This research describes the experiences of co-designing a technology-enhanced online Pharmacy course and how the Technology Enhanced Learning Accreditation Standards (TELAS) informed the design and development of a fit-for-purpose online course. This study used Gibb’s reflective model and Driscoll’s constructivist learning theory to unpack and align the processes in the development of the course. Finally, we have discussed the broader implications of the TELAS framework to online courses not only as a reflective tool but as an opportunity to inform future pedagogical practices, course improvements, validations and application of TELAS in practice.
{"title":"Co-designing the first online pharmacy course with the technology-enhanced learning accreditation standards (TELAS) as a reflective tool","authors":"Zablon Pingo, Heather Volk, Seb Dianati","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v6i2.163","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v6i2.163","url":null,"abstract":"This research describes the experiences of co-designing a technology-enhanced online Pharmacy course and how the Technology Enhanced Learning Accreditation Standards (TELAS) informed the design and development of a fit-for-purpose online course. This study used Gibb’s reflective model and Driscoll’s constructivist learning theory to unpack and align the processes in the development of the course. Finally, we have discussed the broader implications of the TELAS framework to online courses not only as a reflective tool but as an opportunity to inform future pedagogical practices, course improvements, validations and application of TELAS in practice.","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"35 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140245014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Within educational scholarship, and in particular technology-enhanced learning research, the ‘enactivist’ conception of cognition has been steadily gaining in prominence over the past few decades (Begg, 2002; Leonard, 2020). Enactivism can be defined as a philosophical proposition contending that cognition emerges by way of active interplay between an organism and its context. Enactive theory sees that organisms create experiences and understandings through their actions and are not passive receivers of input from an environment. They are ‘actors,’ such that what they experience is shaped by how they act (Varela et al., 1991). Enactivist understandings of learning see education as emergent processes in which ‘knowing’ for an organism stems from, and is embedded in, complex systems of relations between individuals and how they influence and are influenced by cultural contexts. These in turn are also influenced by, and influence environmental circumstances (Begg, 2002). Concerning educational technology (edtech), enactivist approaches have gained attention due to this cognitive position being based upon circular forms of influence, in which tools used, environments, social interactions and more, all contribute to cognition occurring (Author 2, 2021). Additionally, indigenous epistemologies and worldviews are also being looked to by many within edtech research, to define and conceptualise learning technology in more ecological, embodied, and co-relational ways (Hradsky, 2023; Meighan, 2022; Reedy, 2019). Indigenous worldviews offer more interconnected, ecological, and systems-oriented ways of viewing education and edtech, connecting to circular enactivist positions. Indigenous worldviews and enactivism relate in that both are interconnected and holistic viewpoints, which see less separation between individuals, other beings, environments, and ‘the world.’ This is important, as in a world full of ‘wicked’ socio-ecological problems, bridges need to be built between ecological and relational indigenous viewpoints, and traditional western science and philosophy (reductionist and rationalistic) (Authors, 2021). In this presentation, we posit that there are potential unexplored links between enactivist educational approaches which utilise technology (such as XR interventions. See: Author 2, 2020, Author 1, 2018; Author 1, 2021), and indigenous approaches and philosophies of technology enhanced learning (Authors, 2022). Such contemporary projects which contribute to this conversation include O-Tu-Kapua (Author 2, 2017), Kōrimurimu (Author 1, 2018) and Pipi’s World (Author 2, 2021; Author 2, 2019). In particular, Kōrimurimu (2018) fostered an educational ‘ecosystem’ in which students could engage and interact with the learning using a variety of different technologies, approaches, and through stimulation of different senses. Embodied and holistic methods were utilised to stimulate learning in not purely rationalistic/cognitive ways. These approaches tied bo
{"title":"Connecting enaction and indigenous epistemologies in technology-enhanced learning","authors":"James Smith-Harvey, Claudio Aguayo","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.170","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.170","url":null,"abstract":"Within educational scholarship, and in particular technology-enhanced learning research, the ‘enactivist’ conception of cognition has been steadily gaining in prominence over the past few decades (Begg, 2002; Leonard, 2020). Enactivism can be defined as a philosophical proposition contending that cognition emerges by way of active interplay between an organism and its context. Enactive theory sees that organisms create experiences and understandings through their actions and are not passive receivers of input from an environment. They are ‘actors,’ such that what they experience is shaped by how they act (Varela et al., 1991). Enactivist understandings of learning see education as emergent processes in which ‘knowing’ for an organism stems from, and is embedded in, complex systems of relations between individuals and how they influence and are influenced by cultural contexts. These in turn are also influenced by, and influence environmental circumstances (Begg, 2002). Concerning educational technology (edtech), enactivist approaches have gained attention due to this cognitive position being based upon circular forms of influence, in which tools used, environments, social interactions and more, all contribute to cognition occurring (Author 2, 2021). Additionally, indigenous epistemologies and worldviews are also being looked to by many within edtech research, to define and conceptualise learning technology in more ecological, embodied, and co-relational ways (Hradsky, 2023; Meighan, 2022; Reedy, 2019). Indigenous worldviews offer more interconnected, ecological, and systems-oriented ways of viewing education and edtech, connecting to circular enactivist positions. Indigenous worldviews and enactivism relate in that both are interconnected and holistic viewpoints, which see less separation between individuals, other beings, environments, and ‘the world.’ This is important, as in a world full of ‘wicked’ socio-ecological problems, bridges need to be built between ecological and relational indigenous viewpoints, and traditional western science and philosophy (reductionist and rationalistic) (Authors, 2021). In this presentation, we posit that there are potential unexplored links between enactivist educational approaches which utilise technology (such as XR interventions. See: Author 2, 2020, Author 1, 2018; Author 1, 2021), and indigenous approaches and philosophies of technology enhanced learning (Authors, 2022). Such contemporary projects which contribute to this conversation include O-Tu-Kapua (Author 2, 2017), Kōrimurimu (Author 1, 2018) and Pipi’s World (Author 2, 2021; Author 2, 2019). In particular, Kōrimurimu (2018) fostered an educational ‘ecosystem’ in which students could engage and interact with the learning using a variety of different technologies, approaches, and through stimulation of different senses. Embodied and holistic methods were utilised to stimulate learning in not purely rationalistic/cognitive ways. These approaches tied bo","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"11 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140244330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What role can generative AI have an art and design education? Given that we are in a year of change as open-source Open AI systems shift how we teach, learn, and assess in times of question-answering chatbot and personal assistance tools. Applying a post-human approach (Blaikie, et al, 2020) to education might help us rethink pedagogy (Wessels, et al, 2022), knowledge creation and scholarly publication for knowledge sharing. In this SoTEL Symposium presentation/discussion with the ASCILITE MLSIG I propose a move away from a humanist world view that continues to shape our thoughts around the binary of teacher-learner within our walled disciplinary and consider how we might Incorporate generative AI tools in the curriculum to foster interdisciplinary collaborations with the more-than human. What if we shifted teaching and learning to facilitate new ways of being on the planet, so that we prioritised ourselves, one another as well as non-human and more-than-humans in our educational ecologies. Building the digital literacies and computational thinking capabilities (George-Reyes, et al, 2021) to learn with GAI will create opportunities to thinking about the world and all its space and places, as interconnected and entangled. In this trendsetter webinar I pose a series of questions and prompts that I had in conversation with Chatty G (ChatGPT) to consider how we might imagine and understand the world in different ways so that we might integrate generative AI and into our education ecologies in higher education. Presentation: https://doi.org/10.26188/22281685
生成人工智能在艺术和设计教育中扮演什么角色?鉴于我们正处于一个变化的年份，开源开放人工智能系统在问答聊天机器人和个人辅助工具的时代改变了我们的教学、学习和评估方式。将后人类方法(Blaikie, et al, 2020)应用于教育可能有助于我们重新思考教育学(Wessels, et al, 2022)、知识创造和知识共享的学术出版。在这次与ASCILITE MLSIG的SoTEL研讨会的演讲/讨论中，我提出了一种摆脱人文主义世界观的做法，这种世界观继续在我们的学科框架内围绕着教师-学习者的二元结构塑造我们的思想，并考虑我们如何将生成人工智能工具纳入课程中，以促进与超越人类的跨学科合作。如果我们改变教与学，以促进在这个星球上的新方式，那么我们在我们的教育生态中优先考虑我们自己，彼此以及非人类和超越人类。建立数字素养和计算思维能力(George-Reyes, et al, 2021)来学习GAI将为思考世界及其所有空间和地点创造机会，这些空间和地点是相互联系和纠缠的。在这个引领潮流的网络研讨会上，我提出了一系列问题和提示，这些问题和提示是我在与Chatty G (ChatGPT)交谈时提出的，以考虑我们如何以不同的方式想象和理解世界，以便我们可以将生成式人工智能整合到高等教育的教育生态中。演示:https://doi.org/10.26188/22281685
{"title":"Generative AI and education ecologies","authors":"K. Coleman","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.175","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.175","url":null,"abstract":"What role can generative AI have an art and design education? Given that we are in a year of change as open-source Open AI systems shift how we teach, learn, and assess in times of question-answering chatbot and personal assistance tools. Applying a post-human approach (Blaikie, et al, 2020) to education might help us rethink pedagogy (Wessels, et al, 2022), knowledge creation and scholarly publication for knowledge sharing. In this SoTEL Symposium presentation/discussion with the ASCILITE MLSIG I propose a move away from a humanist world view that continues to shape our thoughts around the binary of teacher-learner within our walled disciplinary and consider how we might Incorporate generative AI tools in the curriculum to foster interdisciplinary collaborations with the more-than human. What if we shifted teaching and learning to facilitate new ways of being on the planet, so that we prioritised ourselves, one another as well as non-human and more-than-humans in our educational ecologies. Building the digital literacies and computational thinking capabilities (George-Reyes, et al, 2021) to learn with GAI will create opportunities to thinking about the world and all its space and places, as interconnected and entangled. \u0000In this trendsetter webinar I pose a series of questions and prompts that I had in conversation with Chatty G (ChatGPT) to consider how we might imagine and understand the world in different ways so that we might integrate generative AI and into our education ecologies in higher education. \u0000Presentation: https://doi.org/10.26188/22281685","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128026195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
S. French, Signe Ravn, Elena Balcaite, Eibhlis Moore
This article examines student engagement with video technology in a large undergraduate university subject. Drawing on a mixed methods study that included a survey and focus groups with students, we analyse students’ experiences with and perspectives on the videos to gain insights into their effectiveness in supporting student engagement and learning. By analysing engagement along three distinct, yet interconnected, dimensions – cognitive, behavioural and affective – our study highlights differences in the ways in which students engage with videos as one key form of technology enhanced learning. We find that videos can promote cognitive engagement by helping students to understand key concepts and making them more relatable, and that they can foster affective engagement, especially by creating an increased sense of teacher presence. However, while the students in our study largely perceived the videos to be engaging and beneficial to their learning, behavioural engagement was inconsistent across the cohort and often lacking. Student concerns about investing time in engaging with video resources suggest that communication from educators on their role in the curriculum is especially important. These findings contribute important insights into students’ video technology use which in turn can inform the pedagogical use of technology in teaching and learning.
{"title":"Understanding students’ views on the efficacy of video technology to promote engagement in higher education.","authors":"S. French, Signe Ravn, Elena Balcaite, Eibhlis Moore","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v1i2.172","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v1i2.172","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines student engagement with video technology in a large undergraduate university subject. Drawing on a mixed methods study that included a survey and focus groups with students, we analyse students’ experiences with and perspectives on the videos to gain insights into their effectiveness in supporting student engagement and learning. By analysing engagement along three distinct, yet interconnected, dimensions – cognitive, behavioural and affective – our study highlights differences in the ways in which students engage with videos as one key form of technology enhanced learning. We find that videos can promote cognitive engagement by helping students to understand key concepts and making them more relatable, and that they can foster affective engagement, especially by creating an increased sense of teacher presence. However, while the students in our study largely perceived the videos to be engaging and beneficial to their learning, behavioural engagement was inconsistent across the cohort and often lacking. Student concerns about investing time in engaging with video resources suggest that communication from educators on their role in the curriculum is especially important. These findings contribute important insights into students’ video technology use which in turn can inform the pedagogical use of technology in teaching and learning. ","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127109364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) is a teaching and learning approach that utilizes various forms of technology to enhance the learning experience (Cochrane, Redmond, and Corrin, 2018). One example of TEL is the use of digital fabrication, where we can find various open-source prototyping platforms, in educational settings. ADAPTA is an assistive technology educational event, in which elder people and students came together in meaningful and authentic domestic problem-solving educational activity, implementing the CPA methodology, based on a process of observation and prototyping, attempts to open a space for the design of assistive parts/devices for the elderly to improve your quality of life, through creation, testing, fabrication and usage of the pieces. A relevant aspect of the CPA methodology is that it allows the cultivation of 21st Century skills, through challenging projects that encourage the four Ps – Project, Passion, Peers and Play (Resnick, 2017). The CPA in Spanish, (APC in English for Autonomous Project Cell) methodology is a four-step process that can be used in conjunction with digital design processes and digital fabrication to support TEL. The four steps of the CPA methodology are: (a) Observation: This step involves students observing and documenting their surroundings or a specific problem they want to solve. This can involve collecting data, taking photos, or sketching out ideas in a real space (b) Documentation: In this step, students document their observations and ideas in a clear and organized manner. This can involve creating a written report, creating a visual representation of their ideas, using an open source online platform (c) Make/reflect: In this step, students used analog drawing and sketches, digital drawing, and digital fabrication. Later, the Arduino platform to create a prototype of their solution. This can involve programming the Arduino using a variety of programming languages, such as C++ or Python, and connecting various electronic components to the Arduino to create their desired outcome. As they work on their prototype, students should also be encouraged to reflect on their progress and make any necessary adjustments (d) Show and Tell: In the final step, students present their prototype to their peers and teachers/guides, demonstrating the functioning of their solution and explaining the process they followed to create it. This step allows students to share their learning with others and receive feedback on their work. Following the 2018 OECD objectives that aspire to an education that promotes individual, social and planetary well-being, we pay special attention to the domestic problems experienced by older adults. Considering that 16.2% of the country's inhabitants are over 60 years of age and, according to data from the Casen Survey, some 460,000 elderly people live in single-person households in Chile, it is important to pay attention to how aging creates difficulties in mobility and coexi
{"title":"CPA Methodology: educational technological design proposal to solve problems","authors":"Ronnie Videla-Reyes","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.169","url":null,"abstract":"Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) is a teaching and learning approach that utilizes various forms of technology to enhance the learning experience (Cochrane, Redmond, and Corrin, 2018). One example of TEL is the use of digital fabrication, where we can find various open-source prototyping platforms, in educational settings. ADAPTA is an assistive technology educational event, in which elder people and students came together in meaningful and authentic domestic problem-solving educational activity, implementing the CPA methodology, based on a process of observation and prototyping, attempts to open a space for the design of assistive parts/devices for the elderly to improve your quality of life, through creation, testing, fabrication and usage of the pieces. A relevant aspect of the CPA methodology is that it allows the cultivation of 21st Century skills, through challenging projects that encourage the four Ps – Project, Passion, Peers and Play (Resnick, 2017). \u0000 \u0000The CPA in Spanish, (APC in English for Autonomous Project Cell) methodology is a four-step process that can be used in conjunction with digital design processes and digital fabrication to support TEL. The four steps of the CPA methodology are: (a) Observation: This step involves students observing and documenting their surroundings or a specific problem they want to solve. This can involve collecting data, taking photos, or sketching out ideas in a real space (b) Documentation: In this step, students document their observations and ideas in a clear and organized manner. This can involve creating a written report, creating a visual representation of their ideas, using an open source online platform (c) Make/reflect: In this step, students used analog drawing and sketches, digital drawing, and digital fabrication. Later, the Arduino platform to create a prototype of their solution. This can involve programming the Arduino using a variety of programming languages, such as C++ or Python, and connecting various electronic components to the Arduino to create their desired outcome. As they work on their prototype, students should also be encouraged to reflect on their progress and make any necessary adjustments (d) Show and Tell: In the final step, students present their prototype to their peers and teachers/guides, demonstrating the functioning of their solution and explaining the process they followed to create it. This step allows students to share their learning with others and receive feedback on their work. \u0000 \u0000Following the 2018 OECD objectives that aspire to an education that promotes individual, social and planetary well-being, we pay special attention to the domestic problems experienced by older adults. Considering that 16.2% of the country's inhabitants are over 60 years of age and, according to data from the Casen Survey, some 460,000 elderly people live in single-person households in Chile, it is important to pay attention to how aging creates difficulties in mobility and coexi","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127146129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Presentation recording: https://doi.org/10.26188/22106603.v1 Innovation in higher education is essential to drive improvements in teaching and learning (Hannan, 2005). However, transitioning innovations from pilot to mainstream is an ongoing challenge that has long plagued the education sector. Education is a complex system – a system of systems. Like all systems there is an inherent inertia or stability. Any change or impact on the system requires a strong catalyst. Over the past decades we have witnessed several catalysts that have had system wide impact. The advent of MOOCs, the global pandemic and most recently, generative artificial intelligence. Clearly, the scale of these noted catalysts vastly outweighs small organisational innovations, and therefore, the opportunities for change can also be considered vastly different. However, the processes for enacting change on a system remain similar. In this context, Mary Uhl-Bien (2021) argues for a model of complexity leadership, to promote organisational generative emergence. In Uhl-Bien’s terms you can only fight complexity with complexity. Much of the discussion to date surrounding ChatGPT has focused on its potential to transform assessment in education. However, this disruption elicits two reactions that reflect the complexity leadership approach posited by researchers such as Uhl-Bien (for an overview see Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2017). One approach has been to resist the disruption by attempting to maintain the status quo through blocking or banning use. The other approach is to invite play and interaction with the tool to understand the potential benefits and concerns for education practice. The uncharted territory that AI in education represents requires an innovative approach to navigate. We don't yet know how this will work, so innovation is key to advancing our understanding of how AI can best be used in education. In so doing, it is essential to work within the friction of disrupting stable education and organizational systems to move forward in advancing teaching and learning practice. Complexity leadership, as advocated by Uhl-Bien, offers a framework for dealing with the dynamic and unpredictable environment of higher education. Leaders must understand the complexity of the system in which they operate, which includes acknowledging the different stakeholders and their roles, as well as the various external and internal factors that may impact the organization. Complexity leadership recognizes that change cannot be controlled, but can be guided through engaging with stakeholders, encouraging experimentation, and creating a safe environment for failure. This “Trendsetter discussion” explores the role of generative AI on education calling for increased scholarship and innovation to bring research informed lens for integration into practice. The talk covers different models of innovation as well as the impact ChatGPT is beginning to play on how we rethink the role of teaching a
演示记录:https://doi.org/10.26188/22106603.v1高等教育的创新对于推动教与学的改进至关重要(Hannan, 2005)。然而，将创新从试点转变为主流是一个长期困扰教育部门的持续挑战。教育是一个复杂的系统，是系统的系统。像所有的系统一样，存在固有的惯性或稳定性。对系统的任何改变或影响都需要强有力的催化剂。在过去的几十年里，我们目睹了几个具有全系统影响的催化剂。mooc的出现，全球流行病，以及最近的可生成人工智能。显然，这些著名的催化剂的规模远远超过了小型的组织创新，因此，变革的机会也可以被认为是非常不同的。然而，在系统上实施变更的过程仍然是相似的。在这种背景下，Mary ul - bien(2021)提出了一种复杂性领导模式，以促进组织生成性涌现。用乌尔宾的话来说，你只能用复杂性来对抗复杂性。迄今为止，围绕ChatGPT的大部分讨论都集中在它改变教育评估的潜力上。然而，这种破坏引发了两种反应，反映了Uhl-Bien等研究人员提出的复杂性领导方法(概述见Uhl-Bien和Arena, 2017)。一种方法是试图通过阻止或禁止使用来维持现状，以抵制这种破坏。另一种方法是邀请游戏和互动的工具，以了解潜在的好处和关注的教育实践。人工智能在教育领域所代表的未知领域需要一种创新的方法来导航。我们还不知道这将如何发挥作用，因此创新是促进我们理解如何最好地将人工智能用于教育的关键。在这样做的过程中，必须在破坏稳定的教育和组织系统的摩擦中工作，以推进教学和学习实践。正如乌尔比恩所倡导的，复杂性领导为应对高等教育的动态和不可预测的环境提供了一个框架。领导者必须了解他们运作的系统的复杂性，这包括承认不同的利益相关者和他们的角色，以及可能影响组织的各种外部和内部因素。复杂性领导认识到变化是无法控制的，但可以通过与利益相关者的接触、鼓励实验和为失败创造一个安全的环境来引导变化。这场“引领潮流的讨论”探讨了生成式人工智能在教育中的作用，呼吁增加学术研究和创新，将研究成果融入实践。讲座涵盖了不同的创新模式，以及ChatGPT开始对我们如何重新思考教学的角色和教育的目的产生的影响。人工智能在教育领域并不是一个新事件。通过GPT等工具，人工智能在教育领域的大规模媒体曝光，带来了显著的公众和专业意识。积极和消极。人工智能将成为教育领域日益重要的颠覆性力量。ChatGPT对评估的影响是人工智能将如何改变我们制定教育方式的一个明显例子。通过采用复杂性领导方法，我们可以应对这种破坏，鼓励实验，并为失败创造一个安全的空间。这可以帮助我们更好地了解教育实践的潜在利益和关注点，同时也可以促进教与学的创新。在破坏稳定的教育和组织系统的摩擦中工作，对于推进教与学至关重要。汉南，A.(2005)。高等教育创新:学习技术变革的背景。教育科技学报，36(6)，975-985。乌尔比恩，M.(2021)。复杂性领导与追随:变化的世界中变化的领导。管理学报，21(2)，144-162。Uhl-Bien, M.， & Arena, M.(2017)。复杂性领导:使人和组织具有适应性。组织动力学，46(1)，9-20,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2016.12.001
{"title":"Embracing uncertainty and complexity to promote teaching and learning innovation","authors":"S. Dawson","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.171","url":null,"abstract":"Presentation recording: https://doi.org/10.26188/22106603.v1 \u0000Innovation in higher education is essential to drive improvements in teaching and learning (Hannan, 2005). However, transitioning innovations from pilot to mainstream is an ongoing challenge that has long plagued the education sector. Education is a complex system – a system of systems. Like all systems there is an inherent inertia or stability. Any change or impact on the system requires a strong catalyst. Over the past decades we have witnessed several catalysts that have had system wide impact. The advent of MOOCs, the global pandemic and most recently, generative artificial intelligence. Clearly, the scale of these noted catalysts vastly outweighs small organisational innovations, and therefore, the opportunities for change can also be considered vastly different. However, the processes for enacting change on a system remain similar. In this context, Mary Uhl-Bien (2021) argues for a model of complexity leadership, to promote organisational generative emergence. In Uhl-Bien’s terms you can only fight complexity with complexity. \u0000 \u0000Much of the discussion to date surrounding ChatGPT has focused on its potential to transform assessment in education. However, this disruption elicits two reactions that reflect the complexity leadership approach posited by researchers such as Uhl-Bien (for an overview see Uhl-Bien and Arena, 2017). One approach has been to resist the disruption by attempting to maintain the status quo through blocking or banning use. The other approach is to invite play and interaction with the tool to understand the potential benefits and concerns for education practice. The uncharted territory that AI in education represents requires an innovative approach to navigate. We don't yet know how this will work, so innovation is key to advancing our understanding of how AI can best be used in education. In so doing, it is essential to work within the friction of disrupting stable education and organizational systems to move forward in advancing teaching and learning practice. \u0000 \u0000Complexity leadership, as advocated by Uhl-Bien, offers a framework for dealing with the dynamic and unpredictable environment of higher education. Leaders must understand the complexity of the system in which they operate, which includes acknowledging the different stakeholders and their roles, as well as the various external and internal factors that may impact the organization. Complexity leadership recognizes that change cannot be controlled, but can be guided through engaging with stakeholders, encouraging experimentation, and creating a safe environment for failure. \u0000 \u0000This “Trendsetter discussion” explores the role of generative AI on education calling for increased scholarship and innovation to bring research informed lens for integration into practice. The talk covers different models of innovation as well as the impact ChatGPT is beginning to play on how we rethink the role of teaching a","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"114 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114045287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ronnie Videla-Reyes, Eduardo Ravanal, C. Pino, Maybritt Aros, Camilo Ibacache, Paulina Valdivia
Creativity is considered one of the skills crucial for 21 Century to face the challenges proposed by the 2030 education agenda (Frey & Osborne 2013; OECD, 2018, Reimers & Chung 2019). In our reading, active methodologies such as project-based learning and design thinking are often seen as fundamental in favoring creativity together oriented towards individual, social, and planetary well-being (UN, 2022). A persistent problem for the training of 21st century skills, in which creativity, intellectual openness and computational thinking are essential in teacher training, is the adherence to cognitivist foundations and conventional methodologies. The traditional cognitivism has reduced the notion of creativity in processes and products. In our proposal, we want to redirect the question about what happens in the head (process) or in the world that makes people creative (world), rather, we invite creativity to be considered as a skillful experience embedded in a context and that arises from sensorimotor engagement and distributed perception (Varela, Thompson & Rosch, 1991; Hutchins 1995; Kalaydjian et al 2022). In this sense, we propose the 4E cognition approach (embodied, enacted, embedded, and extended) as a necessary theoretical and empirical framework to guide the understanding of creativity in contexts of active methodologies. Project-Based Learning and Design Thinking teacher education often fosters creativity as a deep experience that emerges in engagement with artifacts and interaction with others, opening unprecedented possibilities for capturing emerging understanding and enhancing skillful performance in challenging tasks (Videla, Veloz and Pino, in press). However, active methodologies such as project-based learning and design thinking are hardly linked to contemporary paradigms of cognition that are anti-representationalist, embodied, and situated in sociocultural contexts. The 4E approach argues that cognition is intertwined with the world because of a history of structural couplings, that is, the contingent relationships that stage skillful performance in response to the situational sense of sensorimotor engagement with artifacts and people (Dreyfus, 2002). We assume that creativity is a skillful experience of kinesthetic 'knowledge' (Penny, 2022). In teacher training, these ideas for cultivating creativity are overshadowed by conventional static methodologies and cognitive notions that reduce creativity to final products and internal mental processes (Guilford 1967; Torrance 1972; Sternberg & Grigorenko 2001; Gardner 1994; Kaufman & Beghetto 2009). Although these notions have contributed to understanding the phenomenon of creativity, in this article we relate to collective, distributed, and embodied notions of creativity that escape individual and cognitive bias (Glăveanu 2014; Ihde & Malafouris 2019; Malinin 2019). Our approach is in tune with Vygotsky's ideas about perceptual ontogenesis, in which perception is reconfigured fr
Noy, L.和Bachrach, A.(2022)自由游戏中集体创造力的分布式模型。前面。7:902251建造。https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.902251 Kaufman J. C. & Beghetto R. A.(2009):超越大与小:创造力的4c模型。普通心理学评论13:1-12。https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688 Malinin L.(2019)体现创造力有多激进?4E方法对创造力研究和教学的影响。心理学前沿10:2372。https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02372经合组织。(2018)。教育和技能的未来:教育2030。巴黎:经合组织。潘妮，S.(2022)。数字文化中的感觉运动障碍。AI与Soc 37, 355-366。https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01186-0 Reimers F. M. & Chung C. K.(2019) 21世纪的教学与学习:来自六个国家的教育目标、政策和课程。哈佛教育出版社。(2001)吉尔福德的智力模型结构与创造力模型:贡献与局限。创新研究学报13(3-4):309-316。https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_08托伦斯P.(1972)创造性思维托伦斯测验的预测效度。创新行为学报6(4):236-252。https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1972.tb00936.x Varela F. J, Thompson E. & Rosch E.(1991)具身心理。麻省理工学院出版社，马萨诸塞州剑桥。https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6730.001.0001 Videla, R.， Veloz, T.和Pino, C.(出版中)。从STEAM教育中捕捉大鱼:从4E认知中获得创造力。建构主义基础。https://constructivist.info/special/edu21/维果茨基l.s.(1926/2001)。教育心理学(r.h.西尔弗曼译)。佛罗里达州博卡拉顿:CRC Press LLC。
{"title":"How do the 4E approach and actives methodologies contribute to rethinking creativity in teacher training?","authors":"Ronnie Videla-Reyes, Eduardo Ravanal, C. Pino, Maybritt Aros, Camilo Ibacache, Paulina Valdivia","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.160","url":null,"abstract":"Creativity is considered one of the skills crucial for 21 Century to face the challenges proposed by the 2030 education agenda (Frey & Osborne 2013; OECD, 2018, Reimers & Chung 2019). In our reading, active methodologies such as project-based learning and design thinking are often seen as fundamental in favoring creativity together oriented towards individual, social, and planetary well-being (UN, 2022). A persistent problem for the training of 21st century skills, in which creativity, intellectual openness and computational thinking are essential in teacher training, is the adherence to cognitivist foundations and conventional methodologies. The traditional cognitivism has reduced the notion of creativity in processes and products. In our proposal, we want to redirect the question about what happens in the head (process) or in the world that makes people creative (world), rather, we invite creativity to be considered as a skillful experience embedded in a context and that arises from sensorimotor engagement and distributed perception (Varela, Thompson & Rosch, 1991; Hutchins 1995; Kalaydjian et al 2022). \u0000 \u0000In this sense, we propose the 4E cognition approach (embodied, enacted, embedded, and extended) as a necessary theoretical and empirical framework to guide the understanding of creativity in contexts of active methodologies. Project-Based Learning and Design Thinking teacher education often fosters creativity as a deep experience that emerges in engagement with artifacts and interaction with others, opening unprecedented possibilities for capturing emerging understanding and enhancing skillful performance in challenging tasks (Videla, Veloz and Pino, in press). However, active methodologies such as project-based learning and design thinking are hardly linked to contemporary paradigms of cognition that are anti-representationalist, embodied, and situated in sociocultural contexts. The 4E approach argues that cognition is intertwined with the world because of a history of structural couplings, that is, the contingent relationships that stage skillful performance in response to the situational sense of sensorimotor engagement with artifacts and people (Dreyfus, 2002). We assume that creativity is a skillful experience of kinesthetic 'knowledge' (Penny, 2022). \u0000 \u0000In teacher training, these ideas for cultivating creativity are overshadowed by conventional static methodologies and cognitive notions that reduce creativity to final products and internal mental processes (Guilford 1967; Torrance 1972; Sternberg & Grigorenko 2001; Gardner 1994; Kaufman & Beghetto 2009). Although these notions have contributed to understanding the phenomenon of creativity, in this article we relate to collective, distributed, and embodied notions of creativity that escape individual and cognitive bias (Glăveanu 2014; Ihde & Malafouris 2019; Malinin 2019). Our approach is in tune with Vygotsky's ideas about perceptual ontogenesis, in which perception is reconfigured fr","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133474862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Presentation: https://youtu.be/ff490WnkE2w Abstract: Many educational institutes have been challenged with the rapid response to developing appropriate “new norms” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. This was complicated further at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) with the announced sundowning of the Learning Management System (LMS- Blackboard) in late 2020. With the forced transition to Canvas during a pandemic, AUT Learning Transformation LAB (altLAB) worked directly with academic and administrative staff to establish a collaborative approach to implementing Canvas tailored for each Faculty. The Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences (FHES) established a Community of Practice (CoP) with staff from altLAB, “Canvas Champions”, Faculty Academic Advisors, and project Change Manager gaining direct relationships towards both the project management team and academics. CoP employs three key characteristics: (1) Joint Enterprise (shared domain of interest); (2) Mutual Engagement (engagement in joint activities and relationship building), and (3) Shared Repertoire (sharing of resources for practice) (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Nicolini et al., 2016; Wenger-Trayner et al., 2015). Joint Enterprise was readily established by inviting key members to a join a weekly “FHES Canvas Catch Up” with a shared aim of integrating well-designed curriculum and assessment into Canvas courses. Members of the group actively engaged in joint activities that both informed staff of the Canvas project, while opportunistically responding to the pandemic to “refresh” courses with pedagogically informed curriculum, assessment, and delivery of the Canvas builds. “How To” guides and Course Start Checklists were developed when gaps of learning were identified in the Canvas roll out, which were supported and reinforced by regular Q&A drop-in sessions and email-outs facilitated by the Canvas Champions. All 1837 AUT courses were transitioned for delivery in Canvas from Semester One, 2022. A standard template was developed and utilised to provide consistency across the university, with minor modifications to meet the needs of the individual faculties. As of October 2022, 97% of students (n=1898 responses) were accessing Canvas on a weekly basis with 66% daily; and 86% of students ‘satisfied’ (of which 36% were ‘extremely satisfied’). 83% of students perceived that they had a mostly consistent experience between courses. While student engagement and satisfaction were paramount and realised during the shift to Canvas (especially in disrupted times); the project was met with some challenges. For example, in response to COVID-19, the planned 18-month project was delayed resulting in a 15-month roll-out. Academics prioritise the transition to online delivery of teaching and learning over communications of the LMS implementation and training opportunities. This presentation will highlight some key learnings in the context of an LMS transition, with recommendations for future pr
{"title":"It takes a Village","authors":"T. Stretton, Nawal Chanane, A. Lees","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.166","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.166","url":null,"abstract":"Presentation: https://youtu.be/ff490WnkE2w \u0000Abstract: \u0000Many educational institutes have been challenged with the rapid response to developing appropriate “new norms” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. This was complicated further at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) with the announced sundowning of the Learning Management System (LMS- Blackboard) in late 2020. With the forced transition to Canvas during a pandemic, AUT Learning Transformation LAB (altLAB) worked directly with academic and administrative staff to establish a collaborative approach to implementing Canvas tailored for each Faculty. \u0000The Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences (FHES) established a Community of Practice (CoP) with staff from altLAB, “Canvas Champions”, Faculty Academic Advisors, and project Change Manager gaining direct relationships towards both the project management team and academics. CoP employs three key characteristics: (1) Joint Enterprise (shared domain of interest); (2) Mutual Engagement (engagement in joint activities and relationship building), and (3) Shared Repertoire (sharing of resources for practice) (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Nicolini et al., 2016; Wenger-Trayner et al., 2015). Joint Enterprise was readily established by inviting key members to a join a weekly “FHES Canvas Catch Up” with a shared aim of integrating well-designed curriculum and assessment into Canvas courses. Members of the group actively engaged in joint activities that both informed staff of the Canvas project, while opportunistically responding to the pandemic to “refresh” courses with pedagogically informed curriculum, assessment, and delivery of the Canvas builds. “How To” guides and Course Start Checklists were developed when gaps of learning were identified in the Canvas roll out, which were supported and reinforced by regular Q&A drop-in sessions and email-outs facilitated by the Canvas Champions. \u0000All 1837 AUT courses were transitioned for delivery in Canvas from Semester One, 2022. A standard template was developed and utilised to provide consistency across the university, with minor modifications to meet the needs of the individual faculties. As of October 2022, 97% of students (n=1898 responses) were accessing Canvas on a weekly basis with 66% daily; and 86% of students ‘satisfied’ (of which 36% were ‘extremely satisfied’). 83% of students perceived that they had a mostly consistent experience between courses. \u0000While student engagement and satisfaction were paramount and realised during the shift to Canvas (especially in disrupted times); the project was met with some challenges. For example, in response to COVID-19, the planned 18-month project was delayed resulting in a 15-month roll-out. Academics prioritise the transition to online delivery of teaching and learning over communications of the LMS implementation and training opportunities. \u0000This presentation will highlight some key learnings in the context of an LMS transition, with recommendations for future pr","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133003981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This Master of Criminology subject has a mix of postgraduate students with a wide range of learning strategies, skillsets, and experiences. Half the students were physically located on campus and the other half were online in a Blended Synchronous Learning (BSL) environment. Although the subject suffered technology failure across the first seven weeks of the 12-week semester, and subsequent changes to the structured learning experiences, the students kept turning up for class. The student cohort worked out ways to engage even when the technology prevented them from engaging in the intended way. In response to the technology fail, the subject coordinator, (me) reverted to a more didactic approach, reducing risk associated with learning, proportional to the risk associated with the technology. Unfortunately, the most important element of the subject design, was also the first technological component to be dropped. The lessons learned included thinking carefully about the vulnerability of the pedagogy in the BSL subject; always have fall back options for interactivity and protect the most essential features of the pedagogy. The deeper lesson however, was that the technology fail allowed for a new set of relationships to emerge in the learning environment. Within the knowledge ecology of the space the cohort responded and adapted through their personal knowledge networks in ways not previously envisioned. The student experience is important – by keeping a focus on the experience (rather than the content), the students will remember it and have a better learning experience.
{"title":"BSL Case Study","authors":"J. Fitzgerald","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v4i3.152","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v4i3.152","url":null,"abstract":"This Master of Criminology subject has a mix of postgraduate students with a wide range of learning strategies, skillsets, and experiences. Half the students were physically located on campus and the other half were online in a Blended Synchronous Learning (BSL) environment. Although the subject suffered technology failure across the first seven weeks of the 12-week semester, and subsequent changes to the structured learning experiences, the students kept turning up for class. The student cohort worked out ways to engage even when the technology prevented them from engaging in the intended way. In response to the technology fail, the subject coordinator, (me) reverted to a more didactic approach, reducing risk associated with learning, proportional to the risk associated with the technology. Unfortunately, the most important element of the subject design, was also the first technological component to be dropped. The lessons learned included thinking carefully about the vulnerability of the pedagogy in the BSL subject; always have fall back options for interactivity and protect the most essential features of the pedagogy. The deeper lesson however, was that the technology fail allowed for a new set of relationships to emerge in the learning environment. Within the knowledge ecology of the space the cohort responded and adapted through their personal knowledge networks in ways not previously envisioned. The student experience is important – by keeping a focus on the experience (rather than the content), the students will remember it and have a better learning experience.","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115541864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Presentation: https://www.pechakucha.com/presentations/sotel-2023-neil-cowie-and-keiko-sakui-machine-translation Machine translation (MT) of languages has been around nearly 30 years but the importance of its role in language learning has grown exponentially in recent years. This paper summarizes recent research on teacher and learner attitudes to MT, and suggests ways that MT can be used in language classrooms. Studies in the 2010s (Pym, 2013) suggest that teachers were against the use of MT because of its poor quality. However, the level of MT dramatically improved from 2016 when Google Translate adopted a neural-network system. As a result, teachers’ attitudes shifted to more acceptance of MT. Even so, teacher views about MT tend to fall into two camps: those who feel it is a form of cheating (Carré et al., 2022) and those who see it as an appropriate teaching tool. The former take the general approach of “detect, react and prevent”, whilst the latter wish to “integrate and educate” (Jolley & Maimone, 2022). Research has shown that students use MT in different ways according to their level. More advanced students tend to check words and phrases rather than translating a whole report. They understand the limits of MT but at the same time they believe it can help learn a language (Godwin-Jones, 2022; Jolley & Maimone, 2022). Research suggests that training in the use of MT can increase chances for such students to reflect on their language learning (Pellet & Myers, 2022) and that they can become aware of and correct MT errors (Zhang & Torres-Hostench, 2022). On the other hand, lower level students use MT differently as they may lack confidence in their language abilities (Organ, 2019). There are studies that claim lower level students can be linguistically overwhelmed in trying to notice and compare their own translations with MT; therefore, they do not correct the output of MT and submit it as their own work (Lee, 2022: Niño, 2020). In general, the accuracy of MT has improved so quickly that many teachers who previously dismissed MT as poor can no longer ascertain whether their students have actually used it or not (Jolley & Maimone, 2022). This creates doubt in how to assess student work fairly. Furthermore, as teachers vary in their attitudes towards the use of MT for learning, students can be very confused as to whether they are allowed to use MT in different teachers’ classes; and, if they are allowed, in what ways can they do so appropriately. In order to overcome this uncertainty and confusion, it is suggested that, after Reinders (2022), institutions, students and teachers become partners in exploring MT to find the best way to use it for learning. This will vary according to each educational context, particularly concerning student level, but it is vital to create commonly accepted guidelines, approaches and practices so that MT can be best used for language learning and not just as a tool to complete tasks with little or no educati
{"title":"Should Machine Translation have a role in language classrooms or not?","authors":"N. Cowie, K. Sakui","doi":"10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v5i1.162","url":null,"abstract":"Presentation: https://www.pechakucha.com/presentations/sotel-2023-neil-cowie-and-keiko-sakui-machine-translation \u0000Machine translation (MT) of languages has been around nearly 30 years but the importance of its role in language learning has grown exponentially in recent years. This paper summarizes recent research on teacher and learner attitudes to MT, and suggests ways that MT can be used in language classrooms. \u0000Studies in the 2010s (Pym, 2013) suggest that teachers were against the use of MT because of its poor quality. However, the level of MT dramatically improved from 2016 when Google Translate adopted a neural-network system. As a result, teachers’ attitudes shifted to more acceptance of MT. Even so, teacher views about MT tend to fall into two camps: those who feel it is a form of cheating (Carré et al., 2022) and those who see it as an appropriate teaching tool. The former take the general approach of “detect, react and prevent”, whilst the latter wish to “integrate and educate” (Jolley & Maimone, 2022). \u0000Research has shown that students use MT in different ways according to their level. More advanced students tend to check words and phrases rather than translating a whole report. They understand the limits of MT but at the same time they believe it can help learn a language (Godwin-Jones, 2022; Jolley & Maimone, 2022). Research suggests that training in the use of MT can increase chances for such students to reflect on their language learning (Pellet & Myers, 2022) and that they can become aware of and correct MT errors (Zhang & Torres-Hostench, 2022). On the other hand, lower level students use MT differently as they may lack confidence in their language abilities (Organ, 2019). There are studies that claim lower level students can be linguistically overwhelmed in trying to notice and compare their own translations with MT; therefore, they do not correct the output of MT and submit it as their own work (Lee, 2022: Niño, 2020). \u0000In general, the accuracy of MT has improved so quickly that many teachers who previously dismissed MT as poor can no longer ascertain whether their students have actually used it or not (Jolley & Maimone, 2022). This creates doubt in how to assess student work fairly. Furthermore, as teachers vary in their attitudes towards the use of MT for learning, students can be very confused as to whether they are allowed to use MT in different teachers’ classes; and, if they are allowed, in what ways can they do so appropriately. In order to overcome this uncertainty and confusion, it is suggested that, after Reinders (2022), institutions, students and teachers become partners in exploring MT to find the best way to use it for learning. This will vary according to each educational context, particularly concerning student level, but it is vital to create commonly accepted guidelines, approaches and practices so that MT can be best used for language learning and not just as a tool to complete tasks with little or no educati","PeriodicalId":384031,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129524536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：