Category: 23 good reasons
-
Incentivize cooperation
Today’s article is written by Darrion Letendre & Robert Lawson
Darrion Letendre is the Land Based Learning Specialist at NorQuest College. He is an advocate for Indigenous education and revitalizing cultural knowledge through Western education systems. He has been a member of the Open Education Steering Committee, providing strategic guidance and wisdom as it relates to Indigenous Peoples’ ways of knowing.
Robert Lawson is an Educational Developer at NorQuest College in Edmonton, Canada. He has been actively promoting open education at the college since 2016 and is a member of the college’s Open Education Steering Committee. He is also a member of the Board of Directors for OE Global.
One of the principal reasons we value open education is that it presents tremendous opportunities for collaboration. This collaboration comes in many different ways; research, the development of learning resources, and cooperation between students and between students and instructors. In our learning context, open education has even supported reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.
We are fortunate to work at a college whose values encourage collaboration. Our Skills of Distinction, the competencies we want every NorQuest graduate to have, echo the generosity of spirit encapsulated in Bronwyn Hegarty’s Attributes of Open Pedagogy – community, trust, sharing and openness.
“As an educational developer involved in open education, it has been very rewarding to see instructors collaborate on textbook development and to witness their thrill in seeing it adopted across the country. It has been wonderful to hear stories of engaged students working with their peers and their instructors to create ancillary resources for their open textbooks.
This generosity of spirit I have been fortunate enough to experience at my own institution is what attracts me and what sustains me in the open community as a whole. I have been attending open education conferences and events since 2016. Each time, I come away with a tremendous feeling of fulfillment as I connect with people willing to collaborate on or share their applied research or teaching projects, people dedicated to removing barriers in education.”
“One of the highlights of my career so far, was in the successful planning and execution of the 2023 OE Global Conference as one of the conference’s Indigenous co-chairs. The wisdom and energy that was shared still echoes across the world, and I am grateful to know that people have carried this experience with them in meaningful ways. I believe the journey our planning team took together, in the spirit of wahkotowin (kinship), is the spirit people felt while attending the conference. I will admit it was not always straightforward, or easy at times, but what meaningful journey is? Sometimes the path forward presents many obstacles, but by working together and sharing multiple perspectives, we were able to navigate to our ultimate destination. Co-governance, between non-Indigenous and Indigenous People, was the dream of my ancestors; I was, and still am proud of our attempt to walk together in meaningful partnership. In many ways, open education was the door to this relationship, and I am grateful to Robert for his invitation.
However, at the same time Open Education presents wonderful opportunities for open knowledge sharing, there also exists an important intersection between knowledge transfer and ownership regarding Indigenous People’s traditional knowledge. During the planning for the 2023 OE Global Conference, we came to realize some inherent challenges with the advancement of open education and Indigenous Peoples cultural knowledge. As one of our conference themes suggested, not all knowledge is a free-for-all and can be opened, rather, some knowledge must remain closed off to ensure its protection and survival. Although I am excited by the rich opportunities open education can provide, I must remain hesitant with how traditional Indigenous knowledge and culture fits into that world. As we have witnessed throughout history, knowledge is power, but for me, it is a gift. What history has showed me is that when we share our gifts, they can be taken from us and used in ways that they were not intended. This is why, at least in the case of many traditional knowledge systems, it must be open as possible and closed when necessary.
“Much like the foundational practice in local Cree culture, braiding came to represent strength and unity as diverse groups collaborated at OE Global 2023.” https://www.flickr.com/photos/oeglobal/53267067673/in/album-72177720312015057
Nonetheless, I still hold high hope for the future of education for all people. Much like our conference planning, the path of open education will not be straightforward; we will stumble, and sometimes we will fall, but if we continue to pick each other back up and keep moving forward, together, our future ancestors will marvel at the world we can build for them; one that embraces openness, like my ancestors, but respects the sovereignty and self-determination of both worlds.”
-
Separating Fake from Truth in Education
Today’s article is written by Mitja Jermol
Mitja Jermol is the holder of the UNESCO Chair on Open Technologies for Open Educational Resources and Open Learning and the member of the board of the International Research Center on Artificial Intelligence under auspices of UNESCO (IRCAI), both at Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana Slovenia.
According to a study conducted by Stanford in 2016, more than 80% of middle school students struggle to distinguish between fabricated content and real news stories online (Wineburg et al., 2016). The study has been regularly adapted since (https://purl.stanford.edu/gf151tb4868 ) and results are getting worse not better.
This alarming statistic underscores a growing crisis in education – the production of misinformation and its impact on student learning.
The digital age that brought unprecedented access to information comes with the challenge of navigating an increasingly complex landscape of truth and falsehood. Educational and academic institutions, traditionally bastions of knowledge and critical thinking, are facing the difficult task to prepare students to distinguish fact from fiction in an environment where misinformation spreads at unprecedented speeds through social media, apps, and digital platforms.
With the appearance of more and more powerful generative AI that allows everyone to create millions of compelling but untruth stories the challenge is becoming increasingly complex as the line between authentic and artificially generated content becomes ever thinner.
Several studies revealed the complex nature of misinformation and its impact on learning. Researchers (Ecker et all 2022) found that exposure to misinformation can create persistent misconceptions that resist correction, even when students are later presented with accurate information. Study firstly published in Scientific American in 2018 (Greenemeier 2018) demonstrated that misinformation spreads up to six times faster on social media platforms than facts, making it particularly challenging for students to maintain accurate understanding of current events.
Figure generated by AI
It looks like humanity is rapidly moving from the real world based on data, facts and common truth devised through a scientific method to a pure fiction and narrative-based reality, where the line between truth and fabrication becomes increasingly blurred. These challenges pose significant risks to the educational process. Students who cannot effectively evaluate information sources may develop misconceptions that hamper their learning, make decisions based on false baselines, and propagate the spread of misinformation. In addition, the inability to distinguish credible from non-credible information undermines the fundamental goals of education – developing informed, critical thinkers.
Several studies (Centola et all, 2018, Xie J et all, 2011) demonstrated that only from 10-25% of the whole population in a country can be enough to flip social conventions or establish new norms. So, if one combines the power of Generative AI, with the amplifying effect of social media and use them strategically on population that grew in the complex world of fake and truth without proper mechanisms and methods to distinguish between them, the potential for manipulation and erosion of trust in institutions and information itself becomes incredibly dangerous.
However, there are already several mechanisms in place to address misinformation and several new attempts to address these challenges in education combining traditional critical thinking skills with modern digital literacy techniques, supported by systematic curriculum integration, critical pedagogy and continuous assessment.
The SIFT method (Stop, Investigate, Find better coverage, Trace claims) for example, developed by Caulfield (Caufield 2023) has shown promising results in improving students’ ability to evaluate online information. The CRAAP test (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose) developed by (Blakeslee 2004) mainly used by librarians might be properly adapted to address information platform-specific factors such as algorithmic bias, user-generated content, and the spread of misinformation within closed networks. This adaptation might include motivation and author’s credibility as well, emotional impact and more.
Several more traditional approaches include various combinations of inquiry-based learning, lateral reading and source evaluation, collaborative fact-checking projects, simulations and role-playing, critical analysis of media narratives.
Finally, we always like to conclude with teachers and put all the burden on them. It is true that teachers should serve as models of critical evaluation while teaching students. It is also advisable that their professional development should involve being informed about emerging misinformation trends, they should learn and teach evaluation techniques, should develop skills in guiding student discussions about controversial topics, and more. While teachers, schools, and educational systems are crucial, the issue of separating fake from truth in education extends far beyond the classroom. The teachers are only one component of a broader societal challenge that requires a coordinated approach. Addressing this complex issue demands a comprehensive strategy that involves family involvement, community engagement, media literacy initiatives, platform accountability, and ongoing research into the nature and impact of misinformation.
The ability to separate fake from truth has become a fundamental skill for the 21st century. The future of informed citizenship and democratic discourse depends on our ability to prepare students for an increasingly complex information landscape. The truth is that we are not very good at it today and that the rapid development of technologies, fast dissolvement of norms and practicing miss-information at the highest levels of society without accountability does not serve as an example.
References
Blakeslee S, (2004) “The CRAAP Test,” LOEX Quarterly: Vol. 31: No. 3, Article 4.
Available at: https://commons.emich.edu/loexquarterly/vol31/iss3/4Caulfield M, Wineburg S, (2023), “How to Think Straight, Get Duped Less, and Make Better Decisions about What to Believe”, University of Chicago Press; First Edition (November 16, 2023)
Centola D, Becker J, Brackbill D, Baronchelli A. (2018) “Experimental evidence for tipping points in social convention” .Science 360,1116-1119(2018).DOI:10.1126/science.aas8827
Ecker U.K.H., Lewandowsky S., Cook J. et al (2022). “The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction”. Nat Rev Psychol 1, 13–29 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Greenemeier L (2018), “False news travels 6 times faster on Twitter than truthful news”, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/false-news-travels-6-times-faster-on-twitter-than-truthful-news
Wineburg S, McGrew S, Breakstone J, Ortega T. (2016).” Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning”. Stanford Digital Repository. Available at: http://purl.stanford.edu/fv751yt5934
Xie J, Sreenivasan S, Korniss G, Zhang W, Lim C, Szymanski BK. (2011) “Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities”. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2011 Jul;84(1 Pt 1):011130. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.84.011130. Epub 2011 Jul 22. PMID: 21
-
Development of Evaluative Judgment
Today’s article is written by Loubna Terhzaz
Loubna Terhzaz is a lecturer at the Faculty of Science, Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco. She is a member of the ICESCO Chair for Open Education, the UNITWIN network UNOE and Secretary General of the Averroès Foundation for the promotion of scientific research, innovation and sustainable development.
Open education is an educational practice that facilitates open access to education, offering learners accessible, diverse, collaborative, and personalized learning. It provides the learner with an opportunity to develop critical thinking skills, a major challenge in the age of AI, through the competence of evaluative judgment.
According to Cowan (2010), evaluative judgment is the high-level cognitive skill required for lifelong learning. In other words, it is the ability to make judgments about the quality of one’s own work and that of others with accuracy, objectivity, and with the goal of improving and responding to future learning needs, especially in the era of artificial intelligence.
As a professor at Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, I observe that the rise of AI has profoundly changed the way students approach their assignments. The ease with which they can now generate reports using AI platforms is undeniable. These tools allow them to quickly obtain well-structured presentations, but they do not necessarily contain reliable content. This is where critical thinking becomes essential. Open education, with its pedagogical approach focused on learner autonomy, offers an ideal framework for developing this crucial skill of evaluative judgment.
Open education, through Open Educational Resources (OER), allows students to modify, retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute the educational resources (the 5 Rs) according to the approved license. It enables students to develop their ability to express, formulate judgments, and evaluate education, a common practice in Anglo-Saxon universities but still not widespread elsewhere (Younès, 2007). This evaluative judgment process gives students the opportunity to compare the relevance and quality of information, including that generated by AI. It also allows professors a valuable tool to identify needs and gaps in their content and pedagogical approach, especially when facing the challenges of artificial intelligence.
At the same time, and in line with this goal of developing critical thinking, the assessment of students by professors should also prioritize the ability to analyze and judge over the mere accumulation of knowledge.
Furthermore, open discussion forums present important spaces for exchange. They allow students to confront their ideas and construct new knowledge. The support and presence of professors in these forums are essential to guide these exchanges and ensure the success of all students, particularly those facing social difficulties, refugees, or immigrants. These opportunities for exchange also encourage students to analyze, evaluate, and question information while fostering a relationship of trust and mutual respect that enhances learning
“Jugement évaluatif de l’enseignement” by Loubna TERHZAZ. CC-BY
Although open education provides an environment conducive to evaluative judgment, measures must also be taken within traditional education to optimize its application until open education becomes more widespread.
To prepare students and professors to take advantage of this approach, the following measures would be relevant:
1. Integrate critical thinking education into curricula at various levels, organizing practical exercises where students must analyze situations involving AI and provide tools for evaluating the credibility of information sources.
2. Train professors and educational staff by offering training on new technologies, partnerships with AI specialists, and creating networks for sharing best practices and resources on integrating ethics and evaluative judgment into AI education.
3. Develop tools to support critical thinking and ethical reflection, encouraging the creation of software or platforms and environments where students can interact with AI systems and analyze the results produced by them.
4. Encourage a reflective learning environment by being autonomous and responsible for their own learning, which fosters strong judgment skills. However, students today are often more focused on finding a quick and easy answer by using AI responses, which limits the personal reflection that this autonomy promotes.
5. Encourage a collaborative and participatory approach through forums, learning networks, or knowledge-sharing platforms that allow for enriching evaluative judgment and developing a more balanced and reasoned approach.
Through the implementation of measures in traditional education, we can prepare students to develop sharp critical thinking and solid evaluative judgment, enabling them to thrive in an open education environment in the future and face the challenges of AI.
Cowan, J. (2010). Developing the ability for making evaluative judgements. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(3), 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510903560036.
Younès, N. (2007). À quelles conditions l’évaluation formative de l’enseignement par les étudiants est-elle possible en France ? Revue française de Pédagogie, 161, 25-40.
Please note that this article has been translated with the help of artificial intelligence and reviewed by individuals who are not professional translators. Despite our efforts to ensure accuracy and fidelity, errors or inaccuracies may remain. Feel free to let us know at: chaireunescorelia@univ-nantes.fr
