Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence in Education. An Ethical Approach

Jorge Gabriel Berges-Puyo     

UNED, Spain

ABSTRACT: Human Intelligence has been leading education since the beginning of teaching and learning. With the arrival of the Artificial Intelligence in recent times, there is a need to warn educational communities about the perils of its implementation. In this article, we review the concepts of Human and Artificial Intelligence and their applications to education. Specifically, we focus on an ethical approach related to the use and implementation of the A.I., according to four main ethical paradigms: Ethics of Justice, Ethics of Care, Ethics of Critique, and Ethics of the Profession. For each one of these paradigms, we ask a question to be discussed considering the literature related to it. Lastly, we present a series of conclusions as a result of the previous discussion. Our conclusions include a series of suggestions for the educational community to enhance the learning experience of our learners.

KEYWORDS: Human Intelligence; Artificial Intelligence; Education; Ethics of Justice; Ethics of Care; Ethics of Critique, Ethics of the Profession.

1. INTRODUCTION

Since the beginning of times, human beings have been using Human Intelligence (HI) in their daily lives to execute actions and face challenges and obstacles.

In this study we review the concept of Human Intelligence (HI), its use, implementation in education, benefits and accomplishments. What is to be human? What is the meaning of being human from where Human Intelligence is used in education? What are the attributes that humans have to help learners prosper?

On the other hand, we live in a time period where the Artificial Intelligence (AI) is arriving to all sectors of our society. We are told and encouraged to embrace it as a beneficial and helpful tool to carry out daily tasks. In this sense, we bring attention on the specific area of the AI in education, its implementation and ethical implications, focusing on the paradigm of the ethics of justice, ethics of care, ethics of critique, and ethics of profession.

Educational institutions across the globe are designing a set of skills for the twenty-first century learner such as critical thinking, problem solving, effort, responsibility, reflection, motivation, reliability, perseverance, collaboration, or ethical decision making among others.

Corresponding Author: Jorge Gabriel Berges-Puyo     

*Cite this Article: Jorge Gabriel Berges-Puyo (2025). Human Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence in Education. An Ethical Approach. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research Studies, 5(5), 452-458

In this article we investigate how the implementation of the AI can influence the achievement of these skills by scrutinizing the ethical repercussions of this implementation in an educational context.

2. HUMAN INTELLIGENCE. CONCEPT AND TYPES

The word intelligence derives from the Latin noun intelligentia, which stems from the verb intelligere, to comprehend. The definition of intelligence is subject to discussion. Binet (1905) conceived intelligence as good sense or capacity of accommodation to circumstances. Wechsler (1944), who developed his intelligence scales for adults (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, WAIS) and children (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, WISC) viewed intelligence as the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment. Humphreys (1979) defined intelligence as the resultant of the process of acquiring, storing in memory, retrieving, combining, comparing, and using in new contexts information and conceptual skills. Sternberg (1982) considered intelligence as a goal-directed adaptive behavior. Gardner (1983) proposed his Theory of Multiple Intelligences. He claimed that there are eight types of intelligences: Linguistic, Logical/Mathematical, Spatial, Bodily/Kinesthetic, Musical, Interpersonal, Intrapersonal, and Naturalist. Feuerstein (2003) presented their Theory of Structural Cognitive Modifiability in which intelligence is defined as “a process broad enough to embrace a large variety of phenomena that have in common the dynamics and mechanics of adaptation”, (p. 38). We can see in these concepts of intelligence how the common denominator is the capacity to adapt to new circumstances, contexts, or environments. However, this intelligence emanates from the person, the individual, the human. Therefore, it is important to stress the characteristic of being human in the concept of intelligence. Thus, what is it to be human? In this article, we use a holistic view of being human. From this perspective, the core of being human is the spiritual heart, the essential element and link that connects body, mind, and soul (Anderson, 2020; Deikman, 1998). According to this, from a holistic point of view, being human is the result of actions guided by the spiritual heart, whose essence is kindness, compassion, hope, community, gratitude, humility, wisdom, intuition, peace, courage, and interconnectedness. As a consequence, we can define Human Intelligence as the capacity guided by the spiritual heart to accommodate to new contexts or circumstances.

3. HUMAN INTELLIGENCE AND EDUCATION

The origins of education must be found in the times where the first written records were produced, which were found in the Kish tablet, a limestone tablet which dates to around 3,500 BC. The first formal school setting took place in Egypt’s Middle Kingdom, under the supervision of Kheti, treasurer of Mentuhotep II (2061-2010 BC). Since then, many accomplishments have been obtained due to education. According to the U. S. Career Institute, the global average literacy rate overall is 86.81 %. At the same time, many benefits derive from the attainment of education: creating more employment opportunities, obtaining better income, developing critical-thinking, cognitive, and communication skills, improving self-discipline, spreading awareness, enhancing productivity, contributing to the community, etc. Several studies show how education helps in the promotion and development of intelligence (Ritchie and Tucker-Drob, 2018; Falch and Sandgren Massih, 2011). Since the beginning of times, human intelligence has been in charge of education being quintessential in the development and progress of the education of generations of individuals. Lesson plans, tests, homework, projects, teaching, reteaching, reviewing, etc., were delivered, planned and executed by human intelligence used by teachers, professors, tutors, parents, counselors, etc., who share the common characteristic of being human. This characteristic is the key foundation of education: humane. Whitlock and Stuart (1975) consider humane education the education that promotes human behaviors sustained upon the ideals of justice, kindness and compassion. These ideals are essential in a humane educational model, where the ethics of justice and care must be present (Unti and DeRosa, 2003). Thus, human intelligence is the main instrument to deliver humane education in which learners develop an inner and outer awareness fundamental to become ethical learners (Berges-Puyo, 2020). These ethical learners are deeply aware about the responsibility of using the knowledge obtained for the benefit of the community around, where not only people but also nature play an important role.

4. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Artificial intelligence (AI) can be considered a new field in science and engineering. The term was first used in 1956 by a group of scientists in a conference at the Dartmouth college in the United States. Russel and Norvig (2016, p. 2) present eight definitions of AI according to four criteria and from different authors: (a) Thinking humanly. 1.” The exciting new effort to make computers think… machines with minds, in the full and literal sense.” (Haugelan, 1985); 2. “The automation of activities that we associate with human thinking, activities such as decision-making, problem-solving, learning… (Bellman, 1978); (b) Thinking rationally. 1. “The study of mental faculties through the use of computational models.” (Charniak and McDermott, 1985); 2. “The study of the computations that make it possible to perceive, reason, and act.” (Winston, 1992); (c) Acting humanly. 1. “The art of creating machines that perform functions that require intelligence when performed by people.” (Kurzweil, 1990); 2. “The study of how to make computers do things at which at the moment, people are better.” (Rich and Knight, 1991); (d) Acting rationally. 1. “Computational Intelligence is the study of the design of intelligent agents.” (Poole et al., 1998); 2. “AI … is concerned with intelligent behavior in artifacts.” (Nilsson, 1998).

The timeline of AI can be described in five stages:

1. 1950’s. The origins of AI took place during this period of time in which computing machines worked as large-scale calculators. The British mathematician Alan Turing was the first to envision the AI. He believed in the possibility to create machines able to develop themselves beyond their original programming. John McCarthy, a college mathematics professor is another important figure of this time. During the summer of 1956, McCarthy invited a group of researchers to participate in a workshop to investigate the possibilities of creating thinking machines. This event is known as the Dartmouth conference, which is the name of the college where he taught mathematics and where the conference took place. The event lasted 8 weeks, 11 attendees were present, among which 6 participated for the full period of time, while the other 5 attended two weeks at least. The proposal of the conference stated that the goal of this workshop was the developing of learning or features of intelligence by machines. Among the 11 professors and scientists present, McCarthy was the first to use the expression of artificial intelligence.
2. 1960’s-1970’s. The Dartmouth conference created a lot of excitement in the scientist

community. This excitement was growing in the next twenty years when Eliza the first chatbot, Shakey the Robot were created, and The American Association of Artificial Intelligence was founded. On the other hand, Lighthill (1973) published a paper critical with the state of the AI, affirming that the expectations were too high in comparison to the results provided. The conclusions of his report resulted in AI funding cuts.

3. 1980’s-1990’s. The funding cuts present during the 1970’s continued over the next two

decades despite a brief period of time in the early 1980’s. It was during the late 1990’s when the AI research field recovered an enthusiast momentum to continue investigating. In this period of time, it is worth mentioning the invention of the first self-driving car in 1986 by Ernst Dickmanns, a German scientist. In 1996, IBM developed a computer system which was used to play a series of chess games against Gary Kasparov, chess world champion. The computer system was named Deep Blue and could only win one out of the six games. The following year, there was a rematch in which Deep Blue won.

4. 2000-2019. During this period of time, the AI field experienced an increasing interest. In

the year 2000 a social robot named Kismet was created by the MIT’s Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. The goal of this robot was to produce human emotion processes. In 2004, NASA sent two rovers to Mars. Both artifacts were equipped with AI, which allowed them to make decisions autonomously in real time. In 2011, IBM created another computer system, Watson DeepQA, used to participate in the US quiz show Jeopardy. This computer system beat two of the show’s all-time champions. In 2011 and 2014 two virtual assistants were released: Siri by Apple and Alexa by Amazon. Both systems held a natural language processing feature, which allowed them to understand a spoken question and respond with an answer. However, these two virtual assistants had their limitations, since they could not answer anything out of their programming setup. In this two decades, the AI experienced an important development with the investigation of neural networks and deep learning by Geoffrey Hinton, who has recently expressed his concerns on the existential risks of AI, claiming that the AI could potentially become a danger against humanity. In 2016, David Hanson created Sophia a female humanoid robot powered by AI.

5. 2020-present. Since 2020, AI has developed into what is called generative AI, a type of AI that produces videos, texts, images, or other media in response to users’ prompts. Generative AI compiles huge amount of data. The AI system processes this data to create new content that is going to be statistically pertinent to a user’s prompt. Based upon this new concept of generative AI, OpenAI, an American artificial intelligence research organization, created a generative pre-trained transformer (GPT), a type of AI in which neural networks generate human-like content. As a result, language models GPT-1 and GPT-2 were originated. These language models were trained on billions of inputs. Despite this number of inputs, the capacity of these language models was limited. However, the arrival of the language model GPT-3 in 2020 constituted a key development in AI. GPT-3 was trained on 175 billion parameters in comparison to the 1.5 billion of its predecessors. In 2021, following this model of generative AI, OpenAI released Dall-E, an AI system that is capable of generating images from text descriptions. One year later, in 2022, OpenAI released the AI chatbot ChatGPT, which was able to interact with users in a more efficient and engaging way. ChatGPT uses the language model GPT-3 being able to produce follow-up questions and recognize inadequate prompts. In 2023, OpenAI released GPT-4, with the possibility to generate not only text, but also images. Microsoft integrated ChatGPT into its search engine. On the other hand, Google released the chatbot Gemini.

• Artificial Intelligence in Education. An Ethical Approach

Schools in the U.S. and around the globe are pushing for the implementation of the AI in education. From elementary schools to college courses, this trend continues. Several scholars (Baidoo-Anu and Ansah, 2023; Hwang et al., 2014; Lampou, 2023) point out the benefits of AI in education: promotion of personalized and interactive learning; generating prompts for formative assessment activities that produce feedback to improve teaching and learning; assisting teachers or policymakers in making decisions; supplementing educators by making the learning process more engaging and efficient; providing feedback on students’ performance; automating administrative tasks; allowing educators more time for instruction and planning. On the other hand, several researchers (Hwang, 2014; Pham and Sampson, 2022; Polyportis and Pahos, 2024) point out the challenges that the use of AI in education provides: generating wrong information; biases in data training; privacy issues; lack of research in educators’ preparedness and philosophy of technology; devaluation of relationships; unemployment, and digital inequities. Another scholar, Gerlich (2025) reported in his study a negative correlation between frequent use of the AI and the development of critical thinking abilities mediated by an increment of cognitive offloading. These issues related to the use of the AI in education show the compelling necessity to ask ourselves a series of questions from an ethical point of view considering four ethical paradigms: ethics of justice, ethics of care, ethics of critique, and ethics of professionalism. There are many questions for each one of these paradigms. However, considering the purpose of this paper, which is to introduce some concerns that the educational community holds on the increasing use of the AI, we are asking one question for each paradigm hoping for further research to follow.  Table 1 shows the four ethical paradigms and their respective questions that we are tackling.

Table 1

Next, we discuss these questions, considering their repercussions and problematic in the educational setting.

5. DISCUSSION
   • Ethics of Justice. Is it fair for learners to let them rely on data that is unchecked, and can

create biases and inequalities? (Hwang et al., 2014). There are several AI systems (ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Brave Leo, Microsoft Copilot, Gab Arya, etc.) used in educational settings. Who is behind them? Who are the programmers and developers that establish the data that is going to be accepted as truthful and to be shown to the public? What are the values behind these individuals and corporations? Is there a political agenda guiding their approved data? Why is there censorship in those platforms? There is a body of literature warning on the reality of the AI bias (Roselli et al. 2019; Gichoya et al., 2023; Nelson, 2019), inequality (Kim, 2021; Miller, 2020), and censorship (Diskin, 2024: Schell, 2014). Knowing that as a fact, how can educators allow the AI based upon an artificial algorithm be an increasing popular educational tool in our classrooms?

• Ethics of Care. Is it caring for educators to encourage learners to use a tool that erodes

the development of learners’ skills such as critical thinking? Gerlich, (2025) showed in his study a negative influence of the use of the AI over the development of the critical thinking skill in learners. Shapiro et al., (1997) distinguished three types of caring: attention and support; discipline; and “staying on them”. According to this, which kind of attention, support, discipline, or “staying on them” educators provide if the AI as a tool is preventing students from developing critical thinking skills? Considering ethical dilemmas (use of the AI in education) through the ethic of care (Shapiro and Stefkovich, 2016) we as educators, must focus on how we can meet learners’ needs, providing solutions and answers to practical issues.

5.3. Ethics of Critique. How can learners develop a sense of critique in their learning process,

if this process is automatized by an artificial construct? The ethic of critique is designed to raise difficult questions, to reflect, so that inconsistencies, discrepancies, and different paths can be found (Giroux, 2013). Also, the ethic of critique aims at rethinking, redefining, and reframing concepts so that learners can develop skills through a critical analysis of what they are supposed to learn (Starratt, 1991). In this sense, Shapiro and Purpel (1993, 2005), stressed the need of empowering individuals through the discussion of options. This seems to be contrary to the model of the AI where an “official” version is given, while in many instances other options are censored (Diskin, 2024; Wu, 2006) which constitutes a privation of the freedom of knowledge. People and learners, should be able to access different theories, and schools of thinking so that they can obtain their own conclusions through reflection and study (Greene, 1988).

5.4. Ethics of the profession. Is it professional to make the AI create lesson plans,

assignments, tests, quizzes, and other educational activities? Shapiro and Stefkovich (2016) view the ethics of the profession as a series of ethical principles and codes of ethics to be applied to the decision-making process. In this sense, Greenfield (1993) stresses the moral dimension needed from educational leaders to help learners in the best way possible. In particular, teachers must apply the professional ethical principles to the one basic principle that according to most of educational ethicists (Campbell, 2000, 2004; Hansen, 2001, Hostetler, 1997), must guide the educators’ profession: to serve the best interest of the student. Regarding to this we can ask ourselves if letting the AI design and create school materials and lesson plans is compatible with preserving the best interest of the student, knowing that the AI is susceptible of bias, inequality, and censorship.

6. CONCLUSION

The world is experiencing a quick technological advancement in which the AI is becoming a notorious element. However, the HI has been in charge of the humanity and education from the beginning of times. In the last few decades, there has been a push for the implementation of the AI in all sectors of the society, and especially in education. It is important to note that behind the AI there are algorithms and data that come from HI. At this moment, it becomes essential to reiterate the preeminence of the HI on all aspects of our lives. Even on the AI. Below, we expose a series of conclusions regarding this dichotomy between Human and Artificial Intelligence considering an ethical perspective. Much more research is needed. We hope, this article serves as a way to call for the attention of scholars and researches to deepen into the repercussions of the use of the AI in education, considering its advantages but also the issues mentioned here.

• It is not fair for learners to be exposed to the AI when there is bias and inequality with its

use. In order to promote clarity, fairness, and impartiality, it is necessary to ask for transparency. Regarding to this it would be a step in the right direction if the algorithms used to filter the data would be made public, along with the prohibition of censorship. Denying different sides of the same story is not fair. Learners need to be able to consider different ways of thinking, facts, theories, and possible explanations. Preventing the divulgation of specific data according to the sole will of someone should not be allowed in a free society. There cannot be freedom without a fair society.

• Educators stress the importance of helping learners develop skills,

especially the 21^st century skills that are demanded by companies and corporations. Some of these highly demanded skills are critical thinking, problem solving, effort, communication, responsibility, reflection, motivation, reliability, perseverance, resilience, etc. However, using the AI does not help the development of these important learning skills (Gerlich, 2025): how can learners develop the above-mentioned skills if the only task learners have to do is to push a key in their devices? Beck (1994) considers that caring educators focus on creating relationships and connections. Thus, being a caring educator implies developing relationships with learners, establishing humane connections with them, showing them that we as educators care about them and their learning process. Considering that, which kind of relationships and connections learners can get from interacting with a machine? The interaction between learners and the AI is mechanical and, intrinsically passive. One side does the job, another receives it. Therefore, effort, communication, reflection, motivation, etc., are not substantial goals that learners are going to develop. If we want our learners thrive, we need to build an educational process where learners are challenged, within a mutual relationship where they feel educators care about them, being able to make connections with the educational communities around them. Once that happens, learners will know they belong to that classroom, to that community in which through their human relationships and connections a culture of unity (Berges-Puyo, 2023) is finally established.

• Reflecting, questioning, discussing, analyzing, considering different theories, options,

and solutions on the same issue is quintessential in providing a quality learning experience for our learners. Why sensitive information is censored by the programmers and responsible engineers creating the algorithms behind the AI? Where these people get their authority to dictate what can be shown or not? Who are the people or institutions that sponsor and support a transgression on civil liberties like freedom of expression? Is this the model we want to implement in our schools and communities? Are we going to consider as normal this Ministry of Truth? (Orwell, 1949). The ethics of critique is based upon the possibility to ask hard questions like these ones to rethink and reflect. A model of AI in which censorship is a main attribute cannot guide the formation of our learners. On the contrary, AI should be a tool willing to support and encourage debate, presenting different theories and possibilities, and above all, true and real facts concerning the topic at hand.

• Educators, administrators, and students are encouraged by schools to use and

implement the AI. But does this serve the best interest of students? Is professionally ethical let students use a tool that is based upon a series of algorithms that are programmed to censor certain information, and promote bias and inequality? Are we educators serving the best interest of learners when the information provided by the A.I. is unchecked? As professionals, guiding learners in classrooms, is it not part of our ethical profession to make sure we know the consequences of the tools we tell students to use? Black and Fullerton (2020) warn about these issues, proposing a series of actions for students and educators to prevent them from happening. Thus, they recommend educators to teach students a series of actions to obtain reliable sources and information such as to consult the librarian for reference assistance, to examine the context of the topic; to verify the integrity and impartiality of the experts and sites of publication; to distinguish between opinion and facts. Also, these scholars recommend educators to collaborate with the librarian to set-up in class sessions to help learners know the library’s resources and reliable researching methods. Giving students enough time to research, making learners aware of cognitive biases, using Socratic techniques and appropriate dialogic conversations are other suggestions to avoid digital deceit, biased or false information. We believe these action tips can help learners develop good learning habits, being able to identify reliable sources, comparing and contrasting theories and lines of thought, and most importantly, checking that the information they are getting is based on facts and unbiased. All of these action tips are human intelligence-based actions. We should not give too much power to the AI We must find a balance in all the things we do. The AI should be just a tool that can be used as another instrument to obtain information. Considering the issues of its implementation presented in this article, the AI should never be the only, unique, and omnipresent source of information and help for our learners. If we lose the habit to use and trust our own intelligence, we will also start losing ourselves. It is up to all of us to prevent that from happening.

REFERENCES

1. Anderson, M. R. (2020). The Spiritual Heart. Religions, 11(10), 506.
2. Baidoo-Anu, D., and Ansah, L. O. (2023). Education in the era of generative artificial intelligence (AI): Understanding the potential benefits of ChatGPT in promoting teaching and learning. Journal of AI, 7(1), 52-62.
3. Beck, L. G. (1994). Reclaiming Educational Administration as a Caring Profession. Teachers College Press.
4. Bellman, R. E. (1978). An Introduction to Artificial Intelligence: Can Computers Think? Boyd and Frazer Publishing Company.
5. Berges-Puyo, J. G. (2020). A Value and Character Educational Model: Repercussions for Students, Teachers, and Families. Journal of Culture and Values in Education, 4(1), 100-115.
6. Berges-Puyo, J. G. (2023). Heartful Education: Benefits from Teaching Unity in Schools. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research Studies 3(10), 2037-2044.
7. Black, J., and Fullerton, C. (2020). Digital Deceit: Fake News, Artificial Intelligence, and Censorship in Educational Research. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 8, 71-78.
8. Campbell, E. (2000). Professional ethics in teaching: towards the development of a code of practice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(2), 203-221.
9. Campbell, E. (2004). The Ethical Teacher. Open University Press.
10. Charniak, E., and McDermott, D. (1985). Introduction to Artificial Intelligence. Addison-Wesley.
11. Deikman, A. J. (1998). The Spiritual Heart of Service. Alternative Health Practitioner, 4(3), 239-244.
12. Diskin, E. I. (2024). The use of Artificial Intelligence technologies by internet platforms for the purposes of censorship. RUDN Journal of Law, 28(3), 584-603.
13. Falch, T., and Sandgren Massih, S. (2011). The Effect of Education on Cognitive Ability. Economic Inquiry, 49(3), 838-856.
14. Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, S., Falik, L and Rand, Y. (1979). Dynamic assessments of cognitive modifiability. ICELP Press.
15. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic books.
16. Gerlich, M. (2025). AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking. Societies, 15(1), 6.
17. Gichoya, J. W., Thomas, K., Celi, L. A., Safdar, N., Banerjee, I., Banja, J. D., and Purkayastha, S. (2023). AI pitfalls and what not to do: mitigating bias in AI. The British Journal of Radiology, 96(1150), 20230023
18. Giroux, H. A. (2013). Youth in Revolt: Reclaiming a Democratic Future. Paradigm Publishers.
19. Greene, M. (1988). The Dialectic of Freedom. Teachers College Press.
20. Greenfield, W. D. (1993). Articulating values and ethics in administrator preparation. In C. A. Capper (Ed.), Educational Administration in a Pluralistic Society (pp. 267-287). State University of New York Press.
21. Hansen, D. T. (2001). Teaching as a moral activity. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Research of Teaching (pp. 826-857). American Educational Research Association.
22. Hostetle, K. D. (1997). Ethical Judgment in Teaching. Allyn and Bacon.
23. Haugeland, J. (1985). Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea. MIT Press.
24. Hwang, G. J., Haoran, X., Wah, B. W., and Gasevic, D. (2014). Vision, challenges, roles, and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100001.
25. Kim, P. (2021). AI and inequality. Forthcoming in The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence and the Law, Kristin Johnson and Carla Reyes (Eds.), Louis Legal Studies Research Paper, (21-09), 03. Washington University
26. Kurzweil, R. (1990). The Age of Intelligent Machines. MIT Press.
27. Lampou, R. (2023). The integration of artificial intelligence in education: Opportunities and challenges. Review of Artificial Intelligence in education, 4(00), e15.
28. Lighthill, J. (1973). Artificial Intelligence: A General Survey. In Lighthill, J., Sutherland, N. S., Needham, R. M., Longuet Higgins, H. C., and Michie, D. (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence: A Paper Symposium. Science Research Council of Great Britain.
29. Miller, K. (2020). A matter of perspective: Discrimination, bias, and inequality in ai. In Legal regulations, implications, and issues surrounding digital data. IGI Global, 2020. 182-202.
30. Nelson, G. S. (2019). Bias in artificial intelligence. North Carolina Medical Journal, 80(4), 220-222.
31. Nilsson, N. J. (1998). Artificial Intelligence: A New Synthesis. Morgan Kaufmann.
32. Orwell, G. (1949). Secker and Warburg.
33. Pham, S. T., and Sampson, P. M. (2022). The development of Artificial intelligence in education: A review in context. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1408-1421.
34. Polyportis, A., and Pahos, N. (2024). Navigating the perils of artificial intelligence: a focused review on ChatGPT and responsible research and innovation. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, 107.
35. Poole, D., Mackworth, A. K., and Goebel, R. (1998). Computacional Intelligence: A Logical Approach. Oxford University Press.
36. Rich, E., and Knight, K. (1991). Artificial Intelligence. McGraw-Hill.
37. Ritchie, S. J., and Tucker-Drop, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 29(8), 1358-1369.
38. Roselli, D., Matthews, J., and Talagala, N. (2019). Managing bias in AI: In Companion Proceedings of the 2019 World Wide Web Conference, (pp. 539-544).
39. Russell, S. J., and Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: a modern approach. Pearson.
40. Schell, B. H. (2014). Internet censorship: A reference handbook. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
41. Shapiro, J. P., and Purpel, D. E. (1993). Critical Social Issues in American Education: Toward the 21^st Century. Longman.
42. Shapiro, J. P., and Purpel, D. E. (2005). Social Issues in American Education. Democracy and Meaning in a Globalized World. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
43. Shapiro, J. P., Sewel, T. E., DuCette, J. P., and Myrick, H. (1997). Socio-Cultural and School factors in achievement: lessons from tuition guarantee programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
44. Shapiro, J. P., and Stefkovich, J. A. (2016). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education. Routledge.
45. Sternberg, R. J., and Salter, W. (1982). Handbook of Human Intelligence. Cambridge University.
46. Starratt, R. J. (1991). Building an ethical school: A theory for practice in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 185-202.
47. Unti, B., and DeRosa, B. (2003). Humane Education: Past, present, and future. In D. J. Salem and A. N. Rowan (Eds.), The State of the animals II, (pp. 27-50). Humane Society Press.
48. Wechsler, D. (1944). The measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.
49. Winston, P. H. (1992). Artificial Intelligence. Addison-Wesley.
50. Wu, T. (2006). The World Trade Law of Censorship and Internet Filtering. Chicago Journal of International Law, 7(1), 263.