Tag: Assessments

#AI – Will they find their voice? Will we hear it?

I am thinking a LOT about AI. My participation in thinking and reading as a factor of my actual usage would be something in the realm of 1 million to 1 at the moment. Save for some tedious bits and pieces like analysing surveys and the occasional laziness in making very short book summaries (which I then have to correct extensively anyway) I’m just not feeling the joy. Please do not construe in any way that I am therefore “feeling the fear”. No. I’m just spending a lot of time exploring and thinking about it. And what it means. And in particular what it means for the current generation of students / young people.

I started blogging in 2003, and blogged about losing my identity as a person while I spent time being a SAHM, holding the threads of my existence together through bringing up children internationally, nuturing bilingual and multi-cultural beings. I then deleted that blog as it had become too personal, too well known and I had become too identifiable and my children had become adolescents and had a right to their own privacy and thoughts and being. Then I started studying to become an educator and librarian and spent four years in academic pursuit, where for many of my courses, blogging was a course requirement. It was a really good thing to make reflections on learning via blogs a course requirement. At WAB (my previous school) elementary students also blogged and I think there can be nothing as wonderful as seeing the thoughts, words and intellectual development of young people developing and maturing and growing over time. Nothing makes better writers than doing a lot of writing. And through writing, one does tend to become a better writer and find your “writers voice”.

Last week our school shut Grammarly off for students. It’s a tool that has always personally irritated me, as I still grew up with the luxury of uninterrupted schooling where we went to school for our lessons, did all our sports and activities after school at school, had no internet, and government controlled TV that only came in after I turned 12. It was a plain vanilla, no frills government school and there wasn’t even enough money for an arts programme. Yes, huge deficits in my education but I did get grammar. The old fashioned way. Swings and roundabouts.

What did Grammarly do? Well, the new update allows students to highlight a paragraph and request Grammarly to rephrase or improve their writing three times a day for free using AI. And teachers were being given work that didn’t reflect the thoughts, intents, abilities or voice of their students. Teachers care. They care deeply that tools can be used to aid the students that need it the most. They also care that tools don’t get in the way of intellectual and skill development. Writing well takes a LOT of practice and also a LOT of reading and if there are any short cuts I’m not aware of them.

The word of the year in 2023 was “Enshittification“, a termed coined by Cory Doctrow and explains the process of platforms first being good for their users, then abusing the users so businesses can make money off the users, then abusing the businesses go get a piece of the pie and then dying. It is the first two parts of the equation that are of most interest to me viz a viz education and AI.

“Being good for their users” needs a modifier – “appearing to be good for their users”. In his long form article Andrew Nikiforuk touches on “whole foods are being replaced by ultra-processed stuff” which was exactly the analogy I was thinking of while reading NYTimes wellness challenge of this week – the article talking about “Are ultraprocessed foods really that delicious?” and asking readers to compare an ultraprocessed product to its natural equivalent. Unfortunately for many young people when they compare their complex pubescent self to what media is telling them is “the real thing” they feel like they come up short, not the artificial reality. One of the disturbing trends with young people is their anxiety and obsession with being perfect (and not just academic – look at the beauty / makeup thing – talk about a distraction) – some of which is parent / adult driven through a failure to understand or recognise that young people are not hatched with perfect writing, grammar, thought, and research skills. That is the whole point of being at school. We’re seeing a bunch of ultra-processed writing and assignments and research at the moment and I’m not sure that it’s leading to better learning.

I’m currently reading “We do not welcome our 10-year-old Overlord by Garth Nix” – it’s a great middle grade version of this process of something external to humanity trying to take over under the auspices of “being good and doing good”. What I see, even with the most simple of all tools – a spelling check – is that students will type without any attention to spelling or capitalisation and expect the computer to mop up after them. And the next time the word / phrase is used they will continue to use it incorrectly and have auto-correct sort it out. The question then is whether there is any learning happening. And the meta question whether that learning needs to occur or not? Do we enter dangerous territory when we start deciding which students need to know things or not, develop skills in certain areas or not? We do not know what we don’t know and they definitely don’t. It would be way to easy to decide that perhaps some students don’t need to develop a writing voice and that it’s all so hard for them that it’s OK for AI or other tools to just take care of writing and editing what that tool thinks it is that the student is trying to express. Can you see where this is going? Because if we are not exposed to many ideas and thoughts and schools of thought and philosophies and histories how can we have enough information and knowledge under our belts to know what it is that we want to express? How can we know what OUR thoughts and feelings are when we’re in a feedback loop echo-chamber?

Back a little to the blogging thing – if students reflect on blogs that are open to the community it is so much easier to see what is normal and appropriate for each age group. Now we have writing that is largely hidden except to the teacher and their peers if they do comparative grading, and perhaps the adults in the lives of some of the students who will judge it by their adult standards AND whatever tools that are on student computers that again will transform the writing to some external adult standard. I’m also fascinated with, within the context of the apparent need for grading and scoring the work of students how granularity has decreased to the absurd point of students getting a score out of 4 for their efforts. Really? While packing up my life yet again for the move from China to Dubai I came across my old school reports. Everything was graded from 0-100 and there was plenty of room to improve from say a 69 to a 75 or an 89 to a 95 and no one ever ever ever got 100%. There was nuance. A lot of nuance. In the IB system scoring is to 8 and now in the American system it’s to 4. Talk about a blunt tool with which to sculpt learning!

I was just listening to Maggie Appleton (whose writings, as a cultural anthropologist turned Tech person on AI I really appreciate – particularly this one on the dark forest and generative AI) on the HanselMinutes podcast and I love her ideas about using AI for rubberducking – not just for IT debugging but for debugging your ideas and thoughts – although as she says it’s not really built for that as it’s more inclined to “yes AND” than to be a critical partner. I’m so long in the tooth that I remember when blogging was the medium for rubberducking your thoughts and every post got good handfuls of thoughtful comments by real people who would challenge or corroborate on your thinking. I made a lot of IRL friends off the back of blogging back in the day!

I’m fascinated about what other people think about student writing and student voice in writing as opposed to all that is being written about adult voice being taken over by AI – it is terrible, but how fortunate we have been to be allowed to develop a voice in the first place. Are we denying that to this generation of potential writers? Here is a link to one article in Writer’s Digest – of interest are all the other related articles at the bottom including some on maintaining voice as a comedian.

Assessment Item 8: Digital Storytelling Project and Reflection

Part A: Context for Digital Story Telling Project 

 “Knowledge, then, is experiences and stories, and intelligence is the apt use of experience, and the creation and telling of stories. Memory is memory for stories, and the major processes of memory are the creation, storage, and retrieval of stories.” (Schank & Abelson, 1995, p. 8)

In Asia, particularly Hong Kong, where parenting is a competitive sport, giving your children the opportunity to learn Chinese has become the holy grail of expatriate parenting.  Children are enrolled in language programs and immersion schools without much understanding or consideration of the possible consequences. Research is scant, seldom longitudinal and evidence is mainly anecdotal, A focus on positive success stories and oral ability prevails, while a climate of shame and fear prevents openness, analysis and understanding when children do not succeed.

Our family’s story of “chasing the dragon” is one of success, failure and ultimate triumph. Storytelling is a way of making sense of events and experiences and communicating this (Botturi, Bramani, & Corbino, 2012) to others in a similar situation.

The subject area covers language, bilingualism and mother tongue from both a pedagogical and socio-emotional point of view. The purpose is to illuminate the complexities underlying language choices in families in the international school context through storytelling.  The intended audience are parents, educators  and administrators in International Schools. This story will be basis of a presentation at a conference on language next year.  It will be used to add context to academic theory on mother-tongue, language learning and identity so that educators and parents alike not only have an intellectual understanding of the theories but an emotional response through this story to the platitude that “every child is unique”.

Academics and educators may lose sight of the fact that the audience that may best profit from their research and knowledge on bilingualism may only be vaguely aware of the information they need, often filtered through their own or other’s experience (King & Fogle, 2006). The intended audience of this project may have not have the time, inclination or access to scholarship in a form and format that is easily understood and resonates with them. Stories influence “attitudes, fears, hopes, and values” and are more effective at changing belief than persuasive writing as a result of changing how information is processed by the audience (Gottschall, 2012) due to escape into an alternative reality, connection with characters, emotional involvement and self-transformation (Green, Brock, & Kaufman, 2004).  The affordances of digital story-telling including audience participation enhance this engagement (Alexander, 2011). Although students are required to have a high level of English proficiency, often parents do not and their learning needs may therefore not be met. The affordance of digital storytelling is to incorporate multi semiotic systems that ‘allow for the linking and integration of cognitive, tacit, affective, cultural, personal, graphic and photographic ways of exploring, articulating, expressing and representing sense-making about learning and identity’ (Williams, 2009, cited in Walker, Jameson, & Ryan, 2010, p. 219).

Within the international school context, language is an area fraught with assumptions, misapprehension and emotion . This interactive digital experience has value for program implementation as it highlights many of the issues surrounding language acquisition and maintenance in an accessible format allowing for both breadth and depth in understanding of the topic.  Parents, with the best intentions in the world make pedagogically unsound decisions while educators, often coming from a mono-lingual background, may be unable to assist families in their linguistic paths and school administrators may be hampered to do right by the individual due to the logistical and cost complexity of catering to multiple linguistic backgrounds and nuances.

This project aims to increase awareness in all intended audiences so that choices can be made based on current understanding of best practice, educational and logistical issues and potential hurdles along the way. Perhaps we can let go of the “holy grail” of Chinese at the cost of our mother tongues and embrace, pursue and celebrate our own languages, culture and identity, reassured by what we know about language skill transferability.

Part B: Digital Story Telling Project

URL: chasingthechinesedragon.blogspot.com

Please note:

In the creation of my digital story, I have made extensive use of old video footage and photos of my children and others in a classroom setting. I have received the permission from my children to do so, and they partook in a series of interviews with me. However, in order to preserve their and others privacy and confidentiality I have decided to make the product and the blog in which the content occurs private until they are old enough to give permission that is legally binding. As they are now aged 11 and 12, I do not think their consent is as informed as it should be.

I would therefore request people to email me their email addresses so that I can include them on the list of people with permission to access the blog. I’m sorry for the inconvenience around this.

I have discussed this with a number of educators at our school and they feel this is the best way to proceed.

I will use some of the video clips and research for the presentation at the language conference in May, but that will be a dynamic rather than static presentation which will limit the exposure to a wide audience without the necessary context.

Part C: Critical Reflection

There are a number of dimensions related to working as an educational professional in the increasingly pervasive digital environment.  We no longer merely have a duty to teach content and information but need to equip ourselves, and our students with digital literacy and critical evaluative skills to deal with the multi-modal formats encountered in the education journey.

Value of digital story telling

In the “context” section, it was highlighted how effective stories are in changing belief and how information is processed and understood including the emotional engagement and interactive potential of digital media (Bailey, 2014c; Coleborne & Bliss, 2011; Gottschall, 2012; Green et al., 2004; Matthews, 2014).  A case can also be made for the role storytelling has in assimilating knowledge and memory (Schank & Abelson, 1995).

Tools and strategies for teaching / learning

In a recent essay, The Economist proposes a hierarchy of knowledge and learning and distinguishes between digital formats that have a function of “presenting people with procedural information they need in order to take on a simple task or fulfil a well-stated goal” versus teaching through “books” that can have its “pedagogy enriched by embedded media and software that adapts them to the user’s pace and needs” (The Economist, 2014, Chapter 5). Certainly the digital realm offers the possibility of engaging learners in a multi-modal environment which is more likely to resonate with their preferred way of receiving information provided the educator has a good understanding of how to select and use the tools (Anstey & Bull, 2012; Bowler, Morris, Cheng, Al-Issa, & Leiberling, 2012; Phillips, 2012; Unsworth, 2008; Walsh, 2010).

As educators our role needs to evolve and combine aspects of discovery, critical evaluation and enabling access to the most appropriate material (Dockter, Haug, & Lewis, 2010; Leacock & Nesbit, 2007; Nokelainen, 2006; Parrott, 2011), while at the same time educating our students to be mindful consumers and producers of content aware of the “weapons” in their and other’s storytelling “arsenal” and how these can be deployed for good and ill (Gottschall, 2012; Walker et al., 2010; Walsh, 2010).

Then there is the psycho/socio-neurological dimension of the impact digital literature has on how our students access, absorb, process and reflect on information and learning (Edwards, 2013; Goodwin, 2013; Jabr, 2013; Margolin, Driscoll, Toland, & Kegler, 2013; Wolf & Stoodley, 2008). Finally, for our students there are questions around the evolution of their skill sets as they move from consumption of digital products to creation, expression, engagement and interactivity (Hall, 2012).

Current and future developments

An exciting function of digital creations is the way materials can meet learning needs of all types of learners (Kingsley, 2007; Rhodes & Milby, 2007). However, one has to wonder about ephemeral nature of material, formats and platforms in the digital environment with the related issues of curation, preservation and archiving. Just as it appears that blogging as a tool for learning and storytelling has had its rise and demise, so too other platforms may not have longevity.

The whole field appears to be in its infancy with emerging and evolving norms, standards and platforms, (Maas, 2010; Valenza, 2014) where one can only wonder who the winners and losers will be.

Factors around design and publication

There are economic issues of efficiency, resource and time wastage as many individual teachers with varying levels of capability; capacity; understanding and access to tools attempt to participate in the creation of materials (Bailey, 2014b). One issue is the absence of a clearing house or “store” such as “Teachers pay Teachers” (Teachers Pay Teachers, 2014) or “Teacher created Resources” (Teacher Created Resources, 2014) so the discovery of relevant material remains serendipitous and local.  For example, YouTube abounds with “educational” material, but lacks a rating system appropriate for educational quality control including checking for producer bias.

For digital curriculum based material, critical mass, economies of scale, and the integration of pedagogy, design and technical tools and marketing are needed which puts educational publishers or organisation such as TED Education (Ted-ed, n.d.) rather than individual educators in a strong position to take control of this arena.

Copyright, Digital rights, licensing

There are issues around digital rights, rights management, copyright and the like, both for the creator and the consumer of digital products for the classroom. Cost and ownership is a tricky area as many products are leased rather than purchased, are platform captive and access to full text for students with disabilities may be precluded (Michaud, 2013; O’Brein, Gasser, & Palfrey, 2012; Puckett, 2010).

Conclusion

At the end of following this course, it could be suggested that the course name “Literature in Digital Environments” is a misnomer (Bailey, 2014a), and “Literacy in Digital Environments” could be an alternative title to encompass all the aspects of this rich arena.

References:

 

Alexander, B. (2011). Storytelling: A tale of two generations (Chapter 1). In The new digital storytelling: creating narratives with new media (pp. 3–15). Santa Barbara, California: Praeger.

Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2012). Using multimodal factual texts during the inquiry process. PETAA, 184, 1–12. Retrieved from http://chpsliteracy.wikispaces.com/file/view/PETAA+Paper+No.184.pdf

Bailey, N. (2014a, August 20). When is it digital literature? [Web Log post]. Retrieved October 12, 2014, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2014/08/20/when-is-it-digital-literature/

Bailey, N. (2014b, September 10). Module 4.1: What questions or answers do you have in relation to digital storytelling? [Web log post]. Retrieved October 12, 2014, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2014/09/10/module-4-1-what-questions-or-answers-do-you-have-in-relation-to-digital-storytelling/

Bailey, N. (2014c, September 30). Assessment item 7: Blog 4 – Electronic media and the nature of the story [Web log post]. Retrieved October 12, 2014, from http://thinkspace.csu.edu.au/informativeflights/2014/09/30/assessment-item-7-blog-4-electronic-media-and-the-nature-of-the-story/

Botturi, L., Bramani, C., & Corbino, S. (2012). Finding Your Voice Through Digital Storytelling. TechTrends, 56(3), 10–11. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0569-1

Bowler, L., Morris, R., Cheng, I.-L., Al-Issa, R., & Leiberling, L. (2012). Multimodal stories: LIS students explore reading, literacy, and library service through the lens of “The 39 Clues.” Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 53(1), 32–48.

Coleborne, C., & Bliss, E. (2011). Emotions, Digital Tools and Public Histories: Digital Storytelling using Windows Movie Maker in the History Tertiary Classroom. History Compass, 9(9), 674–685. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2011.00797.x

Dockter, J., Haug, D., & Lewis, C. (2010). Redefining Rigor: Critical Engagement, Digital Media, and the New English/Language Arts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(5), 418–420. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ871723&site=ehost-live

Edwards, J. T. (2013). Reading Beyond the Borders: Observations on Digital eBook Readers and Adolescent Reading Practices. In J. Whittingham, S. Huffman, W. Rickman, & C. Wiedmaier (Eds.), Technological Tools for the Literacy Classroom: (pp. 135–158). IGI Global. Retrieved from http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/978-1-4666-3974-4

Goodwin, B. (2013). The Reading Skills Digital Brains Need. Educational Leadership, 71(3), 78. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=91736083&site=ehost-live

Gottschall, J. (2012, May 2). Why Storytelling Is The Ultimate Weapon. Retrieved September 29, 2014, from http://www.fastcocreate.com/1680581/why-storytelling-is-the-ultimate-weapon

Green, M. C., Brock, T. C., & Kaufman, G. F. (2004). Understanding Media Enjoyment: The Role of Transportation Into Narrative Worlds. Communication Theory, 14(4), 311–327. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00317.x

Hall, T. (2012). Digital Renaissance: The Creative Potential of Narrative Technology in Education. Creative Education, 03(01), 96–100. doi:10.4236/ce.2012.31016

Jabr, F. (2013, April 11). The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens [Article]. Retrieved August 31, 2014, from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/

King, K., & Fogle, L. (2006). Bilingual Parenting as Good Parenting: Parents’ Perspectives on Family Language Policy for Additive Bilingualism. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(6), 695–712. doi:10.2167/beb362.0

Kingsley, K. V. (2007). Empower Diverse Learners With Educational Technology and Digital Media. Intervention in School & Clinic, 43(1), 52–56. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=26156207&site=ehost-live

Leacock, T. L., & Nesbit, J. C. (2007). A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Multimedia Learning Resources. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 44–59.

Maas, D. (2010, June). Web-based Digital Storytelling Tools and  Online Interactive Resources [Web Log]. Retrieved from http://maasd.edublogs.org/files/2010/06/Web-based-Digital-Storytelling-Tools-Online-Interactives-2gwjici.pdf

Margolin, S. J., Driscoll, C., Toland, M. J., & Kegler, J. L. (2013). E-readers, Computer Screens, or Paper: Does Reading Comprehension Change Across Media Platforms?: E-readers and comprehension. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(4), 512–519. doi:10.1002/acp.2930

Matthews, J., RGN BSc PG Dip. (2014). Voices from the heart: the use of digital storytelling in education. Community Practitioner, 87(1), 28–30. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1474889132?accountid=10344

Michaud, D. (2013). Copyright and Digital Rights Management: Dealing with artificial access barriers for students with print disabilities. Feliciter, 59(1), 24–30. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/docview/1286679756?accountid=10344

Nokelainen, P. (2006). An empirical assessment of pedagogical usability criteria for digital learning material with elementary school students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 178–197. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=85866426&site=ehost-live

O’Brein, D., Gasser, U., & Palfrey, J. G. (2012, July 1). E-Books in Libraries: A Briefing Document Developed in Preparation for a Workshop on E-Lending in Libraries. Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2012-15. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2111396

Parrott, K. (2011, July 18). 5 Questions to Ask When Evaluating Apps and Ebooks [Web log post]. Retrieved August 31, 2014, from http://www.alsc.ala.org/blog/2011/07/5-questions-to-ask-when-evaluating-apps-and-ebooks/

Phillips, A. (2012). A creator’s guide to transmedia storytelling: how to captivate and engage audiences across multiple platforms. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Puckett, J. (2010). Digital Rights Management as Information Access Barrier. Progressive Librarian, Fall-Winter(34/35), 11–24. Retrieved from http://www.progressivelibrariansguild.org/PL_Jnl/pdf/PL34_35_fallwinter2010.pdf

Rhodes, J. A., & Milby, T. M. (2007). Teacher-Created Electronic Books: Integrating Technology to Support Readers With Disabilities. The Reading Teacher, 61(3), 255–259. doi:10.1598/RT.61.3.6

Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1995). Knowledge and Memory:  The Real Story. In R. S. Wyer (Ed.), Knowledge and Memory: The Real Story (Vol. VIII, pp. 1–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/636/1/KnowledgeMemory_SchankAbelson_d.html

Teacher Created Resources. (2014). Teacher Created Resources – Educational Materials and Teacher Supplies. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from http://www.teachercreated.com/

Teachers Pay Teachers. (2014). TeachersPayTeachers.com – An Open Marketplace for Original Lesson Plans and Other Teaching Resources. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from http://www.teacherspayteachers.com/

TED-Ed. (n.d.). Lessons Worth Sharing. Retrieved October 12, 2014, from http://ed.ted.com/

The Economist. (2014, October). The future of the book. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21623373-which-something-old-and-powerful-encountered-vault

Unsworth, L. (2008). Multiliteracies, E-literature and English Teaching. Language and Education, 22(1), 62–75. doi:10.2167/le726.0

Valenza, J. (2014). The Digital Storytelling Tools Collection. Retrieved October 11, 2014, from https://edshelf.com/profile/joycevalenza/digital-storytelling-tools

Walker, S., Jameson, J., & Ryan, M. (2010). Skills and strategies for e-learning in a participatory culture (Ch. 15). In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 212–224). New York, NY: Routledge.

Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: What does it mean for classroom practice? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33(3), 211–239.

Wolf, M., & Stoodley, C. J. (2008). Proust and the squid: the story and science of the reading brain. New York: Harper Perennial.