Averil Grieve, Amir Rouhshad, Elpida Petraki, Alan Bechaz, David Wei Dai
{"title":"护理和助产专业学生对使用人工智能机器翻译软件撰写大学作业可接受性的道德观点:以缺失为导向的视角还是翻译语言的视角?","authors":"Averil Grieve, Amir Rouhshad, Elpida Petraki, Alan Bechaz, David Wei Dai","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper focuses on tertiary English as an additional language (EAL) students' ethical choices, and the factors impacting on them, when deciding whether to engage with artificially-intelligent (AI) machine translation (MT) tools for the writing of university assignments. It also investigates how student responses align with either deficit-oriented or translanguaging theoretical perspectives. Via semi-structured interviews, the voices of 23 EAL nursing and midwifery students indicate an array of ethical positions which are based on three key areas of consideration: 1) ownership of language and ideas; 2) fairness and respect; and 3) personal growth. The study highlights the scalar, strategic and dynamic nature of students’ ethical decisions and shows that questions of ethicality tap into individual, social and institutional constructs of fairness and respect, skills recognition, lifelong learning and language dominion. The findings also indicate that discussions of fairness should focus not only on differences between non-EAL and EAL students, but also inequalities within EAL cohorts. Student responses provide evidence of both deficit-oriented and translanguaging perspectives. The researchers call for universities to create clear policies concerning use of MT that recognise the levels of reflection that students engage in when writing their assignments and value the full linguistic repertoires that students bring to global educational settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147515852400047X/pdfft?md5=0efef50854a175b5d8cfa3d37df7603e&pid=1-s2.0-S147515852400047X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nursing and midwifery students’ ethical views on the acceptability of using AI machine translation software to write university assignments: A deficit-oriented or translanguaging perspective?\",\"authors\":\"Averil Grieve, Amir Rouhshad, Elpida Petraki, Alan Bechaz, David Wei Dai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper focuses on tertiary English as an additional language (EAL) students' ethical choices, and the factors impacting on them, when deciding whether to engage with artificially-intelligent (AI) machine translation (MT) tools for the writing of university assignments. It also investigates how student responses align with either deficit-oriented or translanguaging theoretical perspectives. Via semi-structured interviews, the voices of 23 EAL nursing and midwifery students indicate an array of ethical positions which are based on three key areas of consideration: 1) ownership of language and ideas; 2) fairness and respect; and 3) personal growth. The study highlights the scalar, strategic and dynamic nature of students’ ethical decisions and shows that questions of ethicality tap into individual, social and institutional constructs of fairness and respect, skills recognition, lifelong learning and language dominion. The findings also indicate that discussions of fairness should focus not only on differences between non-EAL and EAL students, but also inequalities within EAL cohorts. Student responses provide evidence of both deficit-oriented and translanguaging perspectives. The researchers call for universities to create clear policies concerning use of MT that recognise the levels of reflection that students engage in when writing their assignments and value the full linguistic repertoires that students bring to global educational settings.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147515852400047X/pdfft?md5=0efef50854a175b5d8cfa3d37df7603e&pid=1-s2.0-S147515852400047X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147515852400047X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147515852400047X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Nursing and midwifery students’ ethical views on the acceptability of using AI machine translation software to write university assignments: A deficit-oriented or translanguaging perspective?
This paper focuses on tertiary English as an additional language (EAL) students' ethical choices, and the factors impacting on them, when deciding whether to engage with artificially-intelligent (AI) machine translation (MT) tools for the writing of university assignments. It also investigates how student responses align with either deficit-oriented or translanguaging theoretical perspectives. Via semi-structured interviews, the voices of 23 EAL nursing and midwifery students indicate an array of ethical positions which are based on three key areas of consideration: 1) ownership of language and ideas; 2) fairness and respect; and 3) personal growth. The study highlights the scalar, strategic and dynamic nature of students’ ethical decisions and shows that questions of ethicality tap into individual, social and institutional constructs of fairness and respect, skills recognition, lifelong learning and language dominion. The findings also indicate that discussions of fairness should focus not only on differences between non-EAL and EAL students, but also inequalities within EAL cohorts. Student responses provide evidence of both deficit-oriented and translanguaging perspectives. The researchers call for universities to create clear policies concerning use of MT that recognise the levels of reflection that students engage in when writing their assignments and value the full linguistic repertoires that students bring to global educational settings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of English for Academic Purposes provides a forum for the dissemination of information and views which enables practitioners of and researchers in EAP to keep current with developments in their field and to contribute to its continued updating. JEAP publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges in the linguistic, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic description of English as it occurs in the contexts of academic study and scholarly exchange itself.