We found 82 results that contain "adapt"
Posted on: GenAI & Education
Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education (and Learning)
The following are a collection of publicly sourced articles related to the recent rise of artificial intelligence in everyday applications.
note: following each [hyperlinked] title/subtitle are abstracts generated by ChatGPT after receiving prompts from M. Neal. "Write an abstract for [article link]" is indicated with [URL] abstract. "Write an abstract for [article text]" is indicated with [text] abstract. These very similar prompt-responses are shared consecutively in the hope that reading the abstracts will showcase the variations in ChatGPT output (despite similar input).
Deconstructing ChatGPT on the Future of Continuing Education
The future has arrived in continuing education—however, many have yet to realize the arrival.
[URL] Abstract: "The rise of AI technology and advancements in language models, such as ChatGPT, are poised to change the face of continuing education. The technology offers the potential for personalized and interactive learning experiences, making education more accessible and convenient for students. However, there are concerns about the potential job displacement and ethical implications of relying heavily on AI-powered learning systems. The article explores the potential benefits and drawbacks of ChatGPT and other AI systems in continuing education, and the need for careful consideration of these implications as the technology continues to evolve."
[text] Abstract: The recently released ChatGPT and GPT-3.5 from OpenAI have the potential to revolutionize the field of education. The advancements in AI technology will support heutagogy, which emphasizes student-centered, self-determined learning. AI will serve as a learning assistant, providing personalized and adaptive paths for learners. The technology promises universal access to education and a brighter future for lifelong learning. OpenAI has also taken steps to protect the system from providing harmful content, using a combination of a special prompt and Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). Early user responses have been positive, with some stating that ChatGPT could potentially replace human-written essays.
ChatGPT and the rise of AI writers: how should higher education respond?
The proliferation of AI text generators such as ChatGPT has major implications for higher education. Nancy Gleason explores how educators should respond to these tools which can write essays in seconds
[URL] Abstract: "The rise of AI language models like ChatGPT is having a significant impact on writing and journalism, and higher education must respond. As AI technology continues to improve and become more prevalent, it is likely to impact the skills and knowledge required of future writers and journalists. Higher education institutions must consider how to adapt and prepare students for a future where AI-generated writing is increasingly common. The article argues that higher education institutions must play a role in preparing students for the ethical and practical implications of working with AI systems and in shaping the future of writing and journalism in an age of AI."
[text] Abstract: The article discusses the latest developments in deep machine learning, specifically the highly sophisticated AI chatbot ChatGPT developed by OpenAI. The author notes that the new interface has attracted over a million users in just five days and that ChatGPT is free and can generate text in various structured languages. The author also acknowledges potential concerns, such as the accuracy and bias of AI-generated text, but argues that these are dynamic and improving. The author argues that higher education institutions need to embrace the use of AI-generated text, but also need to reassess their pedagogical and assessment practices to incorporate AI-generated text in a way that aligns with the goals of equity, inclusion, and access. The author suggests that assessment should focus on process rather than outcome and gives a sample class activity that encourages students to compare assigned readings with AI-generated content.
Chatgpt And Its Effects On Higher Education (Full article written by ChatGPT)
[URL] Abstract: The use of ChatGPT in higher education has both benefits and drawbacks. ChatGPT is a natural language processing model that can generate human-like text responses to input text, and is trained on large amounts of text data to learn the patterns and structures of human language. This makes it useful for enhancing language understanding, improving writing skills, and increasing accessibility for students with disabilities. However, NLP models can also reproduce and amplify biases and discrimination in the data they are trained on, have limited flexibility, and create a dependence on technology. Cheating on exams with NLP models is also possible and difficult to prevent, but strict monitoring and oversight can help mitigate this risk.
How ChatGPT Could Transform Higher Education
[URL] abstract: This article discusses the potential impact of OpenAI's language model, ChatGPT, on higher education. It highlights the ability of ChatGPT to provide personalized and automated answers to students' questions, allowing for more efficient and accessible education. The article also touches on the potential ethical considerations and the need for proper implementation and regulation in order to maximize the benefits and minimize potential negative consequences.
[text] abstract: ChatGPT is a large language model developed by OpenAI that excels in various text-based tasks, such as writing and composing. In the field of higher education, ChatGPT has the potential to revolutionize the way students and educators approach learning by providing personalized real-time responses to questions and needs. However, there are also significant dangers associated with the use of ChatGPT in higher education, including the potential for the model to reproduce biases and stereotypes and to reduce human interaction and personalized feedback in the learning process.
Freaking Out About ChatGPT—Part I
Artificial intelligence can crank out passable student essays in seconds. What are we going to do?
[text] article: The OpenAI ChatGPT interface has raised concerns in the academic community due to its ability to produce high-quality writing in seconds. The author, who has been monitoring the technology, finds the progress of GPT3 remarkable but also sees it as an opportunity to re-examine teaching practices and align them with pedagogical values. ChatGPT, however, has no understanding of content and cannot synthesize or evaluate information accurately. The author fed ChatGPT sample questions from past AP exams and was surprised by the quality of the responses. The author argues that the prevalence of standardized assessments and templates like the five-paragraph essay has corrupted the learning process and affected student writing abilities and attitudes towards writing and school. To address this, the author suggests providing students with learning experiences of intrinsic interest, utilizing methods of assessment that consider the learning process, and requiring students to demonstrate understanding in different ways.
[URL] abstract: The article "Freaking Out About ChatGPT- Part I" discusses the potential ethical and societal implications of OpenAI's language model, ChatGPT. The author highlights the concerns of chatbots being used for malicious purposes and the consequences of having AI models with advanced language capabilities. The article suggests that as AI technology continues to advance, it is crucial to consider the ethical implications and take steps to mitigate potential negative consequences.
Using Artificial Intelligence in the Classroom
[URL] abstract: This guide provides an overview of using artificial intelligence (AI) in the classroom. It discusses the benefits and challenges of incorporating AI technologies, such as chatbots and machine learning algorithms, into education. It also explores various examples of AI applications in education, such as personalized learning and language tutoring. The guide also provides recommendations for educators and institutions looking to integrate AI into their teaching practices.
[text] Abstract: ChatGPT, a new conversational artificial intelligence (AI) program, has sparked discussions on its potential impact on higher education and the workforce. While some fear its threat, instructors can use it as an opportunity to educate students on AI by incorporating it in their teaching methods. This approach can encourage student participation in a larger societal discussion, help them develop ethical grounding and understanding of academic integrity related to AI. To prepare, instructors should reflect on the potential threats and benefits, test AI themselves, revise assignments, consider data and privacy policies, and identify and communicate opportunities in their course.
4 Ways Universities Can Use AI to Streamline Operations
[URL] Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being adopted by universities to streamline their operations and improve the student experience. AI can help universities save time and resources by automating repetitive tasks, such as scheduling, student services, and administrative functions. There are several ways that universities can use AI to streamline operations and improve efficiency.
Personalized Student Services: AI can be used to provide students with personalized support and information, including admission and enrollment guidance, financial aid, and course scheduling.
Improved Admissions Process: AI can automate the time-consuming and repetitive task of reviewing and sorting through large numbers of applications, enabling universities to process applications faster and more efficiently.
Streamlined Administrative Functions: AI can automate routine tasks, such as student registration, grade reporting, and course scheduling, freeing up staff time and resources for more important tasks.
Enhance Student Learning: AI can be integrated into the curriculum, providing students with customized and interactive learning experiences that can improve their comprehension and retention of course material.
In conclusion, AI has the potential to revolutionize the way universities operate, improving efficiency and the student experience. Universities can use AI to streamline operations, save time and resources, and improve the overall educational experience.
[text] Abstract: This article explains the benefits of using AI chatbots in higher education institutions. AI chatbots can help reduce call and email volume, streamline the application process, increase availability and accessibility for students, and improve operational efficiency for staff. For example, chatbots can answer routine questions from students 24/7 and remind students about unfinished applications. This can increase the likelihood of students enrolling, leading to better margins for the institution. By improving operational efficiency, staff can focus on more complex interactions with students. Chatbots have already been successful in reducing costs for universities and colleges.
ChatGPT: A Must-See Before the Semester Begins
[URL] Abstract: The article "ChatGPT: A Must-See Before the Semester Begins" focuses on the application of advanced language model technology in the classroom. It highlights the potential benefits of using OpenAI's ChatGPT for educational purposes, including improved student engagement and increased efficiency in answering frequently asked questions. The article also provides tips for integrating ChatGPT into teaching practices, such as using it for language translation and enhancing discussion forums. Overall, the article emphasizes the importance of utilizing cutting-edge technology in education and presents ChatGPT as a valuable tool for educators.
[text] Abstract: This article discusses the potential impact of AI in education, specifically in the realm of writing. The author highlights the capabilities of a language model called ChatGPT, which is capable of generating various forms of writing including movie scripts, sonnets, grant proposals, and more. The author argues that the advent of AI writing technology could potentially lead to a shift in the way education is approached, moving away from traditional rote learning and towards a model that emphasizes student-driven learning and collaboration with AI. The author also raises questions about the ethical implications of AI writing, and encourages educators to consider the possibilities for creating more meaningful and purposeful learning experiences for students.
How Emotion AI will change the online learning landscape
[URL] Abstract: Emotion AI is a rapidly developing field that uses artificial intelligence to recognize and respond to human emotions. This technology has the potential to revolutionize the online learning landscape by creating a more personalized and engaging learning experience. By using Emotion AI, online learning platforms can track and respond to the emotional state of students, making the learning process more adaptive and effective. This article explores the benefits of Emotion AI in online learning and how it will shape the future of education.
[text] Abstract: Emotion AI, a branch of affective computing, is gaining mainstream attention for its ability to recognize and respond to human emotions. With the growth of technology, understanding both the cognitive and affective channels of human connection is crucial. As such, industries such as automotive, retail, and education are investing in making their technology more human-like using computer vision and speech recognition. In the education sector, Emotion AI is expected to transform online learning by providing a more personalized and engaging experience for learners. By monitoring the emotions of students and providing feedback to instructors, Emotion AI can improve the learning process and tailor the curriculum to each student's needs. The technology has the potential to play an increasingly important role in the online learning landscape and is likely to transform the way we learn in the future.
ChatGPT Advice Academics Can Use Now
To harness the potential and avert the risks of OpenAI’s new chat bot, academics should think a few years out, invite students into the conversation and—most of all—experiment, not panic.
[URL] Abstract: This article reports on advice offered by academic experts on how to use AI language models like ChatGPT in academia. The experts discuss the benefits and limitations of using AI language models, and offer suggestions on how to effectively integrate them into research and teaching. They also emphasize the importance of being aware of ethical considerations, such as ensuring the appropriate use of data and avoiding the spread of misinformation. The article provides valuable insights for academic institutions looking to utilize AI language models in their work.
[text] Abstract: With the advent of ChatGPT, a language model released by OpenAI, the academic community is grappling with the potential and risks posed by this game-changing technology. The bot writes essays, poems, and debates on a wide range of topics and has even earned passing scores on the bar exam. While some see opportunities for accelerating discussions about teaching and learning, others worry about widespread cheating. Experts in higher education suggest a deliberate and flexible approach to ChatGPT. Faculty members should familiarize themselves with AI writing aids and consider their implications for different courses. Administrators should support faculty training and provide clear instructions to students on the use of AI aids. The focus should be on how these tools can achieve learning outcomes and promote equity and access. By thinking a few years ahead and asking the right questions, academic integrity concerns can be minimized while promoting learning outcomes.
Thoughts about the impact of AI text on assessment
[URL] Abstract: The article "Thoughts About the Impact of AI on Text Assessment" explores the potential consequences of the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence in the field of text assessment. The author discusses the various advantages and disadvantages of relying on AI algorithms, including the ability to analyze large amounts of data quickly, the potential for unbiased scoring, and the possibility of oversimplifying complex linguistic phenomena. They also examine the ethical considerations involved in using AI for text assessment, such as accountability, privacy, and the potential for AI to perpetuate existing biases. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the impact of AI on text assessment and encourages readers to consider both the benefits and challenges of this technology.
[text] Abstract: The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT has raised concerns in the education community regarding their impact on assessment. The author highlights that AI-generated text is not a new problem, as similar issues exist with the use of search engines and essay-writing services. The truthfulness and trustworthiness of AI-generated text are not exclusive to AI, as people can also write untruthful information. The author suggests that the solution to assessment is not to rely on large texts or quizzes, but to focus on long-term engagement for building reputation. The education system needs to be restructured to keep small class sizes and emphasize 1:1 engagement for quality learning. The author also points out that AIs will play a significant role in our lives and need to be educated to be friendly and not competition.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
How to Productively Address AI-Generated Text in Your Classroom
What are ChatGPT and AI-generated text?
How can you most productively address Chat-GPT and other AI text tools?
Why might students use AI-generated text?
How can you identify AI-generated text?
How can you address AI-generated content in your syllabus and course design?
How can you adjust assignments to make them more AI-resistant?
How can you embrace the AI tools for improving student learning?
ChatGPT and AI in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges
Presenters: Vivek Astvansh, Paul Cook, Jeanette Heidewald, Rebecca Itow, Kevin Jones
Moderator: Adam Maksl
Recorded Wednesday, January 18, 2023 3 - 4 p.m. EST
A panel of faculty and experts across IU campuses explores the potential uses and challenges of ChatGPT and other AI technologies in teaching and learning. We've seen many media reports in recent weeks about the technology. Discussions have included not only concerns about students using the tool to cheat but also opportunities to use such tech in automating administrative tasks or proactively introducing students to technology likely to shape the future of work.
In this webinar, we provided a brief overview of the technology and explored these topics and more, identifying both challenges and opportunities for teaching and learning. Our panelists provided diverse, cross-disciplinary perspectives. This panel was the first in a series of programs offered across IU campuses on AI and its role in teaching and learning.
note: following each [hyperlinked] title/subtitle are abstracts generated by ChatGPT after receiving prompts from M. Neal. "Write an abstract for [article link]" is indicated with [URL] abstract. "Write an abstract for [article text]" is indicated with [text] abstract. These very similar prompt-responses are shared consecutively in the hope that reading the abstracts will showcase the variations in ChatGPT output (despite similar input).
Deconstructing ChatGPT on the Future of Continuing Education
The future has arrived in continuing education—however, many have yet to realize the arrival.
[URL] Abstract: "The rise of AI technology and advancements in language models, such as ChatGPT, are poised to change the face of continuing education. The technology offers the potential for personalized and interactive learning experiences, making education more accessible and convenient for students. However, there are concerns about the potential job displacement and ethical implications of relying heavily on AI-powered learning systems. The article explores the potential benefits and drawbacks of ChatGPT and other AI systems in continuing education, and the need for careful consideration of these implications as the technology continues to evolve."
[text] Abstract: The recently released ChatGPT and GPT-3.5 from OpenAI have the potential to revolutionize the field of education. The advancements in AI technology will support heutagogy, which emphasizes student-centered, self-determined learning. AI will serve as a learning assistant, providing personalized and adaptive paths for learners. The technology promises universal access to education and a brighter future for lifelong learning. OpenAI has also taken steps to protect the system from providing harmful content, using a combination of a special prompt and Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). Early user responses have been positive, with some stating that ChatGPT could potentially replace human-written essays.
ChatGPT and the rise of AI writers: how should higher education respond?
The proliferation of AI text generators such as ChatGPT has major implications for higher education. Nancy Gleason explores how educators should respond to these tools which can write essays in seconds
[URL] Abstract: "The rise of AI language models like ChatGPT is having a significant impact on writing and journalism, and higher education must respond. As AI technology continues to improve and become more prevalent, it is likely to impact the skills and knowledge required of future writers and journalists. Higher education institutions must consider how to adapt and prepare students for a future where AI-generated writing is increasingly common. The article argues that higher education institutions must play a role in preparing students for the ethical and practical implications of working with AI systems and in shaping the future of writing and journalism in an age of AI."
[text] Abstract: The article discusses the latest developments in deep machine learning, specifically the highly sophisticated AI chatbot ChatGPT developed by OpenAI. The author notes that the new interface has attracted over a million users in just five days and that ChatGPT is free and can generate text in various structured languages. The author also acknowledges potential concerns, such as the accuracy and bias of AI-generated text, but argues that these are dynamic and improving. The author argues that higher education institutions need to embrace the use of AI-generated text, but also need to reassess their pedagogical and assessment practices to incorporate AI-generated text in a way that aligns with the goals of equity, inclusion, and access. The author suggests that assessment should focus on process rather than outcome and gives a sample class activity that encourages students to compare assigned readings with AI-generated content.
Chatgpt And Its Effects On Higher Education (Full article written by ChatGPT)
[URL] Abstract: The use of ChatGPT in higher education has both benefits and drawbacks. ChatGPT is a natural language processing model that can generate human-like text responses to input text, and is trained on large amounts of text data to learn the patterns and structures of human language. This makes it useful for enhancing language understanding, improving writing skills, and increasing accessibility for students with disabilities. However, NLP models can also reproduce and amplify biases and discrimination in the data they are trained on, have limited flexibility, and create a dependence on technology. Cheating on exams with NLP models is also possible and difficult to prevent, but strict monitoring and oversight can help mitigate this risk.
How ChatGPT Could Transform Higher Education
[URL] abstract: This article discusses the potential impact of OpenAI's language model, ChatGPT, on higher education. It highlights the ability of ChatGPT to provide personalized and automated answers to students' questions, allowing for more efficient and accessible education. The article also touches on the potential ethical considerations and the need for proper implementation and regulation in order to maximize the benefits and minimize potential negative consequences.
[text] abstract: ChatGPT is a large language model developed by OpenAI that excels in various text-based tasks, such as writing and composing. In the field of higher education, ChatGPT has the potential to revolutionize the way students and educators approach learning by providing personalized real-time responses to questions and needs. However, there are also significant dangers associated with the use of ChatGPT in higher education, including the potential for the model to reproduce biases and stereotypes and to reduce human interaction and personalized feedback in the learning process.
Freaking Out About ChatGPT—Part I
Artificial intelligence can crank out passable student essays in seconds. What are we going to do?
[text] article: The OpenAI ChatGPT interface has raised concerns in the academic community due to its ability to produce high-quality writing in seconds. The author, who has been monitoring the technology, finds the progress of GPT3 remarkable but also sees it as an opportunity to re-examine teaching practices and align them with pedagogical values. ChatGPT, however, has no understanding of content and cannot synthesize or evaluate information accurately. The author fed ChatGPT sample questions from past AP exams and was surprised by the quality of the responses. The author argues that the prevalence of standardized assessments and templates like the five-paragraph essay has corrupted the learning process and affected student writing abilities and attitudes towards writing and school. To address this, the author suggests providing students with learning experiences of intrinsic interest, utilizing methods of assessment that consider the learning process, and requiring students to demonstrate understanding in different ways.
[URL] abstract: The article "Freaking Out About ChatGPT- Part I" discusses the potential ethical and societal implications of OpenAI's language model, ChatGPT. The author highlights the concerns of chatbots being used for malicious purposes and the consequences of having AI models with advanced language capabilities. The article suggests that as AI technology continues to advance, it is crucial to consider the ethical implications and take steps to mitigate potential negative consequences.
Using Artificial Intelligence in the Classroom
[URL] abstract: This guide provides an overview of using artificial intelligence (AI) in the classroom. It discusses the benefits and challenges of incorporating AI technologies, such as chatbots and machine learning algorithms, into education. It also explores various examples of AI applications in education, such as personalized learning and language tutoring. The guide also provides recommendations for educators and institutions looking to integrate AI into their teaching practices.
[text] Abstract: ChatGPT, a new conversational artificial intelligence (AI) program, has sparked discussions on its potential impact on higher education and the workforce. While some fear its threat, instructors can use it as an opportunity to educate students on AI by incorporating it in their teaching methods. This approach can encourage student participation in a larger societal discussion, help them develop ethical grounding and understanding of academic integrity related to AI. To prepare, instructors should reflect on the potential threats and benefits, test AI themselves, revise assignments, consider data and privacy policies, and identify and communicate opportunities in their course.
4 Ways Universities Can Use AI to Streamline Operations
[URL] Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being adopted by universities to streamline their operations and improve the student experience. AI can help universities save time and resources by automating repetitive tasks, such as scheduling, student services, and administrative functions. There are several ways that universities can use AI to streamline operations and improve efficiency.
Personalized Student Services: AI can be used to provide students with personalized support and information, including admission and enrollment guidance, financial aid, and course scheduling.
Improved Admissions Process: AI can automate the time-consuming and repetitive task of reviewing and sorting through large numbers of applications, enabling universities to process applications faster and more efficiently.
Streamlined Administrative Functions: AI can automate routine tasks, such as student registration, grade reporting, and course scheduling, freeing up staff time and resources for more important tasks.
Enhance Student Learning: AI can be integrated into the curriculum, providing students with customized and interactive learning experiences that can improve their comprehension and retention of course material.
In conclusion, AI has the potential to revolutionize the way universities operate, improving efficiency and the student experience. Universities can use AI to streamline operations, save time and resources, and improve the overall educational experience.
[text] Abstract: This article explains the benefits of using AI chatbots in higher education institutions. AI chatbots can help reduce call and email volume, streamline the application process, increase availability and accessibility for students, and improve operational efficiency for staff. For example, chatbots can answer routine questions from students 24/7 and remind students about unfinished applications. This can increase the likelihood of students enrolling, leading to better margins for the institution. By improving operational efficiency, staff can focus on more complex interactions with students. Chatbots have already been successful in reducing costs for universities and colleges.
ChatGPT: A Must-See Before the Semester Begins
[URL] Abstract: The article "ChatGPT: A Must-See Before the Semester Begins" focuses on the application of advanced language model technology in the classroom. It highlights the potential benefits of using OpenAI's ChatGPT for educational purposes, including improved student engagement and increased efficiency in answering frequently asked questions. The article also provides tips for integrating ChatGPT into teaching practices, such as using it for language translation and enhancing discussion forums. Overall, the article emphasizes the importance of utilizing cutting-edge technology in education and presents ChatGPT as a valuable tool for educators.
[text] Abstract: This article discusses the potential impact of AI in education, specifically in the realm of writing. The author highlights the capabilities of a language model called ChatGPT, which is capable of generating various forms of writing including movie scripts, sonnets, grant proposals, and more. The author argues that the advent of AI writing technology could potentially lead to a shift in the way education is approached, moving away from traditional rote learning and towards a model that emphasizes student-driven learning and collaboration with AI. The author also raises questions about the ethical implications of AI writing, and encourages educators to consider the possibilities for creating more meaningful and purposeful learning experiences for students.
How Emotion AI will change the online learning landscape
[URL] Abstract: Emotion AI is a rapidly developing field that uses artificial intelligence to recognize and respond to human emotions. This technology has the potential to revolutionize the online learning landscape by creating a more personalized and engaging learning experience. By using Emotion AI, online learning platforms can track and respond to the emotional state of students, making the learning process more adaptive and effective. This article explores the benefits of Emotion AI in online learning and how it will shape the future of education.
[text] Abstract: Emotion AI, a branch of affective computing, is gaining mainstream attention for its ability to recognize and respond to human emotions. With the growth of technology, understanding both the cognitive and affective channels of human connection is crucial. As such, industries such as automotive, retail, and education are investing in making their technology more human-like using computer vision and speech recognition. In the education sector, Emotion AI is expected to transform online learning by providing a more personalized and engaging experience for learners. By monitoring the emotions of students and providing feedback to instructors, Emotion AI can improve the learning process and tailor the curriculum to each student's needs. The technology has the potential to play an increasingly important role in the online learning landscape and is likely to transform the way we learn in the future.
ChatGPT Advice Academics Can Use Now
To harness the potential and avert the risks of OpenAI’s new chat bot, academics should think a few years out, invite students into the conversation and—most of all—experiment, not panic.
[URL] Abstract: This article reports on advice offered by academic experts on how to use AI language models like ChatGPT in academia. The experts discuss the benefits and limitations of using AI language models, and offer suggestions on how to effectively integrate them into research and teaching. They also emphasize the importance of being aware of ethical considerations, such as ensuring the appropriate use of data and avoiding the spread of misinformation. The article provides valuable insights for academic institutions looking to utilize AI language models in their work.
[text] Abstract: With the advent of ChatGPT, a language model released by OpenAI, the academic community is grappling with the potential and risks posed by this game-changing technology. The bot writes essays, poems, and debates on a wide range of topics and has even earned passing scores on the bar exam. While some see opportunities for accelerating discussions about teaching and learning, others worry about widespread cheating. Experts in higher education suggest a deliberate and flexible approach to ChatGPT. Faculty members should familiarize themselves with AI writing aids and consider their implications for different courses. Administrators should support faculty training and provide clear instructions to students on the use of AI aids. The focus should be on how these tools can achieve learning outcomes and promote equity and access. By thinking a few years ahead and asking the right questions, academic integrity concerns can be minimized while promoting learning outcomes.
Thoughts about the impact of AI text on assessment
[URL] Abstract: The article "Thoughts About the Impact of AI on Text Assessment" explores the potential consequences of the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence in the field of text assessment. The author discusses the various advantages and disadvantages of relying on AI algorithms, including the ability to analyze large amounts of data quickly, the potential for unbiased scoring, and the possibility of oversimplifying complex linguistic phenomena. They also examine the ethical considerations involved in using AI for text assessment, such as accountability, privacy, and the potential for AI to perpetuate existing biases. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the impact of AI on text assessment and encourages readers to consider both the benefits and challenges of this technology.
[text] Abstract: The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT has raised concerns in the education community regarding their impact on assessment. The author highlights that AI-generated text is not a new problem, as similar issues exist with the use of search engines and essay-writing services. The truthfulness and trustworthiness of AI-generated text are not exclusive to AI, as people can also write untruthful information. The author suggests that the solution to assessment is not to rely on large texts or quizzes, but to focus on long-term engagement for building reputation. The education system needs to be restructured to keep small class sizes and emphasize 1:1 engagement for quality learning. The author also points out that AIs will play a significant role in our lives and need to be educated to be friendly and not competition.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
How to Productively Address AI-Generated Text in Your Classroom
What are ChatGPT and AI-generated text?
How can you most productively address Chat-GPT and other AI text tools?
Why might students use AI-generated text?
How can you identify AI-generated text?
How can you address AI-generated content in your syllabus and course design?
How can you adjust assignments to make them more AI-resistant?
How can you embrace the AI tools for improving student learning?
ChatGPT and AI in Higher Education: Opportunities and Challenges
Presenters: Vivek Astvansh, Paul Cook, Jeanette Heidewald, Rebecca Itow, Kevin Jones
Moderator: Adam Maksl
Recorded Wednesday, January 18, 2023 3 - 4 p.m. EST
A panel of faculty and experts across IU campuses explores the potential uses and challenges of ChatGPT and other AI technologies in teaching and learning. We've seen many media reports in recent weeks about the technology. Discussions have included not only concerns about students using the tool to cheat but also opportunities to use such tech in automating administrative tasks or proactively introducing students to technology likely to shape the future of work.
In this webinar, we provided a brief overview of the technology and explored these topics and more, identifying both challenges and opportunities for teaching and learning. Our panelists provided diverse, cross-disciplinary perspectives. This panel was the first in a series of programs offered across IU campuses on AI and its role in teaching and learning.
Authored by:
Makena Neal & Chat GPT
Posted on: #iteachmsu
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation Summit Detailed Engagements Report (01/14/22)
Summary of CT&LI Summit Engagements
This report summarizes data gathered from the Center for Teaching and Learning (CT&LI) Kick-off Summit [held on Jan. 14, 2022] and following asynchronous engagement opportunities, as well as concurrent discussions within the center about space and services to directly address the questions in our charge. To read more about the Kick-off Summit, check out "Reflecting on the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation Kick-off Summit".
What factors should we consider when deciding where responsibility lies?
Aligning what is already in place; what units / local-level are already doing well.
How the Center and IT (particularly Academic Tech unit) work together.
How to ensure best use and highest purpose for any given resource.
What are the greatest areas of priority for increased collaboration and focus with regard to teaching and learning?
Development of service portfolio and communicating broadly/transparently (adjusting according to ongoing listening/feedback from users + assessment)
What are the demands/needs of educators? What are current/proposed services in the network? Evaluate gaps relative to current staffing.
Developing “the network” across campus
Developing and maintaining directories of available people, resources and services. Making opportunities for affiliation with the center explicit.
What are our highest areas of need for investment in new skills and expertise, regardless of where those skills are placed
Needed investment in distributed staffing to meet the needs of faculty in colleges/departments/units that may not be as robustly staffed as others in areas/services that the center will not be able to cover (e.g. course assistance).
Evaluation, assessment, feedback, and educational research.
Educator development programming and instructional consultative practitioners.
What models would you see as most effective for increased local support in those colleges or units that currently would not be able to participate in a networked model?
Liaison model, assigning center staff to units, if we add/repurpose positions.
Joint appointments and fellowships, if the center is willing to co-sponsor.
Sponsored work or partial buy-out of educators to augment center staffing.
What design engagements might come after the summit? For instance, to determine the center’s services, design its space, or develop a collaborative model for the network?
Faculty (in process), instructor, and additional educator stakeholder engagement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups.
Evaluation of available center skills, capabilities and available capacities.
Service design exercises specific to individual service portfolio items.
Engagement with IT to coordinate and co-design shared client experience.
Possible direct engagement with MSU students or student-educators (GTAs & ULAs)
Data Highlights
Services and Support Portfolio
Services
Responsive, point-of-need support, including individual consultations
Curriculum and program development
Course design / reform support and incubation
Development and training on various topics at various levels
Catalog of what to get where, and a directory to find people/expertise
Formal structure for online/hybrid course/program development and support
Space
Spaces that support delivery of training, hosting events, social gatherings
A place with presence to host and build the community of educators
Classroom space to experiment, innovate, and create digital experiences
“faculty can do one offs in a space to try something different with a class”
“technology to check out to use in classrooms (like VR or other tools)”
“space for recording teaching and support for editing”
Additional notes on physical space (data in evaluation re: Hub spaces not 1/14 Summit)
Dedicated desks for center staff, with mix of hot-seating / hotelling
Allows clients to meet with center consultants in semi-private settings
Variety of co-working spaces that enables part-time projects teams to gather
Small-group meeting spaces, high-flex tech enabled for remote participants
Individual booths to isolate noise from remote meetings from clients / coworkers
Connection and Collaboration
Hosting of events for collegiality, fellowship, networking and community building
Collaborative programming
Discipline specific or with faculty experts in certain pedagogies or approaches
With other central parties, e.g. MSU IT, DEI, Academic HR, student success, etc.
With faculty learning communities or administrative groups (e.g. online programs)
Sponsored institutional memberships and global virtual conference access for campus
Hosted and invited outside experts, presenters, and seminars or workshops
Fellowships for faculty with benefits for center, network, and the faculty fellow
Fellowships for graduate students that help them develop and gain hiring advantage
Opportunity for faculty/staff to affiliate with the center to encourage boundary-spanning
Teaching and Learning in Practice
Advocacy, leadership narratives, and communicative storytelling that elevate the importance of teaching and learning excellence at every level
Assessment, visibility, and recognition of teaching and learning
Emphasis on and recognition of teaching and learning in tenure and promotion
incentivizing teaching and learning efforts and allocation of time and talent
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL)
Additional Data Details (optional)
Wouldn’t It be Fantastic If (WIFI)
Description of Activity
In this activity the participants were asked to identify blue sky ideas to ultimately group into common themes and inform shared vision for the Center, Network, Teaching and Learning. Participants individually answered the prompt “Wouldn’t it be fantastic if (WIFI) … as many times as they could. Then in small groups, organized statements to show what might be influenced, controlled or created by the Center, Network, or Teaching and Learning.
Stakeholders raised a variety of needs, which were categorized as ed-tech support, resources, staffing, space, as well as coordination/planning. Building a network for these services seems to be something participants hope for, such as a “shared list of experts across campus to make finding the right person to ask easier”. Additionally, this item “explicit partnerships and shared services between the teaching center and other key support units,” speaks to the network.. When it comes to specific services, support for DEI in instruction, fostering innovative practices, instructional design, and pedagogy were among those most frequently mentioned. Consulting, training and events are delivery formats most often associated with the center.
The most common themes can be found here: WIFI Themes
What the Center should provide: Services, Space, Coordination
Services: Consulting, special projects to solve common problems, access to experts, and intramural grants / sponsorships.
A space to provide access to services and resources, and invite educators to gatherings.
Coordination of services and facilitation of collaboration between units and people.
E.g. Educator showcase, repository/ a knowledge-base, and events calendar for all offerings across the university
Opportunities for part-time affiliation to center, as fellows, or to staff services or projects.
Classroom space to innovate and create digital experiences
“where faculty can do one offs in a space to try something different with a class”
“technology to check out to use in classrooms (like VR or other tools)”
“space for recording teaching and support for editing”
What the Educator Network should provide: Coordination, Collaboration, Networking
Coordinate the Educator Network with participation of center and other stakeholders
Allow for collaboration and self-organizing
Recognition to colleagues who contribute
Functional network, depended on by clients (needs) and university (commissioned work)
Maintain a “list of experts”, make it easier to find “the right people” to ask.
Opportunities for learning space experimentation, in prototype classrooms and digital.
What the whole University should support in T&L: Services, Pedagogy Practices, EdTech
In this section, some participants understood Teaching and Learning as how it is viewed and supported by the administration, while others provided more specific ideas around teaching resources and services
Services and resources should be shared in a variety of ways and rather than being siloed all units should work together bringing the following together as shown in this quote “More collaboration and breaking down silos”
Creating a Network of experts coming from all units
Have connection points to colleges and “cross-college work” and working groups
Provide university funding for projects, “awards, innovation grants” for T&L.
“Both/And approach to broad everyone should know AND specific ideas in the disciplines or colleges”, perhaps with the center being more active in the former and the college more active in the latter such as DBER.
All educators may contribute and share pedagogy/best practices in peer-support.
Other supports include and may recognize needs of stakeholders: quality standards, DEI (including opportunities and accessibility), educational technology, and sponsored research such as SoTL, and those not typically included in educator support.
There should be tangible appreciation of the work of educators in Teaching and Learning, including leadership narratives and recognition for RPT.
What I need from you…
The What I Need From You (WINFY) activity asked participants to assume one of five roles, randomly assigned. These included Academic Unit Administrators, Faculty and Instructors, Center Affiliated Staff, College Affiliated Staff, and University-Wide Staff.
Each group was asked to outline what they needed from each of the other four groups to be successful in their roles. The following themes emerged from each of the groups, pointing to commonalities among groups about what each would like to see from the Center.
Services and Support Portfolio
A clear and concise services and support portfolio emerged as a major theme. All five groups said that services and support portfolio was what they needed- both as stakeholders in the center, as center staff working with those stakeholders, and those who were potential partners and patrons of the center. The services and support portfolio -of what the Center provides, what it can offer to help with course design, instructional design, and various other activities, and how to contact and use the center was foundational for all five groups.
Participants in the WINFY activity wanted to have clear definitions of roles and resources of the center; clearer collaboration with college faculty and staff on projects and programs; a better understanding of what types of questions can be referred to the center; and ad hoc but nimble service support. Specific requests included consultations, development and trainings for various comfort levels of instructors, a clear catalog of what to get where, cooperation with local support, a list of resources.
Connection and Collaboration
Another dominant theme across all five groups was the need for and understanding of connection and collaboration. Primarily, participants from the groups wanted other units to be collaborative with the center, to figure out how to connect across boundaries, and how to leverage and build relationships. Four of the groups mentioned more collaborative work with staff in the colleges who are currently working on teaching and learning initiatives. Three of the five groups mentioned collaborative program opportunities, and two of the five groups mentioned a networked approach.
Teaching and Learning in Practice
The third theme that all five groups mentioned was what we are calling teaching and learning in practice. This encompasses a number of things, including teaching and learning in tenure and promotion, incentivizing teaching and learning, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. There was again the need for collaborative programming, this time with discipline specific colleges and with faculty who are experts in certain pedagogies or approaches. One group wanted to know what teaching and learning capabilities are available to help other educators, while another said that assistance with aligning course level objectives, assessments, and curricula with the institutional practices and the resources of the center would be useful. The Academic Unit Administrator and the Faculty group both had incentivizing teaching and learning as something they’d like to see from the center and center staff. There also was an overarching theme of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) but none of the groups made it their top priority-it did emerge as a theme though, so important to highlight here.
Minimum Viable Product Reviews
The “minimum viable product” activity was framed as a Yelp review session. Participants were paired in teams of two and asked to take on the perspective of an educator who had worked with the Center for T&LI and had a positive experience. Throughout the 17 combined Center “reviews” the following were the top ten most mentioned themes/services. Within each of these areas, participants in the 01/14/2022 Kick-off Summit mentioned a range of examples (i.e. Center experiences [per activity instructions]). High level captures of examples for each are included below.
Coaching/Consultation (Feedback, Support, Emotional Support)
Almost 65% of the reviews mentioned some version of coaching or consultation (including additional keywords such as feedback, support, guiding, and helping). Some examples of topics and underlying services within this category include: restructuring programs, refining crouse design, and reviewing curriculum; developing formative and summative assessments, transitioning to different feedback models, and integrating student voice; and finally combining theory and practice, integrating technology and pedagogy, as well as course alignment and student engagement.
Pedagogy (Student Voice)
Over half of the reviews related to methods and practices for engaging in teaching. Examples of experiences and services related to this topic include but are not limited to: support and guidance for strategies, envisioning difference learning experiences, participating in design experiences to try new approaches to teaching and learning; integrate research and teaching; focus on student experiences, create supporting and effective learning experiences, create inclusive and welcoming spaces.
Restructure/Redesign (Modality, Curriculum)
41% of reviews specifically called out redesign as a service of the Center. Examples of restructure and redesign (including topics of modality and curriculum) in the experience reviews include but are not limited to: moving face to face courses online (and planning for possible future transitions) and adapting class to a different structure (i.e. rubric or flipped models, competency-based learning outcomes, trauma informed teaching, asset based practices, etc.).
Student Experience (Engagement, Student-Centered)
41% of reviews mention the Center supporting them in ways that positively impacted student experience, student engagement, and student-centered design. Examples of this theme include: creating welcoming, supportive, and effective learning environments; reviewing curriculum and developing rubrics with respect to student engagement (and adjusting as necessary); and learning about theories of improving student connections to engage with them more effectively.
Confidence (Empowered)
35% of reviews specifically denote improvements in educator confidence and empowerment after working with the Center. Topics where educators had this improved sense of ability and agency included student centered teaching and learning practices, creating supportive and effective learning environments, initiating collaborative partnerships, and general teaching and learning experimentation and implementation.
Collaboration/Partnerships
35% of reviews emphasized the importance of collaborative partnerships with the Center across units. This ranged from individual consultations with faculty to full-scale curricular and program developments. The nature of these partnerships in terms of scope and focus varied in the reviews, but what remained consistent was the value that is derived from these relationships with the Center.
Connection/Community
18% underscored the importance of connection to a network of educators through the Center and the community that is derived from it. This was mentioned in the context of relationships built with Center staff along with events where networking takes place. Sometimes, educators connecting with other educators can make a huge difference in their teaching as it provides essential opportunities for sharing what is being done and learned in one context to another.
Assessment
Assessment was mentioned by 18% of the reviews as being an important piece of expertise that the Center can offer to faculty and programs at MSU. Of course, assessment comes in a myriad of forms and faculty are often seeking ways to improve on their assessment strategies and design.
Inclusion
18% of the reviews made mention of how consultative relationships with the Center could help them improve their efforts around accessibility and inclusion in their classrooms and digital learning environments.
Research/SOTL (Scholarship of Teaching & Learning)
12% of the reviews mentioned various ways they envisioned that the Center staff could help them with their research and scholarship efforts. Examples were not provided in the reviews specifically, but we know that the approaches to research in the scholarship of teaching and learning in particular at MSU are vastly different from college to college and that the Center staff have a great deal of experience and expertise in these areas.
This report summarizes data gathered from the Center for Teaching and Learning (CT&LI) Kick-off Summit [held on Jan. 14, 2022] and following asynchronous engagement opportunities, as well as concurrent discussions within the center about space and services to directly address the questions in our charge. To read more about the Kick-off Summit, check out "Reflecting on the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation Kick-off Summit".
What factors should we consider when deciding where responsibility lies?
Aligning what is already in place; what units / local-level are already doing well.
How the Center and IT (particularly Academic Tech unit) work together.
How to ensure best use and highest purpose for any given resource.
What are the greatest areas of priority for increased collaboration and focus with regard to teaching and learning?
Development of service portfolio and communicating broadly/transparently (adjusting according to ongoing listening/feedback from users + assessment)
What are the demands/needs of educators? What are current/proposed services in the network? Evaluate gaps relative to current staffing.
Developing “the network” across campus
Developing and maintaining directories of available people, resources and services. Making opportunities for affiliation with the center explicit.
What are our highest areas of need for investment in new skills and expertise, regardless of where those skills are placed
Needed investment in distributed staffing to meet the needs of faculty in colleges/departments/units that may not be as robustly staffed as others in areas/services that the center will not be able to cover (e.g. course assistance).
Evaluation, assessment, feedback, and educational research.
Educator development programming and instructional consultative practitioners.
What models would you see as most effective for increased local support in those colleges or units that currently would not be able to participate in a networked model?
Liaison model, assigning center staff to units, if we add/repurpose positions.
Joint appointments and fellowships, if the center is willing to co-sponsor.
Sponsored work or partial buy-out of educators to augment center staffing.
What design engagements might come after the summit? For instance, to determine the center’s services, design its space, or develop a collaborative model for the network?
Faculty (in process), instructor, and additional educator stakeholder engagement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups.
Evaluation of available center skills, capabilities and available capacities.
Service design exercises specific to individual service portfolio items.
Engagement with IT to coordinate and co-design shared client experience.
Possible direct engagement with MSU students or student-educators (GTAs & ULAs)
Data Highlights
Services and Support Portfolio
Services
Responsive, point-of-need support, including individual consultations
Curriculum and program development
Course design / reform support and incubation
Development and training on various topics at various levels
Catalog of what to get where, and a directory to find people/expertise
Formal structure for online/hybrid course/program development and support
Space
Spaces that support delivery of training, hosting events, social gatherings
A place with presence to host and build the community of educators
Classroom space to experiment, innovate, and create digital experiences
“faculty can do one offs in a space to try something different with a class”
“technology to check out to use in classrooms (like VR or other tools)”
“space for recording teaching and support for editing”
Additional notes on physical space (data in evaluation re: Hub spaces not 1/14 Summit)
Dedicated desks for center staff, with mix of hot-seating / hotelling
Allows clients to meet with center consultants in semi-private settings
Variety of co-working spaces that enables part-time projects teams to gather
Small-group meeting spaces, high-flex tech enabled for remote participants
Individual booths to isolate noise from remote meetings from clients / coworkers
Connection and Collaboration
Hosting of events for collegiality, fellowship, networking and community building
Collaborative programming
Discipline specific or with faculty experts in certain pedagogies or approaches
With other central parties, e.g. MSU IT, DEI, Academic HR, student success, etc.
With faculty learning communities or administrative groups (e.g. online programs)
Sponsored institutional memberships and global virtual conference access for campus
Hosted and invited outside experts, presenters, and seminars or workshops
Fellowships for faculty with benefits for center, network, and the faculty fellow
Fellowships for graduate students that help them develop and gain hiring advantage
Opportunity for faculty/staff to affiliate with the center to encourage boundary-spanning
Teaching and Learning in Practice
Advocacy, leadership narratives, and communicative storytelling that elevate the importance of teaching and learning excellence at every level
Assessment, visibility, and recognition of teaching and learning
Emphasis on and recognition of teaching and learning in tenure and promotion
incentivizing teaching and learning efforts and allocation of time and talent
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL)
Additional Data Details (optional)
Wouldn’t It be Fantastic If (WIFI)
Description of Activity
In this activity the participants were asked to identify blue sky ideas to ultimately group into common themes and inform shared vision for the Center, Network, Teaching and Learning. Participants individually answered the prompt “Wouldn’t it be fantastic if (WIFI) … as many times as they could. Then in small groups, organized statements to show what might be influenced, controlled or created by the Center, Network, or Teaching and Learning.
Stakeholders raised a variety of needs, which were categorized as ed-tech support, resources, staffing, space, as well as coordination/planning. Building a network for these services seems to be something participants hope for, such as a “shared list of experts across campus to make finding the right person to ask easier”. Additionally, this item “explicit partnerships and shared services between the teaching center and other key support units,” speaks to the network.. When it comes to specific services, support for DEI in instruction, fostering innovative practices, instructional design, and pedagogy were among those most frequently mentioned. Consulting, training and events are delivery formats most often associated with the center.
The most common themes can be found here: WIFI Themes
What the Center should provide: Services, Space, Coordination
Services: Consulting, special projects to solve common problems, access to experts, and intramural grants / sponsorships.
A space to provide access to services and resources, and invite educators to gatherings.
Coordination of services and facilitation of collaboration between units and people.
E.g. Educator showcase, repository/ a knowledge-base, and events calendar for all offerings across the university
Opportunities for part-time affiliation to center, as fellows, or to staff services or projects.
Classroom space to innovate and create digital experiences
“where faculty can do one offs in a space to try something different with a class”
“technology to check out to use in classrooms (like VR or other tools)”
“space for recording teaching and support for editing”
What the Educator Network should provide: Coordination, Collaboration, Networking
Coordinate the Educator Network with participation of center and other stakeholders
Allow for collaboration and self-organizing
Recognition to colleagues who contribute
Functional network, depended on by clients (needs) and university (commissioned work)
Maintain a “list of experts”, make it easier to find “the right people” to ask.
Opportunities for learning space experimentation, in prototype classrooms and digital.
What the whole University should support in T&L: Services, Pedagogy Practices, EdTech
In this section, some participants understood Teaching and Learning as how it is viewed and supported by the administration, while others provided more specific ideas around teaching resources and services
Services and resources should be shared in a variety of ways and rather than being siloed all units should work together bringing the following together as shown in this quote “More collaboration and breaking down silos”
Creating a Network of experts coming from all units
Have connection points to colleges and “cross-college work” and working groups
Provide university funding for projects, “awards, innovation grants” for T&L.
“Both/And approach to broad everyone should know AND specific ideas in the disciplines or colleges”, perhaps with the center being more active in the former and the college more active in the latter such as DBER.
All educators may contribute and share pedagogy/best practices in peer-support.
Other supports include and may recognize needs of stakeholders: quality standards, DEI (including opportunities and accessibility), educational technology, and sponsored research such as SoTL, and those not typically included in educator support.
There should be tangible appreciation of the work of educators in Teaching and Learning, including leadership narratives and recognition for RPT.
What I need from you…
The What I Need From You (WINFY) activity asked participants to assume one of five roles, randomly assigned. These included Academic Unit Administrators, Faculty and Instructors, Center Affiliated Staff, College Affiliated Staff, and University-Wide Staff.
Each group was asked to outline what they needed from each of the other four groups to be successful in their roles. The following themes emerged from each of the groups, pointing to commonalities among groups about what each would like to see from the Center.
Services and Support Portfolio
A clear and concise services and support portfolio emerged as a major theme. All five groups said that services and support portfolio was what they needed- both as stakeholders in the center, as center staff working with those stakeholders, and those who were potential partners and patrons of the center. The services and support portfolio -of what the Center provides, what it can offer to help with course design, instructional design, and various other activities, and how to contact and use the center was foundational for all five groups.
Participants in the WINFY activity wanted to have clear definitions of roles and resources of the center; clearer collaboration with college faculty and staff on projects and programs; a better understanding of what types of questions can be referred to the center; and ad hoc but nimble service support. Specific requests included consultations, development and trainings for various comfort levels of instructors, a clear catalog of what to get where, cooperation with local support, a list of resources.
Connection and Collaboration
Another dominant theme across all five groups was the need for and understanding of connection and collaboration. Primarily, participants from the groups wanted other units to be collaborative with the center, to figure out how to connect across boundaries, and how to leverage and build relationships. Four of the groups mentioned more collaborative work with staff in the colleges who are currently working on teaching and learning initiatives. Three of the five groups mentioned collaborative program opportunities, and two of the five groups mentioned a networked approach.
Teaching and Learning in Practice
The third theme that all five groups mentioned was what we are calling teaching and learning in practice. This encompasses a number of things, including teaching and learning in tenure and promotion, incentivizing teaching and learning, and the scholarship of teaching and learning. There was again the need for collaborative programming, this time with discipline specific colleges and with faculty who are experts in certain pedagogies or approaches. One group wanted to know what teaching and learning capabilities are available to help other educators, while another said that assistance with aligning course level objectives, assessments, and curricula with the institutional practices and the resources of the center would be useful. The Academic Unit Administrator and the Faculty group both had incentivizing teaching and learning as something they’d like to see from the center and center staff. There also was an overarching theme of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) but none of the groups made it their top priority-it did emerge as a theme though, so important to highlight here.
Minimum Viable Product Reviews
The “minimum viable product” activity was framed as a Yelp review session. Participants were paired in teams of two and asked to take on the perspective of an educator who had worked with the Center for T&LI and had a positive experience. Throughout the 17 combined Center “reviews” the following were the top ten most mentioned themes/services. Within each of these areas, participants in the 01/14/2022 Kick-off Summit mentioned a range of examples (i.e. Center experiences [per activity instructions]). High level captures of examples for each are included below.
Coaching/Consultation (Feedback, Support, Emotional Support)
Almost 65% of the reviews mentioned some version of coaching or consultation (including additional keywords such as feedback, support, guiding, and helping). Some examples of topics and underlying services within this category include: restructuring programs, refining crouse design, and reviewing curriculum; developing formative and summative assessments, transitioning to different feedback models, and integrating student voice; and finally combining theory and practice, integrating technology and pedagogy, as well as course alignment and student engagement.
Pedagogy (Student Voice)
Over half of the reviews related to methods and practices for engaging in teaching. Examples of experiences and services related to this topic include but are not limited to: support and guidance for strategies, envisioning difference learning experiences, participating in design experiences to try new approaches to teaching and learning; integrate research and teaching; focus on student experiences, create supporting and effective learning experiences, create inclusive and welcoming spaces.
Restructure/Redesign (Modality, Curriculum)
41% of reviews specifically called out redesign as a service of the Center. Examples of restructure and redesign (including topics of modality and curriculum) in the experience reviews include but are not limited to: moving face to face courses online (and planning for possible future transitions) and adapting class to a different structure (i.e. rubric or flipped models, competency-based learning outcomes, trauma informed teaching, asset based practices, etc.).
Student Experience (Engagement, Student-Centered)
41% of reviews mention the Center supporting them in ways that positively impacted student experience, student engagement, and student-centered design. Examples of this theme include: creating welcoming, supportive, and effective learning environments; reviewing curriculum and developing rubrics with respect to student engagement (and adjusting as necessary); and learning about theories of improving student connections to engage with them more effectively.
Confidence (Empowered)
35% of reviews specifically denote improvements in educator confidence and empowerment after working with the Center. Topics where educators had this improved sense of ability and agency included student centered teaching and learning practices, creating supportive and effective learning environments, initiating collaborative partnerships, and general teaching and learning experimentation and implementation.
Collaboration/Partnerships
35% of reviews emphasized the importance of collaborative partnerships with the Center across units. This ranged from individual consultations with faculty to full-scale curricular and program developments. The nature of these partnerships in terms of scope and focus varied in the reviews, but what remained consistent was the value that is derived from these relationships with the Center.
Connection/Community
18% underscored the importance of connection to a network of educators through the Center and the community that is derived from it. This was mentioned in the context of relationships built with Center staff along with events where networking takes place. Sometimes, educators connecting with other educators can make a huge difference in their teaching as it provides essential opportunities for sharing what is being done and learned in one context to another.
Assessment
Assessment was mentioned by 18% of the reviews as being an important piece of expertise that the Center can offer to faculty and programs at MSU. Of course, assessment comes in a myriad of forms and faculty are often seeking ways to improve on their assessment strategies and design.
Inclusion
18% of the reviews made mention of how consultative relationships with the Center could help them improve their efforts around accessibility and inclusion in their classrooms and digital learning environments.
Research/SOTL (Scholarship of Teaching & Learning)
12% of the reviews mentioned various ways they envisioned that the Center staff could help them with their research and scholarship efforts. Examples were not provided in the reviews specifically, but we know that the approaches to research in the scholarship of teaching and learning in particular at MSU are vastly different from college to college and that the Center staff have a great deal of experience and expertise in these areas.
Authored by:
Makena Neal, Jessica Sender, Dave Goodrich, Brendan Guent...
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation Summit Detailed Engagements Report (01/14/22)
Summary of CT&LI Summit Engagements
This report summarizes data...
This report summarizes data...
Authored by:
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
Tuesday, Apr 12, 2022
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Navigating Difficult Moments in the Classroom
The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University has shared what to do if a difficult (also referred to as "hot") moment has arisen in your classroom.
While there’s often no single “right” response, as the instructor, how you address difficult moments in the classroom has implications for learning. Your response can communicate indifference or even hostility; alternatively, it can show that you’re aware of your classroom’s dynamics, you aim to promote learning even through struggle, and you care about your students’ well-being. Here are some tips for helping you to respond productively.
Attend to your own reactions. Take a moment to steady yourself. A couple deep breaths can be helpful here. Though it may be challenging, holding steady while navigating a difficult moment can help others feel safe, less reactive, and better able to slow down and explore the dynamics at work in the situation. There are likely many different, complicated responses playing out in the room. What are you feeling? Allow yourself a pause; you can even invite everyone in the room to pause along with you. How are others reacting to what is happening? You can offer everyone some time to think, write, or even leave the room for a bit. Observe your own reactions to what is happening. Try to distinguish between what you are experiencing, what is actually being said or done, and the various possible interpretations of what is happening. There’s a lot going on in this moment! Attending to your reactions is a skill to be practiced.
Understand the situation. It’s possible that, in the heat and complexity of the moment, there has been some misunderstanding. Maybe someone has misspoken or you’ve mistaken their meaning. Others in the room may be in the same situation, wondering whether they've heard and understood a comment correctly, for instance. It's important to make sure that your understanding of the situation is as accurate as possible and sensitive to the different perspectives present in the room. It may be fitting to ask the person or people involved for further explanation or clarification. If the difficult moment was sparked by a comment, you could try repeating back the comment or its logical implications – not as an accusation, but to allow the speaker to clarify their meaning. You might ask: “What makes you say that?” or “Can you say more about what you mean?” Try to discern if there is a learning opportunity here, or perhaps a need for articulating boundaries.
Deepen and nuance your short-term response. You’ve slowed down the situation, attended to your reactions, and asked for further explanation or clarification as needed. As noted above, the dynamics at play in this moment are complex! How can you deepen and nuance your response in the short-term? For one, try and separate the utterance, idea, or action from the person who articulated or performed it. Hold people accountable for what they say and do; also recognize that a single offensive or even harmful act doesn’t reveal the entirety of someone’s character and motives. You can make it clear that a comment or act is unwelcome in the classroom, even while admitting you’re not sure precisely why or how it came about. For another, you might acknowledge the various emotional responses in the room as material that can contribute meaningfully to class discussion. Can these responses reveal something interesting about a concept that is being studied or a method being practiced? This move can both validate the different kinds of responses unfolding for individuals in the room and communicate that lived experience is relevant for classroom learning.
Consider your long-term response. Your short-term response to a difficult moment need not be your only response. Do you think the moment requires follow-up action so that future classes aren’t negatively affected? Would it be helpful to check-in with the class or certain individuals either via email or during the next class meeting? If you perceived harm being done or unease being instigated, you may offer to talk with a student or students after class, over email or in-person. You may also consider how chances for feedback and communication of personal experience might be incorporated in the ongoing class structure. Perhaps invite everyone to write or share exit notes at the end of every class, or maybe you collect feedback at several points throughout the semester. Regular opportunities to articulate one’s experience in a course can do much toward alleviating the pressure placed on any one emotionally intense moment; they also help cultivate a practice of reflection and self-awareness.
Five Strategies to Interrupt Hot Moments from MSU IDI:
CURIOSITY: Ask powerful questions and listen generously to answers. Lead a dialogue balancing all voices in the class. Make sure to surface historically marginalized perspectives.
WRITING EXERCISE: Have students write responses to:
“What I know about this topic…”
“What I want to learn…”
“What I want to say….”
You may ask them to respond anonymously, collect and review to determine how to proceed next time.
SMALL GROUPS: Divide students into groups of 2 or 3 and give them prompts (from above or others); debrief or have them write.
CONTENT/DATA SHARE: Create a graph and ask students what they already know about this topic, what they need to find out. What do we know about this issue historically?
NAMING AND FRAMING: Sometimes it is useful to actually stop the conversation and ask the group to name and explore something that just happened during the conversation. Move away from the specifics of the issue and ask class “what happened here?” Solicit ideas about what, why, how to move forward.
Looking for more resources? Check out the amazing work done by educator development team at the University of Michigan's Center for Research on Teaching and Learning. They provide strategies for anticipating and responding to difficult discussions as well as classroom incivility:
Guidelines for planning and facilitating discussions on difficult or controversial topics
Responding to incidents of hate speech
Teaching and learning in a tense election season
Strategies for making productive use of tense or difficult moments
Facilitating Challenging Conversations in your Classes (blog post)
Sample guidelines for class participation
Guidelines for responding to particular topics and tragedies
Responding to Incivility in the College Classroom
Thank you to colleagues in university educator development at the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University, the Center for Research on Teaching and Learning at the University of Michigan, Institutional Diversity and Inclusion at Michigan State University, and others for their materials that informed or were adapted into this resource. Photo by Patrick Hendry on Unsplash
While there’s often no single “right” response, as the instructor, how you address difficult moments in the classroom has implications for learning. Your response can communicate indifference or even hostility; alternatively, it can show that you’re aware of your classroom’s dynamics, you aim to promote learning even through struggle, and you care about your students’ well-being. Here are some tips for helping you to respond productively.
Attend to your own reactions. Take a moment to steady yourself. A couple deep breaths can be helpful here. Though it may be challenging, holding steady while navigating a difficult moment can help others feel safe, less reactive, and better able to slow down and explore the dynamics at work in the situation. There are likely many different, complicated responses playing out in the room. What are you feeling? Allow yourself a pause; you can even invite everyone in the room to pause along with you. How are others reacting to what is happening? You can offer everyone some time to think, write, or even leave the room for a bit. Observe your own reactions to what is happening. Try to distinguish between what you are experiencing, what is actually being said or done, and the various possible interpretations of what is happening. There’s a lot going on in this moment! Attending to your reactions is a skill to be practiced.
Understand the situation. It’s possible that, in the heat and complexity of the moment, there has been some misunderstanding. Maybe someone has misspoken or you’ve mistaken their meaning. Others in the room may be in the same situation, wondering whether they've heard and understood a comment correctly, for instance. It's important to make sure that your understanding of the situation is as accurate as possible and sensitive to the different perspectives present in the room. It may be fitting to ask the person or people involved for further explanation or clarification. If the difficult moment was sparked by a comment, you could try repeating back the comment or its logical implications – not as an accusation, but to allow the speaker to clarify their meaning. You might ask: “What makes you say that?” or “Can you say more about what you mean?” Try to discern if there is a learning opportunity here, or perhaps a need for articulating boundaries.
Deepen and nuance your short-term response. You’ve slowed down the situation, attended to your reactions, and asked for further explanation or clarification as needed. As noted above, the dynamics at play in this moment are complex! How can you deepen and nuance your response in the short-term? For one, try and separate the utterance, idea, or action from the person who articulated or performed it. Hold people accountable for what they say and do; also recognize that a single offensive or even harmful act doesn’t reveal the entirety of someone’s character and motives. You can make it clear that a comment or act is unwelcome in the classroom, even while admitting you’re not sure precisely why or how it came about. For another, you might acknowledge the various emotional responses in the room as material that can contribute meaningfully to class discussion. Can these responses reveal something interesting about a concept that is being studied or a method being practiced? This move can both validate the different kinds of responses unfolding for individuals in the room and communicate that lived experience is relevant for classroom learning.
Consider your long-term response. Your short-term response to a difficult moment need not be your only response. Do you think the moment requires follow-up action so that future classes aren’t negatively affected? Would it be helpful to check-in with the class or certain individuals either via email or during the next class meeting? If you perceived harm being done or unease being instigated, you may offer to talk with a student or students after class, over email or in-person. You may also consider how chances for feedback and communication of personal experience might be incorporated in the ongoing class structure. Perhaps invite everyone to write or share exit notes at the end of every class, or maybe you collect feedback at several points throughout the semester. Regular opportunities to articulate one’s experience in a course can do much toward alleviating the pressure placed on any one emotionally intense moment; they also help cultivate a practice of reflection and self-awareness.
Five Strategies to Interrupt Hot Moments from MSU IDI:
CURIOSITY: Ask powerful questions and listen generously to answers. Lead a dialogue balancing all voices in the class. Make sure to surface historically marginalized perspectives.
WRITING EXERCISE: Have students write responses to:
“What I know about this topic…”
“What I want to learn…”
“What I want to say….”
You may ask them to respond anonymously, collect and review to determine how to proceed next time.
SMALL GROUPS: Divide students into groups of 2 or 3 and give them prompts (from above or others); debrief or have them write.
CONTENT/DATA SHARE: Create a graph and ask students what they already know about this topic, what they need to find out. What do we know about this issue historically?
NAMING AND FRAMING: Sometimes it is useful to actually stop the conversation and ask the group to name and explore something that just happened during the conversation. Move away from the specifics of the issue and ask class “what happened here?” Solicit ideas about what, why, how to move forward.
Looking for more resources? Check out the amazing work done by educator development team at the University of Michigan's Center for Research on Teaching and Learning. They provide strategies for anticipating and responding to difficult discussions as well as classroom incivility:
Guidelines for planning and facilitating discussions on difficult or controversial topics
Responding to incidents of hate speech
Teaching and learning in a tense election season
Strategies for making productive use of tense or difficult moments
Facilitating Challenging Conversations in your Classes (blog post)
Sample guidelines for class participation
Guidelines for responding to particular topics and tragedies
Responding to Incivility in the College Classroom
Thank you to colleagues in university educator development at the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University, the Center for Research on Teaching and Learning at the University of Michigan, Institutional Diversity and Inclusion at Michigan State University, and others for their materials that informed or were adapted into this resource. Photo by Patrick Hendry on Unsplash
Posted by:
Makena Neal
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Navigating Difficult Moments in the Classroom
The Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard Universit...
Posted by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Tuesday, Oct 17, 2023
Posted on: GenAI & Education
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Complete Guide to Incorporating Generative AI in Your Syllabus
(Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash )
You can also access the Generative AI Syllabus Guide Playlist with this content broken down into the following sections. Table of Contents:
MSU Guidance and [Non]Permitted Uses
Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course
Design For Generative AI (restrict, permit, require)
Design Around Generative AI (ban)
Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI
Beyond Syllabi Language
Additional considerations to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
References
The following MSU-specifics should be used to inform your decisions...
Overall guidance: We collectively share the responsibility to uphold intellectual honesty and scholarly integrity. These are core principles that may be compromised by the misuse of GenAI tools, particularly when GenAI-generated content is presented as original, human-created work.
Permitted uses in Teaching & Learning: Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of GenAI tools.
Students may only use GenAI tools to support their coursework in ways explicitly permitted by the instructor.
Non-permissible uses:
Do not Use GenAI to deliberately fabricate, falsify, impersonate, or mislead, unless explicitly approved for instruction or research in a controlled environment.
Do not Record or process sensitive, confidential, or regulated information withnon-MSU GenAI tools.
Do not Enter FERPA-protected student records, PII, PHI, financial, or HR data into unapproved tools; comply with MSU’s data policy and all regulations.
Do not Use export-controlled data or CUI with GenAI tools unless approved for MSU’s Regulated Research Enclave (RRE).
Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy
A well-prepared course should be designed for ("restrict", "permit" or "require") or designed around ("ban") generative AI. Courses designed for AI should detail the ways and degrees to which generative AI use will be incorporated into activities and assessments. Courses designed for AI may incorporate AI for some activities and not others and depending on course AI may be explicitly excluded or included at different stages. Courses designed around AI may discuss impacts of generative AI as a topic but expectations are that students will not use these types of tools, and the course should be intentionally designed such that the use of generative AI would either not be conducive to the completion of assessments and activities, or such that the attempt to do so would prove overly cumbersome.
Regardless of your approach, communicating your expectations and rationale to learners is imperative.
Set clear expectations. Be clear in your syllabus about your policies for when, where, and how students should be using generative AI tools, and how to appropriately acknowledge (e.g., cite, reference) when they do use generative AI tools. If you are requiring students to use generative AI tools, these expectations should also be communicated in the syllabus and if students are incurring costs, these should be detailed in the course description on the Registrar’s website.
Regardless of your approach, you might include time for ethics discussions. Add time into your course to discuss the ethical implications of chatGPT and forthcoming AI systems. Talk with students about the ethics of using generative AI tools in your course, at your university, and within your discipline or profession. Don’t be afraid to discuss the gray areas where we do not yet have clear guidance or answers; gray areas are often the places where learning becomes most engaging.
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course
There is no “one size fits all policy” for AI uses in higher education. Much like attendance/participation policies, GenAI course-level rules and statements will be determined by individual instructors, departments, and programs. The following resource is provided to assist you in developing coherent policies on the use of generative AI tools in your course, within MSU's guideline. Please adjust these examples to fit your particular context. Remember communication of your course generative AI policies should not only be listed in your syllabus, but also explicitly included in assignment descriptions where AI use is allowed or disallowed.
It is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course-level rule. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects broader use in the unit and discipline. If you have specific questions about writing your course rules, please reach out to the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation.
Design For Generative AI
Restrict [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing the use of AI tools for certain purposes, but not for others. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
Example1:
The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities:
[insert permitted your course activities here*]
The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities:
[insert not permitted your course activities here*]
You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Example2: Taken, with slight modification, from Temple University’s Center for the Advancement of Teaching to demonstrate the kinds of permitted/restricted activity an instructor could denote.
The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities:
Brainstorming and refining your ideas;
Fine tuning your research questions;
Finding information on your topic;
Drafting an outline to organize your thoughts; and
Checking grammar and style.
The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities:
Impersonating you in classroom contexts, such as by using the tool to compose discussion board prompts assigned to you or content that you put into a Zoom chat.
Completing group work that your group has assigned to you, unless it is mutually agreed within your group and in alignment with course policy that you may utilize the tool.
Writing a draft of a writing assignment.
Writing entire sentences, paragraphs or papers to complete class assignments.
You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge. For example, [Insert citation style for your discipline. See these resources for APA guidance, and for other citation formats.]. Any assignment that is found to have used generative AI tools in unauthorized ways [insert the penalty here*]. When in doubt about permitted usage, please ask for clarification.
Use permitted [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing, and perhaps encouraging, broad use of generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use in your course. The following is an example.]
Example:
You are welcome to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Use required [This syllabus statement is useful when you have certain assignments that will require that students use generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
Example:
You will be expected to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with]. Our class will make use of the [insert name of tool(s) here*] tool, and you can gain access to it by [insert instructions for accessing tool(s) here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Design Around Generative AI
Ban [This syllabus statement is useful when you are forbidding all use of generative AI tools for any purpose in your class. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
The use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) is not permitted in this class; therefore, any use of AI tools for work in this class may be considered a violation of Michigan State University’s policy on academic integrity, the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge andStudent Rights and Responsibilities, since the work is not your own. The use of unauthorized AI tools will result in [insert the penalty here*].
CONCERN: The ubiquity of generative AI tools, including their integration into Google search results and MS Office products, means that an outright generative AI ban is implausible for any activity that makes use of the Internet or MS Office Suite.
* It is highly recommended that you have conversations in your department about the appropriate penalties for unauthorized use of an AI. It is important to think about the appropriate level of penalty for first-time offenders and those who repeatedly violate your policies on the use of AI.
Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
This collection of example statements are a compilation from a variety of sources including Faculty Learning Community (FLC) at Cleveland State University, Ohio University’s AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning, and some of Michigan State University’s own educators! (If you have an example generative AI policy from your course that you’d be willing to share, please add it to the comments below or e-mail it to MSU Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation at teaching@msu.edu) NOTE: making your own course-level determination of "ban", "restrict", "permit", or "require" and using the sample language is the best, first place to start!
“AI (artificial intelligence) resources such as ChatGPT can be useful in a number of ways. Because it can also be abused, however, you are required to acknowledge use of AI in any work you submit for class. Text directly copied from AI sites must be treated as any other direct quote and properly cited. Other uses of AI must be clearly described at the end of your assignment.” -Claire Hughes-Lynch
“While AI tools can be useful for completing assignments and detecting plagiarism, it is important to use them responsibly and ethically. Practice based on these guidelines as a future or current K-12 teacher. The following are some guidelines for what not to do when using AI in your assignments and for plagiarism detection:
Do not rely solely on AI tools to complete assignments. It is important to understand the material and complete assignments on your own, using AI tools as a supplement rather than a replacement for your own work.
Do not use AI tools to plagiarize*. Using AI to generate or modify content to evade plagiarism detection is unethical and violates academic integrity.
Do not assume that AI responses are always correct. It has been noted that AI can generate fake results.* Please see the plagiarism/academic integrity policy in the course syllabus.” -Selma Koc
“Intellectual honesty is vital to an academic community and for my fair evaluation of your work. All work submitted in this course must be your own, completed in accordance with the University’s academic regulations. Use of AI tools, including ChatGPT, is permitted in this course. Nevertheless, you are only encouraged to use AI tools to help brainstorm assignments or projects or to revise existing work you have written. It is solely your responsibility to make all submitted work your own, maintain academic integrity, and avoid any type of plagiarism. Be aware that the accuracy or quality of AI generated content may not meet the standards of this course, even if you only incorporate such content partially and after substantial paraphrasing, modification and/or editing. Also keep in mind that AI generated content may not provide appropriate or clear attribution to the author(s) of the original sources, while most written assignments in this course require you to find and incorporate highly relevant peer-reviewed scholarly publications following guidelines in the latest publication manual of the APA. Lastly, as your instructor, I reserve the right to use various plagiarism checking tools in evaluating your work, including those screening for AI-generated content, and impose consequences accordingly.” -Xiongyi Liu
“If you are ever unsure about whether collaboration with others, including using artificial intelligence, is allowed or not, please ask me right away. For the labs, although you may discuss them in groups (and try using AI), you must all create your own code, output and answers. Quizzes will be done in class and must be solely your own work. You alone are always responsible for the correctness of the final answers and assignments you submit.” - Emily Rauschert on AI as collaboration partner
“Chat GPT: The use of Chat GTP is neither encouraged nor prohibited from use on assignments for GAD 250. Chat GPT is quickly becoming a communication tool in most business settings. Therefore, if you choose to use Chat GPT for assignments, please be sure to revise the content for clarity, conciseness, and audience awareness. Chat GPT is simply a tool and should not be used as a way to produce first and only drafts. Every assignment submission will be graded using the rubric provided in the syllabus. Be aware that Chat GPT may not develop high-quality work that earns a passing grade. It is your responsibility to review and revise all work before submitting to the instructor.” -Leah Schell-Barber for a Business Communications Course
“Use of Generative AI, such as ChatGPT and Microsoft Bing-Chat, must maintain the highest standards of academic integrity and adhere to the OU Code of Student Conduct. The use of Generative AI should be seen as a tool to enhance academic research, not as a replacement for critical thinking and originality in assignments. Students are not permitted to submit assignments that have been fully or partially generated by AI unless explicitly stated in the assignment instructions. All work submitted must be the original work of the student. Any ideas garnered from Generative AI research must be acknowledged with proper in-text citation and reference. Students may be asked to save the AI chat as a PDF file for verification.” -Ohio University College of Business Generative AI Use for Academic Work Policy
“‘The policy of this class is that you must be the creator of all work you submit for a grade. The use of others’ work, or the use of intelligent agents, chat bots, or a.i. engines to create your work is a violation of this policy and will be addressed as per MSU and Broad College codes of conduct.’ - Jeremy Van Hof… Or, you might consider this, which I asked ChatGPT to write for me: ‘Sample Policy Language: Students should not use ChatGPT to complete course assignments or for any other academic activities. ChatGPT should be used as a supplemental resource and should not replace traditional academic activities.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting)
Or this much longer version, also written by ChatGPT: ‘The following course policy statement prohibits the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the’ completion of assignments and activities during the duration of the course. At the Broad College, we strive to create an academic environment where learning is the foremost priority. We strongly believe that learning is best achieved through the hard work and dedication of our students. As such, we prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the completion of assignments and activities during the course. Our policy is in line with our commitment to providing a fair and equitable learning environment for all students. We believe that AI should not be used to substitute human effort, as it defeats the purpose of our educational goals, which are to encourage critical thinking and problem-solving. We understand that AI can be a useful tool in many contexts, and we do not discourage its use in other courses. However, in this course, we will not accept assignments or activities that have been completed through the use of AI. We expect our students to be honest and to complete their work independently. We will be monitoring student work closely to ensure compliance with this policy. Violations of this policy will be met with disciplinary sanctions. All students are expected to adhere to this policy and to abide by the standards of the University.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting)” -Jeremy Van Hof, Broad College of Business
“I study AI. I research it in my role as faculty in the Experience Architecture and Professional & Public Writing majors. And I don’t think it’s inherently bad or scary, in the same way that a calculator isn’t bad/scary for math. Artificial intelligence technologies such as ChatGPT can be an excellent starting point and a place to begin inquiry. But they are not a replacement for human thinking and learning. Robots lack empathy and nuance. As such, here is my policy:
You may use AI as a tool, but you may not use AI to replace your own beautiful brain. That means that you may ask ChatGPT, for example, to give you a list of bands similar to one that you hear and appreciate in this course. You may ask ChatGPT to give you an overview of a punk scene in a geographic location at a particular time. You may ask it for the history of punk rock and punk cultures. You may ask it what happened to Sid Vicious.
But you may not ask it to write on your behalf, and you must not turn in anything that has been written by ChatGPT and pass it off as your own for any assignment in this class, including discussion responses, papers, and exams. If you do so, I will know, and that will lead to an uncomfortable moment–and to you failing the assignment.
This is not meant to be punitive. It’s meant to reinforce how much I value you and your ideas and your intellect. In a face-to-face environment, we would have a lengthy conversation about AI, ethics, and human learning. If you want to have that conversation, I’m happy to do so via Zoom–email me!” -Kate Birdsall, asynchronous US23 course on punk-rock politics
Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI
Taken, with slight modification, from “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins, Professor of Educational Technology Leadership, and Human-Technology Collaboration at George Washington University in Washington DC (2022), via Medium.
Beyond Syllabi Language
Communicate your perspective about AI use. In addition to syllabus statements, consider talking with your students about AI tools like ChatGPT. Regardless of your orientation to generative AI use, it is important that you clearly communicate your expectations with the introduction of each assignment/assessment.
Different levels of familiarity: As an emerging technology, students will have differing levels of familiarity with these tools. For instance, while ChatGPT can write a grammatically correct paper or appear to solve a math problem, it may be unreliable and limited in scope. Discuss with students the uses and limitations of AI tools more broadly in addition to your perspective on their use in your class.
Connect to critical thinking skills: AI tools have many implications beyond the classroom. Consider talking with students about how to be engaged-consumers of AI content (e.g., how to identify trusted sources, reading critically, privacy concerns). Discuss how you and colleagues use AI in your own work.
Adapt assessments. AI tools are emerging and it can be incredibly difficult to make any assessment completely free from AI interference. Beyond a syllabus statement, you may also consider adapting your assessments to help reduce the usefulness of AI products. However before revising any assignment, it’s helpful to reflect on what exactly you want students to get out of the experience and share your expectations with your students. Is it just the end product, or does the process of creating the product play a significant role?
Create assessments that allow students to develop ideas over time. Depending on your class size, consider scaffolding assessments to be completed in small components (e.g., proposal, annotated bibliography, outline, first draft, revised drafts).
Ask students to connect their writing to specific course materials or current events. Students can draw from the course textbook, additional readings on Moodle or Blackboard, and even class discussion boards or in-class discussions.
Incorporate personal experiences and reflections. Provide students with opportunities to connect what they are learning to their own lives and experiences—stories unique to each individual.
Incorporate Multimedia Assessments. Consider developing or adapting assessments to include multimedia submissions (e.g., audio or video components). Also, consider peer-review and social annotation tools like Eli Review or Google Docs for students to use when responding to assigned readings or other materials.
Use class time. Ask students to complete writing assignments during class time (e.g. complete reading reflections at the beginning of class, or use exit tickets). Asking students to organize their ideas by writing during class may also support student engagement in other class activities such as discussions and group work.
Get Creative With Your Assignments: Visit “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins (Medium article) for 10 ideas for creative assignments adapted for a classroom with chatGPT. You can mitigate the risk of students using chatGPT to cheat, and at the same time improve their knowledge and skills for appropriately using new AI technologies inside and outside the classroom.
Additional considerations to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
Expand your options. Consider your repertoire of instructional strategies. Atsusi Hirumi offers a guide to research-grounded strategies for any classroom. These are not, however, “a la carte” menus; you must use all of the steps of any strategy to gain the evidence-based benefits.
Reflect on your values. As Tyler Cowen pointed out, there will be those who gain and those that lose with the emergence of chatGPT and other generative AI tools. This is as true for students as it is for faculty and instructors. Be ready to openly discuss the ethical implications of generative AI tools with your students, along with the value of what you are teaching and why learning these are important to their futures.
Consider time. As discussed during Bryan Alexander’s webinar, chatGPT and other generative AI tools offer a short-cut to individuals who are short on time. Examine your course schedule to determine if you are unknowingly pushing students to take short-cuts. Some instructors try to cover too much content in their courses already.
Remember, AI is not human. Be careful not to anthropomorphize chatGPT and other generative AI tools. ChatGPT is a language model, and if we anthropomorphize these technologies, then it will be much harder to understand their promise and perils. Murray Shanahan suggests that we avoid statements such as, “chatGPT knows…”, or “ChatGPT thinks…”; instead, use “According to chatGPT…” or “ChatGPT’s output…”.
Again, AI is likely to be a part of your students’ life to some extent this semester, so plan accordingly. Critically considering your course design in the context of generative AI is an important educator practice. Following the Provost’s call, MSU instructors are encouraged to 1) develop a course-level generative AI use policy and actively discuss with students about expectations for generative AI use in the work for your class, 2) promote equitable and inclusive use of the technology, and 3) work with colleagues across campus to determine ethical and scholarly applications of generative AI for preparing students to succeed in an evolving digital landscape. MSU does not currently have a university-wide policy on AI in the classroom, so it is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course policy. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects that in the discipline.
References
This resource is collated from multiple sites, publications, and authors with some modification for MSU context and links to MSU specific resources. Educators should always defer to University policy and guidelines.
MSU Office of Student Support & Accountability Faculty Resources, including Academic Dishonesty Report form.
Watkins, R. (2022) Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT. Educational Technology Leadership, The George Washington University via Medium: https://medium.com/@rwatkins_7167/updating-your-course-syllabus-for-chatgpt-965f4b57b003
Center for the Advancement of Teaching (2023). Sample Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course. Temple University
Center for Teaching & Learning (2023) How Do I Consider the Impact of AI Tools like ChatGPT in My Courses?. University of Massachusetts Amherst. https://www.umass.edu/ctl/how-do-i-consider-impact-ai-tools-chatgpt-my-courses
Center for Teaching, Learning and Assessment (2023). AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning. Ohio University. https://www.ohio.edu/center-teaching-learning/instructor-resources/chat-gpt
Office of Teaching, Learning, and Technology. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Tools and Teaching. Iowa University. https://teach.its.uiowa.edu/artificial-intelligence-tools-and-teaching
Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship (2023). Chat GPT and Artificial Intelligence Tools. Georgetown University. https://cndls.georgetown.edu/ai-composition-tools/#privacy-and-data-collection
Office for Faculty Excellence (2023). Practical Responses to ChatGPT. Montclair State University. https://www.montclair.edu/faculty-excellence/practical-responses-to-chat-gpt/
Teaching and Learning at Cleveland State University by Center for Faculty Excellence is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
You can also access the Generative AI Syllabus Guide Playlist with this content broken down into the following sections. Table of Contents:
MSU Guidance and [Non]Permitted Uses
Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course
Design For Generative AI (restrict, permit, require)
Design Around Generative AI (ban)
Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI
Beyond Syllabi Language
Additional considerations to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
References
The following MSU-specifics should be used to inform your decisions...
Overall guidance: We collectively share the responsibility to uphold intellectual honesty and scholarly integrity. These are core principles that may be compromised by the misuse of GenAI tools, particularly when GenAI-generated content is presented as original, human-created work.
Permitted uses in Teaching & Learning: Instructors are expected to establish a course-specific guidance that defines the appropriate and inappropriate use of GenAI tools.
Students may only use GenAI tools to support their coursework in ways explicitly permitted by the instructor.
Non-permissible uses:
Do not Use GenAI to deliberately fabricate, falsify, impersonate, or mislead, unless explicitly approved for instruction or research in a controlled environment.
Do not Record or process sensitive, confidential, or regulated information withnon-MSU GenAI tools.
Do not Enter FERPA-protected student records, PII, PHI, financial, or HR data into unapproved tools; comply with MSU’s data policy and all regulations.
Do not Use export-controlled data or CUI with GenAI tools unless approved for MSU’s Regulated Research Enclave (RRE).
Developing and Communicating a Course-level Generative AI Use policy
A well-prepared course should be designed for ("restrict", "permit" or "require") or designed around ("ban") generative AI. Courses designed for AI should detail the ways and degrees to which generative AI use will be incorporated into activities and assessments. Courses designed for AI may incorporate AI for some activities and not others and depending on course AI may be explicitly excluded or included at different stages. Courses designed around AI may discuss impacts of generative AI as a topic but expectations are that students will not use these types of tools, and the course should be intentionally designed such that the use of generative AI would either not be conducive to the completion of assessments and activities, or such that the attempt to do so would prove overly cumbersome.
Regardless of your approach, communicating your expectations and rationale to learners is imperative.
Set clear expectations. Be clear in your syllabus about your policies for when, where, and how students should be using generative AI tools, and how to appropriately acknowledge (e.g., cite, reference) when they do use generative AI tools. If you are requiring students to use generative AI tools, these expectations should also be communicated in the syllabus and if students are incurring costs, these should be detailed in the course description on the Registrar’s website.
Regardless of your approach, you might include time for ethics discussions. Add time into your course to discuss the ethical implications of chatGPT and forthcoming AI systems. Talk with students about the ethics of using generative AI tools in your course, at your university, and within your discipline or profession. Don’t be afraid to discuss the gray areas where we do not yet have clear guidance or answers; gray areas are often the places where learning becomes most engaging.
Example Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course
There is no “one size fits all policy” for AI uses in higher education. Much like attendance/participation policies, GenAI course-level rules and statements will be determined by individual instructors, departments, and programs. The following resource is provided to assist you in developing coherent policies on the use of generative AI tools in your course, within MSU's guideline. Please adjust these examples to fit your particular context. Remember communication of your course generative AI policies should not only be listed in your syllabus, but also explicitly included in assignment descriptions where AI use is allowed or disallowed.
It is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course-level rule. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects broader use in the unit and discipline. If you have specific questions about writing your course rules, please reach out to the Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation.
Design For Generative AI
Restrict [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing the use of AI tools for certain purposes, but not for others. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
Example1:
The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities:
[insert permitted your course activities here*]
The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities:
[insert not permitted your course activities here*]
You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Example2: Taken, with slight modification, from Temple University’s Center for the Advancement of Teaching to demonstrate the kinds of permitted/restricted activity an instructor could denote.
The use of generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) is permitted in this course for the following activities:
Brainstorming and refining your ideas;
Fine tuning your research questions;
Finding information on your topic;
Drafting an outline to organize your thoughts; and
Checking grammar and style.
The use of generative AI tools is not permitted in this course for the following activities:
Impersonating you in classroom contexts, such as by using the tool to compose discussion board prompts assigned to you or content that you put into a Zoom chat.
Completing group work that your group has assigned to you, unless it is mutually agreed within your group and in alignment with course policy that you may utilize the tool.
Writing a draft of a writing assignment.
Writing entire sentences, paragraphs or papers to complete class assignments.
You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge. For example, [Insert citation style for your discipline. See these resources for APA guidance, and for other citation formats.]. Any assignment that is found to have used generative AI tools in unauthorized ways [insert the penalty here*]. When in doubt about permitted usage, please ask for clarification.
Use permitted [This syllabus statement is useful when you are allowing, and perhaps encouraging, broad use of generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use in your course. The following is an example.]
Example:
You are welcome to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Use required [This syllabus statement is useful when you have certain assignments that will require that students use generative AI tools. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
Example:
You will be expected to use generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT, Dall-e, etc.) in this class as doing so aligns with the course learning goal [insert the course learning goal use of AI aligns with]. Our class will make use of the [insert name of tool(s) here*] tool, and you can gain access to it by [insert instructions for accessing tool(s) here*]. You are responsible for the information you submit based on an AI query (for instance, that it does not violate intellectual property laws, or contain misinformation or unethical content). Your use of AI tools must be properly documented and cited in order to stay within university policies on academic integrity and the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge.
Design Around Generative AI
Ban [This syllabus statement is useful when you are forbidding all use of generative AI tools for any purpose in your class. Adjust this statement to reflect your particular parameters of acceptable use. The following is an example.]
The use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, DALL-E, etc.) is not permitted in this class; therefore, any use of AI tools for work in this class may be considered a violation of Michigan State University’s policy on academic integrity, the Spartan Code of Honor Academic Pledge andStudent Rights and Responsibilities, since the work is not your own. The use of unauthorized AI tools will result in [insert the penalty here*].
CONCERN: The ubiquity of generative AI tools, including their integration into Google search results and MS Office products, means that an outright generative AI ban is implausible for any activity that makes use of the Internet or MS Office Suite.
* It is highly recommended that you have conversations in your department about the appropriate penalties for unauthorized use of an AI. It is important to think about the appropriate level of penalty for first-time offenders and those who repeatedly violate your policies on the use of AI.
Example Statements from Current USA, Higher Education Educators
This collection of example statements are a compilation from a variety of sources including Faculty Learning Community (FLC) at Cleveland State University, Ohio University’s AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning, and some of Michigan State University’s own educators! (If you have an example generative AI policy from your course that you’d be willing to share, please add it to the comments below or e-mail it to MSU Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation at teaching@msu.edu) NOTE: making your own course-level determination of "ban", "restrict", "permit", or "require" and using the sample language is the best, first place to start!
“AI (artificial intelligence) resources such as ChatGPT can be useful in a number of ways. Because it can also be abused, however, you are required to acknowledge use of AI in any work you submit for class. Text directly copied from AI sites must be treated as any other direct quote and properly cited. Other uses of AI must be clearly described at the end of your assignment.” -Claire Hughes-Lynch
“While AI tools can be useful for completing assignments and detecting plagiarism, it is important to use them responsibly and ethically. Practice based on these guidelines as a future or current K-12 teacher. The following are some guidelines for what not to do when using AI in your assignments and for plagiarism detection:
Do not rely solely on AI tools to complete assignments. It is important to understand the material and complete assignments on your own, using AI tools as a supplement rather than a replacement for your own work.
Do not use AI tools to plagiarize*. Using AI to generate or modify content to evade plagiarism detection is unethical and violates academic integrity.
Do not assume that AI responses are always correct. It has been noted that AI can generate fake results.* Please see the plagiarism/academic integrity policy in the course syllabus.” -Selma Koc
“Intellectual honesty is vital to an academic community and for my fair evaluation of your work. All work submitted in this course must be your own, completed in accordance with the University’s academic regulations. Use of AI tools, including ChatGPT, is permitted in this course. Nevertheless, you are only encouraged to use AI tools to help brainstorm assignments or projects or to revise existing work you have written. It is solely your responsibility to make all submitted work your own, maintain academic integrity, and avoid any type of plagiarism. Be aware that the accuracy or quality of AI generated content may not meet the standards of this course, even if you only incorporate such content partially and after substantial paraphrasing, modification and/or editing. Also keep in mind that AI generated content may not provide appropriate or clear attribution to the author(s) of the original sources, while most written assignments in this course require you to find and incorporate highly relevant peer-reviewed scholarly publications following guidelines in the latest publication manual of the APA. Lastly, as your instructor, I reserve the right to use various plagiarism checking tools in evaluating your work, including those screening for AI-generated content, and impose consequences accordingly.” -Xiongyi Liu
“If you are ever unsure about whether collaboration with others, including using artificial intelligence, is allowed or not, please ask me right away. For the labs, although you may discuss them in groups (and try using AI), you must all create your own code, output and answers. Quizzes will be done in class and must be solely your own work. You alone are always responsible for the correctness of the final answers and assignments you submit.” - Emily Rauschert on AI as collaboration partner
“Chat GPT: The use of Chat GTP is neither encouraged nor prohibited from use on assignments for GAD 250. Chat GPT is quickly becoming a communication tool in most business settings. Therefore, if you choose to use Chat GPT for assignments, please be sure to revise the content for clarity, conciseness, and audience awareness. Chat GPT is simply a tool and should not be used as a way to produce first and only drafts. Every assignment submission will be graded using the rubric provided in the syllabus. Be aware that Chat GPT may not develop high-quality work that earns a passing grade. It is your responsibility to review and revise all work before submitting to the instructor.” -Leah Schell-Barber for a Business Communications Course
“Use of Generative AI, such as ChatGPT and Microsoft Bing-Chat, must maintain the highest standards of academic integrity and adhere to the OU Code of Student Conduct. The use of Generative AI should be seen as a tool to enhance academic research, not as a replacement for critical thinking and originality in assignments. Students are not permitted to submit assignments that have been fully or partially generated by AI unless explicitly stated in the assignment instructions. All work submitted must be the original work of the student. Any ideas garnered from Generative AI research must be acknowledged with proper in-text citation and reference. Students may be asked to save the AI chat as a PDF file for verification.” -Ohio University College of Business Generative AI Use for Academic Work Policy
“‘The policy of this class is that you must be the creator of all work you submit for a grade. The use of others’ work, or the use of intelligent agents, chat bots, or a.i. engines to create your work is a violation of this policy and will be addressed as per MSU and Broad College codes of conduct.’ - Jeremy Van Hof… Or, you might consider this, which I asked ChatGPT to write for me: ‘Sample Policy Language: Students should not use ChatGPT to complete course assignments or for any other academic activities. ChatGPT should be used as a supplemental resource and should not replace traditional academic activities.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting)
Or this much longer version, also written by ChatGPT: ‘The following course policy statement prohibits the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the’ completion of assignments and activities during the duration of the course. At the Broad College, we strive to create an academic environment where learning is the foremost priority. We strongly believe that learning is best achieved through the hard work and dedication of our students. As such, we prohibit the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the completion of assignments and activities during the course. Our policy is in line with our commitment to providing a fair and equitable learning environment for all students. We believe that AI should not be used to substitute human effort, as it defeats the purpose of our educational goals, which are to encourage critical thinking and problem-solving. We understand that AI can be a useful tool in many contexts, and we do not discourage its use in other courses. However, in this course, we will not accept assignments or activities that have been completed through the use of AI. We expect our students to be honest and to complete their work independently. We will be monitoring student work closely to ensure compliance with this policy. Violations of this policy will be met with disciplinary sanctions. All students are expected to adhere to this policy and to abide by the standards of the University.’ (ChatGPT per Jeremy Van Hof’s prompting)” -Jeremy Van Hof, Broad College of Business
“I study AI. I research it in my role as faculty in the Experience Architecture and Professional & Public Writing majors. And I don’t think it’s inherently bad or scary, in the same way that a calculator isn’t bad/scary for math. Artificial intelligence technologies such as ChatGPT can be an excellent starting point and a place to begin inquiry. But they are not a replacement for human thinking and learning. Robots lack empathy and nuance. As such, here is my policy:
You may use AI as a tool, but you may not use AI to replace your own beautiful brain. That means that you may ask ChatGPT, for example, to give you a list of bands similar to one that you hear and appreciate in this course. You may ask ChatGPT to give you an overview of a punk scene in a geographic location at a particular time. You may ask it for the history of punk rock and punk cultures. You may ask it what happened to Sid Vicious.
But you may not ask it to write on your behalf, and you must not turn in anything that has been written by ChatGPT and pass it off as your own for any assignment in this class, including discussion responses, papers, and exams. If you do so, I will know, and that will lead to an uncomfortable moment–and to you failing the assignment.
This is not meant to be punitive. It’s meant to reinforce how much I value you and your ideas and your intellect. In a face-to-face environment, we would have a lengthy conversation about AI, ethics, and human learning. If you want to have that conversation, I’m happy to do so via Zoom–email me!” -Kate Birdsall, asynchronous US23 course on punk-rock politics
Developing your Scholarly and Ethical Approaches to Generative AI
Taken, with slight modification, from “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins, Professor of Educational Technology Leadership, and Human-Technology Collaboration at George Washington University in Washington DC (2022), via Medium.
Beyond Syllabi Language
Communicate your perspective about AI use. In addition to syllabus statements, consider talking with your students about AI tools like ChatGPT. Regardless of your orientation to generative AI use, it is important that you clearly communicate your expectations with the introduction of each assignment/assessment.
Different levels of familiarity: As an emerging technology, students will have differing levels of familiarity with these tools. For instance, while ChatGPT can write a grammatically correct paper or appear to solve a math problem, it may be unreliable and limited in scope. Discuss with students the uses and limitations of AI tools more broadly in addition to your perspective on their use in your class.
Connect to critical thinking skills: AI tools have many implications beyond the classroom. Consider talking with students about how to be engaged-consumers of AI content (e.g., how to identify trusted sources, reading critically, privacy concerns). Discuss how you and colleagues use AI in your own work.
Adapt assessments. AI tools are emerging and it can be incredibly difficult to make any assessment completely free from AI interference. Beyond a syllabus statement, you may also consider adapting your assessments to help reduce the usefulness of AI products. However before revising any assignment, it’s helpful to reflect on what exactly you want students to get out of the experience and share your expectations with your students. Is it just the end product, or does the process of creating the product play a significant role?
Create assessments that allow students to develop ideas over time. Depending on your class size, consider scaffolding assessments to be completed in small components (e.g., proposal, annotated bibliography, outline, first draft, revised drafts).
Ask students to connect their writing to specific course materials or current events. Students can draw from the course textbook, additional readings on Moodle or Blackboard, and even class discussion boards or in-class discussions.
Incorporate personal experiences and reflections. Provide students with opportunities to connect what they are learning to their own lives and experiences—stories unique to each individual.
Incorporate Multimedia Assessments. Consider developing or adapting assessments to include multimedia submissions (e.g., audio or video components). Also, consider peer-review and social annotation tools like Eli Review or Google Docs for students to use when responding to assigned readings or other materials.
Use class time. Ask students to complete writing assignments during class time (e.g. complete reading reflections at the beginning of class, or use exit tickets). Asking students to organize their ideas by writing during class may also support student engagement in other class activities such as discussions and group work.
Get Creative With Your Assignments: Visit “Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT” by Ryan Watkins (Medium article) for 10 ideas for creative assignments adapted for a classroom with chatGPT. You can mitigate the risk of students using chatGPT to cheat, and at the same time improve their knowledge and skills for appropriately using new AI technologies inside and outside the classroom.
Additional considerations to help you develop your generative AI philosophy (Watkins, 2022)
Expand your options. Consider your repertoire of instructional strategies. Atsusi Hirumi offers a guide to research-grounded strategies for any classroom. These are not, however, “a la carte” menus; you must use all of the steps of any strategy to gain the evidence-based benefits.
Reflect on your values. As Tyler Cowen pointed out, there will be those who gain and those that lose with the emergence of chatGPT and other generative AI tools. This is as true for students as it is for faculty and instructors. Be ready to openly discuss the ethical implications of generative AI tools with your students, along with the value of what you are teaching and why learning these are important to their futures.
Consider time. As discussed during Bryan Alexander’s webinar, chatGPT and other generative AI tools offer a short-cut to individuals who are short on time. Examine your course schedule to determine if you are unknowingly pushing students to take short-cuts. Some instructors try to cover too much content in their courses already.
Remember, AI is not human. Be careful not to anthropomorphize chatGPT and other generative AI tools. ChatGPT is a language model, and if we anthropomorphize these technologies, then it will be much harder to understand their promise and perils. Murray Shanahan suggests that we avoid statements such as, “chatGPT knows…”, or “ChatGPT thinks…”; instead, use “According to chatGPT…” or “ChatGPT’s output…”.
Again, AI is likely to be a part of your students’ life to some extent this semester, so plan accordingly. Critically considering your course design in the context of generative AI is an important educator practice. Following the Provost’s call, MSU instructors are encouraged to 1) develop a course-level generative AI use policy and actively discuss with students about expectations for generative AI use in the work for your class, 2) promote equitable and inclusive use of the technology, and 3) work with colleagues across campus to determine ethical and scholarly applications of generative AI for preparing students to succeed in an evolving digital landscape. MSU does not currently have a university-wide policy on AI in the classroom, so it is your responsibility as instructor to note and explain your individual course policy. A conversation with your department is highly recommended so that generative AI use in the classroom reflects that in the discipline.
References
This resource is collated from multiple sites, publications, and authors with some modification for MSU context and links to MSU specific resources. Educators should always defer to University policy and guidelines.
MSU Office of Student Support & Accountability Faculty Resources, including Academic Dishonesty Report form.
Watkins, R. (2022) Update Your Course Syllabus for chatGPT. Educational Technology Leadership, The George Washington University via Medium: https://medium.com/@rwatkins_7167/updating-your-course-syllabus-for-chatgpt-965f4b57b003
Center for the Advancement of Teaching (2023). Sample Syllabus Statements for the Use of AI Tools in Your Course. Temple University
Center for Teaching & Learning (2023) How Do I Consider the Impact of AI Tools like ChatGPT in My Courses?. University of Massachusetts Amherst. https://www.umass.edu/ctl/how-do-i-consider-impact-ai-tools-chatgpt-my-courses
Center for Teaching, Learning and Assessment (2023). AI, ChatGPT and Teaching and Learning. Ohio University. https://www.ohio.edu/center-teaching-learning/instructor-resources/chat-gpt
Office of Teaching, Learning, and Technology. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Tools and Teaching. Iowa University. https://teach.its.uiowa.edu/artificial-intelligence-tools-and-teaching
Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship (2023). Chat GPT and Artificial Intelligence Tools. Georgetown University. https://cndls.georgetown.edu/ai-composition-tools/#privacy-and-data-collection
Office for Faculty Excellence (2023). Practical Responses to ChatGPT. Montclair State University. https://www.montclair.edu/faculty-excellence/practical-responses-to-chat-gpt/
Teaching and Learning at Cleveland State University by Center for Faculty Excellence is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License
Posted by:
Makena Neal
Posted on: GenAI & Education
Complete Guide to Incorporating Generative AI in Your Syllabus
(Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash )
You can also access the Gener...
You can also access the Gener...
Posted by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Aug 18, 2025
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Catalyst Innovation Program 2019 – 2020 Recipients
Greetings everyone! My name is Rashad Muhammad. I am a Learning Experience Designer in the Hub for Innovation in Learning and Technology. As we begin the new year, I am excited to step into the role of the project manager for the Catalyst Innovation Program. Catalyst Innovation Program was designed to incentivize the MSU community to develop creative and innovative student learning experiences by funding projects that encourage discovery and experimentation.
In this spirit, it is with great enthusiasm that I present this year’s 2019-2020 Catalyst Innovation Program recipients:
Alice Lynn McMichaelHistoryExperiential Environments: Modeling the Past for Embodied Learning
Allison EdenDepartment of CommunicationScreen-based versus immersive virtual training platforms for improving public speaking
Andrea BieremaCenter for Integrative Studies in General ScienceCreating Open-Sourced H5P Adaptive Learning Modules
Ashley HewlettAsc Provost For Undergraduate EducationNew Student Orientation Online Experience
Brad WIlcuts, Daniel TregoDepartment of Theatre/ Al Academic And Information Tech SupportSocial Dancing and Culture meets Extended Reality
Dean AslamElectrical And Computer EngineeringFlipped STEM Learning Using Smartphones and Hands-On FBEI (Functionalized Bricks with Embedded Intelligence) Modules
Jennifer DunnDepartment of ManagementPilot Use of Qualtrics 360 Tool to Provide Multi-Rater Feedback to Students
Jeno RiveraCollege of Agriculture and Natural Resources Office of Academic Student Affairs and Institute of Agricultural TechnologyJamming together: Educational technologies to enhance collaborative learning
John PaskusMI Natural Features InventoryIncreasing Student Engagement via Teamwork, Collaboration, and Real World Connections
Judy WalgrenSchool of JournalismHarnessing the Power of Immersive Media With MSU’s School of Journalism Students
Michelle GrimmMechanical EngineeringInteractive Digital Experience as an Alternative Laboratory (IDEAL): Creative Investigation with Data Analysis
Nick Lepeschkin-NoelIT Services – Advanced Academic and Research TechnologyRemaking the Future – An Education Focused Simulation Framework
Quentin TylerSchool of Planning, Construction and Design and Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources collaboration.Bridging Student Learning in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Through Virtual Reality
Rachel Morris and Michelle RussellBiomedical Laboratory Diagnostics ProgramUtilizing Genome Mutation Analysis Software to Enhance Student Learning, Preparation, and Engagement in Molecular Diagnostics
Saul Beceiro-NovoBiomedical-Physical SciencesCurriculum reform for ISP209L
Zachary NealPsychologyBuilding a Social Simulation Makerspace
This year we increased the total number of winners from 10 to 16. Each proposal was double-blind peer-reviewed. Thirty-five applications were received, each seeking to improve the learning experience at MSU for and with students.
Jeff Grabill, Associate Provost for Teaching, Learning, and Technology said “As we iterate toward a more explicit story about MSU’s digital learning future, it seems necessary to provide as many opportunities as possible for faculty and students to experiment, invent, make, and learn. This program is one of our small bets to create space for faculty and to see what happens.”
MSU’s Chief Digital Academic Officer Brendan Guenther points to the rapidity with which innovation happens, and how structures must adapt – “Catalyst awards give us a rapid investment lever for individuals in the #iteachMSU community, when they sense the need for innovation and have an inspired idea, we can give them the boost needed to make something happen.”
As the year progresses, we will share out stories to keep you updated on the progress these projects are making. Our goal is to empower our recipients to experiment, learn and share that knowledge with the rest of the MSU community. If you missed this application cycle, the next opportunity will be available in the Fall of 2020. Get your ideas ready!
In this spirit, it is with great enthusiasm that I present this year’s 2019-2020 Catalyst Innovation Program recipients:
Alice Lynn McMichaelHistoryExperiential Environments: Modeling the Past for Embodied Learning
Allison EdenDepartment of CommunicationScreen-based versus immersive virtual training platforms for improving public speaking
Andrea BieremaCenter for Integrative Studies in General ScienceCreating Open-Sourced H5P Adaptive Learning Modules
Ashley HewlettAsc Provost For Undergraduate EducationNew Student Orientation Online Experience
Brad WIlcuts, Daniel TregoDepartment of Theatre/ Al Academic And Information Tech SupportSocial Dancing and Culture meets Extended Reality
Dean AslamElectrical And Computer EngineeringFlipped STEM Learning Using Smartphones and Hands-On FBEI (Functionalized Bricks with Embedded Intelligence) Modules
Jennifer DunnDepartment of ManagementPilot Use of Qualtrics 360 Tool to Provide Multi-Rater Feedback to Students
Jeno RiveraCollege of Agriculture and Natural Resources Office of Academic Student Affairs and Institute of Agricultural TechnologyJamming together: Educational technologies to enhance collaborative learning
John PaskusMI Natural Features InventoryIncreasing Student Engagement via Teamwork, Collaboration, and Real World Connections
Judy WalgrenSchool of JournalismHarnessing the Power of Immersive Media With MSU’s School of Journalism Students
Michelle GrimmMechanical EngineeringInteractive Digital Experience as an Alternative Laboratory (IDEAL): Creative Investigation with Data Analysis
Nick Lepeschkin-NoelIT Services – Advanced Academic and Research TechnologyRemaking the Future – An Education Focused Simulation Framework
Quentin TylerSchool of Planning, Construction and Design and Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources collaboration.Bridging Student Learning in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Through Virtual Reality
Rachel Morris and Michelle RussellBiomedical Laboratory Diagnostics ProgramUtilizing Genome Mutation Analysis Software to Enhance Student Learning, Preparation, and Engagement in Molecular Diagnostics
Saul Beceiro-NovoBiomedical-Physical SciencesCurriculum reform for ISP209L
Zachary NealPsychologyBuilding a Social Simulation Makerspace
This year we increased the total number of winners from 10 to 16. Each proposal was double-blind peer-reviewed. Thirty-five applications were received, each seeking to improve the learning experience at MSU for and with students.
Jeff Grabill, Associate Provost for Teaching, Learning, and Technology said “As we iterate toward a more explicit story about MSU’s digital learning future, it seems necessary to provide as many opportunities as possible for faculty and students to experiment, invent, make, and learn. This program is one of our small bets to create space for faculty and to see what happens.”
MSU’s Chief Digital Academic Officer Brendan Guenther points to the rapidity with which innovation happens, and how structures must adapt – “Catalyst awards give us a rapid investment lever for individuals in the #iteachMSU community, when they sense the need for innovation and have an inspired idea, we can give them the boost needed to make something happen.”
As the year progresses, we will share out stories to keep you updated on the progress these projects are making. Our goal is to empower our recipients to experiment, learn and share that knowledge with the rest of the MSU community. If you missed this application cycle, the next opportunity will be available in the Fall of 2020. Get your ideas ready!
Authored by:
Rashad Muhammad
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Catalyst Innovation Program 2019 – 2020 Recipients
Greetings everyone! My name is Rashad Muhammad. I am a Learning Exp...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Monday, Feb 17, 2020
Posted on: The MSU Graduate Leadership Institute
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
College of Arts & Letters Leadership Fellows
Leadership Fellows
2017-2019: Elijah Simmons
2019-2020: Rachel Robinson & Cameron Chase
2020-2021: Sharieka Botex
2021-2022: Philip Montgomery
2021-2023: Hima Rawal
Elijah Simmons (2017-2019)As the first College of Arts & Letters Leadership Fellow, Elijah Simmons sought to bring awareness to the Leadership Institute’s resources and gain an understanding of what more could be done to improve the graduate student experience within the College.Rachel Robinson and Cameron Chase (2019-2020)Rachel Robinson and Cameron Chase worked closely with the College of Arts and Letters’ leadership team to organize CAL Care Week, a week-long event focused on how Spartans can take care of themselves as well as make positive contributions to the MSU community. The planned events for the week included writing workshops, yoga sessions, and painting the Rock in an effort to promote positivity, self-awareness, and connectivity. Examples of workshops include “How to be a Caring Reviewer,” “Creating Academic Boundaries with Care,” and “Teaching to GenZ: Navigating Anxiety and Depression with Art in the Classroom.” Unfortunately, CAL Care Week was scheduled for late March 2020 and had to be canceled due to COVID-19. CAL Care Week was featured on the College of Arts and Letters’ website and in an MSUToday article.Sharieka Botex (2020-2021) | Coordinator (2021-2023)Sharieka Botex, a PhD student in Writing, Rhetoric, and American Cultures was informed by her interest in community-focused work and engaging in a way that took into account her experiences and the experiences and work of Black people on a local and national level. Her project, Shaping Society Through Scholarship and Action, which took place on September 25, 2021, featured Black women scholars whose work classifies them as community-engaged scholars and/or scholarly activists. The event gave them a platform to share their professional and academic journeys and to discuss those who informed and influenced their work on panels moderated by graduate students. It also provided a platform for community organizers and leaders to share their efforts and discuss how and why they view their work as essential. To accomplish the goal of providing stories, resources, and support to those interested in scholar activism, Sharieka hosted multiple panels to spotlight discussions about individuals’ experiences with academia and community work. Her work received the prestigious graduate student award for “exemplary community-engaged scholarship” from MSU’s University Outreach and Engagement (this write-up was adapted from an article written by Kara MacKenzie for the WRAC website).Philip Montgomery (2021-2022) | Coordinator (2022-2023)Philip started a peer mentoring program through a Graduate Student Organization in his graduate program pairing incoming graduate students with established students. The program aimed to increase a sense of belonging and connection from the very beginning of a student’s time in graduate school. With the support of faculty in his program and the Associate Dean of CAL, Philip launched a peer-mentoring scheme that paired incoming graduate students with a returning student in the program. He held several workshops for mentors and mentees to define mentoring, set common goals, and get pairs working together. His assessment determined that the mentor-mentee pairs were successful in sharing resources for meeting program requirements, brokering relationships with other students and faculty members, getting feedback on writing and practice presentations, and one pair even launched a collaborative research project. Philip is looking for ways to embed this program within the structure of his GSO in order to ensure its continuation.Hima Rawal (2021-2023)Hima worked with Social Sciences Fellow, Qi Huang, to address international students’ use of mental health services on campus. They hope to build bridges to increase access to and decrease stigma of mental health services. They collaborated with the Office of International Students & Scholars, Counseling and Psychiatric Services, the Trauma Services Training Network, and more to learn more about how these offices support international students. They also interviewed over a dozen international students to deepen their understanding of the concerns and barriers international students have concerning mental health. Using this data and their partnerships, Qi and Hima hope to create a Wellness Ambassador program where selected international students are trained to reach out to other international students to help them learn about mental health services on campus.
2017-2019: Elijah Simmons
2019-2020: Rachel Robinson & Cameron Chase
2020-2021: Sharieka Botex
2021-2022: Philip Montgomery
2021-2023: Hima Rawal
Elijah Simmons (2017-2019)As the first College of Arts & Letters Leadership Fellow, Elijah Simmons sought to bring awareness to the Leadership Institute’s resources and gain an understanding of what more could be done to improve the graduate student experience within the College.Rachel Robinson and Cameron Chase (2019-2020)Rachel Robinson and Cameron Chase worked closely with the College of Arts and Letters’ leadership team to organize CAL Care Week, a week-long event focused on how Spartans can take care of themselves as well as make positive contributions to the MSU community. The planned events for the week included writing workshops, yoga sessions, and painting the Rock in an effort to promote positivity, self-awareness, and connectivity. Examples of workshops include “How to be a Caring Reviewer,” “Creating Academic Boundaries with Care,” and “Teaching to GenZ: Navigating Anxiety and Depression with Art in the Classroom.” Unfortunately, CAL Care Week was scheduled for late March 2020 and had to be canceled due to COVID-19. CAL Care Week was featured on the College of Arts and Letters’ website and in an MSUToday article.Sharieka Botex (2020-2021) | Coordinator (2021-2023)Sharieka Botex, a PhD student in Writing, Rhetoric, and American Cultures was informed by her interest in community-focused work and engaging in a way that took into account her experiences and the experiences and work of Black people on a local and national level. Her project, Shaping Society Through Scholarship and Action, which took place on September 25, 2021, featured Black women scholars whose work classifies them as community-engaged scholars and/or scholarly activists. The event gave them a platform to share their professional and academic journeys and to discuss those who informed and influenced their work on panels moderated by graduate students. It also provided a platform for community organizers and leaders to share their efforts and discuss how and why they view their work as essential. To accomplish the goal of providing stories, resources, and support to those interested in scholar activism, Sharieka hosted multiple panels to spotlight discussions about individuals’ experiences with academia and community work. Her work received the prestigious graduate student award for “exemplary community-engaged scholarship” from MSU’s University Outreach and Engagement (this write-up was adapted from an article written by Kara MacKenzie for the WRAC website).Philip Montgomery (2021-2022) | Coordinator (2022-2023)Philip started a peer mentoring program through a Graduate Student Organization in his graduate program pairing incoming graduate students with established students. The program aimed to increase a sense of belonging and connection from the very beginning of a student’s time in graduate school. With the support of faculty in his program and the Associate Dean of CAL, Philip launched a peer-mentoring scheme that paired incoming graduate students with a returning student in the program. He held several workshops for mentors and mentees to define mentoring, set common goals, and get pairs working together. His assessment determined that the mentor-mentee pairs were successful in sharing resources for meeting program requirements, brokering relationships with other students and faculty members, getting feedback on writing and practice presentations, and one pair even launched a collaborative research project. Philip is looking for ways to embed this program within the structure of his GSO in order to ensure its continuation.Hima Rawal (2021-2023)Hima worked with Social Sciences Fellow, Qi Huang, to address international students’ use of mental health services on campus. They hope to build bridges to increase access to and decrease stigma of mental health services. They collaborated with the Office of International Students & Scholars, Counseling and Psychiatric Services, the Trauma Services Training Network, and more to learn more about how these offices support international students. They also interviewed over a dozen international students to deepen their understanding of the concerns and barriers international students have concerning mental health. Using this data and their partnerships, Qi and Hima hope to create a Wellness Ambassador program where selected international students are trained to reach out to other international students to help them learn about mental health services on campus.
Posted by:
Megumi Moore
Posted on: The MSU Graduate Leadership Institute
College of Arts & Letters Leadership Fellows
Leadership Fellows
2017-2019: Elijah Simmons
2019-2020: Rachel Rob...
2017-2019: Elijah Simmons
2019-2020: Rachel Rob...
Posted by:
NAVIGATING CONTEXT
Thursday, Sep 29, 2022
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Importance of Inclusion and Student Voices in Online Instruction
Topic Area: Online Teaching & Learning
Presented by: Jonathan Choti
Abstract:
In this talk, I discuss the changes I made to help students transition to remote instruction and how these changes ensured student success. In the changes, I incorporated student voices and paid special attention to student severally affected by the sudden transition. The adjustments I made focused on student participation, assessment, delivery methods, materials, student-to-student interaction, and student-to-instructor interaction. I make changes in my instruction especially to accommodate students badly hit by the abrupt move to online teaching in the spring of 2020. Unexpectedly, these changes benefited the entire classes I taught and ensured student success. The COVID-19 pandemic exerted undue strain on specific categories of our student population. The most affected were students who a) had to work for many hours, b) lacked technology and technical skills, c) were traveling, d) had physical and/or mental instability, and d) operate under severely deprived conditions. To help such students succeed, I diversified my assessment tasks, liberalized grading rubrics and deadlines, varied source materials, and adapted a wide range of teaching techniques to capture and sustain student attention in class. Thus, I sought student views on some aspects of the courses and prioritized their voices. I encouraged student participation and feedback, student-to-student interaction via group projects and breakout rooms. I related course materials to students lived experiences and became better organized. Moreover, I expressed by willingness to help with assignments, posted lecture slides on D2L before class, improved my online communication and reached out to struggling students while applauding top performers.
Session Resources: Importance of Inclusion and Student Voices (PowerPoint)
Presented by: Jonathan Choti
Abstract:
In this talk, I discuss the changes I made to help students transition to remote instruction and how these changes ensured student success. In the changes, I incorporated student voices and paid special attention to student severally affected by the sudden transition. The adjustments I made focused on student participation, assessment, delivery methods, materials, student-to-student interaction, and student-to-instructor interaction. I make changes in my instruction especially to accommodate students badly hit by the abrupt move to online teaching in the spring of 2020. Unexpectedly, these changes benefited the entire classes I taught and ensured student success. The COVID-19 pandemic exerted undue strain on specific categories of our student population. The most affected were students who a) had to work for many hours, b) lacked technology and technical skills, c) were traveling, d) had physical and/or mental instability, and d) operate under severely deprived conditions. To help such students succeed, I diversified my assessment tasks, liberalized grading rubrics and deadlines, varied source materials, and adapted a wide range of teaching techniques to capture and sustain student attention in class. Thus, I sought student views on some aspects of the courses and prioritized their voices. I encouraged student participation and feedback, student-to-student interaction via group projects and breakout rooms. I related course materials to students lived experiences and became better organized. Moreover, I expressed by willingness to help with assignments, posted lecture slides on D2L before class, improved my online communication and reached out to struggling students while applauding top performers.
Session Resources: Importance of Inclusion and Student Voices (PowerPoint)
Authored by:
Jonathan Choti
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Importance of Inclusion and Student Voices in Online Instruction
Topic Area: Online Teaching & Learning
Presented by: Jonat...
Presented by: Jonat...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Wednesday, Apr 28, 2021
Posted on: #iteachmsu
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Catalyst Innovation Program Spring 2022 Cohort
The Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation (CTLI) announces a new round of Catalyst Innovation Program (CIP) recipients for Spring 2022. This program funds creative and innovative uses of tools, technology, and pedagogical approaches for the purposes of allowing experimentation with the potential to enhance student learning experiences with just-in-time awards. It is with great enthusiasm that I present the Spring 2022 Catalyst Innovation Program recipients:Brad WIlcuts, Daniel TregoTheatreNew Media Performance LaboratoryJon FreyDepartment of Art, Art History, & DesignOpening New WindowsJudy Walgren and Megan KudziaJournalism/Digital Scholarship LabUnlocking 360-degree video production for the MSU Library's 360-degree theaterLinda NubaniSchool of Planning, Design, and ConstructionIntegrating eye-tracking and facial expression technology to evaluate the impact of interior design students’ projects on the well-being of users Quentin Tyler MSU ODEI, MSU School of Planning Construction and Design, and MSU ExtensionA Mile in My Shoes; A Continuation of Virtual Reality Confronting BiasStephen ThomasThe Office of the Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education (APUE)Broadening access and increasing representation among MSU’s Undergraduate Learning Assistants (ULAs) through software management, LA Campus.Sunil Chakrapani and Jenifer SaldanhaElectrical and Computer Engineering and Biological Sciences programQR code-based instruction in engineering and biology laboratoriesSusan McQuistonBiomedical Laboratory DiagnosticsAccess to Flow Cytometry data analysis enhances student learning, preparation, and engagement in diverse medical and research applications in preparation for future careersThis is the first award cycle since the formation of the CTLI. Grantees are already benefiting from the CTLI’s integration with the MSU Library through consultations with talent and expertise found in the OER Team, Makerspace, and Digital Scholarship LabMSU’s Chief Digital Academic Officer Brendan Guenther points to the rapidity with which innovation happens, and how structures must adapt - “Catalyst awards give us a rapid investment lever for individuals in the #iteachMSU community, when they sense the need for innovation and have an inspired idea, we can give them the boost needed to make something happen without waiting for the next annual planning cycle.”As the year progresses, we will share stories to keep you updated on the progress these projects are making. Our goal is to empower our recipients to experiment, learn and share that knowledge with the rest of the MSU educator community. If you missed this application cycle, the next opportunity will be available late Spring 2022. Get your ideas ready!
Authored by:
Rashad Muhammad
Posted on: #iteachmsu
Catalyst Innovation Program Spring 2022 Cohort
The Center for Teaching and Learning Innovation (CTLI) announces a ...
Authored by:
PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN
Friday, Mar 11, 2022