Month: December 2021

The shared article for this Learning and Growing session on December 17, 2021 was

Students as Co-authors of an Academic Development Service: A Case Study of the Study Skills Service at the University of Bristol

This article discussed the benefits and challenges of having students assist with the development of both a program akin to the current Academic Skills Development Program and its delivery.

A summary of this analysis is here, with the ‘Now What’ section discussed during the Learning and Growing session.

Zoom recording:

Topic: Learning and Growing
Start Time: Dec 17, 2021 10:28 AM

Meeting Recording:
https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/sUd6vkyr9tEK2MJQVZyy5tSAegDVVKtCTAvWd3-iaMzbK_k4mIZIxh5cFqn4vc9a.kaRWsLyyhfCD_77T

On Friday 03.12.2021, I conducted a post-reading discussion based on two articles in ‘Conversation’: the first article was ‘It takes a mental toll’: Indian students tell their stories of waiting out the pandemic in Australia’. This was a short reading but was particularly relevant to our cohort of International students, who are mostly from South Asia. Most of the group said that they did not find the information surprising, as they expected the same results from the students, and there was a short discussion on the material. I highlighted the importance of stressing that students came from a university culture where they are supposed to be passive learners, while in Australia they are supposed to be active, and that this articles stressed that students and staff need to work together as partners. Additionally, this was supposed to be delivered during their Orientation – Students, Partners and Induction working together, and that students need to take active ownership of their own learning, and to make this clear to new students.

However, the second reading was ‘Unis are using artificial intelligence to keep students sitting exams honest. But this creates its own problems’. This reading resulted in a lot more discussion by the whole team and proved to be more cogent and relevant for our group of students. It is important to note that both readings were very recently published in ‘Conversation’ – on October 20th and November 10th 2021, so they proved relevant to the situation with COVID happening all around the world, and the impact of Omicron, which is a new variant very recently introduced in many countries, including Australia.

The Team brought up that even face-to-face learning can bring up risks of cheating by students and that some people marking exam papers may not be fair and may be biased, which I agreed with.  However, the article brought up the fact that if cheating was not addressed by institutions, it was unfair to honest students who do not cheat. Furthermore, the article also brought up the issue of Security and that simple technical tricks can bypass many of the anti-cheating protections and therefore the tools that are available so far only provide limited benefits, and that the software needed may remain surreptitiously uninstalled. In addition, students studying overseas may be at a disadvantage due to poor internet connections and may have other problems with their devices, which is what we have experienced with some of those students.

There was also the issue of lack of privacy, as video captures the indoor environment and scrutinizes faces without being noticed, which is intimate monitoring for repeat viewings by the Institutions using this software. I stressed the importance of a judicious use of video, as in the article. However, the article states that the software available to date works best on light-skinned faces and not on darker-skinned faces, which implies a hidden bias and possible discrimination that may add to societal biases. Other researchers reported similar concerns, and therefore stressed a lack of fairness with the software that is available at present, especially as it pertains to our cohort of students.

One Team member also flagged atypical eye or head movement in exam takers, which can lead to unwarranted suspicions about students who are not neuro-typical or who have idiosyncratic exam-sitting styles. The Team member mentioned reading aloud when reading, which she does even when there is no-one else in the room. That kind of behavior may lead to further surveillance and interrogation by invigilators within the university, which would not be fair to those people with those kinds of issues.

Additionally, it brought about a discussion about Surveillance culture or ‘Big Brother’, as automated exam monitoring may set a broader precedent and make monitoring of our actions more ‘acceptable’ within the broader communities. The authors mentioned that the public concerns about surveillance and automated decision-making are growing within societies. Therefore, they warned about being cautious when introducing potentially harmful technologies, especially when “they are imposed without our genuine consent”, and this is what I find particularly problematic.

Finally, the authors stress the importance of finding ways to fairly administer exams remotely, as they stress that institutions need to be accountable and transparent with students and offer alternatives such as in-person options, which are fundamental to informed consent and which would comply with what I feel would need to be considered.

The two discussions took up the whole of our allocated time of 1 hour and it was considered a well-discussed topic, which was relevant to our cohort of students and which was relevant considering the direction that online learning is going throughout the world, in this time of COVID-19 and its various variants.

https://charlessturt.zoom.us/rec/share/-sx8Vd3tIAJh3AZsZU6J87Zoq5zEgnE0ATlOISnbk6CLBeyRv1w3aiz9d_oIXw.QDEFY_fi8UD5rVkk

The article by Bailey and Withers (2018) examined, through screen capture, the processes employed by students to paraphrase short text. The authors’ found that some students made use of available word processing software with varying levels of success. Few students used external sites and the sample participants did not demonstrate the use of tools such as Google Translate and paraphrasing assistants, despite this practice being commonly observed in classrooms. The most commonly used word processing tools were the synonym finder and interaction with spellcheck to ‘approve’ changes that the software had suggested. Students in the study demonstrated varying levels of skill in utilising writing software and some demonstrated that they were able to create good work without the use of such tools. The authors’ noted that students were not making “full or efficient use of the software tools available to them, and would benefit from instruction in these” (p.185).

Discussion centred around a number of themes. These included:

• ESL students face serious language barriers that encourage the use of software however this use often creates what the article refers to as ‘word salad’. This may represent an overreliance on making word changes to create the appearance of success in paraphrasing as opposed to understanding the intent of the text and subsequently writing an effective summary. The benefit of using unhelpful techniques, (such as online paraphrasing tools and ‘word spinners’) is that the presentation of any assignment could be better than the alternative of producing nothing at all. Perhaps the true problem is a language problem rather than a paraphrasing issue or an academic integrity problem and if we could seek to manage the language difficulty then the other issues would reduce.
• Final checking of written work was not commonly observed in the study. The requirement to foster this as a crucial step in the editing process was discussed. Staff have also noted that students do not appear to be utilizing proofreading services as much online and promotion of these was discussed.
• Workshops and materials that support students to develop judicious use of writing software (e.g. Google Translate, Grammarly, Wikipedia etc) could be of benefit. As could workshops focusing on student motivation in order to increase passion and interest in their studies (thus creating increased motivation to understand content and improve how they express their ideas).
• Reading techniques such as skim reading and reading for comprehension could enhance ESL students’ ability to develop content understanding and enhance confidence.

Possible action items:

• Promotion of Study Support proofreading services to current student cohort
• Development of workshops and materials that focus on meaningful use of online tools such as Google Translate, Grammarly and Wikipedia
• Development of workshops and materials that focus on the development of successful reading strategies such as skim reading and reading for comprehension
• Investigate methods of working with previous students/successful students to provide encouragement to current students to motivate and inspire them to develop greater understanding of, and passion for, their studies

Article: Bailey, C., & Withers, J. (2018). What can screen capture reveal about students’ use of software tools when undertaking a paraphrasing task?. Journal of Academic Writing, 8(2), 176-190. https://doi.org/10.18522/joaw.456

Recording: Access here