The Manifesto for Teaching and Learning in a Time of Generative AI : A Critical Collective Stance to Better Navigate the Future

Bozkurt, Aras and Xiao, Junhong and Farrow, Robert and Bai, John Y. H. and Nerantzi, Chrissi and Moore, Stephanie and Dron, Jon and Stracke, Christian M. and Singh, Lenandlar and Crompton, Helen and Koutropoulos, Apostolos and Terentev, Evgenii and Pazurek, Angelica and Nichols, Mark and Sidorkin, Alexander M. and Costello, Eamon and Watson, Steven and Mulligan, Dónal and Honeychurch, Sarah and Hodges, Charles B. and Sharples, Mike and Swindell, Andrew and Frumin, Isak and Tlili, Ahmed and Slagter van Tryon, Patricia J. and Bond, Melissa and Bali, Maha and Leng, Jing and Zhang, Kai and Cukurova, Mutlu and Chiu, Thomas K. F. and Lee, Kyungmee and Hrastinski, Stefan and Garcia, Manuel B. and Sharma, Ramesh Chander and Alexander, Bryan and Zawacki-Richter, Olaf and Huijser, Henk and Jandrić, Petar and Zheng, Chanjin and Shea, Peter and Duart, Josep M. and Themeli, Chryssa and Vorochkov, Anton and Sani-Bozkurt, Sunagül and Moore, Robert L. and Asino, Tutaleni Iita (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). pp. 487-513. ISSN 2304-070X

Abstract

This manifesto critically examines the unfolding integration of Generative AI (GenAI), chatbots, and algorithms into higher education, using a collective and thoughtful approach to navigate the future of teaching and learning. GenAI, while celebrated for its potential to personalize learning, enhance efficiency, and expand educational accessibility, is far from a neutral tool. Algorithms now shape human interaction, communication, and content creation, raising profound questions about human agency and biases and values embedded in their designs. As GenAI continues to evolve, we face critical challenges in maintaining human oversight, safeguarding equity, and facilitating meaningful, authentic learning experiences. This manifesto emphasizes that GenAI is not ideologically and culturally neutral. Instead, it reflects worldviews that can reinforce existing biases and marginalize diverse voices. Furthermore, as the use of GenAI reshapes education, it risks eroding essential human elements—creativity, critical thinking, and empathy—and could displace meaningful human interactions with algorithmic solutions. This manifesto calls for robust, evidence-based research and conscious decision-making to ensure that GenAI enhances, rather than diminishes, human agency and ethical responsibility in education.