Editor’s note: Watch “From China’s Beauty to an NENU Lecture,” a short video of Viktor Wang’s journey through China and to Northeast Normal University, site of his presentation on education, innovation and the influence of artificial intelligence.
Artificial intelligence can draft an argument, test a theory and produce an answer in seconds. But for Viktor Wang, the more consequential question is what happens after the machine responds.
Who verifies the information? Who decides whether the answer is useful or fair? And who remains responsible for the work?
Those questions shaped Wang’s invited lecture at Northeast Normal University in Changchun, China, where the California State University, San Bernardino professor presented a framework for understanding AI’s growing role in higher education.
Wang, a professor in CSUSB’s James R. Watson and Judy Rodriguez Watson College of Education, discussed the CSU’s systemwide investment in artificial intelligence, including an initial $16.9 million commitment to expand access to ChatGPT Edu and related resources. He also described the system’s subsequent three-year, $39 million commitment to continue that access.
The figures attracted attention. But Wang said access to powerful technology is only the beginning. The harder task is establishing how faculty members and students should use AI without surrendering judgment, academic responsibility or intellectual ownership.
His framework begins with three prepositions: learning from technology, learning with technology and learning about technology.
- Learning “from” technology treats it as a tutor.
- Learning “with” technology uses it as an intellectual tool.
- Learning “about” technology makes AI itself an object of study, including its capabilities, assumptions and limits.
A student who accepts an AI-generated answer, Wang explained, is engaged in a fundamentally different activity from one who uses AI to challenge an argument, identify weaknesses, explore alternatives and independently verify the result.
He paired the three prepositions with four adverbs: critically, responsibly, ethically and flexibly.
- Critical use requires questioning outputs and checking evidence.
- Responsible use includes protecting privacy, acknowledging AI assistance when appropriate and accepting accountability for the final product.
- Ethical use asks who benefits, who may be harmed and whether efficiency comes at the expense of fairness or human dignity.
- Flexibility recognizes that students need different kinds of support.
Some may require structured guidance and frequent feedback. As their skills grow, they should assume greater independence while continuing to evaluate and revise AI-assisted work.
Wang connected the framework to andragogy, the study and practice of adult learning. In that tradition, students and teachers share responsibility for shaping educational goals, methods and evidence of achievement.
“Everyone programs,” his presentation stated.
The phrase is less about writing computer code than about making deliberate choices. Faculty program teaching. Students program learning. Scholars program research. Academic communities help program governance.
AI can extend each participant’s capacity, Wang said, but it cannot assume responsibility for the decisions that follow.
That principle applies to scholarly writing, too. AI may suggest an outline, clarify a passage, identify a gap or produce a counterargument. The writer must still decide what to keep, verify claims and citations, and own the argument.
“AI suggests; you decide,” Wang’s presentation emphasized.
The ideas he carried to China grew from his teaching, research and scholarship at CSUSB, where his work links artificial intelligence, adult learning, educational technology and human-centered education.
Following the China visit, Wang travelled to Singapore for an invited academic engagement involving adult learning and workforce education.