Digital Image

Open Education Movement

After attending the MALAT virtual symposium, I encountered several new ideas that both updated my knowledge and introduced me to new concepts. Reflecting on the presentations, one aspect that surprised me was my lack of familiarity with the Open Education Movement. Despite teaching internationally and engaging in professional development courses, including an EdX course, I had not grasped the broader scope of the Open Education movement until recently.

The “Open Educational Resources (OER) movement, defined as a technology-empowered effort to create and share educational content globally,” (Caswell, Henson, et al., 2008, p 2), aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal #4, emphasizing inclusive and equitable education for all. Elizabeth Childs’ (2024) view of “openness as a vehicle for change” resonates strongly, highlighting how Open Education is revolutionizing conventional educational models. The benefits of open education are significant, “offering high-quality instructional content at minimal additional cost, benefiting learners, authors, and institutions alike,” (Caswell, Henson, et al., 2008, p9). The Open Education movement’s global impact underscores the importance of embracing technological advancements to ensure quality education and lifelong learning opportunities worldwide.

Generational Tech Savviness

Another surprising idea came up during Corie Houldsworth’s presentation (2024). She highlighted a surprising revelation about technological savviness connected with age. Initially, she assumed that technological proficiency would follow along generational lines, a notion supported by Prensky’s concept of “digital immigrants” and “digital natives, ” (Becker, Fleming & Keijsers, 2011, p388). However, Houldsworth’s experience led her to challenge this assumption, noting that age is not the sole determinant of technological adeptness. She emphasized that personality traits such as curiosity, adaptability, and a willingness to learn new tools play a more significant role in effectively navigating and utilizing technology.

This perspective resonates with Bennett et al.’s (2008) caution against broad generalizations about generational disparities in technology use, highlighting the diverse cognitive abilities within age groups. Houldsworth’s observation also underscores the need to consider factors beyond age, such as access to technology and individual learning skills. Facer and Furlong’s (2001) warning about youth disengagement with technology due to various barriers further complicates the understanding of technological proficiency solely through generational lenses.

In conclusion, while the assumption of generational differences in technological proficiency is common, Houldsworth’s insights emphasize the importance of considering individual traits and access to technology. It is clear that age alone does not dictate one’s ability to adapt and utilize technology effectively.

Instructional Design & AI

The presentation on “Using Generative AI in Centers for Teaching and Learning – Approaches, Challenges, and Opportunities” piqued my interest, as it aligns with my career aspirations in Instructional Design. During it, Brewer and Heyman (2024) both highlighted AI’s transformative impact on Instructional Design, emphasizing its ability to expedite tedious tasks and assist Instructional Designers lacking subject matter expertise. “AI tools like Chat GPT streamline workflows, enabling IDs to focus on creativity and enhance educational material quality,” (Ch’ng, 2023, p.33).

Aspiring ID professionals, like myself, can benefit from AI’s support, “particularly in the fostering of creativity and inclusivity by enabling individuals without specialized skills to engage in design and content creation,” (Ch’ng, 2023, p.35). However, Brewer and Heyman (2024) asserted that the increasing reliance on AI in ID raises concerns regarding its proper use, accessibility, and the need to balance human expertise with AI assistance. The speakers cautioned against overreliance, lack of transparency, and the importance of experts verifying AI-generated content due to its rapid evolution. Ongoing reassessment of AI’s applications and limitations is crucial as it continues to evolve rapidly, or as Brewer (2024) stated, ““The river is flowing really fast.” 

Student Use of AI

During that same presentation, Brewer (2024) posed a question that I found to be incredibly relevant. Is it hypocritical to allow and encourage our educators to use AI as a tool to support and improve their work, but demand original work from students without the aid of any AI? I agree that it is hypocritical, as well as unfeasible realistically, to ban students from the use of AI tools to support their learning. Cassidy (2023) argues that barring the use of AI fails to acknowledge the changing landscape of education and the potential benefits AI offers in enhancing student learning.

I agree with Brewer and Heyman, that institutions need to step back, to think about learning outcomes for students, thereby focusing on the reflection of experience, if the discipline allows for it, as that is something AI struggles with. Heyman mentioned that she already allows students to use GPT and AI tools in certain assignments, as long as there is a lot of transparency and clarity in how it is used. To address these concerns, Sullivan, Kelly & McLaughlan argue (2023) it is essential to use AI tools transparently, citing their use in student work and acknowledging their limitations.

This made me consider how the introduction of AI in K-12 classrooms will impact the development and learning of younger learners. “The increasing prevalence of AI in education raises questions about its impact … If students rely too heavily on AI for ideas and solutions, they may lose the ability to think critically and creatively,” (Cassidy, 2023). After 2 years of online teaching during Covid, I completely understand how too much reliance on technology can impact our young students in a myriad of ways, impacting their reading, problem solving, independent thinking and attention span, to name a few. It is therefore “ crucial to strike a balance between using AI as a tool to enhance learning and ensuring that students develop the skills they need to succeed in a rapidly changing world,” (Sullivan, Kelly & McLaughlan, 2023, p 6).

In conclusion, while AI has the potential to revolutionize education for both educators and learners, its use must be carefully considered and integrated into teaching, learning and assessment practices. Educators and institutions must involve students in discussions about AI to ensure its ethical and responsible use (Sullivan, Kelly & McLaughlan, 2023, p 6). By doing so, we can harness the benefits of AI while mitigating its potential dangers.

References

 Becker, K., Fleming, J. & Keijsers, W. (2011) “ E-learning: ageing workforce versus technology-savvy generation,” Education+ Training, 54(5), p 385-400.

Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008), “The ‘Digital Natives’ Debate: A critical review of the evidence”, British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 39 No. 5, p 775-86.

Brewer, M. & Heyman, J. (2024, April 11) “Using Generative AI in Centers for Teaching and Learning – Approaches, Challenges, and Opportunities.”

Cassidy, C. (2023, January 17). Lecturer detects bot-use in one fifth of assessments as concerns mount over AI in exams. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jan/17/lecturer-detects-bot-use-in-one-fifth-of-assessments-as-concerns-mount-over-ai-in-exams   

Caswell, T., Henson, S., Jensen, M. & Wiley, D. (2008). Open Educational Resources: Enabling universal education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 9(1), p 1–11.

https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i1.469

Ch’ng, L. K. (2023). How AI makes its mark on instructional design. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), p 32-41. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8188576

Facer, K. and Furlong, R. (2001), “Beyond the Myth of the ‘Cyberkid’: Young people at the margins of the information revolution”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 4 No. 4, p 451-69.

Houldsworth, C. (2024, April 9). Work with Human Factors group and her international work with the IAEA on Communities of Practice.

Shakhnoza Mamatova Hoshim qizi. (2023). “The role of AI in Teaching: Advantages, Disadvantages, and Future Implications,”  Eurasian Scientific Herald, 24, p 8–12. Retrieved from https://geniusjournals.org/index.php/esh/article/view/4885

Sullivan, M., Kelly, A., & McLaughlan, P. (2023). ChatGPT in higher education: Considerations for academic integrity and student learning. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 6(1), p 1-10.