Evolution of AI Literacy, Modality, and Agency in Art Education Curriculum
​
Michael G. Lyon
Dr. Richard Siegesmund
​
Northern Illinois University
December 5th, 2023
More knowledge and understanding of the history and development of AI technology and how it plays an authentic role in the art classroom are needed. Educators at all levels are questioning how to embrace the uses and agency of AI technology and how to include this emerging technological resource in their curriculum in an authentic way. This reading seeks to establish a brief history of current trends in the emerging field of AI technology and contribute a clear understanding of how art educators at all levels could authentically embrace the modality of AI technology in the art classroom.
AI technology changes the authorship and authenticity of derived work when used in artmaking if not disclosed to a degree. I declare and am compelled to keep integrity and transparency at the forefront, and no AI has been used in research or writing of the following dialogue. It is why I also feel compelled to make this specific designation and must acknowledge and disclose that I question others when reading work, viewing artwork, and involving my human experience alongside others. In hopes of clarifying why we should and can embrace AI technology, I recognize the difficulties in providing human vs. non-human involvement in authorship and to what degree an individual may feel uncomfortable embracing the technology should be disclosed. Historically, AI has not been adopted, or like cheating in baseball history, deemed by an asterisk, revealed in the use, production, or creative work when it should have. My goal is to embrace AI technology in the classroom while keeping the human condition or spirit fully engaged with the utmost integrity in work and recognizing the benefits of AI. No small singular feat I alone seek solutions for as other scholars simultaneously try to embrace and acknowledge the difference.
​
History
​
In the last half-decade, countless articles have highlighted AI's significance and power to create and revolutionize art making, besides producing art itself. As technology exponentially increases in advancement, and students/society embraces opportunities to utilize it, authenticity is questioned as to its origins. As early as the 1980s, AI technology was developed to work for us instead, even in the sense of the software itself. Anything made by humans can be considered art, but software design, even as students in an art department limited to creative code, constitutes a much more cynical appreciation. (Knochel, 2018) The aesthetic of this type of work can and will be admired, but it belongs solely to those who create it, even if shared freely with others. As for teachers, How and Hung state, “STEAM practitioners must be educated so that they would be able to recognize opportunities in which AI could be applied in the domains they are interested in, where they can transform human-centric ideas into technical inputs that the AI technology can understand” (2019).
​
How has AI grown since? By the inclusion of AI in work, our ability to know when we can remain the original author of the work and then apply it into our curriculum alongside traditional art making or curriculum as teachers. How do we define the distinct point of human manipulation to provide AI input to become an original and unique expression? I also recognize that one must realize the term “AI literacy,” which is often discussed as having multiple meanings of either teaching AI, learning it, and then utilizing it in actual work in contemporary scholarly writing (Somasundaram, Latha, & Pandian, 2020). The massive amount of Big Data being collected and studied on AI usage, software available to recreate human interaction, and disclosure of the ability for unbiased performance are still greatly underway. I am personally connected to this, as I feel others should be, because I also understand the significance of our visual culture on us throughout history, individually and socially. Now well-known, in the implication of influence, are “Several proponents of an art education informed by (and imbued with) visual culture have successfully demonstrated that the visual -is inextricably linked to ongoing social, political, psychological, and cultural struggles (Darts, 2004). Our visual culture affects us on even a psychobiological level, individually and socially, influencing us, encouraging response and opinion, and left to its own devices, has a massive implication to know more than what is humanly possible. AI introduces the very notion of implication that is capable beyond human ability. I think of Nazi propaganda as a minimal example of the influence and historical example of visual culture persuasion as reference and importance, besides the incredible power of all other media. Though AI tech is comprehensively more capable of thoroughly embracing a much larger audience than ever, those who govern and maintain authenticity have become much more important than in the past.
​
Should this be left ungoverned or unrecognized, I wish to investigate the data needed to ensure human authenticity and influence from non-human resources to refrain from intervening or becoming normalized to distract us from our authenticity and creativity. So should the curriculum in the classroom. Historically, only a tiny sampling of legal precedents has been established to pave a path less resistant for the technology to be embraced properly.
​
Trends
​
Plugging a few words into a program that produces visual or written work does not constitute authenticity by the user or the work. Not having the capability to know whether work has had AI influence as an audience is also a concern. The author is responsible for disclosing this information if one has utilized AI or changed it to an undisclosed degree at an undisclosed point, in which only they feel the work then belongs to them. This goes far beyond more critical than just using ChatGPT in our culture. Disruptive and problematic in the creative arts and promoting lessons of morality and ethics in the curriculum has become a focus more than ever. The scholarly community has had this focus and is slowly recognizing that we can embrace other aspects of the technology to use alongside us as we keep a raised eyebrow on authenticity. We need not limit ourselves entirely to technology as we recognize other benefits. Hutson and Robertson agree, “The scholarly community has been instead focused on the theoretical and aesthetic implications of the disruption caused by this emerging technology” (2023). Curriculum development AI software recognizes a lesson’s potentiality and success rates regarding development more precisely than we have been capable of before. Even using Bloom's Taxonomy, specific to cognitive development, current tech is undergoing constant development with results that can be utilized, though still at an early developmental stage. The AI is designed upfront to embrace Bloom’s Taxonomy in hopes of developing and evolving human interaction more specifically. Our understanding of this is already limited as veteran and preservice teachers alike. This is further developed and explained as “The reason why we adopted the Bloom architecture is that AI literacy is novice to educators and a classification of levels of cognitive processes has not yet been developed in the context of AI learning” (Ng, Leung, Chu, & Qiao, 2021). It is just the beginning and then also helps design, with human teacher auditing, lesson plans more appropriate more specifically to an audience of learners than ever before. Encouraging this type of usage of AI could boost acceptance and implementation in classrooms and the art field.
​
Asking students to use any AI in the classroom to assist themselves with AI technology must also designate actual authorship and continue a discussion of authenticity while in the act. In this implementation in the classroom, “Art curriculum standards request teachers to use the Internet and new media in fine art teaching flexibly, enrich the fine art classroom, and broaden students’ thinking by using the Internet resources” (Rong, Lian, & Tang, 2022). The resource modality of AI use can then be established, and authentic design can be benchmarked with its use. Planting this associative learning process and interweaving AI suggestions and design, into a student’s original thought process can propagate new and exciting work not possible before authentic to human design. Still, it must have the ability to be monitored and justly assessed after AI’s involvement.
​
Another trend in AI usage has become using AI itself in defining visual aesthetics, which can assist us in evaluating work in the art classroom. Having an unbiased platform established first, “Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques have successfully demonstrated reliable outcomes for assessing visual aesthetics” (Areeb, Imam, Fatima, Nadeem, 2021). Using this technology, one can implement, at minimum, expected results, including metaphor comparison found in work used significantly in art history and describing an artist's intention. Knowing this, what is produced by artists/AI in marketing and the incredible influence art has upon individuals and society profoundly justifies important moderation and acknowledgment that I question when viewing anything as others should. Knowing whether I am specifically targeted to have an emotional response from an author/artist is valuable and should be discussed when I view work. Knowing this is half the battle and concerned others do not know the significance of this vital influence upon us all. How, when, where, and with what purpose, and questioning authenticity is mandatory before accepting one’s creativity in delivering a message in artwork. Even though AI tech can assess our common examples by defining and “reading” artwork, writing, and musical messages as artists/creators have achieved in the past, it is also known that AI can entirely create independently. Keeping ourselves engaged as educators in this process ensures we can intervene and eliminate students'/society’s use of AI as their work when, in fact, it is not. Then, as a default, creative approaches utilizing more digital artmaking with human involvement become more significant as they provide benchmarking and the ability to police authentic work.
​
Nevertheless, this means more computer design in the art curriculum, adding even more significance to understanding the ethical and moral obligations we must outline in the future for authenticity to occur. Dr. Aron Knochel shows the significance of his research: “Arguing for art educators to learn how to program software and manipulate hardware appears in the art education literature as early as the 1980s when Linda Ettinger (1988) envisioned a future when art students would create “new media” by developing their software” (2015) Again, early recognition of these facts has been known. Still, the significance and implementation of hardware and software design have not crossed over into art curricula until recently, and this should be the reason for this more than ever. We have made strides to embrace AI technology. Still, the software and hardware have not been embraced in lesson planning in the art community, with authenticity concerns as we move forward.
​
Future
​
As copyright protection filters, AI detection, and software still need to be developed to ensure honest authorship, they are often not developed promptly. After creative work has been done, and we realize protection and authenticity are questioned, teachers must realize the significance of this, especially as it pertains to our visual culture's influence in standard social media, fine arts, and the business world. Knowing we must embrace the technology to assist, moderate, and investigate potential use is just the icing on a capability cake that must be eaten to ensure that human creativity remains intact in originality and exploration. Turning science fiction into science facts will remain as pertinent as ever. Still, it will also be guided by human ingenuity and integrity with purpose rather than by tech itself or misaligned inauthentically. Only we, as art educators, collaborating with other fields, can pioneer this assessment. Though we can rely on AI to help guide us, we must ensure human involvement is authentic in all work and prove that it is crafted that way.
​
-AI can play a positive role in art education by actively addressing privacy protection, reliability, and educational engagement. Collaboration among educational institutions, educators, and technology developers is pivotal in realizing this vision, promoting the sustainable development and practical application of AI in art education (Ke, M. F. (2023).
​
AI use in social media is rampant and must be disclosed and realized in art education for our youth. Distorted information and culture jamming are used constantly and directly correlate to multiple socioemotional and individual perceptions misguiding our youth. Significant research exists already on the known influence of gender, race, religion, and social issues targeted inappropriately to gain audiences by marketing company tactics. These, of course, include significant body image desperation, biased race differences, political party affiliation, and rewriting historical facts when constantly bombarded with misinformation. This is likely also known by AI influencers, besides being able to “generate” the influencers online wholly for anyone’s agenda. For example, on an educational front, “Culture jamming is a new effective way to change share aspirations, express ideas, or criticize political issues or other forms of political associations” (Tibuta, 2016) is commonly used. Used in retaliation also by advertising and media more than most realize, AI utilizes the same techniques psychologically presenting problems we now know we must address more neutrally, usually too late, as research shows more connection in how the brain develops and is influenced. One can imagine the power of AI’s influence, as even Paulo Freire contends oppression, “that the dominant elite will never willingly allow the oppressed to escape their subjugation and enjoy unhindered access to power and material goods” (1968). Having such information and influence over us or using AI as an agency in education, humankind must manage and embrace our freedom of expression in its purest state alongside what we are only provided and discover in research. We often are not privy to advancements in AI technology until we find out about new forms invented after the fact. As we realize the cognitive ability of AI has already been influencing aesthetic and emotional responses in media, art educators have become more intertwined in research with psychology and sociology more importantly than ever.
​
Designating this relationship and establishing a thorough understanding of using AI in art classrooms becomes more vital than ever to protect the human condition. Authentic creativity is challenged and establishes dynamic tension with what we learn of the influence of the visual world around us found in other fields, such as psychology and sociology, as AI is injected into any form of making. Knowing, “We can apply AI and VR technology as the teaching means, adopt deep learning model as the teaching method, and combine technology with teaching content to enrich presentational forms and enhance image memory for students” (Rong, Lian, & Tang, (2022) we can still utilize the tech while knowing its benefit while simultaneously acknowledge its influence upon us only if we are informed before its authenticity and origin.
Conclusion
​
Our visual culture continues to grow in application relevance and influences individuality and social and cultural norms. The implication of AI’s influence is profound alongside recent developments in how aesthetics interacts with human cognition development in psychological research; therefore, AI continually has significant implications for its effect on society. Acknowledgment and understanding of these influences must occur alongside its use in any curriculum. However, perhaps in the art curriculum, the safest workspaces are maintained for authentic creation, genuine in the origin of the human condition, to develop new thinking based on sole human ingenuity.
​
Accessing our history of AI, researching, and developing hardware and software to assist human creativity, and implementing it into the curriculum is best done in an informed manner and with a healthy sense of paranoia and authenticity. Knowing this, as we utilize more of the technology in the classroom, and importantly even develop more of it in the art classroom to enhance our ability to ensure human interaction for authenticity, we can deduct that technology becomes more of an ally, keeping it in check with our integrity as Teachers. The need to declare authenticity in our work void of AI becomes more important than declaring AI is used in manufacturing work. To define and hold accountable ingenuity, “The technology of Artificial Intelligence (AI) back propagation method can be effectively used to achieve this” (Somasundaram, Lath, & Pandian, 2020). Again, knowing is just half the battle in authenticity, ingenuity, and implication of the knowledge of AI literacy itself and its application and involvement in modern-day society. With its massive influence on our understanding of visual culture, we must continue AI inclusion in the classroom as a matter of self-defense. If used wisely, with the integrity of the human condition’s originality, working alongside the agency of AI can only be fully harnessed in advancement to eliminate biased oppression or influence. Knowing this significant implication and discovery of continued alliances, only the art field can evolve.
​
The world we live in and understanding visual culture’s influence is just newly being developed and recognized across multiple platforms of disciplines significantly more than ever before. As we become much more cognizant of visual imagery’s effect on us psychologically and socially, it becomes more important to realize the origin of images and the creation of any human or non-human work. Siegesmund and Freedman highlight Berger In Visual Methods of Inquiry also has noticed over 5000 educational research titles, published in more than 20 journals over ten years, recognized and utilize the significant impact of visual image upon society and individuals understanding that we use imagery only to explain methodology and reason itself thoroughly. Knowing the significance of social science research and stating,” Using visual methods, researchers can enable new types of inquiry, answer questions that could not be investigated before, and study conditions and occurrences that cannot be studied adequately through other methods,” is true. (Freedman, Siegesmund 2023) The importance of images of human origin becomes much more significant. We, as art educators, rarely consider scientific empirical research. However, we know how vital visual imagery is depicted in the history of past documents, but how biased, influenced, and improperly dictated reality is always worth exploring. As teachers, we have faith in the significance of understanding pursuing creativity as a form of self-exploration and, as to the reasons why this becomes more understood and significant in development and influence in other fields such as sociology and psychology, it becomes more important than ever to delineate a separation of origin, whether human or not, in the classroom. AI tech can keep our research clean, unbiased, and solely of human origin if used honestly and with complete integrity. However, to ensure results and deduction of new evidence, having possible influence utilizing AI alongside, we should remain healthily paranoid or highly critical of our detailed discoveries. We must maintain a solid fine line as we take the time to learn more about the significance of what we research. As powerful as we know, art, art curriculum, and or visual culture is in our classrooms as we still embrace the long-term alliance, we must maintain to know about AI technology itself. Minding the gap in AI capability and human authorship will ensure we utilize the benefits of AI while keeping the human spirit safely guarded in our advancement and exploration as we learn even more about ourselves in the future. It all starts in the classroom.
References
​
Areeb, Q. M., Imam, R., Fatima, N., & Nadeem, M. (2021, October). AI art critic: Artistic classification of poster images using neural networks. In 2021 International Conference on Data Analytics for Business and Industry (ICDABI) (pp. 37-41). IEEE.
Carducci, V. (2006). Culture jamming: A sociological perspective. Journal of Consumer Culture, 6(1), 116-138.
Chung, S. K., & Kirby, M. S. (2009). Media literacy art education: Logos, culture jamming, and activism. Art education, 62(1), 34-39.
Darts, D. (2004). Visual culture jam: Art, pedagogy, and creative resistance. Studies in Art Education, 45(4), 313-327.
DeLaure, M., & Fink, M. (Eds.). (2017). Culture jamming: Activism and the art of cultural resistance. NYU Press.
Freedman, K., & Siegesmund, R. (2023). Visual methods of inquiry: Images as research. Taylor & Francis.
Freire, P. (2020). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In Toward a sociology of education (pp. 374-386). Routledge.
How, M. L., & Hung, W. L. D. (2019). Educing AI-thinking in science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education. Education Sciences, 9(3), 184.
Hutson, J., & Robertson, B. (2023). A Matter of Perspective: A Case Study in the Use of AI-Generative Art in the Drawing Classroom. The International Journal of New Media, Technology and the Arts, 18(1), 17.
Ke, M. F. (2023). Applications and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the Future of Art Education. Pacific International Journal, 6(3), 61-65.
Knochel, A. D. (2018). Drawing Together and Falling Apart. Parallax, 24(3), 295-305.
Knochel, A. D. (2018). An object-oriented curriculum theory for STEAM: Boundary shifters, materiality and per (form) ing 3D thinking. International Journal of Education Through Art, 14(1), 35-48.
Knochel, A. D., & Patton, R. M. (2015). If art education, then critical digital making: Computational thinking and creative code. Studies in Art Education, 57(1), 21-38.
Mazzone, M., & Elgammal, A. (2019, February). Art, creativity, and the potential of artificial intelligence. In Arts (Vol. 8, No. 1, p. 26). MDPI.
Moga, E., Burger, K., Hetland, L., & Winner, E. (2000). Does studying the arts engender creative thinking? Evidence for near but not far transfer. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/4), 91-104.
Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, S. K. W., & Qiao, M. S. (2021). Conceptualizing AI literacy: An exploratory review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100041.
Rong, Q., Lian, Q., & Tang, T. (2022). Research on the Influence of AI and VR Technology on Students’ Concentration and Creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 767689.
Sandlin, J. A., & Milam, J. L. (2008). “Mixing pop (culture) and politics”: Cultural resistance, culture jamming, and anti-consumption activism as critical public pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(3), 323-350.
Somasundaram, M., Latha, P., & Pandian, S. S. (2020). Curriculum design using artificial intelligence (AI) back propagation method. Procedia Computer Science, 172, 134-138.
Triputra, P., & Sugita, F. (2016). Culture Jamming Phenomenon in Politics (The Jokowi’s Memes in TIME Publication’s Cover and TokoBagus. com Advertisement). Journal of US-China Public Administration, 13(6), 386-396.