Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T00:40:27.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AI in Education – Promise, Peril and a Path Forward

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2025

Matthew Leopold
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

LexisNexis’ Matthew Leopold explains how his team conducted a wide range of interviews with those involved in the legal education system – including librarians, academics, heads of law schools and university leaders – in order to gauge their feelings and thoughts on the impact artificial intelligence (AI) will have, and is having, on the sector. Matthew then goes through the findings, which shows a diverse set of views on AI.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence (AI)academic law librariesuniversities
Type
Main Features
Information
Legal Information Management , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 2024 , pp. 230 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by British and Irish Association of Law Librarians

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Behar-Horenstein, L. S. & Niu, L., 2011. ‘Teaching Critical Thinking Skills In Higher Education: A Review of the Literature’. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(2), pp. 25–42.Google Scholar
de Jager, K. & Brown, C., 2010. ‘The tangled web: investigating academics’ views of plagiarism at the University of Cape Town’. Studies in Higher Education, 35(5), pp. 513–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flavell, J. H., 1979. ‘Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry’. American Psychologist, 34(10), pp. 906–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham-Matheson, L. & Starr, S., 2013. ‘Is it cheating – or learning the craft of writing? Using Turnitin to help students avoid plagiarism’. Research in Learning Technology, Volume 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Center for Academic Integrity, 2021. The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity. [Online] Available at <https://academicintegrity.org/images/pdfs/20019_ICAI-Fundamental-Values_R12.pdf> [Accesed 7 November 2024].+[Accesed+7+November+2024].>Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. & Dean, D., 2004. ‘A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice’. Theory into Practice, 43(4), pp. 268–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pithers, R. & Soden, R., 2000. ‘Critical thinking in education: A review’. Educational Research, 42(3), pp. 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolley, T. A., 2020. Faculty mindset and the adoption of technology for online instruction, Dissertation: Grand Canyon University.Google Scholar
Seirup, H. & Pedhazur Schmelkin, L., 2003. ‘Faculty Perceptions of Academic Dishonesty: A Multidimensional Scaling Analysis’. The Journal of Higher Education , 74(2), pp. 196–209.Google Scholar