Generative AI and the future of education

Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators

Datos Bibliográficos

ID23325903
AutoresWeng Marc Lim (0000-0001-7196-1923, Swinburne University of Technology, autor de correspondencia), Asanka Gunasekara (0000-0002-0858-8668, Swinburne University of Technology), Jessica L Pallant (0000-0002-6030-2719, Swinburne University of Technology), Jason I Pallant (0000-0002-1000-6719, Swinburne University of Technology), Ekaterina Pechenkina (0000-0001-6997-6974, Swinburne University of Technology)
Año2023
Volumen21
Número2
Páginas100790
Fecha de publicación2023-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaThe International Journal of Management Education (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1472-8117 • E-ISSN: 2352-3565
EditorialElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790
OpenAlexW4322617812
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas191
Referencias citadas19

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has taken the world by storm, with notable tension transpiring in the field of education. Given that Generative AI is rapidly emerging as a transformative innovation, this article endeavors to offer a seminal rejoinder that aims to (i) reconcile the great debate on Generative AI in order to (ii) lay the foundation for Generative AI to co-exist as a transformative resource in the future of education. Using critical analysis as a method and paradox theory as a theoretical lens (i.e., the “how”), this article (i) defines Generative AI and transformative education (i.e., the “ideas”), (ii) establishes the paradoxes of Generative AI (i.e., the “what”), and (iii) provides implications for the future of education from the perspective of management educators (i.e., the “so what”). Noteworthily, the paradoxes of Generative AI are four-fold: (Paradox #1) Generative AI is a ‘friend’ yet a ‘foe’, (Paradox #2) Generative AI is ‘capable’ yet ‘dependent’, (Paradox #3) Generative AI is ‘accessible’ yet ‘restrictive’, and (Paradox #4) Generative AI gets even ‘popular’ when ‘banned’ (i.e., the “what”). Through a position that seeks to embrace rather than reject Generative AI, the lessons and implications that emerge from the discussion herein represent a seminal contribution from management educators on this trending topic and should be useful for approaching Generative AI as a game-changer for education reformation in management and the field of education at large, and by extension, mitigating a situation where Generative AI develops into a Ragnarök that dooms the future of education of which management education is a part of (i.e., the “so what”).

Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Generative grammar · Linguistics · Perspective (graphical) · Sociology · AI in Service Interactions · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Digital Transformation in Industry · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Philosophy · Psychology