MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892807847 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13070954

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Christian Education: Efforts to Minimize the Adverse Effects of Technological Advancements on Student Personal Development

2024· article· en· W6892807847 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Leadership and Innovation
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualitySpiritual intelligencePrayerContext (archaeology)Thematic analysisSpiritual developmentPersonal development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Technological advancements, particularly in artificial intelligence (AI), have significantly transformed various aspects of life, including the education sector. Within the context of Christian religious education, AI presents both unique opportunities and challenges. This study aims to explore how Christian educational institutions can strengthen students' spirituality in the AI era, examining the potential impact of AI on spiritual growth and proposing effective strategies to harness this technology without compromising fundamental spiritual and moral values. The research methodology includes a comprehensive literature review, thematic analysis, and interviews with experts in education, theology, and AI technology. Key findings highlight the importance of ethics in AI usage, emphasizing data privacy protection, avoidance of algorithmic bias, and maintaining personal interaction between teachers and students. Additionally, the study underscores the necessity of balancing technology with traditional spiritual practices and fostering critical thinking skills among students. While AI can enhance access to spiritual resources through prayer applications, virtual Bible studies, and online theology courses, it should not replace fundamental spiritual practices such as prayer and communal worship. Proposed strategies include leveraging AI to strengthen spiritual communities, both virtually and physically, and ensuring that this technological integration supports rather than undermines Christian spiritual values. In conclusion, the integration of AI into Christian education, if approached wisely and aligned with ethical principles and biblical teachings, can support the holistic development of students, encompassing both intellectual and spiritual growth. This approach addresses the challenges posed by AI while also capitalizing on its potential to enrich and deepen students' spiritual lives in an increasingly digital world.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it