5A -
Tracks
Track 1
| Wednesday, July 10, 2024 |
| 3:30 PM - 4:25 PM |
| Hall C |
Speaker
Dr Sue-Ann Stanford
JMC Academy
3:30pm - 3:55pm Collaborating with robots: Integrating generative artificial intelligence into assessable creative processes
3:30 PM - 3:55 PMFinal abstract
Focus
Demonstration of how GAI tools have been integrated into design processes for assessable artifacts.
Background context
At the beginning of 2023, it was impossible to ignore discussions about threats posed by GAI to academic integrity in higher education (Gallent Torres et. Al. 2023). For this HEI, the threat was assessed as minimal because its learning and teaching strategies embedded authentic assessment (Boud 2008). The greater challenge was how to integrate GAI into assessable creative processes as industry advice said these tools were already being used in practice (Boucher, Smith, Telliel., 2023 Lyu, Hao, Yi., 2023; McKinsey, 2024).
Description
As a test, a senior academic worked with design students to create artifacts using a combination of analog, traditional digital, and GAI tools. The use of the GAI tool highlighted its strengths and limitations in the generation of images: it expanded the range of what could be produced, whilst at the same time, with a reliance on a literal interpretation of the prompt, how weird the output.
Method
This qualitative case study is ‘particularistic, descriptive and heuristic’ (Merriam, 2009, p. 43). It is based on an instance of classroom practice, where data collected is used to test and inform institutional policy settings.
Evidence and Outcomes
The process undertaken in the classroom setting, situated as a simulated studio workplace, integrated the experimental use of GAI tools into a creative practice that adheres to the principles of assessment (valid, reliable, flexible, fair) and is also authentic.
Contribution
A way has been found to appropriately and ethically integrate the use of GAI into academic processes that simulate industry practice and uphold academic integrity.
Engagement
Along with an entertaining visual presentation, a fun quiz has been integrated into the session, where the audience will be asked to link GAI images with their prompts.
Demonstration of how GAI tools have been integrated into design processes for assessable artifacts.
Background context
At the beginning of 2023, it was impossible to ignore discussions about threats posed by GAI to academic integrity in higher education (Gallent Torres et. Al. 2023). For this HEI, the threat was assessed as minimal because its learning and teaching strategies embedded authentic assessment (Boud 2008). The greater challenge was how to integrate GAI into assessable creative processes as industry advice said these tools were already being used in practice (Boucher, Smith, Telliel., 2023 Lyu, Hao, Yi., 2023; McKinsey, 2024).
Description
As a test, a senior academic worked with design students to create artifacts using a combination of analog, traditional digital, and GAI tools. The use of the GAI tool highlighted its strengths and limitations in the generation of images: it expanded the range of what could be produced, whilst at the same time, with a reliance on a literal interpretation of the prompt, how weird the output.
Method
This qualitative case study is ‘particularistic, descriptive and heuristic’ (Merriam, 2009, p. 43). It is based on an instance of classroom practice, where data collected is used to test and inform institutional policy settings.
Evidence and Outcomes
The process undertaken in the classroom setting, situated as a simulated studio workplace, integrated the experimental use of GAI tools into a creative practice that adheres to the principles of assessment (valid, reliable, flexible, fair) and is also authentic.
Contribution
A way has been found to appropriately and ethically integrate the use of GAI into academic processes that simulate industry practice and uphold academic integrity.
Engagement
Along with an entertaining visual presentation, a fun quiz has been integrated into the session, where the audience will be asked to link GAI images with their prompts.
Biography
The authors are academic peers of many years standing. They have more recently begun collaborating on a diverse range of creative projects, focussing on site-specific and material-specific sculptural work, using scale, sound, and surprise to engage their audience.
As Dean, Dr Sue-Ann Stanford is the senior academic leader of a private Higher Education Institute that is an educational pathway to work in the creative industries. Key to academic governance policy and practice at the HEI. Dr Sue-Ann designs and employs learning and teaching strategies to enable rather than delimit student experiences. With the exponential use of Generative Artificial Intelligence, Dr Sue-Ann has been promoting the experimental use of GAI in the classroom so students and academics alike can learn about the tools while discussing the impact of their use on their creative practice and in the spaces outside the HEI.
Dr Melissa Silk
National Head Of Design
JMC Academy
Co-presenter
Biography
Dr Melissa Silk is an early adopter of GAI in the classroom, which is typical of their general approach to bringing new and emerging technology and techniques to the attention of the academy. Dr Melissa has an international reputation for their work in integrating STEM into art practices; the transdisciplinary approach supports the development of collaboration, critical thinking, communication and design thinking skills in the making process.
Assoc Prof Benito Cao
The University of Adelaide
4:00pm - 4:25pm Teaching, learning and assessing using participatory multiple choice tests in the age of artificial intelligence
4:00 PM - 4:25 PMFinal abstract
Focus: This presentation showcases an innovative pedagogical strategy: participatory multiple-choice tests.
Background/context: The challenges posed by artificial intelligence regarding assessment present an opportunity to reclaim the multiple-choice test as both a formative and summative assessment. This activity illustrates how this can be done in ways that are pedagogically effective.
Description: The activity requires students to write and submit a multiple-choice question for each weekly topic. Every week, the ten best questions (without the answers) are listed online, so that the students can research the answers in their own time –something they are encouraged to do in study groups, and which contributes to the formative dimension of the task. The listed questions (a selected number of them) are used to produce the summative multiple-choice test.
Method: Students who attended the final tutorials, a total of 127 (out of 150), were asked to complete a voluntary and anonymous questionnaire to get their views on the MCT activity. The evaluation consisted of five questions that helped determine the pedagogical value of the activity.
Evidence: The evaluation of the activity reveals that the overwhelming majority of students found the activity useful in terms of helping them better understand the content of the course (80%) and connect that content with the real world (70%), as well as in terms of eliminating or reducing their anxiety and uncertainty in relation to the test (70%).
Contribution: The presentation showcases how multiple-choice tests can be an engaging and effective pedagogical instrument, both in terms of teaching and learning as well as in terms of student assessment.
Engagement: The presentation will model the activity by inviting the audience to produce a multiple-choice test question relevant to the session and provide ample time to ask questions and discus how this activity might be relevant and useful to their teaching practice.
Background/context: The challenges posed by artificial intelligence regarding assessment present an opportunity to reclaim the multiple-choice test as both a formative and summative assessment. This activity illustrates how this can be done in ways that are pedagogically effective.
Description: The activity requires students to write and submit a multiple-choice question for each weekly topic. Every week, the ten best questions (without the answers) are listed online, so that the students can research the answers in their own time –something they are encouraged to do in study groups, and which contributes to the formative dimension of the task. The listed questions (a selected number of them) are used to produce the summative multiple-choice test.
Method: Students who attended the final tutorials, a total of 127 (out of 150), were asked to complete a voluntary and anonymous questionnaire to get their views on the MCT activity. The evaluation consisted of five questions that helped determine the pedagogical value of the activity.
Evidence: The evaluation of the activity reveals that the overwhelming majority of students found the activity useful in terms of helping them better understand the content of the course (80%) and connect that content with the real world (70%), as well as in terms of eliminating or reducing their anxiety and uncertainty in relation to the test (70%).
Contribution: The presentation showcases how multiple-choice tests can be an engaging and effective pedagogical instrument, both in terms of teaching and learning as well as in terms of student assessment.
Engagement: The presentation will model the activity by inviting the audience to produce a multiple-choice test question relevant to the session and provide ample time to ask questions and discus how this activity might be relevant and useful to their teaching practice.
Biography
Dr Benito Cao is Associate Professor in Politics and International Relations at the University of Adelaide. Benito has a vast teaching experience and has received numerous teaching awards. He is a member of the Adelaide Education Academy, Chair of the School of Social Sciences Learning and Teaching Portfolio, and Co-Director of the Bachelor of Arts at the University of Adelaide. He has published in the fields of identity politics, critical thinking, citizenship studies, and environmental politics. He is the author of Environment and Citizenship (Routledge, 2015) and the editor of Environmental Citizenship in the Indian Ocean Region (Routledge, 2021).
Chair
Patsie Polly
Director
Scientia Education Academy
