Exploring Generative AI in Teacher Preparation Call for proposals

 Title/Theme: Exploring Generative AI in Teacher Preparation

The Challenge 

Generative AI is rapidly becoming commonplace and coupled with the availability of personal devices and one-to-one technology adoption, we need to ensure that the current and future generations of teachers understand its implications, know how to adjust their pedagogy and how to use it to assist in lesson planning, assessment, and individualizing instruction. In this call, we are specifically inviting submissions from practitioners using evidence-based strategies in both pre-service and in-service teacher education. 

Submissions might focus on (but are not limited to): 

• Personalized Learning 
• Intelligent Tutoring Systems 
• Automated Grading 
• Data Analysis and Insights 
• AI-driven Simulation and Virtual Reality in Teacher Education 
• Feedback on teacher performance 
• Lesson and assessment planning 
• Inclusion and accessibility 
• Chatbots in Learning and self-regulation 
• Bots for socio-emotional learning 
• Adaptive learning 
• AI literacy for teacher educators 
• What do teachers need to know in a world of Generative AI 
• Teacher preparation in an age of Generative AI
• Whose data? Who is learning? The complex realities of learning in an age of Generative AI 
• Ethical and Equity Implications of Generative AI in Teacher Education 
• The Economics of Generative AI and Teacher Education 
• Cultural Sensitivity and the Deployment of AI in Diverse Educational Settings 
• Assessing the Impact of Generative AI on Accessibility and Inclusion in Teacher Education 
• Generative AI, Social Justice, and Educator Preparation. 

The Approach: 

In addition to an open call for proposals, we also intend to invite scholars to submit articles from those who have participated in events held by the AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (I & T Committee). Since the spring of 2023, the I & T Committee has held a series of webinars and online Lunch and Learn sessions focused on generative AI in teacher education. Researchers and practitioners familiar with AI tools shared policies, procedures, and practices with the AACTE community, leading to rich forward-thinking conversations about this timely topic. We will continue to hold these events leading up to a featured session at the AACTE 2025 Annual Meeting in Long Beach, CA, where some of these scholars and I & T Committee members will be presenters. 

• Editors:
  Valerie Hill-Jackson, Ph.D., Texas A&M University
  Cheryl Craig, Ph.D., Texas A&M University
• Guest Co-Editors:
  Guy Trainin, Ph.D., University of Nebraska- Lincoln
  Laurie Bobley, Ed.D., Touro University
  Punya Mishra, Ph.D., Arizona State University
  Jon Margerum-Leys, Ph.D., Oakland University
  Peña L. Bedesem, Ph.D., Kent State University

Manuscript Guidelines 

Authors are encouraged to submit manuscripts that meet the following criteria: 

• All manuscripts must be fully blinded to ensure a reliable review process. 
• All manuscripts must meet publishing guidelines established by the American Psychological Association (APA) Publication Manual (7th edition, 2019). 
• A manuscript, inclusive of references, tables, and figures, should not exceed 10,000 words. 
• No more than one manuscript submission per author. 
• Read more JTE guidelines. 
• To submit your manuscript, please visit the JTE website. 

Timeline for Submission 

• June 15, 2024: A 150-word bio for each author, a 300-word structured abstract, and 5 keywords due to guest editors. Email these items to jmleys@oakland.edu and the subject line should read: ‘JTE Anniversary 76(3) – Abstract’. 
  
• September 1, 2024: Manuscript submission deadline for ‘Level 1’ external review; see the above guidelines. Manuscripts need to be in ‘near publication’ quality to move forward to the Level 2 review. 
  
• November 15, 2024: Level 1 – External peer review completed. 
  
• December 10 through January 10, 2025: ‘Level 2’ review by guest editors; feedback is provided to prospective authors on a rolling basis. 
  
• Noon (CST) Saturday, February 1, 2025. All final manuscripts must be received in the Sage online system for consideration of publication in JTE’s 75th anniversary issue on Generative AI, 76(3). The publication date is targeted for May 2025. 

The Yin of AI in Education

 

Last Friday I had the chance to be part of a panel on AI at the Carson Center for Emerging Media Arts as part of a larger symposium (more here). It was a great event and I leaned a lot from the main speakers. After the morning speakers set a somewhat somber tone for the potential outcomes we were asked to try and present some of the positive outcomes that might emerge from AI (not just generative) in our respective fields.

I brought up three possible contributions to education:

1. Making teachers' lives easier. Easing the pressure on teachers by providing strategies that help reduce workload in non-instructional tasks such as assessment scoring, planning, letter and parent newsletter writing, etc. This does not replace the need to actually reduce the workload by shifting demands but augments it in ways that will free teachers to focus on what they do best—teaching students.

2. Creating differentiated plans. While curriculum authors and teacher education provide many ideas about how to differentiate instruction, the workload to differentiate instruction for every relevant lesson can be quite significant depending on class size and variability. An AI that can learn from assessment and teacher planning can become an excellent companion, allowing for robustly differentiated instruction with a record that can potentially move with students to subsequent grades or new educational environments (for example, mobility between schools). 

3. Tutoring students and supporting less qualified teachers. The Global South has been experiencing teacher shortages in rural areas, and these shortages are expanding worldwide. Tailored AI can support less qualified teachers and tutor students. While this situation is less than ideal, AI can fill in the gaps until we can create better systems to support teaching.

For these to be successful, school systems must be able to create sequestered, safe instances of AI that can be tailored and protective of student, family, and teacher data. Without such instances, schools should not use AI systems in any way that has access to student data. The goal for researchers should, therefore, be creating these instances through specialized API and examining its impact on teachers and students.

What am I using AI for now as a Teacher Educator and Professional

 Since Generative AI came out, I have been using it extensively. As an exercise, I am logging all the direct Generative AI I use, knowing that there is much AI in the background of which I am less aware.

Generic letters: Looking at my log, I have used generative AI to create four official letters that required carefully worded messages that were sensitive yet firm. In each case, I used Chat GPT to create an initial wording, then edited the text to bring back my writing style and some of my personality when appropriate, and finally, I ran it through Grammarly to make sure that I had no embarrassing grammar and spelling errors. The use of generative AI for composing official letters creates great efficiencies for me and reduces the response times. Interestingly, one person asked me for a letter of support that they generated with the help of GenAI as well as a starting point.

In teaching: I have used ChatGPT to create a description of the social networks between students in a classroom for an activity on creating groups in an elementary classroom. Once again, I needed to refine the prompt a few times and finally edit the document, but the result was quite good, and I created an assignment that I will keep using in the future.

I tried to see what Gen AI would produce for an in-class presentation about reading instruction. The result was VERY generic, and I ended up discarding the suggested slides, retaining the I Dall-E to create unique artwork for the slides I designed for teaching writing. While Generative AI use was limited in creating content, I continue enjoying the use of the Designer feature in PowerPoint as a way to quickly spiff up my slide decks. Since we came back from Spring break, I created a set of questions for a welcome-back exercise that went very well.

Finally, I engaged my students in using GenAI to create groupings in their classroom (mock data) to see what the benefits and challenges are. The discussion that ensued included comments ranging from amazingly fast and accurate to a student questioning whether it is worth the time after a lot of editing.

Review of academic paper: Once I read the paper I was reviewing and had the main points that I wanted to stress to the authors so they could improve their research paper, I used Cen AI to expand and explain my bulleted points. The amount of editing this exercise created for me was a very limited return on investment, and I doubt I will use it in this way again.

Podcasting: I used GenAI to create episode summaries of the Not That Kind of Doctor podcast using the transcripts as the raw material. One episode summary was well done while ina. second GenAI completely missed the point. Both needed editing but were still a major time-saving application.

Across multiple uses, I usually prompt GenAI there times before I get everything that I want (or give up). More detailed prompts yield much more accurate results and less follow-up. Grammarly let me know that it made over 6000 suggested edits. Gen AI has changed how I work; it has made some things much easier and saves me time every day. However, I am still concerned with accuracy and specificity that can be achieved only through my deep seated professional knowledge.

AI Creativity and the near future of education

AI and Creativity created by ChatGPT-4

This week, I spent two days at the Nebraska Educational Technology Association meeting in Omaha. It was great to meet with friends, colleagues, and new acquaintances. Everyone talked about AI as a catapult to changing, rethinking, worrying, and joy. Evi and I spent some time talking about how we humans are still better/ different than the machines. Much like humans have for centuries argued that humans were not like other animals, our current existential obsessive discussion (and fear) is about what happens when Artificial General Intelligence shows up. For me, the question is what we can do in the short run. The answer may very well be a focus on inquiry, creativity, and self-guided learning.

As highlighted by our work in Art TEAMS, integrating new tools and emphasizing creativity and divergent thinking in education presents a forward-thinking model that could significantly influence schools in the coming years. This approach, which blurs the traditional boundaries between art, sense-making, and metacognition, opens up several intriguing possibilities and challenges for education.

For example, schools might increasingly incorporate digital tools and platforms that foster creativity, such as digital art, coding for creative purposes, and virtual reality for immersive learning experiences. These tools can help students explore complex concepts in a hands-on manner, enhancing their understanding and using AI tools to amplify creativity and self-expression. 

By leveraging AI and other technologies, educators can create personalized learning paths for students. This customization allows students to explore subjects at their own pace and according to their interests, which can boost engagement and motivation. This can happen while we encourage metacognitive skills, thinking about one's own thinking, that can help students understand and regulate their learning processes, strengths, and areas for improvement. This self-awareness is crucial for lifelong learning and adaptability, especially in a rapidly changing world. 

This approach allows for breaking down the silos between subjects, especially art, humanities, and sciences, and encourages students to make connections across disciplines. This holistic method fosters critical thinking, creativity, and the ability to see problems from multiple perspectives. 

To reach this goal, we need to focus on teacher education and mindset shift. Teachers will need training and support to adapt to these new tools and pedagogies. Shifting from traditional teaching methods to a more student-centered, creative, and interdisciplinary approach requires time, resources, and a change in mindset. This can happen during pre-service and in-service teacher education and requires attention to equity and access. Our educational system has a robust tendency to focus on basic skills for those with perceived deficiencies who never get to interact with more complex educational experiences.

 As AI and other technologies become more integrated into education, maintaining a balance between technological efficiency and the human elements of learning—such as empathy, ethics, and emotional intelligence—will be vital. The potential for human flourishing through this educational paradigm is significant. By fostering an environment where creativity, critical thinking, and personal reflection are paramount, students can develop not only the skills needed for future careers but also the capacity for resilience, empathy, and ethical decision-making. This approach not only prepares students to thrive in a world where AI plays a significant role but also ensures they contribute positively to their family, community, and society.

Motivation for Tech Careers a Reflection

I have loved science fiction for as long as I can remember. I have a vague memory of going to the neighborhood bookstore Doron and purchasing my first book, Asimov's Foundation. Science fiction primed me to be incredibly curious about computers. Four years later, my father went on sabbatical to Boston and we all came with. In the summer of 1982 we landed in Newton Massachusetts. For the first two months, we lived in the house of the Alroys, who were spending the summer in Switzerland. This part is unclear to me but their neighbour and friend a mathematician asked for help watering the plants and in return he let me use the Atari 400 (in today's dollars a $2000 investment). I remember my utter delight in programming simple Basic programs I learned to create. It started a life-long obsession with technology and that first encounter with a well designed technology and the delight in what it could never really went away.

Reading Kara Swisher's memoir/ history/ critique of Silicone Valley and the big tech companies it feels like I was not the only one. A whole generation of us on the dividing line between the baby boom and Generation X grew up and matured with the tech industry and loved it deeply. I am wondering if the generation emerging now has that sense about any technology? As we work hard to get students excited about technology I am finding that the sense of wonder and excitement is rarely there. Have we become less optimistic? Do they need to feel that they are rising up with new ideas (say AI, for example)? To better recruit teachers and students and increase diversity in tech, we must understand what motivates them and what they most like to be part of. At the same time, we must think about ways to get them excited and feel that they are at the beginning of something great.
 

Riding the Tiger- AI and Teaching in Higher Education

 Recently, I was part of a panel on AI in academia. This is just part of the way I re-orient myself in my work. AI is demanding that we pay attention, or we become obsolete. My metaphor is riding the tiger, and with the help of two AI generators (Dall-E and Firefly), I created two images imagining it.

The metaphor is connected to a few crucial concepts. First, we are not being asked whether the tiger (AI) should be introduced into our lives. It has already been released, and it has now become our problem. We cannot ignore it because the tiger can and will harm us. What is left for us is to try to ride it. I am not certain that we will survive, but I am positive that I will enjoy the process. That I will enjoy the process.hat I will enjoy the process.hat I will enjoy the process.

Second, I believe that we should take an AI pause, not from development but instead from teaching. Pause and dedicate time to think through what AI means for our teaching domain. To guide such work, we should have "worked examples" (Gee, 2010) produced by instructors that are being thoughtful and comprehensive in their incorporation of AI.

 

AI and Academic Publishing

 Like many others, I have been playing with generative AI for the past few months. I am an author of scientific papers and, even more so a frequent reviewer. I have been elated by the potential of generative AI to bridge the gap between English knowledge and conducting high-quality research, especially for international scholars whose first language is not English. This is an opportunity to level the playing field and allow equal access to academic publishing, which is predominantly conducted in English. Many times I have reviewed articles with good ideas but really hard-to-understand language that required many rounds of review and editing before it was publishable.

On the other hand, generative AI is quite as capable of generating data that isn't there (often referred to as hallucinating). For example, after being asked about my publications Chat GPT 3.5 spit out this list: None of the publications are real! This will require our publication engines to allow us to track every in-text reference with quick access so reviewers can check the veracity of such claims that may be "halucinated".

Even more challenging is generative AI's ability to "hallucinate" research studies. In a manner of a few minutes, I was able to have Chat GPT generate two potential studies about reading instruction (synthetic phonics and reading recovery) with ANOVA designs, including result tables. I even got Chat GPT to design and execute a study about the impact of a Wind Surfing intervention on Math achievement of second graders. For example, examine this paragraph generated after I requested a qualitative study instead:

"As this study focuses on qualitative exploration, the quantitative results will not be the primary focus. However, to provide a broader context for the qualitative findings, basic descriptive statistics of math achievement scores may be reported for both the windsurfing instruction group and the control group. These scores will be collected through pre- and post-intervention math assessments administered to all participants. The quantitative results will be used to complement and contextualize the qualitative findings, providing a broader perspective on students' math achievement in relation to their windsurfing experiences."

I am sure that generative AI will create an increase of papers submitted for publication. To prevent science from being overwhelmed and suspicious we may need to write new rules and accelerate existing trends.

1. Demand researchers pre-register their research.

2. Ask that each paper submitted will include a statement about the use of generative AI and will include the transcripts of their use.

3. Create ethical standards for AI use in scientific publishing AND teach about it in graduate schools.

4. Create reviewing mechanisms that allow easy tracking of citations to the source.

Let's Chat about GPT event at UNL

 

Exhibitions and Celebrations of Learning

One of the elements of the Art TEAMS approach is for each learning cycle to end in an exhibition (or celebration) of learning. The exhibition of learning is an opportunity for the learning community to celebrate achievement get positive feedback, and encourage students to start thinking about their development in thinking and making. I recently visited one of our schools, exploring how exhibitions of learning worked in an elementary classroom. 

The teacher organized the tables in a circle (in a tight space, I might add). Each student organized the products they wanted to display across their desk. Some chose EVERYTHING and had very little space, others chose their favorite exemplars, and finally, one innovative student had many learning artifacts but chose to include an arrow pointing to her favorite artifact saying: "You have to read THIS!" 

All students had a stack of feedback notes and went around the room examining other students learning artifacts and leaving positive feedback based on sentence frames projected on the board. 

A debrief after such an event can help students process a portfolio approach and consider what is the most effective approach, not just as the creator but also as the consumer. 

The exhibition of learning gives the students sense of accomplishment and motivation. It can be a great source of metacognition as well. The same can be said for the teacher, a look at the variety and creativity gives the teacher a sense of accomplishment but also a tool to reflect on what could be better next time and what missed opportunities can be seized on in the next inquiry cycle or in subsequent years. 

As an observer in the classroom, the excitement and pride of the students were palpable. Students were smiling, engaged, and proud. I highly recommend creating these moments for students and bringing in administrators and, when possible, parents and guardians to celebrate reaching complex learning goals.

Art TEAMs is made possible a grant from the US Department of Education and by the emergent, collaborative interactions between many individuals. A deep gratitude is extended to all who participated in the experience of teaching (and learning) with emerging media and arts, including teachers (Sarah Holz, Kate Gracie, Maggie Elsner, Matt Auch Moedy, Sarah Gabelhouse, Amy Spilker, Megan Pitrat, Andrew (Mark) James, Jessi Wiltshire, Jessica Davis, Ryan Margheim, Sarah Kroenke, Katie Samson, Melissa Sellers, Casey Sorenson) for embracing ambiguity and vulnerability and expanding into new ways of seeing; administrators (Dr. Lynn Fuller) for holding space and having conversations about new ideas; museum educators (Laura Huntimer) for offering valuable educational resources; teaching artists (Cayleen Green, Fernando Montejano, Angel Geller, and Isabella Meier) for sharing their creative processes; the advisory board (Megan Elliott, Dr. Jorge Lucero, and Dr. Diana Cornejo-Sanchez) for shepherding the design and development of the program; and the research team (HyeonJin Yoon, Carrie Bohmer, Maggie Bertsche, Lorinda Rice, Mackayla Kelsey, Dr. Guy Trainin, Gretchen Larsen, Joelle Tangen, and Kimberley D’Adamo) for weaving together the many pedagogic and curricular threads of a complex tapestry. 

High Quality Materials and Teacher Learning

 The Nebraska Department of Education invited me to the IMPD network conference. I am always happy to participate and see if I can learn and contribute. At the same time, I have to admit that I am somewhat skeptical. I do not doubt that high-quality materials are helpful and more useful than low-quality materials. However, I think about it in an 80/20 split. High-quality materials will contribute to better instruction, but that represents a contribution of about 20% of total improvement. The 80% is in teacher professional learning and development that will raise efficacy and skill. 

The upside of High-Quality materials includes teacher confidence in the curriculum and reducing the need to scrounge for resources late at night. This confidence reduces the pressure on teachers' out-of-school time and gives breathing room for thinking about differentiation and accommodation of different learners. From an information processing perspective, we are reducing teacher cognitive load to enable more effective instructional procedures. 

From this perspective, High-quality materials are a no-brainer; bring it on, and engage with the process. Let's do it! The challenge, however, can be articulated at the individual teacher and system levels.

The cognitive load question can play an opposite role at the individual teacher level. A teacher is using a familiar curriculum is able to be creative around it and differentiate for her students. The familiarity reduces the load, an effect I have seen in reverse every time a district adapts a new curriculum. As a teacher educator, I have placed students in classrooms every semester for the past 20 years. Every time our district decides on a new reading curriculum, teachers reduce the number of preservice teachers they will host, disallow any creative deviation from the curriculum, and be fairly stressed. After about two years, the familiarity once again allows for more adaptation. So the question becomes, does the new curriculum adapted is such an improvement on the old one that it justifies the change. If you accept the 80/20 idea, the bar for improvement is quite high. This effect can be mitigated if you use curriculum change for significant professional learning. Then it becomes a leverage point for growth.

This is when the systemic effect presents with a second challenge; since schools invest significant attention into the process and money into materials, little is left for meaningful professional learning. The danger is that by the time materials are selected, bought, and introduced, everyone is exhausted and does not pay attention to the professional learning required to make it work. The calls for fidelity and making sure spending is justified clash with the individual needs of teachers and students. Moreover, school administration often projects implicitly or explicitly a conformity message that constrains teachers from acting in their best professional judgment.

In the context of our professional learning in Art TEAMS,
we are working very much on the 80% side of teacher professional learning. We acknowledge curriculum and work with teachers to develop ways to differentiate and deepen using metacognitive strategies (such as the creative inquiry process (Marshall and D'Adamo, 2011)) pedagogic moves, and collaborative learning opportunities. It would be interesting to see how teachers change their use of the strategies as the curriculum shifts.

Eco-Learning Literacy and Art

 At the Literacy Research Association meeting in Arizona, I attended a session on Climate Justice (ecology and literacy). A few weeks later, I am spending time with colleagues Kimberley D'Adamo and Laurie Rich, imagining how we can support educators in fostering processing climate learning through art making. the most visible part of the work is the website Art/Act: Educate. This website includes a collection of artists creating environmental art that is attentive to both local conditions and the overall ecological challenge.

One such artist is the indefatigable Leah Wilson, whose amazing work spans many visual approaches and ecosystems.  We are dreaming of supporting educators (in the broadest sense possible) interested in developing art projects addressing environmental concerns and celebrations. Our goal is to increase environmental awareness and give rise to two generations. The first is a generation of educators who help students process the challenge productively and innovatively. The second is creating a generation of youth better equipped to face environmental concerns through art and a deeper understanding of science and the human impact of the challenge we face as a species.

Happy New Year- New Ventures

 The last few months have been extremely busy, and I had fewer opportunities to blog. As the new year commences, I am sharing of our new projects for 2023. This time I would like to focus on our podcasts/ video series coming.

Nick Husbye and I started a podcast for Graduate Students, and junior faculty in Education called "Not that Kind of Doctor. You can find it on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify.

The ART TEAMS project Podcast has lunched at the beginning of December:

Tech EDGE in collaboration with the Nebraska Department of Education will launch a series of video podcasts with Chrystal Liu on integrating technology in the World Language Classroom.  YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify. You can catch it here: https://www.youtube.com/@techedge01 episodes start February 1.

Drop me a line with any feedback on the main issues.

Art TEAMS Successes and Lessons in Year 1

 Many teachers have shared that the program is helping them reconnect to teaching, combat burnout, and feel rejuvenated.  In their feedback and reflections, they attribute this to:

● The careful creation of a strong sense of community and trust

● Responsive curriculum design and feeling heard

● Slowness and airiness-a focus on depth rather than breadth, iteration, spiraling curriculum, and being given time for deep thinking and making

● The mantra “Completion is not the goal” (Lucero)

● Movement segments & reconnecting to their bodies as instruments for learning

Movement and reflection: Teacher participants, Team members, and Advisory Board members expressed the necessity of movement and reflection as the key to processing in their learning experiences and communicated a desire to continue movement and reflective practices. One teacher noted, “the movement piece was absolutely essential to connecting all of this together,” while several others shared the impact of having “more time for reflection” and “reflection times” provided opportunities to slow down and process.   

Challenges in project implementation and lessons for moving forward

Keeping teaching artists engaged 

Teaching Artists were engaged during the concentrated summer workshops. During the academic year, their participation dropped off and was considerably more limited. We are working with our artists, board members and the art community to think about ways to productively engage artists throughout the life of the grant.

Recruiting administrators 

In the post-COVID educational environment, it was hard for administrators to commit large chunks of time. As a result, we inverted the relationship and reached out individually to spend time with each administrator in a time they could find. We used our flexibility to compensate for Administrators' rigid schedules.

Grace

After the last two years of teaching during the Pandemic and Racial Reckoning, educators expressed exhaustion, and some were thinking of a career change. The Curriculum we constructed and adjusted took that reality into account, providing choice and “airiness”. As a result, teachers became more motivated and thought less about a career change. The grant had a significant positive impact on well-being and willingness to continue teaching. We will continue to reduce the number of transitions and give more time for the application of content, to expand the amount of time on the task.

What contributions the project has made to research, knowledge, practice, and/or policy. 

The project is in its first year, and we have limited contributions so far:

Conducting a thematic analysis of post-workshop comments, we uncovered four key themes that were identified, including 1) Movement and Reflection, 2) Collaborative Community, 3) Studio Access and Tool Time, and 4) Curricular Revision and Classroom Implementation.  

Movement and Reflection  

Several teacher participants expressed the necessity of both movement and reflection as modes of pausing and processing in their learning experiences and communicated a desire to continue movement and reflective practices. 

Collaborative Community   

Teachers also indicated the benefit of building and maintaining a supportive network through collaboration, specifically through conversation, observing each other’s work, and developing relationships. 

Studio Access and Tool Time  

Teachers shared continued excitement about the development of EMA projects and learning about tools to continue materializing projects. 

Curricular Revision and Classroom Implementation  

Teacher participants revealed a need for increased time with TFU (Teaching for Understanding), classroom implementation, curricular revision, and focusing on subject content. 

Acknowledgments:

Art TEAMs is made possible by the emergent, collaborative interactions between many individuals. A deep gratitude is extended to all who participated in the experience of teaching (and learning) with emerging media and arts, including teachers (Matt Auch-Moedy, Jessica Davis, Maggie Elsner, Sarah Gabelhouse, Kate Gracie, , Sarah Holz, Mark James, Sarah Kroenke, Ryan Margheim, Megan Pitrat, Katie Samson, Melissa Sellers, Amy Spilker, and Jessi Wiltshire,) for embracing ambiguity and vulnerability and expanding into new ways of seeing; administrators (Dr. Lynn Fuller) for holding space and having conversations about new ideas; museum educators (Laura Huntimer) for offering valuable educational resources; teaching artists (Cayleen Greene, Fernando Montejano, Angel Geller, and Isabella Meier) for sharing their creative processes; the advisory board (Megan Elliot, Dr. Jorge Lucero, and Dr. Diana Cornejo-Sanchez) for shepherding the design and development of the program; and the research team (Kimberley D’Adamo, Lorinda Rice, Guy Trainin, HyeonJin Yoon, and Maggie Bertsche, Carrie Bohmer, Mackayla Kelsey, and Gretchen Larsen) for weaving together the many pedagogic and curricular threads of a complex tapestry.  

Learning Analytics, Validity, and Theory

 This week I participated in the inaugural FLAIEC conference. It was a delightful opportunity to talk with various researchers at different levels and years of experience.

The keynote speakers, who are leaders in the field, have called for a more critical approach to examining the validity of the different indicators. 

Dragan Gašević in his opening keynote, outlined the opportunities and challenges for the advancement of validity of measurement in learning analytics. While Dirk Ifenthaler called for careful processing of the existing literature in an effort to build a valid set of meaningful indicators.

This topic has been central to our group's work. We have long discussions about ways to validly connect the digital traces of learning with reasonable assumptions. The most significant aspect of validity is a robust theoretical set of assumptions. A theory or framework should not be assumed to be infallible. In fact, I believe that we can use our data to confirm or challenge existing theories to develop a better understanding of human learning. 

The abundance of data can lead to overfitting the data to a specific theory. For example, we are currently looking at the importance of Self Regulation (as did many of the papers at the conference). The data fits the theory rather well, with the effect of self-regulation on course achievement significant but entirely mediated by specific learning behaviors. As I reviewed our results, I started wondering about the power of alternative theories. One of our next steps will be to contrast this theory with other theories and see which one fits better with our data and which is more stable across courses and time. 

The theory does not absolve us of the need to check in with more traditional (even psychometric) forms of validity. But for me, a theory is still the key to understanding the data. I am also eager to see what data from our online learners of code can tell us about the development of computer science knowledge, but that is a blog post for another time.

Notes from CSEdCon

Last week I traveled to CSEdCon 2022. As always Code.Org published State of CSE 2022 showing that despite the pandemic progress has been made in a variety of fronts. The two Nebraska representatives (Dr. John Skretta joined me this time) spent quite a bit of our energy learning from the experience of others, and discussing our ideas in meeting the goals outlined in our recent legislation Legislative bill 1112, the Computer Science and Technology Act. We are eager to start working on the problem as the code.org regional partner and the lead institution in the state. We hope to partner with the Nebraska Department of education in making a difference for the students of Nebraska.

I had many discussions in CSEdCon about the critical time to get students interested in Computer Science. Some support an emphasis on Elementary/ primary education. The claim is that early interest can capture all students and significantly increase the odds that girls and students of color will become motivated to pursue computer science. This is true but not quite enough. We know from our research in multiple STEM fields that the very students we were focused on lost interest during the middle school years despite high interest during their primary years.

Others focus on high school, most prominently because of the new high school graduation requirement. I believe that high school (especially beyond 9th grade) is simply too late. Students have established areas of interest and often some idea about a chosen field. They might fulfill a requirement, but that is not very likely to change trajectories as much as needed.

As a result, when asked by any school where to start, I suggest Middle school(more specifically, grades 7-9). This is the age where students may lose interest or get discouraged, and it is early enough to create new trajectories. This is by no means enough. Once a middle grades program is established, a school would start rolling down the elementary, creating better-prepared students and high school classes now answering new demands by excited students and parents.

And if you get this in time- do not forget hour of code in early December!

Schools as a Malleable Material

 The Art TEAMS project has an exceptional advisory council. This group of professionals includes Diana Cornejo-Sanchez, Megan Elliott, and Jorge Lucero. This group of thinkers and doers stretches our thinking and brings joy and engagement into our work. A key moment for me was when Jorge Lucero challenged us to think about school as a malleable material. 

Jorge Lucero (Photo from Engage Art)

What I say from this point forward is my interpretation of the topic inspired by Jorge but the responsibility for any mistake is mine alone. If you think like an artist, the world around us is filled with materials that we can shape to make art. Thinking like an artist helps think about the world as a material that can be shaped, rejecting the notion that the material should be accepted as is. We tend to regard schools and schooling as rigid structures that need to be abided to (especially for teachers and students) or completely reformed or even replaced (policymakers). But what if the best approach is to think about schools as malleable and set on a journey to discover how and where we can shape that malleability to create something new and beautiful.

This is exactly the role we see for Art TEAMS. While we explore using art and creativity to transform learning in classrooms, we are also seeking to start teasing out how to find malleability and push its boundaries to create better classrooms that will be culturally responsive, opening new futures and experiences for all students and their teachers.

In our work with teachers this summer, we came up with some ideas about how schools can be malleable. So I am sharing this list with you as a way to start a discussion.

1. Designing the building. While not a daily occurrence, schools do renovate and sometimes build new schools. This is a golden opportunity to rethink the design of the school and create new affordances for learning. The Pegasus Bay story is such an example.

2. Schedules: Time is a great material that allows new things to happen. Changing schedules by creating longer learning periods or conversely dedicating a few weeks to exploration are great ways to create opportunities for change and deep and self-guided learning. Even adding a few minutes of movement every day could be transformative.

3. Changing mindset- a focus on a growth perspective for teachers and learners can transform the way we think about the way we teach, assess, and provide feedback.

4. People: the way we team, support each other, and leverage student strengths can help create a more vibrant and healthy.

I am including our original whiteboard ideation board and promise to keep exploring and writing about these ideas.

Teaching Fast and Slow Lessons from Art TEAMS Weekend

 This week the Art TEAMS teams got together again to start our Fall activities. We had a joyous day reconnecting and discussing the work we have started doing with our students based on the summer courses. The meeting has taught me a few lessons that will sit with us as we plan the interactions throughout the semester.

Lesson 1:

The impact of deep learning in the summer has already created impact on classrooms. Many of the teachers have reported implementing the Creative Research Journals and even starting the Inquiry Cycle. While it is hard to attribute the implementation to a specific cause. I believe that it was the mix of highly motivated teachers and the powerful learning we had in the summer.

Lesson 2:

Movement is still magic. We started the day with movement, and the teachers are hungry for more movement that is applicable for the classroom. We can make a real difference if we help teachers figure out this part of their work.

Lesson 3:

We always try to teach too much. We have provided our teachers with many tools. Now is the time to create more "air" in the curriculum and make sure teachers have enough time to share their work, plan next steps, and think deeply.

Finally a personal lesson from my reflection about the EMA project led by the Fabulous Gretchen Larsen.

When ideating, go slow and make sure that you spend enough time thinking about the centrality of your idea and my real commitment to it. I have moved too fast to really evaluate my commitment to the purpose of the design. Now I am slowing down and evaluating my project in early iteration. More soon!

On Listening

 

I am about to start my Fall semester. As I plan my interactions with my students, I am challenging myself to examine the practices we used in Art TEAMS this summer and see which of those would fit into my class. The first that sprang into my mind as I was planning the details of the work tomorrow was the use of active listening. In the picture to the right are two of our teaching artists from the summer, Caileen, and Fernando. While they both brought expertise, they also spent a significant amount of time listening. At the end of the second week, Fernando shared a powerful spoken word poem that showed how much he listened. His poem described his understanding of the teacher experience. His poem showed how powerful listening can be in understanding your fellow humans. Hence, in my class this semester I aim to enhance democratic practices with the practice of careful listening. Starting tomorrow, we will take time to make sure that we all learn to provide some space for each other to express ourselves without interruption. 

Individual listening is an addition to the practice of opening circle in which everyone listens ad everyone speaks (in turn). 

If many quote "Be the change you want to see in the worlds" - yes I know there are multiple versions of this sentence and an argument about who originated it. For teacher educators, however, it is also "Model the change you want to see in the world".

It is a new semester, another opportunity to practice and model what we preach.

Thoughts about VR

 My son (18) has the Meta Quest VR headset. This is the fifth VR variation that I have tried on. Before this we had the PlayStation VR console. At work I have interacted with wired versions of the Oculus as well as HP. In a visit to China we interacted with different versions of the Samsung VR. 

As I have interacted with them I have some growing insights. The first is that wired devices are too bulky

Trying out the Samsung VR, China 2018

and limiting. The jump to the Quest two was revolutionary. The second improvement was using hands instead of joysticks. It removes the complexity of conquering button configurations. So despite the jokes about the metaverse and Meta’s focus at least as hardware is concerns they combined good hardware with improving UX. 

As I was watching my son play on the device, I realized something else. usually our kids are seating hours next to the computer slouched on a chair with a leg twitching. In VR they are up waiving their hands moving about and MOVING. In effect some of the best applications right now seem to be focused on physical games that get the most out of the headset. 

VR is far from perfect and applications are still far from being ready for wide educational use but I think that we are getting closer and I am excited to see what comes next.

The Teacher Pipeline and TikTok

This weekend I dove into Teacher TikTok. It was fun and, at times, entertaining. I learned two things that are on the teacher's mind:

1. Requirements- for time beyond the contract, whether extending the school day, weekend or during unpaid summer time.

2. Professional development- the list here is even longer but can be summarized:

    Booking snooty speakers.

    The leaders of professional development are divorced from the reality in classrooms especially post-pandemic.

    Professional development that does not walk the talk.

    Professional development could be a video or email.

Professional development that does not consider the diverse needs of different teacher based on topic, experience and expertise.

Our professional learning in Art TEAMS is trying to provide an alternative that creates learning for teachers that is attentive to needs and presents new ideas but allow for time to process and design. We are focusing on respecting professionals and helping them achieve new things. However, I must also stress that everyone in our cohort chose to take this path. It follows that this work cannot be dictated and still expect to get the same outputs.