I think both articles are equally persuasive and make good points about why you should and shouldn't use A.I. I agree that it can't just be ignored and shut away by education institutions and that it does bring about many benefits to both learners and educators. While it should be embraced, rules and regulations need to be followed about its use. I don't think institutions and educators have a full understanding of what it can do and how it can be utilised at the moment and there are too many grey areas around its use. 

Is there anything obviously missing from either article? You may find it useful to think back to the discussion of evaluating research reports in the previous step.

In the first article arguing against, this seems to be more emotive and lacks any reference to research, analysis or views from other educators/learners.

Does either article convince you that the authors are correct? If so, which evidence convinced you?

I think both authors give good arguments in different ways. Both are equally persuasive. The first is more emotive and may play on the fear around technology and its impact on the world and job roles. The second uses research and the view of others to argue that its use is inevitable and institutions and educators need to prepare and adapt accordingly.

If you have already made a decision about the use of generative AI in your context, which evidence did you draw on when making that decision?

I'm 50/05 with a sway towards the use of AI is inevitable and it needs to be embraced.