The article argues that navigating AI in students as partners practice requires guiding principles to preserve pedagogical trust¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The article argues that students as partners practice needs explicit guiding principles for navigating artificial intelligence so that pedagogical trust is preserved. → Matthews 2025

Evidence¶

Matthews 2025¶

Matthews, K. E. (2025). Five guiding principles for navigating artificial intelligence in students as partners practice to preserve pedagogical trust: Navigating artificial intelligence in students as partners practice. International Journal for Students as Partners, 9(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v9i2.6871

q1 · i? · theoretical · r2

Theoretical argument stated in the editorial's title and framing: five principles are offered as the means of "navigating artificial intelligence in students as partners practice" so as to preserve pedagogical trust. The article supplies this as an argument rather than a tested result.

"Five guiding principles for navigating artificial intelligence in students as partners practice to preserve pedagogical trust"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• AI hallucination can be turned into a pedagogical resource by making verification and collaborative fact evaluation integral to AI-supported learning — related
• The review reports that AI detection tools disproportionately flag multilingual writers, which the authors frame as digital structural violence — related
• Algorithmic empathy is culturally fragile: emotional inference errors in socio-emotional AI can invalidate teachers' experiences, so systems require local validation and participatory design — related
• Generative AI weakens the evidentiary relation between assessment artifacts and learner capacity, so institutions must assess the learner's accountable relation to AI-mediated work — related