下一个词将生成式人工智能作为学习写作资源的利弊设想框架

IF 3.9 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Reading Research Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1002/rrq.567
Sarah W. Beck, Sarah Levine
{"title":"下一个词将生成式人工智能作为学习写作资源的利弊设想框架","authors":"Sarah W. Beck, Sarah Levine","doi":"10.1002/rrq.567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In <jats:italic>Parable of the Sower</jats:italic>, Octavia Butler (1993) wrote: “Any Change may bear seeds of benefit. Seek them out. Any Change may bear seeds of harm. Beware” (p. 116). In this paper, we apply this command to a speculative examination of the consequences of text‐based generative AI (GAI) for adolescent writers, framing this examination within a socially situated “Writers‐in‐Community” model of writing (Graham, 2018), which considers writing as both an act of individual cognition and as situated within concentric circles representing nested social, material, and cultural contexts for writing. Through the lens of this model, we discuss representations of language‐related technologies in works by several well‐known authors of 20th‐century speculative fiction and contrast these speculative scenarios with examples from our recent research into student writers' use of ChatGPT and other GAI tools. Finally, we discuss (a) the limitations of these tools as lacking the ability to set goals and use these goals to compose a written work, which is a key component of an effective writing process and (b) what would be required to supporting students to write agentively in collaboration with these tools, despite these limitations. This discussion focuses on three principles: (1) centering human writers in collaborations with GAI; (2) setting writer goals to address historical, political, institutional, and social influences; and (3) critical agency in literacy with GAI.","PeriodicalId":48160,"journal":{"name":"Reading Research Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Next Word: A Framework for Imagining the Benefits and Harms of Generative AI as a Resource for Learning to Write\",\"authors\":\"Sarah W. Beck, Sarah Levine\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/rrq.567\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In <jats:italic>Parable of the Sower</jats:italic>, Octavia Butler (1993) wrote: “Any Change may bear seeds of benefit. Seek them out. Any Change may bear seeds of harm. Beware” (p. 116). In this paper, we apply this command to a speculative examination of the consequences of text‐based generative AI (GAI) for adolescent writers, framing this examination within a socially situated “Writers‐in‐Community” model of writing (Graham, 2018), which considers writing as both an act of individual cognition and as situated within concentric circles representing nested social, material, and cultural contexts for writing. Through the lens of this model, we discuss representations of language‐related technologies in works by several well‐known authors of 20th‐century speculative fiction and contrast these speculative scenarios with examples from our recent research into student writers' use of ChatGPT and other GAI tools. Finally, we discuss (a) the limitations of these tools as lacking the ability to set goals and use these goals to compose a written work, which is a key component of an effective writing process and (b) what would be required to supporting students to write agentively in collaboration with these tools, despite these limitations. This discussion focuses on three principles: (1) centering human writers in collaborations with GAI; (2) setting writer goals to address historical, political, institutional, and social influences; and (3) critical agency in literacy with GAI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reading Research Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reading Research Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.567\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reading Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.567","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

奥克塔维亚-巴特勒(1993 年)在《撒种的寓言》中写道:"任何变化都可能结出有益的种子。寻找它们。任何变革都可能蕴含着危害的种子。小心"(第 116 页)。在本文中,我们将这一命令应用于对基于文本的生成式人工智能(GAI)对青少年写作者的影响的推测性研究,并将这一研究置于 "写作者-社区 "的社会情景模式(Graham,2018)中,该模式认为写作既是一种个人认知行为,又处于代表写作的嵌套社会、物质和文化背景的同心圆中。通过这一模型的视角,我们讨论了 20 世纪几位著名推理小说作家作品中语言相关技术的表现形式,并将这些推理场景与我们最近对学生作家使用 ChatGPT 和其他 GAI 工具的研究实例进行了对比。最后,我们讨论了(a)这些工具的局限性,即缺乏设定目标并利用这些目标撰写书面作品的能力,而这正是有效写作过程的关键组成部分;(b)尽管存在这些局限性,但要支持学生与这些工具合作进行代理写作,需要哪些条件。讨论将集中在三个原则上:(1) 在与 GAI 的合作中以人类作家为中心;(2) 设定作家目标,以应对历史、政治、制度和社会影响;以及 (3) 在与 GAI 的合作中,以批判性机构进行扫盲。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Next Word: A Framework for Imagining the Benefits and Harms of Generative AI as a Resource for Learning to Write
In Parable of the Sower, Octavia Butler (1993) wrote: “Any Change may bear seeds of benefit. Seek them out. Any Change may bear seeds of harm. Beware” (p. 116). In this paper, we apply this command to a speculative examination of the consequences of text‐based generative AI (GAI) for adolescent writers, framing this examination within a socially situated “Writers‐in‐Community” model of writing (Graham, 2018), which considers writing as both an act of individual cognition and as situated within concentric circles representing nested social, material, and cultural contexts for writing. Through the lens of this model, we discuss representations of language‐related technologies in works by several well‐known authors of 20th‐century speculative fiction and contrast these speculative scenarios with examples from our recent research into student writers' use of ChatGPT and other GAI tools. Finally, we discuss (a) the limitations of these tools as lacking the ability to set goals and use these goals to compose a written work, which is a key component of an effective writing process and (b) what would be required to supporting students to write agentively in collaboration with these tools, despite these limitations. This discussion focuses on three principles: (1) centering human writers in collaborations with GAI; (2) setting writer goals to address historical, political, institutional, and social influences; and (3) critical agency in literacy with GAI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: For more than 40 years, Reading Research Quarterly has been essential reading for those committed to scholarship on literacy among learners of all ages. The leading research journal in the field, each issue of RRQ includes •Reports of important studies •Multidisciplinary research •Various modes of investigation •Diverse viewpoints on literacy practices, teaching, and learning
期刊最新文献
Chronotopes of Transnational Literacies: How Youth Live and Imagine Social Worlds in their Digital Media Practices Fair or Foul? Interrogating the Role of Baseball Knowledge in Studies of Knowledge and Comprehension “It's Like They Are Using Our Data Against Us.” Counter‐Cartographies of AI Literacy To Become an Object Among Objects: Generative Artificial “Intelligence,” Writing, and Linguistic White Supremacy Effectiveness of Visual Attention Span Training on Learning to Read and Spell: A Digital‐game‐based Intervention in Classrooms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1