Selwyn (2022) challenges the growing enthusiasm around artificial intelligence in education, arguing that many AI tools are driven more by efficiency and data collection than by meaningful pedagogy. This perspective really resonated with me, particularly in how I see students engaging with digital tools in my own classroom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I have observed this clearly when students use platforms like Canva to complete projects. While these tools offer creative potential, they can also encourage surface-level engagement. Some students simply insert an image and change a few words without meaningfully altering the template. In these cases, the technology is not supporting critical or creative thinking\u2014it is making it easier to avoid it. Because of this, I often ask students to revise their work until it reflects original thought and design. For me, learning should involve transformation, not just minimal interaction with a pre-made structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Selwyn\u2019s argument also raises a much bigger question: what does meaningful learning look like in an AI-dominated world? If students can use AI to generate answers or complete tasks, then traditional measures of learning may no longer be sufficient. This leaves educators in a difficult position. What skills do students actually need to be successful in the future? Creativity, critical thinking, and the ability to evaluate information seem more important than ever, yet it is still unclear how best to teach and assess these skills. Without clear direction, there is a risk that school begins to feel irrelevant to students, which is a concern I am increasingly aware of in my own practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another idea that stood out to me was Selwyn\u2019s discussion of power and control in educational technology. This is a perspective I had not previously considered in depth. I have often approached technology pragmatically\u2014using whatever tools are available and seem effective. However, this article made me realize that these tools are not neutral. They are designed by companies with specific goals, which may not always align with educational values. This raises important questions about how much control teachers actually have when using digital tools and how much influence is being shaped externally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Overall, this reading has encouraged me to think more critically about my use of technology in the classroom. It reinforces the importance of being intentional, ensuring that digital tools support deeper learning rather than replace it. As I continue in this program, I hope to develop a better understanding of the larger systems influencing education so that I can make more informed decisions for my students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n