Activity Description 

This activity builds on the previous one (analysing the technical aspects of AI tools and systems) and adds a second part to the analysis of the same AI tool or system, now focusing on its educational applicability and assessing how it can contribute to the quality of learning and teaching in your educational environment. The aim is to critically consider the pedagogical possibilities of the chosen solution, relying on existing research and clearly defined evaluation criteria.

The activity is performed in groups of 3 to 4 members and concludes with the creation of an interactive presentation (at least six slides, maximum 15 minutes) and participation in a discussion of other groups’ presentations.

Procedure 
  1. Joining the group: Each participant joins a group through the Group Selection activity.
  2. Selecting and publishing the topic: One group member (the leader) posts a topic proposal in the Topic Selection Forum.
    1. Title of the post: Group X – Name of the topic (e.g., Group 3 – Application of Curipod tools in higher education)
    2. Body of the post: Brief description of the topic, including the name of the selected AI tool or system and the chosen educational environment (e.g., course).
    3. Work on the activity may begin only after the topic has been approved by the instructor.
  3. Literature collection
      • Relevant scientific and professional sources addressing the educational (pedagogical) potential of AI tools and systems in higher education should be researched.
      • Recommended tools for literature search: Connected Papers, Elicit, Semantic Scholar, SciSpace

  4. Analysis of the selected AI tool or system in the chosen educational environment

      • Evaluation according to the criteria: relevance to educational goals, efficiency and accuracy, accessibility and ease of use, bias, ethics, and data security

  5. Creation of an interactive presentation

    • Minimum 6 slides
    • Duration up to 15 minutes
    • Tool: Curipod
    • The presentation must include at least one interactive activity for other participants (e.g., short quiz, survey, real-time discussion) and be visually clear and pedagogically well-structured. List all literature used.

6. Presentation submission: The presentation must be submitted via the ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION activity.

If exporting from Curipod is not possible, save each slide as an image and combine them into a single Word document (then submit as a PDF).

7. Presentation and discussion

The presentation is delivered online via videoconference using the BBB (Loomen) system.

It is mandatory to share the link or QR code of the Curipod presentation in the Topic Selection Forum. 
Active participation in evaluating and exchanging opinions on other groups’ presentations is expected (about 5 minutes of discussion per presentation).

Evaluation method (maximum 6 summative points)

  1.  
Criterion Description Points
Analysis of the AI tool or system according to the given criteria

Detailed analysis of the selected artificial intelligence tool or system in education, based on the criteria: relevance for educational goals, effectiveness and accuracy, accessibility and ease of use, bias, ethics, and data security.

0 points: The analysis is incomplete or superficial and does not address all required criteria.
1 point: The analysis covers most criteria, but lacks deeper elaboration or a clear connection with the educational context.
2 points: The analysis is comprehensive and detailed, covers all criteria, and clearly demonstrates the pedagogical potential of the AI tool or system.

3
Relevance and quality of the sources used

Assesses the use of credible and up-to-date sources that support the analysis and relate to education and AI technologies. The use of literature search tools (Connected Papers, Elicit, Semantic Scholar, SciSpace) is recommended.

0 points: The sources used are not relevant or are not scientifically grounded.
0.5 points: Some sources are relevant, but the overall quality or number of works is insufficient.
1 point: All sources used are scholarly and directly support the claims made in the analysis.

 1
Quality and clarity of the presentation

The presentation should be clear, logically structured, visually coherent, and focused on demonstrating the educational value of the selected tool.

0 points: The content is difficult to follow, with insufficient clarity or structure.
0.5 points: The presentation is partially clear, but the visual organisation or flow of the talk is not optimal.
1 point: The presentation is well-organised, clearly argued, and visually engaging.

1
Interactivity and delivery of the presentation

The presentation includes interactive elements in Curipod and active participation of all group members during the delivery.

0 points: No interactive elements; delivery is passive.
0.5 points: Some interactivity is present, but it is not sufficiently engaging.
1 point: Interactive elements are meaningfully integrated, and the presentation is clear, engaging, and encourages participation.

 1
 
 

Last modified: Tuesday, 28 April 2026, 9:42 AM
Accessibility
Reset All

Background Colour Background Colour

Font Face Font Face

Font Size Font Size

1

Text Colour Text Colour

Font Kerning Font Kerning

Image Visibility Image Visibility

Letter Spacing Letter Spacing

0

Line Height Line Height

1.2

Link Highlight Link Highlight