References
- 1Almatrafi, O, Johri, A and Lee, H. 2024. ‘A systematic review of AI literacy conceptualization, constructs, and implementation and assessment efforts (2019–2023)’. Computers and Education Open, 6: 100173. DOI: 10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100173
- 2Bearman, M, Ryan, J and Ajjawi, R. 2023. ‘Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: A critical literature review’. Higher Education, 86(2): 369–385. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2
- 3Blikstein, P and Blikstein, I. 2021.
‘Do educational technologies have politics? A semiotic analysis of the discourse of educational technologies and artificial intelligence in education’ . In: Ito, M, Cross, R, Dinakar, K and Odgers, C (eds.) Algorithmic rights and protections for children. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. pp. 233–264. DOI: 10.1162/ba67f642.646d0673 - 4Bommasani, R, et al. 2021. ‘On the opportunities and risks of foundation models [Preprint]’. arXiv. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2108.07258
- 5Bozkurt, A, et al. 2024. ‘The manifesto for teaching and learning in a time of generative AI: A critical collective stance to better navigate the future’. Open Praxis, 16(4): 487–513. DOI: 10.55982/openpraxis.16.4.777
- 6Bozkurt, A and Sharma, RC. 2023. ‘Challenging the status quo and exploring the new boundaries in the age of algorithms: Reimagining the role of generative AI in distance education and online learning’. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(1). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7755273
- 7Clark, D. 2023. ‘The construction of legitimacy: A critical discourse analysis of the rhetoric of educational technology in post-pandemic higher education’. Learning, Media and Technology. DOI: 10.1080/17439884.2022.2163500
- 8Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- 9Fairclough, N. 2003. Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203697078
- 10Ferreira, GMD and Lemgruber, MS. 2018. ‘Educational technologies as tools: Critical considerations on a fundamental metaphor’. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 26(112): 1–14. DOI: 10.14507/epaa.26.3864
- 11Ferreira, GMD, Lemgruber, MS and Cabrera, TL. 2023. ‘From didachography to AI: Metaphors teaching is automated by’. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(3): 1–13. DOI: 10.5334/jime.798
- 12Floridi, L. 2023. ‘AI as agency without intelligence: On ChatGPT, large language models, and other generative models’. Philosophy & Technology, 36(15). DOI: 10.1007/s13347-023-00621-y
- 13Gupta, A, Atef, Y, Mills, A and Bali, M. 2024. ‘Assistant, parrot, or colonizing loudspeaker? ChatGPT metaphors for developing critical AI literacies’. Open Praxis, 16(1): 37–53. DOI: 10.55982/openpraxis.16.1.631
- 14Keuning, H, Alpizar-Chacon, I, Lykourentzou, I, Beehler, L, Köppe, C, de Jong, I and Sosnovsky, S. 2024. ‘Students’ perceptions and use of generative AI tools for programming across different computing courses’. arXiv (No. arXiv:2410.06865). DOI: 10.1145/3699538.3699546
- 15Lakoff, G and Johnson, M. 2003. Metaphors we live by. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: 10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001
- 16Maas, MM. 2023. AI is like… A literature review of AI metaphors and why they matter for policy. Legal Priorities Project – AI Foundations Report 2, October 2023. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4612468
- 17Marone, V and Heinsfeld, BD. 2023. ‘“Everyone pursuing their dreams”: Google’s and Microsoft’s discourse on educational technology’. Computers and Education Open, 4: 100138. DOI: 10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100138
- 18Merriam, SB. 1995. ‘What can you tell from an N of 1? Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research’. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4: 51–60.
- 19Miao, F. 2024. 3 top publications of UNESCO by download 10/2024. LinkedIn Post. Available at
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/fengchun-miao-5b999077_ai-aied-aicompetency-activity-7269289735087349760-XWUq . - 20Mitchell, M. 2024. ‘The metaphors of artificial intelligence’. Science, 386:
eadt6140 . DOI: 10.1126/science.adt6140 - 21Nardi, BA and O’Day, V. 2000. Information ecologies: Using technology with heart. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/3767.001.0001
- 22Renz, A and Vladova, G. 2021. ‘Reinvigorating the discourse on human-centered artificial intelligence in educational technologies’. Technology Innovation Management Review, 11(5): 5–16. DOI: 10.22215/timreview/1438
- 23Taylor, S. 2024. Is UNESCO’s guidance for generative AI (GenAI) in education & research “The Solution” to the problem of GenAI adaptation in international schools? A critical analysis of policy recommendations through Carol Bacchi’s What’s The Problem Represented to Be? (WPR) Framework. EdD Dissertation, University of Bath. Available at:
https://sjtylr.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/taylors_edd_-policy_unescogenai.pdf (Last accessed 3 January 2025). - 24UNESCO. 2023. Guidance for generative AI in education and research. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. DOI: 10.54675/EWZM9535
- 25Veletsianos, G, Houlden, S and Johnson, N. 2024. ‘Is artificial intelligence in education an object or a subject? Evidence from a story completion exercise on learner-AI interactions’. TechTrends, 68: 411–422. DOI: 10.1007/s11528-024-00942-5
- 26Weller, M. 2022. Metaphors of Ed Tech. Athabasca: Athabasca University Press. DOI: 10.15215/aupress/9781771993500.01
- 27Yusuf, A, Pervin, N, Román-González, M and Md Noor, N. 2024. ‘Generative AI in education and research: A systematic mapping review’. Review of Education. DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3489