FINAL ASSIGNMENT – Artificial intelligence in education

Activity: Preparation and defence of the FINAL ASSIGNMENT

Title of the Final Assignment: The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education

In the final assignment, you should be able to:

• Design and present a solution for the effective use of artificial intelligence (AI) in education by integrating AI tools and systems into a selected curriculum, programme, or educational process.

• Critically select and apply an appropriate AI tool or system in an educational context.

• Create a digital educational resource using selected AI tools and systems.

• Design a proposal for assessing knowledge using AI capabilities.

• Explain the technical, pedagogical, ethical, and organisational aspects of AI use in your solution.

• Present a vision of how your solution can empower learners, students, and other educational stakeholders and improve the educational environment, with an emphasis on personalisation, differentiation, and active learning.

• Connect the final assignment with the topics covered in the e-course, especially the module “Artificial Intelligence Tools and Systems in Education”.

Instructions for Writing the Final Assignment

(Minimum 1,500 words; maximum 2,000 words):

• Select an educational context – a course or subject, curriculum, or a target group of learners or educational professionals.
• Select one or more AI tools or systems. You may use those you have previously analysed critically.
• Propose a concrete method for integrating the selected AI tools and systems into the chosen educational context, including various activities and teaching or learning methods.
• Create a digital educational resource for the selected context using the chosen AI tool or system.
• Design a proposal for assessing knowledge in the selected educational context using AI (for example, automated assessment, question generation, or learning analytics).
• Explain the pedagogical, technical, ethical, and organisational aspects of your AI-based solution in education.
• Present your vision of how your solution will empower learners, students, and other educational stakeholders.

 Submission of the final assignment:

• Write your final assignment in a Word document.

• Submit your work as a PDF via the FINAL ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION resource.

The final assignment should include the following sections:

• • Title

  • Introduction and description of the chosen educational context

  • Selected AI tool(s) and/or system(s) with justification for the choice (pedagogical, technical, organisational, and ethical aspects)

  • Description of the digital educational resource created using AI, including evidence of its creation

  • Description of the proposed assessment of knowledge using AI, with evidence of its application

  • Vision of how the solution empowers learners, students, or other educational stakeholders

  • Conclusion

  • List of references (including AI tools if used)

Presentation of the final assignment

After submitting the written final assignment, you are required to:

• Create a 20-minute presentation of your solution using an AI tool of your choice.
• Submit the presentation via the FINAL ASSIGNMENT PRESENTATION resource.
• Present your work in the ONLINE MEETING and participate in the evaluation of other participants’ work.

Assessment criteria for the final assignment (maximum 34 points)

References used:

At the end of the paper, it is mandatory to list all references and sources of information used. The literature should be relevant, clearly listed, and cited consistently (APA style or another recognised referencing style is recommended).

Detailed explanation of the criteria and scoring:

1. Clarity and justification of the selected AI tool/system in the educational context (0–6 points)

• 0 points: No tool or system is selected, or the selection is completely unclear and lacks justification.
• 1 point: The tool is mentioned, but there is no real justification or only a very superficial one.
• 2 points: A basic justification is provided, but it is unclear and insufficiently argued.
• 3 points: The selection is justified with several relevant reasons, but details or broader context are missing.
• 4 points: The selection is well justified with clear pedagogical and technical reasons, but organisational and ethical aspects are less developed.
• 5 points: The justification is very clear and detailed, covering most aspects (pedagogical, technical, organisational, ethical) with relevant examples.
• 6 points: The justification is excellent, in-depth, and critical, clearly linked to the educational context, and provides a comprehensive treatment of all aspects.

2. Quality of the digital educational resource created using AI tools (0–6 points)

0 points: No resource created or the resource is unusable.

• 1 point: The resource is very basic, with significant shortcomings or no evidence of AI use.
• 2 points: The resource exists but is rudimentary and poorly adapted to the target group.
• 3 points: The resource is functional and partially adapted, but with limited use of AI capabilities.
• 4 points: A high-quality resource, well adapted, with some innovative elements in AI use.
• 5 points: A very high-quality, interactive, and relevant resource with clear evidence of AI use.
• 6 points: An excellently designed and implemented digital resource that fully leverages AI capabilities and has a strong pedagogical impact.

3. Proposal for knowledge assessment (0–4 points)

• 0 points: No proposal or the proposal is unusable.
• 1 point: The proposal is unclear, insufficiently developed, or unrealistic.
• 2 points: The proposal is partially relevant but has significant shortcomings in feasibility or implementation.
• 3 points: A relevant and feasible proposal with minor shortcomings in detail.
• 4 points: A clear, relevant, and feasible solution with a well-explained use of AI in knowledge assessment.

4. Pedagogical, technical, ethical, and organisational aspects of AI use (0–6 points)

• 0 points: Aspects are not addressed or are treated in a completely superficial manner.
• 1 point: Some aspects are mentioned, but only briefly and unclearly.
• 2 points: All aspects are present, but are addressed unevenly and superficially.
• 3 points: Aspects are partially well developed with basic explanations, but lack depth.
• 4 points: All aspects are well developed with concrete examples, but lack detailed critical analysis.
• 5 points: All aspects are very well and thoroughly developed, with clear links to the proposed solution.
• 6 points: Aspects are addressed in an excellent, critical, and comprehensive manner, with in-depth analysis and realistic examples.

5. Vision of user empowerment (0–4 points)

• 0 points: No vision or completely unclear.
• 1 point: Vision is mentioned, but it is very general and vague.
• 2 points: Partial and unclear vision of empowerment without concrete examples.
• 3 points: Clear and concrete vision with some examples of empowerment.
• 4 points: An excellently defined vision with clear examples of how the solution empowers users and supports active learning.

6. Structure, clarity, and neatness of the written work (0–3 points)

• 0 points: The work is messy, difficult to read, and contains many errors.
• 1 point: The work is somewhat neat but has clear deficiencies in organisation and clarity.
• 2 points: The work is neat and structured, with some minor errors.
• 3 points: The work is excellently structured, clear, neat, and easy to read, with no significant errors.

7. Quality and consistency of the references used (0–3 points)

• 0 points: No references or very poor references; inconsistent citations.
• 1 point: References are present but not sufficiently relevant or are cited inconsistently at times.
• 2 points: Relevant and mostly consistent references, with minor citation issues.
• 3 points: High-quality, relevant, and consistently cited references, including sources generated or suggested by AI tools (if used).

Note: If you have any further questions, please post them in the Discussion Forum.