come.

Conclusion

Both the founding deans and the participants see the potential of AI to profoundly reshape research practices, teaching roles, teacher preparation, pedagogy, curriculum, and literacy in education. The discussion highlighted both the benefits of and problems with AI. Benefits that participants in the Forum identified include personalized instruction, immediate feedback and tutoring for students, support for neurodiverse learners and those with disabilities, relieving educators of non-instructional tasks, and support for innovative and engaging pedagogy.

At the same time, participants expressed their uneasiness and concerns about AI. Some are skeptical that AI will be any more disruptive than earlier technological innovations, such as personal computers and the Internet. Eventually, AI will become just another part of the educational landscape—a minority view among the participants.

A recurring concern was the potential for unethical and harmful use of AI and the need for adequate training for educators and students as well as guardrails for the technology itself. Participants voiced concerns about how to ensure equitable access to the technology. As AI systems are typically trained on data predominantly sourced from Northern Hemisphere countries, a few participants raised concerns about the cultural and geographical biases inherent in these databases, which may not accurately represent or serve the needs of students and educators in other parts of the world.

The discussion also revealed uncertainties about AI's impact on human identity and accountability in educational contexts. Finally, as AI becomes increasingly integrated into education, the role of educators will very likely evolve from content providers to facilitators who guide students through complex information landscapes. This has profound implications for teacher preparation programs.

In short, a central takeaway from the presentations and conversation is the necessity for carefully and thoughtfully navigating AI's opportunities and challenges. A balanced and cautious approach ensures equitable access to technology while preparing educators for a rapidly changing landscape. Harnessing AI's transformative potential responsibly entails addressing ethical implications and maintaining human agency in education. By fostering collaboration among educators and leveraging AI responsibly, educators can enhance learning experiences while ensuring that human values remain at the forefront of educational practices.

Takeaway message

• •

  This article presents the perspectives of a group of global deans on the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education.

• •

  It highlights some of the potential benefits of AI, the challenges that educators face, and the ethical issues that the integration of AI raises.

• •

  The views of these deans underscore the issues that educators worldwide are facing in trying to harness AI's capabilities and promise while managing apprehensions about the impact on equity, privacy, learning, and the evolving role of educators.