教育科技生成式AI文献综述批判性评估

Critique this educational technology literature review for generative AI coverage gaps and methodological rigor issues that could mislead practitioners. Identify four flaws: overreliance on vendor-funded studies without conflict-of-interest disclosure, omission of critical perspectives on labor displacement and teacher deskilling in education, superficial treatment of bias issues limited to demographic representation without examining epistemic justice concerns about whose knowledge gets encoded, and chronological organization obscuring conceptual relationships and theoretical tensions between studies. Suggest three remediations: conflict-of-interest screening protocol for included studies with funding source transparency requirements, inclusion criteria mandating diverse epistemological perspectives including Indigenous and Global South knowledge systems, and concept-mapping synthesis approach replacing chronological narrative to reveal theoretical clusters and contradictions. Evaluate using an epistemic justice framework scoring representation diversity (1-5), power analysis depth (1-5), solution pluralism (1-5), and theoretical coherence (1-5). Respond in bullet points. Constraints: Keep it under 350 words; Use clear section headings; Include exactly three key takeaways.