Raiding the inarticulate since 2010

accelerated academy acceleration agency AI Algorithmic Authoritarianism and Digital Repression archer Archive Archiving artificial intelligence automation Becoming Who We Are Between Post-Capitalism and Techno-Fascism big data blogging capitalism ChatGPT claude Cognitive Triage: Practice, Culture and Strategies Communicative Escalation and Cultural Abundance: How Do We Cope? Corporate Culture, Elites and Their Self-Understandings craft creativity critical realism data science Defensive Elites Digital Capitalism and Digital Social Science Digital Distraction, Personal Agency and The Reflexive Imperative Digital Elections, Party Politics and Diplomacy digital elites Digital Inequalities Digital Social Science Digital Sociology digital sociology Digital Universities elites Fragile Movements and Their Politics Cultures generative AI higher education Interested labour Lacan Listening LLMs margaret archer Organising personal morphogenesis Philosophy of Technology platform capitalism platforms populism Post-Democracy, Depoliticisation and Technocracy post-truth psychoanalysis public engagement public sociology publishing Reading realism reflexivity scholarship sexuality Shadow Mobilization, Astroturfing and Manipulation Social Media Social Media for Academics social media for academics social ontology social theory sociology technology The Content Ecosystem The Intensification of Work The Political Economy of Digital Capitalism The Technological History of Digital Capitalism Thinking trump twitter Uncategorized work writing zizek

How we integrate GAI into teaching will be as much determined by political economy as pedagogical purpose

I fully agree with MairĂ©ad Pratschke’s analysis here in Generative AI and Education: Digital Pedagogies, Teaching Innovation and Learning Design. From loc 2231:

The innovation we have seen in digital education over the last two decades risks being undermined if we use GAI to revert to outdated models of delivery. GAI, rather than increasing automation in education, should enable more interaction, more active learning, more personalisation. The focus for educators therefore needs to be on the design of active, collaborative and constructivist learning that encourages sense-making and critical engagement rather than the generation of content

But it’s important to contextualise how educators come to define their focus and articulate pedagogical purposes. Unless the funding situation changes in UK HEIs, there will be continued pushes for ‘efficiency’: in which case the capacity for automation will be what is seized upon in order to deliver teaching to larger classes with smaller teams. I increasingly worry the vocabulary of co-intelligence, which I’ve also been prone to using, will contribute to this process. If I was a university manager trying to encourage academics to be open to automation through GAI, I would talk about ‘team teaching with conversational agents’.

We need to be extremely sensitive to the tropes and metaphors circulating around GAI in higher education over the coming years. They will be core elements in how the adoption and imposition of GAI in educational practice will be contested. The language of cultural technology, as well as I think being ontologically more accurate, will be harder to weaponise in order to support automation agendas.

Which means I should probably stop talking about ‘conversational agents’ all the time if I want to be consistent đŸ¤”

, , , , , ,
, , ,