TEACHER COMPETENCY

“Human accountability: Teachers can demonstrate both a deepened
understanding of human accountability and human determination in the proper
deployment and use of AI, as well as a critical capacity to assess AI’s capabilities
in facilitating human–AI decision loops, as well as overhyped claims on the use of AI to substitute humans in making high stakes decisions in education.”

CURRICULAR GOALS (CG)

“CG 1.2.1 Deepen teachers’ understanding of the risks related to the absence of human
accountability through examination of use cases of AI for decision loops in educational
management, assessment, teaching strategies and student interactions with AI, enriching and
consolidating their views on the importance of human accountability as a core part of the entire
life cycle of AI.”

“CG 1.2.2 Develop the understanding that human accountability is a legal obligation by encouraging
teachers to debate whether humans or AI should take accountability in AI-assisted decision loops;
guide teachers to conduct reviews on how local and international regulatory frameworks define
human accountability in the design of AI and the provision of AI services including in education.”

“CG 1.2.3 Build associations between human accountability and teachers’ rights by highlighting
the changing roles and responsibilities of teachers, while emphasizing that the central role of teachers is not replicable and that their accountabilities and autonomy cannot be usurped by AI; support teachers to review whether local policies protect teachers’ rights and accountability in the AI era.2

“CG 1.2.4 Uncover risks related to the absence of users’ accountability by encouraging teachers to
examine explainable limitations of specific AI tools (such as that AI cannot understand the real world
or make judgements on values), as well as the unexplainable hallucinations, incorrect answers
and misrepresentations of facts in the current generation of AI tools; discuss the risks AI poses to
student learning, especially for those with special needs (weakening their intellectual development,
critical thinking abilities, human interactions, knowledge constructions and ability to formulate
and express independent opinions).”

LEARNING OBJECTIVES (LO)

“LO 1.2.1 Understand that human accountability in human–AI decision loops is a
legal obligation.”

“LO 1.2.2 Apply local and/or international regulatory frameworks to examine whether the design or use of a specific AI tool diminishes human accountability.”

“LO 1.2.3 Make reference to international or local policies to defend teachers’ accountability in using AI in education and demonstrate resistance to the use of AI outputs and predictions to usurp human teachers’ decisions and students’ thinking processes, knowledge construction and self-expression.”

“LO 1.2.4 Demonstrate teachers’ accountability in the decision loops including when determining the appropriateness of AI tools in teaching, designing age-appropriate pedagogical methodologies and providing necessary human interaction to encourage autonomous learning processes with specific support for those with special needs.”

CONTEXTUAL ACTIVITIES

“Human accountability in AI-assisted decision loops is a legal obligation: Draw a concept map of key duty-bearers and their roles in the design, deployment and use of AI in education, and delineate their human accountabilities.”

“Teachers’ accountability and rights cannot be usurped by AI: Draft a report on the most relevant regulation(s), responsible institution(s) and procedure(s) that can protect teachers’ rights and accountability when adopting AI in education.”

“Teachers’ accountability is a human assurance for ethical and effective uses of AI in education: Draw a concept map on the feasible roles teachers can play in validating and selecting appropriate AI tools, designing pedagogical methodologies, driving human interaction, acilitating students’ use of AI and supporting students with diverse abilities.”