đź“ť Simplify your grading process! Watch our Untangling Grading and Assessment workshop recording to learn practical strategies for clear and effective grading. Discover tips on creating transparent rubrics, saving time on assessments, and boosting student engagement. #CandlerDigitalLearning #GradingTips #EffectiveAssessment
🤖 Unleashing the power of AI in the classroom! This Candler workshop dives into practical ways to integrate AI tools into teaching, from brainstorming and grading support to interactive discussions. Learn how AI can streamline your workload and enrich the student experience. #CandlerDigitalLearning #AIinTeaching #EdTechInnovation”
🎥 Enhance your teaching with video! This fall, Candler Digital Learning hosted a workshop exploring creative ways to use video in Canvas courses. From VoiceThread to video quizzes, we discussed practical tools to engage students and enrich their learning experience. Check out these highlights to bring more interactivity to your classroom! #CandlerDigitalLearning #TeachingWithTech #CanvasTips”
As conversations about Artificial Intelligence (AI) became ubiquitous with the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, my mind immediately recalled the film franchise, Terminator. The movies are centered on a dystopian future where machines, in becoming self-aware, formulate a plan to wipe out humanity. As this recall suggests, my immediate reaction to ChatGPT was one characterized by anxiety and apprehension. First, existentially, what implications will this have for the human community? But also, as an educator, what will be the ramifications in classroom instruction and learning? It is this latter question which I want to explore and offer some thoughts on approaching AI in theological education.
An uncritical use of AI runs the risk of potentially diminishing integral learning skills, distorting reality, and dehumanizing education. For example, a reliance on Word processing tools that utilize AI to rewrite a user’s work, along with the use of generative AI outputs to create digital imagery and videos can lead to a loss in writing, reading, and thinking skills essential for learning and academic research. Additionally, reliance on AI tools contributes to a culture where learners are less engaged in the course and see little value in the study of writing and language as machines mimic these skills.
Another concern is that AI algorithms are not flawless. They prioritize certain perspectives over others and produce inaccuracies in their analysis as they analyze texts and key themes with limited nuance understanding of historical and cultural contexts. Consequently, an uncritical reading of the data results can distort reality for its users. Likewise, AI does not give credit to its sources and engaging AI in the classroom requires significant changes in teaching methods that demanded time and training for educators, often without compensation for their labor. These practices can in turn dehumanize education.
Despite my initial anxiety and apprehension, I have realized that engaging AI is more productive than ignoring it. AI will not go away. Hence, it is better to engage in critical and intentional pedagogical practices that can hopefully mitigate the concerns raised by AI. This requires planning in the front end. When developing course syllabi, one is to consider how to utilize AI in the learning activities and assessments that (1) nudge learners from a dependency on AI and (2) calls learners to think critically about how they are using AI in their learning and lived experience.
To illustrate, summative assessments could solicit learners to engage their context or a particular scenario. The planning for such situational assessments would be served best by including the consideration of the place of AI to assist learners in their preparation to complete assignments; as well as the creation of steps and activities where AI would not be helpful or not allowed to be used, i.e., when speaking of the application and implications of class learning to their context. This planning could also include developing scaffolding (formative) assessments that offer learners practice and feedback on class learning that can guide learners in completing their summative assessment. The hope is that this instructional design can increase learner buy-in for the summative assessment, minimize learner anxiety towards the assignment, and lead to less reliance on AI to produce the work. Additionally, such planning can assist in creating essays/discussion prompts and exam questions that, in identifying concrete concepts from class learning to consider in the response, could make it easier to detect content created by AI.
In closing, if our role as educators is to lead learners out towards human flourishing, for themselves and others, then are we not called to factor in AI in our courses? To employ and promote discourse of AI in ways that can form and inform learners to use AI in humanizing ways in our academic disciplines? And to do so, grounded in God’s promise that where there is sin, grace abounds that much more (Rom 5:20).
National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI)
Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in K-12 settings
Office of Educational Technology, Department of Education of the United States
Advancing Digital Equity for All
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Teaching and Learning
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Education in the age of artificial intelligence
The challenges and opportunities of Artificial Intelligence in education
Other Articles Artificial Intelligence in education: The Three Paradigms
Have you ever researched a topic online and wished you could add something to a page or an article for others to read?
Have you had a course reading assignment and wondered what your classmates have noted, highlighted, or written in the margins of their own copy?
A non-profit based in San Francisco has created an innovative annotation tool with a mission “to help people reason more effectively together through a shared, collaborative discussion layer over all knowledge.” The tool is called Hypothesis, and it is a free, public, standards-based annotation tool that is now integrated into Candler’s Learning Management System (Canvas).
Hypothes.is is a collaborative annotation tool, that allows groups to edit, annotate, and reflect on online documents! A public information tool like Hypothesis, increases accessibility, holds sites and research accountable, and provides for equitable conversation to take place about how information is disseminated online.
For the world of higher education, Hypothes.is also provides an active reading tool for classes– it makes student reading visible, allowing faculty to see students process information and use that information to shape future classroom experiences.
Best of all, Hypothesis is now built into Canvas! Students can annotate, review, highlight assigned readings on Canvas to show your teacher “your work,” (Remember when you had to do this in math class? “Please make sure to show your work for full credit!” Well, this is the research and reading version of this educational task.) Teachers can now see not just that their students are reading the material assigned—but how they’re reading.
In the Classroom: It’s as if the class shares one, colorful, annotated, reflective hard copy of the assigned reading at the same time.
2. Group Collaboration: Tagging and replying
3. Grading and Speed Grader
Faculty can enter into the conversation in two ways– you can respond to comments or make comments as a regular annotator, alongside students. However, you can also make comments visible only to you and the student in the Canvas Speedgrader, as well as providing a grade for the annotation project.
The Office of Digital learning also hosted a webinar with faculty to discuss these options, and you can view that here. Proceed to page 2 if you would like to know more about the web plugin version of Hypothes.is for individualized annotation!
In the dynamic realm of education, Hy-Flex (Hybrid-Flexible) teaching has emerged as a transformative approach to cater to diverse learning needs. As we navigate this new era of education, understanding the various elements needed to embrace the new teaching environment is crucial.
Dr. Joel Kemp, one of our most respected and well-liked faculty at Candler School of Theology, shares his invaluable practices for delivering impactful HyFlex courses. While some practices may be subject to technological updates in classrooms, these principles remain fundamental for engaging both virtual and in-person students.
Dr. Kemp’s Tips for HyFlex Success:Â
Dr. Kemp’s best practices exemplify a thoughtful approach to HyFlex teaching, fostering an amazing learning environment for all students. As technology continues to evolve, these foundational principles serve as a guiding light for educators navigating modern teaching modalities.Â
For further insights into effective HyFlex teaching methods or to explore innovative approaches to digital learning, please reach out to the Office of Digital Learning at CandlerDigitalLearning [at] emory [dot] edu. Your journey to transformative teaching begins here!Â
In After Whiteness: An Education in Belonging, Willie James Jennings explores the implications of white supremacy and racial identity on American Christianity and education. He argues that white supremacy has profoundly impacted American society and religion and created a culture of segregation and exclusion. For Jennings, American Christianity must embrace a new theology of belonging – one that prioritizes inclusiveness and recognizes the inherent value and dignity of all people, regardless of race or ethnicity.
Jennings advocates for a new way of thinking about education and belonging that goes beyond mere tolerance and acceptance and prioritizes the deep connection and interdependence of all people. He argues that education should be used to dismantle systems of oppression and create a more just and equitable society.
What does this have to do with online learning?
The online space has the potential of breaking out of these oppressive models and into more of an equitable and inclusive learning experience.
The following principles can be directly applied to an online learning environment to create a sense of community and foster a culture of belonging among online students. This is especially important in distance learning where students may often feel isolated and disconnected from their peers and instructors.
One strategy for is to prioritize communication and connection between learners and instructors. This can involve intentional synchronous discussions, both via Zoom and in collaborative spaces (see digital whiteboards), as well as faculty providing regular feedback and support for students.
Another important strategy is to encourage collaboration or group work. This does not have to be the traditional “group project,” but can take many forms such as guided group discussions or skill building teams. These provide opportunities for students to support and learn from one another. Contact the Office of Digital Learning for more information!
Additionally, intentionally designed learning activities and assignments that encourage learners to share their experiences and perspectives. This is helpful because it helps others see the connection between learning and their own contexts, as well as creates mutual respect and understanding.
Finally, it is important to be intentional about creating an inclusive and equitable learning environment. This involves actively working to address and dismantle systemic barriers to learning, such as racism, sexism, and ableism. It also involves being mindful of the diverse needs and experiences of learners and taking steps to accommodate and support them. By creating an environment that is inclusive and equitable, instructors can help students feel valued and respected, and create a culture of belonging.
By incorporating these strategies online instructors and learners can work together to create a sense of belonging and community in the online space.
For more information on how to incorporate a more equitable and inclusive space of belonging for all students in your classroom, reach out to us at CandlerDigitalLearning [at] emory [dot] edu.
As online learning becomes more and more accessible, so does the possibility of a more isolated educational experience. Building community, especially in theological education, is essential to student learning.
It is important that the online environment be just as welcoming, hospitable, and supportive for online students as it is in the in-person classroom. A well-designed Canvas course can not only provide students with the tools and resources necessary to succeed academically, but it can also foster a sense of community and connection in the online classroom.
Here are some tips for making your Canvas course an inviting and hospitable space for your students:
By following these tips, you can help to create an online learning environment that is inviting and welcoming to all students. With an intentional and well-designed Canvas course, students will be able to: (1) focus more on their studies and less on finding course content and information; (2) communicate with each other both in and outside of the live class session; and (3) feel prepared to succeed in your course because the information is readily available and accessible.
Contact the Office of Digital Learning at CandlerDigitalLearning [at] emory [dot] edu for more information on how to set up your Canvas site as an inviting and hospitable place for student learning.
By: Ryan Runager and Dr. Sarah Bogue
Often, for many classes, getting a particular grade or simply completing the assignment is more important than the learning of class material.
Asao B. Inoue, Professor of Rhetoric and Composition at Arizona State University, writes:
Classroom writing assessment is more important than pedagogy because it always trumps what you say or what you attempt to do with your students. And students know this. They feel it.[1]
This statement was posed to Candler School of Theology faculty as part of our “Creative Assessments Cohort” supported by the Wabash Center for Teaching and Learning in Theology and Religion.
In the conversation that followed, we received various comments:
Our cohort captured the heart of Inoue’s argument – that assignments are more than the assignment itself.
In our last post, we focused on the design thinking process and how empathy and reflection are essential to any innovation – especially innovative teaching.
In antiracist pedagogy, mapping out our classroom assessment ecologies is essential. We must be able to articulate where power structures exist and where our teaching and assignments fit within them.
“An antiracist classroom writing assessment ecology is a complex political system of people, environments, actions, and relations of power that produce consciously understood relationships between and among people and their environments that help students problematize their existential writing assessment situations, which in turn changes or (re)creates the ecology so that it is fairer, more livable, and sustainable for everyone.”[2]
Inoue presents seven elements of antiracist writing ecologies:
Often in the academy, student success in assessment correlates to social and economic privilege. Good writing often reveals a middle-class set of values, a “clear white racial set of experiences and perspectives.[3]
This “middle class” approach includes modes of assessment that create barriers between faculty and students, between students and learning. Part of dismantling these barriers is to engage faculty in dialogue with students and consider how theological education can adapt to the 21st century context.
The task of reimagining pedagogy is particularly vital for schools of theology. For many institutions, traditional evaluative ecologies (summative final exams and extensive academic writing) are designed to cultivate a specific type of student, which Willie James Jennings identifies as “white self-sufficient masculinity.”[4]
Dr. Jennings recently met with several early career faculty at Candler. He suggested that while many faculty affirm the presence of diverse student populations, they are often not able to honor the contexts and gifts every student brings with them into seminary study: “we desire to teach you, but we don’t desire you,” as Dr. Jennings put it. As the Office of Digital Learning at Candler, we are actively committed to reimagining pedagogy for all students. We are mindful of the barriers created by traditional assessment models and are striving for a more creative and innovative culture of assessment at Candler – one which prioritizes creativity, diversity, equity, and inclusion.
[1] Inoue, Asao B. (2015). Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for A Socially Just Future. Fort Collins: Parlor Press/WAC Clearinghouse, 9.
[2] Inoue, Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies, 82.
[3] Inoue, 28.
[4] Jennings Willie James. 2020. After Whiteness : An Education in Belonging. Grand Rapids Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 27.
Tom Kelly writes that a “Hands-on, user-centric approach to problem solving can lead to innovation, and innovation can lead to differentiation and competitive advantage.”
As theological educators, our work is not inclined toward competitive advantage. Our work is to be present, embodied, and full of understanding as we teach and as students learn.
This is the motivation of the first session in our “Creative Assessments Cohort” grant from the Wabash Center: Design Thinking for Pedagogy.
Design thinking is both a concept and a process of six different phases:
As a business approach, empathy here is rooted in conducting research to understand the consumer. It attempts to place the researcher in the mind of the consumer and explore how they might do, say, think, and feel.
As you define, organize all of the areas that might connect the experiences of different consumers. Where are the problems?
This is the step where there are zero limits. At this phase, you and your team can brainstorm. Throw out ideas on how to address the problem you have defined. What would it look like to solve this problem if you had no limitations on money, personnel, materials, etc.
Prototype your ideas. Take a moment to make them real, especially if it is an idea for a product. If it is a new product, make it. If it is something online, map out a wireframe. If it is for the classroom, try it out the approach.
To test, go back to the consumer for feedback. Ask, “Does this solution meet users’ needs? . . . Does it improve how they feel, think, or do their tasks?”
Implementing is bringing your vision to life. How does your solution impact the problem you’ve encountered? The work of design thinking is never done and always returns back to having empathy and understanding the consumer.
Bethany Stolle writes that “Design thinking is an empathy-driven, human-centered approach to addressing complex problems.”
So, in design thinking, we see that every step returns to empathy. To empathize, educators must get into the minds of students. What are they going through? What do they need to do in their daily lives? What else is going on besides the few hours spent in your class?
EMPATHIZE: Try to map out all of the elements of your students’ experiences, both inside and outside of the classroom.
Once you’ve mapped your “student”, try to find opportunities to address their needs (see “define the problem”). What are your students saying? What aren’t they saying? How can you work to address these needs in your teaching?
Try out new assessments, new pedagogical approaches. Sit down with your students and ask questions rather than a traditional lecture. See how these ideas work for your students. Is there anything you can change?
The strength of design thinking is in its reflection – always going back to identifying with the users, our students.
So: what does design thinking have to do with teaching theology?
Empathize. Empathize. Empathize.
We never know the extent of our students’ experiences outside of our classroom. As theological educators and faculty, it is our mission to shape faithful and creative leaders for the church and the world. By using this framework of empathy and reflection of our teaching, we can serve as models for our students and colleagues.
For more information on design thinking, check out Dr. Kathryn Common’s article here.
You can also connect with us at candlerdigitallearning [at] emory [dot] edu. We’d love to hear from you!
