带着希望走向教育研究的未来

Hongbiao Yin
{"title":"带着希望走向教育研究的未来","authors":"Hongbiao Yin","doi":"10.1002/fer3.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>At the beginning of UNESCO's (<span>2021</span>) enlightening report, it is clearly stated that “[o]ur world is at a turning point” (p. 1). This assertion could not be more accurate when people worldwide have suffered and are gradually recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic; when people across the planet are experiencing various natural or man-made challenges or disasters such as climate transformation, the Russo-Ukrainian War, and the discharge of radioactive water in Japan; when the entire human population faces the excitement and uncertainty brought about by the new technologies including generative artificial intelligence, genetic modification, and human augmentation, etc. As of September 2023, it appears that we find ourselves navigating a sea of chaos and complexity. No one can predict with certainty where our journey will lead in the future.</p><p>However, education is undoubtedly a pathway to the future. As UNESCO (<span>2021</span>) pointed out, “[w]e already know that knowledge and learning are the basis for renewal and transformation” (p. 1). Education signifies our commitment to nurturing the growth of young generations who are the future heroes. Education is not value-free; it embodies hope. As educators, we aspire to form education as a common good worthy of our trust and dedication. Through education, we collectively shape the future.</p><p>This is why educational research today is indispensable and of utmost importance. At this turning point, “[n]o trend is destiny” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3). The future is plural. We need to identify the possible futures of education in particular and the world in general. We need to justify which futures are worthwhile, supported by adequate evidence. We need to imagine alternative futures for education and the world when people strive for a better one. Educational research allows us “to think differently about learning and the relationships between students, teachers, knowledge, and the world” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3).</p><p>Against this background, <i>Future in Educational Research</i> (FER) has been developed by Southwest University, a leading institution in education in China, with the assistance of Wiley, a cutting-edge academic publisher in the world. As a future-oriented, multi-disciplinary, international journal, FER encompasses a wide range of education-related issues and trends. Original articles that advance empirical, theoretical, and methodological understandings of education, teaching, and learning are welcome. FER invites innovative perspectives on the new policies, technologies, and theories across different levels of education. Interdisciplinary dialogs and multidisciplinary works aiming at shaping the sustainable development of education are cordially welcome. We hold great respect for all serious discussions about the future of education and educational research, because we believe that “[m]ultiple alternative futures are possible” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3). The launch of FER indicates our hope and attempt to call upon scholars across countries and continents to imagine and shape the futures of education and educational research together.</p><p>This inaugural issue of FER exemplifies the mission of the journal. This issue features six articles discussing various possibilities of the future of education, which can be broadly categorized into three sections.</p><p>The first section comprises two articles focusing on the futures of public and private education, respectively. It starts with a historical review of the nine large-scale curriculum reforms since the founding of the People's Republic of China by Luo (<span>2023</span>, the issue), the co-editor in chief of FER. Luo considers that compared with previous national curriculum reforms in China, the ninth curriculum reform emphasizes the operability of Compulsory Education Curriculum Program and Standards (2022 Edition). It also pays attention to the interpretation of Curriculum Standards 2022 and teacher training, focuses on providing rich curriculum resources, and encourages curriculum innovation in regional and school-based levels. In the future, reform efforts will concentrate on optimizing the curriculum implementation, advancing localized adoption, and innovating pedagogical approaches to nurturing students. Luo provides an insider's reflection on the landscape and future of curriculum reform in public schools in China.</p><p>In contrast, White (<span>2023</span>, the issue), contributes an inspiring deliberation on the rights and wrongs of private education from a largely global but partly British perspective. White presents three arguments against private schools: they promote social exclusiveness, have created a ruling élite, and are unjust. Then, he critically discusses the meritocratic conception of society that it presupposes. Finally, he provides future perspectives on private schooling across the world. He looks at the proposed and actual measures to abolish or curtail them and explores educational proposals to limit the power of meritocracy, including reforms in the school examination system. In this way, White's discussion has an international relevance, even though he mainly targets private education in Britain.</p><p>The second section consists of two articles commonly focusing on the issue of student engagement in online learning environments. Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020, the global ecology of learning and teaching has been profoundly changed by information technologies. Hew and Huang (<span>2023</span>, the issue) point out that although online learning is becoming ubiquitous around the world, it is still perceived as a weaker option compared to on-campus face-to-face learning because of the persistent and prevalent lack of student engagement in online learning environments. After describing three key challenges of fully online learning, they present three possible strategies to address these challenges: promoting active learning through the online flipped classroom model, enhancing self-regulation skills, and reducing the sense of isolation through the use of chatbots. Through these discussions, Hew and Huang provide an insightful review of the possible strategies and directions to promote student engagement in online learning beyond the era of COVID-19.</p><p>Similarly, Yin (<span>2023</span>, the issue) addresses the concern of promoting student engagement in online learning from a more specific perspective. Using a sample of 5672 undergraduate students from eight higher education institutions in China, Yin examines the association between students' engagement and their online course experiences in emergency online learning during COVID-19. The results identify three types of pedagogical factors influencing student engagement, namely, three “extensively adaptive factors,” two “partially adaptive factors,” and one “dual-effect factor.” These findings indicate the importance of teacher training for instructors to make better use of online learning and reveal the pedagogical opportunities to improve student engagement in technology-mediated learning in the post pandemic era.</p><p>The third section contains two articles with similar interests in exploring the connections between the future of education and different forms of intelligence and technologies. Dietrich and Zakka (<span>2023</span>, the issue) provide a reflection on the relationships between education, neuroscience, and creativity. Inspired by the concept of multiple intelligences, creativity research, particularly from neuroscience, considers that there are also different types of creativity. However, the idea of different types of creativity has not yet taken hold in education because it is not the predominant approach in the neuroscience study of creativity. Dietrich and Zakka explain why empirical neuroscience research has failed to distinguish different types of creativity, and then outline the negative implications for education if creativity is continuously being treated as a monolithic entity. Finally, they introduce a division of creativity into three types that could result in a more individual approach to teaching and promoting creativity in classrooms.</p><p>Focusing on the emerging technology of ChatGPT, Liu et al. (<span>2023</span>, the issue) discuss the future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence. Through a systematic review, they summarize the viewpoints of Chinese scholars and experts regarding the implementation of generative artificial intelligence in education. A majority of Chinese scholars support the cautious integration of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence into education, as they view it as a learning tool that offers personalized educational experiences for students. However, scholars also raise concerns related to academic integrity and the potential hindrance to students' critical thinking competence. As a result, they propose a framework called DATS to outline an optimization path for future applications of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence in schools.</p><p>Taken together, these six articles in this inaugural issue of FER paint a vivid and complex picture with different possible futures of education. The discussions on various educational topics, the adoption of diverse research methods, and the syntheses of distinctive observations and reflections by individual researchers present readers a rich collection of intellectual explorations on the future of education.</p><p>FER, with the editorial team of the journal, sincerely invites you to join us and engage your expertise, wisdom, and passion to explore and develop the futures of educational research together.</p>","PeriodicalId":100564,"journal":{"name":"Future in Educational Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"2-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/fer3.12","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward the futures of educational research with hope\",\"authors\":\"Hongbiao Yin\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/fer3.12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>At the beginning of UNESCO's (<span>2021</span>) enlightening report, it is clearly stated that “[o]ur world is at a turning point” (p. 1). This assertion could not be more accurate when people worldwide have suffered and are gradually recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic; when people across the planet are experiencing various natural or man-made challenges or disasters such as climate transformation, the Russo-Ukrainian War, and the discharge of radioactive water in Japan; when the entire human population faces the excitement and uncertainty brought about by the new technologies including generative artificial intelligence, genetic modification, and human augmentation, etc. As of September 2023, it appears that we find ourselves navigating a sea of chaos and complexity. No one can predict with certainty where our journey will lead in the future.</p><p>However, education is undoubtedly a pathway to the future. As UNESCO (<span>2021</span>) pointed out, “[w]e already know that knowledge and learning are the basis for renewal and transformation” (p. 1). Education signifies our commitment to nurturing the growth of young generations who are the future heroes. Education is not value-free; it embodies hope. As educators, we aspire to form education as a common good worthy of our trust and dedication. Through education, we collectively shape the future.</p><p>This is why educational research today is indispensable and of utmost importance. At this turning point, “[n]o trend is destiny” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3). The future is plural. We need to identify the possible futures of education in particular and the world in general. We need to justify which futures are worthwhile, supported by adequate evidence. We need to imagine alternative futures for education and the world when people strive for a better one. Educational research allows us “to think differently about learning and the relationships between students, teachers, knowledge, and the world” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3).</p><p>Against this background, <i>Future in Educational Research</i> (FER) has been developed by Southwest University, a leading institution in education in China, with the assistance of Wiley, a cutting-edge academic publisher in the world. As a future-oriented, multi-disciplinary, international journal, FER encompasses a wide range of education-related issues and trends. Original articles that advance empirical, theoretical, and methodological understandings of education, teaching, and learning are welcome. FER invites innovative perspectives on the new policies, technologies, and theories across different levels of education. Interdisciplinary dialogs and multidisciplinary works aiming at shaping the sustainable development of education are cordially welcome. We hold great respect for all serious discussions about the future of education and educational research, because we believe that “[m]ultiple alternative futures are possible” (UNESCO, <span>2021</span>, p. 3). The launch of FER indicates our hope and attempt to call upon scholars across countries and continents to imagine and shape the futures of education and educational research together.</p><p>This inaugural issue of FER exemplifies the mission of the journal. This issue features six articles discussing various possibilities of the future of education, which can be broadly categorized into three sections.</p><p>The first section comprises two articles focusing on the futures of public and private education, respectively. It starts with a historical review of the nine large-scale curriculum reforms since the founding of the People's Republic of China by Luo (<span>2023</span>, the issue), the co-editor in chief of FER. Luo considers that compared with previous national curriculum reforms in China, the ninth curriculum reform emphasizes the operability of Compulsory Education Curriculum Program and Standards (2022 Edition). It also pays attention to the interpretation of Curriculum Standards 2022 and teacher training, focuses on providing rich curriculum resources, and encourages curriculum innovation in regional and school-based levels. In the future, reform efforts will concentrate on optimizing the curriculum implementation, advancing localized adoption, and innovating pedagogical approaches to nurturing students. Luo provides an insider's reflection on the landscape and future of curriculum reform in public schools in China.</p><p>In contrast, White (<span>2023</span>, the issue), contributes an inspiring deliberation on the rights and wrongs of private education from a largely global but partly British perspective. White presents three arguments against private schools: they promote social exclusiveness, have created a ruling élite, and are unjust. Then, he critically discusses the meritocratic conception of society that it presupposes. Finally, he provides future perspectives on private schooling across the world. He looks at the proposed and actual measures to abolish or curtail them and explores educational proposals to limit the power of meritocracy, including reforms in the school examination system. In this way, White's discussion has an international relevance, even though he mainly targets private education in Britain.</p><p>The second section consists of two articles commonly focusing on the issue of student engagement in online learning environments. Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020, the global ecology of learning and teaching has been profoundly changed by information technologies. Hew and Huang (<span>2023</span>, the issue) point out that although online learning is becoming ubiquitous around the world, it is still perceived as a weaker option compared to on-campus face-to-face learning because of the persistent and prevalent lack of student engagement in online learning environments. After describing three key challenges of fully online learning, they present three possible strategies to address these challenges: promoting active learning through the online flipped classroom model, enhancing self-regulation skills, and reducing the sense of isolation through the use of chatbots. Through these discussions, Hew and Huang provide an insightful review of the possible strategies and directions to promote student engagement in online learning beyond the era of COVID-19.</p><p>Similarly, Yin (<span>2023</span>, the issue) addresses the concern of promoting student engagement in online learning from a more specific perspective. Using a sample of 5672 undergraduate students from eight higher education institutions in China, Yin examines the association between students' engagement and their online course experiences in emergency online learning during COVID-19. The results identify three types of pedagogical factors influencing student engagement, namely, three “extensively adaptive factors,” two “partially adaptive factors,” and one “dual-effect factor.” These findings indicate the importance of teacher training for instructors to make better use of online learning and reveal the pedagogical opportunities to improve student engagement in technology-mediated learning in the post pandemic era.</p><p>The third section contains two articles with similar interests in exploring the connections between the future of education and different forms of intelligence and technologies. Dietrich and Zakka (<span>2023</span>, the issue) provide a reflection on the relationships between education, neuroscience, and creativity. Inspired by the concept of multiple intelligences, creativity research, particularly from neuroscience, considers that there are also different types of creativity. However, the idea of different types of creativity has not yet taken hold in education because it is not the predominant approach in the neuroscience study of creativity. Dietrich and Zakka explain why empirical neuroscience research has failed to distinguish different types of creativity, and then outline the negative implications for education if creativity is continuously being treated as a monolithic entity. Finally, they introduce a division of creativity into three types that could result in a more individual approach to teaching and promoting creativity in classrooms.</p><p>Focusing on the emerging technology of ChatGPT, Liu et al. (<span>2023</span>, the issue) discuss the future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence. Through a systematic review, they summarize the viewpoints of Chinese scholars and experts regarding the implementation of generative artificial intelligence in education. A majority of Chinese scholars support the cautious integration of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence into education, as they view it as a learning tool that offers personalized educational experiences for students. However, scholars also raise concerns related to academic integrity and the potential hindrance to students' critical thinking competence. As a result, they propose a framework called DATS to outline an optimization path for future applications of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence in schools.</p><p>Taken together, these six articles in this inaugural issue of FER paint a vivid and complex picture with different possible futures of education. The discussions on various educational topics, the adoption of diverse research methods, and the syntheses of distinctive observations and reflections by individual researchers present readers a rich collection of intellectual explorations on the future of education.</p><p>FER, with the editorial team of the journal, sincerely invites you to join us and engage your expertise, wisdom, and passion to explore and develop the futures of educational research together.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future in Educational Research\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"2-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/fer3.12\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future in Educational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fer3.12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future in Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fer3.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在联合国教科文组织(2021)启发性报告的开头,明确指出“我们的世界正处于一个转折点”(第1页)。当世界各地的人们已经从新冠肺炎大流行中遭受痛苦并正在逐渐康复时,这一说法再准确不过了;当地球上的人们正在经历各种自然或人为的挑战或灾难时,如气候变化、俄乌战争和日本放射性水的排放;当整个人类面临新技术带来的兴奋和不确定性时,包括生成人工智能、基因改造和人类扩增等。截至2023年9月,我们似乎发现自己在混乱和复杂的海洋中航行。没有人能够确切地预测我们未来的旅程将走向何方。然而,教育无疑是通往未来的一条道路。正如联合国教科文组织(2021)指出的那样,“我们已经知道,知识和学习是更新和变革的基础”(第1页)。教育意味着我们致力于培养年轻一代的成长,他们是未来的英雄。教育不是没有价值的;它体现了希望。作为教育工作者,我们渴望将教育作为一种值得我们信任和奉献的共同利益。通过教育,我们共同塑造未来。这就是为什么今天的教育研究是不可或缺的,也是至关重要的。在这个转折点上,“没有趋势就是命运”(联合国教科文组织,2021,第3页)。未来是多元的。我们需要确定教育的未来,尤其是整个世界的未来。我们需要证明哪些未来是值得的,并有充分的证据支持。当人们为一个更美好的未来而奋斗时,我们需要想象教育和世界的替代未来。教育研究使我们能够“以不同的方式思考学习以及学生、教师、知识和世界之间的关系”(联合国教科文组织,2021,第3页)。在这种背景下,中国领先的教育机构西南大学在世界前沿学术出版商威利的协助下开发了《教育研究的未来》(FER)。作为一份面向未来、多学科、国际化的期刊,FER涵盖了广泛的教育相关问题和趋势。欢迎提出对教育、教学和学习的实证、理论和方法论理解的原创文章。FER邀请对不同教育水平的新政策、技术和理论进行创新。我们热忱欢迎旨在塑造教育可持续发展的跨学科对话和多学科工作。我们非常尊重所有关于教育和教育研究未来的严肃讨论,因为我们相信“多种替代未来是可能的”(联合国教科文组织,2021,第3页)。FER的推出表明了我们的希望,并试图呼吁各国和各大洲的学者共同设想和塑造教育和教育研究的未来。《FER》的创刊号体现了该杂志的使命。本期共有六篇文章讨论了教育未来的各种可能性,大致可分为三部分。第一部分包括两篇文章,分别关注公立和私立教育的未来。本文从《外国语》杂志联合主编罗(2023年版)对建国以来九次大规模课程改革的历史回顾开始。罗认为,与中国以往的国家课程改革相比,第九次课程改革强调了《义务教育课程大纲与标准(2022年版)》的可操作性。它还注重解读《2022年课程标准》和教师培训,注重提供丰富的课程资源,鼓励区域和学校层面的课程创新。未来,改革工作将集中在优化课程实施、推进本地化采用和创新培养学生的教学方法上。罗对中国公立学校课程改革的前景和未来进行了内部反思。相比之下,White(2023,本期)从一个主要是全球性但部分是英国人的角度对私立教育的是非进行了鼓舞人心的思考。怀特提出了三个反对私立学校的论点:它们宣扬社会排斥,制造了统治精英,而且是不公正的。然后,他批判性地讨论了它所预设的精英社会概念。最后,他提供了世界各地私立学校教育的未来展望。
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
Toward the futures of educational research with hope

At the beginning of UNESCO's (2021) enlightening report, it is clearly stated that “[o]ur world is at a turning point” (p. 1). This assertion could not be more accurate when people worldwide have suffered and are gradually recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic; when people across the planet are experiencing various natural or man-made challenges or disasters such as climate transformation, the Russo-Ukrainian War, and the discharge of radioactive water in Japan; when the entire human population faces the excitement and uncertainty brought about by the new technologies including generative artificial intelligence, genetic modification, and human augmentation, etc. As of September 2023, it appears that we find ourselves navigating a sea of chaos and complexity. No one can predict with certainty where our journey will lead in the future.

However, education is undoubtedly a pathway to the future. As UNESCO (2021) pointed out, “[w]e already know that knowledge and learning are the basis for renewal and transformation” (p. 1). Education signifies our commitment to nurturing the growth of young generations who are the future heroes. Education is not value-free; it embodies hope. As educators, we aspire to form education as a common good worthy of our trust and dedication. Through education, we collectively shape the future.

This is why educational research today is indispensable and of utmost importance. At this turning point, “[n]o trend is destiny” (UNESCO, 2021, p. 3). The future is plural. We need to identify the possible futures of education in particular and the world in general. We need to justify which futures are worthwhile, supported by adequate evidence. We need to imagine alternative futures for education and the world when people strive for a better one. Educational research allows us “to think differently about learning and the relationships between students, teachers, knowledge, and the world” (UNESCO, 2021, p. 3).

Against this background, Future in Educational Research (FER) has been developed by Southwest University, a leading institution in education in China, with the assistance of Wiley, a cutting-edge academic publisher in the world. As a future-oriented, multi-disciplinary, international journal, FER encompasses a wide range of education-related issues and trends. Original articles that advance empirical, theoretical, and methodological understandings of education, teaching, and learning are welcome. FER invites innovative perspectives on the new policies, technologies, and theories across different levels of education. Interdisciplinary dialogs and multidisciplinary works aiming at shaping the sustainable development of education are cordially welcome. We hold great respect for all serious discussions about the future of education and educational research, because we believe that “[m]ultiple alternative futures are possible” (UNESCO, 2021, p. 3). The launch of FER indicates our hope and attempt to call upon scholars across countries and continents to imagine and shape the futures of education and educational research together.

This inaugural issue of FER exemplifies the mission of the journal. This issue features six articles discussing various possibilities of the future of education, which can be broadly categorized into three sections.

The first section comprises two articles focusing on the futures of public and private education, respectively. It starts with a historical review of the nine large-scale curriculum reforms since the founding of the People's Republic of China by Luo (2023, the issue), the co-editor in chief of FER. Luo considers that compared with previous national curriculum reforms in China, the ninth curriculum reform emphasizes the operability of Compulsory Education Curriculum Program and Standards (2022 Edition). It also pays attention to the interpretation of Curriculum Standards 2022 and teacher training, focuses on providing rich curriculum resources, and encourages curriculum innovation in regional and school-based levels. In the future, reform efforts will concentrate on optimizing the curriculum implementation, advancing localized adoption, and innovating pedagogical approaches to nurturing students. Luo provides an insider's reflection on the landscape and future of curriculum reform in public schools in China.

In contrast, White (2023, the issue), contributes an inspiring deliberation on the rights and wrongs of private education from a largely global but partly British perspective. White presents three arguments against private schools: they promote social exclusiveness, have created a ruling élite, and are unjust. Then, he critically discusses the meritocratic conception of society that it presupposes. Finally, he provides future perspectives on private schooling across the world. He looks at the proposed and actual measures to abolish or curtail them and explores educational proposals to limit the power of meritocracy, including reforms in the school examination system. In this way, White's discussion has an international relevance, even though he mainly targets private education in Britain.

The second section consists of two articles commonly focusing on the issue of student engagement in online learning environments. Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020, the global ecology of learning and teaching has been profoundly changed by information technologies. Hew and Huang (2023, the issue) point out that although online learning is becoming ubiquitous around the world, it is still perceived as a weaker option compared to on-campus face-to-face learning because of the persistent and prevalent lack of student engagement in online learning environments. After describing three key challenges of fully online learning, they present three possible strategies to address these challenges: promoting active learning through the online flipped classroom model, enhancing self-regulation skills, and reducing the sense of isolation through the use of chatbots. Through these discussions, Hew and Huang provide an insightful review of the possible strategies and directions to promote student engagement in online learning beyond the era of COVID-19.

Similarly, Yin (2023, the issue) addresses the concern of promoting student engagement in online learning from a more specific perspective. Using a sample of 5672 undergraduate students from eight higher education institutions in China, Yin examines the association between students' engagement and their online course experiences in emergency online learning during COVID-19. The results identify three types of pedagogical factors influencing student engagement, namely, three “extensively adaptive factors,” two “partially adaptive factors,” and one “dual-effect factor.” These findings indicate the importance of teacher training for instructors to make better use of online learning and reveal the pedagogical opportunities to improve student engagement in technology-mediated learning in the post pandemic era.

The third section contains two articles with similar interests in exploring the connections between the future of education and different forms of intelligence and technologies. Dietrich and Zakka (2023, the issue) provide a reflection on the relationships between education, neuroscience, and creativity. Inspired by the concept of multiple intelligences, creativity research, particularly from neuroscience, considers that there are also different types of creativity. However, the idea of different types of creativity has not yet taken hold in education because it is not the predominant approach in the neuroscience study of creativity. Dietrich and Zakka explain why empirical neuroscience research has failed to distinguish different types of creativity, and then outline the negative implications for education if creativity is continuously being treated as a monolithic entity. Finally, they introduce a division of creativity into three types that could result in a more individual approach to teaching and promoting creativity in classrooms.

Focusing on the emerging technology of ChatGPT, Liu et al. (2023, the issue) discuss the future of education in the era of generative artificial intelligence. Through a systematic review, they summarize the viewpoints of Chinese scholars and experts regarding the implementation of generative artificial intelligence in education. A majority of Chinese scholars support the cautious integration of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence into education, as they view it as a learning tool that offers personalized educational experiences for students. However, scholars also raise concerns related to academic integrity and the potential hindrance to students' critical thinking competence. As a result, they propose a framework called DATS to outline an optimization path for future applications of ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence in schools.

Taken together, these six articles in this inaugural issue of FER paint a vivid and complex picture with different possible futures of education. The discussions on various educational topics, the adoption of diverse research methods, and the syntheses of distinctive observations and reflections by individual researchers present readers a rich collection of intellectual explorations on the future of education.

FER, with the editorial team of the journal, sincerely invites you to join us and engage your expertise, wisdom, and passion to explore and develop the futures of educational research together.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Exploring the relationship between learning emotion and cognitive behaviors in a digital game Enhancing university students' learning performance in a metaverse-enabled immersive learning environment for STEM education: A community of inquiry approach Multidimensional challenges of internationalization among universities in Southeast Asia: A scoping review of empirical evidence Correction to Future in Educational Research articles
×
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