Application frame methods and techniques in HighEd courses and self-paced learning .pptx

1. Application frame, methods and techniques
to include advanced digital technologies in
HighEd courses and self-paced learning
experiences and self-reflections in WeCollab
S.Lariccia - Sapienza University

2. We-Collab goals and advancements
Thanks to the WE-COLLAB project at Sapienza and
Link have extended the capabilities of
CommonSpaces (CS), an experimental platform
originally created 10 years ago, in the fields of:
a) Text Analysis (TA) and Content Evaluation;
b) Additional functionalities to record learning
experiences data (per the Learning Analytics
protocol) collected during online self-paced
learning sessions.
c) extra functions (Mobile App) - to record
learning experiences data collected involving
learners in synchronous/asynchronous classes
and lectures (Learning Analytics to archive in a
connected Learning Record Store).
2

3. We-Collab goals and advancements [2]
These applications should be especially well
suited for usage in specific types of teachings,
like, among others:
● foreign languages (basic or advanced);
● linguistics,
● computer-assisted linguistics; computer-
assisted literary critics;
● language and sentiment analysis for
economics, marketing, and social studies
at large.
3

4. We-Collab goals and advancements [3]
Our purpose in this proposal is to collect outer experiences and to sketch a
possible mindscape for the next few years.
We begin with a classification of different subfields of application in education-
Then we will try to draw some conclusions for the next year of WE-COLLAB
project on one hand, and forward for a possible sequel.
4

5. We-Collab goals and advancements [4]
A common feature of these instruments is that they can be used for a wide
range of purposes:
● creators of contents could get an estimation of the readability of a text,
based on indicators of syntactic complexity and lexicon level; this could
stimulate the use of more plain terms, or also more varied lexicon, besides
helping to find spelling errors;
5

6. We-Collab goals and advancements [5]
● similarly, teachers, educational designer / manager and other educators,
could be interested in evaluating educational materials and other contents
in order to assess the suitability of a text for a target audience or an
educational goal; they could also use some functions to get hints in building
a glossary for some subject matter, starting from given materials;
6

7. We-Collab goals and advancements [6]
● a teacher could use the same indicators to assess the writing ability of a
student in terms of lexicon richness, syntax mastery and, possibly, liveliness
of style;
● a learner could use a few functions to better understand a text, for
example for guessing the meaning of an unknown word.
7

8. We-Collab goals and advancements [7]
Sure, the same tools could be more useful in the context of language learning
and teaching of a foreign language (L2 or LS) at an early age and/or in less
favored environments, and even more in self-regulated learning (SRL); probably,
in disciplinary courses they are being enriched with specific terminological
knowledge, which could be an interesting experimentation topic inside the WE-
COLLAB project.
8

9. We-Collab goals and advancements [8]
Furthermore, the project team aims at evaluating the reliability of Learning
Analytics data collected by students’ action through a parallel collection of
physiological – neurocognitive signals generated without any conscious activity
needed by the subject examined.
Brainsigns group - together with CBU - Copenaghen will carry on - n two
different modalities - this part of the project and will present their preparation
of the PR5 stage of We-Collab later on this morning.
9

10. Potential future developments [1]
Even though we are aware that impressive text-analysis, and prompt
engineering dashboards are provided by a whole new universe of tools, such as,
in the last year, the so-called OpenAI-based platform; as they are made available
online by many forefront giants (Alfabeta, Amazon, ChapGPT - Microsoft, among
others) achieving the goals of these agents, as they introduce themselves, it is
not precisely the goal of an educator neither the goal of a self-learner or an
adult subject who’s the long-term scope it is not to fake-out someone else on a
subject but rather to get to autonomously master a knowledge domain (such as
a second language) as a real not mediated actor.
10

11. Temporary conclusions
Experiences are not sellable (or alienable) as products, but, exactly the opposite,
they are tightly connected with one (individual or collective) subject.
So is the experiential knowledge building: everyone has a precise perception of
this fact when she/he experiences playing her/his score part in a music band jam
session in opposition to reproducing (“playing”) a piece of digitized music in his
player at home.
11

12. Temporary conclusions [2]
On the other hand, AI-based technologies and rituality are products, therefore
they must be sold. Someone behind them lives and prospers - or fails and
vanishes - on their selling, and given the massive investments made so far, these
will rock the scene of technologized cultures worldwide.
So how could one educator, one teacher, or one mentor face this new hurricane?
12

13. Temporary conclusions [3]
Deconstructing, understanding, reusing repurposing, and mastering along with
all the other beasts in the technology zoo.
Transforming the product into a process to understand it. Metabolizing it by
limiting purely passive consumption into one smart, awareness-building,
collective practice.
Transforming the products into experiences to boost the subject capacity to be
at the center of her/his universe.
13

14. Temporary conclusions [4]
● The real worry about and in front to ChatGPT lies not, according to these
authors, in students circumventing the processes of knowledge, but in educators
being forced to recognize the failure to foster such a process […] in the first place.
● On the contrary, an attitude of techno-fanaticism can easily be generated,
especially when the subjects who gradually come into contact with generative AI
have lived in a previous state of relative technological illiteracy.
● In this case the new solution may easily appear to those who adopt it to be a
magical solution, a thaumaturgical intervention from above. In this case the
consequences for the educational environment could be seriously negative.
. 14

15. References
● Smith, David Arellano, «How Fears of AI in the Classroom Reflect Anxieties about
Choosing Sophistry over True Knowledge in the American Education System», Critical
Humanities, vol. 2, fasc. 2, gennaio 2024.
● Suman, Chandan, Shekhar Suman, «Using Artificial Intelligence for Foreign Language
Learning», fasc. August, 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374119563.
● Yan, Lixiang, Roberto Martinez-Maldonado, Dragan Gašević, «Generative Artificial
Intelligence in Learning Analytics: Contextualising Opportunities and Challenges through
the Learning Analytics Cycle», novembre 2023. http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00087.
15