Authored by Elisabetta Lando, Miranda Melcher and Dom Pates from City St George's, University of London and originally posted here.
Summary
Smart glasses powered by AI and AR are gaining renewed interest in education, with potential for hands-free, guided, and immersive learning. City St George’s educational technologists ponder if the best use of this technology should be in targeted use cases only and even used Ms co-pilot to help produce this blog.
What happens when wearable AI enters the classroom? Smart glasses are not new. However, recent developments in lighter devices, AI integration and augmented reality (AR) overlays have re-sparked an interest in their educational use. Jisc, an organisation that supports digital innovation in higher and further education and research, has recently published case studies showing that these tools could support hands‑free learning, real-time guidance, and immersive demonstrations, particularly in practical or vocational contexts. [1]
A group of City St George’s educational technologists therefore decided to take a moment and explore both the opportunities and limitations of smart glasses for teaching and learning in the City St George’s context. Our discussion broadly agreed that smart glasses may not transform all teaching, but they could add value in very specific, well-designed use cases.
As a further experiment with technology, this blog post was put together by creating a live transcript of the conversation held on MS Teams and then made into a draft blogpost using MS Copilot. The draft was then revised by the educational technologists who had the discussion.
Accessible, hands-free, and interactive learning
The most obvious benefits of this technology would be enhancing accessibility and inclusion. Research suggests that some glasses can enable text-to-speech, translation, and possibly even adaptive content delivery, thus improving access for students with complex and diverse needs. [2] Yet some of us felt that this technology can work for accessibility only if it is highly individualised. What works for one student may not work for another, reinforcing the need for personalized configurations rather than a standardised solution; something that takes a considerable amount of time and effort.
Another clear benefit that we as a group discussed was the hands-free nature of wearable devices. In laboratory, clinical, or technical settings, being able to access information without handling a device could reduce disruption during practical work. Research in medical education has shown that smart glasses can enhance procedural training and enable real-time observation of complex tasks, such as surgery.[3]
Research on AR in education has shown that such immersive environments can increase engagement, collaboration and knowledge retention, especially when students actively interact with content.[4] This could be applicable for smart glasses. For instance, in our discussion, someone thought of a scenario where computer science students wear glasses and see visual references on how to debug code or real-time conceptual overlays to support learning in computing and STEM disciplines.
Key challenges and concerns
Despite our discussion, we asked ourselves whether constant access to additional information, visual or auditory, might hinder concentration, resulting in anxiety and confusion. Could an “always-on assistant”, even if with the voice of Judy Dench,[5] necessarily support learning? Furthermore, mirroring Arantes and Welshman, in their article in the Times Higher education,[6] perhaps the most significant concern is that of privacy. Smart glasses often include cameras, microphones, and sensors raising questions about covert recording in classrooms. Indeed, research highlights that such devices can collect real-time personal and biometric data, potentially infringing privacy and creating a “surveillance environment.”[7] As noted in our discussion, unlike smartphones, smart glasses are less visible as recording devices, making consent and awareness a much more complex affair.[8]
For education, another particularly pertinent question we discussed was the implications of smart glasses for assessment. Points that were put forward included: students who may need glasses to see yet those same glasses could provide AI-assisted answers in real time; this raises difficult questions. How do we ensure fairness in exams? Can “offline” or restricted modes be enforced? We concluded that, together with generative AI, smart glasses may accelerate the move away from traditional closed-book exams.
Equity was another concern. High-quality smart glasses remain expensive and unevenly available, risking further inequality. Introducing another costly device could deepen, rather than reduce, these divides.
No comments:
Post a Comment