Ethics of artificial intelligence use: challenges and good practices for educational development in Ecuador
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64747/b03qch53Keywords:
AI ethics, learning analytics, human oversight, educational equity, upper‑secondary educationAbstract
This study examines the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in upper‑secondary schools (BGU) in Tarqui Parish, Guayaquil, through applied ethics and education policy. Over one semester, an ethical‑governance package—privacy‑by‑design, educational algorithmic impact assessment (EIA‑E), meaningful human oversight, transparency, and critical AI literacy—was deployed in Mathematics and Language classrooms. A mixed quasi‑experimental design combined difference‑in‑differences with multilevel models and an explanatory qualitative component. The sample comprised 96 classrooms (n = 2,984 students), with baseline anchored to national standardized microdata. Findings show moderate gains in achievement (0.22 SD in Mathematics; 0.17 SD in Language), narrower socioeconomic gaps (up to 0.20 SD in Mathematics), and compliance with ethical indicators (privacy incidents <1/1000 sessions; parity ≥0.91). Optimal weekly use ranged between 90–130 minutes, with diminishing returns beyond ~150 minutes. Connectivity shaped effect sizes, favoring stable links. Qualitative evidence indicated higher trust when transparency dashboards and override protocols were in place. We conclude that ethical governance, combined with instructional design and teacher training in critical AI literacy, enhances AI’s pedagogical value while preventing unintended distributive effects. We recommend national guidelines for EIA‑E, responsible public procurement, and school‑level digital‑ethics committees, alongside longitudinal studies and cluster trials to strengthen inference and scalability
References
Adiguzel, T., Doğan, A., & Özkan, E. (2023). Revolutionizing education with AI: Exploring the transformative potential of ChatGPT. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(3), ep422. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13152
Austin, P. C. (2011). Optimal caliper widths for propensity‐score matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10(2), 150–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.433
Baker, R. S. (2022). Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(4), 901–902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00285-9
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
Cameron, A. C., & Miller, D. L. (2015). A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. Journal of Human Resources, 50(2), 317–372. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.50.2.317
Dávila, M. R., Moreno, D. K., Cajas, C. A., Guzmán, J. C., & Miranda, S. (2023). Estrategias inclusivas con tecnologías digitales en educación media en Ecuador. Horizonte Científico, 13(25), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.64747/9epagq94
Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2017). Education technology: An evidence-based review. NBER Working Paper Series (No. 23744). https://doi.org/10.3386/w23744
Fjeld, J., Achten, N., Hilligoss, H., Nagy, A., & Srikumar, M. (2020). Principled artificial intelligence: Mapping consensus in ethical and rights-based approaches to principles for AI. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3518482
Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.8cd550d1
Gouseti, A., Livingstone, S., & Veteška, J. (2024). Towards a new ethics of AI in K–12 education: From concerns to constructive principles. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 33(5), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2024.2428601
Habibi, A., Muhaimin, M., Danibao, B. K., Wibowo, Y. G., Wahyuni, S., & Octavia, A. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education learning: Acceptance and use. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100190
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Stadler, M., … Weller, J. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kizilcec, R. F., & Lee, H.-S. (2022). Algorithmic fairness in education. En S. A. Scherer & K. D’Mello (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of computing education research (pp. 247–274). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429329067-10
Lin, L., & Aloe, A. M. (2021). Evaluation of various estimators for standardized mean difference in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 40(2), 403–426. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.8781
Meyer, J. G., Urbanowicz, R. J., Martin, P. C. N., O’Connor, K., Li, R., & Peng, P.-C. (2023). ChatGPT and large language models in academia: Opportunities and challenges. BioData Mining, 16(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13040-023-00339-9
Morales Echeverría, D. A., Morales Alarcón, F. P., Cajamarca Altamirano, E. E., & Intriago Usca, F. J. (2024). La protección de datos personales en Ecuador: Evolución legislativa y comparación regional. Perspectivas Sociales y Administrativas, 2(2), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.61347/psa.v2i2.70
OECD. (2023). The state of implementation of the OECD AI Principles four years on (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers No. 3). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/835641c9-en
OECD. (2024). Explanatory memorandum on the updated OECD definition of an AI system (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers No. 8). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/623da898-en
Osorno Hernández, D., Vivas Torres, T. D., & Beltrán García, I. D. (2024). Marco de ética de la IA en educación: Desarrollo del pensamiento crítico y meta-cognición. Horizonte Científico, 14(27), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.64747/yk2urw42
Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2015). Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning (RR-1365-BMGF). RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1365
Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Yang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2022). Student-centered learning analytics: A review of five years of literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00326-w
UNESCO. (2023). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in education—A tool on whose terms? UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.54676/UZQV8501
Zawacki‑Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education—Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Henry Darío Bravo Soria, Carlos Fabricio Brito Solórzano, Carlos Eduardo Cevallos Martínez, Emilia Trinidad Guerra Balseca (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
